[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 210 (Monday, October 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64658-64660]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27728]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Phase 1--Fuels Treatment for Community Protection Environmental 
Impact Statement, Six Rivers National Forest, Lower Trinity Ranger 
District, Humboldt County, California

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Six Rivers National Forest will prepare an Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS) on a proposal to reduce fuels in high severity 
burned stands within strategically located fuel breaks and associated 
fuel treatment areas within the Waterman Ridge, Lone Pine Ridge and 
Mill Creek areas. Fuels reduction treatments are proposed on 
approximately 931 acres of merchantable and 187 acres of non-
merchantable stands. Fuel reduction was identified as a need in the 
Forest-wide Late-Successional Reserve Assessment (April 1999) and 
further developed in the Horse Linto, Mill and Tish Tang Watershed 
Assessment (March 2000). It is the first phase of the Megram Fire 
Recovery Strategy designed to protect communities from wildlife and 
extended exposure to smoke and to restore affected watersheds. The 
entire project is in federal land ownership.
    Treatment within merchantable stands involves the removal of fire 
and insect killed commercial wood material and treatment of the 
remaining fuels. Merchantable stands have the size, quality and 
condition suitable for market under current economic conditions. 
Treatment of remaining fuels would use a combination of methods 
including: Lop and scatter, masticating (chipping) of treatment units 
or strips along roads and skid trails, excavator piling, hand piling, 
burning of piles and concentration of fuels (jackpot burning), yarding 
unmerchantable material to landings and burning it, felling 
unmerchantable material and burning, and broadcast burning.
    Non-merchantable stands would be treated to reduce fuels by cutting 
dead vegetation and hand piling and burning.
    Planting of nursery stock would occur on understocked acres upon 
completion of fuel treatments. Stand tending treatments include release 
for conifer establishment and growth, conifer thinning and pruning.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of this project should be received 
in writing by December 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to S.E. ``Lou'' Woltering, 
Forest Supervisor, Six Rivers National Forest, 1330 Bayshore Way, 
Eureka, California 95501.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Larson, Lower Trinity District Ranger, Six Rivers National Forest, 
(530) 625-2118; or
Dave Webb, EIS Team Leader, Six Rivers National Forest, P.O. Box 228, 
Gasquet, CA 95543, (707) 457-3131, extension 120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the summer and fall of 1999, the 
Megram Fire burned approximately 49,400 acres within the Horse Linto, 
Mill Creek and Tish Tang Creek (HLMTT) watersheds. Subsequent to the 
Fire, the HLMTT Watershed Assessment (WA) was completed in March 2000.
    The Megram Recovery Strategy was prepared in June of 2000, which 
set priorities for implementation of the recommendations made in the 
WA. The Watershed Analysis emphasizes the need to restore watershed 
functions, protect remaining mature and old growth stands from 
catastrophic loss, accelerate development of late-successional habitat, 
reduce fuel levels in strategic locations and create stand conditions 
that would lower the potential for future catastrophic fire and, at the 
same time, provide for community protection from future wildfires and 
extended exposure to

[[Page 64659]]

