Determination to Comply with the District of Montana Court Order

Transcription

1 Determination to Comply with the District of Montana Court Order Gallatin Wildlife Association vs. Forest Service et al. CV (D. Mont.) (June 14, 2016) Review of New Information Pertinent To Domestic Sheep Allotment Management Plans In the Gravelly Mountains Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest Madison County, Montana December, 2017 Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service, Northern Region Responsible Official: Dale Olson Madison District Ranger Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest

2 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA s TARGET Center at (202) (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C , or call (800) (voice) or (202) (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3 Determination AMPs Sheep Allotments in Gravelly Mountains December, 2017 DETERMINATION of Review of New Information Pertinent To Domestic Sheep Allotment Management Plans In the Gravelly Mountains INTRODUCTION This documents my determination and rationale in compliance with the District Court s order of June 14, 2016 for the Forest Service to conduct a review of the five issues concerning big horn sheep raised by the Gallatin Wildlife Association, and any other pertinent new information, to determine whether any, or all of this new information warrants National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) supplementation for the Gravelly Sheep Allotment Management Plans (AMPs). To conduct the review ordered by the Court, the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest (BDNF) prepared the document Review of New Information Pertinent to Domestic Sheep Allotments in the Gravelly Mountains (hereinafter New Information Review ). I have evaluated all information relating to management of the Gravelly Sheep allotments, considered the analysis in the New Information Review and considered all public comment to determine if the new information is sufficient to show that allotment management is affecting the environment in a significant manner or to a significant extent such that a supplementation of NEPA analysis for the AMPs must be prepared. Council on Environmental Quality regulations require supplemental NEPA analysis when there are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts. 40 C.F.R (c)(1)(ii). Specifically, Ninth Circuit case law provides: [i]f there remains major Federal action to occur, and the new information is sufficient to show that the remaining action will affect the quality of the human environment in a significant manner or to a significant extent not already considered, a supplemental EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) must be prepared. Friends of Clearwater v. Dombeck, 222 F.3rd 552, (9th Cir. 2000), citing Marsh v. Oregon Natural Res. Council, 490 U.S. 360, 374 (1989). BACKGROUND Bighorn Sheep Reintroduction into Greenhorn Mountains: Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep were once plentiful in Montana. By the 1930 s, hunting, disease, and range competition from domestic livestock reduced the bighorn to remnant bands. The State of Montana began reintroduction programs in the 1940 s. In 2001, the State decided to reintroduce bighorn sheep in the Greenhorn Mountains south of Alder, Montana, to help restore

4 the area s biodiversity and provide potential hunting and wildlife-viewing opportunities. In 2003 and 2004, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) transplanted 69 bighorn sheep to the Greenhorn Mountains. The New Information Review "Background" and "Reintroduction of Bighorn Sheep" sections provides a more detailed discussion of bighorn sheep in Gravelly Landscape and their reintroduction. Domestic Sheep Grazing Allotments and Allotment Management Plans Domestic livestock, including domestic sheep, were introduced in the Gravelly Landscape (including the Greenhorn Mountains) shortly after discovery of gold in Alder Gulch in 1863, more than 150 years ago. In 1920, an estimated 104,700 ewe/lamb pairs were permitted on the Madison National Forest in the Gravelly, Greenhorn and Snowcrest Mountains. Currently, 7,800 ewe/lamb pairs are permitted to graze seven domestic sheep allotments (Barnett, Black Butte, Coal Creek, Cottonwood, Fossil-Hellroaring, Lyon-Wolverine and Poison Basin) on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest (BDNF) in the Gravelly Mountains. On and off dates for each allotment vary. The earliest on date is July 1 and the latest off date is October 6. Please see the New Information Review section Domestic Sheep Allotment Specific Information for details regarding each allotment. These allotments have been grazed by sheep since prior to the establishment of the National Forest. Current allotment boundary configurations are a result of various allotment combinations. Permitted domestic sheep annually trail to and from these allotments. The trailing route from the west is through The Notch (located in the Snowcrest Mountains). Trailing may also occur from private lands located to the east. Trailing takes approximately 2-3 days for each band to trail to the allotments. Please see the New Information Review section AMP/Grazing Permit Requirements for Sheep Allotments in the Gravelly Mountains for a more detailed discussion of trailing. Grazing use of these allotments follows prescribed grazing practices detailed in term grazing permits and Allotment Management Plans (AMPs) which are described in the Review. An AMP is a document that applies to the management of rangeland ecosystems and livestock operations on public lands by prescribing: (1) the manner in and extent to which livestock operations will be conducted in order to meet ecosystem health, multiple use, economic and other objectives; (2) describes range improvements to be installed and maintained; and (3) contains such other provisions relating to livestock grazing and other objectives found by the Secretary of Agriculture to be consistent with the provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. An AMP integrates resource objectives, standards, guidelines and management requirements for soil and water for watershed protection, wildlife and fisheries, recreation, timber and other resources on lands within a range allotment. The specific authorization to graze livestock on National Forest System lands is the Term Grazing Permit (grazing permit). The grazing permit specifies who is allowed to graze, where grazing will occur, the number and type of livestock and the time frame when grazing is allowed. In addition, the grazing permit requires payment of grazing fees, maintenance of structures and Page 2

