[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14515-14518]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-6123]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Kelsey-Beaver EIS; Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln 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 (EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts of 
fire recovery activities. The project is located on the Three Rivers 
Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County, Montana, 
approximately 30 air miles northeast of Troy, Montana.
    The Proposed Action was developed in response to major fire events 
that burned over 12,100 acres in the Kelsey Creek, Roderick South, and 
Upper Beaver Cr. areas in August 2000. These fires resulted in 
significant tree mortality as well as increases in future fuel levels. 
The fires burned within approximately 1,200 acres of designated old 
growth. Increases in peak water flows in many streams are predicted to 
exceed maximum levels allowed by the Kootenai Forest Plan as a result 
of vegetation loss associated with the fires.
    Following the fires, the forest conducted an assessment to develop 
a framework upon which to base further recovery efforts (Forest 
Assessment of Major Fires 2000, October 2000). This assessment 
identified opportunities for rehabilitation and restoration that have 
been carried forward into this proposal.
    This project proposes to salvage timber, revegetate burned areas, 
improve road drainage conditions, and implement access management 
decisions.
    The purpose and need for these activities is to: (1) Reduce fuel 
accumulations and the potential for reburn; (2) Recover the economic 
value of dead timber; (3) Increase the mature forest component in the 
project area; (4) Restore vegetative species appropriate to burned 
sites; (5) Contribute to watershed recovery processes by correcting 
chronic sources of sediment; (6) Provide access for fire recovery 
projects and public use while maintaining wildlife security.
    Overall guidance of land management activities on the Kootenai 
National Forest, including timber harvest and road management, is 
provided by the Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management 
Plan (Forest Plan, September, 1987). Harvest activities may take place 
in the following Management Areas (MA) 10 and 11--Big Game Winter 
Range, MA 12--Big Game Summer Range, MA 14--Grizzly Habitat Management, 
MA 15--Timber Production, MA 16--Timber with Viewing, MA 17--Viewing 
with Timber, and MA 19--Steep Lands, as defined by the Kootenai 
National Forest Plan.
    The Proposed Action may require a Kootenai National Forest Plan 
project-specific amendment to suspend MA 12 standards that require 
movement corridors and adjacent hiding cover be retained. The wildfires 
burned around some pre-fire openings, removing cover in corridors and 
creating larger openings. The proposed activities would remove burned 
material that previously provided corridor cover. Live trees and some 
snags and coarse woody material would be left to provide wildlife 
habitat and maintain soil productivity. In the larger openings, patches 
and corridors would be left to provide some level of security for 
wildlife movement through the fire areas. Openings over 40 acres would 
result from these proposed activities or when considered with openings 
created by fire.
    The DEIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative 
environmental effects of the alternatives. Past, present, and projected 
activities on National

[[Page 14516]]

