[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7126-7128]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-3776]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Rams Horn Project, Mark Twain National Forest, Phelps and Pulaski 
Counties MO

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental effects of 
proposed land management activities and corresponding alternatives 
within the Rams Horn project area. The Rams Horn project area is 
located immediately east of Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation on 
National Forest System lands administered by the Houston/Rolla/Cedar 
Creek Ranger District in the Spring Creek and Big Piney River 
watersheds, southwest of Rolla, Missouri. The legal description of the 
project area is: Township 34 North, Range 9 West, sections 4-6; 
Township 34 North, Range 10 West, sections 1, 2; Township 35 North, 
Range 9 West, sections 6, 7, 16-21, 26-36; Township 36 North, Range 10 
West, sections 34-36, Fifth Principal Meridian.
    The purpose of this project is to implement land management 
activities that are consistent with the direction in the Mark Twain 
Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) and respond to specific 
needs identified in the project area. The project-specific needs 
include addressing: wildlife habitat maintenance and improvement, 
reduction of non-native invasive noxious weeds, watershed 
rehabilitation, recreation management, and associated or connected 
actions.

DATES: Initials comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be 
received within 30 days following publication of

[[Page 7127]]

this notice to receive timely consideration in the preparation of the 
draft EIS.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions on the proposed action 
or requests to be placed on the project mailing list to: John C. 
Bisbee, District Ranger, Houston/Rolla/Cedar Creek Ranger District, 108 
South Sam Houston Boulevard, Houston, Missouri 65483. E-mail should 
have a subject line that reads ``NEPA Houston'' and be sent to: 
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Hamel, Project Leader/NEPA 
Coordinator, Houston/Rolla/Cedar Creek Ranger District, 108 South Sam 
Houston Boulevard, Houston, Missouri 65483, phone (417) 697-4194.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information presented in this notice is 
included to help the reviewer determine if they are interested in or 
potentially affected by the proposed land management activities. The 
information presented in this notice is summarized. Those who wish to 
provide comments, or are otherwise interested in or affected by the 
project, are encouraged to obtain additional information from the 
contact identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Section.

Proposed Action

    The proposed land management activities (proposed actions) include 
the following, with approximate values: (1) Wildlife habitat 
maintenance and improvement--(a) Maintain 200 acres of unique post oak 
savanna habitat by personnel use firewood removal and prescribed 
burning, (b) maintain 400 acres of unique post oak savanna habitat by 
prescribed burning. (c) maintain existing open and semi open habitat by 
utilizing prescribed fire on 1,050 acres, (d) maintain existing open 
and semi open habitat by utilizing grazing and/or prescribed fire on 
100 acres, (e) maintain existing open and semi open habitat by 
utilizing mechanical means such as brush hogging and/or prescribed fire 
on 100 acres, (f) enhance the warm season grass component in existing 
open and semi open habitat by planting 50 acres with Gamma grass, (g) 
maintain and enhance habitat for old growth wildlife species by 
designating 1,600 acres of old growth, and, (h) create 1,100 acres of 
0-9 age class habitat (would be accomplished with: group selection 
harvest on 1,400 acres, shelterwood harvest on 550 acres, clearcut 
harvest on 400 acres) and 700 acres of Woodland Habitat in Oak, Oak-
Pine, and Pine which exhibits a condition of 20-30 percent forbs, grass 
and shrub ground cover (would be accomplished with: group selection 
harvest on 1,400 acres, commercial thinning on 400 acres, and thinning 
on 400 acres of pine plantations to encourage oak regeneration), (2) 
Reduction of non-native invasive noxious weeds--eliminate multi-flora 
rose on 100 acres through the use of herbicides; (3) Watershed 
rehabilitation--(a) improve bottomland riparian habitat by planting 
hardwoods on 50 acres, (b) improve bottomland riparian habitat by 
removing existing river access sites and access roads, (c) improve 
overall watershed health by closing and rehabilitating 2 miles of old 
non system road corridors, and, (d) improve existing stream crossing; 
(4) Recreation management--(a) improve an existing river access site by 
providing proper parking facilities for canoeists, and, (b) relocate an 
existing river access site (will require construction of \1/4\ mile of 
new system road and parking area) because of watershed concerns and for 
public safety; (5) Associated or connected actions--actions pertinent 
to this project, such as; (a) construction and obliteration of 10 miles 
of temporary road to accomplish some of the items listed in (item 1) 
above, (b) fire line construction, etc.

Decision Space

    Decision making will be limited to activities relating to the 
proposed actions. The primary decision to be made will be whether or 
not to implement the proposed actions listed above, a no-action 
alternative, or another alternative that responds to the projects 
purpose and needs.

Preliminary Issues

    Preliminary comments made by the public and agencies were 
considered in the development of the tentative or preliminary issues. 
These are as follows: effects on Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive 
(TES) species and Management Indicator Species (MIS); concern over new 
road construction, and road closures; concern over motorized 
recreational access; current and designated old growth; current 
vegetative patterns, and species composition; and effects of 
restoration activities to the overall watershed.

Public Participation

    The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and 
assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, the Osage Tribe, 
and other individuals or organizations that may be interested in or 
affected by the proposed actions. Comments received in response to this 
notice will become a matter of public record. While public 
participation in this analysis is welcome at any time, comments on the 
proposed actions received within 30 days of the publication of this 
notice will be especially useful in the preparation of the draft EIS. 
Timely comments will be used in preparation of the draft EIS. The 
scoping process will be used to: identify potential issues; identify 
additional alternatives to the proposed action; and, identify potential 
environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives (i.e., 
direct, indirect, and cumulative effects). In addition, the public is 
encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials at any time during 
the analysis and prior to the decision.

Estimated Dates for Filing

    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency and available for public review in April 2002. A 45-
day comment period will follow publication of a Notice of Availability 
of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. Comments received on the 
draft EIS will be analyzed and considered in preparation of a final 
EIS, expected in June 2002. A Record of Decision (ROD) will also be 
issued at that time along with the publication of a Notice of 
Availability of the final EIS and ROD in the Federal Register.

Reviewers Obligation To Comment

    The Forest Service believes it is important at this early stage to 
give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
the draft EIS must structure their participation in the environmental 
review of the proposal in such a way 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, 513 (1978). Also, 
environmental objections that could be raised at the draft EIS stage 
but that are not raised until after completion of the final EIS may be 
waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F2d 
1016, 1022 (9th Cir, 1986), and Wisconsin Heritage 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 prior of the draft EIS 
in order that substantive comments and objections are available to the 
Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider then and 
respond to them in the final EIS. To assist the Forest Service in 
identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, 
comments should be as

[[Page 7128]]

specific as possible. 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

    The responsible official for this environmental impact statement is 
Randy Moore, Forest Supervisor, Mark Twain National Forest.

    Dated: January 18, 2002.
John C. Bisbee,
District Ranger, Mark Twain National Forest.
[FR Doc. 02-3776 Filed 2-14-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M