[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 149 (Thursday, August 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40183-40191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-19429]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Revised Land and Resource Management Plans for the National
Forests in Alabama, Chattahoochee/Oconee National Forests, Cherokee
National Forest, Jefferson National Forest, and the Sumter National
Forest
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare Environmental Impact Statements
(NOI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to 36 CFR 219.10(g), the Regional Forester for the
Southern Region gives notice of the agency's intent to prepare
Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for the revisions of the Forest
Land and Resource Management Plans (Forest Plans) for the above named
National Forests. For the Jefferson National Forest, this notice
revises their June 28, 1993 notice of intent to prepare an EIS to
revise their Forest Plan. According to 36 CFR 219.10(g), forest plans
are ordinarily revised on a 10-15 year cycle. Several amendments have
been made to each plan since it originated. The existing forest plans
were approved on the following dates:
National Forests in Alabama; March 10, 1986
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests; September 25, 1985
Cherokee National Forest; April 1, 1986
Jefferson National Forest; October 16, 1985
Sumter National Forest; August 2, 1985
The agency invites written comments within the scope of the
analysis described below. In addition, the agency gives notice that an
open and full environmental analysis and decision-making process will
occur on the proposed actions so that interested and affected people
are aware of how they may participate and contribute to the final
decision.
DATES: The agency expects to file the draft EISs (DEIS) with the
Environmental Protection Agency and make them available for public
comment in January of 1998. The Agency expects to file the final EISs
in December of 1998. Comments concerning the scope of the analysis
should be received by December 2, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Forest Supervisors of the
appropriate Forest at the following addresses:
National Forests in Alabama, 946 Chestnut, Montgomery, AL 36107-3010
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests, 508 Oak Street, NW, Gainesville,
GA 30501
Cherokee National Forest, 2800 N. Ocoee Street (P.O. Box 2010),
Cleveland, TN 37320-2010
Jefferson National Forest, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, VA 24019
Sumter National Forest, 4931 Broad River Road, Columbia, SC 29210-4021
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
National Forests in Alabama: Planning Team Leader--Rick Morgan--phone:
(334) 832-4470
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests: Planning Staff Officer--Caren
Brisco--phone: (770) 536-0541
Cherokee National Forest: Planning Staff Officer--Keith Sandifer--
phone: (615) 476-9700
Jefferson National Forest: Planning Staff Officer--Kenneth Landgraf--
phone: (540) 265-5100
Sumter National Forest: Planning Team Leader--Tony White--phone: (803)
561-4000
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The Regional Forester for the Southern Region
located at 1720 Peachtree Road, NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30367, is the
responsible official.
Affected Counties
This Notice of Intent affects the following Counties:
[[Page 40184]]
National Forests in Alabama: Bibb, Calhoun, Cherokee, Chilton,
Clay, Cleburne, Dallas, Hale, Perry, Talladega, Tuscaloosa, Franklin,
Lawrence, Winston, Covington, Escambia, and Macon; Alabama.
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests: Banks, Catoosa, Chattooga,
Dawson, Fannin, Floyd, Gilmer, Gordon, Habersham, Lumpkin, Murray,
Rabun, Stephens, Towns, Union, Walker, White, Whitfield, Green, Jasper,
Jones, Monroe, Morgan, Oconee, Oglethorpe, and Putnam: Georgia.
Cherokee National Forest: Polk, McMinn, Monroe, Greene, Cocke,
Unicoi, Sullivan, Washington, Johnson, and Carter; Tennessee.
Jefferson National Forest: Letcher and Pike; Kentucky--Monroe; West
Virginia--Bedford, Bland, Botetourt, Carroll, Craig, Dickenson, Giles,
Grayson, Lee, Montgomery, Pulaski, Roanoke, Rockbridge, Scott, Smyth,
Tazewell, Washington, Wise, and Wythe; Virginia.
Sumter National Forest: Abbeville, Chester, Edgefield, Fairfield,
Greenwood, Laurens, McCormick, Newberry, Oconee, Saluda, and Union;
South Carolina.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background Information
1. An Ecological Approach to Planning
The general model for an ecological approach to land management
planning includes four iterative steps: assessment decision,
implementations, and monitoring. The first step involves assessment of
the forest situation that characterize the biophysical and social
ecosystem components at appropriate temporal and spatial scales. These
provide a comprehensive description and evaluation of ecosystem
structures, processes, functions, and social and economic conditions
that are critical to understanding the present conditions and
projecting future trends. From this information, decisions can be made
to establish ``desired future conditions'', set goals and objectives,
make resource allocations, establish standards and guidelines,
determine monitoring requirements, and establish priorities. Following
the implementation of those decisions, monitoring and evaluation will
determine if changes should be made in the implementation, if there is
a need for new decision, or if there is a need to re-assess the
situation.
In the Southern Appalachian area, a Southern Appalachian Assessment
has been completed. Also completed is the Chattooga Ecosystem
Management Demonstration Project (Chattooga Project) which was an
effort to consolidate and integrate ecological information for the
Chattooga River Watershed which is located at the junction of North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia; and includes three National
Forests.
