[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 21, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3078-3080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1324]
========================================================================
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. 63, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 1998 /
Notices
[[Page 3078]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Routt Divide Blowdown Analysis, Medicine Bow-Routt National
Forest, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District, Routt County, CO
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 will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to assess and disclose the environmental effects of
proposed salvage logging of a portion of the Routt Divide Blowdown
outside the Mount Zirkel Wilderness Area on the Hans Peak/Bears Ears
Ranger District. The analysis area location is approximately 24 miles
north of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, in portions of sections 3, 4, 5,
8, 9 and 10 of T9N, R83W; sections 1, 2, and 11 of T9N, R84W; sections
17, 20, 21, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33 and 34 of T10N, R83W; sections 1, 2, 3,
4, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 34, 35 and 36 of
T10N, R84W; and sections 33, 34, 35, and 36 of T11N, R84W.
This Notice of Intent is being issued under the authority of the
Routt National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and Final EIS
of November 1983, which is the current guidance for forest management
of the area. It is anticipated that the final Revised Land and Resource
Management Plan for the Routt National Forest will be issued before the
project decision for the Routt Divide Blowdown Analysis is complete.
Therefore, information from the draft Proposed Revised Land and
Resource Management Plan, issued in January 1996, is also included so
readers can evaluate how the project would fit within guidance provided
by the revised plan. The project will tier to the plan that is in
effect when the project decision is made.
The majority of lands affected by the blowdown event within the
analysis area are currently allocated to Management Area 4B (wildlife
habitat), as described in the current Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan for the Routt National Forest, approved in 1983. There
are also some inclusions of blowdown within Management Areas 2A
(semiprimitive motorized recreation) and 6B (range management). The
North Fork and Middle Fork of Elk River are identified as eligible for
consideration by Congress for Scenic River designation. Forested lands
within management areas 4B, 6B and 2A are designated as suitable for
timber production by the forest plan and do contribute to the Allowable
Sale Quantity (ASQ) calculation. Following is a summary of the general
forest plan direction for the area.
Management Area 4B--Wildlife Habitat: Emphasizes wildlife habitat
for one or more indicator species. Semiprivate motorized recreation
opportunities will be provided, but vegetation manipulation and human
activities are managed to provide optimum habitat for the selected
species.
Management Area 2A--Semiprimitive motorized recreation: Emphasizes
semiprimitive motorized recreation opportunities such as snowmobiling,
four-wheel driving and motorcycling both on and off roads and trails in
a naturally appearing environment. Management activities are visually
subordinate. Timber harvest includes clearcutting and shelterwood and
will enhance wildlife diversity.
Management area 6B--Rangeland Management: Emphasizes improving and/
or maintaining rangeland. Improvements may include seeding, burning,
spraying, crushing, or plowing as well as structural improvements.
The Forest Plan is being revised as required by the National Forest
Management Act. The Draft Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for
the Routt National Forest was issued in January 1996. 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
5.11 (General Forest and Rangelands--Forest Vegetation Emphasis, which
provides for a mix of forest products, forage, wildlife habitat and
recreation), and management area 5.13 (Forest Products, which is
managed to produce commercial wood products). These lands are included
in the ASQ calculations as suitable lands. The analysis area also
includes lands allocated to management area 1.32 (Backcountry
Recreation with Limited Motorized Winter Use), which provides for
backcountry recreation opportunities in a natural-appearing landscape
and continues to consider the North Fork and Middle Fork of Elk River
as eligible for Scenic River designation. These lands are not included
in the ASQ calculations as suitable lands.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be postmarked or
received by February 21, 1998. The estimated date for filing the draft
EIS is March 1998, followed by the final decision in May 1998.
ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest
Supervisor; Medicine Bow--Routt National Forest; 925 Weiss Drive;
Steamboat Springs, CO 80487-9315. Written comments and suggestions
concerning the scope of the analysis may be sent to him at that
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Larry Lindner, Interdisciplinary Team Leader. Phone: 970-870-2220
(Steamboat Springs, CO) or 307-745-2424 (Laramie, WY).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 25, 1997, approximately 20,000
acres of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir along the western boundary
of the Mount Zirkel Wilderness Area were subjected to a windthrow
event. The majority of trees were windthrown in about 40-50 patches
ranging in size from about 50 to 4,000 acres. Approximately 12,000
acres of windthrow are within the Mount Zirkel Wilderness and
approximately 8,000 acres are outside and to the west of the wilderness
boundary. This Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement concerns a portion of the blowdown that is within the North
Fork and Middle Fork of Elk River watersheds outside the Mount Zirkel
Wilderness Area. Additional analysis responsive to the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) will be completed for any activities
that may be proposed for the remaining blowdown area.
