[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 131 (Wednesday, July 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36759-36760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17927]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Rocky Mountain Region Environmental Impact Statement for Sheep
Flats Diversity Unit Timber Sales, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison
National Forests, Mesa County, Colorado
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Revision of a notice of intent to prepare an environmental
impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The responsible official for this environmental
impact statement is Mr. Robert Storch, Forest Supervisor of the Grand
Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests, 2250 Highway 50,
Delta, Colorado 81416.
SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement about four (4) proposed timber sales: Valley View, Sheep
Flats, Grove Creek, and Leon. These sales are located in the Sheep
Flats Diversity Unit on the Grant Mesa National Forest, Collbran Ranger
District.
DATES: Publication of Draft EIS: July 1997; Final EIS: January, 1988.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Pam Bode, Team Leader, USDA Forest
Service, 216 North Colorado Street, Gunnison, CO, 81230. Contact Pam
Bode also for further information. Phone: 970-641-0471. FAX: 970-641-
1928.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Supervisor will use this
Environmental Impact Statement to decide how to manage the timber
resource within the Sheep Flats Diversity Unit. The Forest Service is
proposing to harvest four timber sales on this National Forest system
land. Even-aged and uneven-aged silvicultural systems are being planned
in Engelmann spruce, sub-alpine fir, and aspen stands. These sales are
scheduled to be offered within a five to ten year period after this
analysis.
Initial scoping of interested parties identified three preliminary
issues. These are: (1) Constructing roads and harvesting timber within
areas that were identified as the Salt Creek Roadless Area and Priest
Mountain Roadless Area during the 1979 RARE II process, (2) harvesting
old growth timber, and (3) cumulative impacts on ecosystems from
logging operations in and around the sale areas.
Five alternatives will be studied in this analysis. Alternative 1
is no action. Alternatives 2 and 4 harvest suited timber but do not
enter the Salt Creek Roadless Area. Alternatives 3 and 5 harvest suited
timber throughout the Diversity Unit, including within the Salt Creek
Roadless Area. Alternatives 2 and 3 emphasize maintenance of current
old growth attributes and wildlife habitat networks while moderately
improving timber structural diversity. Alternative 4 and 5 emphasize
timber structural diversity and production for wood fiber. The proposed
action is Alternative 5.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acres planned for
harvest
Alternative -------------------------- Volume in Number
RARE II board feet of sales
Total acres acres
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................................................... 0 0 0 0
2........................................................... 682 0 2,222,000 1
3........................................................... 2,615 1798 11,158,000 4
4........................................................... 889 0 3,172,000 1
5........................................................... 3,591 2766 15,279,000 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is a renotification of the Forest Service's intent to
study these timber sales within the Sheep Flats Diversity Unit.
Previous notices of intent were published in the Federal Register
Volume 57, 31, on 2/14/92, and volume 61
177, on 9/11/96. A previous notice of availability
of the draft EIS was published in Volume 59, 5, on
1/7/94. This revised notice provides new dates for completions of the
revised draft and the final Environmental Impact Statements. The
alternatives that are being studied have changed substantially from the
previous document.
Since this is a renotification, news releases have already been
issued and a public meeting has already taken place in March 1992.
Field tours to the proposed area have already been conducted with
concerned parties. Additional news releases have been issued explaining
the new timeline for
[[Page 36760]]
this analysis. Parties that expressed interest previously have been
informed individually by mail that this analysis is continuing. No
additional public meetings are planned, however, the Forest Service is
willing to consider any party's request for additional field tours or
public meetings.
The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will
be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes
the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
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 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 stage but that are not raised until after
completion of the final environmental 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 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.
Dated: June 23, 1997.
Robert L. Storch,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 97-17927 Filed 7-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
