[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 143 (Friday, July 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40047-40048]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19590]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


East Big Red Timber Sale, Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest, 
Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District, Routt County, Colorado

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Medicine 
Bow-Routt National Forest, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District will 
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess and disclose 
the environmental effects of the proposed East Big Red Timber Sale. 
Estimated dates for filing the draft EIS is November, 1997, followed by 
the final decision in February, 1998. The area location is 
approximately 34 miles north of Steamboat Springs, Colorado, in 
sections 13, 23, 25, & 36 of T11N, R85W, sections 7, 8, 16, 17, 18, 19, 
20, 30, 31, & 32 of T11N, R84W, sections 5 & 6 of T10N, R84W.
    All lands within the project area are currently allocated to 
Management Area 7E, as described in the current Forest Land Management 
and Resource Plan for the Routt National Forest, approved in 1983. 
Forested lands within this management area are designated as suitable 
for timber production by the forest plan. Following is a summary of the 
general forest plan direction for the area.
    Management Area 7E-Timber Production: Emphasis is placed on wood 
fiber production and utilization of a size and quality suitable for 
sawtimber. Timber harvest must meet a Visual Quality Objective (VQO) of 
partial retention in foregoing areas as seen from open arterial and 
collector roads as well as main trails. A VQO of modification applies 
to all other areas.
    The Forest Plan is being revised as required by the National Forest 
Management Act. The preferred alternative for the forest plan revision 
(alternative C as described in the DEIS) allocates the majority of the 
project area to management area 5.13, which is to be managed for the 
production of commercial wood products. This allocation includes most 
of the stands proposed for harvest. A few smaller areas allocated to 
management area 5.11, provides for a mix of forest products, forage, 
wildlife habitat and recreation.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions on the draft Environmental 
Impact Statement should be received on or before the 45 day period from 
the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of 
availability in the Federal Register.
    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) 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 them and respond to 
them in the final Environmental Impact Statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft 
Environmental Impact Statement 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 draft 
Environmental Impact 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.

ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest 
Supervisor, Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest, 2468 Jackson Street, 
Laramie, Wyoming 82070-6535. Written comments and suggestions 
concerning the scope of the analysis should be sent to Sherry Reed, 
District Ranger, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District, P.O. Box 
771212, Steamboat Springs, Colorado 80477.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names 
and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the 
public record on this proposed action and will be available for public 
inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and 
considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments will not have 
standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR Parts 215 or 
217. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request 
the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing 
how the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality. 
Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that, under the 
FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very limited 
circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest Service 
will inform the requester of the agency's decision regarding the 
request for confidentiality, and where the request is denied, the 
agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the 
comments may be resubmitted with or without name and address within 10 
days.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirby Self, Interdisciplinary Team 
Leader, Hahns Peak/Bears Ears Ranger District. Phone: (970) 879-1870.

[[Page 40048]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Proposed Action

    The proposal is to harvest and manage approximately 880 acres of 
mature sawtimber stands within the analysis area. The proposal includes 
the following activities:
     Treatment by harvesting approximately 8.0 MMBF of 
commercial timber using both even and uneven-aged silvicultural 
systems. Approximate acres to be treated:
      380 acres--shelterwood & group selections
      470 acres--clearcut
      25 acres--commercial thin
     Construction of approximately 18 miles of specified road 
and 2 \1/2\ miles of road reconstruction.
     Post sale work could include, but is not limited to; 
regeneration and stocking surveys to assure proper reforestation of 
harvested stands; noxious weed spraying; and thinning of past harvest 
areas.

Other Opportunities

     Remedy road maintenance and erosion problems on road 
500.1D by relocating. Obliteration of existing road to eliminate 
trespass concerns and maintenance problems.
     Reduce sediment production from the Hare Trail (FDT 1199) 
by relocating or eliminating trail.
     Reduce fuel loading in the head of the Middle Fork Little 
Snake River.
    All proposed activities would take place within the East Big Red 
analysis area, and are planned for implementation starting in 1999.

Decision to Be Made

    The Medicine Bow-Routt Forest Supervisor will need to make an 
informed decision about the selection of one alternative among several. 
The issues and alternatives developed by the IDT members and public 
commenters must be analyzed and displayed clearly. From the project 
record alone, the Forest Supervisor and others who may review the 
decision, must be able to fully understand the consequences of 
implementating the selected alternative.

Preliminary Issues

     Effects of timber harvest and road construction on 
watershed condition and thus water quality.
     Effects of timber harvest on wildlife habitat with 
potential reduction of big game hiding cover along open roads and 
around meadows from timber harvest, and also the loss of old growth and 
goshawk habitat.
     Effects on range management.
     Impacts on recreation facilities such as trails and 
dispersed camp sites.
     Effects on visual quality primarily from forest roads 550 
and 505, and those roads and units which are adjacent to trails 1199, 
1203, and 1204.
     Effects on roadless character. Several units and roads are 
proposed within the Dome Peak Roadless Area.

Scope of the Analysis

    This environmental analysis shall consider the environmental 
consequences of the proposed action, as well as alternatives reasonably 
implemented, while meeting the purpose and need of the action.

    Dated: July 11, 1997.
Jerry E. Schmidt,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 97-19590 Filed 7-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-GM-M