5 may include additional allotment specific requirements deemed necessary to graze livestock while protecting resources within the area. Grazing permits are subject to direction contained in the Forest Plan and any revision thereto. This is specifically stated in the terms and conditions of the grazing permit. The AMP is also specifically listed as a term and condition of the grazing permit. Allotment grazing requirements as mentioned in the above paragraph must be followed to meet the conditions of the grazing permit. If changes to the AMP occur, these changes automatically change the conditions of the grazing permit. All grazing must follow the requirements set forth in the permits, AMPs and annual operating instructions (AOIs). The AMPs at issue in the Review prescribe livestock management practices for the Barnett, Black Butte, Coal Creek, Cottonwood, Fossil-Hellroaring, Lyon-Wolverine and Poison Basin sheep allotments located on the BDNF in the Gravelly Mountains near Black Butte. With the exception of the Black Butte AMP, these AMPs have been approved, over time, following environmental analysis in an Environmental Analysis Report (EAR), Environmental Assessment (EA), Decision Memo (DM) or Categorical Exclusion (CE). These environmental analyses did not include an EIS. LITIGATION In 2015, Gallatin Wildlife Association et al. filed a complaint (Case 2:15-cv BMM) in U.S. District Court for the District of Montana. One of Gallatin s 1 claims alleged the Forest Service failed to supplement the domestic sheep grazing AMPs in the Gravelly Mountains (Court Order 2, pg. 9). Gallatin also alleged claims regarding the 2009 Forest Plan. On June 14, 2016 the District Court issued an order concerning both the AMPs and the 2009 Forest Plan. District Court Order of June 14, 2016 In terms of the AMPs, the District Court ordered the Forest Service to conduct a review of the five issues raised by Gallatin, and any other pertinent new information, to determine whether any, or all, of this new information warrants supplementation of the original EIS prepared for the AMPs at issue here (Court Order, pg. 37). The five issues raised by Gallatin are (Court Order, pg. 33): 1. The 2003/2004 reintroduction of bighorn sheep in the Greenhorn Mountains, 2. The 2011 listing of bighorn sheep as a sensitive species by the Regional Forester, 3. The existence of the 2002 and 2008 Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) between the BDNF, BLM, MFWP and domestic sheep grazing operators facilitating implementation of a bighorn sheep transplant in the Greenhorn Mountains, 1 Because the June 14, 2016 Court Order collectively refers to plaintiffs Gallatin Wildlife Association, WildEarth Guardians, Western Watershed Project and Yellowstone Buffalo Foundation as Gallatin, this document adopts the same term when referring to plaintiffs. 2 For the reader s convenience, The U.S. District Court Order is electronically available on the BDNF webpage at: Page 3

