97-33346. North Fork St. Joe River Project; Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Shoshone County, Idaho  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 245 (Monday, December 22, 1997)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 66846-66848]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-33346]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
    
    Forest Service
    
    
    North Fork St. Joe River Project; Idaho Panhandle National 
    Forests, Shoshone County, Idaho
    
    AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
    
    ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The St. Joe Ranger District of the Idaho Panhandle National 
    Forest, USDA Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact 
    Statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of vegetation, 
    road and trail, and watershed restoration activities on National Forest 
    lands within the North Fork St. Joe River drainage. The project area is 
    located immediately north of the town of Avery, Idaho. Based on an 
    inter-disciplinary assessment of resource conditions within the area, 
    the purpose and need for this proposal is summarized as:
        1. Maintain or improve long term water quality within the project 
    area. Where water quality is currently limited, work towards restoring 
    properly functioning hydrologic condition. 2. Maintain or improve 
    habitat for native fish. 3. Maintain or develop habitat conditions 
    (including forest structure, habitat connectivity, security habitat and 
    limited road densities) to contribute to the conservation of forest 
    dwelling species. 4. Forest structure: Where conditions permit, 
    maintain or begin restoration of large diameter trees and forest 
    structures once more common within the North Fork St. Joe area. 5. 
    Forest composition: Where conditions permit, maintain or begin 
    restoration of large, potentially long lived seral species (western 
    white pine, western larch, ponderosa pine, white bark pine) which once 
    dominated the forested landscape of the St. Joe River basin. 6. Promote 
    fire use and control strategies for safety and efficiency of 
    suppression and protection and maintenance of resource values. Trend 
    toward allowing fire to play its natural role as a forest disturbance 
    mechanism. Reduce the risk of very large stand replacing fires through 
    vegetation management and restore beneficial fire effects. 7. Maintain 
    or improve the unique and diverse recreational opportunities available 
    within the area. Provide dispersed and developed campsites for the 
    increasing recreational use. Mitigate, where feasible and necessary, 
    effects of the increasing recreational use and supporting 
    infrastructure (trails, campsites, access routes) on other resource 
    values. 8. Reduce the risk of blending genetic material from the poorly 
    adapted, non-local ponderosa pine trees planted earlier this century 
    with that of the native ponderosa pine. Replace the poorly adapted 
    trees with more sustainable native species. 9. Timber harvest, when 
    feasible and cost effective, will be used when it can help achieve the 
    other landscape objectives so as to also contribute wood to the local 
    timber supply. In as much as it is compatible with other objectives, 
    harvest activities will maintain or improve the long term growth and 
    production of commercially valuable wood products from the sites.
    
    DATES: Comments should be postmarked on or before January 21, 1998. 
    Please include your name and address and the name of the project you 
    are commenting on.
    
    ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed 
    management activities or requests to be placed on project mailing list 
    to Brad Gilbert, District Ranger, St. Joe Ranger District, P.O. Box 
    407, St. Maries, ID 83861. Brad Gilbert is the Responsible Official.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pete Zimmerman, Project Team Leader, 
    St. Joe Ranger District, (208) 245-2531.
        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 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.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The decision area contains approximately 
    75,000 acres within the Idaho Panhandle National Forests in Shoshone 
    County, Idaho. All the proposed projects would occur on National Forest 
    lands in the N. Fork St. Joe River drainage immediately north of Avery, 
    Idaho. The legal location of the decision area is as follows: all or 
    portions of
    
    Township 45 North, Range 5 East; Township 45 North, Range 6 East;
    Township 46 North, Range 5 East; Township 46 North, Range 6 East;
    Township 46 North, Range 7 East; Township 47 North, Range 5 East;
    Township 47 North, Range 6 East; Township 47 North, Range 7 East;
    
        The proposed action is designed to achieve the purpose and need for 
    action as described above. The proposed activities would be initiated 
    over the next ten years. While many of the proposed management 
    activities may work towards achieving more than one of the project 
    objectives, they have been grouped here into four basic categories to 
    simplify the description.
    
