U.S. Bureau of Land Management Violated NEPA When Selling Oil and Gas Leases in California

CAland On April 8, a federal magistrate judge issued the first major ruling in a California fracking lawsuit, finding that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to take the necessary “hard look” at the impact of hydraulic fracturing when it sold oil and gas leases in California.

The Northern District of California court held that when BLM sold four leases in 2011 for 2,700 acres of federal land in Monterey and Fresno counties, it violated NEPA by relying on outdated environmental reviews that did not address the increased prevalence of fracking in California and nationwide. The court found that BLM’s dismissal of development scenarios involving fracking as “outside of its jurisdiction” was insufficient to provide the “hard look” at environmental consequences required by NEPA.

This decision may have far-reaching implications because BLM is responsible for leasing oil and gas resources on all federally owned lands. BLM manages approximately 248 million acres and is responsible for about 700 million acres of subsurface mineral resources in the United States – much of it concentrated in the West. In addition, some of the land covered by the challenged federal leases is located in California’s Monterey shale formation, which is estimated to hold 15.4 billion barrels, or 64 percent of the nation’s total shale oil resources.

700325593  The ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club, challenging a September 2011 decision by BLM to auction off the acres of land in southern Monterey County to oil companies. Among other claims, plaintiffs alleged that BLM failed to address the impacts to water quality and other resources that result from hydraulic fracturing. The parties also directly protested the lease sale before it was finalized, urging preparation of a full environmental impact statement that analyzes potential water, endangered species, and climate change impacts, including potential impacts from fracking wastewater. (For those interested in keeping up with future BLM auctions for oil and gas leases on California lands, you can track these here.)

The court has asked for a joint recommendation on the proper remedy and next steps in this case by April 15. According to their press release, the Center and the Sierra Club believe the lease sale should be set aside.

This Thursday, Berkeley Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment (CLEE) will release a new report on hydraulic fracturing in California, focusing on fracking wastewater and potential water impacts.  Co-authored with Michael Kiparsky of CLEE’s new Wheeler Institute for Water Law & Policy, the report addresses the technical process, regulatory framework, and potential near-term changes to fracking in the State driven by pending agency rulemakings, lawsuits, and legislation. We also provide recommendations for more stringent oversight and transparency in fracking operations.

Did you know the BLM wants to wipe out native wild horses and burros in California and Nevada?

PM Gov Land Map.jpg.jpe

Did you know about the important April 25th meeting in Cedarville, Ca.? Can you attend to champion indigenous wild horses and historic burros? They will talk about wiping out the majority of wild horses left on northeastern California’s Twin Peaks range due to the 2012 Rush Fire.

“The changes could result in amendments affecting public lands managed by the BLM’s Alturas, Eagle Lake and Surprise field offices”, said Jeff Fontana, a spokesman for the federal agency, according to the Sacramento Bee.Who can go to this important meeting?

The BLM will push through the anti-wild horse plan unless advocates, lawyers and members of the public go to voice their support for native wild horses to live wild and free on public land, unharassed and in genetically viable herds.

Why is the BLM doing this? They are fast tracking energy projects on wild horse and burro herd management areas (public sanctuaries) as well as doing back room deals on water rights and more.

” . . . The Modoc-Washoe Experimental Stewardship Steering Committee will also discuss wild horse and burro management in northeastern California. A committee exploring options for reopening Cedarville’s lumber mill also will present a report, Fontana said.

The steering committee is one of three nationally established by Congress to advise federal officials on stewardship issues. It works on a full consensus basis to promote innovative range management approaches.

The public meeting starts at 9 a.m. at the BLM office at 602 Cressler St. in Cedarville.”

Read more here:
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/04/17/5347990/blm-meeting-will-discuss-grouse.html

Protect Mustangs™ spurs inquiry into dead horses at Palomino Valley

(Photo © Anne Novak, all rights reserved.)

(Photo © Anne Novak, all rights reserved.)

On Friday April 12, Anne Novak, Executive Director of Protect Mustangs™, asked a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) employee a simple facility question. She wanted to know the mortality rate of captured wild horses at the Palomino Valley facility since January 1, 2013.

Rather than provide an easy transparent answer, the employee dismissed her request and told Novak to contact the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Office.

Novak copied many advocates and members of the media on her second and third request for mortality rate information. She is concerned about the obvious lack of transparency in the BLM’s Wild Horse and Burro Program.

The wild horse and burro advocate community now wants to know how many have died at the facility since the beginning of the year. Several advocates have sent the BLM employee emails as a result of his refusal to share basic facility information.

Esteemed advocates and members of the public have contacted their elected officials to request government transparency and an answer to Novak’s question.

