U.S. Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt signed a record of decision to construct and maintain a system of approximately 11,000 miles of strategically placed fuel breaks to control wildfires within a 223 million-acre area in portions of the Great Basin area.
The decision comes at the same time Chief Victoria Christiansen of the U.S. Forest Service stated to combat wildfires, local resources will be prioritized, and the practical strategy will be rapid containment. Additionally, Christiansen said resources should be committed to fires “only when there is a reasonable expectation of success in protecting life and critical property and infrastructure.”
Wildfires have increased in size and frequency throughout the western U.S. in recent years. These large, repeated fires degrade healthy rangelands, sagebrush communities, and the general productivity of the lands. According to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), in the last decade (2009-2018), 21 fires exceeded 100,000 acres each. During this same timeframe, over 13.5 million acres of BLM-administered acres within the Great Basin area burned. These wildfires destroyed private property, diminished recreational opportunities, and led to habitat loss for a variety of plant and animal species.
“Constructing a system of fuel breaks is a critical first step to reduce the risk of more catastrophic wildfires in the remaining intact sagebrush communities, but we can’t stop there,” said Deputy Director of Policy William Perry Pendley. “Fuel breaks will be most effective when combined with fuel reduction and rangeland restoration treatments, and we’ll soon release a draft plan to provide for those in the Great Basin as well.”
The record of decision (ROD) follows the February release of a final programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) by the BLM. The PEIS presented four different scenarios that ranged from individual fuel break projects with site-specific National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis, to the scenario known as Alternative D, which the BLM decided to implement.
Alternative D
Alternative D will result in the most fuel breaks and the most short-term ground disturbance but will offer BLM the most flexibility in developing fuel-break systems to reduce the number of acres burned each year.
Long-term, “Alternative D has the greatest potential to protect intact sagebrush communities from wildfire and restoration investments in degraded habitats,” according to the PEIS. Additionally, Alternative D will have the fewest long-term impacts. Alternative D will provide “the greatest opportunities to modify wildfire intensity and improve effective wildfire suppression, thereby providing the greatest contribution to long-term preservation and protection of sagebrush communities within the project boundary.”
Fuel breaks could be created along any existing roads or BLM-administered rights-of-ways (ROWs), giving local offices more options for selecting the most effective locations while minimizing the impacts to other resources. The decision provides “a full suite of treatment methods to effectively create and maintain fuel breaks including manual, mechanical, chemical, targeted grazing, and prescribed fire.”
This allows offices to select the most effective method of fuel break creation and maintenance for a specific site. The decision analyzed the impacts of all three common fuel break types (brown strips, green strips, and mowed/grazed strips), allowing field offices to select the most appropriate fuel break type for each specific location. The decision also includes an extensive list of exclusion areas and will be based on vegetation states.
To create fuel breaks, four different methods will be used: manual, mechanical, prescribed burns, and targeted grazing. Targeted grazing will be based on several factors, including vegetation state, desired vegetation objective, terrain, and current year growing conditions.
This will be implemented through agreement or contract, including coordination with affected permittees, and be determined by the local field office on a per-project basis. According to the PEIS, targeted grazing plan will include the following objectives that specify target species, grazing duration, intensity, stocking level, type of livestock, and measurable outcomes; a monitoring plan; and stipulations, including the following:
• To minimize the risk of introducing or spreading invasive plant species through livestock manure, a quarantine period may be needed before livestock are turned out into an area for targeted grazing and when they are removed from such an area;
• Coordinate with applicable permittees, state agencies, or other landowners in advance of targeted grazing treatment. This is to identify and minimize any potential conflicts of targeted grazing with regularly permitted livestock grazing;
• Construct all fencing using proper wildlife specifications contained in BLM handbook 1741-1 Fencing and applicable approved land-use plans;
• Consider on a project-by-project basis potential impacts on cultural resources from targeted grazing, including fences, corrals, and watering sites;
• The use of domestic sheep or goats for targeted grazing will be avoided within 30 miles of bighorn sheep habitat. If targeted grazing is desired within this area, BLM will prepare a separation and response plan, included in the targeted grazing plan, coordinated with the appropriate state agency to provide sufficient separation to minimize the risk of contact and disease transmission of domestic sheep or goats from bighorn sheep;
• Annually target graze sites that are dominated by invasive annual grasses. Where there are substantial areas of desirable perennial herbaceous species, consider targeted grazing strategies that will maintain perennial plant vigor;
• Carefully consider using supplements for livestock during targeted grazing during site-specific planning. Supplements will be nontoxic to wildlife and will be placed to minimize impacts on wildlife or native vegetation;
• Install wildlife escape ramps in temporary tanks to facilitate the use of and escape from livestock watering troughs by greater sage-grouse and other wildlife; and
• Placement and use of temporary watering facilities will be placed to meet site-specific conditions and treatment objectives. They will be removed following the targeted grazing treatment.
Barring legal challenges and subsequent court orders, this ROD may present opportunities for permittees to obtain some additional animal unit months (AUMs) while providing a critical fuel management service to the BLM, according to the Public Lands Council. Your local BLM office should have more site-specific information, or you can contact Kaitlynn Glover (kglover@beef.org) or Tanner Beymer (tbeymer@beef.org) with any questions or concerns. — Charles Wallace, WLJ correspondent