Forest Lands will be considered. The DEIS will disclose the analysis of 
site-specific mitigation measures and their effectiveness. The DEIS is 
expected to be filed with the EPA and available for public review by 
July 2001.
    Scoping Comment Date: 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.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the 
analysis should be sent to Michael L. Balboni, District Ranger, Three 
Rivers Ranger District, 1437 Hwy 2, Troy, MT 59935.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mike Giesey, Team Leader, 
Three Rivers Ranger District. Phone: (406) 295-4693.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The project area is approximately 61,700 
acres and encompasses the Lang, Vinal, Bunker Hill, Yodkin, Beaver, 
Browning, Fowler, Hartman, Fix, Kelsey, Can, Zulu, Smoot, Clay, Rene 
Tributary, and Dutch Cr. drainages. Proposed activities within the 
decision area include portions of the following areas: T35N, R32W; 
T35N; R31W; and T36N, R30W; PMM; Lincoln County, Montana.
    The Kelsey Creek (2,770 acres), Roderick South (315 acres), and 
Upper Beaver (9,015 acres) fires burned within this project area in 
August 2000, ignited by lightning strikes. A total of over 12,100 acres 
burned in these fires with varying severity.
    To meet the purpose and need, this project proposes:
    1. Treatments in areas of high severity fire (70% or more 
mortality) and moderate severity (20-70% mortality) to reduce fuels, 
recover economic value of dead trees, and where appropriate trend 
forest vegetation toward mature forest:
    Dead trees would be salvaged where economically feasible, while 
protecting other resources; mortality would be based on amount of crown 
scorch, and/or cambium and root damage. Approximately 60% of the Kelsey 
Creek and Upper Beaver fire acres and 30% of the Roderick South fire 
acres have been dropped from further consideration for harvest because 
they are either in riparian areas, low fire severity areas, in 
unsuitable MAs, or were previously harvested. The remaining acreage is 
being site-specifically reviewed for inclusion in the Proposed Action.
    Salvage would be accomplished by helicopter logging, and by ground 
based logging systems. Treatment in the high severity fire areas would 
resemble a regeneration clearcut or seedtree harvest due to few 
surviving trees in the units. Treatments in moderate severity areas 
would vary depending on the amount of fire mortality. Where mortality 
is low (20-30%), treatment would be a light commercial thinning from 
below. Where mortality is moderate to high (30-70%), treatments would 
range from commercial thinning from below to shelterwood harvest. After 
harvest, fuels reduction and site preparation would be accomplished 
through machine piling and burning or underburning.
    To expedite hydrologic and vegetative recovery from the fires, 
salvage harvest units in high severity fire areas would be planted. 
Salvage harvest units in moderate severity areas may or may not be 
planted depending on extent of harvest, species composition present, 
and availability of a desirable, natural seed source. Various native 
tree species would be planted, with an emphasis on blister rust 
resistant white pine which historically occurred in greater numbers in 
the Yaak than found presently.
    Up to a total of 9 miles of temporary road may be built, averaging 
\1/2\ mile in length. Temporary roads would be obliterated after post 
harvest activities are completed. Existing roads needed for haul may 
receive reconstruction work such as brushing, blading, road drainage 
work, and realignment.
    To ensure protection of water, fish and wildlife habitat, and other 
resources, the following design criteria would be employed:
    Soil, Water, Fisheries Protections: All harvest proposals will meet 
objectives in the Soil and Water Conservation Practices Handbook 
2509.22 (USDA Forest Service, 1988). Harvest proposals will be designed 
to minimize peak flow conditions in watersheds already exceeding Forest 
Plan standards.
    Wildlife Corridors: The maintenance of landscape-level connectivity 
and the minimization of fragmentation will be incorporated into the 
design of all harvest alternatives.
    Old Growth Protection and Enhancement: Stands with potential to 
become mature forest will be managed in order to develop mature forest 
characteristics over time, including development of large tree size, 
complex stand structure, large down logs, large snags and multistoried 
closed canopy. To encourage this development, removal of understories 
killed by the fire may be necessary to reduce fuel levels and the risk 
of a lethal reburn. Post-fire designated old growth, and replacement 
old growth, will not be proposed for harvest.
    Roadless Area Protection: No harvest or road construction is 
proposed in roadless areas.
    Cavity Habitat, Small Mammal Habitat and Soils Protection: 
Retention of snags will be a priority in order to retain an acceptable 
level of both hard and soft snags and of downed woody debris for 
wildlife and hydrological purposes, and soil productivity. In 
regeneration harvest units, 6-20 trees per acre will be left as snags. 
Approximately 5-30 tons per acre of coarse woody debris would be left 
for long-term soil productivity and as small mammal habitat. Two to 
three small slash piles per acre would be left unburned to provide 
habitat for small mammals.
    Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Protection: No 
salvage harvest would occur in areas where harvest would result in a 
``will impact sensitive species * * * '' or ``likely to adversely 
affect threatened and endangered'' determination for these species.
    2. Areas that experienced high severity fire, but are not salvaged 
may be planted, depending on wildlife requirements for cover, 
availability and type of seed sources and soil, hydrology and safety 
considerations. This includes past harvest units in which planted trees 
were destroyed by fire. Burned plantations with fuel loads that present 
a future fire risk to planted trees would be slashed and burned prior 
to replanting. These areas would be planted with various native tree 
species, with an emphasis on blister rust resistant white pine. 
Riparian areas that experienced high severity fire would be planted 
with a combination of native shrubs and trees. These revegetation 
activities may occur in high severity burn areas of the Mount Henry 
Roadless Area as well as areas outside this roadless area.
    3. Watershed improvement activities would be implemented to reduce 
water routing and sediment transport from existing roads. This would be 
accomplished through application of Best Management Practices and 
activities such as outsloping, waterbarring, culvert replacement/
removal or removal of the actual prism to restore a more natural 
surface flow pattern to the landscape. Road decommissioning and other 
watershed improvement activities will be identified and analyzed in the 
DEIS.
    4. In order to implement this proposal and provide for grizzly bear 
security during the proposed activities, several miles of road 
currently restricted to public access would be opened for harvest 
activities and public use. To offset this, some roads that are 
currently open would be restricted. The Solo Joe road or the Basin Cr. 
road may be closed

