[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 159 (Thursday, August 16, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42991-42992]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-20621]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Fish Passage and Aquatic Habitat Restoration at Hemlock Dam, 
Gifford Pinchot National Forest, Skamania County, Washington

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 restore migratory fish passage, and aquatic and 
riparian habitat at Hemlock Dam on Trout Creek. The Forest is proposing 
to remove Hemlock Dam, partially dredge the reservoir, restore 2000 
feet of the original creek channel, and revegetate the affected 
riparian areas with native plants. In 1998 the United States National 
Marine Fisheries Service declared the Lower Columbia steelhead as 
threatened for extinction, in accordance with the Endangered Species 
Act. Hemlock Dam and the associated fish ladder and reservoir have been 
identified as key factors leading to the decline of the wild steelhead 
in the Trout Creek system. In addition, an inspection of the dam in 
2000 by the Washington State Department of Ecology elevated the safety 
rating of the dam to ``High'' for the ``Downstream Hazard Potential''. 
A failure of the dam during a 100-year food event would threaten life 
and property downstream. Also, considerable environmental damage would 
occur in Trout Creek and the Wind River from the sudden release of the 
sediment in the reservoir. Removing the dam and implementing the 
associated channel restoration would: eliminate the need for a fish 
ladder and restore the stream to provide safe and efficient migratory 
fish passage; restore aquatic and riparian habitat; lower water 
temperatures; and restore natural movement of sediment and organic 
material within the system. Dam removal would address the ``High'' 
Downstream Hazard Potential associated with the dam and sediment-filled 
reservoir. Developing recreation features at the site compatible with 
dam removal, and interpretive facilities to tell the history of the 
dam, are also intended outcomes of this proposal. The proposed action 
would be implemented under the direction of the Gifford Pinchot 
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) as amended by 
the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of 
Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern 
Spotted Owl (1994), referred to as the Northwest Forest Plan.

DATES: Comments concerning the issues and scope of this proposal must 
be received by October 31,2001 to be used for refining this proposed 
action or developing alternatives to the proposal. While public 
participation in this analysis is welcome at any time, comments 
received on or before September 17, 2001 will be especially useful in 
the preparation of the draft EIS.

ADDRESSES: Send comments via post mail to Hemlock Dam Planning Team, 
Mount Adams Ranger District, 2455 Highway 141, Trout Lake, Washington 
98650. Comments via e-mail to [email protected] Subject: Hemlock Dam 
EIS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information: call Ken 
Wieman, 509-395-3385; for planning process information: call Julie 
Knutson, 509-395-3378.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Trout Creek steelhead population has 
been on a precipitous decline since the late 1980's. Approximately 50% 
of the entire Wind River native steelhead production historically came 
from Trout Creek; it now represents less than 10 percent of the Wind 
River wild steelhead population. The genetic diversity of Trout Creek 
steelhead is at risk as a result of a precariously low adult 
population. Inconsistent and ineffective water flow conditions below 
the dam, inefficient fish ladder design, ineffective downstream travel 
routes, and adult trap operations are all sources of fish mortality and 
or/impediments to safe and efficient fish passage. Trout Creek also has 
surpassed water temperature limits lethal to fish, frequently exceeding 
the State water quality maximum temperature standard (16 degrees C.). 
The reservoir created by Hemlock Dam compounds the water temperature 
problem in Trout Creek by slowing the movement of water, and exposing 
the large surface area of the lake to the sun. it also impedes the 
natural movement of sediment and organic material, impacting the 
downstream aquatic ecosystem. The goals of restoration efforts in the 
Wind River Watershed have been to accelerate the recovery of riparian, 
in-stream habitat and water quality. Through the watershed analysis for 
the Wind River, initially conducted in 1996 and updated in 2000, 
removal of Hemlock Dam was recommended for removal to help accomplish 
the restoration goals.
    The inspection of the dam in 2000 by the Department of Ecology 
(DOE) found the dam to be fairly well maintained. Due to the high 
sediment load behind the dam, however, and the lack of information on 
the original dam design specification for silt loads, the State 
Department of Ecology elevated the safety rating of the dam to ``High'' 
for the ``Downstream Hazard Potential''. Due to this rating, the DOE 
requires an analysis of the dam to determine its stability. This 
analysis will be undertaken concurrent with this proposal to remove the 
dam since the information will be relevant when evaluating the no 
action alternative, or any alternatives that propose to keep the dam in 
place.
    The Gifford Pinchot National Forest commissioned a preliminary 
study with Washington State University in 1999 to evaluate feasible 
options to improve fish passage at Hemlock Dam. This preliminary study 
provides the basis for our proposal to remove the dam.
    Several key issues related to the removal of Hemlock Dam have been 
identified to date. They include: (1) Cultural Resources--Loss of the 
dam and fish ladder and protection of prehistoric and historic sites 
within the vicinity of the dam are the key cultural resource issues. 
Hemlock Dam and the fish ladder are historic structures completed in 
1936 by the Civilian Conservation Corps, and are eligible for inclusion 
in the National Register of Historic Places. The dam was constructed in 
order to provide hydroelectric power for the Ranger District and 
Nursery, as well as to provide recreational opportunities for local 
residents. In 1958 the dam was

