Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
AND NEXT ON OUR AGENDA, MIKE DWYER
IS GOING TO TAKE YOU THROUGH A REAL, LIVE EXAMPLE.
AND HE'S GOING TO GIVE YOU SOME INSIGHT
ON HOW TO TACKLE REGIONAL
MITIGATION.
AND WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE LAW AND POLICY MIKE
YOU WORKED ON ONE OF THE FIRST
REGIONAL MITIGATION PROJECTS IN THE BLM.
SO TELL US ABOUT IT. WELL THANKS, CATHY.
IT'S MY PLEASURE TO GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW
OF A PROJECT THAT FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES
IMPLEMENTED THE POLICY THAT'S BEEN DESCRIBED HERE TODAY.
I USE THE QUALIFIER FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES BECAUSE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE REGIONAL
MITIGATION STRATEGY FOR THE DRY
LAKE SOLAR ENERGY ZONE OCCURRED
SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE
DEVELOPMENT IN THE REGIONAL
MITIGATION MANUAL BUT THE TWO
WERE NOT FORMALLY CONNECTED.
THEY WERE, HOWEVER, VERY MUCH
INFORMALLY CONNECTED.
THAT IS THE TWO PROJECT TEAMS
ENJOYED A FREQUENT AND HEALTHY DIALOGUE.
AS A RESULT, THE DRY LAKE
PROJECT MADE SIGNIFICANT USE OF
INTERIM PRODUCTS THAT WENT INTO
THE MAKING OF THIS MANUAL.
WHILE W A 'RE STILL DECOMPRESSING
FROM THE RAREFIED ERA OF THE
PROJECT AND HAVE NOT FULLY
FLESHED OUT OUR LESSONS LEARNED,
I HOPE THAT THIS PRESENTATION
PROVIDES SOME INSIGHT INTO BOTH
THE OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES
ASSOCIATED WITH EXECUTING THE
REGIONAL MITIGATION PROGRAM AT THE PROJECT LEVEL.
SO MIKE, IF THE IDEA FOR
DEVELOPING AN OFFSITE MITIGATION
STRATEGY FOR THE DRY LAKE SOLAR
ENERGY ZONE DIDN'T COME FROM THE
OFFSITE MITIGATION MANUAL, WHERE DID IT COME FROM?
WE IMPOSED IT ON OURSELVES, CATHY.
SO IT CAME FROM THE DECISION TO
IMPLEMENT A SOLAR ENERGY
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IN THE BLM.
AS DESCRIBED IN THE SOLAR
PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ISSUED LAST YEAR.
AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE DECISION
ESTABLISHED SOLAR... 17 SOLAR
ENERGY ZONES IN THE SIX
SOUTHWESTERN STATES BY AMENDING
THE APPLICABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS.
THE DECISION DIRECTED THAT FOR
THE IMPACTS OF SOLAR DEVELOPMENT
THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED OR
MINIMIZED, THE BLM CONSIDER
IMPLEMENTING OFFSITE MITIGATION.
AND THAT A REGIONAL MITIGATION
PLAN BE DEVELOPED AS THE MEANS
TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MIGHT BE DONE.
ONE OF THE SOLAR ENERGY ZONES,
DRY LAKE, IN SOUTHERN NEVADA WAS
SELECTED TO SERVE AS A PILOT FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH A STRATEGY.
AS DEPICTED HERE THE IDEA IS TO
FIRST AVOID IMPACTS AND WHERE
THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE, TO
MINIMIZE IMPACTS BY IMPLEMENTING
THINGS LIKE BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES AS JIM POINTED OUT.
THE IMPACTS THAT REMAIN AFTER
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION ARE
REFERRED TO AS UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS.
THE FIRST TIER OF THE HIERARCHY
WAS IMPLEMENTED FOR SOLAR
DEVELOPMENT ON PUBLIC LANDS BY
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SOLAR ENERGY ZONES.
