[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 114 (Friday, June 13, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35377-35379]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-14727]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Red Pines EIS Project, Nez Perce National Forest, Idaho County, 
ID

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement to disclose the environmental impacts of implementing fuel 
hazard reduction and watershed improvement activities within the Red 
Pines project area in the Red River watershed. Individuals interested 
in actions of this nature are encouraged to submit comments and become 
involved in the planning process.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received 
at the address below on or before July 14, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Bruce Bernhardt, Forest Supervisor, 
Route 2, Box 475, Grangeville, ID 83530.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kara Chadwick, Project Coordinator, 
and (208) 983-1950.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Red Pines project area is located on the 
Nez Perce National Forest in northern Idaho within Idaho County. The 
project area lies about 34 air miles southeast of Grangeville Idaho and 
three air miles southeast of Elk City Idaho. The project area 
encompasses 31,466 acres and includes Dawson, Little Moose, Blanco and 
Ditch Creeks and Lower and Main Red River subwatersheds, and small 
portions of Trail, Soda and Moose Butte Creeks subwatersheds, which 
drain into Red River, which drains directly into the South Fork 
Clearwater River.
    The actions proposed for implementation would reduce existing and 
potential fuel loads through the following activities:
    A combination of thinning and/or salvaging and underburning on 
approximately 4,760 acres. This combination would result in some 
regeneration (clearcut) harvest. A combination of tractor and cable 
yarding systems would be used.
    Approximately 1,645 acres of plantations, 20-50 years in age, would 
be thinned and underburned, favoring fire resistant species. A 
combination of tractor and cable yarding systems would be used.
    Approximately 100 acres of 15-20 year old plantations would be 
precommercially thinned.
    Approximately 25 miles of temporary road would be constructed to 
access the fuel hazard reduction areas described above. These roads 
would be decommissioned following activities.
    Approximately 18 miles of existing roads would be reconditioned 
prior to use for fuel hazard reduction activities.
    As part of this project, activities would be implemented to meet 
Forest Plan requirements for upward trend in fish habitat and water 
quality. The following activities would maintain or improve aquatic 
conditions in the subwatersheds in the project area:
    Restore soil productivity on 175 to 350 acres through soil 
restoration techniques, such as decompaction, revegetation, and 
reestablishing natural drainage features.
    Reduce erosion and water quality impacts at four inactive mine 
sites, using techniques such as reshaping of disturbed areas, soil 
amendments, revegetation, and possibly treatment of water draining from 
adits.
    Reduce sediment production from existing and temporary roads 
planned

[[Page 35378]]

