[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24829-24830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11451]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Charlie Tyson Project; Idaho Panhandle National Forests, St.
Maries Ranger District, Benewah County, Idaho
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Forest Service is gathering
information to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). This
EIS is proposing management activities designed to move the Charlie
Tyson project area toward its desired future condition, a healthy and
diverse ecosystem. Desired future condition goals specific to the
project area were developed by an interdisciplinary team for the
purpose of maintaining ecosystem productivity and diversity while
incorporating human values and needs. The goals for this project area
are listed below:
1. The first goal is to provide vegetation patterns and natural
variability that include important components within the range of
historic levels. Using historic vegetation patterns as a reference
point, the project will strive to maintain more mature timber (80+
years old) in larger patches than currently exist in the project area.
To maintain historic natural variability for the project area, the
project will strive to promote more canopy layers and more species
components. This entails perpetuating seral tree species, subalpine
fir/spruce, quaking aspen and open ridge tops with large ponderosa
pine. This shift toward the historic range of vegetation patterns also
entails maintaining riparian area with stable stream channels and fish
habitats supporting viable populations of desired fish species; thus
the area would be fully supporting beneficial uses.
2. The second goal is to incorporate additional human values and
needs by providing commercial wood products, a long range
transportation plan where only essential roads for land management
exist, a visually attractive landscape, a diverse array of recreational
activities and maintaining existing grazing allotments. There are areas
with past clearcut harvest units that detract from the visual
attractiveness of the landscape; the harsh edges of these clearcuts
could be softened by partial cutting. For recreation, emphasis for this
area is on dispersed use and trail development; unauthorized trail use
will be addressed and three historic Forest Service trails could be
added to the trail system.
3. The third goal is to maintain wildlife habitats. Currently, the
project area has a lack of quality security for wildlife. Activities
proposed will include restricting trail and road access for various
kinds of users.
It will take time to implement the desired future condition
described above; proposed management activities would entail using
techniques to shift the project area toward desired future condition.
Management techniques would include prescribed fire, timber harvesting,
road building, road use restrictions and closures, wildlife security
area(s), watershed/fish habitat improvements and trail development. The
Forest Service estimates that this proposed action would include: 415
acres of underburning, 2773 acres of timber harvesting (commercial
thinning--1892 acres, group selection--46 acres, irregular
shelterwood--381 acres, group shelterwood--403 acres, seedtree--20
acres, clearcutting--31 acres), 10.6 miles of new road construction,
1.7 road miles taken off the road system and a 6200 acre area closure
to all motorized vehicles in the Charlie-Preston drainages (providing
5000 acres of wildlife security). The proposed action also entails
implementing fish/watershed improvement projects in the East Fork of
Charlie, Preston and Brown Creeks and adding three historic Forest
Service Trails back on the trail system for maintenance.
DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of this analysis must be
received within 30 days from the date of this publication in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to District Ranger, St. Maries Ranger
District, P.O. Box 407, St. Maries, ID 83861.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions about the proposed action
and EIS should be directed to Tracy J. Gravelle, St. Maries Ranger
District, Phone: 208-245-2531.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Charlie Tyson project area lies within
Benewah County, Idaho and encompasses the Charlie Creek drainage. It is
located approximately 1 air mile south of Emida, Idaho. The project
area contains 18,100 acres of which approximately 14,400 acres are
administered by the Forest Service. Management activities would be
administered by the St. Maries Ranger District of the Idaho Panhandle
National Forests. This EIS will tier to the Forest Plan (September
1987) which provides overall guidance for the Idaho Panhandle National
Forests in terms of Goals, Objectives, Standards and Guidelines, and
Management Area direction.
Preliminary scoping, including public and other agency
participation, was initiated in August 1991 and has recommenced this
year. A public meeting for the area was held on September 4, 1991 in
St. Maries, Idaho. An additional public open house was held in the town
of Emida, Idaho on [[Page 24830]] January 19, 1994. Two periods of time
are identified for the receipt of comments on this analysis. These two
public comment periods are: During this scoping process and the period
between draft and final environmental impact statements. Comments
received within 30 days from the date of this publication (Federal
Register) will be especially useful in the preparation of the draft
EIS.
Several issues have been identified from scoping, field surveys and
reconnaissance. The principal issues identified to date are:
1. The vegetation patterns and species composition of the area do
not mimic the natural variability noted from data compiled in the early
1900's.
2. There is a lack of quality wildlife security which is
perpetuated by existing road management and well established All
Terrain Vehicle use in the project area.
3. The forest surrounding the project area is fairly well
fragmented.
4. There are areas with past clearcut harvest units that detract
from the visual attractiveness of the landscape.
5. There is unauthorized trail building in the area.
6. The old Forest Service Nakarna-Tyson (#338), Eena Creek (#337)
and Moolock Creek (#320) trails lie within the project area. These
trails are still being used by the public and are in good condition.
This is an opportunity to put this trail back on the system.
7. There are some areas needing watershed/fish habitat
rehabilitation and this is an opportunity to complete this work. In
addition, if management activities were to be implemented, what would
be potential impacts on the fish habitat, water quality and stream
channel equilibrium.
8. If management activities were to be implemented, what would be
the potential impacts on wildlife habitats.
9. How much sustainable timber harvest is available from the
project area.
10. The local community has voiced their concern over availability
of small timber sales. These sales enable smaller timber operators the
opportunity to purchase timber sales.
Development of alternatives is underway. The analysis will consider
the No Action alternative in addition to the proposed action (described
above) and two alternative actions. The two alternative actions would
respond in varying degrees to the purpose and need defined above. These
two alternatives are as follows:
1. One alternative would confine proposed timber management
activities to areas which can be reached by existing roads, i.e. no new
system roads would be necessary. This proposal would include
underburning, timber harvesting, a wildlife security area in the
Charlie-Preston Creek drainages, watershed/fish improvements and trail
development. Potential harvest units for this alternative present many
small sale opportunities.
2. One alternative is being proposed for management activities that
are limited to certain areas of the project area. This addresses the
wildlife security issue for a different part of the project area. This
alternative would include underburning, timber harvesting, road
construction, potential road obliteration, a wildlife security area in
the Eena, Moolock, Brown, Pamas and Short Creek drainages, watershed/
fish improvements and trail development. Potential harvest units for
this alternative present many small sale opportunities.
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice at this early stage 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 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. 334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Reviewers may
wish to refer to CEQ regulations 40 CFR 1503.3.
The draft environmental impact statement should be available for
public review in May, 1994. The final EIS is scheduled to be completed
by September, 1994. The District Ranger, who is the responsible
official for this EIS, will make a decision regarding this proposal.
This decision and reasons for the decision will be documented in a
Record of Decision.
Dated: March 3, 1995.
Bradley J. Gilbert,
District Ranger, St. Maries Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle National
Forests.
The policy of the USDA Forest Service prohibits discrimination on
the basis of race, color, national origin, age, religion, sex
disability, familial status, or political affiliation. People believing
they have been discriminated against in any Forest Service related
activity should write to: Chief, Forest Service, USDA, P.O. Box 96090,
Washington, DC 20090-6090.
[FR Doc. 95-11451 Filed 5-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M