THESE ZONES ARE AREAS FOUND TO
HAVE HIGH POTENTIAL FOR SOLAR
BUT WITH RELATIVELY FEW CONFLICTS.
THAT IS WE AVOIDED AREAS WITH
SIGNIFICANT AND INCOMPATIBLE RESOURCE VALUES.
THE SECOND TIER WAS ALSO ADDRESSED IN THE SOLAR
PROGRAMMATIC EIS. CHAPTER FIVE PROVIDED A ROBUST
SUITE OF DESIGN FEATURES THAT
COULD MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS OF
SOLAR DEVELOPMENT ONSITE. THE SOLAR PROGRAMMATIC
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
INCLUDES A CHAPTER FOR EACH OF
THE 17 SOLAR ENERGY ZONES ASSESSING THE SITE
SPECIFIC IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDING A SITE OF DESIGN
FEATURES SPECIFIC TO THE IMPACTS
EXPECTED IN EACH ZONE.
SO, THE SOLAR PROGRAMMATIC EIS
PROVIDES A SET OF UNAVOIDABLE
IMPACTS THAT FEED THE PROCESS OF
DEVELOPING A REGIONAL OFFSITE
MITIGATION STRATEGY FOR SOLAR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT.
NOW, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT HOW WE
DEVELOPED A REGIONAL MITIGATION
STRATEGY FOR DRY LAKE.
THE DRY LAKE SOLAR ENERGY ZONE
DEPICTED HERE BY THE INVERTED
RED TRIANGLE IS APPROXIMATELY 22
MILES NORTH AND EAST OF DOWNTOWN LAS VEGAS.
IT IS ROUGHLY NINE SQUARE MILES
IN SIZE AND IS BORDERED ON THE
SOUTHEAST BY INTERSTATE 15 AND
THE SOUTHWEST BY THE GREAT BASIN HIGHWAY.
AS GORDON DISCUSSED, IT IS IN
THE EASTERN MOJAVE DESERT AND
THE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY IS
ALMOST ENTIRELY CREOSOTE BURSAGE SCRUB.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH
TAKEN DEPICTED BY THE YELLOW
TRIANGLE, THERE ARE EXISTING
USES ON AND AROUND THE ZONE
INCLUDING POWER LINES AND
NATURAL GAS FIRED POWER PLANTS
AND NATURAL GAS PIPELINE AND AN
ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION AND A
CEMENT PLANT AND A BUNCH OF ROADS AND FENCES.
THE AREA OUTLINED IN RED HAS
BEEN DESIGNATED A NONDEVELOPMENT
AREA IN THE SOLAR PROGRAMMATIC
EIS BECAUSE IT CONTAINS MAJOR
DRAINAGE CHANNELS WITHIN THE SOLAR ENERGY ZONE.
DESIGNATING NONDEVELOPMENT AREAS
WITHIN A SEZ IS ANOTHER WAY OF
IMPLEMENTING THE BLM MITIGATION HIERARCHY.
SO IF WE WERE TO DEVELOP THIS
ZONE FOR UTILITY SCALE SOLAR
GENERATION, WHAT IMPACT SHOULD WE MITIGATE FOR?
WHAT SHOULD WE DO TO COMPENSATE
FOR THOSE UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS AND
WHERE SHOULD WE DO IT?
PRESENTED HERE ARE THE SEVEN
QUESTIONS THAT FORM THE OUTLINE
OF THE DRY LAKE REGIONAL MITIGATION STRATEGY.
THE FIRST THREE QUESTIONS PEAR
DOWN THE UNIVERSE OF EXPECTED IMPACTS FOUND IN THE
SOLAR PROGRAMMATIC EIS TO ONLY THE
SUBSET OF UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS THAT WARRENT OFFSITE MITIGATION.
QUESTIONS FOUR THROUGH SEVEN ARE
ABOUT FIGURING OUT HOW AND WHERE
TO CARRY OUT OFFSITE MITIGATION.