Members of the greater public are wondering why the BLM is hiding the mortality rate. The big questions are spreading on social media: “What is the BLM hiding? How many died at Palomino Valley since January 1, 2013?”

Below is Novak’s third request:

April 17, 2013

Dear Jeb,

Kindly provide a written response to my simple question from April 12th. You will find the whole email stream on our website as well as below:

How many horses died at the facility since Jan 1, 2013?

Thank you for your prompt assistance.

Sincerely,

Anne Novak

 

CC list includes Stacy Peters, Palomino Valley employee and others

BC list undisclosed

 

Anne Novak

Executive Director

Protect Mustangs™

San Francisco Bay Area

Tel./Text: 415.531.8454

 

Read about native wild horses: http://protectmustangs.org/?page_id=562 

Protect Mustangs™ on Facebook

Protect Mustangs™ on Twitter

Protect Mustangs™ on YouTube

Protect Mustangs™ in the News

Donate to help Protect Mustangs™

www.ProtectMustangs.org

Protect Mustangs™ is devoted to protecting native wild horses. Our mission is to educate the public about the native wild horse, protect and research American wild horses on the range and help those who have lost their freedom.

Read Animals Angels’ FOIA report revealing discrepancies in mortality records from January 1, 2010 to May 31, 2012: http://www.animalsangels.org/the-issues/horse-slaughter/foia-requests/497-blm-nevada-mortality-records-a-nevada-rendering-animals-angels-foia-request-reveals-discrepancies.html 

Corruption of the 1971 W.H. & B. Act of must end

 

Cross-posted from http://prophoto7journal.wordpress.com/2013/04/14/corruption-of-the-w-h-b-act-of-1971-needs-to-end/

by Photographer and Journalist

john_babe_pond_sideWild Horse and Burro Act of 1971, and the corruption within, is discussed here.  Indeed a noble Congressional situation and passed unanimously at the time.  The spirit was a good-faith gesture, by Law, toward America’s Wild Horse Herds — But something happened, something terrible happened, and it involved corruption from the top down, and terms of “Acceptable Abuse” which changed everything:

Congressional findings and declaration of policy, and states clearly:

“Congress finds and declares that wild free-roaming horses and burros are living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West; that they contribute to the diversity of life forms within the Nation and enrich the lives of the American people; and that these horses and burros are fast disappearing from the American scene. It is the policy of Congress that wild free-roaming horses and burros shall be protected from capture, branding, harassment, or death; and to accomplish this they are to be considered in the area where presently found, as an integral part of the natural system of the public lands.”

The Breaking Down of the Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971

The initial “blast” of ingenuity and a caring spirit exists in the very opening of the W.H. & B. Act of 971.  From then onward reality, the harsh mistress, enters into the realm of managing America’s Wild Horse Herds.  This actual spirit of well written “Congressional Declaration” becomes nothing more than deception.  Oddly, not by Congress, who had an honest concern toward America’s Wild Horse Herds, and correcting the blatant mistreatment of them within a protective context.  No, this comes down to the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management, and corruption combined with government dishonesty.

We have seen an absolute-reality take place, the disappearance over the years of the care and appropriate managing of America’s Wild Horse Herds.  The Reality:  Proper Management has been replaced with what is termed “Acceptable Abuse” which demonstrates beyond a doubt that the W.H.&B.P. Board of Consultants and the Bureau of Land Management are and always have been unqualified and corrupt; this is an absolute and quantitative reality directly related to their mismanagement or corrupt administration of America’s Wild Horse Herds.  The Federal court cases alone demonstrate beyond a doubt this is reality, and at heavy cost to taxpayers, yet ignored and replaced by misinformation and outright lies to the public, cloaked in some type of odd reasoning with hopes the public will accept it!  The Public has not!

The consultants on the board have a narrow margin of backgrounds.  Their history of demonstrating no knowledgeable context of proper management of horses, other than a livestock mentality, becomes quite obvious within their decisions.  This becomes significant, extremely devastating and on the road toward extinction of our wild horses, in their unqualified behavior to manage America’s Wild Horse Herds.

The absolute destruction of our Wild Horse Herds becomes more applicable, and fit to their purpose — all the while at a much higher cost to taxpayers.  The actual No-Roundup / No Abuse management paradigm, basically leaving the wild horses on America’s Public Lands with a manage-to-enhance and safe-guard them, in reality saves taxpayers $Billions of dollars!  But ignored, because in their minds it is only taxpayer money, and to hell with taxpayers!

This leads to erroneous and contemptible management by BLM; whereas, the W.H.& B. Act of 1971 becomes ignored to the point of being null and void.  This leads to another harsh reality, contentiousness rather than preservation; management driven by animosity rather than a standard set for the protection of a vulnerable specifies; and a total waste of taxpayer money, with no proper or legitimate explanation toward expenditure.  The W.H.&B. Act of 1971 simply becomes a deceptive-cloak to hide and obtain money, because in reality there exists no type of proper management or care of America’s Wild Horse Herds what so ever and in accord with the Act.

