[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 120 (Monday, June 23, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33824-33826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-16260]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Spruce Ecosystem Recovery Project, Dixie National Forest, Iron
and Kane Counties, Utah
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Forest Service, USDA, will
prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Forest Service
to implement several proposals within the Spruce Ecosystem Recovery
Project area, on the Cedar City Ranger District, Dixie National Forest.
These proposals include: (1) Commercial salvage, sanitation and density
management timber harvest, and associated road construction/closures;
(2) commercial and non-commercial regeneration treatments of aspen
forests; (3) the establishment of defensible fire suppression zones;
and, (4) management ignited prescribed fire. Multiple decisions may be
issued upon completion of the analysis; however, the cumulative effects
of all the proposed actions will be disclosed in the EIS. The purpose
of these proposals is to initiate actions that would improve forest
health and diversity, accelerate reforestation, and meet woody debris
objectives within the project area. The project area is located
approximately 15 miles east of Cedar City, Utah. The project would be
implemented in accordance with direction in the Land and Resource
Management Plan (LRMP, 1986) for the Dixie National Forest.
In addition to the management activities proposed to be
implemented, an amendment to the LRMP is being proposed. This amendment
is necessary in order to make the LRMP conform to the Regional Guide.
The amendment is described below under Supplementary Information.
The agency gives notice that the environmental analysis process is
underway. During the analysis process, an issue surfaced that warranted
disclosure of effects under an EIS. This issue is the high degree of
interest associated with the potential to alter the undeveloped
character of a portion of the project area due to proposed road
construction and vegetable management treatments.
Interested and potentially affected persons, along with local,
state, and other federal agencies, are invited to participate in, and
contribute to, the environmental analysis. The Dixie National Forest
invites written input regarding issues specific to the proposed action.
DATES: Written comments to be considered in the preparation of the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) should be submitted by
July, 1997, which is at least 30 days following the publication of this
notice in the Federal Register. The DEIS is expected to be available
for review by August, 1997. The Record of Decision and Final
Environmental Impact Statement are expected to be available by October,
1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: District Ranger, Cedar City
Ranger District, 82 North 100 East, P.O. Box 627, Cedar City, Utah
84721-0627; FAX: (801) 865-3791; E-mail: Brunswick__Nancy/
[email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Direct questions about the proposed action and EIS to Phillip G.
Eisenhauer, Project Environmental Coordinator, by mail at 82 North 100
East, P.O. Box 627, Cedar City, Utah 84721-0627; or by phone at (801)
865-3700; FAX: (801) 865-3791; E-mail: Brunswick__Nancy/
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed projects are located in an
analysis area of about 48,274 acres of National Forest System (NFS)
lands. Approximately 24,926 acres of the project area are forested and
13,348 acres are non-forest. The proposed commercial conifer treatment
areas were recently or are currently infested with spruce beetle
(Dendroctonus rufipennis). Spruce beetle populations are at epidemic
levels; they have killed thousands of spruce trees, on approximately
7,400 acres on the Cedar City Ranger District. In some sites where
spruce was the dominant overstory, few live trees remain. Because
spruce beetle populations have been expanding since the early 1990's,
an additional 15,000 acres of spruce forest are at risk of beetle
infestation.
The purpose of the project is to salvage the dead and dying
Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir trees to recover wood products that
would otherwise be lost, while still meeting desired resource
objectives for standing dead and down tree material. Also, spruce
dominated stands that are classified as moderate risk to spruce beetle
infestation would be treated by commercial and non-commercial
sanitation treatments to alter the forest conditions that contribute to
this risk. These stands were previously thinned with an even aged
silvicultural system to a residual basal area of about 130 square feet.
Reducing the risk in these stands would provide the best opportunity to
maintain a green, forested condition as well as maintain important
resource values associated with maintaining spruce forests, such as old
growth, wildlife habitat, and scenic quality near vistas and along
scenic highway corridors.
