[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-915]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: January 14, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Compartment 28 (Zulu Smoot) Timber Sales; Kootenai National
Forest; Lincoln County, MT
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts of a
proposal to harvest timber and construct and reconstruct roads in the
Zulu and Can Creek and South Fork of the Yaak River drainages located
about 18 air miles northeast of Troy, Montana. This EIS will tier to
the Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and EIS,
which provide overall guidance for achieving the desired forest
condition of the area. The purpose of the proposed action is to harvest
dead, dying or high risk (to mountain pine beetle infestation) stands
of lodgepole pine to reduce potential excessive future natural fuel
loadings, increase the health and productivity of stands that are
currently declining in vigor and provide a more balanced distribution
of timber age classes in the Project Area.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received no later
than February 28, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to John R. Righter, District Ranger,
Three Rivers Ranger District, 1437 North Highway 2, Troy, Montana,
59935.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Monte Fujishin, Supervisory Forester,
(406) 295-4693.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The timber management activities under
consideration would occur within a 13,234 acre analysis area which
includes 8,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Area X166, Pink Mountain
(6,400 acres), and portion of 684, Roderick (approximately 1,600
acres).
The proposed action would harvest about 7.2 million board feet from
15 harvest units totalling 706 acres. Approximately six miles of new
specified road would be constructed and 2 miles of existing road would
be reconstructed. Approximately 1.5 miles of temporary road would be
required and approximately .6 miles of constructed skid trail. With
this proposed action, a portion of the roadless areas may be affected.
There are a variety of purposes for timber harvest and
reforestation in the South Fork Yaak area; the primary purposes are:
(1) To improve timber productivity by replacing stands of dead dying or
high risk lodgepole pine with younger, more vigorously growing trees;
(2) to salvage the dead and lodgepole pine; (3) to reduce potentially
future catastrophic wildfire conditions by removal of natural dead or
dying fuels; and (4) to increase the overall health and vigor of other
stands being considered for management. Additionally, the purpose of
road construction and reconstruction is to facilitate access to the
timber stands to be harvested.
The project area consists of approximately 13,234 acres located in
Sections 2-11, 4-22, 28-30, T34N, R31W; Sections 1, 12, 13, 24, 25,
T34N, R32W; Sections 29-34, T35N, R31W; and Section 36, T35N, R32W;
P.M.M., Lincoln County, Montana.
The decision to be made is what, if anything, should be done in the
South Fork Yaak River Project Area to: (a) Increase timber health and
productivity and contribute to the Forest's sustained yield of timber
products, (b) reduce natural fuel loadings of dead and dying lodgepole
pine as a result of past and potential mountain pine beetle
infestations, (c) dispose of slash and reforest harvested lands, (d)
develop and manage the road system to facilitate removal of timber,
reforest stands and maintain or improve wildlife security and (e)
create a situation of better age class distributions of stands within
project area.
The Kootenai Forest Plan provides guidance for management
activities within the potentially affected area through its goals,
objectives, standards and guidelines, and management area direction.
The areas of proposed timber harvest and reforestation would occur
within Management Areas 12, 15, 17 and 14. Timber harvest would occur
only on suitable timber land. Road construction and reconstruction
would occur in these four management areas. Below is a brief
description of the applicable management direction.
Management Area 12--These are areas that contain productive timber
lands which are suitable for timber harvest, provided that big game
summer habitat objectives are met.
Management Area 14--These are areas that contain productive timber
lands which are suitable for timber harvest, provided that grizzly bear
habitat objectives are met.
Management Area 15--These are areas that contain productive timber
lands which are suitable for timber harvest.
Management Area 17--These are areas that contain productive timber
lands which are suitable for timber harvest, viewing objectives are
met.
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 will be implemented. Additional alternatives will
examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to
achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the 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 National Forest Lands will be considered. 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 has
already occurred in December of 1991. In addition, the public is
encouraged 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. 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 major issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Eliminate minor issues or those which have been covered by a
relevant previous environmental analysis, such as the Kootenai 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.
Preliminary scoping, including public and agency participation, was
initiated in December, 1991, and has continued through this year. Until
recently, an Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) were envisioned. However, it became apparent
to the Interdisciplinary Team that there could be significant effects
on the human environment in Roadless Areas X166 and 684.
The principal environmental issues identified to date are related
to:
1. Impacts on the character of the area of Roadless Area 684 and
X166.
2. Impacts on fish habitat and other beneficial uses due to
potential sediment increase.
3. Impacts on big game security and habitat.
4. Fuels accumulations in terms of potential catastrophic wildfire
situations.
Other issues commonly associated with timber harvesting and road
construction include: effects on water quality, cultural resources,
soils, old growth, and visuals. This list may be verified, expanded, or
modified based on public scoping for this proposal.
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been
initiated with regard to listed species. The Montana Department of
Health and Welfare-Division of Environmental Quality, Montana
Department of Fish and Game, and the Kootenai Salish Indian Tribe will
also be consulted.
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, which is
expected to be filed with the EPA and available for public review in
March, 1994. A 45-day comment period will follow publication of a
Notice of Availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The
comments received will be analyzed and considered in preparation of a
final EIS, which will be accompanied by a Record of Decision. The final
EIS is expected to be filed in June, 1994.
The Forest Service believes it is important at this early stage to
give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
draft EISs 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, 513 (1978). Also, environmental objections
that could be raised at the draft EIS stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final EIS 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 available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully
consider them and respond to them in the final EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, 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 1503.3 in addressing these
points.
I am the responsible official for this environmental impact
statement.
Dated: January 5, 1994.
Robert L. Schrenk,
Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 94-915 Filed 1-13-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M