Vulnerable Species Leads to Extinction

We have learned many things over the years when it comes to extinction of our wildlife.  Apparently, these same learned attributes remain ignored by those same people, who claim to be our nation’s Stewarts of our PublicLands and America’s Wildlife.  Well documented lessons from the past, although ignored currently, still remain the key toward avoiding extinction of a species.

For example yes, there is a difference between a Wild Horse and a domesticated bred horse;  Yes, there is a difference between the many species of wolves, and the domestic dogs of the world; It is this simple to understand.

1.  Slow moving animals are no competition to man-made devises such as helicopters used in the wild horse herd roundups — i.e. no legitimate reasons are ever given to conform to the W.H. & B. Act of 1971 for legitimate roundups — the W.H. & B. Act is ignored in total;

2.  Large animals are vulnerable to over-hunting as well as to government agencies convoluted lies and misinformation, which it has been shown in history, many times, leading to species extinction of many animals;

3.  Altruism, or specifies that have come close to civilization, bonds established in regard to images or friendships, etc., have become detrimental to many species throughout history — i.e. wild horses, wolves, buffalo, Steller’s Sea Cow, the Passenger Pigeon, etc;

4.  Vulnerability due to restricted habitat has been a major cause of wild life extinction throughout history, and is well documented — a lesson here to be not only learned but placed into management paradigms, especially when managing wild horses or wolves;

5.  A related, and certainly obvious situation within this context, is the “Over-Specialization of Habitat”  — and within this discussion cattle and the lies perpetrated by government agencies such as the BLM to enhance our Public Lands with cattle, oil, energy, mining, and other corporate circumstances, etc. . . and to hell with America’s natural ecological habitats and wildlife.

With this categorical explanation, which is well documented and referenced quite well, yet ignored, remains troublesome to the majority of Americans.  The real-truth is any species that suffers from several of these factors can be quickly eliminated.

Conclusively

The fact is that ecological systems are vulnerable to many environmental situations.  Our civilization intruding upon any of these systems becomes detrimental to the over all balance of many other ecological systems.  Our civilization has a history of taking-over lands that once belonged to wildlife and vegetation, and those same elements of nature are now extinct, sadly!

Public Lands and Range Mangers do have access to wildlife that is beneficial to America’s Ecological systems.  It can be attributable to a “language of protection” toward our environment (which includes Wild Horse Herds), if they are qualified to observe these situations.  Most of them are not qualified, so good management is currently non-existent!

Listening and observing what our natural environment has to tell us is of significance, always.  A point of discussion currently that is picking up momentum within the environmental community is the fact of how we identify the difference between a technical report generated by a political agenda — compared to a technical report that positively approaches resolution toward solving a serious environmental or wildlife issue of concern.

Yes, we can use the wild horse herds to let us know of ecological viability within many ecological systems, simply by their presence and health.  Ironically, to many environmentalists, to include terrestrial and wildlife research biologists, government agencies and their consultants ignore this situation.

This is due to government employees lack of qualifications to manage our Public Lands; due to lack of ingenuity and competence to tell the truth; and, due to our present government employees lack of ethics and responsibility in safe-guarding taxpayer money.

When we have proper information, and the public needs this information to rationally confront our government presently, we have the tools to enhance and better America’s over all environment.  If we ignore any of the historical facts, then combine them with arrogant management decisions, we will lose not only wildlife but significant and life giving habitat that keeps us all alive.  Ultimately, the fact is we need better representation and the reality of more and better qualified people to manage our wildlife and environmental situations of this world.

The Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971 exemplifies this situation to the thousandth degree, and America’s Wild Horse Herds are paying the price — government agency’s bad behavior and bad decision making — when compared to actually following the very premise of what the Act outlines — and the ever present historical value of managing not only a diverse realm of ecological systems, but our wildlife as well.

____________________________

The Wild Horse and Burro Act of 1971 Explained.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_and_Free-Roaming_Horses_and_Burros_Act_of_1971

Burea of Land Management version of the W.H.&B. Act of 1971http://www.wildhorseandburro.blm.gov/92-195.htm

The Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (without BLM reference and perspective)http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Wild+FreeRoaming+Horses+and+Burros+Act+of+1971.-a0141802026

Dry saline land: an investigation using ground-based geophysics, soil survey and spatial methods near Jamestown, South Australia. By R.W. Fitzpatrick, M. Thomas, P.J. Davies and B.G. Williams

Literature Review of Factors Influencing Public Perceptions of Water Reuse. By Murni Po, Juliane D. Kaercher and Blair E. Nancarrow – NOTE: This report has been updated in 2004 – click here for the updated version.

