[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 109 (Monday, June 7, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31786-31788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-12780]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Fishlake National Forest, Utah, Fishlake OHV Route Designation 
Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Supervisor of the Fishlake National Forest gives 
notice of the intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) 
to designate a system of routes and managed use areas that are open to 
motorized use. Creating a new motorized travel plan is necessary to 
improve management and enforcement of off-highway vehicle travel policy 
on the Forest. Existing travel rules that were established in the 1986 
Forest Plan did not anticipate the rapid increase in off-highway 
vehicle (OHV) use or the types of user conflicts and resource impacts 
that have occurred in recent years. This notice describes the specific 
elements to be included in a new travel plan, decisions to be made, 
estimated dates for filing the EIS, information concerning public 
participation, and the names and address of the agency officials who 
can provide information.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by July 30, 2004. The draft environmental impact statement is scheduled 
for completion by the fall of 2004 and the final environmental impact 
statement is expected before spring of 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments or requests for further information 
to: Dale Deiter, OHV Team Leader, Fishlake National Forest, 115 East 
900 North, Richfield, UT 84701. Phone: 435-896-1007. Electronic 
correspondence may be sent to [email protected]. 
Please include ``Fishlake OHV Route Designation Project'' on the 
subject line.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Davida Carnahan, Public Affairs 
Officer, Fishlake National Forest, 115 East 900 North, Richfield, UT 
84701. Phone: 435-896-1070.
    For technical information contact: Max Reid, Public Services Staff, 
Fishlake National Forest, 115 East 900 North, Richfield, UT 84701. 
Phone: 435-896-1075.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action

    The Fishlake National Forest Supervisor has determined that there 
is a need to improve management and enforcement of off-highway vehicle

[[Page 31787]]

travel policy on the Forest. This need includes three fundamental 
management considerations.
    1.The need to better accommodate current motorized use and to 
address future growth. There has been rapid growth in OHV use that was 
not anticipated when the 1986 Fishlake Forest Plan was written. Use on 
the managed Paiute and Great Western Trail systems alone has increased 
roughly 172 percent between 1995 and 2003. Similarly, OHV registrations 
in Utah have increased 142 percent from 1998 to 2003. Most of these 
vehicles in turn are used on public lands. The Forest travel plan map 
currently allows unrestricted motorized access seasonally or yearlong 
on 62 percent of the Fishlake National Forest System lands. This is no 
longer a desirable or sustainable management option given the existing 
number of users and expected growth.
    2. The need to have a travel plan that is simple to understand and 
implement, and consistent with other Forests and land management 
agencies.
    The model used for the existing travel plan relies on ``open unless 
signed or mapped closed'' designations that are complicated to 
interpret and as a result are difficult to enforce. The lack of simple 
and consistent travel policies among other Forests and land management 
agencies is confusing for the public and inhibits cooperative law 
enforcement.
    3. The need to reduce the potential for OHV conflicts and impacts 
to other resource uses and values.
    Some OHV activity is occurring in areas and on routes where 
motorized use is prohibited. In some open areas, networks of user-
developed routes continue to appear that are creating user conflicts 
and resource impacts. Problem areas are not uniformly distributed 
throughout the Forest. Some of this use has occurred in riparian areas 
and on highly erodible slopes. In other areas use is very light and 
little or no effects from motorized, wheeled cross-country travel are 
evident. Types of impacts occurring in some cases include the 
introduction and spread of noxious weeds, trampling and compaction of 
soils and rare plants, rutting of wetlands, disturbance and 
displacement of wildlife and livestock, damage to cultural resources, 
and impacts to water quality, riparian and fisheries habitats. The 
major motorized impacts are occurring during hunting season, from 
spring antler shed gathering, in play areas next to communities, and 
around popular dispersed camping areas.
    The Forest Service and public have a need for greater certainty 
about which roads and trails are part of the managed system of 
motorized and non-motorized routes. Greater certainty addresses the 
needs above by providing:
     Improved ability to prioritize and budget for road and 
trail maintenance, and to evaluate public safety hazards,
     Focus on how and where to sustain and improve motorized 
and non-motorized recreation opportunities on the Fishlake National 
Forest,
     Improved ability to coordinate public access across 
different land ownerships,
     Improved public understanding and adherence to travel 
rules, thus reducing the development of user-created routes,
     Improved ability to reduce motorized route and use impacts 
to other resources values and Forest users.

Proposed Action

    Additional details and description of the proposed action can be 
found on the Internet at http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/fishlake/projects/obv.shtml. The proposed action has been developed by tentatively 
designating a motorized travel plan that moves towards desired 
conditions identified in the pre-project assessment. The proposed 
travel plan was compared to the existing travel plan to identify 
changes from current conditions. The proposed action only includes 
routes or areas where a change in current use or route classification 
is needed to create the desired travel plan. The proposed action will 
specify the miles of unclassified routes to be added, and the miles of 
classified routes to be removed from the Forest's existing motorized 
system. Travel by OHVs would only be allowed on routes and areas 
designated as open. Construction of the final proposed action is still 
underway, but it is anticipated that the route system will include over 
2,500 miles of roads and trails on National Forest System lands. In 
addition, seasonal restrictions would be added or removed on some 
routes. The seasonal closure period would be lengthened from March 31 
to April 15 with a start date of January 1. The Paiute and Great 
Western Trail systems would be retained. Motorized cross-country travel 
would be prohibited except as specified for direct access to and from 
dispersed camping, firewood gathering, emergency fire suppression, 
search and rescue, law enforcement, military operations, and Forest 
Service administrative use. Limited changes in area restrictions for 
over snow travel by snowmobiles are proposed to protect critical mule 
deer winter ranges and Research Natural Areas. The proposed alternative 
designates 780 acres in three managed use areas west of Richfield, UT, 
and 193 acres on the Velvet Ridges near Torrey, UT where motorized 
cross-country travel would be permitted. None of the proposed 
exceptions where cross-country travel is permitted authorize resource 
damage by users. The proposed action also includes an implementation 
plan that addresses items such as: Managing the designated system, 
eliminating unauthorized growth of the route network, signing and 
implementing routes and area designations, enforcing the new motorized 
travel plan, involving and educating the public in access and travel 
management, and planning future travel management decisions.

