[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 143 (Friday, July 25, 1997)] [Notices] [Pages 40047-40048] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 97-19590] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service East Big Red Timber Sale, Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District, Routt County, Colorado AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess and disclose the environmental effects of the proposed East Big Red Timber Sale. Estimated dates for filing the draft EIS is November, 1997, followed by the final decision in February, 1998. The area location is approximately 34 miles north of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, in sections 13, 23, 25, & 36 of T11N, R85W, sections 7, 8, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 30, 31, & 32 of T11N, R84W, sections 5 & 6 of T10N, R84W. All lands within the project area are currently allocated to Management Area 7E, as described in the current Forest Land Management and Resource Plan for the Routt National Forest, approved in 1983. Forested lands within this management area are designated as suitable for timber production by the forest plan. Following is a summary of the general forest plan direction for the area. Management Area 7E-Timber Production: Emphasis is placed on wood fiber production and utilization of a size and quality suitable for sawtimber. Timber harvest must meet a Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of partial retention in foregoing areas as seen from open arterial and collector roads as well as main trails. A VQO of modification applies to all other areas. The Forest Plan is being revised as required by the National Forest Management Act. The preferred alternative for the forest plan revision (alternative C as described in the DEIS) allocates the majority of the project area to management area 5.13, which is to be managed for the production of commercial wood products. This allocation includes most of the stands proposed for harvest. A few smaller areas allocated to management area 5.11, provides for a mix of forest products, forage, wildlife habitat and recreation. DATES: Written comments and suggestions on the draft Environmental Impact Statement should be received on or before the 45 day period from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register. 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 but that are not raised until after completion of the final Environmental Impact Statement 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 them and respond to them in the final Environmental Impact Statement. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft Environmental Impact Statement should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft Environmental Impact Statement or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. 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. ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest Supervisor, Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest, 2468 Jackson Street, Laramie, Wyoming 82070-6535. Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the analysis should be sent to Sherry Reed, District Ranger, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District, P.O. Box 771212, Steamboat Springs, Colorado 80477. Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposed action and will be available for public inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments will not have standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR Parts 215 or 217. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing how the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality. Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that, under the FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very limited circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest Service will inform the requester of the agency's decision regarding the request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the comments may be resubmitted with or without name and address within 10 days. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirby Self, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District. Phone: (970) 879-1870. [[Page 40048]] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Action The proposal is to harvest and manage approximately 880 acres of mature sawtimber stands within the analysis area. The proposal includes the following activities:Treatment by harvesting approximately 8.0 MMBF of commercial timber using both even and uneven-aged silvicultural systems. Approximate acres to be treated: 380 acres--shelterwood & group selections 470 acres--clearcut 25 acres--commercial thin Construction of approximately 18 miles of specified road and 2 \1/2\ miles of road reconstruction. Post sale work could include, but is not limited to; regeneration and stocking surveys to assure proper reforestation of harvested stands; noxious weed spraying; and thinning of past harvest areas. Other Opportunities Remedy road maintenance and erosion problems on road 500.1D by relocating. Obliteration of existing road to eliminate trespass concerns and maintenance problems. Reduce sediment production from the Hare Trail (FDT 1199) by relocating or eliminating trail. Reduce fuel loading in the head of the Middle Fork Little Snake River. All proposed activities would take place within the East Big Red analysis area, and are planned for implementation starting in 1999. Decision to Be Made The Medicine Bow-Routt Forest Supervisor will need to make an informed decision about the selection of one alternative among several. The issues and alternatives developed by the IDT members and public commenters must be analyzed and displayed clearly. From the project record alone, the Forest Supervisor and others who may review the decision, must be able to fully understand the consequences of implementating the selected alternative. Preliminary Issues Effects of timber harvest and road construction on watershed condition and thus water quality. Effects of timber harvest on wildlife habitat with potential reduction of big game hiding cover along open roads and around meadows from timber harvest, and also the loss of old growth and goshawk habitat. Effects on range management. Impacts on recreation facilities such as trails and dispersed camp sites. Effects on visual quality primarily from forest roads 550 and 505, and those roads and units which are adjacent to trails 1199, 1203, and 1204. Effects on roadless character. Several units and roads are proposed within the Dome Peak Roadless Area. Scope of the Analysis This environmental analysis shall consider the environmental consequences of the proposed action, as well as alternatives reasonably implemented, while meeting the purpose and need of the action. Dated: July 11, 1997. Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 97-19590 Filed 7-24-97; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-GM-M