Garfield_County_Federal_Lands_document_PRINT_1

GARFIELD COUNTY FEDERAL LANDS NATURAL RESOURCES COORDINATION PLAN & POLICIES Adopted by the Board of County Commissioners – September 8, 2020 Adopted via resolution 2020-45 Garfield County Board of County Commissioners John Martin, Chairman | Tom Jankovsky | Mike Samson

page | 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Forward ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 4 Special Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………………6 I. Purpose ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 II. Garfield County History, Culture and Background ………………………………………… 7 III. Authority …………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 IV. Obligation of Bureau of Land Management……………………………………………………9 V. Obligation of the US Forest Service ………………………………………………………….. 10 VI. Benefits and Burdens of Public Lands ……………………………………………………….. 10 VII. Fundamental Principles of the Plan………………………………………………………… 10 A. Multiple Use …………………………………………………………………………………… 11 B. Sustained Yield ……………………………………………………………………………. 11 C. Public Land Management Principles …………………………………………………… 11 D. Coordination …………………………………………………………………………………. 11 E. Cooperating Agency Status ………………………………………………………………. 11 F. Collaboration ……………………………………………………….……………………….. 11 VIII. Land Management Policies ……………………………………………………………….. 12 A. Forest / Timber Management …………………………………………………………….. 12 B. Wildland Fire …………………………………………………………………………………. 12 C. Range Management ……………………………………………………………………… 15 D. Noxious Weeds & Invasive Species ……………………………………………………….. 17 E. Energy Resources (Oil & Gas, Oil Shale, Coal, Solar, Geothermal, Hydroelectric) ... 19 F. Socio-economic & Economic Viability ……………………………………………………. 23 G. Travel Management, Access & Rights-of-Way ……………………………………….. 24 H. Land Acquisition & Disposal …………………………………………………………….. 25 I. Wildlife Management ……………………………………………………………………… 26 J. Water - Rivers, Lakes, Reservoirs, Ditches and Water Rights …………………………… 30 K.AirQuality……………………………………………………………………………………….32 L. Outdoor Recreation / Tourism / Hunting & Fishing ……………………………………... 33 M. Hard Rock Mining / Gravel & Aggregate Mining ……………………………………… 34 N. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Oil and Natural Gas Operations ……………………. 36 IX. Federal Land Designations & Policies…………………………………………………….. 38 A. Wilderness Areas …………………………………………………………………………….. 38 B. Wilderness Study Areas ……………………………………………………………………… 39 C.LandswithWildernessCharacteristics(LWC)……………………………………………..39 D. Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) ……………………………………… 40 X. Federal & State Land Revenues & Policies………………………………………………… 41 A. Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) ………………………………………………………….. 41 B. Secure Rural Schools (SRS) ………………………………………………………………. 41 C. Severance Tax ……………………………………………………………………………….. 42 D. Federal Mineral Lease ……………………………………………………………………… 42 E. State Lands Board ……………………………………………………………………………. 45 XI. Equal Access to Justice – Sue Settle Agreement ……………………………………… 45

page| 3 APPENDICES 1) Restoring the Rule of Law and Federalism by Ensuring Coordination with State and Local Governments. Prepared by Chavez County, New Mexico; Garfield County, Colorado; Kane County, Utah; American Stewards of Liberty; and Norman D. James, Fennemore Craig P.C. (This was also the Proposed Presidential Executive Order on Coordination – completed in 2017.) 2) Guidelines for Coordination with the U.S. Department of Interior and U.S. Department of Agriculture. Prepared by American Stewards of Liberty. 3) Coordination and Plan Consistency Review Under Section 202(C)(9) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. Norman D. James, Fennemore Craig P.C., 2016 4) Forest Service and State, County, and Local Government Coordination Under Section 6 of the National Forest Management Act. Norman D. James and Ronald W. Opsahl, Fennemore Craig, P.C., 2017 5) Bureau of Land Management: “A desk guide to Cooperating Agency Relationships and Coordination with Intergovernmental Partners.” 2012 6) Guide to Best Practices for Rangeland Management in Garfield County, Colorado Prepared by Lamar Smith, October 24, 2019 7) Resolution 2020-45 adopting the Garfield County Federal Lands Natural Resources Coordination Plan and Policies.

page | 4 FORWARD GARFIELD COUNTY FEDERAL LANDS NATURAL RESOURCES COORDINATION PLAN AND POLICIES COMMISSIONER TOM JANKOVSKY Since the turn of the 20th century, Garfield County has worked cooperatively with federal public land managers in supporting the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. The result was a balanced mosaic of energy resource development, management of timber resources, livestock grazing, recreation and pristine wilderness among other uses. More than 62 percent (2,000 square miles) of Garfield County is public land and home to some of the most abundant natural resources in the United States, including the second largest natural gas reserves in the United States. Prudent, multiple use policies of these resources have long been part of our cultural identity and the backbone of our economy, making Garfield County a very important location in the western U.S. While always operating in the role of a cooperating agency, the Garfield County commissioners noticed a drastic change in how the federal government was planning for the future of public lands management. In 2010, just two years into the Obama Administration, there was a shift in the way federal lands were being handled. It began with the oil shale environmental impact statement (EIS), which decreased amount of available land for oil shale development leasing from 400,000 acres to 60,000 acres for research and development leases in the final EIS. This process did not follow any of the rules and regulations for federal land planning and reduced the voice of local government. The Garfield County commissioners traveled to Washington D.C. to protest the decision, which came from then Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. In the following five years, Garfield County saw another eight major EIS processes, all of which favored a radical environmental agenda. These land-use decisions didn’t come from local land managers, who understand the importance of multiple use for Garfield County. These decisions were forced through from the top down and driven by environmentalists at the Department of Interior and the environmental activist community. These radical environmental changes under the Obama administration were the reason why Garfield County created its own policies to ensure federal public land management practices do not harm the socioeconomics and culture of our county. The county has engaged in a wide variety of policy areas on public lands, including travel and wildlife management and energy resource development; federal land designations, such as wilderness study areas, areas of critical environmental concern, and the like; and federal land revenue policies - payment in lieu of taxes (PILT), the Secure Rural Schools Program, Revised Statute 2477 and more. Home to substantial public lands, Garfield County is obligated to engage in as many federal policy areas as possible that directly impact the economic viability and culture of our county, all while factoring in the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. The key to ensuring the County’s voice on federal land matters is the concept of coordination, which is directly supported by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) and the United States Forest Management Act of 1976 (USFMA). In 2012, Garfield County faced substantial policy challenges from the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Draft Greater Sage-grouse Environmental Impact Statement at the direction of the Department of Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The management policies, along with draft habitat mapping, posed significant challenges to the socioeconomic wellbeing of Garfield County. By coordinating with federal and state agencies, the county used a scientific approach to engage in substantial policy decisions that affected the outcomes and alternatives of the BLM’s 2015 and 2019 records of decision. In the process, the county established strong working relationships with the state and BLM, bringing about some consistency between federal, state and local policies.

page | 5 The County developed its own policies and principles in the Garfield County Greater Sage-grouse Conservation Plan, which provided private and public landowners with land management principles, policies, incentives, and best management practices tailored to fit Garfield County’s unique landscape and habitat for the betterment of the species. This process created the most refined, scientifically sound and reproducible Greater Sage-grouse habitat map in northwest Colorado. The map has been endorsed by Colorado Parks and Wildlife and adopted by the BLM, which incorporated it into its record of decision. Garfield County participated heavily in the BLM’s Planning 2.0 effort, which turned the County’s efforts over to Congress and the President of the United States. Along with a team of western counties, American Stewards of Liberty (ASL) and legal counsel, Garfield County crafted a presidential order that supported coordination with local governments in federal decision-making. As a result, Garfield County was the lone Colorado county selected to join other western counties to work on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the BLM and the National Association of Counties (NACo) that elevated the importance of coordination. In September 2020, Garfield County developed and adopted this Federal Lands Natural Resources Coordination Plan and Policies, which provides a coordination process to help agencies understand the County’s requirements and make all efforts to achieve consistent policies regarding federal land. As rural western Colorado county commissioners, we have a deep appreciation of our county’s rich natural resources and recognize that coordination has provided us with a valuable process to navigate important federal land management policies that affect Garfield County. We achieved success in a variety of policy areas by closely engaging with federal agencies. In the spirit of good governance, the County also hosts a quarterly meeting with state and federal land managers, in which a wide variety of agencies come together to inform us about upcoming planning issues and areas we can work together. We want to thank Garfield County Deputy Manager Fred Jarman for his hard work in helping bring this plan to fruition, and Margaret Byfield, executive director at American Stewards of Liberty, for her expertise regarding coordination and policy direction. We are grateful to the variety of stakeholders who contributed in the plan’s development and represented important local interests that define our way of life, including recreation, natural resource stewardship, agriculture, energy development, and federal agency land management policy, just to name a few. These policies will undoubtedly evolve over time, and this document shall serve as the County’s leading guide when engaging on federal land management policy development. MIKE SAMSON, COMMISSIONER TOM JANKOVSKY, COMMISSIONER JOHN MARTIN, CHAIRMAN

page | 6 SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT It is with specific appreciation we would like to acknowledge the work provided in the preparation of this document to the following contributors, participants and organizations: Garfield County Board of County Commissioners: Commissioner John Martin, Chairman Commissioner Tom Jankovsky Commissioner Mike Samson Tom Jankovsky, Garfield County Commissioner– Project Champion Fred A. Jarman, Deputy County Manager – Project Lead Garfield County Planning Commission The Garfield County Stakeholders Group including representation from: • United States Forest Service • United States Bureau of Land Management • Colorado Department of Parks and Wildlife • Energy Industry Representatives – Caerus Oil & Gas & Terra Energy Partners • Colorado Cattleman’s Association • American Stewards of Liberty • Wilderness Workshop • Roaring Fork Mountain Biking Association • White River Trail Runners ATV / UTV Club • Local Fly-Fishing Industry Representatives • Local Guiding & Outfitter / Outdoor Hunting / Shooting Representatives • Blue Sky Adventures and Canyon Bikes • Local River Rafting / Cycling Industry Representatives • National Oil Shale Association • Citizen At-Large Representative • Local Sheep and Cattle Grazing Representatives

page | 7 I. PURPOSE The Garfield County Federal Lands Natural Resource Coordination Plan & Policies (the Plan) sets forth the County’s policies regarding the use of federal lands in Garfield County. These policies shall be coordinated with all federal planning and management efforts related to the use of the federal lands as required by federal law. Sixty-two percent of Garfield County’s land base is federally owned, making the use of these lands critical to the County and the people it serves. Ultimately, the purpose of this Plan is to provide the policies and process that will help federal agencies understand the County’s requirements and make all efforts to achieve consistent policies regarding land use on federal lands in Garfield County. II. GARFIELD COUNTY HISTORY, CULTURE AND BACKGROUND Founded in 1883, Garfield County is known for its rural to resort character with the main economic drivers of energy development, tourism, and agriculture. The County encompasses approximately 3,000 square miles in Northwest Colorado and has a population of 60,061. Approximately 62% of these lands are owned and managed by the federal government. Under the U. S. Department of Interior, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages 615,973 acres, and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) manages 2,335 acres. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USFS) manages 515,865 acres. The remaining lands are owned by State, County and private interests. There are seven cities and towns within the County, including Carbondale, Glenwood Springs, Carbonate, New Castle, Silt, Rifle and Parachute comprising 60% of the County’s population. The remainder of the population (approximately 24,000) lives in unincorporated Garfield County. The populous areas of the County are in the Colorado and Roaring Fork River Valleys served by 70 miles of Interstate 70, and State Highways 82, 13, and 133. Garfield County is a “right-to-farm” County where the State’s policy is carried out to conserve, protect, and encourage the development and improvement of its agricultural land to produce food and other agricultural products. (C.R.S. 35 – 3.5 - 101) The County’s Right to Farm Policy is also contained in Section 1, Division 3 of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Code.

page | 8 III. AUTHORITY The Congress has mandated that federal The County’s socio-economic well-being, agencies coordinate their plans and policies health, safety, welfare, and culture relies with the plans and policies of States and local significantly on the management of governments for the purpose of harmonizing surrounding federal lands and the policies the plans and working to achieve consistency thereon. As such, it is critical that the of the federal plans with State and local plans. management of those lands are coordinated with Garfield County to ensure that federal The Secretary of Interior “shall … to the land policies are consistent and compliment extent consistent with the laws governing Garfield County’s policies and plans. the administration of the public lands, coordinate the land use inventory, The State has given the County the necessary planning, and management activities power to plan and regulate the lands within its of or for such lands with the land use jurisdiction in order to protect the health, planning and management programs of safety and welfare of its citizens. other Federal departments and agencies and of the States and local governments “Such regulations shall be designed and within which the lands are located. . . . enacted for the purpose of promoting Land use plans of the Secretary under this the health, safety, morals, convenience, section shall be consistent with State and order, prosperity, or welfare of the local plans to the maximum extent he present and future inhabitants of the finds consistent with Federal law and the state, including lessening the congestion purposes of this Act.” in the streets or roads or reducing the (43 U.S.C. § 1712(c)(9)) waste of excessive amounts of roads, promoting energy conservation, securing And, safety from fire, floodwaters, and other dangers, providing adequate light and air, “…The Secretary of Agriculture shall classifying land uses and distributing land develop, maintain, and, as appropriate, development and utilization, protecting revise land and resource management the tax base, securing economy in plans for units of the National Forest governmental expenditures, fostering System, coordinated with the land the agricultural and other industries, and and resource management planning protecting both urban and nonurban processes of State and local governments development.” (30-28-115(1)) and other Federal agencies.” (16 U.S.C. § 1604(a)) The Courts recognize that the States and local governments are “free to enforce [their] Garfield County recognizes that it has the criminal and civil laws on federal land so long obligation to protect the health, safety and as those laws do not conflict with federal welfare of the people and establish plans and law.” California Coastal Comm’n v. Granite policies for this purpose across all lands within Rock Co., 480 U.S. 572 (1987) (quoting Kleppe its jurisdiction. The County also recognizes v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529, 543 (1976)); see the federal land management agencies are also People ex rel. Deukmejian v. Cty. of responsible for managing the federal lands Mendocino, 36 Cal. 3d 476, 491, 683 P.2d 1150, and resources as directed through federal 1160 (1984). law. It is vital that the two planning positions harmonize to prevent conflicting policies and economic harm to the County. The policies, set forth within this Plan, as well as those addressed in other County planning documents, are the issues that must be coordinated by the federal agencies in their planning and management efforts. The Guidelines for Coordination in Appendix 2, sets forth a suggested process to meet this obligation.

