[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 250 (Friday, December 30, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-32147]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 30, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service

 

BlueGrass Bound Ecosystem Management Project; Idaho Panhandle 
National Forest, Boundary County, ID

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the USDA Forest Service is 
gathering information in order to prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) for an Ecosystem Management project in the United 
States portion of the Boundary Creek watershed. The purpose and need 
for action is to trend or sustain the environment in the BlueGrass 
Bound project area towards the desired condition. The desired condition 
is to sustainably support healthy forest and aquatic ecosystems--within 
the project area as part of the Selkirk Ecosystem and the Idaho 
Panhandle National Forest.
    The proposed management activities include watershed, and fisheries 
and wildlife habitat improvement projects. Prescribed fire, timer 
harvesting, road closures, road reconstruction and obliteration, 
limited road construction, fish structures, and wildlife security areas 
are all being considered to achieve the desired condition. The Forest 
Service estimates that this proposed action would include 1,007 acres 
of underburning (including harvest units), 2,088 acres of timber 
harvesting, 23.8 miles of road obliteration, 10.0 miles of road 
reconstruction, 130.2 miles of road stabilization, 1.9 miles of new 
road construction, 1.5 miles of stream rehabilitation, 14.1 miles of 
revegetation, and 84 instream structures for fish habitat. Most of the 
proposed timber harvest locations are located on areas with the highest 
stand treatment needs; low current and potential caribou habitat value; 
low potential for producing and delivering sediment to streams; and 
high potential for creating or improving habitat for wildlife species 
such as flammulated owl, lynx, black-backed and pileated woodpeckers. 
Part of the proposed action involves harvesting timber from existing 
roads within the Saddle Mountain Roadless Area (1-154). These proposed 
actions are being considered together because they represent either 
connected, similar, or cumulative actions as defined by the Council on 
Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.25).

DATES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of this 
analysis would be most useful if received by February 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to District Ranger, Bonners Ferry 
Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Route 4, Box 4860, 
Bonners Ferry, Idaho 83805-9764.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Deiter, EIS Team Leader, Bonners 
Ferry Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Phone (208) 
267-5561.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Development of the alternatives is underway. 
The Forest Service is continuing to seek information and comments from 
all parties who may be interested in or affected by the proposed 
action. The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. The 
analysis will consider the No Action alternative in which none of the 
proposed activities would be implemented. Under No Action, no 
management would be undertaken to actively trend the project area 
towards the desired condition. The proposed action and alternatives 
will respond in part to the purpose and need by addressing the desired 
condition objectives to varying degrees. Three action alternatives to 
the proposed action are being considered at this time.
    1. One alternative would only include watershed, fisheries, and 
wildlife improvements that do not involve harvesting timber.
    2. One alternative would place more emphasis than the proposed 
action on managing vegetation to maintain stand growth and reduce the 
risk of disturbance from insect, disease, and fire. This alternative 
would also include watershed, fisheries, and wildlife improvements.
    3. At least one alternative in addition to No Action would not have 
any activity within the Saddle Mountain Roadless area.
    The draft environmental impact statement should be available for 
public review in March of 1995. The comment period on the draft EIS 
will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency 
publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register. After 
this public comment period, the comments received will be analyzed and 
considered by the Forest Service in preparing the final environmental 
impact statement. The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by July of 
1995. The District Ranger, who is the responsible official for this 
EIS, will make a decision regarding this proposal after considering the 
comments and responses, environmental consequences discussed in the 
final EIS, and applicable laws, regulations, and policies. This 
decision and reasons for the decision will be documented in a Record of 
Decision.
    Public participation is an important part of the analysis, 
commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7). 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. A public meeting and 
open house has already been held. Additional meetings will be held if 
necessary, but are not 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 Idaho Panhandle 
Forest Plan EIS.
    4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
    5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action 
and alternatives (i.e., cumulative effects).
    6. Determine potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.
    Some public comments have already been used during the initial 
interdisciplinary review of the original project proposal. The comments 
that we have received so far relate to the following elements of the 
BlueGrass Bound landscape:
    1. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive plant and animal species.
    2. Watershed and Fisheries.
    3. Roadless.
    4. Visual Quality.
    This list will be verified, expanded, or modified based on 
additional public scoping and interdisciplinary review of this 
proposal. Most of the above comments received so far have been more 
categorically in nature than site specific. Site specific comments are 
the most useful information that we can have for improving the design 
and implementation of this project.
    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. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the 
draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may 
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 
1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) andWisconsin Heritages, Inc.  v. Harris,  
490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of those court 
rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed 
action participate by the close of the 45-day scoping 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 developing issues and alternatives in the final EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
on the proposed action, comments on this notice or the draft EIS should 
be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to 
specific pages or chapters of this notice or the draft EIS. Comments 
may also address the adequacy of the draft EIS 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.
    I am the responsible official for this environmental impact 
statement. My address is Bonners Ferry Ranger District, Rt. 4 Box 4860, 
Bonners Ferry, ID 83805-9764.

    Dated: December 16, 1994.
Allen B. Chrisman,
Acting District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 94-32147 Filed 12-29-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M