[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 5, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24132-24134]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-11198]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Southwestern Region; Authorization of Livestock Grazing 
Activities on the Sacramento Grazing Allotment, Sacramento Ranger 
District, Lincoln National Forest, Otero County, NM

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement on a proposal to authorize livestock grazing activities on 
the Sacramento Grazing Allotment. The project area encompasses over 
111,000 acres of National Forest lands on the Sacramento Ranger 
District of the Lincoln National Forest. The Sacramento Grazing 
Allotment comprises approximately 25% of the range district. The 
project has generated controversy on three main points; effects to 
threatened and endangered animal and plant species, concern for 
degraded riparian areas, and forage competition between wildlife and 
livestock.

DATES: The agency invites written comments and suggestions on the scope 
of the analysis. In addition, the agency will give notice for the full 
environmental analysis once it nears completion so that interested and 
affected people may participate and contribute to a final decision.
    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received in 
writing by June 15, 1999.
    A Draft Enviromental Impact Statement should be available for 
public comment in July, 1999. After considering the comments received 
on the proposed action, the analysis document will be modified to 
include any changes that result. Once updated, the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement should be available to the public in September 1999.


[[Page 24133]]


ADDRESSES: Comments concerning the proposal and scope of the analysis 
should be received in writing by June 15, 1999. Send written comments 
and suggestions concerning the management of this area to Rick Newmon 
or Mark Cadwallader, Sacramento Ranger District, P.O. Box 288, 
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, 88317.

Responsible Offical

    The District Ranger will decide whether or not to authorize 
domestic livestock grazing on the Sacramento Allotment which will 
include adding appropriate forest plan standards and guidelines to Part 
3 of the Term Grazing Permit. If grazing is authorized, the District 
Ranger will decide on the permitted number of animals and season of 
use, range facilities to be constructed, allowable utilization 
standards, required monitoring and mitigation measures (best management 
practices, BMPs). In addition, the District Ranger will establish a 
forage allocation for livestock and wildlife for the Sacramento 
Allotment. This allocation will prescribe a percentage of the total 
available forage that wil be reserved for wildlife species.
for additional information contact: Questions about the proposed 
project and scope of analysis should be directed to Rick Newmon or Mark 
Cadwallader at (505-682-2551).

supplementary information: The Forest Service is planning to authorize 
livestock grazing activities on the Sacramento Grazing Allotment.

Background

    The current Sacramento Allotment is the result of the combination 
of 10 historical allotments. In the late 1970's, the High Nogal Ranch 
Inc. acquired the grazing permits on the allotments mentioned above. 
The control of livestock management on these small allotments by one 
business interest offered an opportunity to combine them into one large 
allotment. Combining the allotments provided an opportunity to improve 
resource management as well as administrative and economic efficiency. 
The allotments were combined and the current Sacramento Grazing 
Allotment was formed. And environmental analysis and an allotment 
management plan (AMP) were approved in 1979 for the newly consolidated 
allotment. The AMP prescribed an intensive rotation grazing system be 
implemented along with a very extensive range improvement development 
program. Full livestock numbers were run on the allotment, under 
direction of the new AMP, for about two years. In 1983, the permittee 
filed for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy left the implementation of the AMP 
only partially completed. Between 1983 and 1989, the allotment saw 
periods of very light use to total non-use by livestock.
    In 1989, the current permittees acquired the grazing permit for the 
Sacramento Allotment. The new permittees acquired only the grazing 
permit and did not acquire the private lands which were an integral 
part of the livestock operation when the original combination took 
place. In addition, the long period of non-use on the allotment 
resulted in deterioration of many of the existing range improvements. 
With many of the range improvements no longer functional and changes in 
private land base available to the current permittees, the existing AMP 
had become essentially unmanageable.
    After acquisition of the grazing permit, the current permittees 
gradually began to stock the allotment to full permitted numbers. When 
full numbers were run on the permit in 1991, forage utilization began 
to exceed acceptable levels. Excessive forage utilization has been a 
concern since 1991.

Existing Condition

    The Sacramento Allotment contains over 36 miles of perennial 
streams. Riparian inventory data indicates that less than 10% of the 
riparian zones associated with these perennial waters are in 
satisfactory condition, based on the Region 3 standards and guidelines 
for riparian areas. The Sacramento Allotment contains about half of all 
the riparian resources on the Sacramento Ranger District. The livestock 
management decisions made on this allotment will be an important factor 
in determining the potential for riparian improvement on the entire 
district.
    The Sacramento Allotment is home to several threatened and 
endangered plant and animal species. They include the Sacramento 
Mountain thistle, Sacramento prickly poppy, Mexican spotted owl, 
peregrine falcon, and the bald eagle. The current forage utilization 
levels are not conducive to moving range condition rating towards good 
to excellent range condition as specified in various specie recovery 
plans.
    Forgage competition between elk and livestock has developed into a 
resource concern. The excessive forage use currently occurring on the 
allotment is the combined result of forage use by the current elk 
population and currently permitted livestock numbers.

Objectives

    Implement a maximum forage use level or minimum stubble height 
requirement that will lead to long-term improvement in rangeland 
ecosystems and riparian habitats.
    Bring permitted livestock numbers in line with estimated carrying 
capacity.
    Develop a grazing management strategy which identifies the 
structural and range improvements required to implement that strategy.
    Establish an allocation of available forage between livestock and 
wildlife.
    Permit livestock grazing as a tool to meet vegetative management 
objectives as set forth in the Lincoln National Forest's Land and 
Resource Management Plan (pp. 34-36 and pp. 86-101).
    Continue to permit commercial livestock use on the Sacramento 
Allotment to a level that contributes to the local custom and culture 
and the local economy while sustaining healthy ecosystems.

Desired Future Condition

    Forest plan standards and guidelines for riparian areas are being 
met.
    Threatened, endangered, and sensitive species habitat is improving 
and recovery objectives are being met.
    Areas of unsatisfactory Range condition are on an upward trend 
toward satisfactory or better range condition.
    The allocation of forage between livestock and wildlife species has 
been implemented. This allocation is continually monitored and actions 
are taken to maintain a viable elk population that is in balance 
maintain with the available forage produced on the allotment.
    Recreational uses and esthetic values have been enhanced through 
the improved management of rangeland ecosystems.

Authorization is needed on this allotment because:

    --Where consistent with other multiple use goals and objectives 
there is Congressional intent to allow grazing on suitable lands. 
(Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960, Wilderness Act of 1964, 
Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, Federal 
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, National Forest Management Act 
of 1976).
    --The Sacramento Allotment contain lands identified as suitable for 
domestic livestock grazing in the Lincoln National Forest Plan and 
continued domestic livestock grazing is consistent with the goals, 
objectives, standards, and guidelines of the forest plan.
    --It is Forest Service policy to make forage available to qualified 
livestock operators from lands suitable for grazing

[[Page 24134]]

consistent with land management plans (FSM 2203.1).
    --It is Forest Service policy to continue contributions to the 
economic and social well being of people by providing opportunities for 
economic diversity and by promoting stability for communities that 
depend on range resources for their livelihood (FSM 2202.1).
    --By regulation, forage producing lands will be managed for 
livestock grazing where consistent with land management plans (36 CFR 
222.2(c)).
    The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will 
be 45 days 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. NYDC, 435 U.S. 
519.553 (1973). 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.

    Dated: April 23, 1999.
Jose M. Martinez,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 99-11198 Filed 5-4-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M