More specifically, sanitation treatments would involve the removal
of uninfested conifer trees of varying sizes in order to alter forest
densities, species composition, and size class. Currently, stands in
the moderate risk class contain about 130 square feet of basal area per
[[Page 33825]]
acre. These treatments would involve reducing the overall stand basal
area per acre (all species) to 100 square feet or less. This will
reduce risk of future infestation by bark beetles.
Rehabilitation of areas heavily impacted by bark beetle mortality
through the completion of natural and artificial regeneration
activities would occur as needed. An estimated 585 acres will be
artificially regenerated. Reforestation is essential to providing for
the most rapid progression toward the desired future condition for
forest cover in the project area.
In addition to commercial and non-commercial treatments, and
related rehabilitation treatments, wildland fuel reduction treatments
are proposed in areas where fuel loadings exceed levels necessary to
meet desired fire suppression objectives. Treatments proposed include
management ignited prescribed fire and the establishment of Defensible
Fire Suppression (DFS) Zones. Both treatments are intended to reduce
the risk of catastrophic fire, especially in wildland-urban interface
areas.
The use of prescribed fire would occur within two areas in the
project area. One area is located in the Center Creek drainage and the
other in the Hancock Peak Roadless Inventory Area. The purpose of the
reintroduction of fire is to reduce loadings, to create diversity in
the landscape vegetation, and reduce the risk of catastrophic fire.
DFS Zones would be established along the perimeter of the Meadow
Lake subdivision. Where fuel conditions in this location currently meet
the desired conditions, no treatments would occur. DFS Zones are
created by implementing fuel ladder (vertical continuity of fuels from
ground level to the forest crowns) and fuel loading reduction
treatments; that is, thinning all species of vegetation in order to
reduce the probability of crown fires carrying through these Zones. The
treatments would include the use of commercial and non-commercial tree
removal, chipping, hand and machine piling and burning of piles; and
broadcast burning of fuels. The DFS Zones would be between 100 to 300
feet wide depending upon the vegetation, fire occurrence, and
topography, and would be located entirely on NFS lands. It is estimated
that the number of acres proposed for establishment of DFS Zones would
not exceed 50 acres.
Regeneration treatment of aspen forests is also included in this
proposal. Treatments would include both commercial harvest and non-
commercial site preparation (i.e.; cut and burn, broadcast burn). About
8,176 acres of forest are dominated by aspen in the project area. Most
are being converted to conifers by natural succession and the lack of
fire in the ecosystem. Most vegetation management treatments would lead
to an increase in the abundance of aspen, which is the desired goal for
resource values identified in the project area (i.e.; wildlife habitat
improvement, vegetation diversity, and visual variety and color in the
landscape). Up to 1,000 acres would be regenerated over the next five-
year period.
Vegetation management treatments involving salvage/sanitation,
density management, aspen regeneration, prescribed fire, and
establishment of DFS Zones would occur on National Forest lands located
within portions of Sections 28-33 of Township(T) 35 South(S), Range(R)
8 West(W); Sections 3-17, 20-24, 26-35 of T.36 S., R8 W.; Sections 3-
10, 15-21, 30-32 of T.37 S., R.8. W.; Sections 1, 2, 11-14, 23-26, 35-
36 of T.37 S., R.8\1/2\ W.; Sections 1-6, 8-15, 24-25 and 36 of T.36
S., R.9 W.; Sections 10-16, 22-27, 35-36 of T.37 S., R.9 W.; Salt Lake
City (SLC) Meridian, Iron County, UT; Sections 1-2 of T.38 S., R.9 W.;
and Sections 5-6 of T.38 S., R.8W., SLC Meridian, Kane County, UT.
The transportation system required to access commercial harvest
areas is largely in place. However, to access all identified moderate
to high risk stands, about five miles of temporary and specified road
construction would be required. The specified road construction is
proposed to occur in an area having undeveloped character.