page | 9 IV. OBLIGATION OF River National Forest (WRNF). This forest was BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT the second forest reserve set aside in the Nation under the Forest Reserve Act in 1891 The BLM administers the lands that remain as the White River Plateau Timber Reserve by from America’s original “public domain.” President Benjamin Harrison. In 1907, when This includes 615,973 acres of land in Garfield an act of Congress changed the name of County. The principal law governing the the Forest Reserves to National Forests, then agencies mission is the Federal Land Policy Forest Supervisor James Blair recognized that and Management Act of 1976, commonly the resources in the WRNF were to be used referred to by its acronym of FLPMA. and not locked up. Over time, the WRNF incorporated other reserves to reach its current The BLM manages three field offices affecting size of approximately 2,270,000 acres across lands in Garfield County including the several Colorado Counties. The forest includes Colorado River Valley Field Office, the White ski areas as well as approximately 750,000 River Field Office and the Grand Junction Field acres of wilderness, including a portion of the Office. These offices manage the BLM lands Flat Tops Wilderness Area (initially designated in their respective areas as directed through as the Flat Tops Primitive Area in 1932), located each area’s Resource Management Plan. in the Northeast corner of Garfield County comprised of 196,344 acres. The economic As the manager of more land (245 million drivers in portions of the forest have shifted surface acres or one-tenth of America’s land over time from consumptive uses (e.g., grazing base) and more subsurface mineral estate and timber harvests) to recreational. (700 million acres) than any other government agency, the BLM carries out a dual mandate By 1960, pubic land management became under FLPMA: that of managing public land for more refined and understood, and the multiple uses (such as energy development, American public was using its lands in new livestock grazing, mining, timber harvesting, ways not envisioned by its founders. The and outdoor recreation) while conserving passage of the Multiple Use and Sustained natural, historical, and cultural resources Yield Act of 1960 directed the Forest Service (such as wilderness areas, wild horse and to manage public lands for timber, range, wildlife habitat, artifacts, and dinosaur fossils). water, recreation and wildlife marking the first The BLM’s responsibility and obligation is to time that all those uses were equal under the administer public lands on the basis of multiple law. The National Forest Management Act use and sustained yield of resources. (NFMA) was enacted in 1976 which carried forward the multiple use and sustain yield V. OBLIGATION OF management principles that required them to THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE coordinate with local governments. The United States Forest Service manages approximately 515,865 acres in Garfield County, the largest area of which is the White

page | 10 VI. BENEFITS AND BURDENS Some of the benefits of having public OF PUBLIC LANDS lands within Garfield County are: Public lands can offer both benefits and 1. They provide a place for all Americans burdens to the American public. In the west, — not just the wealthy few — to however, where public lands dominate the recreate. land base, the balance can be difficult to achieve. Coordination of Garfield County’s 2. They are part of our national heritage policies and needs by the federal land including national parks and management agencies must occur to reduce monuments. the burden and increase the benefits of supporting public lands within the County. 3. They create economic development opportunities and jobs. “In implementing this directive, the Secretaries of these agencies shall keep 4. They help provide natural resources, apprised of local land use plans; assure clean air and clean water. that consideration is given to those local plans that are germane in the As to the burdens, FLPMA Section 1701 (a)(13) development of land use plans for public recognizes it imposes a liability on local and lands; assist in resolving, to the extent state governments charged to provide fire practical, inconsistencies between protection, public education, public safety, Federal and non-Federal Government road and bridge infrastructure, and health plans, and shall provide for meaningful and human services across the public lands; public involvement of local government yet, as a result of the immunity of federal officials, both elected and appointed, in lands from paying local and state taxes, they the development of land use programs, create a financial burden on state and local land use regulations, and land use governments. This vast federal ownership decisions for public lands, including early of public lands, primarily in the west, is an public notice of proposed decisions anomaly in the American System of free which may have a significant impact on markets, free enterprise, capitalism and a non-Federal lands. Land use plans of the decentralized governmental authority. Secretary shall be consistent with local plans to the maximum extent he finds VII. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES consistent with Federal law.” OF THE PLAN (43 USC 1712(c)(9)) Fundamentally, Garfield County’s policies regarding the use of our federal lands are aligned with the provisions made in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and the National Forest Management Act of 1976. These Acts require federal agencies to coordinate the land use inventory, planning, and management activities for such lands with the land use planning and management programs of Additionally, private rights exist on the public lands, and these must be recognized during the planning and management activities. Private individuals hold a possessory interest on federal land in the form of water rights, grazing rights, easements, mineral rights, development rights, oil and gas rights, geothermal and solar rights as well as recreation and outfitter rights, etc. All efforts must be made so as not to infringe on these critical rights.

page| 11 local governments within which the lands are food and habitat for fish and wildlife and located. Equally important, Garfield County’s domestic animals; and that will provide policies support the guiding principles of for outdoor recreation and human multiple use and sustained yield. occupancy and use. (43 USC 1701(a)(8)) Public lands shall be managed in a manner These core principles of this plan are which recognizes the Nation’s need for defined as the following: domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber from the public lands including A. MULTIPLE USE implementation of the Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970 as it pertains to the public The management of the public lands and lands. (43 USC 1701(a)(12)) their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will D. COORDINATION best meet the present and future needs of the American people; making the most The process of harmonizing Federal, state judicious use of the land for some or all of and local plans to achieve consistent these resources or related services over application of policies across multiple areas large enough to provide sufficient jurisdictions. Federal law requires the latitude for periodic adjustments in use federal land management agencies to conform to changing needs and work to make their policies consistent conditions; the use of some land for less with local plans and policies to minimize than all of the resources; a combination of conflicts and support economic growth. balanced and diverse resource uses that Coordination is a distinct process involving takes into account the long-term needs those governing jurisdictions that have of future generations for renewable and planning responsibilities and often taxing non-renewable resources, including, but authority and is a continuous process. (See not limited to, recreation, range, timber, Appendices 1 - 4 for more guidance.) minerals, watershed, wildlife and fish, and natural scenic, scientific and historical E. COOPERATING AGENCY values; and harmonious and coordinated management of the various resources During the development of an without permanent impairment of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) productivity of the land and the quality of under The National Environmental Policy the environment with consideration being Act (NEPA), and Council on Environmental given to the relative values of the resources Quality regulations (CEQ Regs), state, local and not necessarily to the combination of and tribal governments can be invited to uses that will give the greatest economic participate with federal and state agencies, return or the greatest unit output. (43 USC in the preparation of the impact analysis as 1702(c)) a “Cooperating Agency.” The development of the analysis can be for major federal B. SUSTAINED YIELD actions such as the revision of a natural resource plan that will determine future The achievement and maintenance in management activities on the federal perpetuity of a high-level annual or regular lands. Although “Cooperating Agency periodic output of the various renewable Status” was originally reserved for agencies, resources of the public lands consistent with local governments have been allowed to participate in this process in recent years multiple use. (43 USC 1702(h)) and contribute their respective areas of responsibility, authority and expertise to the C. PUBLIC LAND MANAGEMENT analysis. It is vital to the County that it be allowed to participate in all NEPA processes The public lands shall be to help insure a robust and complete managed in a manner analysis is prepared that includes the that will protect the County’s needs, policies and data. (Refer to quality of scientific, scenic, historical, Appendix 5 for additional guidance.) ecological, environmental, air F. COLLABORATION and atmospheric, water resource, The collaborative process is a beneficial and archeological way to bring agencies, State and local values; that, where governments, private stakeholders and appropriate, will special interest groups together to work preserve and protect towards developing common goals that certain public lands in can help shape the management of the their natural condition; public lands. Although the outcome of that will provide the collaborative process is not binding on

page | 12 federal, state or local governments, the in the WRNF. Approximately one-half the objectives, goals and suggested strategies forested land on the WRNF is classified at a should be considered during the various “mature” structural stage. The USFS estimates planning processes. a large portion of the forest was regenerated between 100 and 130 years ago. VIII. LAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES Policy Statements The following section of the Plan provides the County’s policies regarding a multitude of 1) Public lands must be managed in a manner areas of interest specifically related to land that recognizes the Nation’s need for a management on federal lands located with domestic source of minerals, food, timber, Garfield County. and fiber (consistent with Section 102(a) (12) of 43 U.S.C. 1701 commonly, the Federal A. FOREST / TIMBER MANAGEMENT Land Policy and Management Act of 1976) along with other critical uses including the The forest and timber resources in Garfield recreation economy, wildlife habitat and County should be managed according to ecosystem health and services, and the the principles of multiple-use and sustained health of local communities. yield as defined in the Multiple-Use, Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 USC 531). They should 2) The reduction of fuels through silviculture be administered for outdoor recreation, and livestock grazing is necessary. Proactive range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish management practices such as selective purposes. National Forests, such as the White timber harvest and thinning, livestock grazing, River National Forest (WRNF) in the Eastern and prescribed burns on federal lands will portion of Garfield County, were set aside for encourage ecosystems with varied age the purpose of improving and protecting the classes and successional states that support forest, securing favorable conditions of water a variety of species and uses (including flows, and furnishing a continuous supply watershed wildlife habitat improvements) and of timber for the use and necessities of the decrease the risk of catastrophic wildland citizens (16 USC 475). fires and disease. Productive forests depend on a sensitive 3) Long-term (i.e., 20-year) timber harvest, balance of addressing problems such as based on local market value, is important pest infestation and fire outbreaks with forest to allow private industry to take the goals such as continued livestock grazing, financial risk and make an investment in timber production, recreational use, and the infrastructure necessary to maintain forest productivity. High levels of biomass (fuel the timber industry and forest health loads) are a primary concern in today’s forests in the County. Increasing timber as these accumulations of live and dead production should be an vegetation can contribute to pest problems objective of, and purpose for, and encourage epidemics of insects and forest policies to improve the diseases, reduce native biological diversity, economic viability of logging in and provide fuel for fires that can grow to the County and improve forest epic proportions with a constant fuel source. condition. Timber production Biomass reduction is an important step should be considered with necessary to ensure the long-term productivity other values and resources of a forest as well as the safety of its neighbors. on public lands. Historically, logging was an important 4) Insect outbreaks should be economic contributor during the settlement given the same level of the western states, and it continues to of attention and be an important economic engine for local resources as other forest communities. Additionally, the harvesting of emergencies, with timber from the national forests has the added an aggressive and benefit of being an effective management immediate response tool that can reduce fuel loads and thin that will protect areas to deter pest infections. Currently, the communities Rocky Mountain Region is experiencing and from the impacts epidemic infestation of the Mountain Pine and of ourbreaks. Spruce Beetle, and the WRNF is one of the Forest insect primary forests impacted by this infestation. management Increasing the use of timber harvest practices should prioritize areas would help the local economy while also directly adjacent improve forest conditions. to communities and include all methods The main forest cover types in the WRNF necessary to reduce are aspen, Douglas fir, and Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir. Lodgepole pine and small pockets of ponderosa pine also exist

page | 13 or prevent insect infestations, e.g., salvage and improve the condition of wildlife habitat and sanitation cutting, spraying, biological and the forest ecosystem. control, prescribed burning, etc. for the purpose of preventing the next epidemic of B. WILDLAND FIRE widespread tree mortality. Wildland fires can have a devastating 5) Wildland fire use and prescribed burns on effect on communities and landscapes. public lands should be utilized as appropriate Management of rangelands and forests, as to improve the condition of the public lands. well as the development of communities and businesses, should include consideration of 6) Good Neighbor Agreements should be short-term and long-term efforts to prevent used where appropriate, combining the the conditions that would encourage resources of the federal, state and local wildland fires. Additionally, it is essential agencies, to implement authorized that all landowners within the county and forest, rangeland, and watershed federal, state and local agencies establish restoration services across land fire management plans and protocols that ownership boundaries onto work together to ensure an effective response National Forest System lands. that protects life and property, while promptly suppressing wildland fires. 7) Within the WRNF are private lands that are directly and The Garfield County Community Wildfire indirectly impacted by the management of the national Protection Plan (CWPP) was developed in forest. The uses of these lands accordance with the guidelines set forth by may not always agree with the the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (2003) and management goals of the the Colorado State Forest Service’s Minimum National Forest, nevertheless, Standards for Community Wildfire Protection these uses should be Plans (2009). This plan was collaboratively respected and the rights of developed through planning meetings with these landowners should not representatives from the fire protection be diminished. districts, federal agencies, state agencies, county agencies, communities, and other 8) Where possible, the organizations. It identifies and prioritizes areas federal government for vegetation-fuels reduction treatments to agencies should support reduce the wildfire threat to human welfare, opportunities for private and economic and ecological values at risk landowners to work with in the county. It also recommends measures the federal agencies to to reduce the ignitability of structures and create defensible space provides recommendations on ways to

page | 14 improve wildfire response capabilities for the are important to allow private industry to take fire protection districts. the financial risk and make an investment in the infrastructure necessary to maintain the Pursuant to the 2016 Colorado Statewide timber industry and forest health in the County. Wildland Fire Management Annual Operating Plan, Garfield County authorizes an Annual 5) Insect outbreaks should be given the same Operating Plan with the Colorado Division level of attention and resources as other of Fire Prevention and Control, the United forest emergencies, with an aggressive States Forest Service and the Bureau of Land and immediate response that will prevent Management to coordinate wildfire protection infestation into other areas. Forest insect activities. This Mutual Aid Agreement sets forth management should include all methods to the responsibilities of each of the parties when reduce or prevent insect infestations, e.g., a wildfire occurs on federal, state and private salvage and sanitation cutting, spraying, lands. The Sheriff of Garfield County is the fire biological control, prescribed burning, etc. for warden for the County and is joined in the the purpose of preventing the next epidemic agreement by the local Fire Protection Districts of widespread tree mortality. within the County who are the first responders to wildfire incidents. 6) Wildland fire use and prescribed burns on rangelands should be utilized as appropriate Policy Statements to improve the condition of the national forest. 1) Implement the strategies, priorities, and 7) Managed livestock grazing is an appropriate recommendations in the Garfield County management tool for revegetation and Community Wildfire Protection Plan and any fuels reduction. Livestock grazing should subsequent plan updates. be returned to pre-fire levels when post- fire monitoring data shows objectives have 2) All management tools including (but not been met or have been achieved to the limited to) livestock grazing, chemical, and extent allowed by the site potential. Vacant other mechanical controls should be used in grazing allotments should be assigned to the management of non-native and noxious permittees affected by fire as quickly as weeds, including cheatgrass, after wildland possible to minimize the economic disruption fire events. to permittees. 3) The reduction of fuels through silviculture 8) Adaptive management practices for grazing and livestock grazing is necessary. Proactive should be developed and included in term management practices such as selective permits to allow for flexible management timber harvest and thinning, livestock grazing, practices that will decrease fuel loads on and prescribed burns on federal lands will the landscape, particularly in areas with encourage ecosystems with varied age cheatgrass infestations or heavy grass classes and successional states that support understory. a variety of species and uses (including watershed and improved wildlife habitat), and 9) Pinon-juniper infestations should be removed decrease the risk of catastrophic wildland fires to decrease wildfire potential and improve and disease. upland habitat conditions. 4) Timber harvests should be in compliance 10) Post-fire monitoring should be completed as with the forest plan update to improve forest soon as allowed by the fire closure decision to health and the economic viability of logging determine if reseeding objectives have been in the County. Long-term (i.e., 20-year) timber met. If objectives have not been met, harvest leases, based on local market value, complete a determination regarding the likelihood of the objectives being met without