    Vegetation
    
        The St. Joe District proposes to use prescribed fire, timber 
    harvest, planting, and other methods to achieve the desired vegetation 
    conditions described above in the purpose and need. Proposed individual 
    treatments by method are as follows (please note that acreage values 
    are gross and would generally include 10 to 25 percent untreated area 
    within the gross area).
        Prescribed burning would be the primary treatment on approximately 
    3,420 acres. (1) Approximately 310 acres of decadent shrubfields within 
    primary big game winter range would be burned to stimulate fresh browse 
    production.
    
    [[Page 66847]]
    
    (2) Approximately 2720 acres would be burned to reintroduce the 
    beneficial effects of fire into this ecosystem, reduce fuel loads, and 
    create fuel breaks to reduce the risk of larger, more destructive 
    conflagrations within the landscape. About 1,140 of these acres consist 
    of decadent shrubfields outside of primary big game winter range. 
    Another 740 acres consist of subalpine balds along the northern divide 
    where conifers have begun encroaching after seventy plus years of 
    successful fire suppression. The remaining 840 acres consist of lodge-
    pole pine stands within the unroaded portions of the North Fork St. Joe 
    River landscape. (3) Approximately 270 acres of poorly adapted 
    ponderosa pine planted early in this century would be burned to kill 
    these ``off-site'' trees. The purpose is to prevent these trees from 
    cross pollinating with the native ponderosa pine (genetic 
    contamination). These acres would be replanted with better adapted 
    local stock of ponderosa pine, western white pine, and/or western 
    larch. An additional 970 acres of similar non-local ponderosa pine 
    would be treated in this manner if the trees prove uneconomical to 
    harvest prior to burning (see harvest of non-local ponderosa pine 
    below). (4) Approximately 34 acres in and around white bark pine stands 
    would be burned and/or treated mechanically to limit encroachment by 
    other tree species and facilitate natural and planted regeneration.
        Timber harvest, in combination with prescribed fire and tree 
    planting, would be the primary treatment on approximately 2,580 acres. 
    (1) Regeneration harvest treatments (harvest methods designed to 
    establish a new stand of more desirable tree species) would occur on 
    approximately 2,030 acres. Prescribed fire would be used to reduce 
    fuels and prepare the sites for planting. About 1,060 of these acres 
    consist primarily of lodgepole pine, a short lived seral tree specie. 
    The remaining 970 acres consist of poorly adapted ponderosa pine 
    planted early in this century. The purpose of removing these ponderosa 
    pine is to prevent these trees from cross pollinating with the better 
    adapted native ponderosa pine (genetic contamination). As noted above, 
    if any or all of these ``off-site'' ponderosa pine stands prove 
    uneconomical to harvest (they occur primarily in unroaded areas and 
    would require the more expensive helicopter logging) they would still 
    be burned to kill the trees prior to planting to better adapted 
    species.
        (2) Commercial thinning (harvesting excess and less desirable trees 
    from a stand to provide more growing room for the remaining trees) 
    would occur on approximately 550 acres.
    
    Access
    
        The St. Joe District proposes to manage the transportation network 
    (roads and trails) in the following ways: (1) Maintain existing access 
    (motorized and non-motorized) on approximately 145 miles of road and 72 
    miles of trail within the area. (2) Approximately 5.7 miles of new road 
    would be constructed to provide access for timber harvest activities 
    noted above. All but 0.3 miles of these new roads would be either 
    obliterated or stabilized for long term storage following use. The 0.3 
    miles that would be kept drivable would provide new access for an 
    existing mining claim, thereby allowing obliteration of an additional 
    mile of existing road currently accessing the claim. (3) Approximately 
    36 miles of existing road would be either obliterated or stabilized for 
    long term storage. (4) Approximately 1 mile of new trail would be 
    constructed to replace trail access currently served by one of these 
    roads which are proposed to be obliterated.
    
