[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 16, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18580-18583]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-9142]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Revision of Land and Resource Management Plan for the Mark Twain 
National Forest; Barry, Bollinger, Boone, Butler, Callaway, Carter, 
Christian, Crawford, Dent, Douglas, Howell, Iron, Laclede, Madison, 
Oregon, Ozark, Phelps, Pulaski, Reynolds, Ripley, St. Genevieve, St. 
Francis, Shannon, Stone, Taney, Texas, Washington, Wayne, and Wright 
Counties, MO

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare environmental impact statement 
(EIS).

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service intends to prepare an EIS for revising 
the Mark Twain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 
(Forest Plan) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5) and USDA Forest Service 
National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning 
regulations (36 CFR 219.) The revised Forest Plan will supersede the 
current Forest Plan, which the regional forester approved June 23, 
1986, and has been amended 25 times. This notice describes the focus 
areas of change, the estimated dates for filing the EIS, the 
information concerning public participation, and the names and 
addresses of the responsible agency official and the individual who can 
provide additional information.

DATES: Your comments on this Notice of Intent (NOI) should be submitted 
in writing by August 2, 2002. The Draft EIS is expected to be available 
for public review by November 2004. The Final EIS and revised Forest 
Plan are expected to be completed by October 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: NOI--FP Revision, Mark Twain 
National Forest, 401 Fairgrounds Road, Rolla, MO 65401. Electronic mail 
should include ``Forest Plan Revision'' in the subject line, and be 
sent to: mailroom_r9;[email protected]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Watts, Forest Planner, at 573-

[[Page 18581]]

341-7471, TTY 573-341-7453. Information will also be posted on the 
forest web page at www.fs.fed.us/r9/marktwain/
    Responsible Official: Regional Forester, Eastern Region, 310 W. 
Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Regional Forester for the Eastern Region 
gives notice of the agency's intent to prepare an EIS to revise the 
Mark Twain Forest Plan. The Regional Forester approved the original 
Mark Twain Forest Plan in June 1986. This plan guides the overall 
management of the Mark Twain National Forest.
    The National Forest Management Act requires that national forests 
revise forest plans at least every 15 years (U.S.C. 1604[f][5]). 
Additional indicators of the need to revise the 1986 Mark Twain Forest 
Plan are: (1) Land conditions and public demands have changed, (2) 
agency policies and strategic priorities have changed, (3) results of 
monitoring and evaluation suggest the need for revision, (4) new 
information is available, and (5) suggestions for changes have been 
made by those interested in management of the Mark Twain National 
Forest.
    The Nature and Scope of the Decision to be Made: Forest plans make 
the following types of decisions:
    1. Forest-wide multiple-use goals and objectives. Goals describe a 
desired condition to be achieved sometime in the future. Objectives are 
concise, time-specific statements of measurable planned results that 
respond to the goals.
    2. Forest-wide management direction and requirements. These include 
limitations on management activities, or advisable courses of action 
that apply across the entire forest.
    3. Management direction specific to certain portions (management 
areas) of the Forest. This includes the desired future condition for 
different areas of the forest, and the accompanying management 
direction to help achieve that condition.
    4. Lands suited and not suited for resource use and production 
(e.g. timber management).
    5. Monitoring and evaluation requirements needed to gauge how well 
the plan is being implemented.
    6. Recommendations to Congress, if any (e.g. additional Wilderness 
designation).
    The scope of this decision is limited to revisiting only those 
portions of the current Forest Plan that need revision, update, or 
correction. We propose to narrow the scope of revising the Forest Plan 
by focusing on topics identified as being most critically in need of 
change.
    Revision Topics: Many sources were reviewed to identify the parts 
of the current Forest Plan that need revision, update, or correction. 
These sources included: comments from the public, interested groups, 
government officials, State and Federal agencies, and Forest Service 
employees; results of monitoring and evaluation; changes in law and 
policy; relevant new scientific information; the 1991 five-year review 
of the Forest Plan; and the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment.
    Based on our review of the current Forest Plan and the sources 
listed above, we propose that the Forest Plan revision focus on 
improving management in the following areas:

1. Vegetation and Timber Management

    a. Identify lands suited to timber production.
    b. Maintain oak-hickory, shortleaf pine and oak-pine communities by 
providing for adaptive management and greater flexibility of 
silvicultural techniques.