page| 15 additional resources and continued closure. established in the early 1900s on National Forests and from 1940 to 1965 on BLM lands, C. RANGE MANAGEMENT during which time the agencies completed livestock forage inventories to establish The history of domestic livestock grazing in estimated grazing capacity. Garfield County goes back almost 150 years. Livestock production has been a critical Policy Statements component of the economy and lifestyle of the County. Shepherds and ranchers 1) Rangeland vegetation composition and/ began grazing in the area during the late or structure, ground cover, and wildlife habitat 1880’s and continue to this day. Ranching should be monitored using consistent protocols operations are primarily passed down through that provide quantitative measurements of the generations, creating a core part of the changes over time. Implementation of well- community that is born and raised in the area designed livestock grazing management plans and continuing to live out their productive lives should be informed by the monitoring data in Garfield County. They provide an institutional and allow for adaptive management on all knowledge about the community, landscape, public land allotments. climate and seasons. They also provide economic stability to the County, as domestic 2) Adaptive grazing programs should be used livestock operators generally purchase most of that allow permittees to respond to changes their goods and services from local businesses. in forage availability. Adaptive management consists of planning, implementation, A large portion of the land in Garfield County monitoring and evaluation designed to allow is uniquely suited for domestic livestock grazing flexibility in management in response to as it is open, sparse and full of native plants changing conditions or objectives. It is based that are difficult for other animals to digest. As on the application of science, professional a result, livestock grazing, properly managed, expertise, and monitoring of results on the can help reduce wildfire incidents by removing ground to allow for management adjustments forage that would otherwise be fuel. The as needed to reach objectives. creation of additional water sources through water wells, pipelines and troughs in dry areas 3) Site-specific objectives for livestock, wildlife, support wildlife, and increase the diversity of and other resource uses and values should these species. Also, ranchers regularly monitor be based on Ecological Site Descriptions the landscape, and as a result, are the most (ESDs) and soil surveys. Where ESDs and/or informed about current management needs. soil surveys are lacking or needing revision, Permitted grazing on public lands is a critical site-specific monitoring data should be used. piece of livestock operations in Garfield The Forest Service, BLM, and Natural Resource County. The intermingled BLM, USFS and Conservation Service should place a high private lands allows ranching to continue in priority on completion and improvement the County. The low percentage of private of soil surveys and ESDs which can be used lands in the County means that access to on all lands within the County regardless of public lands is critical to maintain the ranching ownership. community and the agricultural sector of the County. 4) County officials and grazing permittee’s should be involved in the BLM Colorado Standards The Current authorized grazing levels were & Guidelines Assessments for Rangeland Health. The assessment of the grazing

page | 16 allotments under these standards is a one agency as a condition for authorization of point in time qualitative conclusion, based range improvements on public lands. on professional judgment and site-specific 11) The timely processing of all term grazing reference materials. The assessment should permits, renewals, and activities proposed be conducted by locally experienced by the permittee, are necessary to facilitate professionals, preferably by an interdisciplinary proper management of the grazing habitat. team, and based on documented reference materials specific to the ecological sites or 12) Animal Unit Months (AUMs) on federal lands riparian types under consideration. Grazing should not be reduced unless a documented permittees and County representatives should resource condition indicates a need for be invited to participate in the assessments, temporary reduction to improve condition. including site visits. 13) Categorical Exclusions for term permit 5) The assessment of rangeland health for a renewals should be used when grazing allotments under the Standards and Guidelines is usually done at selected locations (1) renewal of the permit is under substantially and rarely considers the condition of every the same terms and conditions as the acre of the allotment. Therefore, if some areas existing permit, on an allotment are found to not meet the standards, the assessment should not report (2) monitoring shows that the allotment is at or that this applies to the entire allotment. A more making substantial progress toward thorough assessment should be completed meeting rangeland and riparian health that considers the entire allotment. standards, and 6) Land management agencies should work with (3) no extraordinary circumstances exist such permittees to identify and prioritize where as conflicting threatened or endangered range improvement funds should be species management, special status expended based on allotment category and lands, etc. need. Installation of wildlife-friendly range improvements (e.g., wildlife-friendly fence, bird 14) Permanent retirement of any grazing ramps in tanks) are an important component allotment is generally unacceptable. Any of range improvements. closure or retirement of an allotment should be coordinated with Garfield County and 7) Range improvements, such as fences, water include a consideration of the economic developments, trails, roads, cattleguards, impacts and custom and culture of the corrals and other facilities designed to allow local area. good grazing management, i.e. control of the timing, intensity and distribution of 15) AUMs in suspended use should be analyzed grazing by livestock, should be kept functional and reinstated when resource conditions are and maintained in a timely manner by the at appropriate levels. If improvements are responsible party whether it be the grazing necessary to support reinstatement of AUMs, permittee or the land management agency. such improvements should be analyzed as Gates left open can interfere with control expeditiously as possible. of livestock grazing and result in expense to permittees as well as possible conflict with 16) Vacant allotments should be analyzed, and other range users; therefore, a priority should if they meet assessment standards, be made be placed on installation of cattleguards on available for domestic livestock grazing. higher volume roads, and on designating some roads as administrative only (i.e. used by 17) Vacant grazing allotments should be permittees and agency personnel). assigned to permittees affected by fire or other resource concerns not related to 8) Additional rangeland improvements, such as management, as quickly as possible, to creating water impoundments near roads minimize the economic disruption and drill pads to catch water, should be to permittees. developed when activity is occurring in the area to minimize disturbance to the landscape 18) Any changes in season of use or class of and maximize resources. livestock for the purpose of improving rangeland health and wildlife habitat 9) A programmatic Categorical Exclusion for quality should occur in consultation with the range improvements should be developed permittee. under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, to allow improvements to be 19) Permits for temporary actions such as installed in a timely manner. hauling water should be completed as quickly as possible to address the resource 10) Water rights are adjudicated by the state. concerns necessitating the action. Landowners/permit holders should not be required to transfer water rights to the federal 20) Livestock grazing should be returned to pre-fire levels when post-fire monitoring data shows objectives have been met or have been achieved to the extent allowed by the site potential.

page| 17 21) Adaptive management practices for The Colorado Noxious Weed Act defines grazing should be developed and included a noxious weed as an alien plant or parts in term permits to allow for flexible of an alien plant that have been designated management practices that will decrease by rule as being noxious or has been declared fuel loads on the landscape, particularly in a noxious weed by a local advisory board. areas with cheatgrass infestations or heavy The Garfield County Noxious Weed Management grass understory. Plan (WMP) addresses the following primary concerns: 22) Changes in class of livestock and permit i. The health of our environment is a high priority transfers should be completed without for residents of Garfield County. The health reductions in AUMs and in a timely manner. and productivity of natural plant communities and agricultural lands is threatened by the 23) Reductions of domestic livestock grazing introduction of numerous invasive alien AUMs shall not occur in order to provide plants. Without an effective integrated weed additional forage for another species that is management plan these aggressive plants over its biological objective (e.g., wild horses will continue to infest and degrade the lands over Appropriately Managed Lands (AMLs)). we value so highly. ii. Rapid expansion of noxious weeds is an 24) Riparian areas are those where perennial obstacle to maintaining healthy ecosystems water supply occurs (streams, springs, wet and restoring disturbed native plant meadows) and which, consequently, support communities and habitats. Because noxious different vegetation from the surrounding weeds tend to be highly invasive and harmful uplands. They provide important habitat for to native vegetation, they can quickly wildlife and fish as well as water, shade and dominate many sites and often forage for grazing animals. Uncontrolled cause permanent grazing may result in damage to vegetation damage to plant and water quality due to repeated heavy communities. grazing and trampling of stream banks. Estimates indicate Controlled livestock grazing has been that 100 million acres demonstrated to be compatible with of private, state, maintenance of desirable vegetation, bank and federal land are protection, and water quality. Unless it is infested with noxious feasible to fence out riparian pastures which weeds in just 11 can be managed separately, other means western states. of reducing impact on riparian areas should be used where appropriate. These include: This is (a) shortening the grazing period by pasture occurring in rotation or periodically resting pastures both disturbed containing riparian areas, (b) grazing when and relatively livestock are less attracted to riparian areas undisturbed (cooler weather or when uplands are green), areas. (c) measures to draw livestock away from riparian areas (water, supplements, herding). iii. The intent of the Colorado Noxious Weed 25) The environmental values of riparian areas Act and the goal of the can be sustained by properly managed and Garfield County Weed controlled livestock grazing. However, other Advisory Board is to curb large herbivores (elk, deer, feral horses) are the degradation of our also attracted to these areas and have similar valued environment impacts on vegetation and water quality. These animals may impact riparian areas throughout the entire season or year due to lack of control of timing or intensity of grazing. Numbers of wild and feral grazers must be controlled and measures taken to reduced impact on riparian areas. Livestock permittees should not be penalized for the impact of uncontrolled wild or feral animals. D. NOXIOUS WEEDS & INVASIVE SPECIES Pursuant to the Federal Noxious Weed Act, federal agencies have the authority and responsibility to manage undesirable plants and noxious weeds on federal and public lands. Each federal agency has a designated weed specialist and weed control program.

page | 18 by implementing an Integrated Weed impacted by noxious weeds especially in Management Plan designed to stop the areas where adjacent private landowners spread of noxious weeds. are also proactively managing weeds. There should be a coordinated effort between iv. Management of weeds may seem private landowners, the state and local overwhelming, but through developing governments, and federal agencies, as partnerships at all levels – local, regional appropriate, to work together and control and national – we hope to achieve our noxious weeds in these areas. weed management goals. The challenge for all involved is to develop management 8) Brush treatments and reseedings should be systems, support and direction for the implemented on selected sites where such prevention of the spread of weeds before treatments would improve the rangeland. the situation becomes even more serious The most effective and economical and economically unfeasible. treatments, including controlled burning, should be used on a case by case basis, The purpose of the Weed Management Plan is as well as the use of non-native species for to provide guidelines for managing designated reseeding when they offer the best chance noxious weeds which represent a threat to of success or lower costs. The long-term the continued economic, environmental and benefits to achieving the overall goals for agricultural value of lands in Garfield County. the landscape should be weighed against This plan provides for the implementation possible short-term negative effects of the of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act by treatments. In most cases these treatments detailing integrated management options for need to be maintained to prevent a designated noxious weeds. Options include reinvasion of shrubs to undesirable levels. education, preventive measures, good stewardship, and control techniques. 9) Garfield County’s vegetation management program and the implementation of all The intent is to incorporate those options that federal, state, and local noxious weed are the least environmentally damaging and laws and enforcement efforts should be are practical, timely and economically feasible. coordinated for the purpose of decreasing It is the responsibility of all landowners to use weed infestations. integrated methods to manage noxious weeds, and the responsibility of local governing bodies 10) The goals and objectives of the County to ensure that these plants are managed on WMP were developed for the unique public and private lands. landscape in Garfield County, and provide useful guidance for integrated Policy Statements weed management. The WMP should be considered and incorporated, as 1) Local, state, and federal governments should appropriate, into other weed control be funded at appropriate levels for proper programs in the County. weed management on all lands in the County. Traditionally, federal funding has 11) The noxious weeds present in Garfield failed to support the proper treatment of County that have been prioritized for control noxious weeds, jeopardizing the quality of or elimination by the State and County weed habitat in Garfield County. management plans, and are identified on the Colorado Noxious Weed List, should be 2) The BLM, USFS, and State agencies should given the highest priority for weed control meet the weed management requirements management efforts. of existing agreements, including the County Weed Management Plan. 12) Monitoring efforts should be ongoing to accurately identify the extent of noxious 3) Science based standardized methods and weed infestations and dispersal mechanisms strategies should be used in noxious weeds where possible. monitoring and treatments. 13) Monitoring efforts and programs should be 4) Good land stewardship practices for developed to prevent aquatic nuisance agencies and land users are essential. species (e.g., zebra mussels, quagga mussels) and other invasive water species to 5) Prioritize restoration and rehabilitation to be established in Garfield County. reverse or minimize adverse ecosystem effects caused by invasive species. 14) Educational programs and public notices on activities that spread noxious weeds should 6) Collaborative external partnerships are be made available to public land users. important; however, these partnerships shall Recreation sites, trailheads, campgrounds, not be a substitute for strong, internal weed and public facilities provide a good management programs by federal agencies. opportunity to use educational signage to inform users of how they can help prevent 7) Effective weed management practices are necessary in grazing allotments currently

