[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43501-43503]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21543]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Sand Ecosystem Restoration, Wenatchee National Forest, Chelan
County, Washington
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 43502]]
SUMMARY: The Forest Service, USDA, will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts of a
site specific proposal for the Sand Ecosystem Restoration. The proposed
action is 7 miles south of the town of Cashmere, Washington on
approximately 6,000 acres of National Forest System Land in the
Slawson, Sherman, Sand, Little Camas, Poison, Mission, Bear Gulch, and
Fairview Canyon drainages on the Leavenworth Ranger District of the
Wenatchee National Forest. It is partially located within the Devil's
Gulch Roadless Area. The purpose of the EIS will be to develop and
evaluate a range of alternatives for ecosystem restoration activities
within the Sand Planning Area. The objectives include: (1) Reducing the
number of trees in dense stands and (2) reducing fuel loading. To
achieve these objectives the alternatives may include the following
actions: timber harvest; yarding tops; pruning; slash piling;
prescribed burning; pre-commercial thinning; reforestation; seeding;
road construction; and road decommissioning.
The alternatives will include a no action alternative, and at least
one alternative that proposes no action in the Devil's Gulch Roadless
Area. The proposed project will be consistent with direction given in
the Wenatchee National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as
amended by the April 13, 1994, Record of Decision for Amendments to
Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within
the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. This Forest Service proposal is
scheduled for implementation in 1998-2003. The agency invites written
comments on the scope of this project. In addition, the agency gives
notice of this analysis so that interested and affected people are
aware of how they may participate and contribute to the final decision.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope and analysis of this proposal must
be received by October 1, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope
of the analysis to Rebecca Heath, District Ranger, Leavenworth Ranger
District, 600 Sherbourne, Leavenworth, Washington 98826.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Questions and comments about this EIS should be directed to Bob Stoehr,
Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Leavenworth Ranger District, 600
Sherbourne, Leavenworth, Washington 98826; phone 509-548-6977,
extension 226.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This analysis was prompted by the Mission
Creek Watershed Analysis. This study found that fire exclusion and
other management over the last 90 years have changed many dry forests
from open, parklike stands to very dense and stagnated stands which are
now susceptible to large, intense wildfires as well as bark beetle
infestations. The environmental analysis will look at different ways to
move this part of the Mission Creek Watershed toward a more healthy,
sustainable condition.
The proposed action is to treat approximately 6,000 acres.
Treatments would be made through a combination of activities including:
(1) Thinning of dense stands, and (2) pruning and fuel reduction
through the use of prescribed fire. This proposal will include
helicopter yarding as the primary method of tree removal, and may
require the construction of approximately 4 miles of access roads.
To date, the following key issues have been identified: Remnant
stands of old ponderosa pine; dry forest ecosystem sustainability;
threatened and endangered wildlife species; fire risk; inventoried
roadless area; and economic viability.
The decision to be made through this analysis is where, how, and to
what extent should the various vegetation management and fuels
reduction treatments be implemented within the Sand Planning Area, and
what roading, if any, should occur.
A range of alternatives will be considered, including a no action
alternative, and an alternative that proposes no actions in the Devil's
Gulch Roadless Area. Other alternatives will be developed in response
to relevant issues received during scoping. All alternatives will need
to respond to specific conditions in the Sand Planning Area.
Public participation will be especially important at several points
during the analysis. The Forest Service will be seeking information,
comments, and assistance from Federal, State, tribes, and local
agencies, as well as individuals or organizations who may be interested
in or affected by the proposed actions. This information will be used
in preparation of the draft EIS. The scoping process includes:
1. Identifying potential issues.
2. Identifying issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Eliminating non-significant issues or those which have been
covered by a relevant previous environmental process.
4. Exploring additional alternatives.
5. Identifying potential environmental effects of the proposed
action and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects
and connected actions).
6. Determining potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.
The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review in June,
1998. 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 notice appears in the Federal Register. Copies of
the draft EIS will be distributed to interested and affected agencies,
organizations, tribes, and members of the public for their review and
comment. It is very important that those interested in the management
of the Wenatchee National Forest participate at that time.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft EIS should
be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to
specific pages or chapters of the draft EIS. Comments may also address
the adequacy of the draft EIS 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).
At this early stage, the Forest Service believes it is important to
give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
a draft EIS must structure their participation in the environmental
review of their 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 EIS stage but that are not
raised until after completion of the final EIS 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 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 EIS.
[[Page 43503]]
The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in August 1998. 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 the decision
regarding this proposal. Sonny O'Neal, Forest Supervisor, Wenatchee
National Forest, is the responsible official. As the responsible
official he will document the decision and reasons for the decision in
the Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest Service
Appeal Regulations 36 CFR Part 215.
Dated: July 28, 1997.
Elton Thomas,
Natural Resources Group Leaders.
[FR Doc. 97-21543 Filed 8-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M