Craters draft management plan 
        released for review
        Blueprint for ‘protection and
        
        restoration’ of natural assets
        
        Open house meetings
        The BLM and National Park 
        Service are scheduling open house meetings to inform Idahoans about a 
        new draft management plan for Craters of the Moon National Monument and 
        Preserve. The meetings are scheduled from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. as follows:
        
          - Arco, Tuesday, May 4 at the 
          Arco Business Development Center.
 
 
- American Falls, Thursday, 
          May 6 at American Falls City Hall.
 
 
- Rupert, Thursday, May 13 at 
          Rupert City Hall.
 
 
- Carey, Tuesday, May 18 at 
          the Carey High School multipurpose room.
Additional public meetings or 
        presentations may be requested by contacting Barbara Bassler at (208) 
        732-7200.
        Comments should be sent to 
        Craters of the Moon Planning Team, Shoshone BLM Field Office, 400 West F 
        Street, Shoshone, ID 83352. E-mail comments to
        [email protected].
        
        
        By GREG STAHL
        Express Staff Writer
        In choosing a blueprint for 
        managing the 750,000-acre Craters of the Moon National Monument and 
        Preserve over the next 15 to 20 years, a team of government employees is 
        proposing to aggressively manage for protection of physical and 
        biological resources.
        The National Park Service and 
        Bureau of Land Management announced this week the release of a draft 
        management plan and environmental impact statement for the recently 
        expanded monument and preserve. 
        The document’s release triggers a 
        90-day public comment period that will end Wednesday, July 28. The new 
        management plan is scheduled to be implemented by the end of the year.
        The proposed focus is on one of 
        four alternatives proposed in the draft management plan. Alternative A 
        would not effect any changes. Alternative B would emphasize improving 
        visitor experiences within the monument’s borders. Alternative C would 
        "emphasize and enhance" the primitive character of the monument. 
        Alternative D, the preferred alternative, would emphasize "protection 
        and restoration" of the monument’s natural assets.
        A team of specialists from the two 
        agencies prepared the draft plan, said Monument Superintendent Jim 
        Morris. The team has been working on the plan for more than two years.
        In Morris’ words, the preferred 
        alternative would put an emphasis on restoring sagebrush steppe land 
        that has been impacted by fire, grazing and some other activities. Those 
        lands include about 80,000 acres that are on BLM administered portions 
        of the monument.
        Under a presidential proclamation 
        that expanded the monument in November 2000, the BLM was given 
        management authority over sagebrush steppe portions of the monument, and 
        the Park Service was ordered to manage the area’s abundant lava flows.
        "The monument grew from 54,000 
        acres to more than 750,000 acres with the signing of the proclamation in 
        November 2000," Morris said. "We involved the public and other agencies 
        early on to help identify issues and concerns that need to be considered 
        as a new management strategy is developed."
        According to Rick Vander Voet, BLM 
        monument manager, months of collaboration and meaningful public input 
        have led to the four alternative management strategies that are featured 
        in the draft plan. But he pointed out that the process is not yet 
        finished.
        "It’s a draft plan and only a 
        preferred alternative," he said. "We still haven’t made a decision. 
        We’re still a year away. There are three other alternatives to the 
        preferred alternative."
        Vander Voet said he hopes everyone 
        who has participated in the process will be able to find their opinions 
        reflected in one of the four alternatives. 
        "At this point, it’s not a voting 
        exercise," he said. "We’re asking: Is there an element of one 
        alternative that can be added to another? How can we tweak all four of 
        those alternatives to affect the final decision."