page| 19 the spread of invasive weeds. underground. To date no commercial projects have been operated in Garfield County 15) Early detection of new invasive species although the area has seen a number of threats, and the early implementation of periodic attempts beginning shortly after WWI policies to control these threats, is essential and ending in the late 20th Century with the to preventing the spread of invasive plants. Colony and Unocal projects. The cost of oil Weedy grasses, in addition to cheatgrass, shale processing is currently more expensive have rapidly moved into the Intermountain than producing conventional oil and gas, so West and are often overlooked by land the future of an industry is uncertain. managers. Cheatgrass, specifically, is a The BLM does not lease oil shale fire hazard if not properly controlled. All as it does oil & gas, coal, management tools should be considered and uranium and other used as appropriate to control the spread minerals. Oil of cheatgrass, including livestock grazing, shale was spraying and removal. E. ENERGY RESOURCES OIL SHALE Vast oil shale resources, owned two thirds by the BLM, are located in Garfield and neighboring Rio Blanco County. The Piceance basin in Northwest Colorado contains an estimated 80 percent of the 1.5 trillion barrels of recoverable shale oil resource in the states of Utah, Wyoming and Colorado based upon work by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Oil shale is a sedimentary rock containing an organic material called kerogen that when heated produces liquid shale oil and natural gas. Recently the names ‘oil shale’ and ‘shale oil’ have become confused with liquid oil produced from shale deposits in Texas and North Dakota, and elsewhere in the nation, employing directional drilling and fracturing (fracking). Historically, processing of oil shale has been via ‘ex situ’ techniques: mining the rock and processing it in a surface retorting facility that produces oil and gas and a waste material called spent shale that requires disposal on the surface or return to an underground mine. More recently ‘in situ’ processing has been tested using conventional oil and gas technologies for heating the rock

page | 20 originally a placer claimable mineral resulting in private ownership of deposits near the surface. In 1920 it became a leasable mineral and subsequently was never offered for commercial leasing by the Federal Government. OIL AND GAS Garfield County has been explored for natural resources for more than 100 years and was settled in part due to the extraction boom of the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Energy development and natural resource extraction continues to be a principal industry in Garfield County, and Oil and gas wells can be commonly seen throughout Garfield County. Currently, Garfield County is the second largest producer of natural gas in the State with over 11,000 active gas wells and the mid-stream infrastructure to deliver natural gas to the market. The United States Department of the Interior’s Geologic Survey released a report in June, 2016 that now estimates that the Piceance

page| 21 Basin (located in Garfield County) contains GEOTHERMAL 66 trillion cubic feet of shale natural gas, 74 million barrels of shale oil, and 45 million barrels Geothermal energy is heat derived from the of natural gas liquids that are undiscovered earth. Heat is produced deep within the earth and technically recoverable resources in the through a number of processes including Mancos Shale. This would conservatively place volcanic or radioactive decay. Heat flow this basin as the second largest producible in the County increases in a northwest to shale basin in North America. southeasterly direction, the highest geothermal gradients are found around Glenwood Springs COAL and in the far western portion of the County. Five coal fields are found in Garfield County. Geothermal springs and wells, found at the The largest field, the Piceance, is overlain with earth’s surface or at shallow depths, are 2,000 to 7,500 feet of overburden. Historically, used for recreation and health purposes. mining was conducted at fields along the Deep subterranean geothermal resources, margin of the basin. Since 1888, eight million found at the bottom of non- short tons were extracted from Garfield producing gas County coal fields. McClane Canyon mine, located in a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) coal lease area, is the last active coal mine in the County, but has been idle since Xcel Energy’s Cameo Power Generation Station was decommissioned in 2011, (BLM 2012). The US Geological Survey estimates that 34,200 million short tons of coal are technically recoverable for the Piceance Basin in areas where overburden is less than 6,000 feet. These are along the basin margin. However, areas with the thickest depths may not be economically feasible to mine given the present technology and economic demand. (USGS 2005) SOLAR wells, hold the potential Areas of high potential for solar energy to be developed using Enhanced are available across the County, however, Geothermal Systems technology (EGS) through the two largest areas are in the valley engineered hydrothermal reservoirs made between Silt, Rifle, and Parachute, and by drilling and fracturing. The eastern third of in the Carbondale area. There is also a the County is the most favorable area for EGS concentrated area of high solar potential in development. (NREL 2009a) Glenwood Springs. These lands are primarily private and adjacent to BLM managed lands. The geothermal gradient across the County ranges from a low of 30-40°C/km to a high Locally, small scale photovoltaic arrays are of 70-80°C/km. Areas around Glenwood common because of their smaller footprint. Springs have existing hors prongs and is most The energy generated by these systems can favorable for discovery and development of be used directly or fed into the grid through low-temperature (below 90°C) geothermal net metering. In 2012, 62 photovoltaic systems resources. The area between Carbondale and contributed 4.3 MW of energy to Holy Cross Glenwood Springs has moderate potential for Energy’s net metering program. conventional moderate- to high-temperature geothermal development. (NREL 2009a) Garfield Clean Energy estimates that an additional 7.6 MW of photovoltaic panels HYDROELECTRIC could be installed on public rooftops in the County. The Environmental Protection Agency Hydroelectricity is generated from the (EPA) Re-Power Project identifies the County’s gravitational force of falling or flowing water. landfill as potential sites for solar photovoltaic Water flows through a penstock into a turbine, where it powers a hydroelectric generator that generation. (EPA 2013a) converts mechanical energy into electricity.

page | 22 In the County, hydroelectric power is 3) Federal lands should be open for the produced at the Shoshone Hydroelectric Dam, development of solar arrays and micro-hydro the Zilm Project, and at two small generation projects on reservoirs and ditches. sites in Parachute. 4) Energy resource regulations should be There are several scattered dams in central, streamlined to decrease overlap and eastern, and northeastern Garfield County, contradictions between various permitting including twenty on US Forest Service- agencies. managed lands. There are eight dams in the western part of the County. The potential for 5) Valid existing lease rights to energy resources, hydroelectric generation is widespread across and the intent of the original lease terms the County. Power generation is the highest should be upheld without modification along the Colorado River and in the northeast or cancellation by federal agencies. The corner of the County, but low power and development and use of the lease rights micro-hydro sites are found throughout the shall not be encumbered by overly restrictive County. conditions that would render the lease undeveloped. Policy Statements 6) The cancellation or withdrawal of existing 1) All renewable and non-renewable energy lease rights significantly impacts the economic sources that exist in the County, including oil stability of Garfield County and should only and gas, oil shale, coal, solar, geothermal, and occur in extreme circumstances. In the event hydroelectric, shall be open to responsible the federal government cancels a lease, the development. lease holder shall be compensated for the full value of the lease. 2) All federal lands that have reasonable mineral potential shall be open to leasing, exploration, 7) The extraction of energy resources shall be research, and development with stipulations carried out using science-based reclamation and conditions that will protect the practices and responsible land stewardship. environment and resource values. New or Appropriate reclamation of all surface expansions of existing mineral leases within resource disturbances should occur as soon urban growth boundaries authorized by the as feasible after impacts have been created. BLM shall be coordinated with the County to “As soon as feasible” means restoring at the protect the health, safety and welfare of the time and season that the restoration methods citizens. being used are most likely to succeed and are appropriate for the site. 8) The analysis of all fiscal and socioeconomic impacts to Garfield

page| 23 County from any proposed land management 100 years ago: natural resource development, changes to natural-resource related plans agriculture, regional services, and tourism. or mineral leases should be conducted and The County is notable for its concentration of coordinated with the County prior to the population and development in the area’s action. two major river valleys, and the counter- balancing of large expanses of public lands, 9) The BLM and/or USFS should host economic and lightly populated arid plateaus in the strategy workshops for the development of all remainder of the county. new management plans (or plan amendments and revisions) focused on regional economic Garfield County, particularly the area between conditions, trends, and strategies, and to Rifle and Parachute, has many producing provide an opportunity for local government natural gas wells and large shale gas deposits. officials, community leaders, and other citizens Emerging natural gas production technologies, to contribute their expertise. coupled with rising gas prices, produced a notable energy boom between 2002 and 10) The design and construction of all new roads 2009, and natural gas production continues to shall be done according to the appropriate be a major contributor of the Garfield County safety standards, “no higher than necessary,” economy. to accommodate their intended use. This should be coordinated with the County to Tourism has long been a staple of the Garfield ensure among other concerns that road County economy, including the hot springs placement and maintenance will reduce soil attractions in Glenwood Springs; outdoor erosion. recreation; overnight accommodations associated with I-70; and a strong hunting 11) Best available technologies and best and fishing services industry. In recent management practices in energy years, the tourism/second home industry in development shall be used to reduce pollution nearby Pitkin and Eagle counties stimulated impacts during all stages of activity, with the significant construction, services employment, appropriate economic analysis to ensure and residential housing development in economic viability. Garfield County, particularly in the Carbondale and Glenwood F. SOCIO-ECONOMIC & Springs area. Over the ECONOMIC VIABILITY past decade, Today, the foundations of Garfield County’s economy remain very similar to the economic foundations that shaped this area well over

page | 24 increasing numbers of retirees have relocated 5) The analysis of social and economic factors to the area for its relatively mild climate, should be considered at the lowest possible high quality of life, world-class health care, level, such as at a county-wide basis in recreation opportunities, and expansive open addition to consideration of a state-wide or space. national scale. Though there are similarities between cities 6) There shall be a “no net loss” in County and towns when it comes to economic activity economic base due to federal agency and a community’s economic development decisions. Garfield County, local jurisdictions approach, each municipality also has its and special districts should be included in all differences. discussions regarding mitigation if necessary to protect the economic base of the County. Policy Statements 7) The historic right to access federal lands in 1) Consultation and coordination with the the pursuit of mining, oil and gas development, County is required at the earliest time possible ranching, farming, logging, recreational for any planning and proposed action, activities, motorized vehicle use, hunting, change of existing activities, newly permitted other historic uses, and those roads used by activities, or changes in regulations that may emergency medical and/or law enforcement affect the economic basis of the County. services in the protection of residents and visitors, shall continue. These activities are 2) Consultation and coordination with the critical to the economic viability of Garfield County is necessary to determine the full County. scope of potential social and economic effects of activities proposed on public lands. G. TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, ACCESS & RIGHTS-OF-WAY 3) In order to maintain economically viable communities in the County, the principles of Garfield County supports maintaining and multiple use and sustained yield shall direct enhancing public access to public lands and the management of activities on public opposes road closures, road decommissioning, lands, including access to natural resource moratoria against road building and other development. access limiting policies and practices without coordinating with the County and reaching 4) Subject area experts should complete consistency with county land use plans and socioeconomic analyses for proposed management policies. projects; the experts should be familiar with and focus on the County’s unique history, Access to public lands has always been critical culture, economy and resources. Analyses to the economy of Garfield County. Sixty-two will include a description of existing social, percent (over 2,000 sq. miles) of the County demographic and economic conditions; is in federal ownership. In order to continue the analytical methodologies used; and the the multiple-uses of these lands as required by impacts to topics including (but not limited federal law, open access to the land, water, to) population, employment, income levels, and natural resources is essential. Ranchers rely industry activity, housing, community services, on everything from established roads to game utility services, schools, fiscal impacts to the trails to access water tanks, salting locations, County, local jurisdictions, specials districts, fences, and forage. Hunters and outdoorsmen public revenues and expenses, transportation, rely on access to hunt areas. and quality of life. The County depends on access to public lands for social, recreation, public safety and economic pursuits and relies on the system of roads and rights-of-way across federal lands established under the federal R.S. 2477 provision, which states in whole, “the right-of-way for the construction of highways over public lands, not reserved for public uses, is hereby granted.” Federal Land Management Agencies do not have authority to make binding administrative determinations for R.S. 2477 rights-of-way.

page| 25 Policy Statements 8) The right to access federal lands in the pursuit of mining, oil and gas development, ranching, 1) All actions designed to change or diminish the farming, logging, recreational activities, scope of R.S. 2477 rights-of-ways or any other motorized vehicle use, hunting, other historic access route, shall not occur without proper uses, and those roads used by emergency coordination with the County. medical and/or law enforcement services in the protection of residents and visitors, shall 2) All roads, trails and access routes identified be maintained. These activities are critical to on historical maps and through historical the economic viability of Garfield County. records that predate the withdrawal of the federal lands from the public domain, shall be 9) Garfield County supports rules in compliance recognized as R.S. 2477 rights-of-ways and shall with Federal and State law and where remain open and maintained as necessary, appropriate and reasonable, to protect unless closure of the access route is required natural resources, air quality, wildlife, and to protect the health, safety and welfare private property rights while facilitating access of the people. (See Garfield County Public (e.g., for OHVs, non-motorized, commercial Land Access Historical Routes https://garfield- development, industrial projects, agricultural county.com/public-lands-access/historic- and livestock operations, recreational routes.aspx). All R.S. 2477 rights-of-ways shall development). be identified as such in inventories conducted by federal agencies and recognized as open 10) Garfield County encourages the federal to the public in federal travel management agencies’ efforts to educate public user plans. groups to respect the private property rights of landowners whose properties are 3) All County roads and public rights-of-way intermingled among the public lands. on public lands shall be accurately identified on federal maps and shall not be restricted or 11) Administrative access on closed or restricted eliminated. These access rights are necessary roads shall be allowed when necessary. to protect the County’s resources and to protect the public health, safety and welfare H. LAND ACQUISITION & DISPOSAL (e.g., search and rescue, fire protection, resource conservation, law enforcement, Land exchanges with the BLM and USFS, and emergency medical services). disposals of federal land to private, State and local entities help to facilitate the needs 4) Garfield County’s OHV Ordinance of expanding communities and industries establishes the rules necessary for the safe within the County. Strategic acquisitions and passage of Off-Highway Vehicles on County disposals can help ensure growth areas are roads and access routes in unincorporated well managed, while areas of limited value Garfield County. All federal and state to federal goals are made available for more agencies shall coordinate their travel appropriate uses. Additionally, exchanges and management and road access plans with disposals of federal land can also help the the County’s OHV ordinance to ensure federal agencies meet their objectives, such plans are consistent and harmonized for the as improving land management, consolidating convenience and safety of the citizens. ownership, and protecting environmentally sensitive areas. By exchanging public land that 5) Federal agencies should recognize the is of limited interest to the federal agencies historical use of all R.S. 2477 rights-of-ways but of value to others, the agencies can recognized by the County and landowners acquire other lands with important recreation, and work with the County. The road conservation, scenic, cultural and other recognition process should be clear and resource uses. Land exchanges also allow consistent and give high priority to public the BLM to reposition or consolidate lands safety, private property and public access. into more manageable units and to meet community expansion needs. 6) Garfield County supports legislation to create an administrative process for confirming With the passage of FLPMA, Congress retained historic RS 2477 rights-of-way on federal lands, the public lands in federal ownership unless including but not limited to a waiver of the disposal of those lands furthered the national statute of limitations regarding timely filing of interest. This resulted in the lands within the such applications. thirteen Western states being largely owned and controlled by the federal government, 7) All inventories of roads, trails and access and not in private ownership as is the case in routes conducted by federal agencies shall the Eastern states. Select sales do still occur be coordinated with the County as required and are an important component of the BLM’s by federal law and the travel management land management strategy when they are in regulations, specifically directed at 36 CFR the public interest and consistent with publicly 212.53-55. approved land use plans.

