[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4311]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: February 25, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Proposed Carey Creek Timber Sales, Payette National Forest, Idaho
County, ID
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Forest Service, USDA will
prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Carey Creek
Timber Sales. The Forest Service proposes to treat approximately 1445
acres using a variety of silvicultural methods and prescribed burning.
Harvest prescriptions include: clearcut with reserve trees (245 acres),
commercial thinning (75 acres), salvage/sanitation (509 acres),
shelterwood (489 acres), and uneven aged (127 acres). The proposed
action includes site preparation and regeneration, emphasizing the use
of natural regeneration where possible. Approximately 13 miles of new
road construction are also proposed. Logging methods include tractor,
skyline, and helicopter systems.
Other preliminary alternatives include No-action and an alternative
that seeks to achieve Forest Plan objectives to maximize timber growth
and yield.
The proposed activities are located in the drainages of Carey and
Fall Creeks, which both flow into the Salmon River. The planning area
is approximately 30 miles north of McCall, Idaho.
The EIS will tier to the final EIS for the Forest Plan, Payette
National Forest (May 1988).
The Payette National Forest invites written comments and
suggestions on the scope of the analysis. These may include issues and
comments regarding the proposed project. The agency also 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 concerning the scope of this proposal must be received
by April 2, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope
of the analysis to David F. Alexander, Forest Supervisor, Payette
National Forest, P.O. Box 1026, McCall, Idaho 83638.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Direct questions about the proposed action and environmental impact
statement to Michael L. Balboni, Payette National Forest. Phone: (208)
634-0629.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The planning area includes approximately
21,000 acres within the Payette National Forest in Idaho County, Idaho.
The planning area is within the drainages of Carey and Fall Creeks. The
legal description of the planning area is: Sections 1-9, 17, 18, 20, 21
of Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Sections 3,9-36 of Township 24
North, Range 4 East, Sections 19,28-33 of Township 24 North, Range 5
East, Idaho County, Idaho.
The proposed activities are within the former Carey Creek Roadless
Area. The area has 3,184 acres remaining as roadless. The planning area
has a very small portion that is contiguous with the Frank Church River
of No Return Wilderness. This area comprises less than 300 acres of the
planning area. The planning area is not within any areas recommended
for inclusion in the National Wilderness System by the Payette National
Forest Plan or by any past or present legislative wilderness proposal.
The Proposed Action is the result of an ecosystem and landscape
analysis of the planning area completed by the Interdisciplinary Team
(IDT). The IDT used the landscape analysis and design process developed
by Diaz and Apostol (1992). This 8-step process used aerial
photographs, research literature, stand data, maps, and site visits.
The process defined the natural range of variation for successional
stages in the planning area using the best information available. The
planning area was broken into four zones. The ponderosa pine zone,
mixed conifer zone, subalpine-spruce/fir zone, and subalpine-lodgepole
pine zone. Using stand data and research done in surrounding areas, the
existing condition and natural range of variation for four successional
stages in the planning area was determined. The IDT found that the zone
with the most deviation from the natural range is the subalpine-
lodgepole pine zone. This zone has 79% mature/oldgrowth; the natural
range for this successional stage is 10-20%. The IDT used this and the
rest of the information gained from the landscape analysis to develop
the proposed action, concentrating on the areas where the ecosystem is
most outside the natural range.
The IDT recognizes the role fire has played. The proposed
activities include some prescribed burning in the ponderosa pine zone
where natural fires were regular and of low intensity.
The purpose of the proposed activity is to improve the existing
silvicultural conditions of the timber stands within the Carey Creek
planning area while improving the health of the ecosystem. The Proposed
Action would increase the long-term health and productivity of the
timber resources, provide some short-term wood products, improve the
over-all health of the ecosystem, and protect other resource values in
the planning area. Treatments would follow the goals and objectives in
the Payette National Forest Plan or amend the Plan where appropriate.
The need for the proposed action is generated by the difference
between existing conditions of the ecosystem and timber stands and the
Desired Future Condition for the area described in the Payette Forest
Plan and the landscape analysis for the planning area.
Failing to treat these areas will allow further deviation from the
natural range of conditions for this ecosystem and raise the risk of
severe impacts from insects, diseases, and wildfires. Failing to treat
this area will also result in the Payette National Forest not fully
implementing the Forest Plan Record of Decision, signed in May of 1988.
Issues
The IDT has identified preliminary issues. These issues are briefly
described below:
1. Effects of road building and timber harvest on water quality,
particularly in the Fall Creek drainage where past fires, timber
harvesting, and road construction have occurred at a high rate over the
past several years.
2. Wildlife: Effects of road building, timber harvest, and access
management on some management indicator species and sensitive species
found in the areas such as goshawk, pileated and white-headed
woodpeckers. Also effects on wildlife corridors that currently exist in
the area.
3. Ecosystem Health: Effects of the no-action alternative on the
health of the ecosystem and the risk of major wildfires and insect/
disease outbreaks.
4. Fisheries: Effects of road building and timber harvest on
threatened, endangered, and sensitive fish, such as the chinook salmon
and bull trout.
Public Participation and Scoping
The IDT is developing a citizen participation plan for the proposed
project.
Public participation will be requested at several points during the
analysis. The IDT will be available to visit and discuss the proposed
project with individuals and organizations at their request.
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
project. This input will be used in the preparation of the Draft EIS.
The Scoping process includes:
--Identifying potential issues.
--Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.
--Identifying potential management alternatives addressing the issues
recognized during scoping activities.
--Identifying potential environmental effects of this project (i.e.
direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and connected actions).
The Responsible Official is David F. Alexander, Forest Supervisor,
Payette National Forest.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is scheduled to be
completed and available for review in October of 1994 and the Final
Environmental Impact Statement is expected to be completed in August of
1995.
The Responsible Official will document the decision, and reasons
for the decision, in the Record of Decision when the FEIS is completed.
That decision will be subject to Forest Service appeal regulations (36
CFR part 215).
The comment period on the DEIS will be a minimum of 45 days from
the date the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability
appears in the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important
to give reviewers early 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 that proposal so that it
is meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewers position and
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could have been 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 Circuit, 1986) 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 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: February 18, 1994.
David F. Alexander,
Forest Supervisor, Payette National Forest.
[FR Doc. 94-4311 Filed 2-24-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
