[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 31 (Friday, February 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6942-6944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3800]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Meadow Timber Sales and Associated Activities; Kootenai National
Forest, Lincoln County, MT
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service, will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of timber
harvest, prescribed fire, road closures, road obliteration,
construction of temporary and specified roads in the western portions
of the Tobacco River drainage. The Tobacco River drainage is located
approximately 38 air miles northeast of Libby, Montana, near the
communities of Fortine and Eureka, Montana.
The proposed actions to harvest and reforest timber stands,
construct and reconstruct roads, prescribe burning, and restrict roads
are being considered together because they represent either connected
or cumulative actions as defined by the Council on Environmental
Quality (40 CPR 1508.25). The purposes of the project are to provide
timber to support local communities, regulate disturbance patterns and
natural cycles to provide forest structure to maintain habitat for
viable populations, and manage access to protect important wildlife
habitat and provide recreational opportunities.
The EIS will tier to the Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan and Final EIS of September, 1987, which provides
overall guidance for forest management of the area. All activities
associated with the proposal will be designed to maintain high quality
wildlife, fisheries, and watershed objectives.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before
March 17, 1997.
ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Edward C. Monnig, District
Ranger, Fortine Ranger District, P.O. Box 116, Fortine, Montana, 59918.
Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the analysis
may be sent to him at that address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joleen Dunham, Project Coordinator, Fortine Ranger District. Phone:
(406) 882-4451.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The decision area contains approximately
21,500 acres within the Kootenai National Forest in Lincoln County,
Montana. All of the proposed projects would occur on National Forest
lands in the western portion of the Tobacco River drainage near Eureka,
Montana. The legal location of the decision area is as follows:
Sections 8-10, 14-29, and 33-36 of Township 36 North, Range 27 West;
Sections 29-33 of Township 36 North, Range 26 West; Sections 4-9, 15-36
of Township 35 North, Range 26 West; Sections 1-3, 10-15, 23-26, and
35-36 of Township 35 North, Range 27 West; Sections 1-25 of Township 34
North, Range 26 West; Sections 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 24 of Township
34 North, Range 27 West; and Sections 18, 19, and 30 of Township 34
North, Range 25 West, Principal Montana Meridian.
All proposed activities are outside the boundaries of any roadless
area or any areas considered for inclusion to the National Wilderness
System as recommended by the Kootenai National Forest Plan or by any
past or present legislative wilderness proposals.
The Forest Service to harvest approximately 14 million board feet
of timber through application of a variety of harvest methods on
approximately 3,026 acres of forest land. An estimated 0.8 miles of
temporary road and 3.8 miles of specified road construction would be
needed to access timber harvest areas. Approximately 2.4 miles of this
new specified road construction would be managed with yearlong
restriction to motorized use. An estimated 31 miles of road
reconstruction would also be needed to access timber harvest areas. All
temporary roads would be obliterated following completion of sale
activities. An additional 24 miles of road no longer in use would be
obliterated by various methods which include rehabilitation of stream
crossings, recontouring, ripping and seeding, and installment of
barriers resulting in abandonment. The type of method would be based on
site specific conditions. An estimated 33 miles of existing road would
be restricted year round to improve watershed conditions, minimize
future road maintenance
[[Page 6943]]
costs, and to regulate overall open road density to improve big game
security. The proposal also includes prescribed burning on
approximately 4,200 acres to reduce the potential for future wildfires,
prepare sites for regeneration, enhance wildlife habitat, and maintain
forest health.
Prescribed harvest treatments in this proposal are as follows:
Regeneration Harvest: Windfirm trees favoring western larch and
ponderosa pine would be selected and designated to remain on site as
reserve trees. Reserve trees would average about 10 trees per acre in a
varied distribution. Reserve trees would include 1-2 acre islands and
edge strips of approximately 40 trees per acre that would cover 5-15%
of the stand area. All other merchantable trees would be harvested.
Reserve trees would remain through the next rotation and form the upper
story of a multi-storied stand. Underburning would occur to prepare
site for regeneration of new seedlings. This treatment is proposed on
1,127 acres.
Improvement Cut: Stand densities would be reduced to 80-100 square
feet of basal area per acre by removing the lowest quality and least
vigorous trees greater than 7 inches diameter at breast height.
Existing snags and large down woody material would be left on site. The
remaining trees would provide a fully stocked stand of the best form
and vigor to increase future options for higher quality old growth
conditions. Underburning would occur to stimulate growth and vigor of
shrubs and forbs, and create habitat for flammulated owl and other
species that have adapted to open forest conditions. This treatment is
proposed on 1,037 acres.
Thin from Below: Stand densities would be reduced to 60-80 square
feet of basal area per acre by removing the lowest quality and least
vigorous trees less than 9 inches diameter at breast height. Existing
snags and large down woody material would be left on site. The
remaining trees would provide a fully stocked stand to favor past range
of species composition. Underburning would occur to help re-establish
habitat that was created through past fire regimes. This treatment is
proposed on 677 acres.
Patch Cut with Improvement Cut between patches: Harvest openings
the size of 5-20 acres would occur in areas of insect and disease
pockets and low vigor Douglas-fir thickets. The remainder of the stand
would have densities reduced to 80-100 square feet of basal area per
acre by removing the lowest quality and least vigorous trees greater
than 7 inches diameter at breast height. Three entries would take place
throughout a 30-year period using the patch cut treatment removing
approximately one-third of the stand area with each entry but retaining
a component of mature trees throughout the next rotation as the upper
canopy in a two-storied stand. Underburning would occur to stimulate
growth and vigor of shrubs and forbs, create habitat for flammulated
owl and other species that have adapted to open forest conditions, and
re-establish habitat that was created through past fire regimes. This
treatment is proposed on 185 acres.