[[Page 42992]]

retooled to serve as a source of irrigation for the nursery. The need 
for irrigation ceased in 1997 with the closure of the nursery. (2) 
Recreation--Hemlock Lake has continued to provide recreational 
opportunities since the dam was constructed. While the lake conditions 
and uses have changed over time, the lake currently provides a shallow, 
warm water play area popular with people of all ages during the summer 
months, particularly families with young children. Removing the dam 
would mean a loss of the lake and the current recreation opportunities. 
(3) Wetlands--Over time, wetlands have developed in the backwaters of 
Hemlock Lake and now support plant and animal species that rely on 
wetland habitat. Removing the dam could reduce or eliminate these 
unique habitats, as well as affect pond-dwelling species.
    Two alternatives to full dam removal provided by the WSU study 
address the above issues, in whole or part: (1) Notch the dam, 
construct a new fish ladder, and create an ``off-channel'' pond for 
recreation opportunities; (2) leave the dam in place, dredge the 
reservoir, and construct a new fish ladder.
    Permits required for dam removal include the Hydrologic Permit 
Approval (HPA) from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; 
Approval to Allow Temporary Exceedance of Water Quality Standards from 
the Washington Department of Ecology; Section 404 permit to discharge 
or excavate dredged or fill material and mechanized land clearing in 
waters, including wetlands, form the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; a 
Section 401 Water Quality Certification issued by the Department of 
Ecology under 33 U.S.C. 401 and 1344; and a Shoreline Substantial 
Development, Conditional Use, Variance permit, or Exemption required 
for work activity in the 100-year floodplain, issued by Skamania 
County, Washington.
    This Notice and subsequent scoping notices will satisfy the 
requirements under 36 CFR 800.2(d) for seeking the views of the public 
on the potential effects of an undertaking on historic properties. A 
public open house was held on May 31, 2001, in Stevenson, Washington to 
provide information about the dam, status of the steelhead in the Wind 
River system, and opportunities for improving fish passage and habitat, 
including removal of the dam. The specific need and format for 
additional meetings and workshops will be determined by the comments 
received from the May open house, this notice, and responses by 
individuals and organization contacted via the Hemlock Dam EIS Scoping 
Communication Plan. A web site will be established in the near future 
on the Gifford Pinchot National Forest World Wide Web to enable 
interested parties to access project information directly.
    Continued scoping and public participation efforts will be used by 
the interdisciplinary planning team to identify new issues, develop 
alternatives in response to the issues, and determine the level of 
analysis needed to disclose potential biological, physical, economic 
and social impacts associated with the project. The Forest Service is 
seeking information, comments, and assistance from other agencies, 
organizations or individuals who may be interested in or affected by 
the proposed project. The input will be used in preparation of the 
draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to:
    Identify potential issues;
    Identify major issues to be analyzed in depth;
    Identify alternatives to the proposed action; and
    Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action and 
alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects).
    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by 
September 2002. The comment period on the draft environmental impact 
statement will be 45 days from the date the notice of availability is 
published 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, 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.
    The final EIS is anticipated to be completed by December, 2003. In 
the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to substantive 
comments received during the comment period for the draft EIS. Gregory 
L. Cox, Mount Adams District Ranger, is the Responsible Official. He 
will decide, which, if any, of the proposed project alternatives will 
be implemented. His decision and reasons for the decision will be 
documented in the Record of Decision, which will be subject to Forest 
Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR part 217).

    Dated: August 9, 2001.
Claire Lavendel,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 01-20621 Filed 8-15-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M