Prepared by: Charles Baun Conservation Branch Manager IDARNG Environmental Management Office

Objectives  OCTC Summary  Background on Climate Change and NEPA  NEPA and Climate Change- Practical Application  Sikes Act and INRMPs- A Work in Progress  Conclusion

OCTC- State of Idaho

OCTC  Military Training Since 1953 (Over 70 years)  One of the Largest NG Training Facilities in the US (143,300 ac)  One of the Most Sophisticated Training Facilities in the World  13 miles south of Boise (Largest Metropolitan Area in Idaho)  SBOP-National Conservation Area 1993 (PL ) Area Managed Under: PL and (NLCS); 2010 MOU; 2008 NCA RMP; and 2013 INRMP/ICRMP

OCTC  143,300 acres (NCA)  BLM- 135,500 acres  State Lands- 7,500 acres  State Lands Outside OCTC-640 acres (MATES)  Impact Area-53,500 acres (20 Ranges)  Core Impact Area-3,300 acres  22 Maneuver Areas (A 1-8, B 1-7, C 1-4, D 1-2, and E-1)

IDARNG Resource Management Programs  (EMO) Conservation (Resources & NEPA)  (Range) Integrated Training Area Management (ITAM)  (FMO) Facilities and Wildland Fire Program Note: IDARNG can not directly manage impacts associated with public recreation or livestock grazing.

OCTC Management Summary  BLM-Federal Owner  IDFG-State Wildlife  IDL-State Land Owner  FWS- T&E Species  IDARNG-EMO  IDARNG-CFMO  IDARNG-Range  And NLCS-Federal Enforcement of NCA

Raptors Habitat Training

Raptors Habitat Training The Law Our MissionThe Resources

So Many Managers: Problems or Possibilities?

Objectives  OCTC Summary  Background on Climate Change and NEPA  NEPA and Climate Change- Practical Application  Sikes Act and INRMPs- A Work in Progress  Conclusion

Climate Change and NEPA (Know Your Enemy)  Blame it on the Polar Bear: Listed by FWS in 2008 then the 4(d) Rule 2011 U.S. District Court Judge Emmett Sullivan upheld the 4(d) rule but found that FWS did not comply fully with NEPA  EO (2009)-Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance (Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force )  2010 Initial CEQ Guidance – Poorly Addressed Land/Resource Management Actions (No Use by Agencies)  2014 Revised Draft Guidance. Final not expected to come out anytime soon.

What Does This Mean To Us? 1st: As federal agencies, or proponents with nexus actions, we are required by law to integrate the effects of climate change into our NEPA and Management Documents (INRMP, RMP, Forest Plans…).

What Does This Mean To Us? 1st: As federal agencies, or proponents with nexus actions, we are required by law to integrate the effects of climate change into our NEPA and Management Documents (INRMP, RMP, Forest Plans…). 2 nd : We are required to do so without a standardized process or useable guidance, and there is none coming out in the near future.

The Reason Behind this Mess? This is in fact a diabolical plot by the Polar Bears to make the lives of resource professionals hell because of the 4(d) Rule. Note: The 4(d) Rule was made by then Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne. Mr. Kempthorne was Governor of Idaho for seven years.

Objectives  OCTC Summary  Background on Climate Change and NEPA  NEPA and Climate Change- Practical Application  Sikes Act and INRMPs- A Work in Progress  Conclusion

NEPA - CEQ Guidance Per CEQ Guidelines (2014)- Agencies should consider the following when addressing GHG emissions and GCC in NEPA: (1) the potential effects of the proposed action on GCC as indicated by its GHG emissions; and (2) the implications of GCC for the environmental effects of the proposed action. Standard Process: Did you Take the Hard Look and Record you Findings (Admin Record)?

Direct and Indirect Impacts A typical individual project does not generate enough GHG emissions to influence GCC significantly on its own; the issue of GHG emissions and the effects to GCC is by definition a cumulative environmental impact.  Standardized Language (Canned Statement): Direct and Indirect Effects – In general these actions are not considered Significant if they do not exceed the 25,000 metric ton reporting standard used by the EPA (CEQ-indicator not a threshold) Direct: Number and type of vehicles, equipment, and facilities associated with project. Indirect: Number and type of support vehicles, equipment, and facilities associated with the project. Installations should already have this data defined under reporting baseline requirements associated with EOs and (Scope 1, 2, and 3 emission sources)

Cumulative Effects  Impacts from Proposed Action to GCC: Define Area of Affect- Local Air shed (EPA and DEQ) In general not considered Significant- Unmeasurable Relative to National or Worldwide Emissions and GCC  Impact from GCC to the Proposed Action: Climate Change Models Ecosystem Based Climate Models Climate Based Species Distribution Models Site and Species Vulnerability Models

Objectives  OCTC Summary  Background on Climate Change and NEPA  NEPA and Climate Change- Practical Application  Sikes Act and INRMPs- A Work in Progress  Conclusion

OCTC Management Summary  BLM-Federal Owner  IDFG-State Wildlife  IDL-State Land Owner  FWS- T&E Species  IDARNG-EMO  IDARNG-CFMO  IDARNG-Range  And NLCS-Federal Enforcement of NCA

Annual Sikes Act Meeting Annual Sikes Act Meeting:  Conducted Every Year Between March-June  BLM (NLCS), FWS, IDFG, IDL, and IDARNG  Review Previous Year (IDARNG Summary Report)  Look at 3-5 year Work Plan (INRMP)  Develop Annual Work Plan Annual Work Plan  Identify Issues/Concerns and New Regulations  Develop Task/Project List for Annual Plan  Make Changes to 3-5 year Plan if Needed, Must be In Accordance with- RMP and State Wildlife Strategy  Other Issues and Projects as Needed (Adaptive Management)  Group Implementation

2014 Climate Change and the OCTC Used the annual meeting as the basis for discussing Climate Change:  Process (On Going): All Agencies Present (Who Else?)- Mnt. Home Air Force Base Reviewed Individual Requirements Identified What Was Done to Date  Products: Standardized Language and Process for NEPA and Review Collaboratively Defined Climate Models (Ecosystem, Species Distribution, Vulnerability…) Concepts for Adaptive Management and Streamlined Implementation /Review Integration into RMP and INRMP (State Wildlife Strategy at a Later Date)

Examples of Existing Models  Ecosystem Based Climate Models  Climate Envelope and Species Distribution Models  Site and Species Vulnerability Models  Others…

Ecosystem Based Models How could vegetation communities change under different climate change models? How could carbon storage (above and below ground biomass) and soil structure change? How could fuel types, amount, connectivity, and burn frequency change? How could precipitation patterns change (Type, amount, and timing)? What are the most sensitive areas and species? How could different management actions address climate change scenarios? Use of Adaptive Management.

Climate Envelope and Species Distribution Models Species Climate relationships. Data about the geographic distribution of a species. Corresponding data about current climate variables for the same area. A statistical method to create a relationship between the distribution and the climate. Prediction(s) about the future climate.

Assessing Vulnerability – Site and Species  A System for Assessing Vulnerability of Species (SAVS) to Climate Change-USDA  Legacy Projects: Project : A Tool to Assess the Vulnerability of Terrestrial Vertebrate Species to Climate Change. Project : Climate Change: Adaptive Management Tools and Strategies

Climate Change Sites  CImpactshttps://  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:  EPA Climate Change Science:  Rocky Mountain Research Center Climate Change:  USDA Climate Change Research center:  The National Fish, Wildlife, and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy:  DENIX (Climate Change):  Department of Defense 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap:

Questions/Comments?