Long Ridge Project, Clearwater National Forest, Idaho County, ID, 29610-29611 [06-4757]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
29610
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 2006 / Notices
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose of the Mitchell Project is
to reduce risk to local communities and
resources from severe wildfire and
restore resource conditions to a healthy,
resilient fire-adapted ecosystem across
the project area. There is a need to
reduce potential for large-scale severe
wildfire and to facilitate effective
wildfire suppression/protection in this
wildland-urban interface setting. This
project is focused on implementing
management actions that move toward
achieving:
• Desired conditions and objectives
embodied in Goal 10 of the Forest
Plan—Establish and maintain a mosaic
of vegetative conditions to reduce the
occurrences of stand-replacing fire
* * * and to facilitate * * * firefighting
capbility adjacent to at-risk
communities, sensitive resources, and
non-federal land * * *.
• Desired conditions and objectives
embodied in Goal 7 of the Forest Plan—
Emphasize cooperation with
individuals, organizations and other
agencies while coordinating planning
and project implementation.
• Goals and Objectives applicable to
Forest Plan Management Area (MA)
4.1—Limited Motorized Use and Forest
Product Emphasis; MA 5.1—Resource
Production Emphasis; and MA 5.4—Big
Game Winter Range Emphasis.
• Goals of the Healthy Forest
Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003 (HR
1904) and other National level
initiatives and policy that emphasize
reducing the probability and occurrence
of severe wildfire in fire adapted
ecosystems especially near at-risk
communities and the wildland-urban
interface.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Proposed Action
Proposed actions include the
following:
• Restore natural fuel breaks to help
reduce the potential for large-scale,
intense wildfire spread. Treatment
includes removing conifers from
hardwood stands such as aspen, bur
oak, birch and by expanding and/or
creating meadows (est. 1,400 acres).
• Reduce the amount of existing
forest fuels and fuels created by
vegetation treatment activities.
Treatment includes lopping, chipping,
crushing, piling and burning; creating
up to 40 miles of fuels breaks along
roads and private property boundaries;
and prescribed burning of up to 9,000
acres to reduce fuel levels.
• Thinning the ponderosa pine forest
on about 9,400 acres to reduce potential
for spreading crown fires by reducing
the density of pine, providing fuel
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 May 22, 2006
Jkt 208001
breaks, lessening insect and disease risk
and improving forest health and vigor.
This will be accomplished by using
commerical timber harvest to thin
commerical size trees and other
methods to thin smaller trees of noncommercial size.
Responsible Official
Craige Bobzien, Forest Supervisor,
Black Hills National Forest, 25041 N.
Highway 16, Custer, SD 57730.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The decision to be made is whether or
not to implement the proposed action or
possible alternative at this time.
Scoping Process
Comments and input regarding the
proposal will be received via direct
mailing from the public, other groups
and agencies during the initial public
comment period in May and June 2006.
Comments submitted based on this NOI
will be most useful if received within 30
days from the date of this notice.
Response to the draft EIS will be sought
from the interested public beginning in
October 2006.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent provides
information that the agency will prepare
an environmental impact statement in
response to public comment and
feedback during the May and June 2006
scoping period. Comments received will
assist the planning team to identify key
issues and opportunities used to refine
the proposal or possible alternative and
mitigation measures. Comments on the
DEIS will be requested during the 45
day comment period following the
Notice of Availability, expected to be
published in the Federal Register in
November 2006 (See discussion below).
Early Notice of Importance of Public
Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
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
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
Quality Regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act at 40
CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22;
Forest Service handbook 1909.15, Section 21)
Dated: May 17, 2006.
Brad Exton,
Deputy Forest Supervisor, Black Hills
National Forest.
[FR Doc. 06–4759 Filed 5–22–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Long Ridge Project, Clearwater
National Forest, Idaho County, ID
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service,
will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to disclose the
environmental effects of timber harvest
and watershed restoration activities in
the Long Ridge project area on the
Lochsa Ranger District of the Clearwater
National Forest. The Long Ridge project
area is located in the Musselshell Creek
drainage, a tributary to Lolo Creek,
approximately 8 air-miles southeast of
the town of Pierce, Idaho.
