[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 19, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20350-20352]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-7788]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


McNally Reforestation EIS

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, is preparing an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) to re-establish conifers and 
hardwoods in key areas that burned during the McNally and Manter fires 
on the Sequoia National Forest.

DATES: The public is asked to submit any issues (points of concern, 
debate, dispute, or disagreement) regarding potential effects of the 
proposed action by May 23, 2005. The draft EIS is expected to be 
available for public comment in June, 2005, and the final EIS is 
expected to be published in December, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Jim Whitfield, EIS Team Leader, 
USDA Forest Service, Sequoia National Forest, 900 West Grand Avenue, 
Porterville, CA 93257.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Whitfield, EIS Team Leader, 
Sequoia National Forest, at the address listed above. The phone number 
is (559) 784-1500. Public field trips will be held to allow the public 
to view the project areas prior to a decision on the project. 
Information on the times, dates, locations, and agendas for these 
meetings will be provided in local newspapers, on the Sequoia National 
Forest and Giant Sequoia National Monument Web site, and by direct 
mailings.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In July and August of 2000 and 2002, the Sequoia National Forest 
and the Giant Sequoia National Monument experienced two large wildfires 
that burned extensive areas of the forest and fragmented important 
wildlife habitats. The Manter fire in 2000, burned over 74,000 acres 
and the McNally fire in 2002, burned over 150,000 acres for a total of 
approximately 224,000 acres. Restoration projects were analyzed and 
approved in an environmental assessment for the Manter fire area and in 
an environmental impact statement for the Sherman Pass portion of the 
McNally fire area.
    Following initial implementation of these two decisions, the site 
conditions in portions of the burned areas that were already planned 
for reforestation changed. In addition, portions of the Chico and 
Rincon Roadless Areas and the Giant Sequoia National Monument, which 
were not dealt with in either the Manter or McNally-Sherman Pass 
environmental documents, are in need of treatment. In all, surveys 
indicate that up to 8,000 acres will need treatment to re-establish 
desired forest conditions within 200 years. Competing vegetation and 
populations of pocket gophers have become established at levels that 
will reduce the survival of planted trees. Due to the current condition 
of these areas, successful reforestation in a timely manner will 
require planting in some areas and may require the use of herbicides, 
pesticides, and rodenticides to control competing vegetation, the 
spread of root disease, and the harmful effects from gophers.

Purpose and Need for Action

    The need for management action arises when conditions on the ground 
do not meet desired conditions. It is important to restore certain 
burned areas of native forest habitat, both conifer and hardwood, in 
order to move the land toward its desired conditions, as fully 
described in the Sequoia's Land and Resource Management Plan, as 
amended. The desired conditions for the project area are briefly 
described below:
    (1) Provide forest structure and function across old forest 
emphasis areas that generally resemble pre-settlement conditions, with 
high levels of horizontal and vertical diversity.
    (2) Maintain on re-establish key wildlife habitat for species 
including the California spotted owl, northern goshawk, and Pacific 
fisher.
    Conditions on the ground are not moving toward desired conditions 
in a timely manner without active management, primarily due to 
vegetation competition for water. The areas affected by the fires 
experience extended summer drought, typical of our Mediterranean 
climate, and the coarse, rocky soils do not hold much water. Due to 
these conditions, moisture is the most limiting factor for timely 
conifer establishment and growth in the project area. Shrubs, forbs, 
and grasses have colonized and now fully occupy portions of the burned 
areas. Where the roots of these competing plants occupy the soil 
profile, very little moisture is available to planted or natural 
conifer seedlings unless the competing plants are treated in some 
manner. Experience in the Sequoia National Forest, the Giant Sequoia 
National Monument, and throughout the region clearly shows that 
successful reforestation of conifers is dependent on active management 
to control competing shrubs, forbs, and grasses for the first one to 
five years following planting. This allows the young conifers to 
establish and develop. Once the planted trees are established and their 
roots well developed, more competing plants can be tolerated.
    In addition to competing vegetation, pocket gopher populations have 
increased in the burned areas. Gophers feed on young trees, as well as 
forbs and grasses. In the winter, when other vegetation is unavailable 
to the gophers, evergreen conifers become a primary source of food. 
Gophers feed on the roots and stems of the trees as they burrow 
underground and through the snow. Roots and bark of young seedlings are 
totally stripped away and the girdled seedlings die. Even a few active 
gopher colonies per acre can decimate young plantations. In order to 
assure successful reforestation where gophers are present, it is 
essential to control their populations before planting and during the 
first few years of conifer establishment, until the planted trees reach 
a size where they are more resistant to damage.
    There are large areas of the fire where all or most of the conifers 
were killed. In these areas there will be little or no