page | 26 In the National Forest, a land exchange is necessary to retain at a minimum a net-neutral a discretionary and voluntary real estate land ownership pattern in Garfield County. If transaction between the Federal government the federal government cannot honor Garfield and a non-Federal party and may be initiated County’s “no net gain” policy, it shall provide, by either party. A non-Federal party may be in writing, the reasoning for continuing the land a person, State, or local governmental entity. acquisition contrary to this policy. The USFS shall consider a land exchange only if it is in the public interest and is consistent with 3) The federal agencies shall coordinate with the forest land and resource management Garfield County when public lands are offered plan. for sale in the County. The Secretary shall notify Garfield County to afford the opportunity Policy Statements to zone or otherwise regulate or change or amend existing zoning or other regulations 1) Acquisition of private lands by federal concerning the use of such lands prior to such agencies in Garfield County should only occur conveyance. with a dedicated source of funds for ongoing management to ensure these lands will be 4) No public land conveyance shall be made properly maintained and not contribute to the until the Secretary has notified Garfield County significant maintenance and management as to the consistency of such conveyance with backlog of existing federal lands. applicable County land use plans, programs and policies. 2) All federal land acquisitions and disposals should be reviewed to ensure the proposed I. WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT change of ownership does not result in a net loss of private property or a net gain of federal Garfield County is known for its abundant lands. Because of the limited private property wildlife populations and robust hunting within the County, which provides necessary and fishing industry, a significant economic funding for County services, there shall be driver in the County. Hunting big game, an equal or greater exchange in acres or waterfowl, small mammals, game birds, as value in favor of the County, for federal well as fishing has long been a way of life in land exchanges, acquisitions Garfield County. In addition to the diverse big or disposals. This is game populations, the County also enjoys diverse and productive aquatic fisheries (i.e., the Colorado and Roaring Fork Rivers and their many tributaries and high mountain lakes and reservoirs), small game, furbearer and waterfowl hunting opportunities all of which provide a variety of recreational and economic benefits in the County. Wildlife in Colorado is owned by the State and managed by Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). On the federal lands, 62% of the County’s land base, CPW must work closely with the federal agencies to ensure the lands are managed in such a way as to ensure the viability of the wildlife populations. CPW is also actively involved with managing, protecting, and improving habitat on both private and state lands in Garfield County through CPW’s habitat protection and habitat partnership program. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, authorizes the federal government to take management control of a species (fish, wildlife, and plants) from the State when it was found to be threatened or in danger of extinction. The ESA delegates to the Secretaries of Interior and Commerce the authority to issue rules necessary for the protection and recovery of the species, including designating critical habitat where

page| 27 uses of the area may be restricted or The County has historically taken an active prohibited. role in the viability of the fish, wildlife and plant communities in part because the natural The federal protected species are managed landscape and its multiple uses are critical by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). to the vibrant economy and way of life of When a species is listed as endangered or the citizens. It actively participates in the threatened through the federal rulemaking prevention and recovery of threatened and process, it requires close coordination endangered species within its jurisdiction, between all entities with planning authority including allowing the release of County to ensure the goal of species recovery is owned water to aid in the recovery of the achieved, while minimizing harm to the local Humpback chub and Razorback sucker. economy. This often includes the participation and policy agreement of the County, the State The County coordinated with the BLM to through CPW, the federal land management write the BLM’s Resource Management Plan agencies of BLM, USFS and National Park regarding Greater Sage Grouse, a five-county Service (NPS), private landowners, federal land conservation plan for the Greater-Sage Grouse resource users, and the USFWS. when concerns over the species viability were raised. This was followed with the development As of the drafting of this Plan, Garfield of a County specific conservation plan that County contains four threatened fish, bird included robust and refined habitat maps and mammal species, four endangered fish that have since been adopted by the State of species and four threatened flowering plant Colorado and the BLM as the most accurate species. There is also an experimental, non- representation of actual grouse habitat in the essential population of black-footed ferrets County. (Mustela nigripes) in the County. Policy Statements More specifically, these species are as follows: 1) Coordination between all • Yellow-billed Cuckoo (bird) – Threatened federal, state and local partners shall occur • Mexican Spotted Owl (bird) – Threatened whenever it is first determined through credible science, data, and/or expertise • Canada Lynx (mammal) - Threatened that a species may be in decline. A work • Greenback Cutthroat Trout (fish) – Threatened plan should be initiated that provides a coordinated set • Humpback Chub (fish) – Endangered of voluntary objectives, • Colorado Pikeminnow (fish) – Endangered actions, and status • Bonytail (fish) – Endangered • Razorback Sucker (fish) – Endangered • DeBeque Phacelia (flowering plant) – Threatened • Colorado Hookless Cactus (flowering plant) – Threatened • Ute Ladies-Tresses (flowering plant) – Threatened • Parachute Beardtongue (flowering plant) - Threatened Wild horses and burros are also under federal protection pursuant to the Wild, Free- Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (16 USC 1331). The BLM is the responsible federal agency to protect the animals and ensure the populations remain at appropriate management levels (AML) for the area. Garfield County has one Herd Management Area (HMA) known as the Little Book Cliffs Wild Horse Range that is estimated to have an AML between 90 -150. HMA is located eight miles north of Grand Junction. It is the only herd in Colorado that has appropriate habitat (forage, water and space) within the HMA as a result of management by the BLM and volunteers such as Friends of the Mustang.

page | 28 reports that will support the viability of the or a sensitive species, shall use credible data species. This includes predator control, and the best available science (defensible protection of habitat and food supply and and reproducible) to support the decision. other conservation practices, including studies The information used shall be of high quality, such as those needed to determine threats, objectivity, utility and integrity within the population viability, habitat requirements and meaning of the IQA. other critical information. 5) All data relied upon in the analysis process of 2) The federal agencies shall coordinate with the status of a species shall be made available Garfield in all decisions and proposed actions to the County for review regardless of which affect the County regarding protected whether the data is considered preliminary or species, the reintroduction or introduction proprietary, or whether it has been published of listed species, habitat conservation and/or peer reviewed. If the information is plans, conservation agreements, and other being utilized by a state or federal agency conservations methods. to inform its analysis, it should also be made available to the County for its independent 3) Garfield County may utilize its institutional consideration. knowledge and expertise to prepare management plans for specific species to 6) A full analysis of the economic impacts to the guide proper management and coordination County, the industries within the County, of the resources for the benefit of the species. and the people who reside in the area, shall The principles, objectives, policies, data, and be prepared, analyzed and considered in habitat maps included as a part of these plans proposed critical habitat designations or should be incorporated into all efforts by other species management plans. This analysis shall authorities to manage the species. For the be reviewed and approved by the County to Greater Sage-grouse, agencies should refer ensure the integrity and accuracy of the data. to The Garfield County Greater Sage-grouse Conservation Plan, as amended. 7) Any area designated as critical habitat must be necessary to the survival of the species, 4) As required by the Information Quality Act based on an assessment of the best available (IQA) (44 USC 3516) and the guidelines issued science in compliance with the requirements pursuant to this act, all information relied upon of the IQA. and disseminated to the public in determining a species is endangered, threatened, a 8) The management priority of all efforts directed candidate for listing, a species of concern towards at risk species should be the recovery of the species. Once a

page| 29 species is added to the federal endangered considered for delisting. The County may or threatened list and protection of the recommend to the State or Federal agency habitat and restriction of uses has occurred, that a review of the species’ status be made the agencies should establish a process to or initiate the delisting process. monitor these efforts and determine whether such efforts are contributing to the recovery of 12) The County may participate as a the species. Regular updates on the recovery cooperating agency in the federal efforts should be provided to the County. rulemaking process under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) including for 9) Recovery plans for listed species should be any NEPA analysis related to the designation completed within 18 months of listing and of critical habitat and development of include clear objectives to be reached for recovery plans. This is in addition to, and the purpose of recovering and delisting the separate from, the coordination process of species. These plans should be coordinated the plans and policies. with the County. Once recovery objectives have been reached, the species should be 13) Candidate species, species of concern, officially removed from the special protection species of special concern, sensitive species designation list. or any other species designation that is not endangered or threatened, shall not be 10) Management and species recovery plans managed as though they are a listed species should not be prepared to the detriment under the Endangered Species Act. If such a of other species and should work to be non-ESA designation is challenged through consistent with multiple use mandates. Every litigation, the existing approved management effort should be made to continue the use plan or actions shall be followed until the of all valid permits and lease rights in the litigation is resolved. recovery area. 14) Any species with the protected federal 11) Any listed species that is designation of “threatened” means the recovered, found to determination has been made that the be listed in error, or new species is not currently in danger of extinction, information supports the and therefore, shall not be regulated finding that the species with the same severity of restrictions as an is not in need of federal endangered species. protection, shall be 15) When a species is considered at risk for ESA listing, early cooperation between private landowners, the state and federal agencies is encouraged to avoid listing under the ESA. 16) The introduction or reintroduction of ESA listed species into Garfield County shall not occur, unless a complete economic and health and safety analysis is prepared and approved by the County indicating the County and its residents will not be harmed by the action. Should a species be introduced or reintroduced over the objections of the County, the species should only be considered a non-essential or experimental population. 17) Predators shall be controlled at appropriate levels to eliminate the spread of diseases that negatively impact wildlife, special status, candidate, or listed species. Predators shall also be controlled to reduce mortality of protected species. 18) Wildlife management objectives shall be based on the carrying capacity of the habitat and the needs associated with the authorized multiple uses such as livestock grazing, mineral extraction, wild horses, and hunting and fishing on federal lands. Wildlife population and habitat monitoring efforts should be ongoing to expand the historical record of wildlife activity in the County.

page | 30 19) As required by the Wild Horse Act, horses traditional uses of water. that exceed the AML for the herd area shall be captured and removed from the area, Rivers and reservoirs in Garfield County serve preferably through local access auctions. an important role providing municipal water Additionally, since the herd size can double sources and supporting agriculture and in four to five years if not properly managed, recreation. A large portion of the middle the County supports efficient and cost- Colorado River Basin and lower Roaring Fork effective fertility control and sterilization. Wild River Basin are within Garfield County. The Horses should be inventoried at a minimum headwaters of the Yampa and the White River every three years. lie at an elevation of approximately 10,000 feet within the Flat Tops Wilderness Area of the 20) Rulemaking should be pursued to give White River National Forest in eastern Garfield the BLM additional options for the disposal of County. wild horses to allow BLM to meet their existing statutory requirements. Harvey Gap reservoir was constructed as an irrigation project and is filled by Rifle Creek. It J. WATER - RIVERS, LAKES, RESERVOIRS, was originally built in 1894 and supplied with DITCHES AND WATER RIGHTS water from the Grass Valley Canal, which was built in 1892. The reservoir is about 190 surface The state of Colorado owns all waters in the acres when full. state, regardless of land ownership. It is a public resource for the benefit of all: public Rifle Gap Reservoir was built in 1966 to extend agencies, private citizens, and entities. The the water supply for senior water rights holders state allocates the water to beneficial users on the west side of the Silt Canal Project and recognizes this adjudication as a water through the Davie Ditch. Rifle Creek is the right, a private property right to use the public water source for both reservoirs and their resource. Colorado set up a unique system accompanying canals, referred to as the Silt to allocate and closely monitor the waters of Canal Project by the Bureau of Reclamation. Colorado. Primary provisions detailing water use, rights, and management in Colorado In 1968, Congress passed the National Wild are found in the 1969 Water Rights and and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC 1271) for the Administration Act and the 1965 Ground purpose of preserving selected rivers with Water Management Act. outstanding natural and other qualities in their free-flowing condition. The purpose for the Surface water and tributary waters in Colorado are governed by the doctrine of Prior Appropriation or “first in time, first in right.” It is a priority system mandated in the Colorado Constitution and determines who can use a specific water source, the amount of water that can be allocated for that use, and when the water can be put to beneficial use. Under the Prior Appropriation system, the first party to beneficially use a water source becomes the senior water right holder authorized to use the allocated quantity of water. After the senior water right holder’s allocation has been fulfilled, junior water rights can be satisfied. Beneficial use must employ reasonably efficient practices without waste in order to have enough water available to as many water right holders as possible. Water rights continue to be a critical property right that ranchers, farmers, businesses, and communities depend on for their livelihood. The uses that are considered beneficial have evolved and increased in response to Colorado’s changing community and economic values. For example, an environmental and ecological purpose, such as maintaining the wildlife habitat that is dependent on a natural body of water, is now considered to be a beneficial use under Colorado water law. This is in addition to the

page| 31 Additionally, with Garfield County assistance, there are source water plans for a variety of subdivisions in unincorporated Garfield County. The County also works with the soil, water and conservation districts, helping to guide a unified planning effort for existing and future water needs in the County. Act was to balance the need for dams and Policy Statements other construction on rivers, by protecting other rivers in their free-flowing state. While 1) Water rights are adjudicated by the state. currently there are no Wild and Scenic River Landowners/permit holders should not be designations in Garfield County, Deep Creek required to transfer water rights to the federal has been considered for this designation. agency as a condition for authorization of permits on public lands, or to apply for a right Surface waters are monitored by the Water in the name of the United States. Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 2) When a water right is applied for and proved (CDPHE). The Clean Water Program (CWP) upon by a private individual or corporation, manages nonpoint source pollution, and the water right shall be placed in the name of monitors rivers, lakes, and streams. The CWP the holder, and not in the name of a state or maintains a list of impaired waters per the federal agency as a condition of receiving a federal Clean Water Act requirements and permit. reports impairments to the EPA. At one time, the 303(d)-listing had Cattle Creek listed as an 3) Garfield County supports legislation and impaired stream in Garfield County. In 2015, administrative rule making by the federal with funding provided by Garfield County, agencies that recognizes existing state the Roaring Fork Conservancy embarked on authority for permitting and adjudicating an extensive study to better understand the water use. water quality impairment(s). Data from former studies revealed high water quality near the 4) Projects that improve water quality and headwaters and impaired water quality on quantity, while also increasing the the lower portion of Cattle Creek. At present, dependability of the water supply should the water quality has improved such that the be developed as appropriate. Land 303(d) listing has been dropped. use improvements, mining, oil and gas development should not negatively impact In Garfield County, there are six communities drainages and watersheds within Garfield with watershed protection plans with the County. primary purpose to identify and prioritize threats to their drinking water supplies. 5) Additional water storage facilities in the County that assures present and future growth and protection of Colorado Water Rights pursuant to the Colorado River Compact should be planned for and developed. 6) Proposed “wild,” “scenic,” and “recreational” designations on rivers and their tributaries in Garfield County shall be coordinated with the County. Should “wild,” “scenic,” “recreational” or other designations be imposed by Congress, Garfield County requires full participation in the process including as a cooperating agency during the analysis of impacts under the National Environmental Policy Act. Additionally, all federal management plans for a river designation shall be coordinated with the County to harmonize the federal policies with existing County policies. The rights and needs of Garfield County landowners and water right holders, as well as the socio- economic impacts of the designation, shall be given full consideration and respect throughout the process. 7) The lands surrounding rivers and other waterways shall be managed in such a way