Information from these analyses that cross State boundaries and
involve multiple National Forests, along with the individual National
Forests efforts to update their `'analysis of the management
situation'' (AMS), are now being used by these National Forests to
determine what decisions in their Land and Resource Management Plans
(LRMP) should be re-analyzed or changed in revising their LRMPs.
2. The Southern Appalachian Assessment
Recently the U.S. Forest Service has participated in the
preparation of the Southern Appalachian Assessment (SAA). The
Assessment culminated in a final Summary Report and four Technical
Reports that are now available to the public. It was prepared by the
U.S. Forest Service (the Southern Region of the National Forest System
and the Southern Forest Experiment Station) in cooperation with the
other Federal and state agencies that are members of SAMBA (Southern
Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Cooperative). The Assessment included
National Forest system lands and private lands in the George
Washington/Jefferson, Nantahala-Pisgah, Cherokee, and Chattahoochee
National Forests; and parts of the Sumter and Talladega National
Forests. Also involved were the National Park Service lands in the
Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Shenandoah National Park, and the
Blue Ridge Parkway.
The Assessment facilitates an interagency ecological approach to
management in the Southern Appalachian area by collecting and analyzing
broad-scale biological, physical, social and economic data to
facilitate better, more ecologically based forest level resource
analysis and management decisions. The Assessment was organized around
four ``themes''--(1) Terrestrial (including Forest Health, and Plant
and Animal Resources); (2) Aquatic Resources; (3) Atmospheric Resources
and (4) Social/Cultural/Economic Resources (which includes the Human
Dimension; Roadless Areas and Wilderness; Recreation; and Timber Supply
and Demand).
As the National Forests in the Southern Appalachians were
conducting their forest level efforts to describe their ``Analysis of
the Management Situation'' (AMS), they were also providing information
for the larger-scale analysis in the Southern Appalachian Assessment.
The Assessment supports the revision of the LRMPs by describing how
the lands, resources, people and management of the National Forests
interrelate within the larger context of the Southern Appalachian area.
The SAA, however, is not a ``decision document'' and it did not involve
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. As broad-scale
issues were identified at the sub-regional level (Southern Appalachian
Mountain area) in the Assessment, the individual National Forest's role
in resolving these broad-scale issues becomes a part of the ``need for
change'' at the Forest level.
Public involvement has been important throughout both of these
processes. Continuing public involvement leading to formulation of
alternatives for the forest plan revision analysis efforts will now be
conducted through the ``scoping'' period that follows the issuance of
this Notice of Intent.
3. The Beginning of the Forest Plan Revision Efforts for the National
Forests in Alabama, the Chattahoochee-Oconee, the Cherokee, and the
Sumter National Forests
The National Forests in the Southern Appalachian area have applied
several efforts to begin their revisions. The main objective thus far
has been to do the analysis leading to a proposal to change forest
management direction. A key part of that analysis, for significant
portions of each of the forests, has been the SAA.
On February 24, 1995, a Notice was placed in the Federal Register
(Vol. 60, No. 37) that identified the relationships between the SAA and
the Forest Plan revisions of the National Forests in Alabama,
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests, Cherokee National Forest, and
the Sumter National Forest.
A February 24, 1995 Notice in the Federal Register (Vol. 60, No.
37) identified; (1) that the National Forests in Alabama,
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests, Cherokee National Forest, and
the Sumter National Forest were each preparing an Analysis of the
Management Situation (AMS), and (2) the relationship between the
Southern Appalachian Assessment and those efforts. Since then,
preparation of a Draft AMSs has included updating resource inventories,
defining the current situation, estimating supply capabilities and
resource demands, evaluating the results of monitoring, determining the
``Need for Change'' (36 CFR 219.12(e)(5)), review of previous public
comments, and public meetings or other outreach. These Draft AMSs are
[[Page 40185]]
now available for public review. Together with the results of the SAA,
they are the present basis of the issues/Forest Plan decisions that
will be examined during the plan revision process. Additional topics
will be developed as needed to respond to public comments received on
this Notice of Intent during the 120-day public comment period.
In the past, a ``Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement'' was issued prior to the development of the AMS.
However, for these Forest Plan revisions, an effort was made to first
define the current situation and estimate an ``initial need for
change'' in a Draft AMS prior to issuing a Notice of Intent to Prepare
an Environmental Impact Statement. We hope this will lead to improved
``scoping'', which will help the public provide more concise and
specific comments. This should make it possible to develop more
responsive alternatives to be analyzed in the Environmental Impact
Statements accompanying the individual Revised Forest Plans.
4. Status of the Jefferson, George Washington, and Nantahala-Pisgah
National Forests
The Jefferson National Forest previously issued a Notice of Intent
to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for its Revised LRMP on
June 28, 1993. This NOI revises that earlier notice, and provides
notification that the planning process on the Jefferson National Forest
will now coincide with the planning process and timelines for the other
National Forests in the Southern Appalachians.
Although the George Washington National Forest and the Nantahala-
Pisgah National Forests were part of the Southern Appalachian
Assessment, they are not beginning plan revisions at this time. The
George Washington National Forest completed its Final Revised Forest
Plan on January 21, 1993, and the Nantahala-Pasgah National Forests
completed a significant amendment, Amendment 5 to their Land and
Resource Management Plan on March 18, 1994. However, as information
from the Southern Appalachian Assessment and the other National Forest
planning process are being analyzed, a need to change these plans may
be identified to ensure consistency between the National Forests in the
Southern Appalachians.