smoke. It also points out that restoring natural fire regimes to the 
area is an ideal way of realizing these goals. Based on resource needs 
and public input, the Forest Strategic Leadership Team determined that 
watershed and soil restoration, along with providing for community 
protection for future wildfires, were the primary focus at this time.
    The proposal is also consistent with the National Fire Plan that 
was developed from the report by the Secretaries of Agriculture and 
Interior to the President in response to the wildfires of 2000 
(``Managing the Impact of Wildfires on Communities and the 
Environment'', September 8, 2000). This proposal is consistent with two 
of the five key points of the Plan: Reducing the risk of fire through 
hazardous fuels reduction and working directly with communities to 
ensure adequate protection. Successful implementation of the Plan will, 
in the long term, reduce the number of small fires that become large; 
restore natural ecological systems to minimize uncharacteristically 
intense fires; and reduce the threat to life and property from 
catastrophic wildfire. A key element in the Plan focuses on 
collaboration with communities, interest groups, State and Federal 
agencies and tribal governments.
    The Megram Fire created extensive areas of dead and dying trees and 
shrubs dispersed across a landscape that already had high historic 
vegetation densities and high fuel loading. In addition, a tremendous 
number of snags were created and will continue to be created within the 
severely burned areas as trees are killed by insects and burn-related 
stress. This extensive snag component, in combination with the 
relatively high lightning occurrence in the area and a hazardous fuel 
situation, increases the probability of future lightning ignitions and 
potentially large stand-replacing wildfires. The extent and 
distribution of this fire hazard and risk present a substantial threat 
to local communities, both from wildfires and high levels of smoke. 
Fears and concerns of long-term public health issues are significant to 
the local communities, as is preventing a similar future fire from 
occurring. Wildlife protection of local communities and Tribal Trust 
responsibilities for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation are critical 
components of this proposal.
    Active management would be instrumental in reducing this risk. One 
such management strategy, a system of fuel breaks with associated fuel 
treatment areas, was identified in the Forest-Wide Late-Successional 
Reserve Assessment and further developed within the HLMTT WA. Proposed 
activities within fuel breaks and associated fuel treatment areas 
include treatments necessary to modify areas with high concentrations 
of standing dead and down trees or brush to a more open fuel type. Fuel 
breaks and fuel treatment areas would be located strategically on 
ridges or natural land features, on the upper \1/3\ of slopes or along 
a road. Most of the areas proposed for treatment are located on south 
and west facing slopes because these slopes are generally drier and 
would burn hotter than north and east facing slopes. In addition, the 
location of these areas is related to suppression capability and 
availability of resources.
    Phase 1 would reduce fuels in both merchantable and non-
merchantable stands in the Horse Linto and Mill Creek watersheds within 
the Waterman Ridge, Lone Pine Ridge and Mill Creek areas. Fuels 
reduction would only occur in those stands that have vegetation 
mortality of 60 percent or greater, that are not suitable survey and 
manage species habitat, and are located within the areas identified for 
community protection. There are other areas with mortality greater than 
60 percent containing merchantable and non-merchantable stands that 
will not be treated because these areas do not provide for strategic 
community protection. Fuels reduction would not occur in the Tish Tang 
watershed, which is within the Orleans Mountain ``C'' Roadless Area.
    Water quality parameters are important to the analysis area, which 
include temperature, sediment and turbidity. These parameters are the 
most critical water quality parameters for beneficial uses within the 
analysis area since they can be modified by land management activities. 
Future wildfires in these areas would tend to burn with high severity 
again, which would increase the likelihood of future accelerated 
surface erosion and possibly mass-wasting, delivering sediment to fish-
bearing streams.
    Treatment of merchantable stands would include the removal of fire 
and insect killed commercial wood material, treatment of remaining 
fuels, reforestation and stand tending. Stand tending treatments would 
include release for conifer establishment and growth, conifer thinning 
and pruning. Live trees would be retained, as well as sufficient 
numbers of large, dead trees within each stand to meet Forest standards 
and guidelines for snag retention. However, for units within fuel 
breaks, lower densities of snags would be left on ridge tops for 
firefighter safety and to facilitate fire suppression. Treatment of 
remaining fuels would use a combination of methods including: lop and 
scatter, masticating (chipping) of treatment units or strips along 
roads and skid trails, excavator piling, hand piling, burning of piles 
and concentration of fuels (jackpot burning), yarding unmerchantable 
material to landings and burning, felling unmerchantable material and 
burning, and broadcast burning. Reforestation would be accomplished 
through retention of pockets of natural regeneration and/or by hand 
planting of nursery stock. Stand tending would be long term and 
directed towards creating stands with non-continuous fuel ladders that 
are less conducive to high intensity crown fires.
    Three merchantable stands (six acres) would be treated within 
Waterman Ridge. For all three, commercial material would be removed by 
tractor, with approximately 0.2 miles of temporary roads constructed to 
access one merchantable stand.
    Twenty-eight merchantable stands (267 acres) would be treated 
within the Mill Creek area. Merchantable material would re removed by 
helicopter from 22 stands (228 acres) and by tractor from six stands 
(39 acres). Approximately 0.35 miles of existing roads and 0.45 miles 
of existing temporary roads would be reopened to access three stands.
    Fifty-eight merchantable stands (658 acres) would be treated within 
the Lone Pine Ridge area. Merchantable material would be removed by 
helicopter from 17 stands (256 acres), by tractor from 28 stands (173 
acres) and by cable from 13 stands (229 acres). Approximately 0.1 miles 
of new temporary road would be constructed to access one stand and 
approximately 1.05 miles of existing roads and 0.75 miles of existing 
temporary roads would be reopened to access seven stands.
    One non-merchantable plantation (17 acres) would be treated within 
Waterman Ridge to reduce fuel loading. This plantation was heavily 
stocked with hardwoods before the Megram Fire. Fire-killed vegetation 
would be removed using commercial and/or personal use firewood permits. 
The temporary road used to access an adjoining merchantable stand would 
be extended approximately 0.1 mile along Waterman Ridge. Slash 
resulting from this treatment would be piled and burned. The stand 
would be reforested using nursery stock, with stand tending occurring 
over the long term.
    Two non-merchantable stands would be treated within the Mill Creek 
Area to reduce fuel loading. In one stand, a plantation (45 acres) of 
fire-killed vegetation would be cut, live trees