page | 32 as to provide for the maximum amount and The Air Pollution Control Division at CDPHE quality of water to reach its beneficial use. also regulates air quality through permitting This includes controlling invasive species, and inspections. They regulate mobile and preventing epidemic diseases such as pine stationary sources that meet specific thresholds beetle infestations, and reducing fuel loads for pollutants, including oil and gas operations, that could trigger wildland fires. gravel pits and asphalt batch plants, filling stations, and others. These facilities are located 8) Garfield County shall have full participation on all types of land ownership, including public in any process that establishes Minimum and private lands. Federal lands fall under their Stream Flows (MSFs). The minimum stream flow purview as well. is the amount of flow necessary to preserve desired stream values, including fish and Other federal land management agencies wildlife habitat, aquatic life, navigation and also cover air quality regulation and transportation, recreation, water quality, and monitoring on their lands. The US Forest Service aesthetic beauty. (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) operate particulate matter and ozone 9) All efforts shall be made to fulfill private water monitors in Garfield County, and work to right holders’ allocations first when determining address air quality impacts of wildfire smoke minimum stream flows. Other conservation when these events occur. The BLM “must measures and maintenance activities that ensure that BLM-authorized activities comply may help obtain the minimum stream flows with the CAA” (blm.gov) and focus on shall be considered prior to any reductions in reducing emissions of harmful air pollutants existing water uses. from the land uses and resources they manage. 10) All activities related to the use and distribution of water or that may impact a watershed Garfield County has invested heavily in air connected to a navigable water as defined monitoring to accurately characterize by federal law, shall comply with the Clean air quality conditions in a variety of the Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. §1251). communities we serve. While none of our sites are located on federal lands, air does not K. AIR QUALITY respect jurisdictional boundaries and many of the activities that occur on federal lands have Air quality in Colorado is broadly regulated the potential to impact air quality across the under the National Ambient Air Quality County. In addition to the criteria pollutants Standards (NAAQS) outlined in the Clean mentioned above, five ambient air monitoring Air Act (CAA) of 1970. The US Environmental sites also collect data on Volatile Organic Protection Agency (EPA) has the ultimate Compounds (VOCs). These help to assess authority to enforce these standards, but health risk to the population and to correlate delegates the management of air quality specific compounds with pollutant sources. to the states. In Colorado, this authority is given to the Air Pollution Control Division of Sources: Bureau of Land Management. “Air” https://www. the Colorado Department of Public Health blm.gov/programs/natural-resources/soil-air-water/air and Environment (CDPHE). They ensure compliance with the six “Criteria Pollutants” Policy Statements outlined in the Clean Air Act. In 2019, Garfield County was well within attainment of the 1) Garfield County supports reasonable air three pollutants monitored in our area: ozone, quality regulations that respect the differences particulate matter, and nitrogen dioxide. between oil and gas development on Colorado’s Front Range and the Western Slope. Unlike parts of the Front Range, Garfield County is in attainment of the standard for ozone and should not be subject to the same requirements imposed on a non-attainment area. Regulations should acknowledge the accessibility of our operations, the type of natural gas production, and the socio- economic landscape. 2) Garfield County will continue to monitor air quality to characterize air pollutants that could impact the health of its citizens. Through its technical workgroup, Garfield County staff will continually evaluate the air monitoring program to ensure its methods and data reporting is innovative, effective, and valuable.

page| 33 3) Interagency fire management teams shall L. OUTDOOR RECREATION / TOURISM / implement practices on federal lands that HUNTING & FISHING reduce the risks of catastrophic wildfire, which can be a significant source of air pollution in Since statehood, tourism and recreation have Garfield County. been a staple of Garfield County which is directly supported by our vast public lands. 4) Natural resource development projects These recreation activities include hunting, on federal lands should not cause significant fishing, hiking, snow sports, off road vehicle use, adverse impacts to air quality within Garfield camping, site seeing, horseback rides, water County. sports, mountain biking, and mountaineering, among others. Not only do these public lands 5) Practices and projects that improve air quality provide recreation opportunities, they also in Garfield County are encouraged, including provide a local and regional economic base, reduced vehicle idling, renewable energy and a high quality of life. Federal laws and development, alternative transportation, and policies place primary responsibility for wildlife fugitive dust suppression. management in the hands of the states. Colorado has a lengthy record of success in 6) Garfield County encourages the development conserving species, including those that are and export of natural gas to other regions in hunted or fished. the world that be used to replace existing energy sources responsible for high levels of Policy Statements harmful emissions. Increased use of natural gas globally will help to combat climate change 1) Proposed developments adjacent to streams by lowering emissions of carbon dioxide, a and/or rivers with rafting or fishing potential are primary greenhouse gas. encouraged to dedicate easements for public access to these areas, where compatible with wildlife habitat. 2) Developments should look for opportunities to contribute to the continuation and enhancement of commercial tourism, hunting and guiding on public lands. 3) Public access to federal lands should be maintained and consistent with County plans and policies. 4) Every opportunity should be pursued that allows the tourism industry to utilize public lands, where appropriate. 5) An interconnected trail system in the Colorado River Valley should be established to provide more recreation opportunities to residents and tourists. 6) Trails on public lands should be properly maintained and connected to help the public access these areas for hiking, mountain biking, snow sports, hunting and fishing, and other outdoor activities. 7) Garfield County’s OHV Ordinance establishes the rules necessary for the safe passage of Off-Highway Vehicles on County roads and access routes in unincorporated Garfield County. All federal and state agencies shall coordinate their travel management and road access plans with the County’s OHV ordinance to ensure plans are consistent and harmonized for the convenience and safety of the citizens. 8) Garfield County acknowledges the State of Colorado’s jurisdiction to manage the State’s wildlife and supports the States Wildlife Action Plan. 9) The cancellation of an outfitter or guide permit is generally unacceptable. The County should

page | 34 be notified of, and coordinated with, on any greatest densities of uranium and vanadium change or cancellation of such permit are found. However, deformations in the prior to the action being taken. Any such underlying geology made the County home to action shall include consideration of the one of the largest vanadium-uranium deposits economic impacts and custom and culture of in the Colorado Plateau Uranium Province. Ore the local area. mined from the Rifle and Garfield mines were processed in Rifle. M. HARD ROCK MINING / GRAVEL & AGGREGATE MINING The Grand View Mine, a general limestone mine is located approximately 12 miles north The Mining Law of 1872 is the major Federal of Rifle, Colorado on State Highway 325. law governing locatable minerals in the Historically the site has been associated with United States. This law allows U.S. citizens the the Rifle Creek Mining District which is now part opportunity to explore for, discover, and of the White River National Forest. The site was purchase certain valuable mineral deposits first discovered in 1925 and had its first year of on Federal lands that are open for mining production in 1927 but has long been closed. claim location. Mineral deposits subject Additionally, the Mid-Continent Mine located to acquisition in this manner are generally near Glenwood Springs remains an open and referred to as “locatable minerals.” Locatable active operation mining for chemical grade minerals include both metallic minerals (gold, limestone. silver, lead, copper, zinc, nickel, etc.) and nonmetallic minerals (fluorspar, mica, certain The most usable aggregate (sand and gravel) limestones and gypsum, tantalum, heavy resource in Garfield County is primarily found minerals in placer form, and gemstones). along the Colorado River because of its high- quality gravel and their proximity to improved The Mining Law allows for the enactment of roadways and the interstate highway. Gravel state laws governing location and recording from the Colorado River is well-rounded, well- to mining claims and sites that are consistent shaped, and has a good surface texture. It with Federal law. The BLM manages the Mining is strong, hard, and non-reactive and well Law program on the federal mineral estate graded from coarse to fine. including authorizing and permitting mineral exploration, mining, and reclamation actions. Regarding reclamation, the Open Mining Land Reclamation Act of 1973 established a Like many counties in the western United permitting process, requiring limited bonding States, Garfield County has had a long history and more rigid reclamation performance of mining exploration and development on timelines and standards for coal mines and both private and federal lands for a wide sand and gravel operators. The Colorado variety of commodities. As of the drafting of Mined Land Reclamation Division was this plan, Garfield County has 3,014 mining created in early 1976 to regulate non-coal claims on public land managed by the Bureau mining operations. The Colorado Mined Land of Land Management and 33 records of mines listed by the United States Geological Survey. Reclamation Act was These mines are predominantly lead, uranium, passed, and a Mined vanadium, zinc and silver mines. Land Reclamation Board was Garfield County lies within the Colorado appointed Plateau Uranium Province which is to serve estimated to contain six million tons in an of uranium; it is north of the Uravan Mineral Belt where the

page| 35 administrative and adjudicatory capacity. for mine development on federal lands. The need to clean up those abandoned and In 2020, Garfield County expanded its orphaned mine sites within federal jurisdiction 1041 powers (C.R.S. 24-65.1-101) to include that represent an unacceptable risk to the the regulation of Mineral Resource Areas. environment or human health and safety, must It is the purpose of these regulations to be mitigated. Operators, should be required to establish reasonable and uniform limitations, contribute to pay for clean-up costs. safeguards, and controls for the wise utilization of commercial mineral deposits and for 7) Reclamation costs should be considered and subsequent reclamation of disturbed land. accounted for in any permit process at a These regulations, apply to mining activities level of priority similar to that given to start-up on private and public (federal) lands, were investment costs. Governments and industry designed to provide a clear and practical should work together to ensure that efficient set of rules and steps for the preparation mechanisms are developed to finance of an application to permit mining and the responsible closure practices. reclamation of commercial mineral deposit resource areas while protecting the health, 8) The Federal Government will ensure that, safety and welfare of the citizens of Garfield as a condition for mine development on County. federal lands, comprehensive plans for the reclamation of disturbed areas are Policy Statements developed, including the provision of satisfactory financial assurances to cover the 1) Garfield County supports the legal rights costs of reclamation and, where necessary, and privileges of surface and mineral owners long-term maintenance. to extract and develop their interests as well as the legal rights and privileges of private 9) Mine operators should start to stabilize and property owners and the general public reclaim the affected land using natural and to have the mineral estate developed in a replanted vegetation and natural and artificial reasonable manner and to have adverse topography as soon as practicable after impacts mitigated. mining begins. This in-progress reclamation should be scheduled to coincide with the site 2) Federal Land Management Agencies development schedule. responsible for land management should involve and coordinate with local jurisdictions 10) Phased mining and reclamation measures and the general public during the review and should be considered to mitigate visual decision-making process on mining operations impacts. This procedure limits the number of within federal lands. Coordination should mined acres disturbed at any given time. occur as early and as often as feasible. 11) Mineral resource extraction activities will 3) The exploration, development, production, protect critical wildlife habitat and migration use, re-use, recycling and disposal of minerals routes as identified by state and federal and metals inevitably involve the need to agencies. integrate environmental, economic and social considerations in decision-making. Permitting 12) Excavation in visually sensitive areas such processes must ensure that each of these as ridges, hilltops, sensitive ecosystems such as three elements is taken into account fully and Aspen stands, raptor nesting or feeding areas, as early as possible in the decision-making riparian habitat, and scenic areas should be process. minimized. 4) Direct large-scale hard rock mining 13) Mining operations can create significant operations away from incompatible uses offsite impacts, including but not limited such as municipalities, tourist facilities, traffic, noise, vibration, visual and neighborhoods and areas where community environmental degradation, along with character will be negatively impacted. unwanted socio-economic impacts on adjoining communities. These impacts should 5) Truck traffic will not access mining operations be identified and addressed through the through residential or commercial areas. review process, including the identification of central business districts, pedestrian and tourist- less impactful alternatives. oriented areas. Truck Traffic generated by the mining operation shall avoid residential and 14) Preserve or mitigate natural drainage commercial areas; including central business patterns so the impact of mineral extraction districts, pedestrian and tourist-oriented areas. activities will not cause storm drainage/ floodwater patterns to exceed the capacity 6) The federal government has a role to play in of natural or constructed drainage ways, or the reclamation of mine sites within its areas of subject other areas to increased flooding, responsibility, including establishing fiscal and erosion or sedimentation, resulting in pollution regulatory conditions respecting reclamation to streams, rivers or other natural bodies of water.