Possible Alternatives

    All alternatives studied in detail must fall within the scope of 
the purpose and need for action and will generally tier to and comply 
with the Fishlake forest plan. The added restrictions on motorized 
cross-country travel are the only proposed amendments to the forest 
plan at this time.
    Law requires a ``no-action alternative''. The No Action alternative 
would maintain current allowances and restrictions for OHV use and 
motorized cross-country travel described in the current Fishlake forest 
plan and travel plan.
    The Forest is expecting that the public input will generate either 
thematic concerns or route-specific issues that may be addressed by 
modifying the proposed action to create a new alternative or 
alternatives.

Responsible Official

    Mary Erickson, Forest Supervisor, Fishlake National Forest, 115 
East 900 North, Richfield, UT 84701.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The decisions to be made in this project are:
    1. Identifying rules, exceptions, and strategies for closing the 
Forest to motorized cross-country travel.
    2. Designating the type and season of motorized use to be allowed 
on classified routes.
    3. Designating or eliminating unclassified travelways.
     Legally, the Forest Service cannot recognize nor maintain 
unclassified routes. Therefore, it is proposed to either designate 
these travelways or eliminate them. Currently there are about 700 miles 
of inventoried or known roads and trails that are not officially part 
of the Forest travel system. These routes may have been constructed for 
a specific short-time purpose and were never properly closed, or some 
may also be the result of traffic going off-route repeatly

[[Page 31788]]

forming an illegal road or trail. Unclassified routes mapped before 
completion of the route designation project may be evaluated directly 
in the EIS. Disposition of routes that are added to the inventory after 
completion of the EIS will be assessed using a screening process that 
will be disclosed in the EIS. The analysis for this project will 
provide a one-time assessment of unclassified routes that will result 
in either the inclusion or elimination of a given route from the Forest 
travel network. After the decision date, any newly created travelways 
will by default be designated for elimination unless a separate 
analysis and decision are conducted under the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA). Future road and trail proposals for new construction 
will undergo disclosure and analysis in accordance with NEPA.

 Scoping Process

    The first formal opportunity to comment on the Fishlake OHV Route 
Designation Project is during the scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7), 
which begins with the issuance of this Notice of Intent. All comments, 
including the names, addresses and when provided, will be placed in the 
record and are available for public inspection. Mail comments to: Dale 
Deiter, Fishlake National Forest, 115 East 900 North, Richfield, UT 
84701.
    The Forest Service requests comments on the nature and scope of the 
environmental, social, and economic issues, and possible alternatives 
related to the development of the new travel management plan and EIS.
    A series of public opportunities are scheduled to explain the 
proposed travel plan and route designation process to provide an 
opportunity for public input. Seven scoping meetings are planned.

June 15, 2004--Richfield, UT at Snow College Conference Center from 
6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.
June 16, 2004--Fillmore, UT at Millard High School Lunchroom from 7 
p.m. to 9 p.m.
June 17, 2004--Loa, UT at the Loa Civic Center from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.
June 22, 2004--Beaver, UT at the 10th Street Center from 7 p.m. to 9 
p.m.
June 24, 2004--Junction, UT at the Piute Event Center 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.
June 29, 2004--Salina, UT at the old Legion Hall from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.

    A meeting in Salt Lake City has tentatively been scheduled for June 
23, 2004 at the Salt Lake City Public Library 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.
    Written comments will be accepted at these meetings. The Forest 
Service will work with tribal governments to address issues that would 
significantly or uniquely affect them.

Preliminary Issues

    Important goals for the project are to create a motorized travel 
plan that is simple to understand, consistent with other public land 
management agencies in Utah, and is enforceable. Protections for 
critical mule deer winter range and Threatened and Endangered plant 
habitats, roadless considerations, and the need to maintain motorized 
and nonmotorized recreational opportunities have also directed the 
development and design of the proposed action.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement. The Fishlake 
National Forest has received and assessed numerous comments from the 
2001 OHV Events Environmental Assessment that was completed to permit 
the Rocky Mountain and Fillmore ATV jamborees. The Forest has also 
received substantial input at public meetings held for the Forest Plan 
revision effort and from Topical Working Groups (TwiGs) that have 
addressed suitability issues related to OHVs, dispersed recreation, and 
roadless. Through these efforts the Forest has an understanding of the 
broad range of perspectives on the resource issues and social values 
attributed to motorized recreation on the Fishlake National Forest. 
Consequently, site-specific comments are the most important types of 
information needed for this EIS. Comments about existing or proposed 
conditions on individual routes, desired motorized or non-motorized 
recreation opportunities, uses and impacts, and travel plan rules and 
designations are being sought. Public knowledge about existing routes 
that are not shown on the Forest inventory is also requested. Because 
the Fishlake OHV Route Designation EIS is a stand-alone document, only 
public comment letters received directly to this project will be 
formally addressed in an appendix in the FEIS.

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 July 30, 2004 comment period and during 
the comment period following the draft EIS 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: June 1, 2004.
Mary C. Erickson,
Fishlake Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 04-12780 Filed 6-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M