[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