HOW IT WILL BE FUNDED AND HOW
SUCCESS WILL BE MEASURED.
QUESTION FOUR PROVIDES THE
BRIDGE BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS OF TASKS.
SO, MIKE, EARLIER GORDON
TALKED ABOUT A SET OF QUESTIONS,
EIGHT QUESTIONS OR SO. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME
QUESTIONS SO CAN YOU TAKE A
MINUTE AND EXPLAIN HOW THE TWO ARE TOGETHER?
YEAH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA.
THEY REALLY ALL COME FROM THE SAME PROCESS.
THREE OF THE QUESTIONS ARE ON BOTH LISTS.
AND THEY'RE UNDERLINED IN THE
NEXT SLIDE THAT'S GOING TO COME UP. AS IN COMMON.
BETWEEN BOTH THE LISTS. THE REMAINING QUESTIONS ON
GORDON'S LIST PROVIDE
INFORMATION THAT IS HELPFUL IN
DECIDING IF AN UNAVOIDABLE IMPACT
WARRANTS OFFSITE MITIGATION.
YOU SEE THOSE AS COMPONENTS OF
QUESTION NUMBER THREE ON MY LIST.
I'LL BRIEFLY DESCRIBE EACH OF
THESE QUESTIONS, HOW WE ANSWERED
EACH OF THESE QUESTIONS FOR THE DRY LAKE PROJECT.
INCIDENTALLY, THE SOLAR
PROGRAMMATIC EIS DIRECTED THAT THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A REGIONAL MITIGATION STRATEGY SHOULD
PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR STAKEHOLDER INPUT.
ACCORDINGLY, WE CONVENED SEVERAL
WORKSHOPS AND SOLICITED COMMENTS
OVER INTERIM PRODUCTS OVER THE
LIFE OF THE PROJECT. WE HAD OVER 100 PEOPLE
REPRESENTING A VARIETY OF
INTERESTS, PARTICIPATE IN SOME
WAY OVER THE COURSE OF THIS PROJECT.
STAKEHOLDERS WERE INVOLVED AT EVERY STEP.
THEY CONTRIBUTED EXPERTISE,
CREATIVITY AND OPINION THAT MADE
THE FINAL PRODUCT BETTER.
I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE
PRODUCT YOU'LL BE INTRODUCED TO
HERE IS AS MUCH THEIR WORK AS IT IS OURS.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE
STARTED WITH THE IMPACT SPECIFIC
TO DEVELOPING DRY LAKE FOR UTILITY SCALE, SOLAR
DEVELOPMENT, AS ANALYZED IN THE
SOLAR PROGRAMMATIC EIS.
AT THE TIME IT WAS WRITTEN, THE
AUTHORS DIDN'T KNOW WHAT
TECHNOLOGY MIGHT BE BE INSTALLED
AT DRY LAKE BUT IT WAS SAFE TO
ASSUME THAT SOLAR DEVELOPMENT
CAN HAVE A FAIRLY DRASTIC EFFECT
ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.
THE TWO PHOTOS HERE OF THE
BRIGHTSOURCE PROJECT ON PUBLIC
LAND IN THE LAS VEGAS DISTRICT
ILLUSTRATES THE INTENSITY OF
UTILITY SCALE SOLAR DEVELOPMENT.
EACH TOWER AND THERE ARE THREE
ON THIS SITE, REQUIRES
APPROXIMATELY ONE SQUARE MILE OF REFLECTORS.
I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR
ATTENTION TO WHAT THE GROUND
LOOKS LIKE UNDER THE REFLECTORS
ON THE LOWER OF THE TWO PHOTOS.
IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE COMPLETE
REMOVAL OF VEGETATION, SOILS AND
EVEN THE TOPOGRAPHY ITSELF AS
THIS AREA IS GRADED FLAT.
