[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 1, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11034-11035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-4878]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Big Creek Resource Management Project, Flathead National Forest, 
Flathead County, Montana

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 harvest trees; conduct prescribed burning; 
pre-commercially thin trees; reconstruct recreational trails and 
facilities; implement access management changes, including road 
reclamation; and conduct rehabilitation activities in aquatic habitat 
within the Big Creek watershed. The area is located 10 miles north of 
Columbia Falls, Montana.
    The Forest Service is seeking further information and written 
comments from Federal, State and local agencies and other individuals 
or organizations who may be interested in or affected by the proposed 
actions. These comments will be used to prepare the draft EIS.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received 
in writing by April 4, 2000. The draft EIS is expected to be filed with 
the Environmental Protection Agency and made available for public 
review in September, 2000. No date has yet been determined for filing 
the final EIS.
    The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will 
be 45 days from the date of the Environmental Protection Agency 
publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to David Ondov or Jimmy DeHerrera, 
Glacier View Ranger District, P.O. Box 290340, Hungry Horse, Montana, 
59919.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Ondov, Planning Team Leader, 
406-387-3800.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:   

Nature and Scope of the Proposed Action

    This proposal is necessary to address resource conditions related 
to wildlife, forest health, fisheries and watershed, recreation use, 
and other human uses within the 58,000 acre Big Creek watershed which 
are outside desired ranges. There is also the desire to maintain 
resource conditions across the landscape that are similar to what fire 
and other natural disturbance processes would have created 
historically.
    The purpose of the proposal is to restore landscape composition, 
structure, and patterns to conditions similar to that expected under 
natural disturbance and succession regimes, and to restore fire as an 
important ecological process in this watershed; to reduce existing 
populations of selected invasive (noxious) weeds; to improve diversity 
of viewing opportunities into Glacier National Park and the east facing 
slope of Demers Ridge; to protect human and environmental values in 
this watershed from the effects of catastrophic fire; to improve the 
quality and quantity of ungulate winter and spring range forage; to 
improve grizzly bear security; to improve water quality and fisheries 
habitat; to reconstruct the Smokey Range Trail to an acceptable 
standard for visitor use; to provide a developed trailhead and visitor 
information at the northern terminus of the Demers Ridge Trail; and to 
relocate a portion of the Canyon Creek Snowmobile Trail onto a route 
that is suitable for grooming.

[[Page 11035]]

    The proposed action includes approximately 3,700 acres of 
vegetation treatment (fuels reduction through slashing or tree 
thinning, prescribed burning, tree harvest along with associated fuels 
treatments and reforestation activities, and pre-commercial thinning), 
70 miles of road reclamation and yearlong closure of other roads, 
placement of large woody debris in streams, stabilization or removal of 
several log jams in streams, review and rehabilitation of old skid 
roads on 20-25 acres, repair of 7 streamside slumps, reconstruction of 
a trail, construction of a new trailhead facility, and improvement and 
relocation of 6 miles of a groomed snowmobile trail system.
    This EIS will tier to the Flathead National Forest Land and 
Resource Management Plan (LRMP) and EIS of January, 1986, and its 
subsequent amendments, which provide overall guidance of all land 
management activities on the Flathead National Forest.

Decision To Be Made

    Should the Forest Service implement the proposed action or any 
action to meet the purpose and need established for the project, or 
defer any action at this time within the Big Creek watershed? The 
deciding official for the project is Jimmy DeHerrera, District Ranger, 
Hungry Horse/Glacier View Ranger Districts, Flathead National Forest.

Preliminary Issue and Alternatives

    Preliminary scoping for the Big Creek project was conducted in 
November, 1999, through an open house and a field trip. The purpose of 
these public forums was to introduce a preliminary proposal which could 
be refined based on public comment. A public mailing is planned at the 
same time this notice of intent is published in the Federal Register to 
present the refined proposed action and purpose and need for the 
project. Based on public and internal comments, the following issues 
have emerged:
    1. Economic feasibility of some proposed vegetation treatments.
    2. Aquatic effects from vegetation treatments.
    3. Sediment effect from road reclamation.
    4. Effects of road management changes on human access and use of 
the area.
    The interdisciplinary team has not yet developed any alternatives 
to the proposed action that respond to these issues.
    The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers 
notice at this early stage 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. 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: February 23, 2000.
Jimmy DeHerrera,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 00-4878 Filed 2-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M