[[Page 20351]]

natural seed available for natural regeneration of conifers. In areas 
where natural seed is not available, reforestation of conifers will 
require planting for successful regeneration to occur in a timely 
manner.
    Some areas burned in the fire will be reforested with hardwood 
species. In some cases, reforesting the burned area with native 
hardwoods will be easier than reforesting native conifers due to the 
ability of some hardwood species to sprout from roots that remain 
following the fire.
    The tree of heaven, a non-native weed tree, is present and 
expanding its range along the Kern River within the McNally fire area. 
It is producing abundant root sprouts and creating dense thickets, 
which are displacing the native cottonwood/willow forest.

Proposed Action

    In order to meet the above Purpose and Need the Cannell Meadow and 
Hot Springs Ranger Districts propose to reforest key areas burned 
during the McNally fire of 2002 and the Manter fire of 2000. 
Approximately 40% of the proposed reforestation areas are located 
within roadless areas. The project area encompasses approximately 8,000 
acres and is located in Townships 20, 21, 22, and 23 South, Ranges 32, 
33, 34, and 35 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDB&M). The 
project area is in Tulare County, California.
    In order to move toward the desired condition for diverse forest 
habitat, reforestation will reestablish conifer and hardwood species. 
Reestablishing native forest will be accomplished with a combination of 
planting, natural seeding, and sprouting of native trees. In addition 
to reforestation, approximately 20 acres of non-native, invasive trees 
(tree of heaven) will be eliminated.
    Potential reforestation activities include preparing the planting 
sites to improve planting success, planting trees, reducing live 
vegetation that may compete with planted or naturally regenerated 
trees, reducing gopher populations that may damage or kill young 
conifers, reducing standing or down fuels to reduce short and long-term 
impacts to regenerated trees, and eliminating the invasive tree of 
heaven. Methods may include the use of mechanical equipment such as 
excavators and bulldozers for masticating or clearing competing live 
vegetation or dead trees and plants; the use of ground or aerial 
equipment for applying herbicides; and the use of hand-held equipment 
for planting trees, applying herbicides, applying poisoned bait to 
control gophers, applying pesticides to cut stumps to prevent the 
spread of root disease, removing competing vegetation, piling dead 
trees and plants, and burning undesirable live or dead vegetation.
    The analysis will be consistent with the Sequoia National Forest 
Land Management Plan (LRMP) as amended by the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan 
Amendment, 2004 (SNFPA) and the Giant Sequoia National Monument Plan, 
2004 (GSNM).

Preliminary Issues

    Recent experience indicates that the use of herbicides, pesticides, 
and rodenticides to control competing vegetation and gophers and the 
need to quickly re-establish hardwood and conifer habitat are 
controversial. There is also controversy over actively replanting an 
area with conifers, along with the associated site preparation and 
release work, versus allowing nature to take its course by letting 
conifers and other native trees seed in from residual trees.

Decisions To Be Made and Responsible Official

    The decision to be made is whether to implement the Proposed Action 
as described above, or to meet the purpose and need for action through 
some other combination of management actions, or to defer any action at 
this time.
    The Responsible Official is District Ranger David M. Freeland, 
Sequoia National Forest, Greenhorn/Cannell Meadow Ranger Districts, 
P.O. Box 3810, Lake Isabella, CA 93240.

Coordination With Other Agencies

    In the preparation of the EIS, the Forest Service will consult with 
the State Historic Preservation Office, and other federal and state 
agencies as appropriate, as well as Native American Tribes.

Commenting

    Comments received in response to this invitation to participate in 
public scoping or any future solicitation for public comments on a 
draft environmental impact statement, including names and addresses of 
those who comment, will be considered part of the public record and 
will be available for public inspection. Comments submitted anonymously 
will be accepted and considered. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 
1.27(d), any person may request the agency to withhold a submission 
from the public record by showing how the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA) permits such confidentiality. Persons requesting such 
confidentiality should be aware that under the 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 
request is denied, the agency will return the submission and notify the 
requester that the comments may be resubmitted with or without name and 
address.
    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 that, at this early stage, it is very 
important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to 
public participation in the environmental review process. First, 
reviewers of a draft environmental impact statement must structure 
their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that 
it is meaningful and alerts the agency to the reviewer's position and 
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 
533 (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 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is 
very important that persons 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 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.


[[Page 20352]]


    Dated: April 13, 2005.
Arthur L. Gaffrey,
Forest Supervisor, Sequoia National Forest.
[FR Doc. 05-7788 Filed 4-18-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M