[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 9, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61063-61064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-29324]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Analysis of Beaver Park Project Area; Black Hills National
Forest; Spearfish/Nemo Ranger District; Lawrence and Meade Counties, SD
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to 36 CFR 219.10(g), the District Ranger of the
Spearfish/Nemo Ranger District, Black Hills National Forest, gives
notice of the agency's intent to prepare an environmental impact
statement for the analysis of the Beaver Park Project Area. The
responsible official for this project is John C. Twiss, Forest
Supervisor, Black Hills National Forest.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to the District Ranger, Spearfish/Nemo
Ranger District, Black Hills National Forest, 2014 N. Main, Spearfish,
SD 57783.
DATES: This project schedule is as follows: File Draft EIS--December
1999. File Final EIS and Record of Decision signature--February 2000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Natvig, Project Interdisciplinary
Team Leader, 605-642-4622. Additional information, such as maps,
scoping summary and list of issues identified through the scoping
process can be obtained by written request to the Spearfish/Nemo Ranger
District office, or by phone at the above address and phone number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Timber harvest and associated activities
within the Beaver Park Project Area (24,415 acres) is proposed by the
Spearfish/Nemo Ranger District to address a growing mountain pine
beetle epidemic. The 1997 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan
(Forest Plan), which guides management of the Black Hills National
Forest, identifies management goals and objectives relating to insect
outbreaks and epidemics. The planning team has identified that there is
a need for activities in the Beaver Park Project Area in order to meet
these Forest Plan goals and objectives. The purpose and need for the
project is to: (1) Reduce mountain pine beetle populations in pine
stands; (2) cooperate with other agencies and private entities in
efforts to decrease risk of a mountain pine beetle outbreak in the
adjacent Sturgis Community Watershed and other private lands; and (3)
reduce the susceptibility of vegetation to catastrophic fire and
outbreaks of mountain pine beetles.
Proposed activities include commercial timber harvest (both
sanitation harvest of beetle infested trees, and commercial thinning
harvest), road construction and reconstruction associated with
commercial timber harvest, non-commercial treatment of beetle infested
trees, pheromone baiting, prescribed burning, and mechanical fuel
treatment.
This project area includes Beaver Park, a 5,109 acre inventoried
(RARE II) roadless area. The Record of Decision (ROD) for the 1997
Forest Plan did not recommend wilderness designation for Beaver Park,
and placed this area into 4 management emphasis areas. The majority of
the area (2,637 acres) is to be managed for Backcountry Non-motorized
Recreation (Management Area (MA) 3.32), and is not part of the land
base considered suitable for timber harvest. Another 106 acres was
placed into the Sturgis Experimental Watershed (MA 5.3B), an area set
aside for watershed research, and not part of the suitable land base.
The remaining area was placed into the land base considered suitable
for timber harvest; 1,795 acres are to be managed for Limited Motorized
Use and Forest Production Emphasis (MA 4.1), and 571 acres are to be
managed for Big Game Winter Range Emphasis. This proposed action
includes timber harvest and new road construction within the roadless
area.
Preliminary issues include effects from management activities on
the roadless and natural characteristics of the Beaver Park roadless
area (especially in MA 3.32), and the result this would have on future
wilderness or Research Natural Area status. Issues also include effects
of the mountain pine beetle epidemic on the City of Sturgis Community
Watershed and Fort Meade Veteran's Administration Watershed, on
wildfire risk, visual resources, and the Centennial Trail.
The EIS will analyze a range of alternatives including, (A) No
Action; (B) Maximum Beetle Suppression, including timber harvest and
road construction within the roadless area; (C) Beetle Suppression with
No Roads in MA 3.32; (D) Beetle Suppression Outside the Beaver Park
Roadless Area; and (E) Beetle Suppression with only Sanitation/Salvage
Harvest in the Beaver Park Roadless Area. Alternatives B through D
include road construction and the use of conventional and cable logging
systems. Alternative E is similar to D outside the roadless area, but
includes helicopter logging within the roadless area. All action
alternatives include removal of currently infested trees and thinning
of healthy stands to reduce the risk of beetle infestation.
The decision to be made in the Beaver Park Project Area is whether
or not to control the existing mountain pine beetle epidemic, and by
what strategy, as displayed in the various alternatives. This decision
will include whether or not to control the epidemic within the roadless
area boundary, and whether or not to allow new road construction within
the roadless area. The decision on this project will abide by the terms
of any decision issued on appeals of the Revised Forest Plan. The Black
Hills
[[Page 61064]]
National Forest is exempt from the existing 18 month interim roads
rule in roadless areas, due to the recently completed Revised Forest
Plan.
The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will
be a minimum of 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. 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, 1033 (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: October 29, 1999.
Pamela E. Brown,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 99-29324 Filed 11-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M