Date: 4/24/15
To: Megan Mueller
From: Phil Hartger
Re: Proposed White River RMPA Build-Out Scenario
Table 1. The number of well pads generated in the preferred alternative and proposed RMPA build-out scenarios for the Mesaverde Play Area.
1,710
Additional # of Well
Pads in the Proposed
RMPA
972
Difference
(Preferred Alternative Proposed RMPA)
738
203
140
63
160,037
440
141
299*
103,003
224
42
182
Acres
Additional # Well Pads in
Preferred Alternative
Mesaverde Play Area
712,359
Lands with wilderness characteristics
66,756
Greater Sage-grouse priority habitat
Greater Sage-grouse general habitat
Area of Interest
Greater Sage-grouse linkage habitat
45,582
66
84
-18
Mule deer summer range
387,224
876
444
432
Mule deer migration corridor
66,663
121
63
58
Mule deer winter Range
511,291
1,254
795
459
Mule deer severe winter range
Mule deer winter concentration
areas
Elk summer range
265,376
672
390
282
209,251
518
329
189
367,311
845
418
427
Elk summer concentration areas
30,582
61
27
34
Elk Winter Range
595,844
1,458
866
592
519
0
2
-2
119,040
260
143
117
Elk Severe winter range
Elk Winter concentration areas

Differences in the distribution of well pads between the preferred alternative and proposed amendment result both from the numerical reductions in
the number of well pads as well as the expansion of NSO stipulations.
o Priority habitat for the greater sage-grouse accounts for a lot of the NSO expansion.
o The sage-grouse priority habitat has a high degree of overlap with several categories of mule deer habitat, in part accounting for the high
reductions in those numbers (e.g. mule deer summer/winter range).
Table 2. Current number of well pads and projected number of well pads under the Proposed RMPA in the Mesaverde Play Area.
Acres
Estimated # of Well
Pads in the Current
Landscape
Additional # of Well Pads
under the Proposed
Action
Total # of
Well Pads
Mesaverde Play Area
712,359
796
972
1,768
Lands with wilderness characteristics
66,756
21
140
161
Greater Sage-grouse priority habitat
160,037
171
141
312
Greater Sage-grouse general habitat
103,003
161
42
203
Greater Sage-grouse linkage habitat
45,582
13
84
97
Mule deer summer range
387,224
337
444
781
Area of Interest
Mule deer migration corridor
66,663
29
63
92
Mule deer winter Range
511,291
621
795
1,416
Mule deer severe winter range
Mule deer winter concentration
areas
Elk summer range
265,376
414
390
804
209,251
349
329
678
367,311
334
418
752
Elk summer concentration areas
30,582
2
27
29
Elk Winter Range
595,844
710
866
1,576
Elk Severe winter range
Elk Winter concentration areas


519
0
2
2
119,040
83
143
226
Well pads were distributed randomly across the MPA but not allowed to fall areas designated as NSO. Additionally, well pads were not
allowed to land closer to land closer than 300 feet to an existing road or 600 feet to an existing well pad to avoid overlap with existing
infrastructure.
We also excluded domestic wells, dry & abandoned, plugged & abandoned well types for the analysis.
Table 3. Surface disturbance estimates in the Mesaverde Play Area with 8.25 acre and 5 acre well pads, respectively.
Area of Interest
Estimated # of
Well Pads in the
Current Landscape
Mesaverde Play Area
796
Existing Surface
Disturbance (8.25 acre
pads, 12 acres total
disturbance)
9,552
Additional
# of Well
Pads
Additional
Disturbance (5 acre
pads, 8.75 acres
total disturbance)
Additional
Disturbance (8.25 acre
pads, 12 acres total
disturbance)
Acreage
Difference (5 acre
pads versus 8.25
acre pads)
972
8,505
11,664
3,159
Lands with wilderness characteristics
21
252
140
1,225
1,680
455
Greater Sage-grouse priority habitat
171
2,052
141
1,234
1,692
458
Greater Sage-grouse general habitat
161
1,932
42
368
504
137
Greater Sage-grouse linkage habitat
13
156
84
735
1,008
273
Mule deer summer range
337
4,044
444
3,885
5,328
1,443
Mule deer migration corridor
29
348
63
551
756
205
Mule deer winter Range
621
7,452
795
6,956
9,540
2,584
Mule deer severe winter range
Mule deer winter concentration
areas
Elk summer range
414
4,968
390
3,413
4,680
1,268
349
4,188
329
2,879
3,948
1,069
334
4,008
418
3,658
5,016
1,359
Elk summer concentration areas
2
24
27
236
324
88
Elk Winter Range
710
8,520
866
7,578
10,392
2,815
Elk Severe winter range
0
0
2
18
24
7
Elk Winter concentration areas
83
996
143
1,251
1,716
465


Doesn’t include existing road infrastructure.
During the development cycle, the pads will occupy 8.25 acres. With associated infrastructure the surface disturbance sums to 2 years,
followed by 3 years of interim reclamation. Post-development cycle (5 years), the pads are presumed to be reclaimed down to 5 acres in
size. We therefore calculated the projected well pads at both 5 acres (conservative) and 8.25 acres.
Existing Road Density Calculations:
It is clear that the existing road network is substantial and not accounted for in the impact assessment by BLM.
Road density (calculated from the roads data acquired from the White River Field Office during the first build-out):



2,351 miles of roads within the MPA
Multiplied by the conservative estimate of 16 ft. road widths gives a surface coverage of 4,098 acres of existing roads
Existing road density is roughly 2.27 miles of road per square mile