[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 31, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41703-41704]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3710]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Black Hills National Forest, Hell Canon Ranger District, Custer, 
South Dakota--Norbeck Wildlife Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: This project proposes to implement wildlife habitat 
improvements on about 6,049 acres within the Norbeck Wildlife Preserve 
on the Hell Canyon Ranger District of the Black Hills National Forest. 
In addition, the project proposes to conduct prescribed burning on 
7,391 acres of the Black Elk Wilderness. This project will analyze 
effects of these treatments within the constraints of the Black Hills 
National Forest Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (BHNF LRMP), 
as amended.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received 
within 30 days after publication of this notice in the Federal 
Register. The draft environmental impact statement is expected in 
March, 2008 and the final environmental impact statement is expected 
July, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Send writhen comments to Michael Lloyd, District Ranger, 
Hell Canyon Ranger District, 330 Mt. Rushmore Rod., Custer, South 
Dakota 57730. Comment may also be submitted by e-mail to: [email protected]. with ``Norbeck'' as 
subject. Electronic comments must be submitted in word (.doc), RichText 
(.rtf), or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alice Allen, Project Coordinator, 
Blacks Hills National Forest, Hell Canyon Ranger District, at 330 Mt. 
Rushmore Rd., Custer, South Dakota 57730, phone (605) 673-4853.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Purpose and Need for Action: The purpose for the proposed action is 
to benefit ``game animals and birds'' by improving habitat conditions 
in the Norbeck Wildlife Preserve. In addition, there is a need to 
protect these habitats for game animals and birds in Norbeck from a 
wildfire escaping from the Black Elk Wilderness. The EIS will determine 
current conditions, analyze environmental consequences of habitat 
improvements on those conditions, and assist the decision maker in 
selecting management/monitoring strategies consistent with meeting 
desired conditions in the BHNF LRMP, including the goals for 
``Management Areas 5.4A--Norbeck Wildlife Preserve'' and ``Management 
Area 1.1A--Black Elk Wilderness''. The Forest Service seeks to provide 
high quality habitat for ``game animals and birds'' in accordance with 
the Norbeck Organic Act of June 5, 1920.
    Proposed Action: The Norbeck Wildlife Project proposes to manage 
vegetation to benefit game animals and birds on about 6,049 acres 
within the Norbeck Wildlife Preserve. The project also proposes to use 
prescribed fire on 7,391 acres of the Black Elk Wilderness to help 
protect these habitats from wildfire escaping from the wilderness. The 
Forest Service will evaluate, analyze and determine the effects of the 
proposed treatments on Norbeck focus species (Griebel, Burns and Deisch 
2007) including mountain goat, bighorn sheep, elk, white-tailed deer, 
turkey, bluebird, golden-crowned kinglet, brown creeper, ruffed grouse, 
song sparrow, northern goshawk and black-backed woodpecker.
    Possible Alternatives: The No Action alternative would not 
authorize habitat improvements of any type on any portion of the 
project area at this time. Other alternatives may be developed in 
response to public comments.
    Responsible Official: The Responsible Official for this project is 
Michael D. Lloyd, District Ranger, Hell Canyon Ranger District, Black 
Hills National Forest, 330 Mt. Rushmore Rd., Custer, South Dakota.
    Nature of Decision to be Made: The Forest Service will evaluate the 
proposed action and alternatives. After reviewing the proposed action, 
the alternatives, the environmental analysis, and considering public 
comment, the District Ranger will reach a decision that is in 
accordance with the purpose and need for this project. The decision 
will include, but not be limited to:
    (1) Whether or not to undertake vegetative treatments to improve 
habitat conditions for game animals and birds in Norbeck Wildlife 
Preserve,
    (2) Whether or not to undertake prescribed burning in the Black Elk 
Wilderness to protect these habitats from fire escaping from the 
wilderness,
    (3) If so, what actions are appropriate and under what conditions 
actions will take place.
    Public Comment: This notice of intent initiates the scoping process 
which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The 
District desires to involve interested parties in identifying issues 
related to habitat management for game animals and birds. Comments will 
help the planning team identify key issues and opportunities to develop 
habitat improvements, monitoring strategies, and alternatives.
    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.

[[Page 41704]]

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: July 24, 2007.
Craig Bobzien,
Forest Supervisor,
[FR Doc. 07-3710 Filed 7-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M