[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 23 (Friday, February 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6693-6695]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-2634]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Skyline Ridge EIS, Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County,
Montana
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service, will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects associated with
fire recovery activities in the areas of four 1994 wildfires, including
Pulpit, Studebaker, Gunsight, and Seventeenmile fires. The project area
is located in the Seventeenmile, O'Brien, and Lower Yaak Physiographic
Areas of the Three Rivers Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest,
Lincoln County, Montana. Part of the proposed project's activities lie
within Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRA's).
The Forest Service proposes to salvage timber, construct and
reconstruct roads, reduce fuel concentrations, revegetate with trees,
native shrubs, and grass, and obliterate roads. These activities are
being considered together because they represent either connected or
cumulative actions as defined by the Council on Environmental Quality
(40 CFR 1508.25). The purposes of the proposed action's activities are
to harvest fire killed timber in a timely manner, manage the road
systems, reduce future potential for catastrophic fire, sustain timber
productivity, improve wildlife and riparian habitat, specifically for
threatened, endangered, or sensitive (TES) species, and accelerate
watershed recovery. An amendment to the Kootenai Forest Plan is also
part of this proposal.
Overall guidance of land management activities on the Kootenai
National Forest, including timber harvest and road management, are
regulated by the Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management
Plan (Forest Plan) (September, 1987). In addition we considered more
recent scientific thinking on the functioning of forest ecosystems
(Ecosystems Management). Based on this analysis we developed a proposed
action that does not meet Forest Plan standards. Specifically we
proposed timber harvest in management Area 2, roadless recreation.
DATE: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before
March 6, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed
management activities or a request to be placed on the project mailing
list to Michael L. Balboni, District Ranger, Three Rivers Ranger
District, Kootenai National Forest, 1437 North Hwy 2, Troy, Montana
59935.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Prieve, EIS Team Leader, Three Rivers Ranger District, Kootenai
National Forest, Phone (406) 295-4693.
[[Page 6694]] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The project area consists of
approximately 6375 acres of National Forest land. The Seventeenmile
fire was 1773 acres and is located within all or portions of T33N,
R32W, Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11 and T34N, R32W, Sections 33 and
34. The Studebaker fire was 1896 acres and located within all or
portions of T33N, R33W, Section 36; T33N, R32W, Sections 30, 31 and 32;
and T32N, R33W, Sections 1, 2 and 3. The Pulpit fire was 2085 acres and
is located within all or portions of T32N, R33W, Sections 9, 14, 15,
16, 21, 22, 23 and 27. The Gunsight fire was 621 acres and is located
within all or portions of T33N, R33W, Sections 21, 22, 27 and 28.
Timber salvage harvest of dead and dying timber is proposed on 2556
acres of forested land within the four fires using a variety of logging
systems. Approximately 20 MMBF is proposed for harvest. This includes
750 acres within the 1773-acres Seventeenmile fire, 429 acres within
the 621-acre Gunsight fire, 588 acres within the 2085-acre Pulpit fire
and 789 acres within the 1896-acre Studebaker fire. Fuel reduction
accomplished in conjunction with the timber harvest includes grapple
piling and prescribed burning. Watershed restoration activities are
proposed within and in the vicinity adjacent to the fires. This
includes road obliteration (approximately 15 miles) which consists of
scarification, seeding, and pulling culverts from roads, recontouring,
and riparian planting and debris placement in stream channels
(approximately 10 miles). Replanting is proposed on approximately 4412
acres of land--including both conifer seedlings for reforestation and
native shrubs and herbaceous plants for wildlife habitat. The timber
harvest operations would require construction of approximately 2 miles
of temporary road and reconstruction of approximately 22 miles of
existing roads. This action would require temporarily opening
approximately 31 miles of roads currently restricted from vehicle
traffic.
Approximately 1131 acres proposed for harvest lie within one of two
Inventoried Roadless Areas: Roderick IRK (#684)--710 acres in the
Seventeenmile fire, and Saddle IRA (#168)--421 acres in the Gunsight
fire. No road construction would occur within these areas.
The areas proposed for salvaging fire damaged timber occur in a
wide range of Management Areas (MA's) as defined in the Kootenai Forest
Plan.