6 4. Updated information regarding disease transmission between domestic sheep and bighorn sheep, and 5. The consideration by MFWP that bighorn sheep could be reintroduced to closed allotments. The District Court also provided that The USFS will need to consider the appropriateness and scope of future domestic grazing based upon a full and open environmental review process This full and open environmental review process also must consider whether sufficient new information has emerged that requires the environmental review for the AMPs to be updated (Order, pg ). In terms of the 2009 Forest Plan, the District Court ordered the Forest Service to conduct a Supplement Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to consider the Memorandum of Understanding. This SEIS is being conducted separately from the New Information Review. NEW INFORMATION REVIEW The Forest Service s analysis of the effects of BDNF s domestic sheep grazing in the Gravelly Mountains in terms of whether the five issues raised by Gallatin, and any other pertinent new information warrants supplementation of the NEPA analyses prepared for the AMPs is documented in the New Information Review, along with all attachments, record documents, public comment, and the Forest Service s responses to comments. Process The BDNF prepared both a Draft New Information Review and a Final New Information Review in response to the Court s Order. The Draft New Information Review was released on January 13, 2017 for a 30-day a public comment period. The Final New Information Review, being released with this Determination, has been modified based on public comments and comments from MFWP. Public Involvement The Forest Service has responded to each public comment received on the Draft New Information Review. Twenty-six (26) comments were received. The Forest Service s responses are provided as Attachment C to the Final New Information Review and are organized by comment letter. The Forest Service reviewed each comment letter to identify specific issues raised. These issues were summarized and identified sequentially by number for each comment letter. The Forest Service response to each issue raised by each comment is provided in the RESPONSE sections of Attachment C. The entire content of letters providing comments on the Draft New Information Review are available on the project web page ( Please click on the Public Comment/Objection Reading Room link in the right hand column of the web page. Page 4

7 DETERMINATION and RATIONALE I have carefully considered all information relating to management of the Gravelly Sheep allotments, considered the analysis in the New Information Review and considered all public comment and it is my determination that the new information does not show that allotment management, at the present time, is affecting the environment in a significant manner or to a significant extent such that supplementation of the NEPA documents prepared for the AMPs is warranted. The information included in the New Information Review, summarized below, validates my determination including: no known commingling of the species; no bighorn sheep have been removed due to presence of domestic sheep on the BDNF; the distribution area of bighorn sheep does not include the Gravelly Mountains; Forest Service, MFWP and permittees have committed to measures in the MOU and are taking measures to minimize risk of commingling consistent with the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) Recommendations including removal of any individual commingling bighorn through kill permits, reporting, marking and counting sheep, locating and reacquiring where possible stray/dead sheep, and taking action to identify and remove sick domestic sheep on the allotments; the Gravelly Mountains do not provide suitable winter habitat for bighorn sheep due to snow depth; and MFWP states in their comments that based on snow depth it would be nearly impossible logistically for MFWP personnel to transport bighorns, the bighorn sheep would not be expected to survive the winter, and that releasing bighorn into the Gravelly Mountains is unlikely to occur. The Forest Service, grazing permittees and the MFWP will continue their efforts working cooperatively to minimize the risk of commingling and any adverse impact to the Greenhorn herd. Coordination with the MFWP and Forest Service will include, as feasible, aerial and ground surveys for bighorn sheep prior to trailing on and off and additional personnel surveying on-the-ground during trailing to pro-actively manage allotment grazing under the MOU. My determination is further based on the fact that if circumstances occur that require additional grazing allotment management measures to be taken, the Forest Service has the authority to make any needed modifications or cancel the grazing permits, in whole or in part, as provided in Part 1, Term 3 of the grazing permits. In addition, management of the allotments remains consistent with sensitive species management and Forest Plan direction. My determination is also based on the fact that the BDNF, consistent with the Rescissions Act, plans to begin a new NEPA process in 2018 for the AMPs, as part of AMP revision. Below is a summary of the information that forms the basis of my determination in terms of: 1) New Information Review; 2) Permit/Annual Operating Instructions Terms and Conditions; 3) Allotment Management Plan Rescissions Act Schedule; and 4) Forest Plan Compliance. Page 5

