Despite major advances in science and drilling techniques over the past decade, all four of the BLM's alternatives represent a continuation of current drilling practices, with six times as many wells projected as the current plan. While the Western Heritage Alternative would require well-clustering and directional drilling as a standard practice to minimize impacts to lands and wildlife, the BLM alternatives continue to rely on high-impact vertical drilling, with its sprawling networks of roads, pipelines, and drilling sites.

For coalbed methane development, the BLM's Preferred Alternative would require salty wastewater to be injected underground in the Little Snake watershed near Baggs; the Western Heritage Alternative would apply this approach to all watersheds, including the North Platte and Great Divide Basin

The Great Divide country contains a handful of special landscapes that are outstanding for their wildness, scenery, or important wildlife habitats. Some of these include wilderness-quality lands like the spectacular battlements and spires of Adobe Town, the wild canyons of Wild Cow Creek, and the rugged peaks of the Ferris and Pedro Mountains. They also include the juniper-clad uplift of the Powder Rim, home to desert elk and rare songbirds, the unique sand dunes and ponds of the Ferris Dunes, the windswept rims and cushion-plant communities of Chalk Mountain, and the desert wetlands of the Chain Lakes. Protected areas are listed below for each alternative:

All in all, the BLM's preferred plan would leave most sensitive and important landscapes wide open to oil and gas drilling, and protect relatively little of the public lands for recreation and wildlife.

The BLM's proposed plan would provide weak and ineffective seasonal protections for big game crucial winter ranges, sage grouse breeding and nesting sites, and nest sites for birds of prey. Scientific studies have demonstrated that seasonal measures result in wildlife abandoning these important habitats. The BLM's plan would provide relatively strong protection for mountain plover nesting areas and prairie dog colonies, for which the agency deserves credit. In contrast, the Western Heritage Alternative would protect all of these sensitive habitats under "No Surface Occupancy" protections, allowing the oil industry to extract the oil and gas from underneath these lands using directional drilling without ever disturbing the surface. No Surface Occupancy is the kind of win-win solution that provides the best mix of multiple uses while providing sensitive lands with the protection they deserve. In the final analysis, the BLM's plan charts a course leading to the disappearance of rare wildlife and the reduction of big game populations.

Each of the BLM's alternatives provides limited protection for important historical resources like the Overland Trail and Native American sites. These protections range from No Surface Occupancy for the first quarter mile from a site in the BLM's Preferred Alternative to simple "avoidance" in this area for several of the alternatives. The five-mile buffer recommended in the Western Heritage Alternative and by historical groups was not considered in any alternative. In addition, the BLM's analysis failed to engage the tribes in identifying important sites before the management is set in stone, an egregious failure to conduct a real analysis.