[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 16 (Friday, January 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3656-3657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-1728]
========================================================================
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. 62, No. 16 / Friday, January 24, 1997 /
Notices
[[Page 3656]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Beaver Creek Ecosystem Management Project; Kootenai National
Forest, Sanders County, Montana
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA-Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the Beaver Creek Ecosystem Management Project to
disclose the effects of timber harvest, prescribed fire, road
management and construction, noxious weed control, trailhead
restoration, and lookout facility renovation in the Big Beaver and
Little Beaver Creek drainages located approximately 8 air miles from
Trout Creek, Montana. The purpose and need for this project was
documented in the Beaver Creek Physiographic Area Landscape Assessment.
The purposes are to provide for long-term sustainability of forest
resources (i.e. vegetation resource, protection and enhancement of
habitat for wildlife and fish species, recreation resources etc.),
while contributing to natural recovery processes (which reduce impacts
to resources) and enhancing recreational facilities for public use. The
DEIS is expected to be filed with the EPA and available for public
review by March 31, 1997.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before
March 25, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the
analysis should be sent to James I. Mershon, District Ranger, Cabinet
Ranger District, 2693 Hwy 200, Trout Creek, Montana, 59874.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John Head, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Cabinet Ranger District.
Phone: (406) 882-4451.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The decision area contains approximately
55,000 acres within the Kootenai National Forest in Sanders County,
Montana. All of the proposed projects are located in the Big Beaver and
Little Beaver Creek drainages,which are tributary to the Clark Fork
River, near Trout Creek, Montana. The legal location of the decision
area is as follows: Sections 6-7, 17-19, and N \1/2\ Section 20,
T22N,R30W; Sections 1-30 T22N,R31W; Sections 1-5, 8-12, 13-17, 20-24,
25-29, 34-35, T22N, R32W;; Section 31, T23N,R30W; Sections 25-30, 31-
36, T23N, R31W; Sections 25-26, 32-36, T23N,R31W, Principal Montana
Meridian.
The Forest Service proposes to harvest approximately 19 million
board feet of timber through application of a variety of harvest
methods on approximately 5400 acres of forest land. An estimated 12
miles of temporary road and 120 miles of road reconstruction would be
needed to access timber harvest areas. All temporary roads would be
obliterated following completion of sale activities. The proposal also
includes prescribed burning on approximately 3000 acres to enhance
wildlife habitat. An estimated 38 miles of road would be treated by
rehabilitation of stream crossings, recontouring, ripping and seeding
etc. The type of treatment would be based on site specific conditions.
To help provide habitat and food for wildlife associated with the
alpine and subalpine ecosystem, white bark pine seedlings would be
planted in high elevation communities on approximately 20 acres. The
Forest Service also proposes to conduct channel rehabilitation on
approximately one mile of stream. The methods used to restore the
channel sections would include placement of channel stabilizing
structures such as revetments, rock weirs, and sediment traps as
needed. In addition, to help improve fish habitat large woody debris
will be recruited on approximately 5 miles of stream. Some of the
recruitment may include limited timber felling within the riparian
areas. A lookout structure that is rented out to the public on a
nightly basis is scheduled for renovation. Renovations may include
painting, structural support and reroofing. Three trailheads, and
numerous dispersed camping sites are propose for rehabilitation. This
rehabilitation would be based on site specific conditions and include
such things as creating barriers (eg rock) for vehicle restriction
where necessary. Trailhead work would include providing suitable
parking and signing In addition, the proposed action includes a noxious
weed control program designed to slow the spread of knapweed (Centauria
maculosa) and stop any new infestations of other noxious plant species.
The Kootenai Forest Plan provides guidance for management
activities within the potentially affected area through its goals,
objectives, standards and guidelines, and management area direction.
The proposed projects encompass several management areas (MAs):
2,5,10,11,12,13,15,16,18 and 19. This proposal includes openings
greater than 40 acres, to emulate historic disturbance patterns, and
project specific Forest Plan amendments for: (1) Open road density in
MA 12 (big game summer range); (2) removal of snag habitat in MA 10
(big game winter range); and (3) timber harvest in MA 13 (old growth).
Project specific amendments are allowed when it is determined during
project design that the best way to meet the goals of the Forest Plan
conflicts with a Forest plan standard (Forest Plan Volume (II-20).
The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of
these will be the ``no action'' alternative in which none of the
proposed activities will be implemented. Additional alternatives will
examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to
achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the issues
and other resource values.
The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative
environmental effects of the alternatives. Past, present, and projected
activities on both private and National Forest lands will be
considered. The EIS will disclose the analysis of site-specific
mitigation measures and their effectiveness.
Preliminary Issues
Tentatively, several preliminary issues of concern have been
identified. There issues are briefly described below:
Water and Fisheries Resources--Rivers and streams are
complex and dynamic natural systems. The physical, chemical and
biological conditions in
[[Page 3657]]
them are a result of all the natural and human-caused events within the
watershed. There are three main concerns related to the water and
fisheries resources and the effects of the proposed action. (1) Amount
of large woody debris; (2) streamflow regime; and (3) sediment sources.
Big Game wildlife--open road densities are currently over
the recommended amount for big game habitat effectiveness and security.
There is concern regarding the effect of the proposed action on big
game security and habitat.
Other issues commonly associated with such activities include: effects
on soils, air quality, sensitive plants, and old growth. This list may
be verified, expanded, or modified based on public scoping for this
proposal.
Decisions To Be Made
The Kootenai Forest Supervisor will decide the following:
Whether or not to harvest timber and, if so, identify the
selection of, and site-specific location of, appropriate timber
management practices (silvicultural prescription, logging system, fuels
treatment, riparian habitat conservation areas and reforestation), road
construction/reconstruction necessary to provide access and to achieve
other resource objectives, and appropriate mitigation measures.
Whether water and fish rehabilitation projects (including
road obliteration) and other project area improvements (including work
on trailheads, dispersed campsites, noxious weeds etc) should be
implemented and, if so, to what extent.
Whether or not wildlife enhancement projects (including
white bark pine planting and prescribed burning) should be implemented
and, if so, to what extent.
Whether road access restrictions or other actions are
necessary to meet big game wildlife needs.
Whether project specific Forest Plan amendments are
necessary to meet goals and objectives of the Forest Plan.
What, if any, specific project monitoring requirements
would be needed to assure mitigation measures are implemented and
effective.
Public Involvement and Scoping
Public participation is an important part of the analysis process,
commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) which will
begin with the publication of this notice. The public is encouraged to
take part in the process and is encouraged to visit with Forest Service
officials at any time during the analysis and prior to the decision.
The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and
assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies and other
individuals or organizations who may be interested in, or affected by,
the proposed action. 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.
Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
Explore additional alternatives which will be derived from
issues recognized during scoping activities.
Identify potential environmental effects of this project
and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and
connected actions).
Estimated Dates for Filing
While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time,
comments received within 60 days of the publication of this notice will
be especially useful in the preparation of the Draft EIS. The Draft EIS
is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and to be available for public review by March 31, 1997. 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. It is very important that those interested in the
management of this area participate at that time.
The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by June 15, 1997. 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, environmental 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. As the
Responsible Official I will decide if the proposed project will be
implemented. I will document the decision and reasons for the decision
in the Record of Decision. I have delegated the responsibility to
prepare the EIS to James I. Mershon, District Ranger, Cabinet Ranger
District.
Dated: January 16, 1977.
Lawrence R. Cron,
Acting Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 97-1728 Filed 1-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M