[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 2 (Tuesday, January 4, 1994)]
[Notices]
[Pages 292-294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: January 4, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Murphy Timber Sales and Associated Activities; Kootenai National
Forest, Lincoln County, MT
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of 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 timber
harvest, reforestation, wildlife habitat enhancement (prescribed
burning), construction of low standard haul roads, and restriction of
existing roads within the lower portion of the Fortine Creek drainage.
The Fortine Creek drainage is located approximately 40 air miles
northeast of Libby, Montana near the town of Fortine, Montana.
The proposal's actions to harvest and reforest timber stands,
construct and reconstruct roads, prescribed burning, and restricting
roads are being considered together because they represent either
connected or cumulative actions as defined by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.25). The purposes of the project are
to maintain and enhance winter thermal habitat requirements for
whitetailed and mule deer, improve grizzly bear habitat by providing
security, cover, and forage, and maintain a healthy forest while
providing timber to the local economy.
The EIS will tier to the Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan and Final EIS of September 1987, which provides overall
guidance for achieving the desired forest condition of the area. All
activities associated with the proposal will be designed to maintain
high quality wildlife, fisheries, and watershed objectives.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received within 45
days following publication of this notice.
ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Jane P. Kollmeyer, District
Ranger, Fortine Ranger District, P.O. Box 116, Fortine, Montana 59918.
Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the analysis
may be sent to her at that address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joleen Dunham, ID Team Leader, Fortine Ranger District. Phone: (406)
882-4451.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The decision area contains approximately
15,000 acres within the Kootenai National Forest in Lincoln County,
Montana. All of the proposed projects are located in the Fortine Creek
drainage with sub-drainages of Deep, Brimstone, and Murphy Creeks
included. The legal location of the decision area is as follows:
Sections 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,
33, and 34 of Township 35 North, Range 25 West; Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26,
27, 28, and 29 of Township 34 North, Range 25 West; Sections 25 and 36
of Township 35 North, Range 26 West; and Sections 1 and 12 of Township
34 North, Range 26 West; Principal Montana Meridian.
Some timber management and prescribed wildlife burning activities
under consideration would occur within the Marston Face Roadless Area
X172 and the Thompson-Seton Roadless Area 483. No proposed activities
are located in areas considered for inclusion to the National
Wilderness System as recommended by the Kootenai National Forest Plan
or by any past or present legislative wilderness proposals. Both even-
aged and uneven-aged management would be used in implementing the
proposed actions. Logging systems consist of tractor harvest only.
The Forest Service proposes to harvest approximately 3.3 million
board feet of timber through application of a variety of harvest
methods on approximately 1063 acres of forest land. The proposal also
includes prescribed burning of 117 acres to enhance wildlife habitat.
The Forest Service proposal also includes approximately 2.1 miles of
new road construction (0.9 miles of temporary road and 1.2 miles of low
standard specified road) and approximately 1.0 mile of road re-
construction to access the specific harvest units. Approximately 15-18
miles of existing road is also proposed for additional road use
restrictions to improve wildlife habitat security.
The Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
provides overall management objectives in individual delineated
management areas (MA's). The proposed projects encompass three
predominant MA's; 11, 13, and 14. Briefly described, MA 11 is managed
to maintain or enhance the winter-range habitat effectiveness for big-
game species and produce a programmed yield of timber. MA 14 focuses on
maintaining or enhancing grizzly bear habitat, reducing grizzly/human
conflicts, assisting in the recovery of the grizzly bear, realizing a
programmed yield of timber production, and providing for the
maintenance or enhancement of other wildlife species, especially big-
game. MA 13 is designated to provide the special habitat necessary for
old growth dependent wildlife. Timber harvest is proposed only in MA
11. Prescribed burning for wildlife is the only activity proposed in MA
14. No activity is proposed in MA 13.
Issues
Tentatively, several issues of concern have been identified through
the scoping process. These issues are briefly described below:
Whitetailed and Mule Deer Winter Thermal Cover--How would
the proposed action maintain and enhance winter thermal cover?
Visuals--What effects would the proposed action have on
naturally appearing views seen from trails, private land, Dickey Lake
and Highway 93?
Timber Supply--How would the proposed action help satisfy
local and national needs?
Activity in Roadless Area--What effect would the proposal
have on the roadless character of Marston Face and Thompson-Seton
Roadless Areas.
Grizzly Bear--How would the proposal maintain and enhance
grizzly bear habitat?
Old Growth--What effect would the proposed action have on
old growth habitat?
Forest Health--Some stands are not growing at their full
potential and some have sustained heavy mortality due to the mountain
pine beetle. What effect would the proposed action have to reduce
susceptibility to bark beetles and improve stand conditions?
Water Quality--What effects would the proposed action have
on riparian areas, lakes, and private water developments?
Public Involvement and Scoping
Public participation to this point has been extensive. On August
15, 1991 an initial scoping meeting was held with the local community
and interested individuals for the development of a timber sale
proposal. On May 28, 1992 we held another open house to present a
revised proposal. In addition, a field trip to the Murphy Decision Area
was conducted on June 26, 1992 with seven individuals attending.
Comments were requested in writing during all of these public
involvement efforts. Consultation with appropriate State and Federal
agencies has been initiated. Preliminary effects analysis indicated
that the proposed action may significantly affect quality of the human
environment and may substantially alter the undeveloped character of
the Marston Face Roadless Area. These potential effects prompted the
decision to prepare an EIS for the Murphy Timber Sales.
This environmental analysis and decision making process will unable
additional interested and affected people to participate and contribute
to the final decision. Public participation will be requested at
several points during the analysis. The Forest Service will be seeking
information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, local
agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be interested
in or affected by the proposed projects. 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.
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 analysis will consider a range of alternatives, including the
proposed action, no action, and other reasonable action alternatives.
Estimated Dates for Filing
The draft Murphy EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by
September, 1994. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of Availability
of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the
draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of
Availability in the Federal Register.
The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by December, 1994. In
the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments
and responses received during the comment period that pertain to the
environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision
regarding the proposal.
Reviewer's Obligations
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. versus NRDC, 435 U.S.
519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at
the draft environmental impact statement stage may be waived or
dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon versus Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016,
1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. versus 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 and respond to them
in the final EIS.
To be most helpful, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific
as possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merit
of the alternatives discussed. 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.
Responsible Official
Jane P. Kollmeyer, District Ranger, Fortine Ranger District,
Kootenai National Forest, P.O. Box 116, Fortine, Montana, 59918, is the
Responsible Official. As the Responsible Official I will decide which,
if any, of the proposed projects will be implemented. I will document
the decision and reasons for the decision in the Record of Decision.
That decision will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations.
Dated: December 16, 1993.
Jane P. Kollmeyer,
District Ranger, Fortine Ranger District.
[FR Doc. 94-4 Filed 1-3-94 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M