Development of a strategy for monitoring Australia’s natural resources: a discussion paper. By Mac Kirby, Neil McKenzie and Myriam Bormans

Quantifying and managing sources of sediments and nutrients in low-lying canelands. By Christian H. Roth, Fleur Visser, Robert Wasson, John Reghenzani and Ian Prosser

Use of APSIM to simulate water balances of dryland farming systems in south eastern Australia. By K. Verburg and W.J. Bond

Salt Transport in the Bremer Hills, SA. Interpretation of Spatial Datasets for Salt Distribution. Fourth report for NAP South Australian Salt Mapping and Management. Chris Smitt, Jim Cox and Phil Davies

Modelling catchment-scale nutrient generation. By Lachlan T.H. Newham and John J. Drewry

The Floodplain Risk Methodology (FRM): A suite of tools to rapidly assess at the regional scale the impacts of groundwater inflows and benefits of improved inundation on the floodplains of the lower River Murray. By Kate Holland, Ian Jolly, Ian Overton, Matt Miles, Linda Vears and Glen Walker

Ecological Risk Assessment for the Wetlands of the Lower Burdekin. By Bart M. Kellett, Terry Walshe and Keith L. Bristow

Ivanhoe Plain Aquifer Pumping Trial July 2003 – April 2005: Stage 1 OrdRiver Irrigation Area, Kununurra, Western Australia. By Anthony J. Smith, Duncan Palmer, Daniel W. Pollock and Ramsis B. Salama

Modelling periphyton biomass, photosynthesis and respiration in streams. By J. J. Christopher Rutherford and Susan M. Cuddy

Effects of salinity on stream ecosystems: improving models for macroinvertebrates. By J. Christopher Rutherford and Ben J. Kefford

A conceptual model of particulate trapping in riparian buffers. By Lachlan Newham, Kit Rutherford, and Barry Croke

Preliminary Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points Plan (HACCP) – Salisbury Stormwater to Drinking Water Aquifer Storage Transfer and Recovery (ASTR) Project. By Swierc, J., Page, D., Van Leeuwen, J. and Dillon, P.

A Bilingual User’s Guide for the Decision Support Tool for Managing Re-Vegetation and its Impact on Hydrology (ReVegIH) in the Coarse Sandy Hilly Catchments of the Loess Plateau, China.  By Li, L.T., McVicar, T.R., Van Niel, T.G. Zhang, L., Li, R., Yang, Q.K., Zhang, X.P., Mu, X.M., Wen, Z.M., Liu, W.Z., Zhao, Y.A. and Liu, Z.H.

Mapping Perennial Vegetation Suitability and Identifying Priority Areas for Implementing the Re-Vegetation Program in the Coarse SandyHilly Catchments of the Loess Plateau, China. By Tim R. McVicar, ZhongMing Wen, Tom G. Van Niel, LingTao Li, QinKe Yang, Rui Li and Feng Jiao

Managing Change: Australian structural adjustment lessons for water. By J.C. McColl and M.D. Young

Estimates of average hydraulic drivers for sediment and nutrient fluxes in the GBR catchments from SedNet. By F.J. Cook and A. Henderson

Idealised analogue for predicting groundwater response times from sloping aquifers. By Glen R. Walker, Mat Gilfedder, and Warrick R. Dawes

Understanding spatial patterns of discharge in semi-arid regions using a recharge-discharge balance to determine vegetation health. By Rebecca Doble, Glen Walker and Craig Simmons

Modelling the fate of molinate in rice paddies of South Eastern Australia using RICEWQ. By Evan W.Christen, Wendy C. Quayle, Sang-Ok Chung and Ki Jung Park

Pesticide use in the 6th Creek sub-catchment, Mt. Lofty Ranges, S.A. and assessment of risk of off-site movement using Pesticide Impact Rating Index (PIRI). By Danni Oliver and Rai Kookana

Pesticide use in the Ord River Irrigation Area, Western Australia, and Risk Assessment of Off-site Impact using Pesticide Impact Rating Index (PIRI). By Danni Oliver and Rai Kookana

An Automated Remote Digital Image Collection System. By Aaron Hawdon and Rex Keen

Spatially Distributing 21 Years of Monthly Hydrometeorological Data in China: Spatio-Temporal Analysis of FAO-56 Crop Reference Evapotranspiration and Pan Evaporation in the Context of Climate Change. By Tim R. McVicar, LingTao Li, Tom G. Van Niel, Michael F. Hutchinson, XingMin Mu and ZhiHong Liu

Sequester prompts call for wild horses and burros to be returned to the wild

Wild horse mares in holding (Photo © Anne Novak, all rights reserved.)