THE INITIAL UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
WERE TAKEN FROM THE SOLAR
PROGRAMMATIC EIS AND WERE
REVIEWED AND AMENDED SLIGHTLY BY
AN INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM AT THE
LOCAL BLM OFFICE WITH FIRSTHAND
KNOWLEDGE OF AND THE MOST
UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION ABOUT THE
RESOURCES FOUND IN DRY LAKE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ENDED UP WITH
TWO LISTS OF UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS.
THOSE IMPACTS THAT ARE
DEFINITELY UNAVOIDABLE AND THOSE
IMPACTS THAT MAY BE UNAVOIDABLE.
IN THE OPINION OF THE INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM, THE
IMPACTS ON THE MAYBE LIST CAN BE
EFFECTIVELY MINIMIZED BY THE
SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF DESIGN FEATURES.
BUT RECOMMENDED THEY BE CLOSELY
MONITORED TO ENSURE THEY'RE EFFECTIVE.
THE OTHER LIST, THE DEFINITE
LIST WAS CARRIED FORWARD TO THE
NEXT STEP IN THIS PROCESS.
TO MOVE TO THE NEXT AND FINAL
SUBSET OF IMPACTS, THOSE THAT
WARRANT OFFSET MITIGATION,
THEY APPLY THE CRITERIA FOUND IN THE
BLM REGIONAL MITIGATION MANUAL,
INCLUDING CONSIDERATION OF THE POTENTIAL
EFFECT OF THE UNAVOIDABLE
IMPACTS ON PROBLEMATIC REGIONAL
TRENDS AND THE ROLE OF THE
IMPACTED RESOURCES PLAY IN THE
GREATER ECOSYSTEM AS GORDON DESCRIBED.
LISTED HERE IS THE SUBSET OF
UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS THAT,
ACCORDING TO THE SCREENING
PROCESS, MET THE CRITERIA FOR
WARRANTING OFFSITE MITIGATION.
THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY SURPRISES
HERE BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT
THAT WE BUNDLED THE IMPACT TO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. UNDER THE HEADING ECOSYSTEM
SERVICES. BECAUSE OUR CONCEPTUAL MODEL
HELPED US REALIZE WHERE
ECOSYSTEMS ARE CONCERNED, THE
WHOLE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE SUM OF THE PARTS.
BY THE WAY, THIS AND THE NEXT
FEW SLIDES FEATURE A FEW OF THE
SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES FOUND IN
THE DRY LAKE SOLAR ENERGY ZONES.
ONCE WE HAVE THE IMPACTS THAT
WARRANT OFFSITE MITIGATION,
WE ARE IN A POSITION TO STATE
WHAT IT IS WE'RE TRYING TO
ACHIEVE WITH OFFSITE MITIGATION.
AS YOU CAN SEE, ON THE NEXT
SLIDE, THESE ARE REGIONAL LEVEL GOALS.
WHILE THIS IS THE PLACE WHERE
MITIGATION RATIO MIGHT APPEAR IN
A PLAN SUCH AS TWO ACRES
RESTORED FOR EVERY ONE ACRE
DISTURBED, WE CHOSE NOT TO GO
DOWN THIS PATH FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
FIRST, THE DRY LAKE PROJECT
AREA, AS YOU SAW IN THE SLIDES I
SHOWED EARLIER, ALREADY EXPERIENCED A GOOD DEAL OF
DISTURBANCE FROM EXISTING USES.
THUS THE CONDITION OF THE
LANDSCAPE IS ALREADY LESS THAN
ITS FULL POTENTIAL BEFORE ANY
SOLAR DEVELOPMENT EVER OCCURS.
SECOND, THE TEAM FELT THE FOCUS
SHOULD BE BE ON THE OUTCOMES RATHER THAN OUTPUTS.
THAT IS THINGS MITIGATION IS
MEANT TO ACHIEVE IN THE REGION.
ARTICULATING OUR REGIONAL
MITIGATION GOALS LED US DIRECTLY
TO THE LAS VEGAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN.