All newly constructed temporary roads would be obliterated upon
completion of the project, and any new permanent or systems road would
be physically closed. In addition, approximately eight miles or
existing roads that would be used or are located within treatment areas
would be closed upon completion of project activities to meet the
desired condition for other resources.
In addition to the vegetation management treatments, and related
activities, and amendment to the Dixie National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan is being proposed.
Size of Created Openings
Proposed changes to DNF-LRMP Management Direction and Standards and
Guidelines:
a. The following changes are proposed to general direction E03, 06,
and 07, section 6(a), (b) and (c) found on page IV-40 of the DNF-LRMP:
``6. The maximum size of openings created by the application of
clearcut even-aged silvicultural treatments will be 40 acres regardless
of forest cover type. A proposal for larger openings created by the
application of clearcut even-aged silvicultural treatment are subject
to a 60-day public review and require approval by the Regional Forester
as specified in the Regional Guide of 1984. Exceptions to this are:
(a) Larger openings which are the result of natural catastrophic
events such as fire, insect or disease attach, and windstorm. These
larger openings may be commercially salvaged in blocks larger than 60
acres without requirement for 60-day public review and approval by the
Regional Forester. This does not preclude public notification and
participation requirements as outlined under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA).
(b) The area does not meet the definition of a created opening.
b. In addition to this change under the general direction of the
DNF-LRMP at page IV-40, the proposed E03, 06, and 07, section 6 (a) and
(b) just defined is proposed to be added to each specific Management
Area direction, where applicable.
The proposed actions would implement management direction,
contribute to meeting the goals and objectives identified in the DNF-
LRMP, and move the project area toward the desired condition. This
project EIS would be tiered to the Dixie National Forest LRMP EIS
(1986), which provides goals, objectives, standards and guidelines for
the various activities and land allocations on the Forest.
Based upon the responses to the public scoping effort conducted in
April, 1997, the issues that have been identified include: the effects
of activities on the undeveloped character of areas within the project
area; the effects of the activities on the economic livelihood of local
communities (Brian Head Town); the effects of an increase/decrease in
access in the area; and, the effects on the Hancock Peak Roadless Area.
Tentative alternatives to the proposed action include: (1) No
action (the project would not take place, but current management would
continue); (2) no harvest activities associated with road construction
within the undeveloped areas and no prescribed fire treatment within
the focus area in Center Creek; and, (3) no treatments within the
Hancock Peak Roadless Area.
As lead agency, the Forest Service would analyze and document
direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects for a range of
alternatives. Each alternative would include mitigation measures and
monitoring requirements.
[[Page 33826]]
Hugh C. Thompson, Forest Supervisor, Dixie National Forest, is the
responsible official. He can be reached by mail at 82 North 100 East,
P.O. Box 580, Cedar City, Utah, 84720-0580.
The Forest Service is seeking comments from individuals,
organizations, and local, state, and Federal agencies who may be
interested in or affected by the proposed action. Scoping notices have
been sent to potentially affected persons and those currently on the
Dixie National Forest mailing list that have expressed interest in
timber management proposals, proposals relating to wildlife habitat
modifications and Forest Plan amendments. Other interested individuals,
organizations, or agencies may have their names added to the mailing
list for this project at any time by submitting a request to: Phillip
G. Eisenhauer, Project Environmental Coordinator, 82 North 100 East,
P.O. Box 627, Cedar City, UT 84720-0627.
The analysis area includes both National Forest System lands and
private lands. Proposed treatments would occur only on National Forest
system lands. No federal or local permits, licenses or entitlements
would be needed.
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
the DEIS must structure their participation in the environmental review
of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the
reviewers' position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.
v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that
could have been raised at the DEIS 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, (9th Circuit, 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 the time it can meaningfully
consider them and respond to them in the final EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns about the proposed action, comments on the DEIS should be
as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to
specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also
address the adequacy of the statement 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.
Dated: June 13, 1997.
Hugh C. Thompson,
Forest Supervisor, Dixie National Forest.
[FR Doc. 97-16260 Filed 6-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M