[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21590-21592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08455]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2013 /
Notices
[[Page 21590]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Coconino National Forest; Arizona; Flagstaff Watershed Protection
Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service is preparing an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to document the potential effects of the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project (FWPP). The analysis will evaluate and
disclose the effects of implementing treatments on the National Forest
to reduce the threat of high severity wildfire and subsequent flooding
in two watersheds around Flagstaff. Specifically, two key areas have
been identified for analysis and treatment under this project: The Dry
Lake Hills portion of the Rio de Flag Watershed north of Flagstaff, and
the Mormon Mountain portion of the Upper Lake Mary Watershed south of
Flagstaff. The project area includes approximately 10,543 acres
(roughly 7,569 acres in the Dry Lake Hills portion and 2,974 on Mormon
Mountain), and proposed treatments would include thinning and
prescribed fire on roughly 8,810 of those acres. The EIS will analyze a
variety of harvesting methods, including the use of traditional ground-
based equipment, hand thinning, and also methods atypical for the
region, including cable and helicopter logging, in order to treat
steep, inaccessible terrain.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
by May 13, 2013. The draft environmental impact statement is expected
in early 2014 and the final environmental impact statement is expected
in the summer of 2014.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Erin Phelps, Project Leader, USDA
Forest Service, Coconino National Forest, 5075 N. Hwy 89, Flagstaff, AZ
86004. Comments may also be sent via email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 928-527-8288. Verbal
comments can be submitted in person at the Flagstaff Ranger District
Office, 5075 N. Hwy 89, Flagstaff, AZ 86004 or via telephone at (928)
527-8240 during normal business hours (8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m.).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Visit our planning Web site at http://www.fs.usda.gov/projects/coconino/landmanagement/projects or contact
Erin Phelps, Project Leader, by phone at (928) 527-8240 or by email at
[email protected].
Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD)
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
The primary purpose of the Flagstaff Watershed Protection Project
(FWPP) is to reduce the risk of high severity wildfire and subsequent
flooding in two key watersheds around Flagstaff, Arizona: In the Dry
Lake Hills portion of the Rio de Flag Watershed, and the Mormon
Mountain portion of the Upper Lake Mary Watershed.
The FWPP analysis area includes portions of the Coconino National
Forest that have either not been analyzed or not been treated
previously due to prohibitive costs associated with very steep terrain,
low value material, and other challenging issues such as potential
impacts to wildlife and visual concerns.
There is a need to reduce the risk of high intensity wildfire in
watersheds that contribute to the drinking water for the City of
Flagstaff as well as reducing the risk of high intensity wildfire in
the watershed that drains into the city itself. There is also a need to
reduce the risk of severe flooding that would likely damage the
drinking water infrastructure south of town, and which could also cause
extensive damage to private municipal property should a high-intensity
wildfire occur in mountainous areas that make-up the Upper Lake Mary
and Rio de Flag watersheds.
In general, fire regimes in the analysis area have shifted from
historically more frequent, lower-intensity surface fires (Fire Regime
I and III, Condition Class I) to less frequent, higher-intensity crown
fires (Condition Class III). There is a need to reduce the potential
for crown fire and high intensity surface fire, and to reduce the
likelihood of human-caused ignitions. The desired condition is to
reduce the threat of high severity wildfire and subsequent flooding to
values at risk within and adjacent to the project area, including the
City of Flagstaff, outlying communities, the Kachina Peaks Wilderness,
and Upper Lake Mary. For the majority of the project area, the desired
condition is to decrease the departure from historic conditions, and
return the majority of the analysis area in FRI and FRIII to Condition
Class 1.
To meet the project's purpose and need, the Forest Service proposes
a combination of thinning and prescribed burning activities,
establishing a permanent campfire closure order in the Dry Lake Hills
area and decommissioning about 34 miles of road in the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project area. To facilitate timber removal,
approximately 15.5 miles of temporary road are also proposed, and three
non-significant Forest Plan amendments would be necessarily to
implement the proposed activities.
Treatments would include mechanical and hand thinning as well as
prescribed fire on approximately 8,810 acres. Mechanical tree thinning
would occur within Mexican spotted owl protected activity centers (MSO
PACs) with a desired condition of trees greater than 16 inches dbh
contributing more than 50 percent of the stand basal area and
maintaining a minimum of 40 percent canopy cover in pine-oak and 60
percent in mixed conifer per the MSO Recovery Plan (2012), followed by
prescribed burning. Thinning treatments have been designed in
coordination with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to occur
within MSO nest/roost habitat to reduce the risk of high severity
wildfire. Some treatments proposed within occupied PACs may need to
occur during the breeding season (March 1-August 31); however
treatments within PACs would be prioritized to be completed as quickly
as possible to avoid long-term impacts and would be coordinated with
FWS.
Prescribed fire would include initial pile burning to remove slash
[[Page 21591]]
accumulated through harvesting, followed by broadcast burning.
Maintenance burning may occur every five to seven years following
implementation in order to maintain lower fuel loading levels and to
restore a frequent, low-intensity fire regime. Areas of mixed conifer
on steep slopes may not receive prescribed burning treatments due to
the difficulty and safety concerns associationed with implementation in
these fuel types and terrain, and also because the vegetation type may
not require as frequent burning due to longer historic fire intervals.
