[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 83 (Friday, April 30, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23263-23265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-10808]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
White Pine Creek Project; Kootenai National Forest, Sanders
County, MT
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 White Pine Creek Project to disclose the
effects of timber harvest, prescribed fire, road management including
construction, reconstruction and obliteration, fish habitat
improvement, steam channel reconstruction, trailhead parking area
improvement, and aspen restoration, in the White Pine and Little Trout
Creek drainages located approximately 5 air miles south of Trout Creek,
Montana. The purpose and need for action is to: (1) Enhance and
maintain vegetative communities within the project area that promote
overall forest health. Focus management activities on stands which have
high levels of mortality due to root disease and white pine blister
rust. Focus on stands that need management activities in order to
perpetuate old growth ponderosa pine ecosystems. Create forage openings
for big game animals and other wildlife; (2) Maintain habitat for big
game, specifically wildlife security; (3) Maintain, enhance and restore
hydrologic function and fisheries habitat, within the White Pine
Project Area; (4) Maintain or enhance visual resources as seen from
critical viewpoints within the Trout Creek community; and (5) Provide a
transportation system that maintains road and trail access to meet
recreational and other public needs.
The DEIS is expected to be filed with the EPA and available for
public review by September, 1999.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before
June 1, 1999.
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: Contact Dave Clay, Interdisciplinary
Team Leader, Cabinet Ranger District, Phone: (406) 827-3533.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The decision area contains approximately
40,000 acres within the Kootenai National Forest in Sanders County,
Montana. All of the proposed projects are located in the White Pine and
Little Trout Creek drainages, which are tributaries to the Clark Fork
River, near Trout Creek, Montana. The legal location of the National
Forest lands within the decision area are as follows: all or portions
of Section 4-5, T22N, R32W; Sections 3-11, 14-24, 27-30, T23N, R31W;
Section 1-3, 10-17, 20-29, 31-34, T23N, R32W; Sections 31-33, T24N,
R31W; Section 24-26, 35-36, T24N, R32W, Principal Montana Meridian.
The Forest Service proposes to harvest approximately 33,000 hundred
cubic feet (equivalent to 15 million board feet, MMBF) of timber
through the application of a variety of harvest methods on
approximately 2,300 acres of forest land. Approximately 1,200 acres
would be logged with a helicopter, 700 acres with a skyline yarder, and
400 acres by a tractor. Silviculture systems include 1,200 acres of
regeneration harvest and 1,100 of commercial thinning. Vegetation
management also includes approximately 5 acres of aspen regeneration.
An estimated 5 miles of new permanent road, 12 miles of new temporary
roads and 33 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 1,000 acres to reduce natural fuels
and enhance wildlife habitat. An estimated 19 miles of road would be
obliterated by the timber purchaser and another 31 miles of road would
be obliterated with watershed funding by rehabilitation of stream
crossings, recontouring, scarification and seeding. The Forest Service
also proposes to improve fish habitat through the placement of instream
structures and large woody debris on 4 miles of White Pine Creek,
stabilize stream channels in 6.7 miles by placing large woody debris
and large rock structures in damaged sections to protect the stream
channel and provide fish habitat. Reconstruct the stream channel in 2.7
miles of White Pine Creek and plant riparian vegetation along
streamcourses. The watershed and fisheries work would be based on site
specific conditions and is contingent on the availability of funding.
Improvement in trailhead parking along the White Pine Creek Road
#215 is proposed for both the Reader Gulch trail #749 and the Grays
Gulch trail #756. Trailhead work would include providing suitable
parking and signing.
Lynx habitat would also be created by small regeneration units in
high elevation lodgepole pine stands on approximately 10 acres.
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 includes activities in several management areas
(MAs): 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, and 19. A portion of the Trout
Creek Inventoried Roadless Area #664, is included within the project
area. No activities are proposed within this roadless area. This
proposal includes 4 openings greater than 40 acres (size range is 60 to
150 acres), to treat and regenerate areas experiencing heavy root
disease induced mortality (Regional Forester approval for exceeding the
forty acre regeneration harvest would be required prior to signing the
Record of Decision); and three Forest Plan project specific 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). Forest Plan 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).
White Pine Creek has been designated by the State of Montana as a
Water Quality Limited Segment (WQLS), because of stream alterations due
to agricultural uses.
Range of Alternatives
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.
[[Page 23264]]
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, if needed, and their effectiveness.
Preliminary Issues
Tentatively, several preliminary issues of concern have been
identified. These issues are briefly described below:
Transportation Systems
The implementation of the proposed action would change the overall
transportation system within the White Pine Analysis Area which may
affect the public's ability to use traditional access routes.
Visual Resources
Implementation of the proposed action may alter the existing scenic
resource within the project area. Even though the proposed action is
planned to improve the visuals of the past harvest activities, some
members of the public may feel that it will have additional scenic
impacts.
Watershed
Past management activities and those associated with the
implementation of the Proposed Action may result in increased peak
flows and sediment production.
Wildlife
The proposed action could potentially reduce security for wildlife
species by constructing new roads in wildlife security areas and the
reopening of existing roads.
Old Growth
The implementation of the Proposed Action may have short term
effects on old growth characteristics, specifically the snag components
of those stands.
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, and reforestation), road construction/reconstruction
necessary to provide access and to achieve other resource objectives,
and appropriate mitigation measures.
Whether or not water and fish rehabilitation projects
(including road obliteration) and other project area improvements
(including trailhead parking area enlargement and control of noxious
weeds, etc.) should be implemented and, if so, to what extent.
Whether or not wildlife enhancement projects (including
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 security needs.
Whether or not project specific Forest Plan amendments for
MA 10, 12 and 13 are necessary to meet the specific purpose and need of
this project, and whether those amendments are significant under NFMA.
What, if any, specific project monitoring requirements
would be needed to assure mitigation measures are implemented and
effective.
Public Involvement and Scoping
In December of 1998 and April of 1999, preliminary efforts were
made to involve the public in looking at management opportunities
within the White Pine Creek area. Comments received prior to this
notice will be included in the documentation for the EIS. 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 30 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 September, 1999. 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 January, 2000. 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 commend 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
Bob Casteneda Forest, Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest, 1101 US
Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923 is the Responsible Official. As the
Responsible Official he will decide if the proposed project will be
implemented. He will document the decision and reasons for the decision
in the Record of Decision.
[[Page 23265]]
I have delegated the responsibility to prepare the EIS to James I.
Mershon, District Ranger, Cabinet Ranger District.
Dated: April 17, 1999.
Bob Castenada,
Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 99-10808 Filed 4-29-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M