Wild horse mares in holding (Photo © Anne Novak, all rights reserved.)

Conservation group requests a freeze on roundups

WASHINGTON (April 8, 2013)–Last week Protect Mustangs, the California based conservation group, officially called for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to put a freeze on roundups and return all wild horses and burros, in government funded holding, to herd management areas in the West. They cited the current climate of federal economic instability as putting captive wild horses and burros at risk. As of April 7th, Protect Mustangs has not received a response from from BLM officials.

“It’s fiscal folly to roundup more wild horses and burros than they can adopt out,” explains Anne Novak, executive director for Protect Mustangs. “The roundups need to stop now. We are calling for the more than 50,000 stockpiled native wild horses and historic burros to be returned immediately to public land. We are concerned the government won’t be able to pay for their feed and care during the federal fiscal crisis. We need to be proactive to ensure their safety. If a government shutdown occurs, their only chance of survival is in the wild.”

The Weekly Standard broke the story on BLM’s $6 Mil helicopter contract for the wild horse and burro program after the sequester went into effect.

Roundups increased dramatically in 2009–the same year BLM started fast tracking energy projects with the Stimulus Act in full force. The deadly Calico Roundup and others popped up all along the Ruby Pipeline natural gas route. Protect Mustangs believes wild horses and burros are being removed from 26 million acres to avoid environmental mitigation and costly delays for the extractive industry.

Last month, in response to the BLM’s request for comments on the controversial Continental Divide-Cresta natural gas development project, Protect Mustangs called for a $50 Mil fund to mitigate environmental distress and removal of Wyoming’s wild horses.

In 2012, Wild Horse & Burro Advisory Board member, Callie Hendrickson, suggested slaughtering native wild horses as a solution for the government’s holding crisis. Protect Mustangs is concerned the pro-kill faction of the BLM will jump on current federal economic instability to spin a death or slaughter sentence for captured wild horses and burros.

“Native wild horses should not be made to suffer further because of the BLM’s fiscal irresponsibility,” states Kerry Becklund, outreach director for Protect Mustangs. “Killing them is wrong. Now it’s time to return them to their wild lands. All the captive males have already been castrated so they won’t be reproducing. Overpopulation is a myth anyways.”

The BLM justifies using fertility control drugs because of the overpopulation myth. Yet cattle outnumbers wild horses at least 50 to 1 and is the source of most range damage. EPA approved “limited use pesticides” such as SpayVac®, GonaCon™ and ZonaStat-H appear to be risky forms of fertility control. Currently the BLM is using these drugs on wild horses and burros on the range. Protect Mustangs is against using pesticides on native wild horses–especially the nonviable herds.

“Why aren’t these drugs FDA approved for domestic horses if they aren’t harmful?” asks Novak. “We are against using these drugs on mares being released back into the wild. It’s dangerous to use these drugs on nonviable herds. If the herd numbers drop then inbreeding occurs and that’s bad.”

Wild horses are a native species. The horse evolved in America millions of years ago. There were 2 million roaming in freedom in 1900. Today they are underpopulated on the range. Advocates estimate there are less than 20,000 left in the wild. They can fill their niche in the ecosystem and be managed using holistic methods to reduce wildfire fuel, reseed the land, create biodiversity and reverse desertification.

“We are asking for a proactive solution to avoid disaster,” adds Novak. “It’s simple. Return wild horses and burros to the range and save more than $50 Mil taxpayer dollars annually.”

# # #

Below is a copy of the official email sent to Ms. Guilfoyle, Division Chief of Wild Horses & Burros. It was copied to the BLM Acting Director and other staff:

——– Original Message ——–

Subject: Calling for a Freeze on Roundups & Return to HMAs

From: <anne@protectmustangs.org>

Date: Mon, April 01, 2013 1:02 pm

To: jguilfoy@blm.gov

Cc: dbolstad@blm.govnkornze@blm.govjconnell@blm.gov

Joan Guilfoyle, Division Chief

Division of Wild Horses and Burros

20 M Street, S.E.

Washington, DC 20003

Main Contact Number: 202-912-7260

 

Dear Ms. Guilfoyle,

In this climate of federal economic instability, including the possibility of government shutdown, we request that all wild horses and burros in government funded holding be returned to the herd management areas immediately. We call for a freeze on all wild horse and burro roundups to prevent the equids from being caught up in an uncertain fate.