TO SEEK ESTABLISHED MANAGEMENT
PRESCRIPTIONS FOR THE IMPACTED
RESOURCES THAT SEEM TO SPEAK TO MITIGATION.
I SHOULD ALSO MENTION THAT THE
DESERT TORTOISE IS LISTED AS A
THREATENED SPECIES UNDER THE
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.
DRY LAKE IS TORTOISE HABITAT BUT NOT
CRITICAL HABITAT. THERE IS A HABITAT CONSERVATION
THERE IS A HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN IN PLACE FOR CLARK COUNTY
IN WHICH DRY LAKE IS LOCATED
AND THE ASSOCIATED SECTION SECTION 7
PERMIT REQUIRES PAYMENT OF $810 PER ACRE.
THE TORTOISE MITIGATION FEES GO
TOWARD THE VARIETY OF ACTIVITIES
AIMED AT SUSTAINING THE POPULATION IN THE COUNTY
INCLUDING HABITAT RESTORATION AND PROTECTION.
WITH OUR GOALS IN HAND, OUR NEXT STEP IS
TO IDENTIFY WHAT ACTIONS WE'RE
GOING TO TAKE TO ACHIEVE THEM.
AND WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE PLACE.
LISTED HERE ARE THE CRITERIA WE
USE TO RANK A HOST OF POTENTIAL ACTIONS AND SITE.
THE LIST OF POTENTIAL ACTIONS
AND SITES WAS NOMINATED BY BOTH
BLM STAFF AND THE PUBLIC.
THE LOCAL BLM INTERDISCIPLINARY
TEAM MADE THE FINAL CALL ON THE RECOMMENDATION.
THE PLACE THAT ROSE TO THE TOP
OF THE NOMINATED LOCATIONS WAS
THE GOLD BUTTE AREA OF CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN OR ACEC IN
SOUTHEASTERN NEVADA.
IT IS A 350,000 ACEC DESIGNATED
IN 1998 BY THE DECISION TO
IMPLEMENT THE LAS VEGAS RNP.
IT IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 40
MILES DUE EAST OF DRY LAKE AND
IS BORDERED ON TWO SIDES BY THE
LAKE MEAD NATIONAL RECREATION
AREA MANAGED BY THE NATIONAL PARKS SERVICE.
IT WAS DESIGNATED AN ACEC FOR A
VARIETY OF OUTSTANDING RESOURCE
VALUES INCLUDING DESERT TORTOISE
HABITAT, WILDLIFE CORRIDORS,
SCENIC VALUES AND CULTURAL RESOURCES.
WHY DID IT RISE TO THE TOP?
THE SHORT ANSWER IS THAT IT BEST
MET THE CRITERIA FOUND IN THE
REGIONAL MITIGATION MANUAL.
LET ME HIGHLIGHT A FEW OF THE
MOST SIGNIFICANT OF THESE.
FIRST, IT IS IN THE SAME STATE,
COUNTY AND ECOLOGICAL REGION AS
THE DRY LAKE SOLAR ENERGY ZONE.
SECOND, THERE IS SIGNIFICANT
OPPORTUNITY FOR RESTORATION
THANKS TO RECENT WILDFIRES AND
ALSO TO PROLIFERATION OF ROADS
THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN A
BLM TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR
CLOSURE AND RESTORATION. THIRD, RESTORATION AND
PROTECTION ARE CONSISTENT WITH
THE MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS FOR
THE AREAS SPECIFIED IN THE LAS VEGAS RNP.
FOURTH, ANALYSIS IN THE MOJAVE
ASSESSMENT AND ALSO BY THE
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE INDICATE
THE VEGETATION AND TORTOISE
HABITAT WILL PERSIST LONGER IN
THE ACEC LONGER THAN IT IS IN
ADJACENT AREAS AS A RESULT OF CLIMATE CHANGE.