8 New Information Review The Forest Service in the New Information Review analyzed the five issues, along with other pertinent information, as ordered by Court in considering whether supplementation of the NEPA analysis for the AMPs was required. The summary of the analysis of the five issues, along with other pertinent information, is provided below. 1. Reintroduction of Bighorn Sheep The Greenhorn bighorn sheep herd was reintroduced into the Greenhorn Mountains in with the knowledge that domestic sheep grazing existed in the seven allotments on National Forest Service land in the Gravelly Mountains. Actions were taken to minimize the risk of commingling, however, the risk of commingling still exists. To date, no known adverse impacts have occurred to the bighorn sheep population from Forest Service grazing management. Facts relevant to the Greenhorn herd and domestic sheep grazing in the Gravelly Mountains and actions being taken to reduce the risk of commingling include the following: Commingling has not been known to occur on the BDNF in the 13 years since bighorn sheep were reintroduced to the Greenhorn Mountains. In 13 years, MFWP or Forest Service personnel have not observed bighorn sheep in the Gravelly Mountains. The core distribution area of the Greenhorn herd does not include the Gravelly Mountains. The known distribution area of the Greenhorn sheep herd has been identified by MFWP biologist Dean Waltee to include the Greenhorn Mountains, the west side of the Snowcrest Mountains to the Devils Hole, and the lower portion of Hinch Creek in the Ruby Mountains. ( communication from Dean Waltee.) This updated bighorn sheep distribution area is shown on the maps in Appendix A of the New Information Review. Trailing through modeled bighorn sheep habitat in the Snowcrest Mountains occurs during a limited period of time and is constrained in a narrow area such that the possibility for stray domestic sheep is minimized. The Greenhorn population has met the criteria for limited hunting. No bighorn sheep have been removed from the Greenhorn herd due to the presence of domestic sheep on the BDNF. MFWP agreed in the MOU to issue a kill permit to the grazing permittees to protect the Greenhorn herd from disease transmission. Permittees have not needed to utilize the kill permit as no bighorn sheep have been observed close to the domestic sheep. Forest Service, MFWP and permittees are taking measures consistent with the WAFWA Recommendations including reporting, marking and counting sheep, locating and reacquiring where possible stray/dead sheep, and taking action to avoid and remove sick domestic sheep on the allotments. MFWP, Forest Service, and permittees are working cooperatively to minimize risk of commingling. Specifically, during the spring and fall prior to when domestic sheep are trailing on and off the Forest and through the neighboring Wildlife Management Area, Page 6

9 permittees have been contacting the local MFWP biologist to determine if any bighorn sheep are known near the trailing route. Coordination with the MFWP and Forest Service will include, as feasible, aerial and ground surveys for bighorn sheep prior to trailing on and off, additional personnel on-the-ground during trailing, and to pro-actively manage allotment grazing under the MOU. No determination has yet been made by MFWP to manage bighorn sheep beyond the Greenhorn Mountains into the Snowcrest Mountains. The MFWP 2001 EA acknowledged the need to conduct an updated assessment if bighorns become established in the Snowcrest Mountains and MFWP is currently discussing this need Listing of Bighorn Sheep as a Sensitive Species Bighorn sheep remain on the Region 1 Sensitive Species List but this status is not significant new information related to management of bighorn sheep on the BDNF as the BDNF completed an assessment in 2011 considering effects to bighorn sheep from BDNF management actions. The review of BDNF management direction in the report Potential Bighorn Sheep Interactions with Domestic Sheep on the Beaverhead-Deerlodge NF Report to the Chief (USDA 2011) found that the BDNF Forest Plan and specific AMP strategies provided sufficient direction for the overall management of bighorn sheep on the Forest. This coupled with the lack of management removals of any bighorns related to the management of BDNF domestic sheep grazing allotments demonstrates that a change in bighorn sheep management is not warranted. Domestic sheep grazing on the Madison Ranger District of the BDNF, May impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing or cause a loss of viability to the population or the species at the present time. This is based on the entirety of the information presented in the New Information Review and the following rationale: While it remains possible the species could commingle on BDNF sheep allotments in the Gravelly Mountains or along the trailing route in the future, information gained since the 2003/2004 transplants show that bighorn have coexisted within 5 miles of domestic sheep grazing since transplant and commingling on BDNF lands has not occurred and disease has not been spread to these bighorn sheep. All bighorn sheep herds in close proximity to these domestic sheep allotments have increased in numbers of observed animals or remained relatively stable with no substantial or recent pneumonia die-offs. Forest Service, MFWP and permittees are taking measures consistent with the WAFWA Recommendations including coordination, reporting, marking and counting sheep, locating and reacquiring where possible stray/dead sheep, and taking action to identify and remove sick domestic sheep on the allotments. Coordination with the MFWP and Forest Service will include, as feasible, aerial and ground surveys for bighorn sheep prior to trailing on and off, additional personnel on-the-ground during trailing, and to proactively manage allotment grazing under the MOU. In the event of a bighorn sheep at risk of or commingling with domestic sheep on the BDNF, control measures are permitted by MFWP if necessary to prevent the bighorn from returning to the herd and potentially spreading disease. Page 7

