Big Creek Vegetation Treatment Project, Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Rich County, UT, 28298-28299 [06-4539]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
28298
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 16, 2006 / Notices
the petition for a determination of
nonregulated status from interested
persons for a period of 60 days from the
date of this notice. We are also soliciting
written comments from interested
persons on the EA prepared to examine
any environmental impacts of the
proposed determination for the subject
plum event. The petition, the EA, and
any comments we receive are available
for public review on the Regulations.gov
Web site or in our reading room
(instructions for accessing
Regulations.gov and information on the
location and hours of the reading room
are provided under the heading
ADDRESSES at the beginning of this
notice). Copies of the petitions and the
EA are also available as indicated in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this notice.
After the comment period closes,
APHIS will review the data submitted
by the petitioner, all written comments
received during the comment period,
and any other relevant information.
After reviewing and evaluating the
comments on the petition and the EA
and other data and information, APHIS
will furnish a response to the petitioner,
either approving the petition in whole
or in part, or denying the petition.
APHIS will then publish a notice in the
Federal Register announcing the
regulatory status of ARS–PLMC5–6
plum and the availability of APHIS’
written decision.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781–
7786; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and
371.3.
Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of
May 2006.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E6–7402 Filed 5–15–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Big Creek Vegetation Treatment
Project, Wasatch-Cache National
Forest, Rich County, UT
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
ACTION:
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:06 May 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
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, email comments to: comments-intermtnwasatch-chache-ogden@fs.fed.us.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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, WasatchCache 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 decisionmaking 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
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 94 / Tuesday, May 16, 2006 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
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 45day 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:06 May 15, 2006
Jkt 208001
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]
28299
Supervisor for the National Forests and
Grasslands in Texas. These meetings are
open to the public. The public may
present written comments to the RAC.
Each formal RAC meeting will also have
time allocated for hearing public
comments. Depending on the number of
persons wishing to comment and time
available, the time for individual oral
comments may be limited.
Dated: May 10, 2006.
Raoul W. Gagne,
Designated Federal Officer, Davy Crockett
National Forest RAC.
[FR Doc. 06–4544 Filed 5–15–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Notice of Public Meeting, Davy
Crockett National Forest Resource
Advisory Committee
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Secure
Rural Schools and Community Self
Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106–
393) and the Federal Advisory
Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Davy Crockett National Forest
Resource Advisory Committee (RAC)
meeting will meet on June 22, 2006.
DATES: The Davy Crockett National
Forest RAC meeting will be held on
June 22, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The Davy Crockett National
Forest RAC meeting will be held at the
Davy Crockett Ranger Station located on
State Highway 7, approximately onequarter mile west of FM 227 in Houston
County, Texas. The meeting will begin
at 6 p.m. and adjourn at approximately
9 p.m. There will be a public comment
period.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Raoul Gagne, District Ranger, Davy
Crockett National Forest, Rt. 1, Box 55
FS, Kennard, Texas 75847: Telephone:
936–655–2299 or e-mail at:
rgagne@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Davy
Crockett National Forest RAC proposes
projects and funding to the Secretary of
Agriculture under section 203 of the
Secure Rural Schools and Community
Self Determination Act of 2000. The
purpose of the June 22, 2006 meeting is
to review the status of approved
projects, review a Title III proposal, and
prepare to receive additional project
proposals to submit to the Forest
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Forest Service
Fresno County Resource Advisory
Committee
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Fresno County Resource
Advisory Committee will meet in
Prather, California. The purpose of the
meeting is to discuss the 2007 project
submittal process and timeline
regarding the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act of
2000 (Pub. L. 106–393) for expenditure
of Payments to States Fresno County
Title II funds.
DATES: The meeting will be held on June
20th from 6:30 p.m. to 9 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the High Sierra Ranger District, 29688
Auberry Road, Prather, California
93651. Send written comments to
Robbin Ekman, Fresno County Resource
Advisory Committee Coordinator, c/o
Sierra National Forest, High Sierra
Ranger District, 29688 Auberry Road,
Prather, CA 93651 or electronically to
rekman@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robbin Ekman, Fresno County Resource
Advisory Committee Coordinator, (559)
855–5355 ext. 3341.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
meeting is open to the public.
Committee discussion is limited to
Forest Service staff and Committee
members. However, persons who wish
to bring Payments to States Fresno
County Title II project matters to the
attention of the Committee may file
written statements with the Committee
staff before or after the meeting. Public
sessions will be provided and
individuals who made written requests
by June 14, 2006 will have the
opportunity to address the Committee at
E:\FR\FM\16MYN1.SGM
16MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 16, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28298-28299]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing 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: comments-intermtn-wasatch-
chache-ogden@fs.fed.us.
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
