Pacific Southwest Region, Regional Office, California, Sierra Nevada Forests-Management Indicator Species Amendment, 21205-21206 [E7-8160]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Notices
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 24, 2007.
Faye L. Krueger,
Wasatch-Cache Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E7–8149 Filed 4–27–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Pacific Southwest Region, Regional
Office, California, Sierra Nevada
Forests—Management Indicator
Species Amendment
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Pacific Southwest Region
of the U.S. Forest Service proposes to
adopt a common list of Management
Indicator Species (MIS) and associated
monitoring strategies by amending the
Land and Resource Management Plans
(LRMPs) for the Eldorado, Inyo, Lassen,
Modoc, Plumas, Sequoia, Sierra,
Stanislaus, and Tahoe National Forests
and Lake Tahoe Basin Management
Unit. These will likely be nonsignificant forest plan amendments.
DATES: To be most effective, comments
concerning the scope of the analysis
should be received by May 21, 2007.
Public scoping for this analysis,
originally expected to be documented in
an Environmental Assessment, began on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:27 Apr 27, 2007
Jkt 211001
February 21, 2007. Unless response to
this notice raises concerns not yet
expressed, the draft environmental
impact statement is expected in late
May 2007 and the final environmental
impact statement is expected in July
2007.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to the
Forest Service at the following
addresses. Hardcopy mail: U.S. Forest
Service, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo, CA
94592, ATTN: Brenda Kendrix.
Electronic mail: commentspacificsouthwest-regionaloffice@fs.fed.us, Subject Line: Sierra
Nevada Forests MIS Amendment. Use
Rich Text Format (.rtf) or Word (.doc).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information contact Diana Craig,
Interdisciplinary Team Leader, at U.S.
Forest Service, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo,
CA, or at the e-mail address above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
This proposed action responds to a
need for a more suitable and
manageable list of MIS, while
maintaining a sufficient number of
species to cover the range of habitats in
the Sierra Nevada affected by Forest
Service management activities.
Monitoring and recent judicial
interpretations have led to the
conclusion that the Forest plan
provisions related to MIS and MIS
monitoring are in need of
reconsideration. Specifically, some MIS
currently identified in the LRMPs are
problematic because (1) no tested
monitoring methodology exists or the
methodology is prohibitively expensive,
(2) some MIS currently identified in the
LRMPs are not strongly linked to
habitats or ecosystem components that
are affected by national forest
management activities, or (3) some MIS
do not occur on or occur only
incidentally on a Forest and, therefore,
neither populations nor habitat
relationships can be monitored for MIS
objectives.
In addition, the current lists provide
no coordination or standardization
across the Sierra Nevada Forests. Each
national forest has a different, and often
unrelated, MIS list. Often forest scale
information does not provide the most
meaningful biological data. Maintaining
a monitoring program on each
individual forest is not strategic and is
an inefficient use of money and
resources.
The purpose of this action is to
improve the ability of the national
forests to provide for the diversity of
plant and animal communities, as
identified in the National Forest
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21205
Management Act (NFMA). This will be
accomplished by identifying MIS for the
10 national forests (1) that are clearly
linked to habitats or ecosystem
components that are affected by national
forest management activities, and (2) for
which population or habitat status and
change can be effectively and affordably
monitored and evaluated.
Proposed Action
The Forest Service proposes to adopt
common list of MIS and associated
monitoring strategies by amending, via
non-significant forest plan amendment,
the LRMPs for the ten Sierra Nevada
National Forests in the Pacific
Southwest Region (Eldorado, Inyo,
Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Sequoia, Sierra,
Stanislaus, and Tahoe National Forests
and Lake Tahoe Basin Management
Unit). These ten national forests occur
in Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El
Dorado, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Lassen,
Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono,
Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra,
Siskiyou, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yuba, and
Douglas Counties in California and
Esmeralda and Mineral Counties in
Nevada.
This action will replace the existing
MIS lists and associated monitoring
strategies identified in the LRMPs for
each of the 10 national forests. Other
MIS-related parts of the LRMPs (e.g.,
habitat objectives, desired conditions,
standards and guidelines) will NOT be
changed by this proposal; therefore,
habitat and species-specific protection
measures will continue for all current
MIS.