    Recreation
    
        The St. Joe District proposes to make improvements to several 
    campsites as follows: (1) Additional campsites and facilities would be 
    constructed at the Squaw Creek Campground. (2) Several dispersed camp 
    sites would be hardened within the Loop Creek meadows and toilet 
    facilities added to protect adjacent resources.
    
    Aquatic Restoration
    
        The St. Joe District proposes the following aquatic restoration 
    activities in addition to those identified above (e.g. road 
    stabilization, etc.). (1) Complete exploratory core drilling on three 
    old railroad grade through-fills to determine and evaluate their 
    condition and structural integrity. Based on the results, develop an 
    action plan to mitigate potential risks. (2) Plant trees within 140 
    acres of riparian areas adjacent to the North Fork St. Joe River and 
    Clear Creek. (3) Develop and implement a stream restoration plan for 
    Loop Creek downstream from the mouth of Moss Creek. (4) Construct 
    baffles to facilitate fish passage through the Loop Creek water bypass 
    tunnel.
    
    Preliminary Issues
    
        We expect issues and concerns with this project to include the 
    effects on wildlife, fish, water quality, roadless, visual quality/
    aesthetics and recreation as well as the effects of road construction, 
    clearcutting, size of openings, and economic feasibility. Final issues 
    will be developed and analyzed based on your comments and the 
    interdisciplinary team's analysis of potential effects of the proposed 
    action on the various resource values. These issues will be used to 
    develop alternatives to the proposed action and guide the type and 
    detail of analysis conducted.
        Additionally, some of the vegetation treatment may result in 
    openings of over 60 acres. While we would like comments that would 
    affect alternatives early, comments on the size of openings and their 
    effects will be accepted for 60 days after publication of this notice. 
    This 60 day public review period and approval of the Regional Forester 
    for exceeding the 40 acre limitation for regeneration harvest would be 
    required prior to the signing of the Record of Decision.
        The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives to this 
    proposed action. One of these will be the ``No Action'' alternative. 
    Additional alternatives will examine varying levels and locations for 
    the proposed activities to achieve the proposal's purpose, as well as 
    to respond to the issues and other resource values.
        Public participation is an important part of the analysis and will 
    play an important role in developing the alternatives. The mailing list 
    for public scoping will be developed from responses to this NOI and 
    responses to the Forest's ``Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions.'' 
    In addition, the public is encouraged to visit with Forest Service 
    officials during the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest 
    Service will also be 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 
    actions. Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in 
    preparation of the Draft EIS.
        The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed 
    with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public 
    review in March 1998. The final environmental impact statement is 
    expected to be completed in May 1998.
        The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will 
    be 45 days 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,
    
    [[Page 66848]]
    
    reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their 
    participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is 
    meaningful and alerts the agency to the reviewer's position and 
    contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 
    533 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the 
    draft environmental statement stage but that are not raised until after 
    completion of the final environmental 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 concern 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. Reviews 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 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits 
    discrimination in its programs on the basis of race, color, national 
    origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, and marital 
    or familial status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) 
    Persons with disabilities who require alternatives means of 
    communication of program information (braille, large print, audiotape, 
    etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center ad (202) 720-2600 (voice and 
    TDD).
        To file a complaint, write the Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. 
    Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250, or call 1-800-245-6340 
    (voice) or 202-720-1127 (TDD). USDA is an equal employment opportunity 
    employer.
    
        Dated: December 11, 1997.
    Bradley Burmark,
    Deputy District Ranger.
    [FR Doc. 97-33346 Filed 12-19-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
12/22/1997
Department:
Forest Service
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
Document Number:
97-33346
Dates:
Comments should be postmarked on or before January 21, 1998.
Pages:
66846-66848 (3 pages)
PDF File:
97-33346.pdf