Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Mountain City Ranger District, Mountain City Ranger District Rangeland Management Project; Environmental Statements; Notice of Intent, 60489-60490 [05-20781]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2005 / Notices
the ultimate decision for a Bozeman
Watershed Project. My address is Forest
Supervisor, Gallatin National Forest,
P.O. Box 130, Federal Building,
Bozeman, MT 59771.
Dated: October 7, 2005.
Rebecca Heath,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 05–20788 Filed 10–17–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest,
Mountain City Ranger District,
Mountain City Ranger District
Rangeland Management Project;
Environmental Statements; Notice of
Intent
Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Mountain City Ranger
District of the Humboldt-Toiyabe
National Forest will prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
on a proposal to authorize continued
livestock grazing on National Forest
System (NFS) lands within the
boundaries administered by the Ranger
District. The Project Area is located in
Elko County, Nevada.
DATES: In order to be most effective,
comments concerning the scope of the
proposed analysis should be received
within 30 days from the date that this
Notice of Intent (NOI) is published in
the Federal Register. The draft EIS is
expected to be completed in March
2006, and the final EIS is expected to be
completed in September 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to:
District Ranger, Mountain City Ranger
District, 2035 Last Chance Road, Elko,
NV 89801.
Electronic comments may be sent via
e-mail to: comments-intermtnhumboldt-toiyabe-mtncity@fs.fed.us.
Please put ‘‘Grazing EIS’’ in the
subject line of e-mail transmissions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Douglas Clarke, Project Coordinator,
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest,
2035 Last Chance Road, Elko, NV 89801,
Telephone: 775–778–6127.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of and Need for Action
The Mountain City Ranger District
Rangeland Management Project is an
opportunity to provide for livestock
grazing that is managed in a manner that
will maintain areas that are currently
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:22 Oct 17, 2005
Jkt 208001
ecologically satisfactory, according to
Forest Plan direction (desired
functioning conditions), or that will
improve specific areas identified
through this analysis or in the future as
ecologically unsatisfactory (less than
functioning condition).
Given the focus on this need, the
purpose of the project is to bring current
improper livestock grazing practices
into alignment with the requirements of
wildlife and other natural resources
where needed in the Project Area. Also
included in this project is the need to
be able to apply the use of adaptive
management when managing livestock
and the affected natural resources.
Currently, term grazing permits provide
for little flexibility or ability to change
management when monitoring shows a
need or opportunity for change.
In the time since the Forest Plan goals
were identified in 1986, wildlife
science, range science, and natural
resource management science have
continued to evolve. More is known
now about the relationship between
species and the environments in which
they live, resulting in changes in
management direction for specific
species over the last decade. Range
scientists within both the Forest Service
and the academic community have also
conducted research and published
scientific papers regarding the
influences that livestock grazing has on
the environment. In many areas across
the American West, the results of this
research have been applied in the
design and implementation of effective
adaptive management strategies. Much
of this current science and knowledge
should now be incorporated into grazing
management within the Project Area.
The primary emphasis will be an
ecological based approach rather than
livestock administration. However, the
emphasis will also include reponding to
improper livestock management.
In addition to the need to incorporate
new or updated research into existing
grazing management strategies, the
Mountain City Ranger District has
gathered an extensive collection of
historic and current photographs taken
from the same places in different
decades throughout the District. These
photographs, known as ‘‘repeat photo
sets’’ show that, in general, rangeland
ecological conditions throughout the
District have improved from the early
1900’s to now, or maintained
themselves at an acceptable level for the
most part. In many instances there is a
pronounced improvement from the
1960’s and 1970’s until now, which is
a timeframe when many of the grazing
management improvements in place
today (rotational or improved grazing
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60489
systems, infrastructure improvements
such as division fences and water
developments, and improved herding or
animal husbandry practices) were
originally implemented. The
information gleaned from advances in
science since the original Forest Plan
was implemented, the inferences to
ecological condition available from the
repeat photo sets, and existing sitespecific information were used to
develop the proposed action for this
analysis. The proposed action is
designed to be able to specifically
address, either currently if known
during the course of this analysis, or
identified through future monitoring or
subsequent advances in knowledge
about ecological relationships, the
impacts from improper grazing
practices.