5. The Role of Forest Plans
National Forest System resource allocation and management decisions
are made in two stages. The first stage is the forest plan, which
allocates lands and resources to various uses or conditions by
establishing management areas and management prescriptions for the land
and resources within the plan area. The second stage is approval of
project decisions.
Forest plans do not compel the agency to undertake any site-
specific projects; rather, they establish overall goals and objectives
(or desired resource conditions) that the individual National Forest
will strive to meet. Forest plans also establish limitations on what
actions may be authorized, and what conditions must be met, during
project decision-making.
The primary decisions made in a forest plan include:
(1) Establishment of the forest-wide multiple-use goals and
objectives (36 CFR 219.11(b)).
(2) Establishment of forest-wide management requirements (36 CFR
219.13 to 219.27).
(3) Establishment of multiple-use prescriptions and associated
standards and guidelines for each management area (36 CFR 219.11(c)).
(4) Determination of land that is suitable for the production of
timber (16 U.S.C. 1604(k) and 36 CFR 219.14).
(5) Establishment of allowable sale quantity for timber within a
time frame specified in the plan (36 CFR 219.16).
(6) Establishment of monitoring and evaluation requirements (36 CFR
219.11(d)).
(7) Recommendation of roadless areas as potential wilderness areas
(36 CFR 219.17).
(8) Where applicable, designate those lands administratively
available for oil and gas leasing; and when appropriate, authorize the
Bureau of Land Management to offer specific lands for leasing. (36 CFR
228.102 (d) and (e))
The authorization of site-specific activities within a plan area
occurs through project decision-making, the second stage of forest
planning. Project decision-making must comply with NEPA procedures and
must include a determination that the project is consistent with the
forest plan.
6. The Role of Scoping in Revising the Southern Appalachian Land and
Resource Management Plans
This NOI includes a description of the preliminary Issues and
``Proposed Actions'' for the five National Forests in the Southern
Appalachians that are revising their LRMPs. The ``Proposed Actions''
are actions within one or more of the plan decisions identified in the
purpose and need.
Scoping to receive public comments on the preliminary issues and
proposed actions will begin following the publication of this NOI. The
public comments received during this comment period will be used to
further refine the preliminary issues that should be addressed, the
forest plan decisions that need to be analyzed (the ``proposed
actions''/``need for change''), and to help define the range of
alternatives that will be developed.
For more information on how the public can become involved during
the Scoping period, see Section 6 of this NOI.
B. Purpose and Need for Action
This Notice applies to each of the 5 Forest Plans. The need to
revise these plans is driven by the changing conditions identified in
the SAA and in individual Forest assessments as well as the changing
public values associated with these National Forests. These conditions
and values make it appropriate that all of these Southern Appalachian
Forest Plan Revisions be done simultaneously.
The purpose for revision rests in the requirements of the National
Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning required by the
National Forest Management Act and its implementing regulations
contained in Chapter 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section
219. According to 36 CFR 219.10(g), forest plans are ordinarily revised
on a 10-15 year cycle. These five forests are all completing these
cycles.
C. Preliminary Issues
1. Introduction
Early in the process there are several sources of what are called
``preliminary issues''. These are issues stated so that the public,
when learning about the environmental analysis, can focus their needs
and preferences on the forest plan decisions. One source of information
leading to issue development has been the Southern Appalachian
Assessment. The Assessment has produced some findings and preliminary
issues of broad public interest which have implications that must be
considered. This consideration may involve one or more or all Forests,
depending on the issue. In addition, the Forests, working with their
publics, have identified preliminary issues specific to their Forest.
2. Findings of the Southern Appalachian Assessment
The Southern Appalachian Assessment (SAA) provides key information
concerning those portions of the National Forests that are within the
SAA area that will be used in plan
[[Page 40186]]
revisions. The SAA teams compiled existing region-wide information on
resource status and trends, conditions, and impacts of various land
management activities and resource uses that apply to portions of each
of the five forests that are revising Forest Plans. Several preliminary
issues are listed that are associated with the findings of the
Assessment. The findings include:
Aquatic Resources
Water Quality and Quantity
The Southern Appalachian ecosystem is widely recognized as one of
the most diverse in the temperate region. The headwaters of nine major
rivers lie within the boundaries of the Southern Appalachians, making
it a source of drinking water for much of the Southeast. In addition,
as a general finding, there has been a reduction in water use in the
Southern Appalachian area.
Preliminary issues or management opportunities:
--Protection, maintenance and improvement of water resources within the
SAA area in coordination with multiple use management.
--Coordination of water quality (and quantity on some forests) needs
with adjacent forests, land owners and other agencies with water
management responsibilities.
--Insuring water quality and quantity needs for channel maintenance and
biotic resources.
Stream Condition and Habitat Quality
The SAA aquatics report identified streams, water bodies, and
riparian habitat that were degraded to varied extent.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Restoration of degraded streams, habitat and riparian loss.