FIFTH, THE CURRENT LEVEL OF
FUNDING IS INSUFFICIENT TO
ACCOMPLISH EITHER THE NEEDED
RESTORATION WORK OR THE
PROTECTION OF THE AREA FROM FURTHER DEGRADATION.
PARTICULARLY FROM UNAUTHORIZED,
OFF-ROAD RECREATION.
FINALLY, THE MITIGATION ACTIONS
WILL BENEFIT MULTIPLE RESOURCES.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE SIGNIFICANT
CULTURE RESOURCES FOUND IN THE GOLD BUTTE ACEC.
AS YOU MIGHT EXPECT, THE
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION ACTIONS ARE
RESTORATION OF DISTURBED
AREAS AND PROTECTION OF RESOURCES IN THE ACEC FROM
FURTHER DEGRADATION.
I'LL GIVE YOU JUST A MINUTE OR TWO TO READ THESE
RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON.
YOU KNOW, MIKE, WHILE THEY'RE
LOOKING AT THOSE, YOU MENTIONED
THAT THE CURRENT LEVEL OF
FUNDING IS INSUFFICIENT AND BY
LOOKING AT THESE ACTIONS, THEY
SEEM KIND OF AMBITIOUS.
SO HOW WOULD YOU FUND THIS WORK?
THE TEAM RECOMMENDED THAT CHARGING
A FEE TO FUND OFFSITE MITIGATION ACTIONS.
HOWEVER, PRECISELY HOW THIS FEE
IS CALCULATED IS ONE UNFINISHED
PIECE OF THE PUZZLE AND IT IS COMPLICATED.
FOR EXAMPLE, FOR DRY LAKE, THE
COST OF RESTORING AND PROTECTING
AN ACRE OF THE CREOSOTE
BURSAGE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY IN THE EASTERN
MOJAVE DESERT CAN BE IN ORDER OF
MAGNITUDE HIGHER THAN THE VALUE OF THE LAND.
SO IF WE BUILD A FEE AROUND THE
COST OF OFFSITE MITIGATION,
THERE IS POTENTIAL TO CREATE
DISINCENTIVE FOR SOLAR DEVELOPMENT ON PUBLIC LANDS
THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THE RENEWABLE
PROGRAM IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
IF WE GO THE OTHER WAY AND BUILD
A FEE AROUND THE APPRAISED VALUE OF THE LAND
TO BE DEVELOPED,
WE'LL END UP RESTORING FEWER
ACRES THAN ARE DISTURBED.
ANOTHER CONSIDERATION IS THAT
DRY LAKE IS SUBJECT TO HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE DESERT TORTOISE.
WE WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT
AMONG OTHER THINGS HABITAT RESTORATION AND PROTECTION
SO, ARE WE DOUBLE CHARGING THE DEVELOPER
WHERE THE TORTOISE IS CONCERNED?
WE ARE NOT ONLY MEASURING BUT
MEASURING THE RIGHT THINGS.
AS GORDON MENTIONED, THESE
INCLUDE THINGS LIKE
DID WE ACCURATELY PREDICT THE IMPACTS?
DID THE DESIGN FEATURES MINIMIZE
THE IMPACTS AS PREDICTED?
DID THE OFFSITE MITIGATION
ACTIONS ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS?
AND HOW DID OUR EFFORTS AFFECT REGIONAL TRENDS?
FINALLY, WE HAVE TO HAVE A
STRATEGY IF OUR MEASUREMENTS
INDICATE WE'RE NOT ACHIEVING
DESIRED RESULTS AND ADAPTED MANAGEMENT PLANS.
THIS PROJECT PROVIDES AN
OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ADAPTIVE
MANAGEMENT TO A NEW LEVEL
BY TURNING OUR CONCEPTUAL MODEL
INTO A DECISION SUPPORT MODEL
AND USING IT AS A FRAME OF
REFERENCE FOR ADVANCING OUR
UNDERSTANDING OF THE ECOSYSTEM
AND FOR ASSESSING THE COSTS AND
BENEFITS OF VARIOUS MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES.
