[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 16 (Friday, January 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3656-3657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-1728]


 ========================================================================
 Notices
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
 or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
 and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
 delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
 statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
 appearing in this section.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 16 / Friday, January 24, 1997 / 
Notices  

[[Page 3656]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Beaver Creek Ecosystem Management Project; Kootenai National 
Forest, Sanders County, Montana

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) for the Beaver Creek Ecosystem Management Project to 
disclose the effects of timber harvest, prescribed fire, road 
management and construction, noxious weed control, trailhead 
restoration, and lookout facility renovation in the Big Beaver and 
Little Beaver Creek drainages located approximately 8 air miles from 
Trout Creek, Montana. The purpose and need for this project was 
documented in the Beaver Creek Physiographic Area Landscape Assessment. 
The purposes are to provide for long-term sustainability of forest 
resources (i.e. vegetation resource, protection and enhancement of 
habitat for wildlife and fish species, recreation resources etc.), 
while contributing to natural recovery processes (which reduce impacts 
to resources) and enhancing recreational facilities for public use. The 
DEIS is expected to be filed with the EPA and available for public 
review by March 31, 1997.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before 
March 25, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the 
analysis should be sent to James I. Mershon, District Ranger, Cabinet 
Ranger District, 2693 Hwy 200, Trout Creek, Montana, 59874.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John Head, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Cabinet Ranger District. 
Phone: (406) 882-4451.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The decision area contains approximately 
55,000 acres within the Kootenai National Forest in Sanders County, 
Montana. All of the proposed projects are located in the Big Beaver and 
Little Beaver Creek drainages,which are tributary to the Clark Fork 
River, near Trout Creek, Montana. The legal location of the decision 
area is as follows: Sections 6-7, 17-19, and N \1/2\ Section 20, 
T22N,R30W; Sections 1-30 T22N,R31W; Sections 1-5, 8-12, 13-17, 20-24, 
25-29, 34-35, T22N, R32W;; Section 31, T23N,R30W; Sections 25-30, 31-
36, T23N, R31W; Sections 25-26, 32-36, T23N,R31W, Principal Montana 
Meridian.
    The Forest Service proposes to harvest approximately 19 million 
board feet of timber through application of a variety of harvest 
methods on approximately 5400 acres of forest land. An estimated 12 
miles of temporary road and 120 miles of road reconstruction would be 
needed to access timber harvest areas. All temporary roads would be 
obliterated following completion of sale activities. The proposal also 
includes prescribed burning on approximately 3000 acres to enhance 
wildlife habitat. An estimated 38 miles of road would be treated by 
rehabilitation of stream crossings, recontouring, ripping and seeding 
etc. The type of treatment would be based on site specific conditions. 
To help provide habitat and food for wildlife associated with the 
alpine and subalpine ecosystem, white bark pine seedlings would be 
planted in high elevation communities on approximately 20 acres. The 
Forest Service also proposes to conduct channel rehabilitation on 
approximately one mile of stream. The methods used to restore the 
channel sections would include placement of channel stabilizing 
structures such as revetments, rock weirs, and sediment traps as 
needed. In addition, to help improve fish habitat large woody debris 
will be recruited on approximately 5 miles of stream. Some of the 
recruitment may include limited timber felling within the riparian 
areas. A lookout structure that is rented out to the public on a 
nightly basis is scheduled for renovation. Renovations may include 
painting, structural support and reroofing. Three trailheads, and 
numerous dispersed camping sites are propose for rehabilitation. This 
rehabilitation would be based on site specific conditions and include 
such things as creating barriers (eg rock) for vehicle restriction 
where necessary. Trailhead work would include providing suitable 
parking and signing In addition, the proposed action includes a noxious 
weed control program designed to slow the spread of knapweed (Centauria 
maculosa) and stop any new infestations of other noxious plant species.
    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 proposed projects encompass several management areas (MAs): 
2,5,10,11,12,13,15,16,18 and 19. This proposal includes openings 
greater than 40 acres, to emulate historic disturbance patterns, and 
project specific Forest Plan amendments for: (1) Open road density in 
MA 12 (big game summer range); (2) removal of snag habitat in MA 10 
(big game winter range); and (3) timber harvest in MA 13 (old growth). 
Project specific amendments are allowed when it is determined during 
project design that the best way to meet the goals of the Forest Plan 
conflicts with a Forest plan standard (Forest Plan Volume (II-20).
    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 both private and National Forest lands will be 
considered. The EIS will disclose the analysis of site-specific 
mitigation measures and their effectiveness.

Preliminary Issues

    Tentatively, several preliminary issues of concern have been 
identified. There issues are briefly described below:
     Water and Fisheries Resources--Rivers and streams are 
complex and dynamic natural systems. The physical, chemical and 
biological conditions in

[[Page 3657]]

them are a result of all the natural and human-caused events within the 
watershed. There are three main concerns related to the water and 
fisheries resources and the effects of the proposed action. (1) Amount 
of large woody debris; (2) streamflow regime; and (3) sediment sources.
     Big Game wildlife--open road densities are currently over 
the recommended amount for big game habitat effectiveness and security. 
There is concern regarding the effect of the proposed action on big 
game security and habitat.
Other issues commonly associated with such activities include: effects 
on soils, air quality, sensitive plants, and old growth. This list may 
be verified, expanded, or modified based on public scoping for this 
proposal.

Decisions To Be Made

    The Kootenai Forest Supervisor will decide the following:
     Whether or not to harvest timber and, if so, identify the 
selection of, and site-specific location of, appropriate timber 
management practices (silvicultural prescription, logging system, fuels 
treatment, riparian habitat conservation areas and reforestation), road 
construction/reconstruction necessary to provide access and to achieve 
other resource objectives, and appropriate mitigation measures.
     Whether water and fish rehabilitation projects (including 
road obliteration) and other project area improvements (including work 
on trailheads, dispersed campsites, noxious weeds etc) should be 
implemented and, if so, to what extent.
     Whether or not wildlife enhancement projects (including 
white bark pine planting and prescribed burning) should be implemented 
and, if so, to what extent.
     Whether road access restrictions or other actions are 
necessary to meet big game wildlife needs.
     Whether project specific Forest Plan amendments are 
necessary to meet goals and objectives of the Forest Plan.
     What, if any, specific project monitoring requirements 
would be needed to assure mitigation measures are implemented and 
effective.

Public Involvement and Scoping

    Public participation is an important part of the analysis process, 
commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) which will 
begin with the publication of this notice. The public is encouraged to 
take part in the process and 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. 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.
     Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
     Explore additional alternatives which will be derived from 
issues recognized during scoping activities.
     Identify potential environmental effects of this project 
and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and 
connected actions).

Estimated Dates for Filing

    While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time, 
comments received within 60 days of the publication of this notice will 
be especially useful in the preparation of the Draft EIS. The Draft EIS 
is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
and to be available for public review by March 31, 1997. 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. It is very important that those interested in the 
management of this area participate at that time.
    The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by June 15, 1997. 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. v. 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 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 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

    Robert L. Schrenk, Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest, 506 
US Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923 is the Responsible Official. As the 
Responsible Official I will decide if the proposed project will be 
implemented. I will document the decision and reasons for the decision 
in the Record of Decision. I have delegated the responsibility to 
prepare the EIS to James I. Mershon, District Ranger, Cabinet Ranger 
District.

    Dated: January 16, 1977.
Lawrence R. Cron,
Acting Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 97-1728 Filed 1-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M