page | 36 15) Areas of disturbance due to mining activities specifically, the financial health of Garfield should be kept to the minimum necessary County depends significantly upon natural to accommodate minerals extraction gas production, which in turn affects the operations. County’s ability to provide critical services. For example, property tax revenue and school 16) All mining plans should strive to minimize district budgets, among many others, are visibility into mining sites. Unique landscapes, heavily impacted by the oil and gas sector. where the visual attraction is unusual, such Approximately 53% of the assessed value of as: ridges and valleys with associated wildlife all property in Garfield County is from oil and habitat, riparian habitat, and scenic overlooks gas and also 53% of Garfield County’s property and vistas, should be preserved. taxes come from oil and gas production.1 As a consequence, the oil and gas sector is 17) Results of visibility mitigation should be in an important contributor to Garfield County’s keeping with the surrounding environment. ability to provide services such as infrastructure development, schools, libraries and social N. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND OIL services. AND NATURAL GAS OPERATIONS In order to protect the economic well-being Garfield County affirms its commitment to both of Garfield County, the County seeks to improving air quality (specifically, as a function encourage the continued development of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions) and and use of its energy resources. At the same encouraging the responsible conduct of oil time, the County recognizes the importance and gas production, gathering, processing of a healthy environment and particularly and transmission operations in the County of air quality and is therefore committed to and the State of Colorado. In the course of protecting the natural resources and the developing land use plans now and for the future, the County believes that these goals environment by managing and improving are not only of equal importance, but that air quality—as evidenced by, for example, they are also complementary. the development of the County’s Air Quality Program Management Plan. Garfield County Energy development, including oil and gas is also committed to continuing to ensure that operations, has been a cornerstone of Garfield the public remains fully informed of factors County’s economy since the late 1800s. More

page | 37 that affect air quality and air quality policies approximately 22% of the total 2017 emissions.5 going forward. Emissions from commercial and residential Garfield County recognizes the largest uses totaled almost 12%, while agricultural reduction in the United States’ GHG emissions accounted for 9%. Emissions from oil emissions over the past few years has been and gas production and processing amounted accomplished by the electricity sector’s switch to about 4% of the total U.S. GHG emissions.6 from coal to natural gas.2 Indeed, while the oil and natural gas sector is a source of GHGs, specifically methane, these Increased use of natural gas is the number emissions are falling as a proportion of total one reason the United States has reduced methane emissions.7 GHG emissions more than any other developed country, achieving emission levels The Colorado Department of Public Health 12% lower than in 2005.3 and Environment also produces a GHG inventory every five years. According to Garfield County’s primary energy natural the 2019 Draft Inventory, the oil and gas resource is natural gas. It is therefore cognizant sector accounted for 12% of Colorado’s that the continued responsible development GHG emissions in 2015, and projected GHG of this resource is important to the ultimate emissions for the same sources through reduction of GHG locally, nationally, and 2030 hover around the same level. Electric globally. power accounted for approximately 29% and transportation for 22% of the total 2015 The County is also aware that levels of GHG emissions.8 emissions are affected by a number of factors, including but not limited to sources Due to the various sources of GHG emissions of emissions, types of fuel used in energy and the documented relative contribution of production, and weather trends. Each different sectors to GHG emissions, Garfield year, the U.S. Environmental Protection County seeks to approach any GHG-related Agency (“EPA”) publishes the Inventory of initiatives and policies understanding the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, specific contribution of each industry sector. which reviews sources of and trends in GHG More specifically, it is committed to supporting emissions. The 1990-2017 Inventory, published policies which do not disproportionately in 2019 (the “Inventory”) found that the target any one sector, while promoting transportation sector accounted for almost reasonable GHG emissions reductions. With 29% of 2017 emissions,4 while the electricity full understanding of the contribution of the production sector contributed almost 28%. oil and gas sector to GHG emissions, Garfield The industry sector as a whole contributed 1 Based off the Garfield County Assessor’s 2019 Certification of Values and property tax abstract. 2 U.S. Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 2018, Energy Information Administration (EIA), November 2019. 3 Id 4 Inventory at ES-2 5 Inventory at ES-24. 6 Inventory at 3-64 and 3-80. 7 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and University of Colorado, Long-Term Measurements Show Little Evidence for Large Increases in Total U.S. Methane Emissions Over the Past Decade (2019), 8 Draft 2019 Colorado Greenhouse Gas Inventory at 5.

page | 38 County also recognizes that Colorado has promoting GHG emission reductions. the most robust and stringent oil and gas regulations in the Country. As such, Garfield 5) Garfield County supports LNG export projects County is committed to supporting GHG- which would have a major positive impact in related policies which do not unnecessarily or the fight against global climate change by selectively regulate the oil and gas sector. replacing coal with clean-burning natural gas Equally, Garfield County has been and in Asia and other global users. continues to be committed to reducing GHGs within the County. Routine measurements of IX. FEDERAL LAND DESIGNATIONS & POLICIES VOCs (a component of natural gas along with methane) in Garfield County show that the The following section provides current annual average concentrations of methane designations of public lands as typically (a GHG) from 2008 through 2018 exhibit identified through an inventory process by a statistically significant downward trend. federal agencies with land use authority. This Routine measurements of ozone (formed from section also provides Garfield County’s policies precursor VOCs) show that from 2008 through regarding the same. 2018, Garfield County has been in attainment with EPA requirements for ozone standards, A. WILDERNESS AREAS known as NAAQS. There is every indication The Wilderness Act of 1964 established the the County will remain in attainment in the National Wilderness Preservation System to be future. Garfield County also has continued to managed by the United States Forest Service perform regular ambient air quality monitoring (USFS), National Park Service (NPS), and the to ensure that it fully understands the impact United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). of GHG and other air pollutant emissions on The passage of the Federal Land Policy and air quality. Overall, thanks to Garfield County’s Management Act (FLPMA) in 1976 added the commitment to environmental protection, air BLM as a wilderness management authority quality in Garfield County has continued to to the Wilderness Act. Wilderness areas must improve even during periods of growth in oil meet the criteria established by the Wilderness and gas production in the County. Act to be designated as Wilderness. These are: Ultimately, Garfield County will prioritize policies “A wilderness, in contrast with those areas and land use plans which balance energy where man and his works dominate the development with air quality improvement. It landscape, is hereby recognized as an will continue to actively support responsible area where the earth and its community natural gas and oil development and of life are untrammeled by man, where protection of the environment using a robust, man himself is a visitor who does not data-driven approach. remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of Policy Statements undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, 1) Garfield County supports reasonable national, without permanent improvements or regional, and global GHG policies and goals human habitation, which is protected that are comprehensive, practical, cost- and managed so as to preserve its natural effective, and do not unnecessarily single out conditions and which (1) generally appears specific industry segments. to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man’s 2) Garfield County will continue to monitor GHG work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has emissions as part of its efforts to understand air outstanding opportunities for solitude quality in the County and to ensure the health or a primitive and unconfined type of of its citizens. recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to 3) Natural resource development projects make practicable its preservation and use on federal lands should not cause significant in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may adverse impacts to GHG emission levels within also contain ecological, geological, or Garfield County. other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.” (16 USC 1131(c)) 4) Because Garfield County’s economic well- being is significantly impacted by natural Wilderness Areas must be established by an resources development, Garfield County Act of Congress and can be recommended supports in concept future GHG regulations by the federal land management agency or that balance economic development with directly by a member of Congress. environmental well-being. Specifically, Garfield County is committed to supporting GHG The Flat Tops Wilderness Area was established emission reduction policies and goals which by Congress in 1975 and exists in the north do not unnecessarily or selectively regulate eastern portion of Garfield County. It is the oil and gas or agricultural sectors while Colorado’s second largest wilderness area and was where Arthur Carhart, a USFS

page| 39 landscape architect, recommended in 1919 C. LANDS WITH WILDERNESS that the area remain undeveloped. Sometimes CHARACTERISTICS (LWC) called the “Cradle of Wilderness,” Flat Tops is where the idea of wilderness was first applied FLPMA requires the BLM to maintain a current to public land. It is managed by the USFS. inventory of the public land resources and other values. This includes determining if B. WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS (WSA) changes have occurred to the landscape since the original inventory, or if new lands Upon the passage of FLPMA, the BLM was have been acquired that may have wilderness required to complete an inventory of the lands characteristics as set forth in the Wilderness and resources within 15 years. As a part of this Act. These lands are to be reviewed subject process, the BLM identified lands meeting the to local government coordination and public wilderness criteria set forth in the Wilderness comment, and if approved by the Secretary, Act and forwarded these recommendations are designated as Lands with Wilderness to the President. Congress acted on these Characteristics (LWC’s). recommendations, establishing some of the areas as Wilderness. Those areas Congress did LWC designations may result in increased not approve continue to be held as Wilderness restrictions of use on these lands in order to Study Areas (WSA’s) in such a manner as to maintain their primitive nature. The following not impair their suitability to be designated areas are currently being managed as LWC’s as Wilderness in the future, until Congress in Garfield County as of the draft of this plan: determines otherwise. Specifically, the statute requires: • Bitter Creek • South Shale Ridge • Evacuation Ridge • Roan Southeast “During the period of review of such • Demaree South areas and until Congress has determined • Spring Canyon Cliff Unit otherwise, the Secretary shall continue • East Demaree • Northeast Cliffs to manage such lands according to • Spink Canyon • East Fork his authority under this Act and other • Pike Ridge • Grand Hogback applicable law in a manner so as not • Bookcliffs South • Deep Creek to impair the suitability of such areas • East Salt • Flattops Addition for preservation as wilderness, subject, • Thompson Creek however, to the continuation of existing mining and grazing uses and mineral leasing in the manner and degree in which the same was being conducted on October 21, 1976.” (43 USC 1782(c)) The following WSA’s are currently designated in Garfield County: Hack Lake (1993) – 10 acres D.

page | 40 AREAS OF CRITICAL applies guidelines derived from social and ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (ACEC) natural sciences to preserve the qualities for which wilderness was established. Ultimately, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern or if so designated by Congress, wilderness ACEC designations were authorized through areas should require active management as FLPMA and are managed by the BLM. They discussed here. apply to areas that are developed or used and need protection to prevent irreparable 3) All valid existing lease rights and historical uses damage to important resources. These can in wilderness areas, WSA’s, LWC’s and ACEC’s be historical, cultural, or scenic values, as well shall be protected and continue as required as fish and wildlife resources and other natural by federal, state and local laws. resources. ACECs can also be designated to protect human life from natural hazards. 4) WSA’s should be released from consideration ACECs can only be designated during the as Wilderness that contain non-wilderness land-use planning process and often prohibit characteristics, such as roads or active oil and any new development or activities such as gas wells. roads and oil and gas production. 5) Management and the authorization of uses The following areas are being managed as of special land use designations should be ACEC’s in Garfield County as of the draft of compatible with surrounding management this plan: and contribute to the sound policy of multiple use, economic viability, and community • Anvil Points stability. • Deep Creek 6) As a part of the authorized uses on Wilderness, WSA’s, LWC’s and ACEC’s, continued access • Glenwood Springs Debris to and maintenance of water developments, Flow Hazard Zones fences, and other infrastructure located within designated wilderness, must continue at the • Lower Colorado River same or greater level allowed prior to the special designation. All valid existing lease • Magpie Gulch rights and historical uses in Wilderness areas, WSA’s, LWC’s and ACEC’s shall be protected • Grand Hogback and continue as required by federal, state and local law. • Mount Logan Foothills 7) Consideration of new areas for Wilderness, • Sheep Creek Uplands WSA’s, LWC’s or ACEC’s should be analyzed in coordination with the County. • Trapper Northwater 8) Designations of Wilderness areas, WSA’s, LWC’s • East Fork Parachute Creek or ACEC’s that would compromise the County’s ability to properly protect the Policy Statements lives, welfare and property of its citizens are prohibited. 1) Federal land use designations such as Wilderness, WSA’s, LWC’s and ACEC’s impose 9) Infrastructure such as roads, fences, pipelines restrictions that often include reduced access and water tanks are recognized by the County and the diminished use or elimination of as improvements that have permanently mining, oil and gas development, grazing, altered the landscape, connecting man’s hunting and recreation. These activities development activities directly to the land, substantially contribute to the local economy regardless of whether such elements can and the County’s ability to properly fund be removed. Any areas with these features and serve the public needs. All consideration shall not qualify as areas with wilderness of special land use designations must be characteristics. coordinated with Garfield County and meet the statutory requirement imposed by 10) Accurate, on-the-ground mapping of roads, Congress. All management activities and fences, rangeland improvement and any uses on these lands must be coordinated with other anthropogenic influence in lands Garfield County. Full access and productive under consideration for Wilderness, LWCs or use of the land shall be authorized as allowed ACECs , shall be completed and included under federal, state and local law. with any inventory or proposal for a potential designation, including those prepared by the 2) Simply designating a wilderness does not County. assure its preservation. An understanding of wilderness values is needed to guide all 11) No actual or de facto buffer zones should be activities in wilderness, including grazing, established around special designation areas, access to private lands, mining, fish and creating additional restrictions on areas not wildlife, cultural sites, fire, and insects and so designated. disease. Management is needed to minimize the impacts of the wilderness visitor on the immediate environment and the experience of other visitors. Wilderness management

page| 41 12) Garfield County urges federal agencies to offset follow specific provisions in both the losses in property taxes Wilderness Act and the Americans due to non-taxable Federal lands within their with Disabilities Act to accommodate boundaries. The original law is Public Law wheelchair use in wilderness. Specifically, 94-565, dated October 20, 1976. This law Title V Section 508 (c) of the American was rewritten and amended by Public Law with Disabilities Act reads as follows: “IN 97-258 on September 13, 1982 and codified GENERAL - Congress reaffirms that nothing in at Chapter 69, Title 31 of the United States the Wilderness Act prohibits wheelchair use Code. The law recognizes the inability of local in a wilderness area by an individual whose governments to collect property taxes on disability requires its use. The Wilderness Act Federally-owned land can create a financial requires no agency to provide any form impact. of special treatment or accommodation or to construct any facilities or modify any conditions of lands within a wilderness area to facilitate such use.” 13) Any proposed designation of an ACEC shall be coordinated with the Board of Commissioners to determine if designation of the ACEC creates any conflicts with the Counties plans as required by 43 U.S.C. §1712(c)(9). All good faith efforts should be made to meaningfully resolve these conflicts prior to public notice of the proposed designation and must be included in the public document. 14) All lands within the County shall remain open and free of ACEC protective designations unless the County is provided with credible data that certain activities are causing “irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, or scenic values, fish and wildlife resources or other natural systems or processes, or to protect life and safety from natural hazards,” (43 USC § 1702 (a)). 15) All information relied on by the agency for any special designation, whether this be for Wilderness, LWC or ACEC, shall meet the standards established by the Information Quality Act (44 U.S.C. §3516) and implementing guidelines. X. FEDERAL & STATE LAND REVENUES Policy Statements Due to the substantial land ownership of lands 1) Because Garfield County is unable to tax the across the western United States as well as the property values or products derived from complexities driven by the split estate, there federal lands, PILT payments are necessary to are a variety of federal programs and laws support essential local government services. that are intended to return dollars to those Mandatory, long-term, predictable full impacted states, counties and cities in the funding for PILT in FY 2020 and beyond should west. What follows are some of the primary be established. programs and laws specifically designed to return revenues to Garfield County in some 2) In the event Congress fails to not fund PILT, fashion. Because approximately 62% of land Garfield County will research and pursue other in Garfield County is comprised of public options to secure the required funding. This lands, these laws and programs are critically includes supporting optional ownership and important to the well-being of the County. management of public lands. A. Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) B. Secure Rural Schools (SRS) “Payments in Lieu of Taxes” (PILT) are Federal One hundred years ago, the federal payments to local governments that help government recognized that counties faced a loss of revenue due to federal ownership of large tracts of land. Historically,

