[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 234 (Wednesday, December 7, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X94-11207]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 7, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

 

Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness Programmatic 
Management Plan, Boise, Bitterroot, Nez Perce, Payette, and Salmon-
Challis National Forests; Boise, Custer, Idaho, Lemhi and Valley 
Counties, ID

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare Environmental Impact Statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) to document the analysis. It will disclose the 
environmental impacts of proposed actions to develop goals and 
objectives, describe desired future condition(s), establish indicators 
and standards, delineate management zones, develop management 
prescriptions and establish monitoring requirements for the Frank 
Church-River of No Return Wilderness, an area of 2,361,767 acres in 
Central Idaho. This Wilderness contains both the Middle Fork and Main 
Salmon Wild Rivers and the Upper Selway Wild River.

    The action will amend the existing Land and Resource Management 
Plans as part of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. This new 
management direction will apply to projects implemented after site-
specific analysis has been conducted. The coordinated management 
direction established by the Record of Decision for the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement will be incorporated into all land and 
resource management plans within the administrative boundaries of the 
Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness.

DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis described 
in this Notice should be received on or before December 30, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to FC-RONR Wilderness Coordinator, 
P.O. Box 729, Salmon, ID 83467.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ken Wotring, Wilderness Coordinator, Frank Church-River of No Return 
Wilderness, 208-756-5131.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This EIS will update the existing Management 
Plans and the Land and Resource Management (Forest) Plans that govern 
the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness by developing goals and 
objectives, describing Desired Future Conditions, selecting indicators 
of wilderness conditions, establishing standards for these indicators, 
identifying possible management actions for sites where standards could 
be or are being exceeded, delineating management zones, developing 
management prescriptions and establishing monitoring requirements for 
the Bitterroot, Boise, Nez Perce, Payette and Salmon-Challis National 
Forests lands within this wilderness area.