Protection of Aquatic Species
Diversity of aquatic species across the Southern Appalachian area
is high, with a rich fauna of fish, molluscs, crayfish, and aquatic
insects. Approximately 39 percent of the SAA area is in the range for
wild trout, consisting of 33,088 miles of potential wild trout streams.
The three trout species within the SAA area are vulnerable to stream
acidification, which is increasing, particularly in the northern part
of the Assessment area and higher-elevation streams. The heritage
program files indicate there are 190 species that are endangered,
threatened, or of special concern within the SAA area. Mussel
populations may experience additional declines over the next 30 years
in the Tennessee River basin.
Preliminary issues or management opportunities:
--Protection for these aquatic species and maintenance of the water
quality supporting them.
--Management for trout in suitable habitat areas.
Human Induced Impacts on Aquatic Resources
Although human activities that impair aquatic habitat have
decreased, population growth and concomitant land development have the
potential to increase pressure on aquatic resources. More than 80
percent of the river miles in most watersheds representing 75 percent
of the river miles in the SAA area are rated as fully supporting their
uses (fully supporting is a measure which states that 90 percent of the
time the stream meets water quality criteria). Aquatic Resources within
the SAA are affected by acid mine waste, National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) facilities, sedimentation (in certain
localized situations), urban and rural development, and industrial
facilities.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--How the National Forests will manage human induced impacts to the
aquatic resources.
Atmospheric Resource
Air Pollution
The SAA found that visibility in the Southern Appalachians has
decreased since the 1940's as haziness has intensified due mainly to
sulfates in the air. Improvements are expected; however, once the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990 are implemented. It is expected that there
will be a 50 percent reduction in SO2 emissions nationwide. Acid
deposition is also a problem in the region and headwater streams are
most susceptible to acidification (see also, aquatic resource
discussion). In addition, nitrogen oxide emissions are expected to
increase, contributing to visibility impairment, acid deposition, and
ground level ozone, which can cause growth reduction and physiological
stress in trees. The greatest potential for growth loss due to the
ozone concentration is in the northern and southern ends of the
Southern Appalachian area and wherever sensitive hardwoods are located
at higher elevations. Particulate matter in the air is a concern, while
apparently not one that is increasing currently, especially while land
managers are anticipating accelerating the use of prescribed fire for
numerous purposes.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Adverse effects of air pollution on visibility, nitrogen oxide
emissions, and acid deposition.
--Management's increasing use of prescribed fire and particulate matter
in the atmosphere.
Social, Cultural, and Economics
Effects on Local Communities
The combined natural resource sector (wood-products manufacturing,
forestry, mining, and tourism) provides nearly 10 percent of SAA area
employment, 7 percent of wages, and 12 percent of the industry output.
The number of employees (including seasonal or part-time) associated
with tourism has doubled between 1977 and 1991.
Over 30,000 jobs are directly related to recreation facilities on
Federal land. The counties with the greatest number of these jobs are
located near the area's two National Parks and the large concentration
of National Forests in western North Carolina. Counties with white-
water rivers, such as the Chattooga, Nantahala, and Ocoee have seen
increases in recreation-related employment.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Resource allocation and its effect on local economies, including
stabilizing and helping the economies and social structure of local
communities.
Societal Changes in the Southern Appalachian Area
Changes in the social pattern has effects on the management of
natural resources in the region. Changing relative values between
commodity and non-commodity uses of forest resources and Southern
Appalachian ecosystems are cited by the SAA. While not consistent
across the Southern Appalachian area, the population has increased 27.8
percent in the region between 1970 and 1990. For natural resource
management, however, the increase in the area's population is less
significant than the economic development that accompanied the increase
and the attitudes and cultural attachment that exists here.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity.
--The mix of natural resource goods and services from National Forest
System lands that is sensitive to evolving demographics, attitudes, and
needs.
[[Page 40187]]
Wood products from public lands
The Federal share of timberland in individual counties ranges up to
69 percent. The decisions made by Federal agencies, therefore, can
strongly influence local timber production and the economy in certain
parts of the region.
The National Forests hold a large share of high-grade oak
sawtimber. Since this is the kind of timber that is in shortest supply
and greatest demand, National Forest timber sales can affect the
markets for high-quality oak. The terrain in National Forests is more
rugged and there are fewer roads, making the timber on these lands more
expensive to harvest.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--The role of the National Forests in supplying forest products, and
the association of these products to specific Desired Future Conditions
on individual Forests.
Recreation settings and use
Only around 8 percent of the Southern Appalachians, including the
Great Smokey Mountain National Park, can be classified as having
``remote'' recreation settings. About two-thirds of these settings are
on public lands. About 18 percent of the Southern Appalachians are
highly developed settings with 2 percent in urban, 4 percent in
suburban, and 12 percent in transition of emerging development
settings. About 45 prevent of the area is rural, and about 24 percent
is natural-appearing forests.
Congestion in recreation use tends to occur on the shores of lakes
and streams, because the settings are in high demand. Due to limited
sources of supply, settings and facilities for mountain biking,
horseback riding, off-highway vehicle driving, and white-water rafting
often are congested.
