[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72903-72904]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-31025]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Stanislaus National Forest, CA; Larson Reforestation and Fuels 
Reduction Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement to restore, reforest, and reduce fuels within the 13,263 acre 
Larson project area that was burned in the Stanislaus Complex Fire of 
1987. The Larson project area is located in Mariposa County, 
California, on Stanislaus National Forest, Groveland Ranger District. 
The project area is located three miles south of Highway 120, two miles 
north of the Merced River Canyon, and is bounded by Pilot Peak Lookout 
on the west and Yosemite National Park on the east. The legal 
description is: Township 2 South, Range 18 East, Sections 13, 24, 25, 
36; Township 2 South, Range 19 East, Sections 15-18, 19-22, 26-30, 31-
35; Township 3 South, Range 19 East, Sections 2-6, 9-10, MDM.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by January 15, 2003. The draft environmental impact statement is 
expected September 2003 and the final environmental impact statement is 
expected April 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to John R. Swanson, District Ranger, 
Stanislaus National Forest, Groveland Ranger District, 24545 Highway 
120, Groveland, CA 95321 or fax them to (209) 962-7412.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Roskopf, Silviculture Forester, 
Stanislaus National Forest, Groveland Ranger District, 24545 Highway 
120, Groveland, CA 95321, phone (209) 962-7825.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action is being undertaken to 
comply with the direction contained in the National Forest Management 
Act (1976) Sec. 4.(d)(1), stating that ``it is the policy of Congress 
that all forested lands shall be maintained in appropriate forest cover 
with species of trees, degree of stocking, rate of growth, and 
conditions of stands designed to secure the maximum benefits of 
multiple use sustained yield management in accordance with the land 
management plans''. In addition, this environmental impact statement 
(EIS) will tier to the Stanislaus National Forest Land and Resource 
Management Plan and EIS of 1991 as amended.

Purpose and Need for Action

    The Larson Fire (part of the Stanislaus Complex Fire of 1987) 
burned over 15,000 acres of forest and non-forest lands within the 
Larson project area. The fire burned in a mosaic pattern of moderate 
and high intensities. Significant regeneration of conifer trees 
following a wildfire and the associated benefits of a forested 
ecosystem has not occurred. Relying on natural regeneration and 
succession to reforest an area would take many decades. By restoring 
and reforesting the area, the associated benefits of recreation, 
timber, soil quality, visual quality, water quality, and wildlife 
habitat would recover to pre-fire levels at an accelerated rate.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action would consist of combinations of site 
preparation (4,300 acres), reforestation (4,500 acres), release (4,800 
acres), precommercial thinning (750 acres), prescribed burning (4,800), 
and defensible fuel profile zone construction (150 acres) treatments. 
Site preparation treatments would include mechanical, manual, and 
chemical methods. Specific treatments would include shredding, tractor 
piling,

[[Page 72904]]

grapple piling, crushing, felling, hand herbicide applications 
(glyphosate or triclopyr), and aerial herbicide (glyphosate) 
applications. Reforestation treatment would include planting and re-
planting if needed. Release treatments would include hand herbicide 
(glyphosate or triclopyr) application and a second hand herbicide 
(glyphosate or triclopyr) application if needed. Precommercial thinning 
treatments would include shredding, hand felling and piling, and hand 
felling with lopping and scattering of slash. Prescribed burning 
treatments would include broadcast, underburn, and pile burning. 
Defensible fuel profile zone construction would include tractor piling 
and shredding.

Possible Alternatives

    A range of reasonable alternatives will be considered as long as 
they meet the purpose and need of the proposed action, meet the project 
objectives of the proposed action, and are consistent with the Forest 
and Resource Management Plan. A ``no action'' alternative will also be 
considered.

Responsible Official

    The Responsible Official is Glenn Gottschall, Acting Forest 
Supervisor, Stanislaus National Forest, Supervisor's Office, 19777 
Greenley Road, Sonora, CA 95370.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The decision to be made is how to restore and reforest the land 
that was burned in the Stanislaus Complex Fire of 1987 to meet a 
variety of resource needs (i.e., recreation, timber, watershed, 
wildlife). The Forest Supervisor may select one of the proposed 
alternatives for reforesting the burn area, modify one of the proposed 
alternatives by adding additional management requirements or mitigation 
measures, or defer reforestation treatments of the burned area.

Scoping Process

    The Larson Reforestation and Fuels Reduction Project encouraged 
public participation through notification in the Stanislaus National 
Forest Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA), a publication mailed to 
over 500 governmental agencies, organizations, groups, and interested 
individuals. In addition, the project is listed on the Stanislaus 
National Forest SOPA web site (http;://www.r5.fs.fed.us/stanislaus/
planning/sopa/index.htm). Furthermore, a preliminary scoping letter was 
mailed out to various individuals, organizations and government 
agencies in September of 1997 and August of 1998 requesting public 
comments. This project will also be listed in the Federal Register.

Preliminary Issues

    Preliminary concerns include the effects of mechanical, chemical, 
and prescribed burning treatments on air quality, soil quality, water 
quality, and threatened and endangered species.

Permits or Licenses Required

    A county burning permit will be required for prescribed burning 
operations. A California Pesticide Applicators License will be required 
for herbicide operations.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement. 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. Scoping comments will be used to refine the proposed action; 
develop management requirements, mitigation measures, or alternatives; 
and identify potential issues and environmental effects of the proposal 
and the alternatives. This input will be used in the preparation of the 
draft environmental impact statement (DEIS).
    Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement will be 
prepared for comment. 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.
    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.
    Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who 
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal 
and will be available for public inspection.

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

    Dated: November 26, 2002.
Glenn J. Gottschall,
Acting Forest Supervisor, Stanislaus National Forest.
[FR Doc. 02-31025 Filed 12-6-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M