[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 116 (Thursday, June 17, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32477-32479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15423]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Timber Harvest, Reforestation, and Road Construction Near Trapper
Creek, Moonlight Creek, Watkins Creek, Spring Creek, Rumbaugh Creek,
Cherry Creek and West Denny Creek Drainages; Gallatin National Forest,
Gallatin 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 of timber
harvest, reforestation, and road construction in the vicinity of
Trapper Creek, Moonlight Creek, Watkins Creek, Spring Creek, Rumbaugh
Creek, Cherry Creek and West Denny Creek drainages (herein referred to
as the West Lake Project), located in the South Madison Mountain range,
Gallatin National Forest, Hebgen Lake Ranger District, Gallatin County,
Montana. The West Lake project is one of several projects being
proposed on the Gallatin National Forest to contribute timber volume to
facilitate acquisition of approximately 54,000 acres of lands currently
owned by Big Sky Lumber Company (BSL) located within the proclamation
boundary of the Gallatin National Forest. These lands are checkerboard
inholdings that originate as part of the construction grants given to
the Northern Pacific Railway Company by the Federal Government in the
late 1800's and early 1900's. In addition, this project will contribute
toward providing a flow of wood products from National Forest lands.
The Gallatin National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
(Forest Plan) provides overall guidance for land management activities,
including timber and road management, within the area. The proposed
actions of timber harvest, reforestation, and road construction are
being considered together because they represent either connected or
cumulative actions as defined by the Council on Environmental Quality
(40 CFR 1508.25). This EIS will tier to the Gallatin Forest Plan Final
EIS (September, 1987).
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before
July 19, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed
management activities or a request to be placed on the project mailing
list to Stan Benes, District Ranger, Hebgen Lake Ranger District,
Gallatin National Forest, P.O. Box 520, West Yellowstone, Montana
59758.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan LaMont, EIS Team Leader, Hebgen
Lake Ranger District, Gallatin National Forest, Phone (406) 646-7369.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Timber harvest and reforestation is proposed
on approximately 1325 acres of forested land in the West Lake project
area, which has been designated as suitable for timber management by
the Gallatin Forest Plan. The timber harvest operations and general
administration of National Forest lands will require constructing up to
2.3 miles of new roads.
The Gallatin Forest Plan provides the overall guidance for
management activities in the potentially affected area through its
goals, objectives, standards and guidelines, and management area
direction. The primary purpose of this project is to utilize available
timber volume within the West Fork area as one of several federal
exchange assets to be used to facilitate acquisition of approximately
54,000 acres of lands currently owned by BSL located within the
proclamation boundary of the Gallatin National Forest. These lands are
checkerboard inholdings that originate as part of the construction
grants given to the Northern Pacific Railway Company by the Federal
[[Page 32478]]
Government in the late 1800's and early 1900's.
Another purpose for the BSL/West Lake Timber Sale proposal is to
contribute toward providing a flow of wood products from National
Forest lands identified as ``suitable'' for timber production, as
directed in the Gallatin Forest Plan (Forest Plan, pg. II-1). The
forested areas being considered for harvest are identified as
productive Forest lands available for timber harvest provided grizzly
bear habitat objectives are met. The purpose of road construction is to
access stands of timber to be harvested. All new roads will be
effectively closed to vehicle travel after completion of post-sale
activities.
The purpose of closing roads is to minimize future road maintenance
costs, reduce sedimentation, and to regulate overall open road density
to maintain or improve big game habitat security.
The project area consists of approximately 1325 acres of National
Forest land located in T11S, R3E, Sec 26, 35, and 36; T12S, R3E, Sec 1,
2, 11, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, 25, and 36; T12S, R4E, Sec 18, 19, 20, 29,
30, 31, 32, and 33; and T13S, R4E, Sec 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18,
and 20; P.M. MT.
The areas of proposed timber harvest and reforestation would occur
within Management Area 5 and 13. Timber harvest would occur only on
suitable timber land. Road construction would occur in these management
areas plus Management Area 7 when crossing streams. Below is a brief
description of the applicable management direction.
Management Area 5--This management area contains travel corridors
that receive heavy recreation use. Timber harvest is allowed within
this area provided that the following goals are met. Management goals
for MA 5 include: (1) maintain and improve wildlife habitat values; and
(2) maintain the natural attractiveness of these areas to provide
opportunities for public enjoyment and safety.
Management Area 13--This management area consists of forested,
occupied grizzly bear habitat. The productive Forest lands area
available for timber harvest provided grizzly bear habitat objectives
are met. Management goals for MA 13 include: (1) managing vegetation to
provide habitat necessary to recover the grizzly bear; (2) meet grizzly
bear mortality reduction goals as established by the Interagency
Grizzly Bear Committee; (3) allow a level of timber harvest compatible
with Goal 1; and (4) meet State water quality standards and maintain
stream channel stability.
Management Area 7--These are riparian zones or areas where
vegetation is present that requires either free or unbounded water or
soil moistures in excess of what is normally found in the area. Lands
within this management area are suitable for timber harvest as long as
soil, water, vegetation, fish, and dependent wildlife species are
protected. These suitable lands must also be adjacent to other
management areas suitable for timber management.
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 in
response to issues and other resource values.
The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative
environmental effects of the alternatives. Past, present, and projected
activities on both private and National Forest lands will be
considered, including the effects caused by recent and past harvesting
and road construction on private lands. The EIS will disclose the
analysis of site-specific mitigation measures and their effectiveness.
Public participation is an important part of the analysis,
commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7), which will
occur during June 1999. In addition to this initial scoping, the public
may visit 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. No public meetings are scheduled at this time.
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 issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Eliminate insignificant issues or those which have been covered
by a relevant previous environmental analysis, such as the Gallatin
Forest Plan EIS.
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 following principle issues have been identified so far:
1. The potential effect of proposed timber harvest and associated
road development on grizzly bear habitat (primarily security and
cover).
2. The potential of proposed timber harvest and associated road
development activities to displace grizzly bears use within the sale
area.
3. The potential for proposed harvest and associated road
development to affect water quality and stream conditions.
Other issues commonly associated with timber harvesting and road
construction include: effects on native fisheries, old growth habitat,
big game species, sensitive wildlife and plant species, cultural
resources, soils, noxious weeds, and scenery in the area. This list
will be verified, expanded, or modified based on public scoping for
this proposal.
The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in October of
1999. 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 West Lake project area participate at
that time. The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed by mid-January,
2000.
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
[[Page 32479]]
assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues,
comments should be as specific to this proposal 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 am the responsible official for this environmental impact
statement. My address is Gallatin National Forest, P.O. Box 130,
Federal Building, Bozeman, MT 59771.
Dated: June 7, 1999.
David P. Garber,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 99-15423 Filed 6-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