A high proportion of recreation use on Federally owned land occurs
at the outer edges of the Appalachian chain. As population centers
grow, use patterns will creep toward the center of the mountain ranges.
Wilderness and roadless areas account for 4 percent of all land in
the Southern Appalachians. As population increases and urban areas
expand, there is concern that the wilderness resource will be affected
by overuse.
Preliminary issues or management opportunities:
--The mix of recreation settings on National Forest system lands and
the management of each.
--Increasing urbanization of lands adjacent to the National Forests and
the effects on Forest Service management.
--Access to public lands.
Roadless and Wilderness
A total of 752,654 acres of inventoried roadless areas were
identified in the SAA National Forests ranging in size from 2,035 acres
to 27,293 acres and representing 61 percent of all roadless areas
within the SAA area.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Management of these and other areas to meet wilderness, recreational,
and other resource demands.
Terrestrial--Plant and Animal Resources
Current conditions and trends of forest landscapes
The Southern Appalachian Assessment described current conditions
and trends of forested landscapes. These were applied to 9 forest
classes and 4 successional classes. The Assessment found that currently
National Forests contain 17 percent of the region's forests, 7 percent
of the early successional habitats and 42 percent of the late
successional habitats.
Currently around 3 percent of National Forest system land is in
early successional habitat. This is 4 percent below mid 1970s National
Forest levels. There were 10 species associates identified for this
habitat. Forty-five percent of the National Forest System lands in the
SAA area are in late successional habitat. This represents an increase
of 34 percent since 1970.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Desired future conditions for the mix of these habitat conditions
must be determined, as well as the larger landscape conditions
(forested as opposed to agriculture).
Old Growth forests
Around 1.1 million acres of possible old-growth forest were
identified in an initial inventory of SAA National Forests. Patches
identified vary from 1 acre to 13,000 acres in size and across a full
range of vegetative communities.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Management of these areas, as well as other types of areas, and their
spacial allocation to meet the biological, social, and cultural
objectives associated with this condition.
Rare Communities
The Assessment found that 31 rare communities are key to the
conservation of 65 percent of the Federally listed T&E species and 66
percent of the species with viability concern (globally ranked G1, G2,
G3) in the Southern Appalachians. Examples of these rare communities
are high elevation grassy and heath balds, mountain longleaf pine
woodlands, granitic domes, high elevation rocky summits, and sphagnum
and shrub bogs.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Management of rare communities.
Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered (T&E) and Viability Concern
Species
The Assessment looks at 51 Federally listed T&E species (11 habitat
associations) and the needs of 366 viability concern species (17
habitat associations). While not all of these species and habitats
occur on National Forest system lands, the importance of this listing
lies in the fact that the Forest Service manages habitat that is often
key to preservation and recovery of many species.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Recovery and management of Federally listed T&E species and Forest
Service sensitive species.
Game Species
The SAA provided population trends, current status, and some future
forecasts for 10 major game species.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--The role of the National Forests in sustaining habitats to support
the major game species identified in the SAA for public hunting and
viewing.
Black Bear Habitat
The SAA determined that National Forests contain around 4 million
acres of potentially suitable black bear habitat, of which about 77
percent has relatively low road density (less than 1.6 miles of road
length per square mile) and 51 percent has less than 0.8 miles per
square mile. Habitat parameters include open road density, early
successional habitats, late successional habitats capable of producing
denning sites, and oak mast. Black bear have experienced a moderate
range expansion in some parts of the Southern Appalachians over the
last 25 years.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--The Desired Future Condition of black bear habitat in the Southern
Appalachian National Forests.
Area-Sensitive Forest Bird Habitats
A total of 15.8 million acres of mid- to late-successional
deciduous forest
[[Page 40188]]
habitat is contained in the SAA area. Approximately 66 percent of these
acres are suitable forest interior habitat. Around 8.2 million acres
are in forest tracts greater than 5,000 acres in size. These larger
tracts have the potential to support all 16 area sensitive landbirds
(primarily neotropical migrants). Habitat fragmentation and edge effect
were considered. It is estimated that National Forests are currently
providing 39 percent of the acreage in these large forest tracts in the
SAA area. Taking into account the conditions of the larger landscape,
the SAA estimated that around 90 percent of the habitat on National
Forest system land is forest interior.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Management of area-sensitive forest bird habitats.
High Elevation Forest Habitats
About 32 percent of the high elevation montane spruce-fir/northern
hardwood habitats in the Southern Appalachian area are found on
National Forest system land and 23 plant and animal species are
included in this habitat association. The Southern Appalachian National
Forests are facing possible declines, caused by balsam woolly adelgid
and air pollution, in this rare high elevation forest community.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--Possible declines in high elevation forest habitats due to balsam
wooly adelgid.
Riparian Habitat
The SAA looked at seeps, springs, and streamside areas. A total 1.5
million acres of these types are in forested cover. Of this, the SAA
estimated that National Forests contain around 219,000 acres of
forested riparian habitat. The future quality of these habitats is
uncertain and may decline due to threats from hemlock wooly adelgid, an
exotic insect.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--The Desired Future Conditions for both terrestrial and aquatic
riparian habitats, including the specific management of threats to
these habitats from hemlock wooly adelgid.