Proposed Action
The Mountain City Ranger District of
the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest
is proposing to authorize continued
livestock grazing on grazing allotments
within the District under updated
grazing management direction. The
proposal encompasses approximately
490,500 acres of NFS lands in Elko
County, Nevada. This updated
management direction would be
incorporated into all livestock grazing
permits and associated allotment
management plans as needed. This
direction would guide livestock grazing
management within the Project Area
during the coming decade, or until
amendments are warranted based on
changed condition or monitoring
results.
Other Possible Alternatives
In addition to the Proposed Action
detailed above, we have tentatively
identified two (2) additional alternatives
that will be analyzed in the EIS:
(1) No Action Alternative: A
continuation of the current grazing
management without updated direction.
(2) No Grazing Alternative: New
grazing permits would not be issued
when existing permits expired.
Responsible Official
The responsible official is: Forest
Supervisor, Humboldt-Toiyabe National
Forest, 1200 Franklin Way, Sparks, NV
89431.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
Based on the environmental analysis
presented in the EIS, the Forest
Supervisor will decide whether or not to
continue grazing on the allotments
within the Project Area in accordance
with the standards in the Proposed
Action or as modified by mitigation
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
60490
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 18, 2005 / Notices
measures and monitoring requirements
identified during the course of the
analysis.
Scoping Process
The Forest Service will mail
information to interested and/or affected
parties. Public involvement will be
ongoing throughout the analysis
process, and public input will be
specifically requested at certain times.
There are currently no scoping meetings
planned.
Preliminary Issues
The following are some potential
issues identified through internal Forest
Service scoping based on experience
with similar projects. We are asking you
to help us further refine the existing
issues as wells as identify other issues
or concerns relevant to the Proposed
Action. This list is not considered allinclusive; rather, it should be viewed as
a starting point:
• Improper livestock grazing has the
potential to affect the following
resources as identified by internal
scoping:
• Water quality in streams throughout
the District;
• Habitat for Lahontan Cutthroat
trout, a federally-listed species found in
the Humboldt River Basin;
• Heritage resources within the
Project Area;
• Vegetation, including riparian plant
communities and aspen stands, which
may result in a decline in the long-term
productivity of the land base;
• Wildlife habitat for several species,
including mule deer, pygmy rabbits,
spotted frogs, northern goshawk, and
sage grouse.
Comment Requested
This NOI initiates the scoping process
which will guide the development of
the EIS. The public is invited to submit
comments stating your concerns and
issues that are relevant to the proposed
project. These comments will be used to
help establish the scope of study and
analysis for the EIS.
Early Notice of Importance of Public
Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
17:22 Oct 17, 2005
Jkt 208001
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in
the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(Pub. L. 92–463) and under the Secure
Rural Schools and Community SelfDetermination Act of 2000 (Public Law
106–393) the Beaverhead-Deerlodge
National Forest’s Tri-County Resource
Advisory Committee will meet on
Thursday, November 3, 2005, from 4
p.m. to 8 p.m. in Philipsburg, Montana,
for a business meeting. The meeting is
open to the public.
DATES: Thursday, November 3, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the USDA Forest Service office, 88 10–
A Business Loop, Philipsburg, Montana.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bruce Ramsey, Designated Forest
Official (DFO), Forest Supervisor,
Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest,
at (406) 683–3973.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda
topics for this meeting includes a review
of projects proposed for funding as
authorized under Title II of Pub. L. 106–
393 and public comment. If the meeting
location is changed, notice will be
posted in local newspapers, including
The Montana Standard.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22;
Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section
21)
SUMMARY: The Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board (Access Board) has established an
advisory committee to advise the Board
on issues related to the accessibility of
courthouses covered by the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the
Architectural Barriers Act of 1968. The
Courthouse Access Advisory Committee
(Committee) includes organizations
with an interest in courthouse
accessibility. This notice announces the
date, times and location of the next
Committee meeting, which will be open
to the public.
