[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 246 (Friday, December 20, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67303-67304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-32342]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Dome Peak Timber Sale Analysis, White River National Forest;
Routt County, CO
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement to disclose effects of
alternative decisions it may make to harvest dead Engelmann spruce and
associated road construction within the Dome Peak Timber Sale planning
area, on the Eagle Ranger District of the White River National Forest.
DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be
received on or before March 1, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Veto J. LaSalle, Forest Supervisor,
White River National Forest, P.O. Box 948, 9th and Grand Ave., Glenwood
Springs, Colorado 81602. Mr. LaSalle is the Responsible Official for
this EIS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Van Norman, Project Coordinator,
Holy Cross Ranger District, 24747 U.S. Highway 24, P.O. Box 190,
Minturn, CO 81645, (970) 827-5715.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 28, 1996 the White River National
Forest released a Draft Environmental Assessment for the proposed
action and alternatives to that proposed action under Public Law 104-
19. Based on comments received from members of the public, the
Interdisciplinary Team has determined that the proposed action and
alternatives to that action represent a roadless area entry. Therefore,
and Environmental Impact Statement is required as per Forest Service
Handbook 1909.15, Section 20.6. The proposed action proposes to harvest
approximately 2.5 million board feet from approximately 650 acres of
dead Engelmann spruce using a combination of ground-based and
helicopter yarding and to construct approximately 1.1 miles of new
specified road.
The proposed action is consistent with governing programmatic
management direction contained in the Rocky Mountain Regional Guide and
FEIS for Standards and Guidelines (1983) and in the Final EIS and Land
and Resource Management Plan for the White River National Forest (LMP,
1984). The LMP allocated the proposed timber sale area to semi-
primitive non-motorized use and allows for timber harvest. The site-
specific environmental analysis provided by the EIS will assist the
Responsible Official in determining which improvements are needed to
meet the following objectives: Reduce natural fuel loadings and to
provide wood products for the nation and opportunities for timber
related jobs. Alternatives will be carefully examined for their
potential impacts on the physical, biological, and social environments
so that tradeoffs are apparent to the decisionmaker.
Public participation will be fully incorporated into preparation of
the EIS. The first step is the scoping process, during which the Forest
Service will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from
Federal, State, and local agencies, and other individuals or groups who
may be interested or affected by the proposed action. This information
will be used in preparing the EIS. No public meetings are planned for
this project. Public comments received during initial scoping and those
raised during public review of the Draft Environmental Assessment for
this project will be incorporated into this EIS. Individuals who have
provided comments during initial scoping, on the Draft Environmental
Assessment, and those who provide comments on this EIS will receive
copies of the Draft EIS for their review.
Preliminary issues include the potential effects of proposed
actions on the following elements of the biological, physical and
social environments: Wildlife habitat, and overall biological
diversity; wetlands and riparian areas; scenic quality; air quality;
roadless area resource values; recreation resource values, range
resource values, and social and economic values. The direct, indirect,
cumulative, short-term, and long-term aspects of impacts on national
forest lands and resources, and those of connected or related effects
off-site, will be fully disclosed.
Preliminary alternatives include the proposed action (described
above) and No Action, which in this case is deferring treatment of the
area until the future. A third preliminary alternative will be analyzed
which would harvest approximately 0.4 million board feet of dead
Engelmann spruce from approximately 100 acres using ground-based
yarding and to construct
[[Page 67304]]
approximately 1.1 miles of new specified road. Additional alternatives
may be developed after the significant issues are clarified and
management objectives are fully defined. The Responsible Official will
be presented with a range of feasible and practical alternatives.
Permits and licenses required to implement the proposed action
will, or may, include the following: consultation with U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service for compliance with Section 7 of the Threatened &
Endangered Species Act; review from the Colorado Division of Wildlife,
and clearance from the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office.
The Forest Service predicts the draft environmental impact
statement will be filed during the spring of 1997 and the final
environmental impact statement during the summer of 1997.
The Forest Service will seek comments on the draft environmental
impact statement for a period of 45 days after its publication in the
Federal Register. Comments will then be summarized and responded to 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 environmental impact 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.)
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice at this early stage of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
the draft environmental impact statement 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
DEIS 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 45 day comment period
so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the
Forest Service at a time when they 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.
Dated: December 13, 1996.
Ben DelVillar,
Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 96-32342 Filed 12-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-BW-M