Forest Vegetation Health
The SAA addresses changes in forest vegetation or soil productivity
in response to human-caused disturbances or natural processes,
potential effects of presence and absence of fire, how the health of
the forest ecosystem is being affected by air pollution and native and
exotic pests, and how current and past management affecting the health
and integrity of forest vegetation in the Southern Appalachians.
The SAA predicts that the European gypsy moth will spread as far
south as northern Georgia by the year 2020. Other identified threats to
forest ecosystem health include dogwood anthracnose, butternut canker,
beech bark disease, southern pine beetle, and asiatic gypsy moth.
Preliminary issue or management opportunity:
--The role of fire in sustaining forest ecosystems.
--Management of identified threats to forest health.
3. Preliminary Issues That May Be Common to the Five Forests
Preliminary issues from the SAA and Forests have been identified
that apply to one or more or all of the National Forests in this
Notice. Some of these include aquatic resources, forest health,
inventoried roadless areas, scenery management, T&E and Sensitive
species, terrestrial resources, and wood products. Public response to
scoping will be used to develop the actual issues and the forest or
forests to which they apply.
4. Preliminary Issues on Individual National Forests
The Southern Appalachian area National Forests have also developed
some preliminary issues locally. Since each National Forest must
develop its own issues, the following lists will appear in somewhat
different formats. The forests will further refine these, incorporate
the findings of the SAA and finally, determine the significant issues
to carry forward into the NEPA analysis. The following issues are
identified by topics and more specific information is available at the
individual Forest by contacting the planners listed at the beginning of
this Notice.
National Forests in Alabama
Trails and associated facilities and their management
Wilderness area management
Special area designations
Forest cover types, old growth and rotations
Management tools to use in achieving desired future conditions
Mix of goods and services from the Forest
Longleaf restoration for RCW recovery
Habitat types
Fire management
Road density
Land acquisition and exchange
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests
Timber management
Road access management and resource protection
Trails
Water quality and increasing forest use
Biological diversity and timber harvesting
Biological diversity, visual quality and hardwood harvesting
Pesticide use and biological and social effects
Balance between rural and urban public demands
Cherokee National Forest
Public road planning, development and management
Timber resource management
Outdoor recreation settings
Trail network management
Forest uses and water quality
Management for biological diversity
Forest health and ecosystems and timber harvesting
Management and scenic attractiveness--landscape patterns
Mix of management intensities across the landscape
Jefferson National Forest
Biological Diversity
Old growth
Habitat fragmentation
Riparian areas/Aquatic ecosystems
Air quality
Special interest Areas
Proposed, endangered, threatened, and sensitive species
Wildlife and fish management
Tree health
Wilderness and rivers
Wilderness
Wild and Scenic Rivers
Mount Rogers National Recreation Area
Recreation opportunities
Recreation opportunities
Management practices
Timber management
Fire management
Grazing
Timber production
Transportation system
Access
Off-highway vehicles
Minerals, oil and gas
Oil and gas
Minerals
Special Uses
Social and economic concerns
Below cost timber sales
Subsurface property rights
Local community economies
Sumter National Forest
Biodiversity
Variety of communities
Old growth
Proposed threatened, endangered, and
[[Page 40189]]
sensitive species
Rare and underrepresented plan communities
Riparian areas
Landscape patterns
Role of fires in forest ecosystems
Mineral development
Protection of water and other resource values
Recreation
Mix and emphasis of opportunities
Chattooga Wild and Scenic River values
Timber Management
Lands available for timber management and
Desired timber products
D. Proposed Actions
Each National Forest did an initial analysis of its management
situation focusing on changes that have taken place during the current
ten-year planning period. During the past decade Forest Plan
Amendments, annual monitoring, five year reviews of implementing Forest
Plans, and working with the public have provided the Forests with
valuable information about changes that are needed in existing Forest
Plans. This initiates the determination of the need to establish or
change management direction as required under the NFMA regulations at
36 CFR 219.12.(e)(5). From this information each Forest compiled a
preliminary list of subject areas, or revision items, which will be
used to guide their plan revision. The proposed action is to develop or
revalidate goals, objectives, standards and guidelines, and
prescriptions.
1. Proposals that are Common to all Five Forests
When revising a forest plan, roadless areas of public lands within
and adjacent to the forest shall be evaluated and considered for
recommendation for wilderness areas 36 CFR 219.17(a). At least every 10
years each forest must review the designation of lands not suited for
timber production (36 CFR 219.14(d). For these forests, the ten-year
review is being done in this revision process so all alternatives will
evaluate existing suitability designations in light of current
conditions. The following list includes additional items that are
shared by all of the five National Forests listed in this Notice.
--Establish desired future condition(s), goals, and objectives for
resource management.
--Establish, where appropriate, consistent management direction across
adjacent National Forest boundaries.
--Establish new management areas;
--Determine suitability of lands for resource management;
--Determine timber allowable sale quantity (i.e., Timber ASQ);
--Analyze and recommend rivers and streams for eligibility and/or
suitability for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers
System;
--Replace the current Visual Management System with the new Scenery
Management System and establish new visual objectives;
--Adjust the plan monitoring and evaluation requirements to address the
elements of the revised plans;
--Identify any needed new special or unique areas;
--Address management needs for all forms of forest access; and
--Address the question of oil and gas leasing on the National Forest
system lands.
