[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 26 (Wednesday, February 8, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7516-7518]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3046]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
North Fork Fire Salvage and Associated Activities, Kootenai
National Forest, Lincoln County, MT
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The North Fork, 336, and Maxine Wildfire burned over 8000
acres of Kootenai National Forest system lands in the late summer of
1994. The Forest intends to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) to assess and disclose the environment effects of opportunities
designed to recover economic value of burned timber, reduce future
fuels accumulations and the corresponding risk of severe reburn,
rehabilitate existing sediment sources, improve hydrologic conditions
in affected watersheds, and protect long-term soil productivity. These
objectives would be accomplished through salvage harvest of fire-killed
timber; reforestation of harvested and several burned areas; fuels
reduction in harvested areas; restoration of non-essential roads,
revegetation of road cuts and fill slopes, and drainage improvement on
existing roads; providing for immediate and long-term recruitment of
instream large woodly material within the North Fork decision area. The
North Fork decision area is located approximately 20 air miles
southwest of Eureka, Montana.
All proposals within the North Fork decision area would protect
visual quality on stream segments eligible for classification under the
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, provide for wildlife habitat, and conserve
fisheries habitat.
The proposal's actions to salvage fire-killed trees and reforest
burned area, construct, reconstruct, and restore roads, reduce fuels
and future fire hazard, and implement watershed recovery projects are
being considered together because they represent either connected or
cumulative actions as defined by the Council on Environmental Quality
(40 CFR 1508.25). The EIS will trier to the Kootenai National Forest
Land and Resource Management Plan and Final EIS of September 1987,
which provides overall guidance for achieving the desired forest
condition of the area.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be relieved by March 10,
1995.
ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Robert L. Schrenk, Forest
Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest. Written comments and suggestions
concerning the scope of the analysis should be sent to Robert J.
Thompson, District Ranger, Rexford Ranger District, 1299 Hwy 93 N,
Eureka, Montana, 59917.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Chute, Planner, Rexford Ranger
District. Phone (406) 296-2536.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the night of August 14-15, 1994, a
lightning stormed started 207 fires on the Kootenai National Forest in
northwest Montana. Several fires ranging in size from less than one
acre to over 7000 acres occurred on the Rexford Ranger District. The
North Fork Fire Recovery EIS is being prepared in response to
conditions resulting from the largest of these fires, the 8000+ acre
North Fork Fire Complex. An interdisciplinary landscape analysis team
is using an ecosystem based approach to assess the fires affects and
identify management opportunities that could be implemented to move the
postfire landscape toward a desired ecological condition.
Burn intensities in the North Fork wildfires varied considerably.
Within the fire perimeters approximately 5350 acres burned at high
intensity (average 90% tree mortality), 1400 burned at moderate
intensity (average 70% mortality), and 1300 acres burned at low
intensity (average 30% mortality). The fires burned into or adjacent to
the Wild and Scenic study corridors in Big Creek and South Fork Big
Creek (eligible for Recreation classification), and North Fork Big
Creek and Copeland Creek (eligible for Wild classification), all of
which are pending Wild and Scenic River study. The fires also burned
within the Big Creek Roadless area #701.
The North Fork decision area contains approximately 36,000 acres
within the Kootenai National Forest in Lincoln County, Montana. All of
the proposed projects are located in the Big Creek drainage with sub-
drainages of North Fork Big, South Fork Big, Good, Mesler, Roberts,
Copeland, and Drop Creeks, included. The legal location of the decision
area is as follows: Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29, and 30 of Township 34 North,
Range 30 West; Sections 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 24 of Township 34
North, Range 30 West; Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15,
16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33,
34, 35, and 36 of Township 35 North, Range 30 West; Sections 1, 12, 13,
14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35, and 36 of Township 35 North, Range 31 West; and
Sections 21 and 32 of Township 36 North, Range 30 West; Principle
Montana Meridian. The land in and adjacent to the decision area is
entirely federal ownership under the jurisdiction of the Forest
Service.
Proposed Action
The primary purpose of the project is to recover valuable timber
products from trees burned by wildfires that occurred in 1994, with the
secondary benefit of reducing the potential for future uncontrollable
wildfires. Actions are also proposed to enhance watershed recovery and
improve grizzly bear habitat security. The Forest Service proposes to
harvest approximately 24-27 million board feet of timber by salvaging
fire-killed timber and imminently dead trees on approximately 2119
acres of forest land outside riparian protection areas (draft PACFISH
criteria) and wild and scenic eligible corridors. Only trees that were
killed, or are expected to die as a result of the fires, would be
harvested. The proposal includes prescribed burning of about 2006
acres, and excavator piling [[Page 7517]] on about 113 acres to reduce
fuel loads in harvested areas, which would reduce the risk of future
large, uncontrollable wildfires. An estimated 2000 acres of proposed
salvage units would be planted with conifer seedlings to help meet
desired conditions for species diversity. The Forest Service proposal
also includes approximately 0.5 miles of temporary road construction,
1.8 miles of permanent road construction, and 2.5 miles of road
reconstruction to access the specific harvest units. All temporary
roads constructed for this project, as well as an estimated 39 miles of
existing non-essential road are proposed for restoration to reduce
sediment and water yields, and improve grizzly bear habitat security.