Sincerely,

Anne Novak

 

Anne Novak

Executive Director

Protect Mustangs

 

Media Contacts:

Anne Novak, 415.531.8454 Anne@Protect Mustangs.org

Kerry Becklund, 510.502.1913 Kerry@ProtectMustangs.org

Photos, video and interviews available upon request

Links of interest:

$6 Mil helicopter contract during sequester: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/feds-sign-6m-helicopter-contract-wild-horse-and-burro_714436.html  

Sequester affects wild horse adoption center near Reno: http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020634912_apnvbudgetbattlewildhorses1stldwritethru.html

Ruby pipeline and wild horse roundups? http://www.8newsnow.com/story/12769788/i-team-bp-connected-to-wild-horse-roundups

Protect Mustangs calls for $50 Mil Wyoming mitigation fund for wild horses http://horsebackmagazine.com/hb/archives/20979  and http://protectmustangs.org/?p=3954

Callie Hendrickson, pro-slaughter appointee: http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2012/03/callie_hendrickson_wild_horse_board_slaughter.php

GonaCon press release spins wild horse overpopulation myths: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/02/horse_vaccine_approval.shtml

ZonaStat-H EPA Pesticide Fact Sheet: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/pending/fs_PC-176603_01-Jan-12.pdf

Cloud Foundation report: Observations of PZP contraceptive us in the Pryors http://protectmustangs.org/?p=3901

Cloud Foundation paper: PZP-22 . . . Do unintended side effects outweigh benefits? http://protectmustangs.org/?p=3270

Native wild horses: http://protectmustangs.org/?page_id=562

Protect Mustangs in the news: http://protectmustangs.org/?page_id=218

www.ProtectMustangs.org

Protect Mustangs is devoted to protecting native wild horses. Our mission is to educate the public about the native wild horse, protect and research American wild horses on the range and help those who have lost their freedom.

 

Saved from government holding, 2 long yearlings get a second chance

“Follow your heart. Adopt a pair of mustangs. Gentle them with love.” ~Anne Novak, Executive Director of Protect Mustangs

Both wild yearlings, Blondie and Tibet, had 2-Strikes from failed Bureau of Land Management (BLM) adoptions. Protect Mustangs stepped in to prevent a 3rd Strike and save them from sale ($10 each by the truckload) and probable slaughter.

Blondie is the soon to be 2 year old palomino filly from California’s Fox Hog herd.

Tibet is the 18 months old gelding with a blaze from the Continental Divide in Wyoming.

Blondie arrived untamed from the Litchfield BLM Holding Corral in December 2012 and Tibet arrived from the Wyoming Corral in February 2013 thanks to our village of supporters.

Now both wild horses are gentled. They have been exposed to cars, trucks, helicopters, people riding horses, kids, dogs, cats, kids on scooters, tarps and more. They can be haltered, pick up their feet and be lead. This is their second turnout in the main arena at the training facility. Anne Novak has donated their training.

Protect Mustangs is an all volunteer organization and are very grateful for your help. Please donate towards board and care for the wild horse Ambassadors. Protect Mustangs is also raising money for a used truck and trailer to facilitate adoptions by bringing wild horses down from the BLM corrals near Reno and Susanville, once the mustangs have been adopted. The organization will use the truck and trailer for community outreach and education work as well. Please help by donating here: http://protectmustangs.org/?page_id=701

No treats were used during this training session.

All images © Anne Novak for Protect Mustangs.org, all rights reserved.

Congressional hearing on allegations of abuse, fraud and mismanagement at the BLM

In 2012 BLM Deputy Director Mike Pool testified before the House Resources National Parks, Forests and Public Lands subcommittee. During the Q&A segment of the hearing, subcommittee chairman Rob Bishop (UT-01) questioned Mr. Pool about his knowledge of BLM employees misusing taxpayer to fund personal expenses.

 

Request for public participation in BLM Wyoming RAC meeting using communication technology

(Photo © Cat Kindsfather, all rights reserved)

(Photo © Cat Kindsfather, all rights reserved)

Growing Concern BLM will wipe out certain Wyoming herds to appease the local grazing association

The public feels their written comments are not taken into consideration by BLM.

Stakeholders want to participate in the Wyoming RAC meeting giving oral comments using technology such as a teleconference or Skype to foster the public process.

The scoping notice is alarming: http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wy/information/NEPA/rfodocs/adobetown-saltwells.Par.3977.File.dat/ATSWScopeNotice.pdf

Protect Mustangs is circulating a petition requesting the BLM use communication technology to allow oral comments.

Below is the formal request to include the public in oral comments using communication technology and Livestream the controversial meeting.

From: anne@protectmustangs.org <anne@protectmustangs.org>

Subject: Public wants to give oral comment using technology

To: dsimpson@blm.gov

Cc: mpool@blm.govcwertz@blm.govcwarren@blm.gov

Date: Friday, February 1, 2013, 1:22 AM

Dear Sirs & Madames,

The public is up in arms that such an important opportunity for public comment is being held in a remote area without the ability to make oral comment using technology to bridge the distance.

