[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 5, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24565]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 5, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project, Tahoe National Forest,
Sierra County, CA
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Tahoe
National Forest will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS)
for proposed watershed restoration, timber salvage, fuels reduction,
wildlife habitat improvement, and reforestation activities within the
xx,xxx-acre Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project analysis area located
in the Feather River and Truckee River watersheds. The project area is
located within all or portions of T19N, R15 & 16E, T20N, R15, 16, &
17E; and T21N, R15, 16, and 17E, MDB&M.
The agency invites comments and suggestions on the scope of the
analysis. In addition, the agency gives notice of the full
environmental analysis and decision-making process that will occur on
the proposal so that interested and affected people are aware of how
they may participate and contribute to the final decision.
DATES: Comments should be made in writing and received by November 21,
1994.
ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning the project should be directed
to Steve Bishop, District Ranger, Sierraville Ranger District, P.O. Box
95, Sierraville, CA 96126.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Bishop, District Ranger,
Sierraville Ranger District, Sierraville, CA 96126, telephone (916)
994-3401, or Martha Twarkins, Project Team Leader, at the above
location or at (916) 478-6293.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice of Intent to prepare the Eastside
Forest Restoration Project EIS was published in the Federal Register on
May 16, 1994 [59 FR 25440-25441]. That 85,000-acre project was proposed
to address the area's extensive tree mortality and overstocked timber
stands. Opportunities were identified to treat those stands in order to
improve forest health and reduce the fire hazard, while concurrently
accomplishing watershed restoration and wildlife habitat improvement
goals.
Significant new circumstances have occurred that bear on the
original proposal. From August 16 through August 31, 1994, the 48,000-
acre Cottonwood Fire burned through the Eastside Forest Restoration
Project analysis area, affecting about 36,300 acres of National Forest
System land and 11,700 acres of lands of other ownership on both the
Tahoe and Toiyabe National Forests.
The fire burned with high-to-moderate intensity on over 90 percent
of the affected area, leaving only skeletons of burned trees and
shrubs. Less than 10 percent of the area burned with low intensity,
leaving partially burned or scattered live trees. This loss of
vegetation has resulted in large areas of exposed soils and, thus,
unstable watershed conditions, large amounts of new fuels, and the loss
of standing timber and future timber growth potential. The fire also
affected other important resources, such as wildlife habitat,
recreation sites, visual quality, historic and pre-historic sites,
fisheries, sensitive plant and animal species, and water quantity and
quality.
The unburned portion (about xx,xxx acres) of Eastside Forest
Restoration Project EIS is being deferred for analysis until the
completion of the Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project EIS; a revised
Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the
remaining area, along with new time schedules, will be placed in the
Federal Register at a later date.
The Cottonwood Fire Restoration Project analysis area is about
xx,xxx acres in size, and includes xx,xxx acres of National Forest
System lands and xx,xxx acres of lands of other ownerships. Most of the
area is in the Feather River watershed, with a small portion in the
Truckee River watershed. It is located east of the town of Sierraville
and Highway 89, north of Sardine Peak and Lewis Mill, west of Babbitt
Peak and the crest of the Bald Mountain Range, and south of the town of
Loyalton. Major drainages within the project area include Cottonwood
Creek, Lemon Canyon, Turner Canyon, Smithneck Creek, Bear Valley Creek,
and Badenaugh Canyon. The project area includes all lands within the
fire boundary on the Sierraville Ranger District of the Tahoe National
Forest; the area burned on the Carson Ranger District of the Toiyabe
National Forest will be analyzed separately.
In preparing the environmental impact statement, the Forest Service
will identify and analyze a range of alternatives that address the
issues developed for this area. One of the alternatives will be no
treatment. Other alternatives will consider differing levels of
implementation of salvage treatments, fuels reduction, watershed
restoration, road obliteration, wildlife habitat improvement, and new
road construction and reconstruction. An ecological approach will be
used to achieve multiple-use management of the Cottonwood Fire area. It
also means that the needs of people and environmental values will be
blended in such a way that this area's desired condition would
represent a diverse, healthy, productive, and sustainable ecosystem.
Public participation will be important during the analysis,
especially during the review of the draft environmental impact
statement. The Forest Service is 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 environmental impact statement. The scoping process includes:
1. Identifying potential issues.
2. Identifying issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Eliminating insignificant issues or those which have been
covered by a relevant previous environmental analysis.
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 following list of issues has been identified through initial
scoping:
(1) To what extent can the potential for future large, catastrophic
wildlife be reduced within the project area?
(2) To what extent can the forest health be restored within the
project area?
(3) What level of timber commodities could result from forest
health restoration projects?
(4) To what extent will erodable and sensitive soils, and thus
long-term soil productivity, be affected by the proposed activities?
(5) To what extent will the view from Highways 49 and 89 be
affected? What visual character will result from the proposed
activities, and to what extent can visual quality be improved in
sensitive areas affected by the fire?
(6) To what extent will vegetative diversity be improved to support
a wide variety of biological communities?
(7) To what extent and at what timing will wildlife habitat be
restored for the large variety of wildlife using the area?
(8) To what extent will watershed conditions be improved and
restored by the proposed activities?
(9) To what extent will air quality in the Sierra Valley and
Truckee areas be affected by the proposed activities?
Comments from other Federal, State, and local agencies,
organizations, and individuals who may be interested in, or affected by
the decision, are encouraged to identify other significant issues.
Public participation will be solicited through mailing letters to
potentially interested or affected mining claim owners, private land
owners, and special use permittees on the Sierraville Ranger District;
posting information in local towns; and mailing letters to local timber
industries, politicians, school boards, county supervisors, and
environmental groups. Continued participation will be emphasized
through individual contacts. Public meetings used as a method of public
involvement during preparation and review of the draft environmental
impact statement will be announced in newspapers of general circulation
in the geographic area of such meetings well in advance of scheduled
dates.
The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by
December, 1995. 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 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 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 the
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 EIS.
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.
The final EIS is expected to be available by March, 1995. The
responsible official is John H. Skinner, Forest Supervisor, Tahoe
National Forest.
Dated: September 26, 1994.
Larry Gruver,
Acting Forest Supervisor
[FR Doc. 94-24565 Filed 10-4-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
