top of page
Conservation Alt Story

Livestock Grazing and Range Management

Photographer: Mary O'Brien


Note: In order to detect differences between Alternatives B, C, and D for livestock grazing, it was necessary to do a word search in text for “FW-RANGE-“  within the section on Environmental Consequences. The DEIS contains no chart comparing provisions of Alternatives B, C, D for livestock grazing.

GOALS

Conservation Alternative Goals (FW-RANGE-GL): 01-03

Proposed Management Plan (Management Plan, Vol. 1) Goals (FW-RANGE-GL): 01-03

Description of Alternatives: All, B, C, D (DEIS, Vol. 2) Goals 


DESIRED CONDITIONS

Conservation Alternative Desired Conditions (FW-RANGE-DC): 01-09

Proposed Management Plan (Management Plan, Vol. 1) Desired Conditions (FW-RANGE-DC): 01-02

OBJECTIVES

Conservation Alternative Objectives (FW-RANGE-OB): 01-06

Proposed Management Plan (Management Plan, Vol. 1) Objectives (FW-RANGE-OB): 01-04

Description of Alternatives: All, B, C, D (DEIS, Vol. 2) Objectives (FW-RANGE-OB)


STANDARDS

Conservation Alternative Standards (FW-RANGE-ST): 01-21

Proposed Management Plan (Management Plan, Vol. 1) Standards (FW-RANGE-ST): 01-02

Alternatives C (DEIS, Vol. 2) Standards (FW-RANGE-ST)


GUIDELINES

Conservation Alternative Guidelines (FW-RANGE-GD):01-06

Proposed Management Plan (Management Plan, Vol. 1) Guidelines (FW-RANGE-GD): 01-07

Description of Alternatives: All, B, C, D (DEIS, Vol. 2) Guidelines (FW-RANGE-GD)


The DEIS does not compare livestock grazing/range alternatives A, B, C, and D side-by-side. The only charts comparing the alternatives are for the  three issues the Forest felt are significant: (Issue 1: Sustainable Recreation; Issue 2: Traditional and cultural ways of life; and Issue 3: Ecological  Resilience). Livestock grazing appears in two of the 23 rows comparing the forest plan alternatives. The row in Table 2.6-3 is particularly confusing:



 

ABOUT THIS COMPARISON


All text in this chart is copied and pasted from the Conservation Alternative, the MLNF proposed Management Plan, and the MLNF DEIS except for any text in brackets and in italics font.

YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED TEXT

BLUE HIGHLIGHTED TEXT

 GREEN HIGHLIGHTED TEXT

Note only two (minor) Standards  in the DEIS to manage the entire livestock use throughout nearly 100% of the MLNF. Note also the extremely weak Guidelines (e.g., 4” stubble height at the “greenline”, which is the immediate edge between a streambank and the stream and does not include the much broader riparian area). 


Comentarios


logoicon-02.png

Our Vision of how the Manti-La Sal National Forest should be managed and cared for by the Forest Service and users in the coming 10-15 years. 

 We welcome your specific suggestions for how this Conservation Alternative can be improved. 

Why Should The Conservation Alternative
bottom of page