[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 123 (Thursday, June 26, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38006-38007]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-16143]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Jarbidge Rangeland Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Jarbidge Ranger District, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest 
will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on a proposal to 
authorize continued livestock grazing in the project area under updated 
grazing management direction in order to move existing rangeland, 
riparian, and forest resource conditions toward a set of desired 
conditions. The project area includes all Forest System lands managed 
by the Jarbidge Ranger District.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by August 26, 2003. The draft environmental impact statement is 
expected December 2003 and the final environmental impact statement is 
expected September 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to James Winfrey, Project Manager, 
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, 2035 Last Chance Road, Elko, Nevada 
89801.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, mail 
correspondence to or contact James Winfrey, Project Manager, Humboldt-
Toiyabe National Forest, 2035 Last Chance Road, Elko, Nevada 89801. The 
telephone number is 775-778-0229. E-mail address is [email protected].

Purpose and Need for Action

    The Jarbidge Rangeland Project was identified to address livestock 
grazing and its effects on the overall diversity of fish, wildlife, 
vegetation species, and rangeland, riparian and watershed condition. 
While wildlife and natural resource management direction has been 
evolving over the last decade, livestock management direction and 
practices have been slower to change. This project is an opportunity to 
align the livestock management practices in the Jarbidge Rangeland 
project area with the specific management direction for the other 
resources in the project area.
    The purpose of the Jarbidge Rangeland project is to evaluate 
current livestock grazing practices in relation to their effects on 
other resources and, where necessary, adjust those practices to 
maintain or move toward the desired environmental conditions.

Proposed Action

    The Jarbidge Ranger District, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, is 
proposing to authorize continued livestock grazing in the project area 
under updated grazing management direction in order to move existing 
rangeland, riparian, and forest resource conditions toward a set of 
desired conditions. After scoping and during the analysis phase of this 
project the interdisciplinary team (IDT) will use the existing 
rangeland condition and other resources to identify where and how 
livestock grazing management practices may need to be adjusted to meet 
the desired conditions.

Possible Alternatives

    In addition to the proposed action we have tentatively identified 
two additional alternatives that will be analyzed in the EIS.
    (1) No Action Alternative: This would be continuation of the 
current grazing management.
    (2) No Grazing Alternative: This would be not issuing new grazing 
permits when existing permits expire.

Responsible Official

    Robert L. Vaught, Forest Supervisor, Humboldt-Toiyabe National 
Forest, 1200 Franklin Way, Sparks, Nevada 89431

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Based on the environmental analysis and disclosure in the EIS, the 
Forest Supervisor will decide whether or not to continue grazing on the 
allotments within the Jarbidge Rangeland Project area, and, if the 
decision is made to continue grazing, then he will also decide which 
standards, mitigation measures, monitoring criteria, and modifications, 
should be applied.

Scoping Process

    The Forest Service will use a mailing of information to interested 
parties. Public involvement will be ongoing throughout the analysis 
process and at certain times public input will be specifically 
requested. There are currently no scoping meetings planned.

Preliminary Issues

    The following are some potential issues identified through internal 
Forest Service scoping based on our experience with similar projects:
    [sbull] Livestock grazing has the potential to adversely affect 
water quality and aquatic habitat.
    [sbull] Livestock grazing has the potential to adversely affect 
soils and vegetation, which may result in a decline in condition of 
wildlife habitats, the long-term availability of forage, and the 
diversity of species.
    [sbull] Livestock grazing has the potential to adversely affect 
riparian habitat conditions and ecologic function.
    The list is not considered all-inclusive, but should be viewed as a 
starting point. We are asking you to help us further refine these 
issues and identify other issues or concerns relevant to the proposed 
project.

Comment Requested

    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

[[Page 38007]]

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.

    Dated: June 23, 2003.
Robert L. Vaught,
Forest Supervisor, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest.
[FR Doc. 03-16143 Filed 6-25-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M