[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