Most people have jobs that prevent them from traveling to Rock Springs, Wyoming to spend the night and speak at 8 a.m. the following morning.

The cost of traveling to your location is also excessive.

The public comment period will be Feb. 8, at 8 a.m. Interested persons may make oral comments or file written statements for the council to consider. Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment and time available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. If there are no members of the public interested in speaking, the meeting will move on to the next agenda topic. ~ BLM

I’d like to ask you to please find a way to engage all the stakeholders in oral comment and allow enough time for this to occur.

We’d like to go on the record to ask you, as an act of good faith, to facilitate the public’s wish to comment orally by implementing a teleconference during the comment period or allow stakeholders to comment orally via Skype.

We request you LiveStream the 2 days of meetings to show you are engaging in transparency.

Thank you for your kind assistance.

Best wishes,

Anne Novak

 

 

 

Release Date: 01/09/13

Contacts:

Cindy Wertz (307) 775-6014

 

WYOMING RESOURCE ADVISORY COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR FEBRUARY

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Wyoming Resource Advisory Council will meet Wednesday, Feb. 6, Thursday, Feb. 7, and Friday, Feb. 8, at BLM’s High Desert District, Rock Springs Field Office, 280 Highway 191 North, Rock Springs, Wyo., in the Pilot Butte Conference Room.

The meeting is open to the public. The meeting will begin on Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. at the Rock Springs Wild Horse Holding Facility on Lionkol Road. The meetings will begin at 8 a.m. on Thursday and Friday at the Rock Springs Field Office. Planned agenda topics include a discussion on checkerboard land ownership, landscape scale partnerships, invasive weeds, trails and follow up from previous meetings.

The public comment period will be Feb. 8, at 8 a.m. Interested persons may make oral comments or file written statements for the council to consider. Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment and time available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. If there are no members of the public interested in speaking, the meeting will move on to the next agenda topic.

The purpose of the council is to advise the Secretary of the Interior through the BLM on a variety of issues associated with public land management. For more information contact BLM RAC Coordinator Cindy Wertz, (307) 775-6014.

The BLM manages more than 245 million acres of public land, the most of any Federal agency. This land, known as the National System of Public Lands, is primarily located in 12 Western states, including Alaska. The BLM also administers 700 million acres of sub-surface mineral estate throughout the nation. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, recreational and other activities on BLM-managed land contributed more than $130 billion to the U.S. economy and supported more than 600,000 American jobs. The Bureau is also one of a handful of agencies that collects more revenue than it spends. In FY 2012, nearly $5.7 billion will be generated on lands managed by the BLM, which operates on a $1.1 billion budget. The BLM’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands.

–BLM–

Wyoming State Office   5353 Yellowstone Rd.      Cheyenne, WY 82009

 

 

Anne Novak

Executive Director

Protect Mustangs

P.O. Box 5661

Berkeley, California 94705

Links of interest:

Wyoming Resource Advisory Council Meeting: http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/info/news_room/2013/january/09-RAC.html

BLM scoping statement Adobe Town and Salt Wells Creek Herd Management Area: http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wy/information/NEPA/rfodocs/adobetown-saltwells.Par.3977.File.dat/ATSWScopeNotice.pdf

Proposed Wyoming gas field would be one of the largest on the planet

Posted on January 31st, 2013 by The Wyoming Outdoor Council

This image, taken from GoogleEarth, shows the heart of the Jonah Field, which, compared to this proposed project had roughly one-third the number of wells approved.

This GoogleEarth image shows the heart of the Jonah Field, which, compared to this proposed project had roughly one-third the number of wells approved. While the Jonah has more well pads relative to wells (on roughly 30,000 acres), the Continental Divide-Creston project will cover more than 1 million acres.

Let’s speak up before March 6 to help protect residents, workers, and the environment

By Bruce Pendery

The Bureau of Land Management is analyzing a mammoth, 9,000-well natural gas drilling project proposed in south-central Wyoming near Wamsutter.

Called the Continental Divide-Creston project, it would be one of the largest single natural gas field developments in the United States.

We are asking for your help to reduce the environmental impacts of this project as much as possible. Please send your comments to the BLM by March 6! (See below)

Our biggest concern—and what we are focusing on the most—is making sure this project is done right relative to air quality. This development needs to be conducted in such a way that residents and workers are safe and can breathe clean air, and that the air, land, and wildlife, stays healthy in the future.


This Proposed Project Will Be Bigger than Rhode Island

The BLM would allow BP America Production Company and other operators to drill up to 8,950 new wells. The project area would include 1.1 million acres—or more than 1,600 square miles—much of which would be in what’s known as the “railroad checkerboard.” And much of this proposed project would involve “infill” of existing natural gas fields where 4,400 wells have already been drilled.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council does not oppose development in this area outright because it is not located in one our “heritage landscapes” (iconic areas where we believe any energy development is inappropriate) and it is largely an “infill” project where there is already a lot of existing disturbance.