2. Ecological Sustainability and Ecosystem Health

    a. Restore and maintain healthy forest ecosystems in response to 
oak decline; provide a healthier balance of shortleaf pine and white 
oak; restore open woodland habitats.
    b. Encourage natural vegetation by allowing pine and oak 
reforestation and stand improvement in a wider variety of situations.
    c. Provide a wide diversity of natural communities and wildlife 
habitat conditions.
    d. Revise list of management indicator species.

3. Fire Management

    a. Use prescribed fire to restore ecosystems, reduce hazardous 
fuels, maintain healthy forests and provide wildlife habitat.
    b. Manage wildland fires to protect life and property.
    c. Improve and maintain forest health and reduce the intensity of 
wildland fires through a proactive approach to fire and fuels 
management.

4. Management Area Boundaries and Prescriptions

    a. Adjust management area boundaries where needed to incorporate 
ecological landtypes, current social demands, and management 
practicalities.
    b. Evaluate inventoried roadless areas for Wilderness designation. 
Determine the most appropriate use and management for inventoried 
roadless areas not recommended to Congress for Wilderness designation. 
Determine eligibility and highest potential classification for any 
rivers identified with potential for inclusion in the Nation's wild and 
scenic river system.

5. Riparian Management

    a. Restore and maintain the ecological function of riparian areas, 
emphasizing the ecological processes that riparian areas play in 
supporting aquatic systems and water quality; define riparian areas and 
aquatic ecosystems based on plant community, soil and hydrologic 
criteria; protect water quality and ecological processes associated 
with karst terrain and karst features.
    Additional detail on the Revision Topics is available in the 
document titled ``Assessment of the Need For Change in the Revision of 
the Mark Twain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.'' You 
are encouraged to review this additional document before commenting on 
the Notice of Intent. You may request the additional information as 
indicated in the ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT sections 
of this notice.
    Other Changes: In addition to the major revision topics listed 
above, we anticipate making other changes that are important as 
direction for the forest but which tend to be narrow in scope. These 
changes, which are listed below, would not affect many resources or 
result in significant changes in the plan.

1. Access and Transportation Management

    a. Modify or eliminate road density standards in management area 
prescriptions.
    b. Eliminate ``woods roads'' designation.
    c. Eliminate the Forest Plan Transportation Map.
    d. Clarify existing plan direction for off-highway vehicle (OHV) 
and all-terrain vehicle (ATV) use on the forest.

2. Scenery Management System

    a. Replace the current Visual Management System with the national 
Scenery Management System.

3. Monitoring and Evaluation

    a. Revise the monitoring strategy to focus on information that will 
enhance understanding of resource management issues, is measurable and 
scientifically supported, and is feasible given probably budgets.
    We also propose making changes of an editorial nature. These could 
include changes to explain or clarify direction in

[[Page 18582]]