10 No bighorn sheep have been confirmed in the Gravelly Mountains or along the trailing routes of the domestic sheep. However, future review and analysis of domestic sheep management will take place following the Rescissions Act schedule and additional measures may be warranted and are permitted under BDNF authority if bighorn sheep routinely appear in the vicinity of the domestic sheep allotments and domestic-bighorn conflicts arise. 3. Existence of MOUs The MOUs provided, and continue to provide, protective measures that reduce the risk of pathogen exposure and subsequent potential pneumonia outbreaks in the bighorn herd. The MOUs improve the likelihood of continued occupancy of the Greenhorn Mountains by bighorn sheep and potential for future hunting opportunities, meeting the intent of the transplant proposal without a need to revise management practices described in the domestic sheep AMPs. Preventative measures in the MOUs further reduce the risk that any bighorn that comes in contact with domestic sheep will not return to the herd and transmit disease. 4. Updated Information Regarding Disease Transmission Between Domestic Sheep and Bighorn Sheep A review of most recent literature, it is clear maintaining spatial separation between domestic and wild sheep, is foremost the best approach to limiting disease transmission between the two species (Cassier et al 2018). Brewer et al. (2014) notes there is currently no effective treatment once clinical signs of pneumonia are documented. In terms of management of the BDNF domestic sheep allotments in relation to the bighorn sheep, spatial separation has been maintained between the BDNF domestic sheep allotments and bighorn sheep. Further, the modified 2016 MOU between the BDNF, MFWP, BLM, and domestic sheep producers contain preventative measures to manage risk of contact between domestic and wild sheep reducing the risk of an infected bighorn sheep returning to the Greenhorn herd or any bighorn sheep herd and knowingly affecting the population. No known commingling between domestic and bighorn sheep has occurred on the BDNF since the bighorn sheep were transplanted and the herd has not experienced a die-off and is free from pneumonia-like symptoms. 5. Consideration by MFWP that Bighorn Sheep Could Be Reintroduced to Closed Allotments MFWP comments on the New Information Review has made clear that due to the high amount of snow (multiple feet) in the Gravelly Mountains, reintroducing bighorn sheep in the winter is borderline impossible logistically for MFWP personnel to transport bighorns, and the bighorn sheep would not be expected survive the winter due to the deep snow. Further, non-winter reintroduction would not be feasible due to heat stress. The MFWP explains: Because capture and relocation efforts occur during the winter and the modeled bighorn habitat in the Gravelly Mountains would be expected to have multiple feet of snowpack, a release directly onto those habitats would not be feasible. Any bighorns released during the winter would have to be snow machined or air-lifted to the modeled habitats, and would not be expected to survive that initial winter season. Any attempts to capture and relocate bighorn sheep to the Gravelly Mountains during snow free months would be expected to lead to very high mortality associated with heat stress. Surviving bighorn sheep would need to find suitable winter range on their own. Because Page 8

11 of these factors, releasing bighorn into the Gravelly Mountains is unlikely to occur. MFWP has made no determination that they would reintroduce bighorn sheep into the Gravelly Mountains. 6. Other Pertinent Information Vegetation/Soil/Water: field reviews over the last few decades have found no indicators of over use of the vegetation or detrimental soil or streambank impacts within the sheep allotments. (Suzuki, personal communication). Within riparian areas, species diversity and abundance is as expected for these plant communities well within the expected potential and natural range of variability for the sites. Plant cover is high and shrub cover continues to increase. The overall unique nature of how sheep graze, along with required grazing practices, greatly reduce livestock impacts in riparian areas. Current vegetative, soil and riparian conditions on the allotments do not indicate significant environmental impacts from domestic sheep grazing practices as currently permitted through grazing permits, AMPs and Annual Operating Instructions. Bighorn Sheep Habitat Assessment GIS Analysis: The MFWP Bighorn Sheep Habitat Assessment GIS Analysis is only one piece of information the MFWP will consider in determining future translocation sites. MFWP also considers such site-specific information such as the overall quality of the habitat to support the population objective, the location of the extent of habitat, the potential for individuals to foray in relation to domestic sheep allotments, and whether conditions such as snow-depth (such as in the Gravelly Mountains) would preclude modeled habitat from providing winter habitat. As such, MFWP modeled habitat in the Gravelly Mountains from the Bighorn Sheep Habitat Assessment GIS, does not determine that MFWP will translocate bighorn sheep there in the future. Permit/Annual Operating Instructions Terms and Conditions The grazing permit is the authorization to graze domestic sheep on the Gravelly allotment on National Forest System lands. The New Information Review discusses the permit terms and practices required to be followed by the permittee in the section AMP/Grazing Permit Requirements for Sheep Allotments in the Gravelly Mountains. The term grazing permits and the permit practices apply measures to minimize risk of commingling during both trailing on and off the allotments and during allotment grazing. Please see the New Information Review section Reintroduction of Bighorn Sheep discussing the WAFWA Recommendations and measures taken to minimize risk of commingling. Required sheep herding practices in Part 3, Term 10 (a-g) of the permit cannot be completed without the daily presence of a herder. Part 2, Term 8(d) subjects the permit to potential adverse action (suspension and cancellation) if terms of the permit area not complied with. Moreover, Annual Operating Instructions, made part of the permit, require record keeping of actual numbers and actual use dates of pasture/camp unit movement throughout the season, and notification of the date the permittee plans to enter the Forest. In addition, grazing practices to be followed on all seven domestic sheep allotments in the Gravelly Mountains include bedding practices and use of guard dogs as provided in Annual Operating Instructions. (See discussion in Page 9