2. Proposed Actions That are Unique to the Individual Forests
In addition to those items listed in A., above, there are a number
of other proposed actions that the individual forests have developed.
The following lists are not complete; however, at this point they
contain many of the more specific actions that the forests have
determined to be important and that should be incorporated in the
respective plan revisions. Additional actions will be added and some
may be deleted as a result of scoping.
National Forests in Alabama
--Identify, maintain and/or restore the LLP/wiregrass community on the
Conecuh National Forest where it is appropriate to do so;
--Address the 3-5 year burning rotation on the sandy soil types found
primarily on the Tuskegee and Conecuh Districts and conflicts with
ecosystem relationships;
--Incorporate into the Forest Plan, recovery plans for 9 T&E species;
--Incorporate conservation agreements for sensitive species--as needed;
--Incorporate the new RCW EIS into plan revision;
--Examine land ownership adjustment needs across the Forest;
--Incorporate new management direction for over-used areas, especially
wilderness areas and trails, and encourage use of alternate trailheads
and areas associated with the Sipsey Wilderness;
--Upgrade existing developed recreation sites to meet current
standards, and provide greater accessibility for people with
disabilities;
--Provide guidance for increased interpretative services and maps for
wilderness areas and trails; and
--Provide management direction for regeneration and conversion to
address changing conditions/emphases.
--Establish management guidelines for the fisheries program to consider
where and when to install habitat structures and to fertilize lakes.
--Establish guidelines for addressing noxious weeds and exotic species,
especially where they impact sensitive species or rare communities.
--Determine if grazing should be continued on the Conecuh National
Forest, and if it should be woods grazing or pasture grazing.
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests
--Establish Forest Plan goals and objectives, and management direction
for special forest products (medicinal herbs, craft material, etc.);
--Incorporate management requirements of the Regional Forester's June
1995, decision and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Recovery Plan
(when completed) for the red cockaded woodpecker which apply to the
Oconee National Forest.
--General forest lands need different management emphasis across the
forests. Currently, the general forest area (MA-16) has the same goals
and objectives for all lands. This could be true for other MA's as
well.
--Clarify the use of timber harvesting to meet Forest Plan goals and
objectives. The revised Forest Plan should incorporate standards and
guidelines to assist the Districts in determining those conditions and
situations that would enable a sale to be classified as forest
stewardship (timber purposes, personal use, wildlife habitat, etc.)
--Add timber quality as a objective of timber management.
--Adjust acres on which planned timber harvesting could occur due to
reductions for resource protection such as: riparian areas, cultural
resources, Proposed, Endangered, and Sensitive Species (PETS), and any
other factors which would effectively reduce the suitable land base.
--Establish standards, guidelines, and monitoring requirements for
single-tree selection.
--Update direction for timber harvest in riparian areas.
--Establish recreational carrying capacities.
--Establish management direction for the Chattahoochee National Forest
to restore appropriate streams to native brook trout.
[[Page 40190]]
--Establish management direction for rare communities identified in the
Southern Appalachian Assessment.
--Establish coordinated desired future conditions, goals, objectives
and direction for the Chattooga River Watershed between the Sumter, the
Chattahoochee-Oconee, and National Forests in North Carolina.
--Revise other management direction to incorporate new information
about: range management; transportation systems; development of
monitoring and recovery plans for PETS; redesign shade protection
guidelines for aquatic habitat needs and establish direction for woody
debris and aquatic habitat management; review and update air quality
direction to clarify needs for Wilderness, non-Wilderness, problem
areas, and relationship to State permitting process.
Cherokee National Forest
--Identify special or unique areas, and establish goals for management
of such areas;
--Establish guidelines for production of special forest products, and
minerals.
--Establish, where appropriate, consistent management direction across
adjacent National Forest boundaries.
--Revise guidelines that respond to threats from pests and noxious
species.
--Clarify the use of timber harvesting and other planned human-caused
disturbances to meet Forest Plan goals and objectives.
Jefferson National Forest
--Develop goals, objectives, standards and guidelines for salvage of
dead and dying timber where deemed appropriate. Determine and clearly
describe priorities for salvage;
--Consider the effects of long-term fire suppression on ecosystems and
the role of prescribed fire as a management tool;
--Address the use and effects of livestock grazing to achieve multiple-
use goals and objectives;
--Add direction to provide for new Federal regulations and the 1987
Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act;
--Consider subsurface ownership when evaluating land allocations; and
--Provide minimum management requirements and direction for special
uses (e.g., linear rights-of-way, military exercises, electronic sites
and commercial services.)
Sumter National Forest
--Coordinate with the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest and the
National Forests in North Carolina to establish goals, objectives, and
desired future conditions for the Chattooga River Watershed.
--Link land ownership adjustment priorities with desired future
condition, goals, and objective establishment.
--Establish, where appropriate, consistent management direction across
adjacent National Forest boundaries.
--Consider insect and disease in development and evaluation of
alternatives and effects.