DATES: The meeting of the Committee is
scheduled for November 17, 2005
(beginning at 9 a.m. and ending at 5
p.m.) and November 18, 2005
Dated: October 12, 2005.
Edward C. Monnig,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 05–20781 Filed 10–17–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
A draft EIS will be prepared for
comment. The comment period on the
draft EIS will be 45 days from the date
that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) publishes the notice of
availability (NOA) in the Federal
Register.
The Forest Service believes that, at
this early stage, it is important to give
reviewers notice of several court rulings
related to public participation in the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
environmental review process. First,
reviewers of draft EISs 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 have been raised at the draft EIS
stage but that are not raised until after
completion of the final EIS 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 consider them and respond
to them in a meaningful manner within
the final EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in
identifying and considering issues and
concerns regarding the Proposed Action,
comments on the draft EIS should be as
specific as possible. It is also helpful if
the comments refer to specific pages,
sections, or chapters of the draft
document. Comments may also address
the adequacy of the draft EIS or the
merits of the alternatives formulated
and discussed in the document.
Reviewers may wish to refer to the
Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) Regulations for implementing the
procedural provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 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 of this proposal and will
be available for public inspection.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Notice of Tri-County Advisory
Committee Meeting
AGENCY:
ACTION:
PO 00000
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: October 11, 2005.
Bruce Ramsey,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 05–20782 Filed 10–17–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
ARCHITECTURAL AND
TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS
COMPLIANCE BOARD
Courthouse Access Advisory
Committee; Meeting
Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\18OCN1.SGM
18OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 18, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60489-60490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20781]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, Mountain City Ranger District,
Mountain City Ranger District Rangeland Management Project;
Environmental Statements; Notice of Intent
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Mountain City Ranger District of the Humboldt-Toiyabe
National Forest will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on
a proposal to authorize continued livestock grazing on National Forest
System (NFS) lands within the boundaries administered by the Ranger
District. The Project Area is located in Elko County, Nevada.
DATES: In order to be most effective, comments concerning the scope of
the proposed analysis should be received within 30 days from the date
that this Notice of Intent (NOI) is published in the Federal Register.
The draft EIS is expected to be completed in March 2006, and the final
EIS is expected to be completed in September 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: District Ranger, Mountain City
Ranger District, 2035 Last Chance Road, Elko, NV 89801.
Electronic comments may be sent via e-mail to: comments-intermtn-
humboldt-toiyabe-mtncity@fs.fed.us.
Please put ``Grazing EIS'' in the subject line of e-mail
transmissions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Douglas Clarke, Project Coordinator,
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, 2035 Last Chance Road, Elko, NV
89801, Telephone: 775-778-6127.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of and Need for Action
The Mountain City Ranger District Rangeland Management Project is
an opportunity to provide for livestock grazing that is managed in a
manner that will maintain areas that are currently ecologically
satisfactory, according to Forest Plan direction (desired functioning
conditions), or that will improve specific areas identified through
this analysis or in the future as ecologically unsatisfactory (less
than functioning condition).
Given the focus on this need, the purpose of the project is to
bring current improper livestock grazing practices into alignment with
the requirements of wildlife and other natural resources where needed
in the Project Area. Also included in this project is the need to be
able to apply the use of adaptive management when managing livestock
and the affected natural resources. Currently, term grazing permits
provide for little flexibility or ability to change management when
monitoring shows a need or opportunity for change.
In the time since the Forest Plan goals were identified in 1986,
wildlife science, range science, and natural resource management
science have continued to evolve. More is known now about the
relationship between species and the environments in which they live,
resulting in changes in management direction for specific species over
the last decade. Range scientists within both the Forest Service and
the academic community have also conducted research and published
scientific papers regarding the influences that livestock grazing has
on the environment. In many areas across the American West, the results
of this research have been applied in the design and implementation of
effective adaptive management strategies. Much of this current science
and knowledge should now be incorporated into grazing management within
the Project Area.
The primary emphasis will be an ecological based approach rather
than livestock administration. However, the emphasis will also include
reponding to improper livestock management.
