Sage Grouse Proposed Mineral Withdrawal

[nevadad00d]

Here are the areas that would be effected in Nevada and northeastern California . If you go to the BLM site you can download a map of other states effected as well. http://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/blm/nv/wildlife___fishes/sage_grouse.Par.17552.File.dat/15-05-27GRSG%20Proposed%20Plan%20Habitatmap.pdf

[Clay Diggins]

Here are the areas that would be effected in Nevada and northeastern California . If you go to the BLM site you can download a map of other states effected as well. http://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/blm/nv/wildlife___fishes/sage_grouse.Par.17552.File.dat/15-05-27GRSG%20Proposed%20Plan%20Habitatmap.pdf

 

 

There are no areas in California included in the proposed withdrawal. The map you linked to is not the areas that are a subject of the proposed mineral withdrawal.

 

Take a look at the Map I offered. The withdrawn area layer is a direct feed from the BLM.

[nevadad00d]

I did a google search on the title of the withdrawal. Went to the BLM site and the story about it, to try to find more info on what all activity it would effect. It had links to this and other state maps of other states. I'm not sure if something has changed since you first posted the Land Matters map or something changed since this map was made by them.

[nevadad00d]

PS: This is the title of the map their link goes to: Greater Sage Grouse Proposed Plan Habitat Map

[nevadad00d]

Down near the bottom of this page http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/sagegrouse.html

it says: To see a map of proposed mineral withdrawal areas in Sagebrush Focal Areas, click here and this is the link to another map, this one: http://blm-egis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=45b2d7896c36467aac3990b739d75a26

 all three are different. The first map I posted was the one you get to when you click on Nevada at the link at the top of this posting. On the page it comes up on, you can download in a pdf or jpeg at the lower right. All I can say is, I hope your map is right and these are something else because, these cover a lot more area.

[Clay Diggins]

I did a google search on the title of the withdrawal. Went to the BLM site and the story about it, to try to find more info on what all activity it would effect. It had links to this and other state maps of other states. I'm not sure if something has changed since you first posted the Land Matters map or something changed since this map was made by them.

 

Those are the maps that were used in the five year multi state endangered species study. The result of that five year study was that the Sage Grouse is neither endangered or threatened.

 

The map you show was last updated in May of last year,  The Proposed Mineral Withdrawal was first revealed at the end of September. To this date the only map of the proposed withdrawal area is the one shown on the Map I linked you to.

 

I've been working for months on getting better information than the map shown here but this is the only map the BLM is using to describe the proposed withdrawal area. This is the best information available. Read the report and study the proposed withdrawal and I think you will see that the map you posted has nothing to do with the proposed withdrawal.

 

The BLM has not been forthcoming about the details of this withdrawal. Much of what they have published is very misleading. That's why Land Matters has spent so much time and effort to squeeze the facts out of the BS being presented.

 

My hope was that interested citizens would take the time to review the facts and make their opinions known on whether 7,000 claims should face challenges and 10 million acres closed to mining because the Sage Grouse population is so healthy.

 

It appears the BLM misinformation campaign has been effective in obscuring the facts.

 

The link you posted to the BLM map showing the proposed withdrawal is the same as the one I presented but the BLM map doesn't show any mining claims or land status. Neither California nor most of the areas shown on the downloaded "Proposed Plan Habitat" map you linked to are being considered in the proposed withdrawal.

[nevadad00d]

Iin the 9th paragraph in your first post here, you state:

 

The new custom interactive Sage Grouse Proposed Withdrawal Map shows just the claims affected with all the claim information normally found only on the Land Matters Mining Claims Maps.

 

If this is a map of "just" the mining claims effected, what about all the rest of the area effected that isn't currently claimed? It appears that this proposal would close off a lot more area to future claims or possible other activity such as metal detecting for nuggets. I still haven't found what all activity would be effected. Scary

[Clay Diggins]

Iin the 9th paragraph in your first post here, you state:

 

The new custom interactive Sage Grouse Proposed Withdrawal Map shows just the claims affected with all the claim information normally found only on the Land Matters Mining Claims Maps.

 

If this is a map of "just" the mining claims effected, what about all the rest of the area effected that isn't currently claimed? It appears that this proposal would close off a lot more area to future claims or possible other activity such as metal detecting for nuggets. I still haven't found what all activity would be effected. Scary

 

It is not a map of "just" the mining claims affected. The map has several options for display on the right side. Among those options is displaying the full proposed withdrawal area. Under the category "Mining Claims" you will see an option "Proposed Sage Grouse Mineral Withdrawal" with a checkbox to the left of it. Click on the checkbox and refresh or zoom in on the map and the full area of the "Proposed Sage Grouse Mineral Withdrawal" will be displayed.

 

If the proposed withdrawal is approved new claims will not be allowed for the next 20 years. More than likely prospecting will be allowed. Mineral leasing will still be allowed. You can see the few details about what activities are being restricted by reading the withdrawal notice.

[nevadad00d]

"The BLM has not been forthcoming about the details of this withdrawal. Much of what they have published is very misleading. That's why Land Matters has spent so much time and effort to squeeze the facts out of the BS being presented."

 

I agree with that. When getting to the story of this withdrawal on the BLM site, it links to the maps I posted in their article with state specific maps listed first then at the bottom of the page there's a link to the actual withdrawal map. You would think that the state specific maps above would be the same as the withdrawal map, just for each state but, isn't according to the withdrawal map.

[nevadad00d]

After doing a little more research:

We have to close off mining in the northern parts of all three of these counties (Washoe, Humbolt & Elko) for sage grouse yet, there were sage grouse hunts in 2015 in all of these areas in the three counties that border the north end of the state.

011 Washoe county, 031, 033, 051 Humbolt county, 061, 062, 066, 067, 071, 072, 074, 075, 076, 077, 081 Elko county, all within the proposed withdrawal. These areas pretty much cover just about all of the withdrawal in Nevada. The amount of area that mines exist in the withdrawal probably dont even make up 1% of the land they want to close. I call BS.

 

Nevada Upland Game Hunts for sage grouse in lower half of regulations:
http://www.ndow.org/uploadedFiles/ndoworg/Content/Wildlife_Education/Publications/2015-16-Upland-Game-Brochure.pdf

 

Nevada hunt unit map:
http://www.ndow.org/uploadedFiles/ndoworg/Content/Hunt/Resources/NDOW_HuntUnits_2013_ArchD.pdf