[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35903-35904]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17467]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 126 / Wednesday, July 1, 1998 /
Notices
[[Page 35903]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
Whitetail-Pipestone Recreation Management Strategy; Site-specific
Deerlodge Forest Plan Amendment; Butte and Jefferson Ranger Districts;
Silver Bow and Jefferson Counties, Montana
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA and Bureau of Land Management, USDI.
ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service and BLM will prepare an environmental
impact statement (EIS) to create a recreation management strategy for
the Whitetail-Pipestone area and amend site-specifically the Deerlodge
Forest Plan and the Headwaters Resource Management Plan to include
further recreation direction. The Forest Service and the BLM will be
joint lead agencies for this EIS (40 CFR 1501.5). The purpose is to
determine what network of roads and trails will best provide a variety
of recreation opportunities while protecting resources from soil
erosion, spread of noxious weeds, and disturbance of wildlife habitats
and heritage resources.
DATES: Initial comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be
received in writing no later than July 19, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Deborah L.R. Austin, Forest
Supervisor, Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, 1820 Meadowlark,
Butte, MT, 59701.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jocelyn Dodge, Environmental Analysis
Team Leader, Butte Ranger District, 1820 Meadowlark, Butte, MT, 59701,
or phone: (406)494-2147, Eric Tolf, Jefferson Ranger District, 3
Whitetail Road, Whitehall MT, 59759, or phone (406)287-3223 or Darrell
McDaniel, BLM, 106 North Parkmont, Butte, MT, 59701, or phone (406)-
494-5059.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Service and BLM propose to create
a recreation management strategy for federal lands in the Whitetail-
Pipestone Area. Five sub-units would be managed with an area
restriction with non-motorized and/or motorized travel allowed on
various designated roads and trails. Different sub-units would
emphasize different recreation opportunities. The proposed strategy
also includes construction of trailhead and camping facilities and an
interpretive site, and allows for future trail construction to meet
resource and recreation objectives. This proposal would result in non-
significant amendments to the Deerlodge Forest Plan and the Headwaters
Resource Management Plan.
The analysis area lies between Butte, Boulder, and Whitehall,
Montana. It includes all National Forest and Bureau of Land Management
lands within an area defined by Interstate 15 from Butte to Boulder,
Whitetail Road from Boulder to Whitehall (including Hadley Park), and
Montana Highway 2 from Whitehall to Butte. The project area totals
276,234 acres including private lands.
The Forest Service and BLM land management plans include goals to
provide areas for quality motorized and non-motorized recreation and to
provide a wide variety of suitable recreation experiences. Since these
plans were adopted about ten years ago, monitoring shows large
increases in use and changes in type of recreation activities. A
recreation management strategy for the area must address changes in
recreation activities in the last 10 years, address current and
anticipated travel demands on public land, and manage recreation use
while protecting resources, including historic and prehistoric sites.
Potential issues identified are the effects of the proposal on
watershed function, recreation, road and trail safety, fish and
wildlife, heritage resources, and roadless character.
Public participation is important to the analysis. Part of the goal
of public involvement is to identify additional issues and to refine
the general, tentative issues identified above. People may visit with
Forest Service and BLM officials at any time during the analysis and
prior to the decision. Two periods are specifically designated for
comments on the analysis: (1) During the scoping process and (2) during
the draft EIS comment period.
During the scoping process, the Forest Service and BLM are seeking
information and comments from Federal, State, and local agencies and
other individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected
by the proposed action. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service
will be consulted concerning effects to threatened and endangered
species. The agencies invite written comments and suggestions on this
action, particularly in terms of identification of issues and
alternative development.
Analysis of this proposed action began in an environmental
assessment (EA). Public involvement for the EA started in July, 1995.
Since then, the public has participated in formulating issues and
developing alternatives through responding to large mailings and
attending periodic public meetings and field trips.
In addition to the proposed action, a range of alternatives has
been developed in response to issues identified during scoping. One of
these is the ``no action'' alternative, in which no changes would be
made to current travel management direction for the analysis area. A
second alternative identified proposes to reduce secondary road
densities from the present condition by 50 to 90 percent, while
maintaining general forest access for traditional non-motorized
recreation. Class I primary motorized road access would remain the same
as the existing condition. A third alternative proposes to increase the
number of trails, trailheads, campgrounds, view points, and tables, and
identify historic points more than identified in the proposed action.
The Forest Service and BLM will analyze and document the direct,
indirect, and cumulative effects of all alternatives.
The Forest Service and BLM will continue to involve the public and
will inform interested and affected parties as to how they may
participate and contribute to the final decision. Another formal
opportunity for response will be provided following completion of a
draft EIS.
The draft EIS should be available for review in October, 1998. The
final EIS
[[Page 35904]]
is scheduled for completion in March, 1999.
The comment period on the draft EIS will be 90 days from the date
the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of
availability in the Federal Register.
The Forest Service and BLM believe 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 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 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, 803F.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 those interested in this proposed action
participate by the close of the 90-day comment period so substantive
comments and objections are made available to the forest Service and
BLM at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to
them in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service and BLM 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.
The Beaverhead-Deerlodge Forest Supervisor and the Headwaters
Resource Area Manager are the responsible officials who will make the
decision. They will decide on this proposal after considering comments
and responses, environmental consequences discussed in the Final EIS,
and applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The decision and
reasons for the decision will be documented in a Record of Decision.
Dated: June 4, 1998.
Thomas W. Heintz,
Acting Forest Supervisor, Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest.
Dated: June 5, 1998.
Merle Good,
Area Manager, Headwaters Resource Area.
[FR Doc. 98-17467 Filed 6-30-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
