|
|
|
January 30, 2007
Mr. Bob
Bennett
RE: Fortification Creek Special Management Area
Dear Mr. Bennett: In regards to the Fortification Creek Special Management Area which includes a Wilderness Study Area, important elk habitat and a proposed Area of Critical Environmental Concern, the above groups request that the BLM revoke its approval of the PODs within the Special Management Area but outside the elk boundaries. A single comprehensive NEPA analysis regarding minerals development within the Special Management Area is necessary to ensure resource protection. 43 U.S.C. § 1732(b); 40 C.F.R. §§ 1508.25, 1508.27. Even though the approved PODs occur outside of the various elk boundaries identified in the Special Management Area, this does not obviate BLM’s obligation to take a comprehensive, hard look at proposed and reasonably foreseeable development within the entire Special Management Area to ensure that any and all unnecessary or undue degradation is prevented. 43 U.S.C. § 1732(b). This is important given the potential for significant, cumulative edge effects to elk and other resources within and proximate to the Special Management Area. 40 C.F.R. § 1508.8. Additionally, BLM is under a legal duty to assess reasonable alternatives commensurate with proposed and reasonably foreseeable development within the same context. 40 C.F.R. §§ 1502.14, 1508.27. We therefore, would appreciate the opportunity to work with BLM to identify and consider such alternatives. However, at present, the current approach undercuts this opportunity and frankly, constitutes a textbook example of piece-meal development prohibited by NEPA and the CEQ regulations. See 40 C.F.R. § 1508.25, 1508.27. We reject the assertion that the necessary comprehensive analysis was conducted as part of the underlying NEPA process for the 2003 ROD/RMP Amendments for the Powder River Basin. The 2003 ROD/RMP Amendments, based on BLM’s own representations during pending litigation before the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming, were predicated on the promise that BLM would take appropriate action on a “case-by-case through approval of APDs and PODs….” See Federal Respondents’ Response to Petitioners’ Opening Brief at 19, American Lands Alliance v. BLM, 04-CV-0019-J; 43 U.S.C. § 1732(b). We took this to mean that BLM would coordinate well-field development at the site-specific stage to ensure resource protection. Furthermore, the 2003 ROD/RMP specifically stated that further study of the Special Management Area would take place. See, e.g, Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan Amendments for the Powder River Basin Oil and Gas Project at 9-10 (2003). Unfortunately, at present, BLM’s current direction in the Special Management Area provides evidence of a potential ‘shell game’ in play within the broader Powder River Basin. More to the point, BLM’s current direction risks prejudicing and compromising a host of both development and conservation-oriented management alternatives that were not addressed at the RMP level and cannot be addressed through the piece-meal approval of individual PODs that are divorced from a comprehensive hard look at cumulative impacts and commensurate management alternatives. A single, comprehensive EIS for proposed and reasonably foreseeable development is thus an imperative for this treasured area. It is literally the very last wild place in the Powder River Basin and must be given the highest protection allowed as well as the highest level of scrutiny and mitigation to protect the wilderness values, the watersheds and elk and other important wildlife. Consideration and action on the previously requested swap of the State inholding inside the Wilderness Study Area for other areas in the BLM or State lands is necessary now that the industry’s plan to excessively develop this parcel with sixteen well sites is known. The entire reasoning of having a protective core area of the WSA and SMA will be severely compromised. The de facto wilderness qualities of the area will not be upheld as required by law. To stress this request, we respectfully submit for the official record the 1996 Game and Fish Department Elk Study for Fortification Creek, as well as the enclosed Map entitled “POD Proposals, Fortification Creek Special Management Area. Planning Map, Johnson, Campbell and Sheridan Counties, Wyoming, Gene R. George & Associates.” The map depicts industry’s proposed and reasonably foreseeable development within and proximate to the Special Management Area – development that is simply not being properly considered by BLM’s current piece-meal approach. Our organizations are committed to seeking full protection to the Fortification Creek Area, as it appears that the BLM did so as well. The BLM once stated that there is a high level of comments and public interest in the preservation of the elk and the wild Fortification Creek area. The agency itself attempted to mitigate harm from the operators via a 2005 letter to the operators. This letter stated that the goals for the Fortification Creek area were to “protect and maintain the values” and to manage the PODs with “coordinated development practices”. These tenets appear to have fallen aside due to intense industry pressure, evidenced by the enclosed map. Please know that our organizations would like to be involved and acknowledged as stakeholders in this process. Respectfully submitted,
Liz Howell ________________________________
Jill Morrison ___________________________
Bruce Pendery _________________________________
Suzanne Lewis _______________________________
Mark Winland _____________________________
Nada Culver _________________________________
Johanna Wald _________________________________
Kirk Koepsel
Wyoming Wilderness Association 2007-2008© Wyoming Wilderness Association, all rights reserved |