[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 40 (Thursday, February 28, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10741-10742]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-3772]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Sierra National Forest; California; Kings River Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a supplement to the Kings River 
Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a supplement to the 2006 Kings 
River Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The 
supplement will be focused on new information and clarification, 
particularly related to Pacific fisher; a new multi-forest Land 
Management Plan Amendment regarding management indicator species; 
applicable suggestions in a new paper titled An Ecosystem Management 
Strategy for Southern Sierra Mixed-Conifer Forests by North, M., P. 
Stine, K. O'Hara, W. Zielinski and S. Stephens; and collaboration that 
may result in a change in the timing, description, and location of 
activities within the project area.

DATES: Scoping is not required for supplements to environmental impact 
statements (40 CFR 1502.9(c)4(4)). The draft supplement to the FEIS is 
expected to be issued in April 2008 and the final supplement to the 
FEIS is expected in July 2008. Comments on the draft supplement to the 
FEIS must be received by 45 days after publication.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Ray Porter, District Ranger, High 
Sierra Ranger District, PO Box 559, Prather, CA 93651, Attn: Kings 
River Project Supplement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ross Peckinpah, Kings River Project 
Coordinator, at the High Sierra Ranger District. Telephone number is 
(559) 855-5355 x3350. Information regarding the Kings River Project can 
be found on the Sierra National Forest Web site located at: http://www.fs.fed.us/sierra/projects/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The Kings River planning area encompasses approximately 131,500 
acres of public lands in two watersheds of the Kings River drainage. 
The northern edge of the project is located about two miles southeast 
of Shaver Lake, CA.
    One hundred years of fire suppression in the Sierra Nevada has 
resulted in forests full of dead wood and thickly clustered trees. This 
situation, plus continued urbanization of lands adjacent to national 
forest lands, has put the forests and homes at risk of catastrophic 
fire. A FEIS was released in October of 2006 addressing the situation 
in the Kings River Project area that applied an uneven aged 
silvicultural system and prescribed fire upon eight units totaling 
13,700 acres. On December 20, 2006 the Record of Decision (ROD) for the 
Kings River Project was signed. The decision was appealed and upheld by 
the Regional Forester. In May of 2007 a lawsuit was filed against the 
Forest Service that alleged the analysis conducted for the Kings River 
Project FEIS and ROD was inadequate. Since that time additional 
information has developed to help analyze effects of restoration 
projects on sensitive wildlife species like Pacific fisher. A new 
multi-forest Land Management Plan Amendment has also been issued 
regarding management indicator species. A new paper suggesting An 
Ecosystem Management Strategy for Southern Sierra Mixed-Conifer Forests 
by North, M., P. Stine, K. O'Hara, W. Zielinski and S. Stephens is 
about to be peer reviewed and published. Collaborative efforts with 
those who opposed this project and/or new information could change the 
timing, description, and location of activities within the project area 
that would require supplementing the FEIS and publishing a new ROD. As 
a result of this, the December 20, 2006 ROD was withdrawn.

Purpose and Need for Action

    This supplement is focused on new information and clarification, 
particularly related to Pacific fisher; a new multi-forest Land 
Management Plan Amendment regarding management indicator species; 
applicable suggestions in a new paper titled An Ecosystem Management 
Strategy for Southern Sierra Mixed-Conifer Forests by North, M., P. 
Stine, K. O'Hara, W. Zielinski and S. Stephens; and ongoing 
collaboration so the purpose and need for action remain the same as was 
described in the 2007 Kings River Project FEIS. ``The underlying need 
for the proposed action is to restore historical pre-1850 forest 
conditions across a large landscape'' (Kings River Project FEIS pg. 1-
4).

Proposed Action

    The proposed action and all alternatives are expected to remain the 
same as was described in the 2007 Kings River Project FEIS. Three 
alternatives were analyzed in the FEIS to address the Purpose and Need: 
(1) The Proposed Action--including commercial tree harvest & thinning, 
underburning, reforestation, plantation maintenance, fuels treatments, 
watershed restoration projects, and herbicide treatments to plantations 
and noxious weeds, (2) No Action and (3) Reduction in Harvest Tree 
Size--limiting the vegetation treatments to trees 30'' diameter and

[[Page 10742]]

smaller; treatment of understocked areas associated with existing 
openings by site prep, planting and release. The alternatives and 
proposed action will be informed by the new information and could 
result in their modification.

Responsible Official

    Ed Cole, Forest Supervisor, Sierra National Forest, 1600 Tollhouse 
Ave., Clovis, CA 93612.

Commenting and Review

    A draft supplement to the Kings River Project Environmental Impact 
Statement will be prepared for comment. The comment period will be 45 
days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the 
notice of availability in the Federal Register. The paragraphs that 
follow are standards that apply all EIS related actions including a 
supplement to a FEIS.

    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 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 
supplement and will be available for public inspection.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 
1909.15, Section 21)

    Dated: February 22, 2008.
Edward C. Cole,
Forest Supervisor.
 [FR Doc. E8-3772 Filed 2-27-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-01-P