Non-essential roads are those that are no longer considered a necessary
part of the permanent transportation system. Drainage improvement
activities (such as surface ripping, drainage structure improvement,
seeding) would be implemented on an additional 4 miles of existing
system roads, with the intent of restoring natural drainage and
reducing sediment. These roads will be needed for future management
access, and would remain a part of the permanent transportation system.
Additional road access restrictions may be needed to provide adequate
security areas for grizzly bears, however identification of specific
road closure proposals is pending further analysis. In addition,
projects to improve watershed recovery, reforestation of 475-550 acres
of severely burned areas not proposed for salvage, revegetation of road
cut and fill slopes, and repair of damaged hiking trails would be
accomplished if adequate funds are available.
The decision area includes all or a portion of three roadless
areas: the entire Big Creek Roadless Area #701, and portions of the
Zulu Roadless Area #166 and Mt. Henry Roadless Area #666. Some timber
salvage, fuels reduction activities, and reforestation would occur
within the Big Creek Roadless Area; no activities are proposed within
the Zulu or Mt. Henry Roadless Areas. No road construction is proposed
within any roadless area. No proposed activities are located in areas
considered for inclusion to the National Wilderness System as
recommended by the Kootenai National Forest Plan or by any past or
present legislative wilderness proposals.
Due to the high level of tree mortality in proposed harvest units,
most harvested areas would resemble clearcut, seed-tree, or shelterwood
silvicultural methods. Only those live trees which must be cut to
facilitate logging fire-killed trees would be harvested. In addition to
most live trees, 10-15 snags per acre would be retained in all
harvested areas if available. Timber harvest would be done by skyline,
forwarder or winter tractor, and helicopter, and designated to result
in minimal ground disturbance, risk of erosion, and compaction.
The Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
provides overall management objectives in individual delineated
management areas (MA's). The decision area contains nine MA's: 2, 3,
10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, and 24. Briefly described, MA 2 is managed to
protect and enhance roadless recreation use and provide wildlife
values. MA 3 is managed to provide opportunities for dispersed
recreation in naturally appearing environments using trails and
primitive roads for access. MA 10 is managed to maintain or enhance
habitat effectiveness for winter use by big-game animals and protect
scenic quality in areas visible from major travel routes. MA 12 is
managed to maintain or enhance the summer-range habitat effectiveness
for big-game species and produce a programmed yield of timber. MA 13 is
managed to provide the special habitat necessary for old growth
dependent wildlife. MA 14 focuses on maintaining or enhancing grizzly
bear habitat, reducing grizzly/human conflicts, assisting in the
recovery of the grizzly bear, realizing a programmed yield of timber
production, and providing for the maintenance or enhancement of other
wildlife species, especially big game. MA 15 is managed primarily for
timber production while providing for other resource values. MA 19 is
managed to protect soil stability and water quality by maintaining the
vegetation in a healthy condition and minimizing surface disturbance.
MA 24 is managed to protect mid to high elevation sites with rocky,
thin soils. This MA is also managed for any wildlife resources that may
occur. Timber salvage and fuels reduction is proposed in MA 12, MA 14,
and MA 24.
Preliminary Issues
Several preliminary issues of concern have been identified by the
Forest Service. These issues are briefly described below:
Water Quality--Streams in the decision area have been
impacted by past management and large wildfires. How would the proposed
action affect water yield, sediment production, stream stability, and
recovery from past impacts?
Timber Supply--An estimated 92 million board feet of
timber was killed in the North Fork Fire complex. Much of this fire-
killed timber will quickly lose its commercial value due to rapid
deterioration. To what extent does the proposed action recover the
commercial value of fire-killed timber to help meet local and national
needs?
Activity in Roadless Areas--What effect would the proposal
have on the roadless character of the Big Creek Roadless Area and other
roadless areas?
Grizzly Bear--The decision area lies within the recovery
area for the Cabinet/Yaak grizzly bear ecosystem. How would the
proposal maintain and enhance grizzly bear habitat, and contribute to
recovery efforts?