[[Page 64660]]

would be pruned and cut vegetation would be hand piled and burned. A 
portion of this stand would need reforestation. In the other stand, a 
natural stand (56 acres), merchantable trees would be retained and non-
merchantable trees and brush would be cut, hand piled and burned. 
Reforestation would be accomplished through retention of pockets of 
natural regeneration and by hand planting of nursery stock. Stand 
tending would occur over the long term.
    Five non-merchantable stands (69 acres), all plantations, would be 
treated within the Lone Pine Ridge area to reduce fuel loading. In two 
plantations (16 acres), fire killed vegetation would be cut, live trees 
would be pruned and cut vegetation would be hand piled and burned. In 
three plantations (53 acres), dead trees would be felled, live trees 
would be thinned and pruned. In all five plantations, no reforestation 
would occur.
    This proposal is Phase 1 in the overall strategy to protect 
communities from wildfires and extended exposure to smoke and to 
restore affected watersheds. Phase II would continue the work that is 
proposed in Phase I, by reducing fuels in unburned and moderately 
burned areas within the strategic fuelbreaks. Connecting the high 
severity and less severely burned fuel treatment areas would create a 
more continuous and effective fuelbreak. The unburned and moderately 
burned areas are suitable habitat for survey and manage species. 
Surveys for these species will be initiated during the fall of 2000 and 
spring of 2001. Results of these surveys would be utilized in the 
development of Phase II proposed actions, which would be analyzed under 
separate environmental analysis. The potential foreseeable future 
actions under Phase II would be considered in the cumulative effects 
analysis completed for Phase I.
    Public participation will be an integral component of the analysis 
process and will be especially important at several points during the 
analysis. During the scoping process, the Forest Service will seek 
information, comments and assistance from Federal, State, County and 
local agencies, tribes, individuals and organizations that may be 
interested in or affected by the proposed activities. The scoping 
process will determine the scope of the issues to be addressed, 
determine the significant issues related to the proposed action, 
identify and eliminate other issues, assign tasks and determine 
disciplines, determine the existence of related environmental documents 
and identify schedules for analysis and decision making. Written 
scoping comments will be solicited through a scoping package that will 
be sent to the project mailing list and the local newspaper. Public 
open houses to present the proposed action and answer questions will be 
held from 7 PM to 9 PM, PST at the following locations:
     November 8, 2000 at the Trinity Valley Elementary School, 
Highway 96, Willow Creek, CA, 95513
     November 9, 2000 at Redwood Acres Turf Club, 3750 Harris 
Street, Eureka, CA 95501
    For the Forest Service to best use the scoping input, comments 
should be received by December 1, 2000. The scoping package is 
available by contacting Dave Webb at the address or phone number listed 
above. Tentative issues that may be analyzed in the EIS include the 
potential effects to water quality and downstream cumulative watershed 
impacts to beneficial uses; to air quality; to threatened, endangered 
and sensitive wildlife, plant and fish species and associated habitat; 
and to soil productivity.
    Based on the results of scoping and the resource conditions within 
the project area, alternatives (including a no-action alternative) will 
be developed for the draft EIS. The draft EIS is projected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in February 2001. The 
final EIS is anticipated in April 2001.
    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.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as 
possible. 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 the 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, 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 designated 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.
    No Permits or special authorizations would be required. The Six 
Rivers National Forest is the lead agency for preparation of this 
document. There are no cooperating agencies on this project. 
Consultation will occur with local tribes, National Marine Fisheries 
Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. S.E. ``Lou'' Woltering, 
Forest Supervisor, Six Ribers National Forest, is the responsible 
official. In making the decision, the Responsible Official will 
consider the comments; responses; disclosure of environmental 
consequences; and applicable laws, regulations and policies. The 
Responsible Official will state the rationale for the chosen 
alternative in the Record of Decision.

    Dated: October 23, 2000.
S.E. ``Lou'' Woltering,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-27728 Filed 10-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M