THIS IS WORK THAT REMAINS TO BE DONE.
THAT IS A VERY QUICK OVERVIEW OF
THE STRATEGY AND THE PROCESS.
THE INTERNAL DRAFT OF THE DRY
LAKE STRATEGY WILL BE PUBLISHED
TO THE WEB IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.
OKAY, SO WE POSTED THIS... THAT
INTERNAL REPORT TO A GOOGLE SITE.
I HAVE A NEPA TRAINING GOOGLE SITE.
ONLY INTERIOR EMPLOYEES CAN GET TO IT.
WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO
DISTRIBUTE THAT LINK.
I THINK WE MIGHT SEND AN E-MAIL OUT.
IF YOU WANT A LINK TO THE SITE,
JUST LET ME KNOW AND I'LL E-MAIL IT TO YOU.
BECAUSE WE JUST GOT THAT FIGURED OUT YESTERDAY.
SO WE'LL HAVE THAT ON THERE.
AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO HAVE A LOOK AT IT.
IT SOUNDS REALLY GREAT TO ME.
SO GORDON, YOU WORKED ON THIS
PROJECT... GORDON... YOU WORKED
ON THIS FOR QUITE AWHILE. BUT DO YOU HAVE SOME
OBSERVATIONS FROM IT? WHERE DID GORDON COME FROM?
THE DRY LAKE REGIONAL MITIGATION STRATEGY WAS
DEVELOPED IN RESPONSE TO AN
INTERNAL STIMULUS, THAT IS THE
BLM DECIDED TO DEVELOP THIS
STRATEGY TO GET OUR ACT TOGETHER
ON WHAT OFFSITE MITIGATION MIGHT
LOOK LIKE FOR THE DRY LAKE SOLAR
ENERGY ZONE BEFORE WE INITIATE LEASING.
BUT THIS CREATED A COUPLE OF
CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT NOT BE
TYPICAL OF OTHER PROGRAMS...
PROGRAMS OTHER THAN SOLAR ENERGY.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE STARTED WITH THE COMPLETED EIS.
THAT HAD IDENTIFIED IMPACTS AND DESIGN FEATURES.
THIS ALLOWED US TO START,
ALREADY KNOWING THE UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS.
MANY OTHER PROPOSED PROJECTS
THAT MAY WARRANT OFFSITE
MITIGATION WILL NOT HAVE THIS LUXURY.
IN THESE SITUATIONS, IT IS
LIKELY THAT DEVELOPING A
REGIONAL MITIGATION STRATEGY
WOULD BE BEST ACCOMPLISHED AS A
PART OF THE NEPA PROCESS.
BECAUSE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS
STRATEGY WAS NOT A NEPA PROCESS,
THE FINAL PROCESS IS A
RECOMMENDATION ONLY AND IF IT IS
ADOPTED BY THE AUTHORIZED
OFFICER, IT WILL HAVE TO BE
INCORPORATED WITH THE NEPA THAT
WILL BE CARRIED OUT TO SUPPORT LEASING.
ANOTHER OBSERVATION IS THAT FROM
TIME TO TIME THROUGHOUT THE
PROJECT, AS JIM POINTED OUT, WE
HAD TO REMIND OURSELVES AND OUR
STAKEHOLDERS THAT WE'RE NOT
REQUIRED TO MITIGATE ALL OF THE
UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS. THE KEY QUESTIONS ARE WHICH
IMPACTS AND HOW AND WHERE WE'LL
COMPENSATE FOR THEM.
ANOTHER OBSERVATION IS THAT WE
FOUND THE REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE
REFRESHING AND USEFUL. TAKING A BROADVIEW OF
PROBLEMATIC REGIONAL TRENDS GAVE
US A NEW WAY TO LOOK AT CUMULATIVE IMPACTS.