DATES: This project will be scoped
beginning in May 2006. Comments that
are received during the scoping period
will be used to develop alternatives to
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 23, 2006 / Notices
the proposed action in the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement. A 45day public comment period will follow
the release of the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement that is expected in
December 2006. The Final
Environmental Impact Statement is
expected in June 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
suggestions concerning the scope of this
project should be sent to Lois Foster
(lfoster@fs.fed.us), Interdisciplinary
Team Leader, Lochsa Ranger District,
Kamiah Ranger Station, Rt. 2, Box 191,
Kamiah, ID 83536.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois
Foster (lfoster@fs.fed.us),
Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Lochsa
Ranger District, Kamiah Ranger Station,
Rt. 2, Box 191, Kamiah, ID 83536. Phone
(208) 935–4258.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Long
Ridge Project area contains
approximately 4,200 acres, all of which
are National Forest lands. The legal
location is portions of Sections 27, 32,
33, and 34, T36N, R6E; and Sections 4,
5, 8, 9, and 17, T35N, R6E; Boise
Meridian, Idaho County, Idaho. The
proposed actions would occur on
National Forest lands and are all outside
the boundaries of any inventoried
roadless area or any areas considered for
inclusion in the National Wilderness
System as recommended by the
Clearwater National Forest Plan or by
any past or present legislative
wilderness proposals.
Purpose and Need for Action is to: (1)
Reestablish white pine and larch as
major components of the forest
ecosystem, and change the tree species
mix to more closely resemble the
historic species composition for this
landscape; (2) Remove dead trees on the
ground that are currently creating high
fuels levels, and reduce the excessive
numbers of standing dead and dying
trees that will contribute to ground fuels
in the future; and (3) Capture the
commercial value of the timber in these
stands before it is lost due to mortality
and decay.
The Proposed Action would harvest
timber using regeneration harvest on
approximately 850 acres within the
Musselshell Creek drainage.
Regeneration harvest would leave
approximately 15–20 trees per acre as
individual trees and in groups, where
feasible, to provide a continued source
of nutrients and organic materials to the
soils to maintain site productivity, and
to provide future snags and down
woody material for wildlife habitat. To
facilitate timber removal, existing
temporary and permanent roads would
be used. Gravel would be replaced and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:14 May 22, 2006
Jkt 208001
additional cross drains would be
installed on approximately 5 miles of
existing roads, and an estimated 2 miles
of new permanent roads would be
constructed. Approximately 5 miles of
existing roads that are not needed for
future management access would be
obliterated following completion of salerelated activities.
Possible Alternatives the Forest
Service will consider include a ‘‘no
action’’ alternative in which none of the
proposed activities would be
implemented. Additional alternatives
that will be considered may include
varying levels and locations for the
proposed activities to achieve the
purpose and need for action, as well as
to respond to the issues and other
resource concerns.
The Responsible Official is the Forest
Supervisor of the Clearwater National
Forest, 12730 Highway 12, Orofino, ID
83544. The Responsible Official will
decide if the proposed project will be
implemented, and will document the
decision and reasons for the decision in
a Record of Decision. That decision will
be subject to Forest Service Appeal
Regulations. The responsibility for
preparing the DEIS and FEIS has been
delegated to Cindy Lane, District
Ranger, Lochsa Ranger District, Rt. 1,
Box 398, Kooskia, ID 83539.
The Scoping Process will be initiated
with the release of a Scoping Letter in
April 2006. Comments that are received
in response to the Scoping Letter will be
included in the documentation for the
EIS. Additional scoping will follow the
release of the DEIS, expected in
December 2006. This proposal also
includes openings greater than 40 acres.
A 60-day public review period and
approval by the Regional Forester for
exceeding the 40-acre limitation will
occur prior to the signing of the Record
of Decision. The 60-day public review
period is initiated with this Notice of
Intent.
Preliminary Issues that could be
affected by proposed activities include
air quality, economics, fuels treatment,
future management accessibility,
grazing, heritage resources, old growth
habitat, recreation access, scenic
quality, size of openings, soil
compaction and productivity, tribal
treaty rights, and water quality.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29611
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
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: April 27, 2006.