However, although much of this area is far from pristine, we need to do everything we can to ensure that companies “do it right” at every stage of this project’s development. Therefore, we believe the BLM should require careful, effective, environmentally protective measures as conditions to the development in order to protect residents, workers, air quality, and remaining wildlife habitats.

 


How to Make a Difference

The BLM has prepared a draft environmental analysis, called an “environmental impact statement” for this project. It considers five alternative development options but it does not specify a “preferred alternative.”

The BLM is now accepting comments on this draft analysis. The comment deadline is March 6. It would be very helpful if you could offer your input on the draft. This could help improve the project, and help ensure that we “do it right” in the face of this massive level of development.

Here are some issues you might consider raising in your comments:

  • While much of this project is in the “railroad checkerboard”—where the BLM’s ability to protect the environment is reduced because of the intervening privately owned sections of land—the project area extends into large, contiguous blocks of public land roughly 20 miles north and south of Interstate 80. You can ask the BLM to provide enhanced protection for these contiguous areas of public lands.
  • The Directional Drilling alternative is the most environmentally protective of the current alternatives, so please ask the BLM to adopt it. This alternative would be even more effective if the BLM were to set a limit on the number of well pads that can be developed.
  • Directional Drilling has become increasingly common and popular with industry with the horizontal “reach” of these wells becoming ever greater.Having multiple wells drilled from a single well pad with directional drilling to access gas resources at great distances can greatly reduce environmental impacts. You can ask the BLM to maximize the use of directional drilling, and to require the greatest “reach” possible.

 


Where to Send Comments:

You can submit your comments to the BLM by March 6 by e-mail:Continental_Divide_Creston_WYMail@blm.gov, or fax: 307-328-4224, or by regular mail: Bureau of Land Management, Rawlins Field Office, P.O. Box 2407, Rawlins, WY 82301.

You can view the draft environmental impact statement here:http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/field_offices/Rawlins.html.

Cross-posted from: http://wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org/blog/2013/01/31/proposed-wyoming-gas-field-would-be-one-of-the-largest-on-the-planet/

BLM says it cannot track cattle on its lands

 

Cows in Nevada (Photo © Anne Novak)

Cows in Nevada (Photo © Anne Novak)

Blames Lack of “Seamless Data” for Excluding Livestock from Range Assessments 

By: Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER)

Washington, DC January 24, 2013 – The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) says it was an absence of “reliable data”—and not politics—that caused it to exclude consideration of commercial livestock impacts from multi-million dollar assessments of environmental conditions on Western range lands. BLM thus rejected the first scientific misconduct complaint filed against it by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), which today released a detailed rebuttal of BLM’s self-exoneration.

In a letter dated January 2, 2013, Louis Brueggeman, the BLM Scientific Integrity Officer, rejected the PEER scientific misconduct complaint filed more than a year earlier, on November 30, 2011. He concluded that the complaint had “no merit” since the decision to exclude grazing was reached independently by study team leaders (all BLM managers) solely for “technical reasons” relating to the “lack of sufficient existing data” about livestock impacts.

In reaching this conclusion, BLM ignored meeting minutes produced by PEER in which BLM managers are quoted saying that study of grazing impacts would concern “stakeholders” and the Washington Office due to “fear of litigation.” The claim that the real reason was lack of data does not hold water because:

– Attempts to exclude grazing began at the earliest stages of the study, before data availability was even examined. Further, BLM assertions of data gaps were never examined, let alone verified;
– Other factors being studied, such as invasive species, also have data gaps but these issues did not prevent invasive species from being selected as a study focus; and
– BLM managers hid the existence of a major livestock database which was never given to researchers.

“Caught with its pants down, BLM would have us believe it is wearing ankle warmers,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that the $40 million study was the biggest in BLM history but will end up being largely useless. “As by far the biggest disturbance factor on Western range lands, commercial livestock grazing simply cannot be left out of a scientific landscape assessment.”

PEER today asked Dr. Suzette Kimball, the Scientific Integrity Officer for the entire Interior Department, to reject BLM’s findings and institute an independent review. This is the first scientific misconduct complaint filed against BLM under rules purporting to prevent political manipulation of science.

“Unless some standards of credibility are applied, agencies will be able to simply deny instances of scientific misconduct, no matter how well documented or compelling,” Ruch added. “This scientific integrity process will become a complete joke if BLM can get away with claiming ‘the cows ate my homework.'”

See the original scientific integrity complaint

View the BLM response

Read the PEER letter to Dr. Kimball

Examine line-by-line rebuttal

Look at the damage wreaked by commercial livestock