the existing plan, remove items that do not pertain to the six Forest 
Plan decisions, or remove direction that can be found elsewhere, such 
as in the Forest Service Directives System. These changes would not 
represent a change in the direction, goals or objectives in the Plan.
    Topics beyond the scope of this Forest Plan Revision: Forest plan 
decisions do not change laws, regulations or rights. The revised Forest 
Plan will only make decisions that apply to National Forest System 
lands. The revised Forest Plan will make no decisions regarding 
management or use of privately owned lands or reserved and outstanding 
mineral estates.
    Of the topics suggested for change, some appear to be adequately 
addressed in the 1986 Forest Plan, as amended, and do not need to be 
changed. Others are not considered to be among the highest priority 
topics to be included in this revision, but rather can be differed to 
be addressed in future amendments. For a discussion of the process used 
to narrow the range of plan revision topics, see the document titled 
``Assessment of the Need For Change in the Revision of the Mark Twain 
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.'' You may request a 
copy of this document as indicated in the ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT sections of this notice. Some of the Forest Plan 
decisions that do not need to be changed at this time are:
     Management for Federally-listed and other sensitive 
species--The Forest Plan was amended in 2000 and 2001 to incorporate 
changes in management for threatened and endangered species. In 2001, 
an analysis found that the current Forest Plan provided objectives 
contributing to the viability of species on the Region 9 Regional 
Forester's Sensitive Species list. We do not propose any changes for 
management of species at risk.
     Management of rivers previously identified as eligible for 
inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers system--Under current 
Forest Plan direction, these rivers and the National Forest System 
lands around them are managed to perpetuate their current condition and 
protect their unique qualities. There has been no wide spread public 
support, or any indication from the State, Federal agencies, or 
Congressional delegations that there is a need to change the current 
management of these rivers or to conduct a suitability determination at 
this time. Therefore, we do not propose any changes in the management 
direction for these rivers.
     Off-road vehicle use on the Forest--Under the current 
plan, the Forest is ``closed unless posted open'' to motorized use. 
This means that off-highway vehicle (OHV) and all-terrain vehicle (ATV) 
use is restricted to designated trails or use areas. OHVs and ATVs may 
also use Forest Service classified roads (system roads), if the vehicle 
complies with State law. OHV and ATV users have expressed a strong 
interest in using existing unclassified roads, which the Forest Plan 
considers to be closed (whether or not there is a physical closure) and 
therefore off-limits to all motorized vehicle use. Based on monitoring 
results, interpretation of national policy trends, other Forests' 
experiences, and our own experiences trying to manage ATV and OHV use, 
we do not believe that a major change in plan direction for off-road 
motorized use is warranted.
     Recreation Management--The Forest Plan was recently 
amended to update the goals and management direction for recreation. 
The amendment expanded the recreation program emphasis to include 
providing quality developed sites and recreation facilities designed to 
meet the needs and desires of the public being served by the facility. 
The amendment also added Management Prescription 7.1 to the Forest 
Plan, emphasizing intensive recreation opportunities occurring in the 
more highly developed recreation areas. We do not propose any 
additional changes in direction for recreation management at this time.
     Heritage Resources Management--The Forest Plan was 
recently amended to address current federal mandates and compliance 
requirements for heritage resources. Processes were included for 
preservation efforts to restore and interpret selected heritage sites, 
increase public outreach, and develop public education and volunteer 
programs. We do not propose any additional changes in direction for 
heritage resources management at this time.
     Fish and Aquatic Management--The Forest Plan was recently 
amended to incorporate goals and management direction for fish and 
aquatic species into the Forest Plan. The amendment provides for 
protection of aquatic ecosystems, restoration of degraded aquatic 
ecosystems and recovery of threatened or endangered aquatic species, 
and enhancement of aquatic resource user opportunities by increasing 
system productivity, improving user access and/or associated amenities, 
and providing environmental education and interpretation. We do not 
propose any additional changes in direction for fish and aquatic 
management at this time.
     Minerals Exploration--There is a high level of interest 
and widely differing opinions about the mining and processing of lead 
in Missouri. The responsibility of the Forest Service in regards to 
mining is limited to the surface activities, primarily those associated 
with exploration for minerals. We believe that the Forest Plan contains 
appropriate and adequate direction in regards to the surface activities 
associated with mining that occur on the Mark Twain National Forest, 
and we do not propose any changes to the management direction in the 
Forest Plan.
    Public comments received on topics beyond the scope of the Forest 
Plan revision will be acknowledged as such. Comments relating to 
project or program implementation will be forwarded to the managers 
responsible for that topic area. Comments on topics outside the 
responsibility of the Forest Service will be forwarded to the 
appropriate agency, State or local government.
    Range of Alternatives: We will consider a range of alternatives 
when revising the Forest Plan. Alternatives will provide different ways 
to address and respond to issues identified during the scoping process. 
A ``no-action alternative'' is required, meaning that management would 
continue under the existing Forest Plan.
    Proposed Revised Planning Regulations: The Department of 
Agriculture published new planning regulations in November of 2000. 
Concerns regarding the ability to implement these regulations prompted 
a review and will likely result in a proposed revision of the 2000 
planning rule. On May 10, 2001, Secretary Veneman signed an interim 
final rule allowing forest plan amendments or revisions initiated 
before May 9, 2002, to proceed under the 2000 planning rule or under 
the 1982 planning rule. The Mark Twain National Forest will proceed 
under the 1982 planning rule, pending future transition direction in a 
revised rule.
    Coordination with other National Forests: The Mark Twain, Ouachita, 
and Ozark-St. Francis National Forests manage about four million acres 
of public land in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands of southeastern 
Oklahoma, southern Missouri, and northern and west-central Arkansas. 
Besides proximity, the forests share many management issues, markets, 
communities of interest, and ecological conditions. For example, the 
Mark Twain and the Ozark National Forests are working closely together 
on strategies for coping with the recent red oak borer infestation and 
oak decline.