Burning with Slashing: Underburning would be done outside harvest
units to reduce fuel loads, provide a stand mosaic and wildlife
betterment. The prescription would involve burning during the spring
and early summer conditions which provide good smoke dispersion and
safe burning conditions. The results would be a stand which includes
areas of unburned material with some trees up to 9 inches diameter at
breast height killed and up to 10% of the larger trees scorched with
approximates past natural fires. This treatment is proposed on 1160
acres.
The Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
provides overall management objectives in individual delineated
management areas (MA's). The proposed projects encompass five
predominant MA's; 3, 11, 13, 15, and 16. Briefly described, MA 3 is
managed to provide for opportunities for dispersed recreation
activities in a natural-appearing environment using trails and
primitive roads for access. MA 11 is managed to maintain or enhance the
winter range habitat effectiveness for big-game species and produce a
programmed yield of timber. MA 13 is designated to provide special
habitat necessary for old growth dependent wildlife. MA 15 focuses upon
timber production using various silvicultural practices while providing
for other resource values such as soils, air, water, wildlife,
recreation, and forage for domestic livestock. MA 16 is managed to
produce timber while providing for a pleasing view. Timber harvest is
proposed only in MA's 3, 11, 15, and 16. Prescribed burning for fuels
and wildlife habitat is the only activity proposed in MA 13. This
proposal includes openings greater than 40 acres in MA's 11, 15, and 16
to replicate historic disturbance patterns. If these large openings are
included in the final decision, a 60 day public review will be provided
during the comment period on the Draft EIS. 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. In
addition, site specific amendments to the Forest Plan regarding open
road density in MA 15 and visual quality objectives in MA 16 may be
necessary.
The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of
these will be the ``no action'' alternative in which none of the
proposed activities would be implemented. Additional alternatives will
examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to
achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the issues
and other resource values.
Preliminary Issues: Tentatively, several issues of concern have
been identified. These issues are briefly described below:
--Road Closures: Specific roads will need to be closed to meet road
densities for wildlife security and improve watershed conditions. Some
individuals are concerned that too many roads are being restricted from
public use and existing roads should be left open. What effect will
these road closures have on the publics' access to recreational areas?
--Old Growth: Values associated with old growth forests include
maintaining old growth dependent species and the aesthetic, spiritual
and emotional values which people place on undisturbed stands of old
trees. While the Kootenai Forest Plan requires a minimum 10% of the
Forest to be retained as Old Growth habitat (MA 13), there is a concern
that additional areas of mature interior forest should be protected.
What effect will proposed activities have on the old growth habitat and
old growth dependent species?
--Timber Supply and Forest Health: Some individuals are concerned that
the Forest Service is not placing enough emphasis on providing goods
and services to the public. In addition, there is concern that the
health and vigor of forest stands could be improved through more
aggressive timber harvest and management. How will the proposed
activities improve timber growth and produce economic benefits to the
public?
--Re-Introduction of Prescribed Fire: A key component of the proposal
is the use of prescribed fire as a tool to restore the role that
wildfires played in the structure of a pre-1900 forest landscape. How
will the proposed activities affect the risk of wildfire to resources
and private property?
Public Involvement and Scoping: On August 15, 1996 an advertisement
was placed in the Tobacco Valley News, Eureka, Montana, requesting
public comment and information concerning
[[Page 6944]]
the Meadow Project Area. In addition, on August 16, 1996 a letter was
mailed to approximately 250 individuals comprising the mailing list for
the Meadow Project Area requesting written comments. Taking into
account the comments received and information gathered during
preliminary analysis, it was decided to prepare an EIS for the Meadow
Timber Sales and Associated Activities. Comments received prior to this
notice will be included in the documentation for the EIS.
This environmental analysis and decision making process will enable
additional interested and affected people to participate an contribute
to the final decision. The public is encouraged to take part in the
process and is encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials at any
time during the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service
will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal,
State, 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 and final EIS. The scoping process
will include:
--Identifying potential issues.
--Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.
--Identifying alternatives to the proposed action.
--Considering additional alternatives which will be derived from issues
recognized during scoping activities.
--Identifying potential environmental effects of this project and
alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and
connected actions).
Estimated Dates for Filing: While public participation in this
analysis is welcome at any time, comments received within 30 days of
the publication of this notice will be especially useful in the
preparation of the Draft EIS. The Draft EIS is expected to be filed
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for
public review by August, 1997. At that time, EPA will publish a Notice
of Availability of the Draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment
period on the Draft EIS will be a minimum of 45 days from the date the
EPA publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.
The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed by October, 1997. 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 a decision
regarding the proposal.
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 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 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
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
discussed. 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.
Responsible Official: Edward C. Monnig, District Ranger, Fortine
Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest, P.O. Box 116, Fortine,
Montana, 59918, is the Responsible Official. As the Responsible
Official, I will decide which, if any, of the proposed projects will be
implemented. I will document the decision and reasons for the decision
in the Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest
Service Appeal Regulations.
Dated: February 4, 1997.
Edward C. Monnig,
District Ranger, Fortine Ranger District.
[FR Doc. 97-3800 Filed 2-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
