[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 108 (Thursday, June 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30838-30839]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14635]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Kalispell; Idaho Panhandle National Forests; Bonner County, Idaho
and Pend Oreille County, WA
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; 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 salvage
thinning, reforestation, site preparation and use of prescribed fire in
an ecosystem management project in the Kalispell Creek drainage. The
area is located west of Priest Lake in the northern Selkirk Mountains,
Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Priest Lake Ranger District, Bonner
County, Idaho and Pend Oreille County, Washington. Part of the proposed
activities are within the Hungry Mountain Roadless Area (01-156). The
project area is within the Kalispell-Granite Grizzly Bear Management
Unit.
The purposes of this project are to improve the health and vigor of
stands, to salvage dead and dying timber, to rehabilitate 50- to 70-
year-old plantations of off-site ponderosa pine and white pine which is
not blister-rust resistant, to reintroduce the role of fire into dry-
site ecosystems, and to contribute to meeting society's demand for wood
products. The proposal's actions to harvest and reforest stands and
utilize prescribed fire 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 project-level EIS tiers to the Idaho Panhandle National
Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) and Final EIS
(September, 1987), which provides overall guidance of all land
management activities on the Idaho Panhandle National Forests,
including timber and access management.
DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 21, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Kent Dunstan, District Ranger,
Priest Lake Ranger District, HCR 5, Box 207, Priest River, ID 83856; or
e-mail comments to rl__ipnf@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
Contact Bob Stutz, EIS Team Leader; telephone (208) 443-2512.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Ecosystem management activities are proposed
on a total of approximately 5,050 acres within the Kalispell Creek
drainage. Existing roads, 15.6 miles of temporary winter roads
constructed from snow, and 11 helicopter landing sites would provide
access for vegetative treatments. No new road construction would occur.
The proposal includes 4,094 acres of salvage in plantations which are
50 to 70 years old, followed by planting on 3,803 acres within those
plantations; prescribed burning on 206 acres of dry-site ecosystems;
prescribed burning on 1,049 acres for fuel breaks and/or site
preparation; thinning on 245 acres of immature, overly-dense stands;
and reforestation on 505 acres which would not be harvested before
planting.
The Kalispell drainage has experienced a series of significant
natural and human-caused disturbances within the last 70 years. The
major disturbances include a wildfire in 1926 and a subsequent reburn
in 1939. Logging occurred from 1927 to 1932, including salvaging in a
portion of the area burned by the 1926 fire. Following these events,
approximately 9,000 acres of ponderosa pine and white pine were
planted, as well as a scattering of Douglas-fir and spruce. The
ponderosa pine seedlings were from a seed source not suited to this
area, and the white pine seedlings were not rust-resistant stock,
resulting in uncharacteristically high levels of insects and diseases.
Current mortality is high, and ongoing mortality in the non rust-
resistant white pine is estimated to be three percent per year.
The goal of this project is to restore the vegetation in the
analysis area towards historic stocking levels and species
compositions. This would create conditions that more closely resemble
the historical stands that were adapted to the site, climate, and fire
regimes in this ecosystem and that are sustainable over time.
The purpose and need for ecosystem management in this area is four-
fold, as follows: (1) To salvage and rehabilitate high mortality stands
that were planted with ``off-site'' ponderosa pine and non blister-
rust-resistant white pine; (2) to reintroduce the role of fire in the
ecosystem, where it has been disrupted through fire suppression, in a
way that will emulate effects of mixed severity fire under a natural
fire regime; (3) to provide tree species and stocking levels that
existed historically; (4) to contribute to the short-term supply of
[[Page 30839]]
timber to help meet the national demand for wood products and to
support the local economy.
The analysis area consists of approximately 24,400 acres of
National Forest lands included in T35N., T36N. and T37N. in R.45E.,
T35N. and T36N., R.46E., Willamette Meridian, Washington; and T.60N.,
and T61.N. in R.4W., and T.60N and T.61N., R.5W., Boise Meridian,
Idaho.
The decision to be made is how much, if any, timber harvest should
occur; how many acres, if any, of reforestation and site preparation
should be accomplished; how many acres, if any, prescribed burning
should be performed; and the timing of such activities. The decision
would also include the type and level of access, if any.
The Forest Plan provides guidance for management activities within
the analysis area through goals, objectives, standards, guidelines, and
management area directions. The proposed activities would take place in
designated Management Areas (MAs) 1, 4, 9 and 16. Goals for each of
these MAs include protecting soil productivity, meeting or exceeding
state water quality standards, providing opportunities for dispersed
recreation, and meeting visual quality objectives. Below is a brief
description of other management direction for these areas.
Management Area 1: Manage for long-term growth and production of
commercially valuable wood products and to provide wildlife habitat.
Management Area 4: Manage big game winter range to provide forage
for wildlife needs through timber harvest and permanent forage areas.
Management Area 9: Manage lands to maintain and protect existing
improvements and resource productive potential.
Management Area 16: Riparian area dependent resources will be
featured, while producing other resource outputs at levels compatible
with objectives for riparian resources.
The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives, including
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 as well as responding
to issues and other resource values.
The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect and cumulative
environmental effects of the alternatives. Past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable activities in the analysis area will be
considered. Analysis of site-specific mitigation measures and their
effectiveness will be disclosed.
Public participation is an important part of the analysis process,
commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) which will
begin with the publication of this notice. The public is encouraged to
take part in the process and 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. 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.
Exploring 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).
The following issues have been identified: Grizzly bear security
habitat, water and sediment yield and fisheries habitat, roadless area
character, soils, and big game winter range. This list may be changed
based on continuing public participation.
The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by
September, 1997. At that time EPA will publish a notice of availability
in the Federal Register. The comment period on the Draft EIS will close
45 days from the date the notice of availability appears in the Federal
Register. It is very important that those interested in the management
of this area participate at that time. While public participation in
this analysis is welcome at any time, comments received within 45 days
of the publication of this notice will be especially useful in the
preparation of the Draft EIS. The Final EIS is scheduled to be
completed by December, 1997.
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 45-day scoping 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. Comments received in response to this solicitation,
including names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered
part of the public record on this proposed action and will be available
for public inspection.
To be most helpful, 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 1503.0 in addressing these points.
I am the responsible official for this environmental impact
statement.
Dated: May 28, 1997.
Kent Dunstan,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 97-14635 Filed 6-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