[[Page 14517]]

in order to open the Turner Cr. road for salvage and reforestation 
activities. Several more roads may be identified for access management 
changes during the course of the analysis.

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.

Preliminary Issues

    Tentatively, several preliminary issues of concern have been 
identified. These issues are briefly described below:
    Watershed and fisheries: Past management activities and wildfire 
events have resulted in predicted peak flows that exceed Forest Plan 
standards. Water Quality Limited Segments (WQLS), as defined by the 
state of Montana, exist within the analysis area. Though the intent of 
harvest and road construction design is to minimize additional impacts, 
there may be concerns that additional management activities could 
result in short-term increased peak flows and sediment production. 
While the intent is to maintain or improve long-term aquatic 
conditions, westslope cutthroat trout and other aquatic species may 
experience short-term impacts.
    Wildlife: The proposed action could potentially reduce existing 
cavity habitat in snags and reduce suitable hiding cover for wildlife 
security.
    Public Access: The implementation of the proposed action would 
change access within the Kelsey-Beaver Analysis Area and may affect the 
public's ability to use traditional routes.
    Economic Value: Preliminary public comments expressed concern that 
the value of burned timber will be lost unless salvage logging occurs. 
Additional comment have voiced concern over the timeframe proposed for 
addressing salvage logging and expressed the need to recover the 
economic value of affected trees in a timely manner.

Decisions to be Made

    The Kootenai Forest Supervisor will decide the following:
    1. Whether or not to salvage timber and, if so, the selection 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 achieve other resource objectives; and appropriate 
mitigation measures.
    2. Whether or not to revegetate riparian or other burned areas not 
harvested to expedite recovery.
    3. Whether or not water quality improvement projects (including 
road decommissioning) should be implemented and, if so, to what extent.
    4. Whether road access restrictions, or other actions, are 
necessary to meet wildlife security needs.
    5. Whether or not project specific Forest Plan amendments are 
necessary to meet the specific purpose and need of this project, and 
whether those amendments are significant under NFMA.
    6. What, if any, specific project monitoring requirements would be 
needed to assure mitigation measures are implemented and effective.

Public Involvement and Scoping

    In November 2000, preliminary efforts were made to involve the 
public in looking at restoration and salvage opportunities within the 
fire areas. 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 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 that 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:
     Identify 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

    The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by July 
2001. 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 October 2001. 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 to applicable 
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision 
regarding the proposal.

Reviewer's Obligations

    The Forest Service believes 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 comment 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

    As the Forest Supervisor of the Kootenai National Forest, 1101 US 
Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923, I am the Responsible Official. As the 
Responsible Official I will decide if the proposed project will be 
implemented. I will document the decision and reasons for the decision 
in the Record of Decision. I have delegated the responsibility to 
prepare the EIS to

[[Page 14518]]

Michael L. Balboni, District Ranger, Three Rivers Ranger District.

    Dated: March 5, 2001.
Bob Castaneda,
Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 01-6123 Filed 3-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M