for use in this project. These activities would include improving the 
road surface, improving drainage and stabilizing eroding areas.
    Decommission 40 to 45 miles of existing road that do not improve 
access to the area for public recreation or administrative use, using 
techniques ranging from abandonment to recontouring.
    Reduce erosion and water quality impacts from an existing rock pit.
    Replace three culverts identified as barriers to fish passage.
    Replace as many culverts (85 identified) as possible to prevent 
them from becoming plugged with debris.
    Add large woody debris to stream channels where they have been 
determined to be debris deficient.
    Plant riparian areas with native grasses, forbs and woody species 
where needed to promote bank stability and/or streamside shade.
    Maintain existing fish habitat improvement structures in the main 
stem of Red River. This would involve mostly handwork, but could 
include machine work.
    Improve two miles of Red River and one mile of Little Moose Creek 
by placing large woody debris or other structures in the stream, 
remeandering selected channel reaches, stabilizing banks and planting 
riparian areas.
    Improve dispersed sites in the Blanco area along Red River by 
defining and hardening campsites to reduce sediment runoff, providing 
vault-type toilets to reduce pollutants into Red River, and providing a 
parking area, an unloading ramp, hitching rails and a feed bunk.
    Two Forest Plan amendments are necessary to implement fuel hazard 
reduction activities.
    Past activities have caused detrimental soil disturbance in some 
areas proposed for fuel hazard reduction activities. The proposed 
amendment would state, ``Where detrimental soil conditions from past 
activities affect 15 percent or less of the activity area, a cumulative 
minimum of 85 percent of the activity area shall not be detrimentally 
compacted, displaced, or puddled upon completion of activities'' and 
``Where detrimental soil conditions from past activities affect more 
than 15 percent of the activity area, the cumulative detrimental soil 
disturbance from project implementation and past activities shall not 
exceed the conditions prior to the planned activity and shall provide a 
net improvement in soil quality.''
    A second Forest Plan amendment is necessary to implement projects 
in Ditch, Trail, Bridge, Baston and Soda Creeks and in Upper and Main 
Red River. Appendix A of the Forest Plan states that ``Management--
derived sediment which could affect fish habitat will not be allowed 
until monitoring indicates that habitat has recovered to planned 
levels.'' The proposed activities, including the aquatic improvement 
activities, are expected to produce some sediment in the short term 
that could affect fish habitat, however, the activities would be 
designed to result in an upward trend in fish habitat conditions over 
time.
    The following footnote would apply to Siegel, Deadwood, Redhorse, 
Dawson, Moose Butte, Ditch, Trail, Otterson, Bridge, Upper Baston, 
Soda, Shcooner and Trapper Creeks and Upper Main, Main, Lower, Lower 
South Fork, Upper South Fork, Middle Fork and West Fork of Red River, 
as listed in Appendix A of the Nez Perce Forest Plan:
    ``Aquatic conditions in these watersheds have been determined to 
fall below levels needed to meet fish/water quality objectives. General 
forest management activities can occur concurrently with aquatic 
improvements in these watersheds as long as an upward trend in habitat 
carrying capacity is indicated. Upward trend is indicated using 
multiple sources of information including stream surveys, monitoring 
data, predictive modeling, literature reviews and/or professional 
judgment. It is not specifically required that an upward trend be 
demonstrated through monitoring prior to initiation of general forest 
management activities.''
    Five subwatersheds (French Gulch, Lowest Red River, and Campbell, 
Little Moose and Blanco Creeks) within the Red River watershed have not 
been rated for water quality conditions. Water quality ratings for 
these subwatersheds need to be completed on a site- or project-specific 
basis. If these subwatersheds are determined to be below objective, the 
footnote described above would apply.
    A scoping letter outlining these actions described here is being 
mailed to over 200 interested individuals and organizations. In 
addition, the Red River District will host an informal, open house 
session the evening of June 17, 2003 to answer questions and solicit 
comments on the proposal. A field trip to the project area is being 
planned for August 2003. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement will 
be mailed to all those who responded during the scoping period.
    The Interdisciplinary Team has identified five preliminary issues 
associated with potential effects on the proposed activities: Potential 
effects of the activities on lynx and lynx habitat; potential effects 
of the activities on the Region One listed sensitive plant known as 
candystick; potential effects of the activities on soil productivity; 
potential effects of the activities on threatened, endangered and 
sensitive fish, fish habitat and water quality; consistency with the 
anticipated Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the 303(d) listed South 
Fork Clearwater River; and reduction in miles of road and access to the 
area.
    The decision to be made in response to this analysis include: (1) 
Are fuel hazard reduction activities needed, and if so, where, when and 
how would they be implemented? (2) What transportation system is 
necessary in the analysis area and how will it be managed? (3) Are the 
fish habitat and water quality improvement activities for Forest Plan 
upward trend requirements needed, and if so, where, when and how would 
they be implemented? (4) What mitigation is needed to assure forest 
management activities are consistent with the Nez Perce Forest Plan and 
environmental law? (5) Are amendments to the Nez Perce Forest Plan 
necessary to implement the proposed actions? (6) What implementation 
and effectiveness monitoring is needed?
    The responsible official for this project is the Nez Perce Forest 
Supervisor. Comments to this notice should be sent to the address and 
contacts identified above and should be submitted within 30 days of 
publication of this notice in the Federal Register. A Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is expected to be available in 
January 2004 and a Final EIS in April 2004. Should an action 
alternative be selected, implementation could be initiated in fall/
winter 2004.
    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 it is important to give reviewers 
notice at this early stage 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

[[Page 35379]]

until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may 
be waived or dismissed by the courts. 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 during this scoping and 
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.).

    Dated: June 3, 2003.
Bruce E. Bernhardt,
Forest Supervisor, Nez Perce National Forest.
[FR Doc. 03-14727 Filed 6-12-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M