[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 18, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12142]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: May 18, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Steamboat Ski Area Expansion, Routt National Forest, Routt
County, Colorado
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement to analyze and disclose the effects of a proposal by the
Steamboat Ski & Resort Corporation to expand the existing Steamboat Ski
Area. The Steamboat Ski Area is located on the Routt National Forest
within Routt County, Steamboat Springs, Colorado and is presently
operating under Special Use Permit granted to the Steamboat Ski &
Resort Corporation.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received
by June 15, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Sherry B. Reed, District Ranger,
Hahns Peak Ranger District, P.O. Box 771212, Steamboat Springs,
Colorado, 80477. Oral comments will also be accepted.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wendy Schmitzer, Project Coordinator, (303) 879-1722 or (303) 879-1870.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: .The proposal of the Steamboat Ski & Resort
Corporation includes expansion of the Steamboat Ski Area into two
separate areas. The east expansion, hereafter referred to as
Morningside Park, would include the installation of one fixed-grip,
triple chairlift. The permit boundary would expand by approximately 170
acres of National Forest land, with approximately 132 acres of skiable
terrain being developed for lower intermediate level skiers to expert
ability skiers. Some clearing of trees would occur during lift
installation and trails would be developed through glading. The terrain
is primarily open but some tree skiing would be available. The north
expansion, hereafter referred to as Pioneer Ridge, would include the
installation of two limited-capacity, detachable lifts. The permit
boundary would expand by 788 acres of National Forest land, with
approximately 640 acres of skiable terrain being developed for
intermediate level skiers to expert ability skiers. Clearing would
occur during lift installation and during trail construction. However,
tree skiing would be emphasized with large pockets of interspersed tree
islands occurring. Some glading will also take place.
The purpose of and need for this expansion is to improve skiing at
the Steamboat Ski Area. The proposed expansions are intended to
increase the variety and amount of skiable terrain at the area without
substantially increasing the capacity of the mountain or adding a new
base area. This will ensure that the ski area remains competitive and
continues to provide a quality skiing experience, responding to
evolving customer preferences. It will also better balance the area's
operations. The need to provide this quality skiing experience arises
from market research which indicates customers strongly prefer the
addition of new and varied skiing terrain.
The decision to be made is whether or not to permit expansion of
the existing Steamboat Ski Area.
The Routt National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan has
identified the area of the proposed ski area expansions as suitable for
winter sports, with a management prescription of 1B, which provides for
existing and potential winter sports sites. ``Management emphasis
provides for downhill skiing on existing sites and maintains selected
inventoried sites for future downhill skiing recreation
opportunities.'' The proposed action is consistent with Forest Plan
direction.
A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ``404 Permit'' for dredging and
filling waters and/or wetlands may be required. The Forest Service will
request the U.S. Army Corps and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to
cooperate in the environmental analysis, and may request cooperation
from other State or Federal agencies.
Preliminary issues associated with this proposal include air
quality impacts in a non-attainment airshed; wildlife concerns,
community growth, and visual considerations.
The Forest Service invites comments and suggestions on the scope of
the analysis to be included in the draft environmental impact statement
(DEIS). In addition, the Forest Service gives notice that it is
beginning a full environmental analysis and decision-making process for
this proposal so that interested or affected people may know how they
may participate in the environmental analysis and contribute to the
final decision. The first public ``scoping'' meeting is tentatively
scheduled for early June, 1994, in Steamboat Springs, Colorado. The
purpose of this meeting is to learn what issues and concerns members of
the public or interested agencies have that are connected to the
proposal and should be considered. Knowledge of these issues and
concerns will help establish the scope of the Forest Service
environmental analysis and define the kind and range of alternatives to
be considered. Forest Service officials and the proponent will describe
and explain the proposed actions and the process of environmental
analysis and disclosure to be followed in evaluating this proposal. The
Forest Service welcomes any public comments on the proposal.
The Responsible Official will be Sherry B. Reed, District Ranger,
Hahns Peak District, Routt National Forest, P.O. Box 771212, Steamboat
Springs, Colorado, 80477.
We expect to publish a draft environmental impact statement in mid
1995, to ask for public comment on the draft material for a period of
45 days, and to complete a final environmental impact statement in late
1995, or early 1996.
The 45-day public comment period on the draft environmental impact
statement will commence on the day the Environmental Protection Agency
publishes a ``Notice of Availability'' in the Federal Register.
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
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 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.) Please note that comments
you make on the draft environmental impact statement will be regarded
as public information.
Dated: May 13, 1994.
Sherry B. Reed,
Hahns Peak District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 94-12142 Filed 5-17-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