[[Page 18583]]

Recognizing our commonalities, and in an attempt to set the stage for 
forest plan revisions, the respective Forest Supervisors initiated the 
Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment in 1996. This multi-agency, broad-
scale assessment yielded a five-volume set of reports in late 1999 and 
demonstrated the value of a coordinated approach to meeting national 
forest planning needs in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands. We intend to 
continue coordination among the three national forests throughout the 
forest plan revision process.
    Inviting Public Participation: We are now soliciting comments and 
suggestions from Federal agencies, State and local governments, 
individuals, and organizations on the scope of the analysis to be 
included in the draft environmental impact statement for the revised 
Forest Plan (40 CFR 1501.7). Comments should focus on (1) the proposal 
for revising the Forest Plan, (2) possible alternatives for addressing 
issues associated with the proposal, (3) potential environmental 
effects that should be included in the analysis, and (4) any possible 
impacts associated with the proposal based on an individual's civil 
rights (race, color, national origin, age, religion, gender, 
disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital or family 
status). We will encourage public participation in the environmental 
analysis and decision-making process.
    Along with the release of this NOI and proposal for revising the 
Forest Plan, we will provide for many types of public involvement. One 
method of public involvement will be a series of public meetings hosted 
by the Forest Service. These purpose of these meetings is to (1) 
present and clarify proposed changes to the Forest Plan; (2) describe 
ways that individuals can respond to this Notice of Intent; and (3) 
accept comments from the public on this proposal for revising the 
Forest Plan.
    Below is the schedule of initial meetings based on publication of 
this NOI. Additional meetings may be scheduled as needed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Date                                    Time                               Location
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 6, 2002..........................  7-8:30 p.m............................  West Plains Civic Center, 110
                                                                                 St. Louis, West Plains, MO
                                                                                 65775.
June 13, 2002.........................  7-8:30 p.m............................  Black River Coliseum, 301 South
                                                                                 5th Street, Poplar Bluff, MO
                                                                                 63901.
June 20, 2002.........................  7-8:30 p.m............................  Farmington Civic Center, #2
                                                                                 Black Knight, Farmington, MO
                                                                                 63640.
June 27, 2002.........................  7-8:30 p.m............................  Leinor Community Center, #1
                                                                                 Hurigan Drive, Columbia, MO
                                                                                 65201.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Availability of Public Comment: Comments received in response to 
this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, 
will be considered part of the public record on this proposed action 
and will be available for public inspection. Comments submitted 
anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, those who submit 
anonymous comments will not have standing to appeal the subsequent 
decisions under 36 CFR parts 215 or 217.
    Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any persons may request 
the agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing 
how the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) permits such confidentiality. 
Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that under FOIA 
confidentiality may be granted in only very limited circumstances, such 
as to protect trade secrets.
    The Forest Service will inform the requester of the agency's 
decision regarding the request for confidentiality and where the 
requester is denied, the agency will return the submission and notify 
the requester that the comments may be resubmitted with or without name 
and address within 90 days.
    Release and Review of the Draft EIS: The DEIS is expected to be 
filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be 
available for public comment in November 2004. At that time, the EPA 
will publish a notice of availability in the Federal Register. The 
comment period on the DEIS will be 90 days from the date the EPA 
publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, that 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 Poser Corp. v. NRDS, 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 90-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 of Environmental Quality Regulations (http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/nepanet.htm) for implementing the procedural 
provision of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in 
addressing these points.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 
1909.15, Section 21)

    Dated: April 8, 2002.
Donald L. Meyer,
Acting Regional Forester.
[FR Doc. 02-9142 Filed 4-15-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P