In addition to the need to incorporate new or updated research into
existing grazing management strategies, the Mountain City Ranger
District has gathered an extensive collection of historic and current
photographs taken from the same places in different decades throughout
the District. These photographs, known as ``repeat photo sets'' show
that, in general, rangeland ecological conditions throughout the
District have improved from the early 1900's to now, or maintained
themselves at an acceptable level for the most part. In many instances
there is a pronounced improvement from the 1960's and 1970's until now,
which is a timeframe when many of the grazing management improvements
in place today (rotational or improved grazing systems, infrastructure
improvements such as division fences and water developments, and
improved herding or animal husbandry practices) were originally
implemented. The information gleaned from advances in science since the
original Forest Plan was implemented, the inferences to ecological
condition available from the repeat photo sets, and existing site-
specific information were used to develop the proposed action for this
analysis. The proposed action is designed to be able to specifically
address, either currently if known during the course of this analysis,
or identified through future monitoring or subsequent advances in
knowledge about ecological relationships, the impacts from improper
grazing practices.
Proposed Action
The Mountain City Ranger District of the Humboldt-Toiyabe National
Forest is proposing to authorize continued livestock grazing on grazing
allotments within the District under updated grazing management
direction. The proposal encompasses approximately 490,500 acres of NFS
lands in Elko County, Nevada. This updated management direction would
be incorporated into all livestock grazing permits and associated
allotment management plans as needed. This direction would guide
livestock grazing management within the Project Area during the coming
decade, or until amendments are warranted based on changed condition or
monitoring results.
Other Possible Alternatives
In addition to the Proposed Action detailed above, we have
tentatively identified two (2) additional alternatives that will be
analyzed in the EIS:
(1) No Action Alternative: A continuation of the current grazing
management without updated direction.
(2) No Grazing Alternative: New grazing permits would not be issued
when existing permits expired.
Responsible Official
The responsible official is: Forest Supervisor, Humboldt-Toiyabe
National Forest, 1200 Franklin Way, Sparks, NV 89431.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
Based on the environmental analysis presented in the EIS, the
Forest Supervisor will decide whether or not to continue grazing on the
allotments within the Project Area in accordance with the standards in
the Proposed Action or as modified by mitigation
[[Page 60490]]
measures and monitoring requirements identified during the course of
the analysis.
Scoping Process
The Forest Service will mail information to interested and/or
affected parties. Public involvement will be ongoing throughout the
analysis process, and public input will be specifically requested at
certain times. There are currently no scoping meetings planned.
Preliminary Issues
The following are some potential issues identified through internal
Forest Service scoping based on experience with similar projects. We
are asking you to help us further refine the existing issues as wells
as identify other issues or concerns relevant to the Proposed Action.
This list is not considered all-inclusive; rather, it should be viewed
as a starting point:
Improper livestock grazing has the potential to affect the
following resources as identified by internal scoping:
Water quality in streams throughout the District;
Habitat for Lahontan Cutthroat trout, a federally-listed
species found in the Humboldt River Basin;
Heritage resources within the Project Area;
Vegetation, including riparian plant communities and aspen
stands, which may result in a decline in the long-term productivity of
the land base;
Wildlife habitat for several species, including mule deer,
pygmy rabbits, spotted frogs, northern goshawk, and sage grouse.
Comment Requested
This NOI initiates the scoping process which will guide the
development of the EIS. The public is invited to submit comments
stating your concerns and issues that are relevant to the proposed
project. These comments will be used to help establish the scope of
study and analysis for the EIS.
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
A draft EIS will be prepared for comment. The comment period on the
draft EIS will be 45 days from the date that the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) publishes the notice of availability (NOA) in
the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes that, 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 EISs 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 have been raised at the draft EIS
stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final EIS
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 consider them and respond to them
in a meaningful manner within the final EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns regarding the Proposed Action, comments on the draft EIS
should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if the comments
refer to specific pages, sections, or chapters of the draft document.
Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft EIS or the merits
of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the document. Reviewers
may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 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 of 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: October 12, 2005.
Edward C. Monnig,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 05-20781 Filed 10-17-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P