EXAMINING THEM FROM AN OUTCOME
PERSPECTIVE VERSUS AN OUTPUT PERSPECTIVE.
WE STILL HAVE SOME THINKING TO
DO TO GET MORE QUANTITATIVE
ABOUT HOW WE DO THIS BUT EVEN THE
QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF
REGIONAL TRENDS HELPED US MOVE
FROM UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS TO
THOSE THAT WARRANT OFFSITE MITIGATION.
IN A SIMILAR WAY, USING THE
CONCEPTUAL MODEL THAT GORDON
SHOWED US, HELPED US VISUALIZE
THE INTERRELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN
INDIVIDUAL RESOURCES AND ECOLOGICAL SERVICES.
AND HELPED US SEE THAT WE CAN'T
PARSE MITIGATION OF RESOURCES
THAT PLAY CRITICAL ROLES IN A
SYSTEM AND EXPECT THE RESULTS TO BE EFFECTIVE.
REGARDING THE MITIGATION FEE,
THE CHALLENGE IS TO COME UP WITH
ONE THAT SUPPLIES THE RESOURCES
NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT EFFECTIVE
OFFSITE MITIGATION BUT IS, AT
THE SAME TIME, SENSITIVE TO
MARKET FORCES SO THAT IT DOES
NOT ENCOURAGE EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO ENCOURAGE. FINALLY, REGARDING THE STAKE
HOLDERS WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE
PROJECT, WHILE THERE WERE MANY
ENTITIES INVOLVED, WE DID HAVE TWO LARGE GROUPS OF
STAKEHOLDERS. THE CONSERVATION INTERESTS AND
THE SOLAR INDUSTRY INTERESTS.
THE CONSERVATION GROUPS
GENERALLY WERE CONCERNED THAT
WHATEVER AND WHEREVER WE CARRIED
OUT OFFSITE MITIGATION, THAT THE
FINAL INVESTMENT WOULD BE DURABLE AND ADDITIVE.
DESPITE OUR BEST EFFORTS TO
CONVINCE THEM OTHERWISE, THEY
WERE NOT ENTIRELY COMFORTABLE
THAT THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS IN
THE ACEC WERE EITHER.
INDUSTRY ON THE OTHER HAND WAS
ALL ABOUT THE BOTTOM LINE UNCERTAINTY.
THEY REMINDED US FREQUENTLY THE
FEE HAD TO BE SOMETHING THE
INDUSTRY COULD BEAR AND THAT
THEY SHOULDN'T BE THE ONLY
PUBLIC LAND USERS REQUIRED TO PAY IT.
THIS BRINGS US BACK TO THE BLM
MANUAL AND THE QUESTION IS HOW
IT MIGHT BE APPLIED ACROSS A
SPECTRUM OF MULTIPLE USES.
THAT SEEMS TO BE A GOOD SEGUE TO
OPENING UP THE DISCUSSION TO EVERYONE.
THANKS, MIKE. I'M REALLY GLAD YOU TALKED ABOUT
THE STAKEHOLDERS. I THINK... I IMAGINE THAT
INVOLVING THEM THROUGHOUT THIS
PROCESS MADE DRY LAKE A LOT MORE SUCCESSFUL.
I THINK EVEN THOUGH YOU SAID
THAT YOUR TEAM AND JIM'S TEAM
WERE LOOSELY CONNECTED, I'M SURE
IT WAS REALLY HELPFUL FOR BOTH
OF YOUR TEAMS TO BE WORKING ON
THESE TWO THINGS AT THE SAME TIME. ALL RIGHT.
ONE MORE THING, IS IT OKAY IF
PEOPLE CONTACT YOU WITH
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS
OR IF THEY WANT TO KNOW MORE? SURE, OF COURSE.
PLEASE, YOU CAN E-MAIL ME AT
MDWYER@BLM.GOV OR CALL ME AT 702-515-5186.