[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 16, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28298-28299]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4539]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Big Creek Vegetation Treatment Project, Wasatch-Cache National 
Forest, Rich County, UT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Supervisor of the Wasatch-Chache National Forest 
gives notice of the agency's intent to prepare an environmental impact 
statement on a proposal for vegetation treatment over approximately 
4,000 acres of vegetation in the 21,000 acre Big Creek project area in 
the Bear River Range in northeastern Utah. The project area is 
approximately 50 miles northeast of Ogden, Utah and is located at the 
headwaters of the Big Creek watershed. The vegetation types to be 
treated include aspen-conifer, conifer, and sagebrush communities that 
are not in properly functioning condition. Methods include prescribed 
fire, timber harvest, mechanical treatment, and herbicide application.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by June 15, 2006. The draft environmental impact statement is expected 
in November, 2006 and the final environmental impact statement is 
expected April, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to District Ranger, Ogden Ranger 
District, 507 25th Street, Suite 103, Ogden, Utah 84401, Attn: Big 
Creek Project. Or, e-mail comments to: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chip Sibbernsen, Ogden Ranger 
District, 507 25th Street, Suite 103, Ogden, UT 84401, (801) 625-5112.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose and need for this project is three-fold: (1) To develop 
variation in vegetation age and type across the landscape, consistent 
with the properly functioning condition as described in the Revised 
Forest Plan; (2) to enhance ecosystem resiliency and maintain desired 
fuel levels with fire operating within historical fire regimes as 
described in the Revised Forest Plan; and, (3) to provide commercial 
timber that contributes to a sustainable level of goods and services 
consistent with the Revised Forest Plan.

Proposed Action

    The proposed project includes treatment of approximately 4,000 
acres of aspen-conifer, conifer, and sagebrush communities within the 
Big Creek project area. This would include the following: (1) About 700 
acres (primarily aspen-conifer communities) would be treated with 
prescribed fire in a mosaic pattern; (2) approximately 1,300 acres of 
sagebrush would be treated by prescribed fire, mechanical means, or 
application of herbicides, depending on specific site characteristics 
and desired results; (3) timber harvest would be the method of 
treatment over approximately 1,000 acres of the conifer type, including 
partial and selective cutting scattered over about 850 acres of 
Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir, Douglas-fir, and mixed conifer to 
regenerate aspen and conifer trees, and about 150 acres of clearcutting 
in lodgepole pine to incorporate existing, small clearcut units into 
larger patches more resembling historic landscape patterns; and (4) 
approximately 1,000 acres of the conifer-aspen type would have a timber 
harvest of commercial conifer trees followed by prescribed burning to 
reduce fuels and facilitate aspen regeneration.
    Accessing the vegetation treatment areas would potentially require 
the construction of approximately 12 miles of temporary roads. These 
roads would be obliterated (returned to contour and revegetated) upon 
completion of the project. Approximately 2 miles of roads would be 
constructed to access conifer harvest units that are partially cut (to 
allow for future access). Referred to as ``intermittent service 
roads'', these roads would be gated closed and seeded, but the road 
prism would be kept in place for future administrative use.

Possible Alternatives

    A no action alternative will be considered as well as any other 
alternatives that may be developed in response to significant issues.

Responsible Official

    The Responsible Official is Faye Krueger, Forest Supervisor, 
Wasatch-Cache National Forest, 8236 Federal Building, 125 South State 
Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84138.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The decisions to be made include whether or not to implement the 
proposed prescribed fire, timber harvest, mechanical and chemical 
treatments in aspen, conifer, and sagebrush communities, and if so, 
where and to what degree.

Scoping Process

    The forest Service invites comments and suggestions on the scope of 
the analysis to be included in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement 
(DEIS). In addition, the Forest Service gives notice that it is 
beginning a full environmental analysis and decision-making process for 
this proposal so that interested or affected people may know how they 
can participate in the environmental analysis and contribute to the 
final decision. This notice of intent initiates the scoping process 
which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The 
Forest Service welcomes any public comments on the proposal.

Preliminary Issues

    Preliminary issues include effects of treatments on wildlife 
habitat and

[[Page 28299]]

threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant and wildlife populations, 
effects of prescribed fire on soils, protection of springs, streams, 
and riparian areas, potential for invasive species following 
treatments, and effective closure of roads after treatments.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement.
    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: May 10, 2006.
Faye L. Krueger,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 06-4539 Filed 5-15-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M