Three project-specific, non-significant amendments to the Coconino
National Forest Land Management Plan (Forest Plan; 1987, as amended)
would be required to implement the proposed action. A site (project)
specific plan amendment is a one-time variance in Forest Plan direction
for the project; Forest Plan direction reverts back to its original
language/direction upon completion of the specified project. The
language proposed does not apply to any other forest project.
The Forest Plan is currently under revision; depending on the
timing of the release of the final Forest Plan document, the final FWPP
analysis will be consistent with the revised Forest Plan. Additionally,
a revised MSO Recovery Plan, issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) was finalized in December of 2012 (USDI 2012). The
current Forest Plan is consistent with the previous MSO Recovery Plan
(USDI 1995). For this project, a Forest Plan amendment would be needed
to utilize the revised recovery plan direction if it is different than
what is currently included in the Forest Plan. The proposed Forest Plan
amendments include:
Amendment 1: Adding the desired percentage of interspace within
uneven-aged stands to facilitate restoration in northern goshawk
habitat (excluding nest areas), add the interspace distance between
tree groups, add language clarifying how canopy cover would be
measured, and add a definition to the Forest Plan glossary for the
terms ``interspaces,'' ``open reference condition,'' and ``stands.''
Amendment 2: Adding language to allow mechanical treatments in MSO
PACs beyond 9 inches dbh, treatments in MSO restricted habitat above 24
inches dbh, and also to allow treatments and prescribed burning within
MSO nest/cores. The monitoring requirement specified under the Forest
Plan would be amended to include the monitoring plan developed by the
Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Rocky Mountain
Research Station. This amendment would also remove timing restrictions
for the duration of the FWPP project. Treatments within PACs would be
prioritized to be completed as quickly as possible to avoid long-term
impacts and would be coordinated with FWS.
Amendment 3: Removing language restricting mechanical equipment to
slopes less than 40 percent and language identifying slopes above 40
percent as inoperable. This amendment would allow mechanical harvesting
on slopes greater than 40 percent within the project area. Since the
Forest Plan was written and amended, mechanized ground-based equipment
has progressed to be able to operate on steep slopes more effectively.
In order to be able to utilize such equipment to treat slopes above 40
percent in the project area and meet the purpose and need, this Forest
Plan amendment is needed.
Possible Alternatives
A full range of alternatives to the proposed action, including a
no-action alternative, will be considered. The no-action alternative
represents no change and serves as the baseline for the comparison
among the action alternatives.
Cooperating Agencies
The City of Flagstaff is a Cooperating Agency for the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project, and is participating in the planning and
analysis process.
Responsible Official
M. Earl Stewart, Forest Supervisor, Coconino National Forest.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Forest Supervisor is the responsible official for deciding
whether or not, and in what manner, lands within the Flagstaff
Watershed Protection Project area would be treated to reduce wildfire
and flooding hazards.
Items in this decision will include: Number of acres treated
mechanically; number of acres treated by hand thinning; number of acres
treated with prescribed fire; treatments within the MSO restricted
habitat; treatments within MSO PACs and protected habitat; treatments
within northern goshawk habitat; construction of new temporary roads;
decommissioning/obliteration of closed roads; type of implementation
method to be used; issuance of a permanent camfire restriction order in
the Dry Lake Hills; project-specific Forest Plan amendments; and design
features to protect forest resources of soil, water, scenery values,
wildlife and habitat, and rare plants.
The decision will be based on a consideration of the environmental
effects of implementing the proposed action or alternatives. The Forest
Supervisor may select the proposed action, any alternative analyzed in
detail, a modified proposed action or alternative, or no action.
Scoping Process
This notice of intent initiates the formal scoping process, which
guides the development of the environmental impact statement. Multiple
public meetings will be held throughout the planning process for the
FWPP project, including a general information sharing and comment
gathering meeting scheduled for May 1, 2013 at the Aquaplex in
Flagstaff (1702 N. 4th Street) from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. The Greater
Flagstaff Forests Partnership (GFFP) will also be hosting meetings on
behalf of the City of Flagstaff. Please visit the FWPP project Web site
at http://www.flagstaffwatershedprotection.org/ for more information
and a calendar of upcoming meeting dates.
This project is subject to the objection process pursuant to 36 CFR
part 218 (March 27, 2013), and is not being authorized under the
Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA). As such, those who provide
specific written comments during the formal scoping and/or the comment
periods in accordance with Sec. 218.5 will be eligible to participate
in the objection process. Issues raised in objections must be based on
previously submitted timely, specific written comments regarding the
proposed project unless new information arises after designated
opportunities (36 CFR 218.7).
It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times
and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of
the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be
provided prior to the close of the 30 day scoping period and should
clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions.
Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names
and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record
for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be
accepted and considered, but will not be eligible for objection per
Sec. 218.5.
[[Page 21592]]
Dated: April 5, 2013.
M. Earl Stewart,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2013-08455 Filed 4-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE ;P