[[Page 3079]]
Preliminary estimates indicate that as much as 80 million board
feet of timber may be salvageable within the analysis area. Insects,
rots and stains are expected to greatly reduce the economic value of
the logs within a few years. Therefore, a timely decision is needed to
maximize any economic benefit the people of the United States would
achieve should the decision be made to salvage the blowdown sawtimber
or any efforts to do so would be foregone.
Proposed Action
To restore recreation opportunities, to enhance regeneration of
stands, and to use blowdown timber through salvage logging
opportunities in response to the Routt Divide Blowdown event within one
of the largest patches where road access already exists. The Forest
Service intends to analyze: (a) The effects of the blowdown to the
natural, social and economic resources; (b) the opportunities to
mitigate the effects of the blowdown through salvage logging or other
methods; and (c) the effects of salvage logging as well as any needed
mitigation measures.
Most projects developed by the Forest Service are tailored to fit
on-the-ground conditions and must meet numerous design constraints,
such as size and shape of units, etc. The Routt Divide Blowdown was a
natural disturbance rather than the result of a planned activity by the
Forest Service. Since the blowdown was an act of nature rather than of
Forest Service design, some aspects of projects developed in response
to the blowdown may not look like projects that are regularly
conceived, designed and implemented by the Forest Service.
Much of the analysis area has been inventoried as part of the
analysis process for past and proposed sales, so there is already
specific data and general information available. The Interdisciplinary
Team will develop a site specific proposed action as part of its
analysis for disclosure in the draft EIS. The design of any activities
proposed for the area must be responsive to the effects of the event
itself and will be guided by applicable Forest Plan Standards and
Guidelines. Should circumstances warrant deviation from the Forest Plan
Standards and Guidelines, an amendment(s) to the Plan subject to the
NEPA process may be necessary. Some proposed activities may be
innovative and non-traditional due to the nature of the blowdown
itself.
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.
Decision To Be Made
The Medicine Bow-Routt Forest Supervisor will make a decision about
the selection of one alternative among several concerning whether a
portion of the Routt Divide Blowdown outside wilderness will be salvage
logged and what mitigation measures will be required. The issues and
alternatives developed from public comment and Interdisciplinary Team
analysis will be clearly disclosed in the Environmental Impact
Statement. From the project record alone, the Forest Supervisor and
others who may review the decision, will be able to fully understand
the consequences of implementing the selected alternative.
Preliminary Issues
--Effects to recreation
--Effects to Mount Zirkel Wilderness area
--Effects to Wild and Scenic River classification
--Effects to Roadless areas
--Effects to National Forest permittees
--Effects to local communities and Forest Users
--Effects to channel stability from increased water yield
--Effects to soil productivity from surface erosion
--Effects to wildlife and fish, including Threatened, Endangered and
Sensitive species
--Social effects
--Safety
--Regeneration of new forests in the blowdown
--Effects of salvage logging
--Effects of road construction required to salvage logs
--Visual effects (including those resulting from the need to maintain
roughness, shade and structure within a contiguous large area of
blowdown)
--Potential that the blowdown material may lead to epidemic levels of
insect populations and the effects of such an epidemic
Reviewers 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 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 draft Environmental Impact Statement
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.
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.
[[Page 3080]]
Responsible Official
Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest Supervisor; Medicine Bow--Routt National
Forest; 2468 Jackson Street, Laramie, WY 82070 is the Responsible
Official. As the Responsible Official, I will decide which, if any of
the alternatives to be described in the draft Environmental Impact
Statement will be implemented. I will document the decision and the
reasons for my selection of the decision in the Record of Decision.
Dated: January 14, 1998.
Jerry E. Schmidt,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 98-1324 Filed 1-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-GM-M