Thomas K. Reilly,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 06–4757 Filed 5–22–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 23, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29610-29611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4757]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Long Ridge Project, Clearwater National Forest, Idaho County, ID
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service, will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of timber harvest
and watershed restoration activities in the Long Ridge project area on
the Lochsa Ranger District of the Clearwater National Forest. The Long
Ridge project area is located in the Musselshell Creek drainage, a
tributary to Lolo Creek, approximately 8 air-miles southeast of the
town of Pierce, Idaho.
DATES: This project will be scoped beginning in May 2006. Comments that
are received during the scoping period will be used to develop
alternatives to
[[Page 29611]]
the proposed action in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. A 45-
day public comment period will follow the release of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement that is expected in December 2006. The
Final Environmental Impact Statement is expected in June 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of
this project should be sent to Lois Foster (lfoster@fs.fed.us),
Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Lochsa Ranger District, Kamiah Ranger
Station, Rt. 2, Box 191, Kamiah, ID 83536.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois Foster (lfoster@fs.fed.us),
Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Lochsa Ranger District, Kamiah Ranger
Station, Rt. 2, Box 191, Kamiah, ID 83536. Phone (208) 935-4258.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Long Ridge Project area contains
approximately 4,200 acres, all of which are National Forest lands. The
legal location is portions of Sections 27, 32, 33, and 34, T36N, R6E;
and Sections 4, 5, 8, 9, and 17, T35N, R6E; Boise Meridian, Idaho
County, Idaho. The proposed actions would occur on National Forest
lands and are all outside the boundaries of any inventoried roadless
area or any areas considered for inclusion in the National Wilderness
System as recommended by the Clearwater National Forest Plan or by any
past or present legislative wilderness proposals.
Purpose and Need for Action is to: (1) Reestablish white pine and
larch as major components of the forest ecosystem, and change the tree
species mix to more closely resemble the historic species composition
for this landscape; (2) Remove dead trees on the ground that are
currently creating high fuels levels, and reduce the excessive numbers
of standing dead and dying trees that will contribute to ground fuels
in the future; and (3) Capture the commercial value of the timber in
these stands before it is lost due to mortality and decay.
The Proposed Action would harvest timber using regeneration harvest
on approximately 850 acres within the Musselshell Creek drainage.
Regeneration harvest would leave approximately 15-20 trees per acre as
individual trees and in groups, where feasible, to provide a continued
source of nutrients and organic materials to the soils to maintain site
productivity, and to provide future snags and down woody material for
wildlife habitat. To facilitate timber removal, existing temporary and
permanent roads would be used. Gravel would be replaced and additional
cross drains would be installed on approximately 5 miles of existing
roads, and an estimated 2 miles of new permanent roads would be
constructed. Approximately 5 miles of existing roads that are not
needed for future management access would be obliterated following
completion of sale-related activities.
Possible Alternatives the Forest Service will consider include a
``no action'' alternative in which none of the proposed activities
would be implemented. Additional alternatives that will be considered
may include varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to
achieve the purpose and need for action, as well as to respond to the
issues and other resource concerns.
The Responsible Official is the Forest Supervisor of the Clearwater
National Forest, 12730 Highway 12, Orofino, ID 83544. The Responsible
Official will decide if the proposed project will be implemented, and
will document the decision and reasons for the decision in a Record of
Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest Service Appeal
Regulations. The responsibility for preparing the DEIS and FEIS has
been delegated to Cindy Lane, District Ranger, Lochsa Ranger District,
Rt. 1, Box 398, Kooskia, ID 83539.
The Scoping Process will be initiated with the release of a Scoping
Letter in April 2006. Comments that are received in response to the
Scoping Letter will be included in the documentation for the EIS.
Additional scoping will follow the release of the DEIS, expected in
December 2006. This proposal also includes openings greater than 40
acres. A 60-day public review period and approval by the Regional
Forester for exceeding the 40-acre limitation will occur prior to the
signing of the Record of Decision. The 60-day public review period is
initiated with this Notice of Intent.
Preliminary Issues that could be affected by proposed activities
include air quality, economics, fuels treatment, future management
accessibility, grazing, heritage resources, old growth habitat,
recreation access, scenic quality, size of openings, soil compaction
and productivity, tribal treaty rights, and water quality.
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: April 27, 2006.
Thomas K. Reilly,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 06-4757 Filed 5-22-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