12 the New Information Review in section AMP/Grazing Permit Requirements for Sheep Allotments in the Gravelly Mountains. ) It is also important to understand that if circumstances occur that require additional protection of resources, the Forest Service has the authority to make any needed modifications or cancel the permit, in whole or in part. Part 1, Term 3 states: This permit can also be cancelled, in whole or in part, or otherwise modified, at any time during the term to conform with needed changes brought about by law, regulation, Executive order, allotment management plans, land management planning, numbers permitted or seasons of use necessary because of resource conditions.... Allotment Management Plan Rescissions Act Schedule The Rescissions Act of 1995 (P.L ) Section 504(a) and the 2004 Appropriations Act (P.L ) Section 325 requires the Secretary of Agriculture to schedule when Forests will complete environmental analysis and documentation required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for all grazing allotments. This schedule is set at the discretion of the Secretary and periodically reviewed and updated to account for completed environmental analysis and adjust timeframes due to agency workload management and priorities. Through various riders, Congress requires reissuance of expired, transferred or waived grazing permits prior to completion of NEPA analysis for AMP revisions. Existing term grazing permits authorizing domestic sheep on the seven allotments were issued following this Congressional direction. The BDNF prioritizes revision of AMPs based on resource considerations and need to consider potential management change. The BDNF has approximately 240 active allotments identified on its Rescissions Act schedule. AMP revision and consideration of alternatives including consideration of a no grazing alternative during the NEPA process will be conducted in accordance with the Rescissions Act. In accordance with the Rescissions Act, the Forest plans to begin NEPA analysis in 2018 along with public comment on revision of the Gravelly Mountains sheep allotment AMPs. We will include the Cottonwood S&G allotment and domestic sheep grazing portion of the Upper Ruby Cattle and Horse allotment along with the other six Gravelly Sheep allotments. Forest Plan Compliance The BDNF is managed in accordance with the BDNF 2009 Forest Plan. The Forest Plan reflects the multiple-use mandate of the Forest Service; including the opportunity for domestic sheep grazing. The seven sheep allotments are incompliance with the Forest Plan. Yearly monitoring of the six Gravelly sheep allotments show that the allotments are being managed consistent with the Forest Plan livestock grazing standards. (Forest Plan p ). The Forest Plan wildlife habitat standard provides that sheep allotments which become vacant will be closed to sheep grazing or the vacant allotment may be used by an existing Gravelly Landscape sheep permittee, with no increase in permitted use. (Forest Plan p. 49). The Gravelly sheep allotments have not become vacant. The Gravelly sheep allotments remain as the only domestic sheep allotments on the BDNF. Page 10

13 SUMMARY Based on the analysis summarized above, I have determined that supplementation of the NEPA analysis of the Gravelly Sheep allotment AMPs is not required at the present time as new information does not show that continued domestic sheep grazing is affecting the environment in a significant manner or to a significant extent. However, consistent with the Rescissions Act schedule, the BDNF plans to begin a new NEPA process for AMP revision for the seven Gravelly sheep allotments. CONTACT PERSON For more information and or to request a printed copy of the 2017 New Information Review, please contact Jan Bowey Biological Scientist for the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest at , at jbowey@fs.fed.us or Dale Olson District Ranger at , at dolson07@fs.fed.us with "2017 New Information Review" in the subject line. SIGNATURE Dale Olson District Ranger Madison Ranger District Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest C \ Date \ Page 11