--Consider historical Forest budget trends in alternative analysis.
--Incorporate carrying capacity (biological, physical, and social) of
the Chattooga River in establishment of desired future condition,
goals, and objectives for the Wild and Scenic River.
--Consider ecological classification in developing management areas and
desired future conditions.
--Develop desired future conditions that integrate coordinated resource
goals and objectives that will facilitate the development of multiple-
use projects.
--Revise the monitoring and evaluation direction to include
effectiveness monitoring for Forest Plan goals, objectives, and desired
future conditions.
--Develop two separate indicator lists (mountains and piedmont) to
incorporate new PETS species that are readily monitored, forest
interior species, area-sensitive species, and species that may indicate
effects at a landscape scale.
E. Preliminary Alternatives
The actual alternatives presented in each forest's draft EIS will
portray a full range of responses to issues which are significant on
the individual Forest. The five separate draft EIS's will examine the
effects of implementing strategies to achieve different desired future
conditions for each forest and will develop possible management
objectives and opportunities that would move the forests toward desired
conditions. A preferred alternative will be identified in each draft
EIS.
The range of alternatives presented in each DEIS will include one
that continues current management direction and others will also be
provided to address the range of issues developed in the scoping
process.
F. Involving the Public
The objective in this process for public involvement is to create
an atmosphere of openess where all members of the public feel free to
share information with the Forest Service and its employees on a
regular basis. All parts of this process will be structured to maintain
this openess.
The Forest Service is 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 utilized in the preparation of the draft
environmental impact statements. The range of alternatives to be
considered in the EIS will be based on the identification of
significant public issues, management concerns, resource management
opportunities, and plan decisions specific to each of the National
Forests. Public participation will be solicited by notifying in person
and/or by mail, known interested and affected publics. News releases
will be used to give the public general notice, and public scoping
meetings will be conducted on each National Forest.
Public participation will be sought throughout the plan revision
process and will be especially important at several points along the
way. The first opportunity to comment will be during the scoping
process (40 CFR 1501.7). Scoping includes: (1) Identifying additional
potential issues (other than those previously described), (2) from
these, identifying significant issues or those which have been covered
by prior environmental review, (4) exploring additional alternatives,
and (5) identifying potential environmental effects of the proposed
action and alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative
effects).
As part of the first step in scoping, a series of public
opportunities are scheduled to explain the public role in the planning
process and provide an opportunity for public input. Formats, times and
places will vary. These are determined by the individual forest to meet
the needs of their publics. For more specific information on times and
locations, please contact the Forests. These meetings will occur as
follows:
National Forest in Alabama
Proposed Locations and Dates:
Double Springs, Alabama; August 6, 1996
Brent, Alabama; August 8, 1996
Heflin, Alabama; August 13, 1996
Talladega, Alabama; August 14, 1996
Andalusia, Alabama; August 20, 1996
Tuskegee, Alabama; August 22, 1996
Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests
Proposed Locations and Dates:
Madison, Georgia; September 5, 1996
Gainesville, Georgia; September 7,
[[Page 40191]]
1996
Dalton, Georgia; September 10, 1996
Cherokee National Forest
Proposed Locations and Dates:
Elizabethton, Tennessee; October 7, 1996
Greeneville, Tennessee; October 8, 1996
Alcoa, Tennessee; October 10, 1996
Tellico Plains; October 15, 1996
Ducktown, Tennessee; October 16, 1996
Cleveland, Tennessee; October 17, 1996
Nashville, Tennessee; October 21, 1996
Jefferson National Forest
Proposed Location and Date:
Mt. Rogers NRA, Jefferson National Forest, Virginia; August 17,
1996
Sumter National Forest
Proposed Locations and Dates:
Columbia, South Carolina; August 22, 1996
Edgefield, South Carolina; August 26, 1996
Newberry, South Carolina; September 10, 1996
Walhalla, South Carolina; September 21, 1996
G. Release and Review of the EISs
Each Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is expected to be
filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be
available for public comment by January, 1998. At that time, the EPA
will publish a notice of availability of each DEIS (one for each
Forest's DEIS) in the Federal Register. The comment period on each DEIS
will be 3 months from the date the EPA 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
the DEIS 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 DEIS stage but that are not raised until after
completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) 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 3 month 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 each FEIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed actions, comments on each DEIS 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 DEIS or the merits of the alternatives
formulated and discussed in the statements. 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.
After the comment periods end on each DEIS, the comments will be
analyzed, considered, and responded to by the Forest Service in
preparing each FEIS. The FEISs are scheduled to be completed in
December, 1998. The responsible official will consider the comments,
responses, environmental consequences discussed in each FEIS, and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making a decision
regarding these revisions. The responsible official will document the
decision and reasons for the decision in a Record of Decision for each
Forest Plan. Each decision will be subject to appeal in accordance with
36 CFR 217.
The responsible official for each of the Forest Plans is the
Regional Forester, Southern Region, 1720 Peachtree Road, NW., Atlanta,
Georgia 30367.
Dated: July 25, 1996.
Gloria Manning,
Deputy Regional Forester, NRT.
[FR Doc. 96-19429 Filed 7-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
