<\/p>\n
San Juan Citizens Alliance, Rocky Mountain Wild, Conservation Colorado and San Miguel County argue that the BLM failed to properly consider the impacts of drilling activity on the bird, which was listed at threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 2014.<\/p>\n They want the court to set aside 10 lease parcels sold in March in western San Miguel county to allow for additional studies.<\/p>\n Eight of the leases, located in the Dry Creek Basin area, are tucked between two occupied critical habitat areas of the Gunnsion sage grouse.<\/p>\n Jimbo Buickerood, of San Juan Citizens Alliance, said the BLM\u2019s reliance on a Resource Management Plan from 2015 to satisfy federal environmental requirements for the lease sale is noncompliant.<\/p>\n \u201cThe larger management plan looks at a broad area from 100,000 feet level, and does not get near the ground for the specific analysis appropriate to protect the sage grouse,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n For example, the complaint says more study is needed on impacts of expected truck traffic on lease access roads, which pass through occupied sage grouse habitat and are within 1.9 miles of \u201cleks,\u201d sensitive breeding areas where males conduct elaborate mating dances.<\/p>\n Plaintiffs are also concerned that the approved leases don\u2019t allow the BLM to adjust or terminate company development plans that threaten the bird\u2019s habitat during the next permit stage, called the application for permit to drill, or APD.<\/p>\n \u201cThey are supposed to do real analysis at the leasing stage, because if you don\u2019t do it then, it is not going to happen at the drilling permit stage,\u201d Buickerood said.<\/p>\n According to the lawsuit, leasewide, no-surface occupancy conditions cannot be imposed at the APD level, and neither can leasewide travel bans and restrictions be imposed, if needed.<\/p>\n \u201cThe lease terms do not confirm BLM\u2019s statutory power to deny or require alterations to APDs that are likely to take (harm) Endangered Species Act-listed species,\u201d the lawsuit states.<\/p>\n It further claims that under the Endangered Species Act, energy leases that \u201cmay affect\u201d Gunnison sage grouse are not valid without consultation from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which the lawsuit alleges was not done properly.<\/p>\n San Miguel County Commissioner Hilary Cooper said the county joined the lawsuit because commissioners fear that mismanaged energy development could derail their efforts to improve the bird\u2019s population and get it removed from the Endangered Species Act list.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019ve worked really hard with neighboring counties and CPW to improve conditions for this bird through land-use planning, habitat projects and conservation easements,\u201d she said in a phone interview. \u201cWe\u2019re asking the BLM to take a step back and more carefully review potential impacts of drilling, including transportation.\u201d<\/p>\n Cooper said her constituents understand that failure to improve the bird\u2019s numbers risks elevating it from threatened to endangered status.<\/p>\n \u201cThey know that would have impacts on private property within sage grouse habitat,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n Environmentalists are also concerned that two of the leases overlap or are adjacent to the nominated Dry Creek Basin Area of Critical Environmental Concern, proposed to protect Gunnison sage grouse habitat.<\/p>\n The current rangewide population of the Gunnison sage grouse is estimated at 5,000 birds across the seven population areas. The largest population, about 4,000 birds, inhabits the Gunnison Basin, and the rest are spread out in seven populations in Southwest Colorado and Southeast Utah. They include Pi\u00f1on Mesa, Crawford, San Miguel Basin, Gunnison Basin, Dove Creek, Cerro Cimarron-Sim and Poncha Pass. The Utah population is near Monticello.<\/p>\n \u201cDue to their small population numbers and genetic isolation, theses satellite populations are important to the overall survival of the species,\u201d according to a press release announcing the lawsuit.<\/p>\n When contacted regarding the lawsuit, the BLM said it could not comment on ongoing legal actions.<\/p>\n