page | 42 Congress shared revenue generated from C. Severance Tax federal forest lands with local governments in recognition that federal ownership of Severance tax refers to a tax imposed by a forestlands deprived counties of revenue state on the value of nonrenewable natural they would have if the land were privately resources extracted from the earth, such as owned. Shared revenue also recognized that oil, coal, or gas. Colorado’s severance tax counties provided services that benefitted was enacted in 1977. The severance tax is the land. As compensation for the land being imposed on the production or extraction of exempt from taxation and for local services, metallic minerals, molybdenum, oil and gas, Congress shares a portion of the revenue oil shale, and coal. Taxes are collected by the from its forestland. At their peak, in fiscal year Department of Revenue. 1989, payments totaled $361 million. Receipts Severance tax revenue is divided evenly have declined substantially since then, largely between the Department of Natural because of declines in timber sales. Resources (DNR) and the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA). DNR’s half is deposited As timber harvests dramatically declined, into the Severance Tax Trust Fund, where it is counties encountered financial difficulties held in trust as a replacement for depleted due to the lost revenue, not only from timber natural resources, for the development and sales, but also from the loss of sawmills. At one conservation of the state’s water resources, time, Garfield County had several small family and for use in funding programs that promote operated sawmills, however these have all and encourage sound natural resource since closed because of the timber policies planning, management, and development that prevented timber sales in the area. By related to minerals, energy, geology, and 2000, income from forest sales declined by water and for the use in funding programs 80 percent. The Secure Rural Schools and to reduce the burden of increasing home Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 energy costs on low-income households. (SRS), also known as Federal Forest Payments, This distribution of Severance Tax is illustrated was enacted to stabilize payments to counties below. for schools and roads and to improve forest ecosystems. It offset losses to affected counties in more than 40 states and based payments on average historical timber revenues. Recipients were required to expend 80 percent of their payments for education and road maintenance. An eligible recipient could also elect to set aside 20 percent. Policy Statements DOLA’s severance tax revenue is credited to the Local Government Severance Tax Fund 1) Garfield County encourages Congress to and distributed to local governments. Seventy renew its long-standing commitment to percent is available for discretionary loans forest counties by increasing revenue sharing and grants to local governments socially through active forest management and or economically impacted by the mineral extending SRS as critical transitional funding. extraction industry. Local governments apply to DOLA for the loans and grants at three 2) Forest management practices should be different times during the year. DOLA is assisted reformed to improve forest health, increase by a 12-member Energy and Mineral Impact production and ensure robust revenue sharing Assistance Advisory Committee in making to all forest counties. funding decisions. The money must be used for the planning, construction, and maintenance 3) In the event Congress fails to fund SRS, Garfield of public facilities, and for the provision of County will research and pursue other public services. The remaining 30 percent options to secure the required funding. This includes supporting optional ownership and management of public lands. 4) Timber harvests are essential to the economy and culture of the County and should be planned for and approved by the Federal agencies to fulfill the multiple-use and sustained yield principles directed in federal law, specifically through the Multiple Use- Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (MUSYA) (16 USC 528).

page| 43 of the money received each fiscal year is by the United States Navy. Congress ratified the distributed directly to local governments by President’s authority to set aside federally owned August 31 of the following fiscal year based lands with the passing of the Pickett Act in 1910. on the geographic location of energy industry Following these events, Congress enacted the employees, mine and well permits, and overall Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 which dictated a mineral production. system of leasing and development for mining interests on federally owned lands. The primary Policy Statements provisions in the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 provided a number of functions: 1) Garfield County supports the redistribution of local impact grants and direct distribution • Enables entrance onto public lands to of Severance Tax payments to cities and explore for minerals with permission of the counties where the resources are severed. government. 2) Garfield County supports the use of the • Enables drilling and extraction of minerals severance tax to reduce the burden of with authority granted by the government. increasing home energy costs on low-income and fixed income households. • Enables the government to manage the exploitation 3) For the years that the State does not release of leasable the Severance Tax dollars in a timely manner minerals. and as prescribe by law, the County will seek full payment of these funds plus reasonable • Enables the interest. government to receive compensation from the lessee for the privilege of extracting minerals on federal public lands. D. Federal Mineral Lease Previous to the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the General Mining Act of 1872 authorized citizens to freely prospect for minerals on public lands and allowed a discoverer to stake claims to both minerals and surrounding lands for development. This open-access policy enabled a major oil rush in the West, in 1909 prompting U.S. Geological Survey Director to warn Secretary of the Interior that oil lands were being claimed so quickly they would be unavailable within a few months. As a result, President Taft promptly created the first American oil reserve by executive order on September 27, 1909, withdrawing 3,041,000 acres of public lands in California and Wyoming from further claims, and reserving the oil for use

page | 44 The Bureau of Land Management to State Public and Higher Education schools. is the principal administrator of the Mineral See the graph below: Leasing Act. The BLM evaluates areas for potential development and awards leases With the recent creation of the Garfield County based on whoever pays the highest bonus Federal Mineral Lease District (FMLD), Federal during a competitive bidding period. Royalties Mineral Lease payments are directed to the are payments made from one party to another FMLD and not Garfield County. The FMLD is an based on usage of an asset, often in the form independent public body charged by the state of a percentage. The Mineral Leasing Act legislature with distributing financial resources required monetary gains from the leasing of it receives from the development of natural public lands to be divided three ways, except resources on federal lands within Garfield County for Alaska: to communities impacted by these activities. The FMLD is also authorized by law to provide services • 50 percent of gross revenues to states other to those communities. than Alaska. Policy Statements • 40 percent of gross revenues to Reclamation Fund. 1) Garfield County supports the redistribution of Federal Mineral Lease payments to cities, • 10 percent of gross revenues to Federal counties and Federal Mineral Lease Districts Treasury. where the resources are severed. • 90 percent of gross revenues to Alaska. 2) Garfield County opposes any attempts to lessen revenue sharing receipts with county For Colorado, the Colorado Department of Local and state governments under the Mineral Affairs distributes revenue derived from energy Leasing Act. Garfield County supports and mineral extraction statewide. These revenues amending the Act such that the federal share come from State Severance Tax receipts and of mineral royalties would be directed to Federal Mineral Lease non-bonus payments. counties or Federal Mineral Lease Districts in which mineral development occurs. Further, The Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) revenue sharing should not negatively impact administers the Direct Distribution of State Payment in lieu of Taxes (PILT) payments to Severance Tax and FML revenue to counties, county governments. municipalities, and school districts. This is accomplished through 3) For the years the State does not release the FML dollars in a timely manner and as 1) Direct Distribution - counties, municipalities, prescribe by law, the County will seek full and school districts, and payment of these funds plus reasonable interest. 2) Local Government Project Grants & Loans. Forty-eight percent of these funds go directly

page | 45 E. State Lands Board Policy Statements In 1876, the Colorado Constitution created the 1) The arbitrary ceiling preventing Counties Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners such as Garfield from recovering attorneys’ (State Land Board), which manages lands the fees upon successfully defending its position Federal Government granted to Colorado in litigation against the federal government, in public trust. The Federal Government was should be removed. All entities, whether large required to transfer these public lands to the or small should receive equal treatment under State equally across each County, based on the the law. number of township sections in each County. However, Garfield County did not receive its 2) Garfield County supports the Open Book on allotted share at the time because the land Equal Access to Justice Act, a bill that would was reserved for an Indian Reservation. The require the Administrative Conference of the distribution of these critical state lands to Garfield United States to prepare a report each year County still has not occurred today. on the amount of fees and other expenses awarded by federal courts to nonfederal The State Land Board is the second-largest entities when they prevail in a case against the landowner in Colorado, with 2.8 million surface United States. acres and 4.0 million mineral estate acres. A dual mission guides State Land Board management of 3) Garfield County supports the requirement these assets: that EAJA awards be paid from agency funds and EAJA reform should curtail environmental 1) To produce reasonable and consistent laws suits brought by environmental litigation income over time, and organizations. 2) To provide sound stewardship of the state 4) Garfield County supports the following trust assets. legislative reforms to EAJA particularly related to improved reporting and use of the EAJA: The lands are held in eight public land trusts, which benefit public schools and public a) The case name and number of the institutions. State Land Board revenue entirely adversary adjudication or court case, funds its operations, and the agency does hyperlinked to the case, if available. not rely on tax dollars. The State Land Board’s Strategic Plan is used as a framework to guide b) The name of the agency involved in the the Board and Staff in achieving agency adversary adjudication or court case. objectives and goals. c) The name of each counsel of record Policy Statements representing the agency involved in the adversary adjudication or court case. 1) The Lands in Garfield County that the State is entitled to receive as a part of the federal d) A description of the claims in the distribution of lands from Statehood, shall be adversary adjudication or court case. transferred expeditiously so as not to further deprive the County or the State the benefit e) The name of each party to who the of the resources generated from these lands. award was made. Based on the distribution formula established in 1876, these total 3,833 sections of land subject f) The name of each counsel of record to transfer. representing each party to whom the award was made. XI. Equal Access to Justice – Sue Settle Agreement g) The name of each administrative law judge, and the name of any other agency The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) (5 USC employee serving in an adjudicative role, 504 and 28 USC 2412(b)-(d)) provides for the in the in the adversary adjudication that award of attorney fees and other expenses to is the subject of the application for the eligible individuals and small entities that are award; or the name of each judge in the parties to litigation against the government. case, and the court in which the case was An eligible party may receive an award when heard. it prevails over the government, unless the government’s position was “substantially justified” h) The disposition of the application for fees or special circumstances make an award unjust. and other expenses, including any appeal However, currently those Counties such as of action taken on the application. Garfield County, with assets over an arbitrarily set ceiling, are prevented from recovering i) The amount of the award. their losses in litigation against the federal government, even when they have prevailed in j) The names and hourly rates of each their position. attorney for whose services the award was made under the application. k) The names and hourly rates of each expert witness for whose services the award was made under the application. l) The basis for the finding that the position of the agency concerned was not substantially justified.

page | 46

page | 47

page | 48 Draft Executive Order RESTORING THE RULE OF LAW AND FEDERALISM BY ENSURING COORDINATION WITH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS Prepared By: Chaves County, New Mexico Garfield County, Colorado Kane County, Utah American Stewards of Liberty Fennemore Craig, PC Contact: Margaret Byfield Executive Director, ASL 512-663-3826 (cell) [email protected] 624 South Austin Avenue, Ste 101 . Georgetown, TX 78626 512-591-7843 . Www.americanstewards.us

page | 49 EXECUTIVE ORDER ------ RESTORING THE RULE OF LAW AND FEDERALISM BY ENSURING COORDINATION WITH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Policy. (a) It is in the national interest to ensure that Federal departments and agencies work closely with the States and their local governments prior to making decisions and taking actions because they may have significant local and regional impacts on land and resource uses as well as State and local land use planning efforts. Local governments, in particular, are important units of government charged with planning authority and the responsibility to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens. Effective and meaningful coordination between Federal agencies and the States and their local governments is essential to maintain the proper balance between the Federal government and the States, as envisioned by the Framers of our Constitution. (b) Meaningful coordination with State and local governments is especially important when Federal departments and agencies make decisions that involve federally owned land. The Federal government owns about 640 million acres of land, or about 28 percent of the land in the United States. Four agencies administer 609 million acres of this land: the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture. Most of these lands are in the West and Alaska. Over 61.2 percent of Alaska is federally owned, as is about 47 percent of the 11 coterminous western States. Moreover, Federal agencies often regulate aspects of land and resource uses occurring on non-Federal land. Consequently, the Federal government has tremendous impacts on State and local governments and their citizens. To minimize conflicts and support economic growth, Federal agencies should closely coordinate their land use planning and other regulatory actions with the States and their local governments. (c) Various Federal laws and agency regulations require that Federal departments and agencies coordinate with State and local governments for the purpose of ensuring that the issues and concerns of State and local governments are addressed and that their land use planning and management activities are harmonized with the planning, and management activities of Federal agencies. This Executive Order is intended to reinforce those obligations and to ensure that Federal departments and agencies recognize the important rights and interests of State and local governments under our Federal system of government and engage in effective and meaningful government-to-government coordination with them. 2

page | 50 Section 2. Government-to-Government Coordination Principles (a) State and local governments are elected representatives of the public and are authorized to carry out specific planning and governing responsibilities as expressed in their plans, policies and programs. Government-to-government coordination shall serve as the process to harmonize Federal, State and local plans, policies and programs. (b) In accordance with State law, local governments often must exercise their duties through an open public process that includes public meetings and participation of the governing board. In these situations, Federal agencies are required to engage in meaningful coordination with local governments through their public meeting process. All information that may be relevant to coordinating the objectives, plans, policies and programs of Federal and local governments shall be disclosed and discussed through a public meeting process, unless doing so is precluded by law. (c) Coordination with State and local governments is expected to be a continuing process. When new planning efforts or policy changes are being considered, the Federal agency shall contact State and local governments to ensure the concerns of State and local governments are identified early and are addressed as part of the decision-making process to avoid potential conflicts. (d) Prior to public comment on a plan, policy or program being developed or modified by a Federal agency, the Federal agency shall provide State and local governments with a written review document and shall incorporate into the Federal agency’s public document any determination by a State or local government as to whether the proposed Federal action will be consistent with the State and local objectives, plans, policies and programs. (e) Prior to issuing a final decision on a plan, policy or program being developed or modified by a Federal agency, the Federal agency shall provide State and local governments with a written document that describes the efforts that have been made to coordinate, identifies any issues or conflicts with State and local plans, policies and programs, and explains how those issues and concerns have been resolved in the final decision. Federal agencies shall make all reasonable efforts to achieve consistency between Federal, State and local objectives, plans, policies and programs and to address and resolve issues and concerns raised by State and local governments, unless precluded by Federal law. Section 3. Coordination on Actions Pertaining to Federal Land Planning and Management. (a) The Secretary of the Interior and the heads of DOI agencies that are responsible for managing Federal land, as well as the Secretary of Agriculture and the Chief of the Forest Service with respect to National Forest System land, shall coordinate their land use inventory, planning, and management activities of or for such lands with the land use planning and management plans, policies, and programs of States and local governments within which the lands are located, unless contrary to Federal law. (b) The Secretary of the Interior and the heads of DOI agencies that are responsible for managing Federal land, as well as the Secretary of Agriculture and Chief of the Forest Service with respect to National Forest System land, shall keep apprised of the land and resource use 3