Old Growth--An estimated 1500 acres of designated old
growth was destroyed by intense, stand replacing wildfire. What options
are available to manage for suitable levels of old growth habitat in
the decision area?
Fisheries--Some streams contain fisheries habitat and
resident fish populations, including torrent sculpin (a Region 1
sensitive species), possibly bull trout (currently being considered for
listing as a threatened or endangered species), and westslope cutthroat
trout (likely hybridized). How would the proposed action affect
fisheries habitat and populations?
Future Fire Risk--The wildfires of 1994 killed more trees
over a larger area than would be expected in this ecosystem. Over the
next 20 years most of these fire killed trees will fall, creating high
fuel loadings over an area that is unprecedented in scale. Recurrence
of wildfires are anticipated within the next 50 years, and could
produce more severe effects to soils, water resources, and vegetation
than the 1994 fires. How would the proposed action reduce future fuel
loads and the corresponding risk of severe, uncontrollable wildfire?
Forest Plan Amendment
The Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan has
specific management direction for the North Fork decision area. The
North Fork proposed action is designed to maintain or improve resource
conditions and move towards achieving desired ecological conditions,
and is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Forest Plan.
Prior to making a NEPA decision, a thorough examination of all
standards and guidelines of the Forest Plan would be completed and, if
necessary, plan exceptions or amendments would be addressed in the EIS.
Decision To Be Made
The Kootenai National Forest Supervisor will decide the following:
[[Page 7518]]
Should dead and imminently dead trees within fire areas be
harvested and if so how and where,
What amount, type, and distribution of watershed restoration
projects, including road restoration, would be implemented,
What burned areas need to be replanted,
What road access restrictions would be implemented to provide
security for grizzly bears, and
If Forest Plan exception or amendments are necessary to proceed
with the Proposal Action within the decisions area.
Public Involvement and Scoping
Some public participation efforts have already been initiated. On
October 1, 1994 a public field trip to the North Fork Decision Area was
held to provide interested people with an opportunity to view the fire
areas and ask questions of fire managers and resource specialists. On
January 10, 1995, an open house and slide presentation was held with 25
individuals attending. Comments were requested during both of these
public involvement efforts. An open house will be held from 10:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m. on February 21, 1995 at the Rexford Ranger District
office, 1299 Hwy 93 N, Eureka, MT 59917, to provide an opportunity for
the public to review of the proposed action. Consultation with
appropriate State and Federal agencies has been initiated. Preliminary
effects analysis indicated that the wildfires may significantly affect
the quality of the human environment, and fire recovery activities have
the potential to both intensify and reduce effects. These potential
effects prompted the decision to prepare an EIS for the North Fork Fire
Salvage.
This environmental analysis and decision making process will enable
additional interested and affected people to participate and contribute
to the final decision. Public participation will be requested at
several points during the analysis. The Forest Service will be seeking
information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, local
agencies, and other individuals or organizations who may be interested
in or affected by the proposed projects. This input will be used in
preparation of the draft and final EIS. The scoping process will
include:
Identifying potential issues.
Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.
Exploring addition alternatives which will be derived from
issues recognized during scoping activities.
Identifying potential environmental effects of this
project and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects
and connected actions).
The analysis will consider a range of alternatives, including the
proposed action, no action, and other reasonable action alternatives.
Estimated Dates for Filing
The draft North Fork Fire Recovery EIS is expected to be filed with
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for
public review by April, 1995. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of
Availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment
period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes
the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.
The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by August, 1995. In the
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and
responses received during the comment period that pertain to the
environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision
regarding the proposal.
Reviewer's Obligations
The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
draft environmental impact statements must structure their
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,
553 (1978). Also environment objections that could be raised at the
draft environmental impact statement stage may be waived or dismissed
by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir.
1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338
(E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very important
that those interested in this proposed action participate by the close
of the 45 day comment period so that substantive comments and
objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it
can meaningfully consider and respond to them in the final EIS.
To be most helpful, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific
as possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merit
of the alternatives discussed. Reviewers may wish to refer to the
Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the
procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40
CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Responsible Official
Robert L. Schrenk, Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest, 506
US Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923 is the responsible Official. I have
delegated the responsibility to prepare the North Fork Fire Salvage
Environmental Impact Statement to Robert J. Thompson, District Ranger,
Rexford Ranger District. As the Responsible Office I will decide which,
if any, of the proposed projects will be implemented. I will document
the decision and reasons for the decisions in the Record of Decision.
That decision will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations.
Dated: January 30, 1995.
Robert L. Schrenk,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 95-3046 Filed 2-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M