Below is a brief description of the affected Management Areas for
the proposed action, along with the number of acres proposed for
harvest within each MA:
Management Area 2--These areas are characterized by a natural-
appearing environment offering roadless recreation opportunities and
are within an unsuitable timber base 680 acres proposed for salvage
harvest.
Management Area 2-OG--These MA 2 areas consist of scattered parcels
of existing old growth or mature timber stands which contain component
of old growth and are within an unsuitable timber base. 83 acres.
Management Area 33--These are areas with a natural-appearing
environment and a minimal number of adjacent or internal roads offering
roaded recreation opportunities and are within an unsuitable timber
base. They occur mostly in upper elevations from 4,500' and up. 49
acres.
Management Area 10--These are areas that are used by various
species of big game for winter range, usually between December 1 and
April 30 and are within an unsuitable timber base. 15 acres.
Management Area 12--These areas are generally located at or above
elevations of 4000' and contain inclusions of moist or wet habitat
types. Most species of big game use this management area during the
period from late spring through late fall. This management area is
characterized by suitable timber producing sites and moderate to
rolling topography. 891 acres.
Management Area 13--These areas consist of scattered parcels of
existing old growth or mature timber stands which contain components of
old growth and are within an unsuitable timber base. 628 acres.
Management Area 14--These areas are identified Interagency Grizzly
situations 1 and 2 in conjunction with suitable timber land. 105 acres.
Management Area 18--This management area occurs on areas of slopes
in excess of 40% where timber productivity is moderate to high. It is
distinguished by the difficulty in establishing coniferous regeneration
and is within an unsuitable timber base. 105 acres.
For those management areas classified an unsuitable for timber
production, an amendment to the Forest Plan would be required to
implement the ecosystem management based proposal or any alternative
which would harvest timber in unsuitable timber MA's. These would
include MA's 2, 2-OG, 3, and 13.
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. Another alternative will be
analyzed which meets Forest Plan direction. Additional alternatives
will examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities
to achieve the purpose and need, as well as respond to the issues and
concerns identified by the public.
The interdisciplinary team (IDT) has identified tentative or
preliminary issues briefly described as follows:
(1) The effects of the proposed action and alternatives on the
characteristics of the IRA's and unsuitable management areas.
(2) The effects of the proposed action and alternatives on water
quality and fisheries.
(3) The effects of the proposed action and alternatives on
ecosystem health and the risk of catastrophic wildfires and insert or
disease outbreaks.
(4) The effects of the proposed action and alternatives on
threatened, endangered, or sensitive (TES) species, such as the grizzly
bear and bull trout.
(5) The effects of the proposed action and alternatives on timber
supply.
The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative
environmental effects of the proposed action and each alternative,
including no action. These include past, present, and projected
activities on both private and National Forest lands along with
proposed mitigation measures and their effectiveness.
The decision to be made is how much, if any, fire damaged timber
should be salvaged in these fire areas, within the context of ecosystem
management and Forest Plan direction.
Public participation is an important part of the analysis,
commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7), which will
occur February 3, 1995 to March 6, 1995. In addition, the public 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, and
local agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be
interested in or affected by the proposed action. A public meeting will
be scheduled in Troy, Montana on February 28, 1995, and at the Upper
Ford Work Center on March 1, 1995.
Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in
preparation of the Draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to:
1. Identify potential issues.
2. Identify major issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Eliminate minor issues or those which have been covered by a
[[Page 6695]] relevant previous environmental analysis, such as the
Kootenai Forest Plan.
4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action and
alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects).
6. Determine potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.
The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in April of
1995. At that time, the EPA will publish a Notice of Availability of
the Draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the Draft
EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA's notice of availability
appears in the Federal Register. It is very important that those
interested in management of the analysis area participate at that time.
To be most helpful, comments on the Draft EIS should be as site-
specific as possible. The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed by
September, 1995.
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 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 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 30-day scoping 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 developing issues and alternatives.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as possible.
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.
I have the final authority for issuing a decision regarding this
proposal. I have delegated the responsibility of preparing the EIS to
Three Rivers District Ranger, Michael Balboni. My address is Kootenai
National Forest, Supervisor's Office, 506 Hwy 2 West, Libby, MT 59923.
Dated: January 27, 1995.
Robert L. Schrenk,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 95-2634 Filed 2-2-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