    Preliminary issues identified to date include:
     What effect will management decisions have on the 
Wilderness' ecological values and the preservation of natural 
biodiversity?
     How will exotic plants and animals be managed?
     Will expanding exotic plant and animal populations 
significantly affect wilderness values?
     Will management actions have an effect on fish habitat, 
particularly salmon and steelhead trout?
     Will natural fire regimes and fire management practices be 
affected?
     Will wildlife species and their habitats be impacted by 
this action?
     How will existing mining claims be affected by this 
action?
     Will it be possible to establish long term baseline 
monitoring of the wilderness resource after implementation of this 
decision?
     How will research be affected by this decision?
     What will be the effects of human waste and litter 
impacts?
     Will it be possible to minimize user impacts and reduce 
crowding to ensure a positive wilderness experience?
     How will recreational activities be managed to allow for 
use while minimizing impacts to the natural resource and wilderness 
experience?
     How can the Wilderness' cultural and historical values be 
protected and maintained while at the same time be share with the 
public?
     How will unique qualities and management policies of the 
Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness, such as authorized 
motorboats on the main Salmon River and established aircraft use, be 
effected by this decision?
     How can stock use be managed while minimizing impacts to 
the natural resource and wilderness experience?
     How will the decision affect consistency and uniformity in 
regulations, cooperation among Ranger Districts and accountability in 
management?
     How can outfitters and guides be encouraged to perpetuate 
the wilderness resource and wilderness experience?
     How can the state and private inholders be encouraged to 
manage their lands in a manner compatible with the surrounding 
Wilderness?
     How can trails and trailhead facilities be managed to 
provide access while minimizing impacts to the resource?
     Can river traffic be managed in an equitable manner that 
minimizes impacts to the river and the river experience?
     What is the appropriate amount, type and level of 
development and maintenance for adjacent roads and roadside facilities?
     How should aircraft access be managed?
     What is the appropriate level of development and 
maintenance for airstrips?
    The Forest Service is seeking information and comments from 
Federal, State and local agencies as well as individuals and 
organizations who may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed 
action. The Forest Service invites written comments and suggestions on 
the issues related to the proposal and the area being analyzed. 
Information received will be used in preparation of the Draft EIS and 
Final EIS. For most effective use, comments on potential issues should 
be submitted to the Forest Service within 45 days from the date of 
publication of this Notice in the Federal Register. Neutrally 
facilitated public meetings will be held in Grangeville, McCall, Boise, 
Pocatello, and Salmon, Idaho, and Hamilton, Montana, on December 5, 6, 
7, 8, 9, and 10, 1994, respectively, for the purpose of identifying 
issues, developing Desired Future Conditions and mapping potential 
management zones. A response card will be mailed to the persons and 
organizations on the ``Frankly Speaking'' mailing list. Similarly 
facilitated public meetings will be held in Cascade, Idaho Falls, 
Lewiston, and Nampa, Idaho, and Missoula, Montana, to solicit comments 
on potential indicators, standards and management prescriptions. 
Response cards will again be sent to the ``Frankly Speaking'' mailing 
list to solicit input on these topics. Agency-sponsored open house 
meetings will be held at the Forest Headquarters offices of the 
Bitterroot, Boise, Caribou, Nez Perce, Payette and Salmon-Challis 
National Forests to gather comments on the Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement. The date, time and location of all of the above meetings 
will be published in ``The Idaho Statesman'' (Boise, Idaho), ``The 
Missoulian'' (Missoula, Montana), ``The Lewiston Tribune'' (Lewiston, 
Idaho), ``The Star News (McCall, Idaho), ``The Post Register'' (Idaho 
Falls, Idaho) and ``The Recorder-Herald'' (Salmon, Idaho).
    Preparation of the EIS will include the following steps:
    1. Define the purpose of and need for action.
    2. Identify potential issues, desired future conditions and 
management zones.
    3. Eliminate issues of minor importance or those that have been 
covered by previous and relevant environmental analysis.
    4. Select issues to be analyzed in depth.
    5. Identify prospective indicators, standards and management 
prescriptions.
    7. Identify reasonable alternatives to the proposed action.
    8. Describe the affected environment.
    9. Identify the potential environmental effects of the 
alternatives.
    10. Select monitoring requirements.
    Steps 2, 3, and 4 will be completed through the scoping process.
    Steps 5 will consider a range of alternatives developed from the 
key issues. One of these will be the ``No Action'' alternative, in 
which the existing management direction would be maintained. Other 
alternatives will consider various combinations of indicators, 
standards, management zones and management prescriptions in response to 
issues.
    Step 8 will describe the physical, biological and social attributes 
of the area to be affected by this proposal, with special attention to 
the environmental factors that could be adversely affected.
    Step 9 will analyze the environmental effects of each alternative. 
This analysis will provide the rationale for amending the Land and 
Resource Management (Forest) Plans and will be consistent with National 
Forest Management Act requirements. The direct, indirect, and 
cumulative effects of each alternative will be analyzed and documented. 
In addition, management prescription or management zone specific 
mitigation measures will be identified and the effectiveness of these 
mitigation measures will be disclosed.
    The approximate boundary of the area used for this analysis is the 
Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness which includes almost the 
entire Middle Fork Salmon River drainage, the Main Salmon River 
drainage from Wheat Creek downstream to the South Fork Salmon River, 
excluding Little Mallard and Robertson Creeks and that portion of the 
Main Salmon River downstream from the South Fork Salmon River to Huntz 
Gulch on the South side of the river, the Big Creek drainage downstream 
from Smith Creek, and the South Fork Salmon River downstream from Knob 
Creek. A total of 2,361,767 acres in four counties (Custer, Idaho, 
Lemhi and Valley) is included in this Wilderness area. For a map, 
please refer to the ``Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness (North 
Half, South Half), available from the USDA, Forest Service, 
Intermountain Region, Ogden Utah 84401.
    The proposed management activities would be administered by the 
Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness Headquarters in Lemhi 
County, Idaho.
    Agency representatives and other interested people are invited to 
visit with Forest Service officials at any time during the EIS process. 
Three specific time periods are identified for the receipt of formal 
comments on the analysis. The three comment periods are, (1) during the 
scoping process, (2) during the draft indicators and standards 
identification and management prescriptions development phase, and (3) 
during the formal review period of the Draft EIS.
    The Draft EIS is estimated to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in October 
1995. At that time, the EPA will publish an availability notice of the 
Draft EIS in the Federal Register.
    The comment period on the Draft EIS will be 45 days from the date 
the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in 
the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in 
this proposed action participate at that time. To be most helpful, 
comments on the Draft EIS should be as specific as possible and may 
address the adequacy of the statement of merits of the alternatives 
discussed (see The Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for 
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental 
Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3).
    In addition, Federal court decisions have established that 
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 reviewers' positions and 
contentions. ``Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDDC'', 435 U.S. 
519, 553 (1978). Environmental objections that could have been raised 
at the draft stage may be waived if not raised until after completion 
of the final environmental impact statement. ``City of Angoon v. 
Hodel,'' (9th Circuit,m 1986 and ``Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. 
Harris,'' 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). The reason for this 
is to ensure 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.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns related to the proposed action, comments on the Draft EIS 
should be as specific as possible. Referring to specific pages or 
chapters of the Draft EIS is most helpful. Comments may also address 
the adequacy of the Draft EIS or the merits of the alternative 
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, 40 
CFR 1503.3, in addressing these points.
    The final EIS is expected to be released December 1, 1995.
    The Lead Forest Supervisory for the Frank Church-River of No Return 
Wilderness, who is the Responsible Official for the EIS, will then make 
a decision regarding this proposal after considering the comments, 
responses, and environmental consequences discussed in the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement, and applicable laws, regulations, and 
policies. The reasons for the decision will be documented in a Record 
of Decision.

    Dated: November 15, 1994.
Charles C. Wildes,
Lead Forest Supervisor, FC-RONR Wilderness.
[94-30047-Filed 12-6-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M