Travel Management Plan U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

travel management plan
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Travel Management Plan U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE Travel Management Plan U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE Land Status by Mesa Garfield Montrose Rio Blanco Total County BLM Surface Lands 721,700 322,600


slide-1
SLIDE 1

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

Travel Management Plan

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management

slide-2
SLIDE 2

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

Land Status by County Mesa Garfield Montrose Rio Blanco Total BLM Surface Lands 721,700 322,600 17,100 1,061,400 Federal Minerals 857,700 355,900 17,300 400 1,231,300

slide-3
SLIDE 3

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

Long-range master plan, vision for the future

– Initiated in 2008, with significant public and cooperator involvement – Determines appropriate multiple uses for over

  • ne million acres on BLM managed lands

mostly in Mesa and Garfield counties for the next 20 years – Creates a balanced plan that provides for resource use and resource conservation – Includes travel plan decisions

Resource Management Plan Overview

slide-4
SLIDE 4

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

  • RMP Public scoping meetings

– Grand Junction, Collbran and Moab

  • Hosted travel management workshops

– Delta, De Beque, Colbran, Gateway, Fruita, and Grand Junction, with over 200 participants

  • Two separate travel management comment periods
  • Extended comment period for draft plan of 60 days for a total of 150

days (hosted 5 open houses)

  • Travel management community meeting in Grand Junction
  • Travel management training for community leaders
  • Hosted information on website
  • Presented information in google earth
  • Provided presentations at user group meetings
  • Mesa County hosted training videos
  • Mesa County hosted listening sessions Tuesdays and Thursdays

following release of Proposed RMP on route designations

Public/Community Involvement

slide-5
SLIDE 5

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

  • Cooperating agencies since 2008

(Mesa County, Fruita, GJ, Palisade, Collbran, Debeque, CPW , BOR, USFWS, USFS, Ute Tribes)

  • Cooperators provided BLM with data

through the scoping process and as needed to help inform decisions.

Cooperating Agency Involvement

  • Cooperators attended 5 weeks of draft route

designation meetings and 7 weeks of final route designation meetings

slide-6
SLIDE 6

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

  • 43 Code of Federal Regulations Part 8342

– “All designations shall be based on the protection of the resources of the public lands, the promotion of the safety of all the users of the public lands, and the minimization of conflicts among various uses of the public lands”

  • National Management Strategy for Motorized Off-Highway Vehicle Use on

Public Lands (BLM 2001)

  • Travel and Transportation Management Manual (BLM Manual 1626, 2011)

– RS 2477 “Travel Management planning is not intended to address the validity of any RS2477 assertion. RS2477 rights are determined through a process that are entirely independent of the BLMs planning process.”

  • Travel and Transportation Management Handbook (BLM Handbook H-

8342-1, 2012)

  • National Environmental Policy Act

Authority & Guidance for Travel Management Planning

slide-7
SLIDE 7

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

  • To achieve RMP Goals

and Objectives

  • Carefully considered

nearly 1,500 public comments

  • Balance access with

resource protection, safety and recreational enjoyment

  • On-going process

Travel Planning is a Tool

slide-8
SLIDE 8

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

Gateway Slide

slide-9
SLIDE 9

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

Designation Travel Plan Travel Plan %

  • f total

Travel Plan followin g mitigati

  • n

Travel Plan mitigati

  • n % of

total Open (in open areas) 290.2 7.3% 290.2 7.3% Limited to Administrative and Permitted Uses Only 256.1 6.4% 378.7 9.5% No Legal Access 334.7 8.4% 0.0 0.0% Closed 852.8 21.3% 894.8 22.4% Total Open to Non-motorized Only 177.8 4.4% 195.4 4.9% Total Open to Motorized 2,375.3 59.4% 2,527.7 63.2% Total 3,996.6 100.0% 3,996.6 100.0%

slide-10
SLIDE 10

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

  • Signed Record of Decision for RMP and Travel Plan

– Starts the appeal process for the route designation decisions (30 days) – Appeals are resolved by IBLA (fact sheets available)

  • Deferred Routes will undergo another analysis process (National

Environmental Policy Act) which will result in an EA or EIS

  • BLM will continue to seek cooperating agency participation in

providing information on future revisions to the Travel Management Plan

  • RMP Implementation; new trail proposals; continued

commitment to working with community on trail based recreation

Next Steps

slide-11
SLIDE 11

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

  • Mesa County Maintained: 6/2010

– 245 miles with 245 miles open to the public – 100% of those will remain open to motorized use

  • Mesa County Vested Interest Routes: 6/2010

– 167 miles with 162 miles open to the public – 97% of those will remain open to motorized use

  • Mesa County recreational routes of importance: 6/2013

– 1484 miles with 1091 open to motorized use – 74% of those will remain open to motorized use

Mesa County Routes of Importance

slide-12
SLIDE 12

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

  • 393 miles of routes were proposed to be closed
  • r administrative in the final Travel Plan
  • 209 of the 393 miles will be deferred
  • 184 of the 393 miles will not be deferred and are

within

– No legal public access - 79 miles – Cultural importance - 58 miles – Areas of Critical Environmental Concern - 29 miles – Sarlacc Trail - 11 miles – Wilderness Study Areas - 7 miles

Mesa County Recreational Routes of Concern

slide-13
SLIDE 13

GRAND JUNCTION FIELD OFFICE

Tools for Review ing the Travel Plan Decisions