The proposed action will have the
following components: (1) Major
habitats or ecosystem components that
are affected by national forest
management activities on the ten
national forests; (2) suitability and
feasability criteria to assess whether a
species meets the identified need; (3)
MIS for major habitats or ecosystem
components identified in component 1;
and (4) appropriate monitoring
strategies for each identified MIS
(habitat or population monitoring,
including the specific type of
population monitoring).
Possible Alternatives
Public comment has suggested an
alternative analyzing all species
identified as MIS in Appendix E of the
2001 Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Sierra Nevada Forest
Plan Amendment (2001 SNFPA FEIS)
and associated monitoring. We will
analyze this alternative, called SNFPA
Appendix E, in detail.
E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM
30APN1
21206
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 82 / Monday, April 30, 2007 / Notices
Responsible Official
Bernard Weingardt, Regional Forester,
Pacific Southwest Region, U.S. Forest
Service, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo,
California 94592, is the Responsible
Official.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Responsible Official will decide
whether to amend by adopting a
common list of MIS and associated
monitoring strategies for each of the 10
LRMPs as proposed, to amend with an
alternative MIS list and associated
strategies, or retain the existing MIS lists
and associated monitoring strategies.
Although non-significant Forest Plan
amendments are normally signed by
Forest Supervisors, the Regional
Forester for the Pacific Southwest
Region will be the Deciding Officer for
this decision.
Scoping Process
The analysis of this proposed action
was originally expected to be
documented in an Environmental
Assessment (EA). Formal scoping for
this analysis began on February 21, 2007
when a scoping letter was sent to over
4,000 addresses. The Forest Service
used the last known distribution list of
the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forests Plan
Amendment Record of Decision because
the current amendment covers roughly
the same area and communities of
interest. An open house was held on
March 23, 2007. The proposed action
was first published in the Schedules of
Proposed Actions for each of the ten
Forests for the Second Quarter of Fiscal
Year 2007. An Internet Web site (https://
www.fs.fed.us/r5/snfmisa) displays
comprehensive information about the
project. This notice of intent offers the
opportunity to comment to a larger
audience.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Preliminary Issues
Comments about implementing the
existing monitoring requirements in the
Sierra Nevada Forests Plan Amendment
and concerns that those requirements
should not be weakened will drive
development of an alternative as
described above in the Possible
Alternatives section.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent continues the
scoping process which now guides the
development of an 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:27 Apr 27, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 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 24, 2007.
Beth G. Pendleton,
Deputy Regional Forester, Pacific Southwest
Region.
[FR Doc. E7–8160 Filed 4–27–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Notice of New Fee Site; Federal Lands
Recreation Enhancement Act (Title VIII,
Pub. L. 108–447)
Tonto National Forest, USDA
Forest Service
ACTION: Notice of new fee site
(Reference to previously published
Federal Register document, Vol. 772,
No. 12, Page 2490, January 19, 2007).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Tonto National Forest
plans to implement a $6 per vehicle fee
for overnight camping and day-use at
Haigler Canyon Recreation Site. This
site is undergoing major improvements
which will increase facilities and
services available to the public once
completed. Fees paid at similar
recreation sites on the Tonto National
Forest demonstrate that the public
appreciates and enjoys the availability
of developed recreation sites and is
willing to pay reasonable fees for use of
such sites. Funds from the fee revenue
will be used for the continued operation
and maintenance of Haigler Canyon
Recreation Site.
DATES: Haigler Canyon will become
available for recreation use in August,
2007.
Forest Supervisor, Tonto
National Forest, 2324 E. McDowell
Road, Phoenix, AZ 85006
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dave Killebrew, Recreation Fee
Coordinator, 602–225–5239
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Recreation Lands Enhancement
Act (Title VIII, Pub. L. 108–447)
directed the Secretary of Agriculture to
publish a six month advance notice in
the Federal Register whenever new
recreation fee areas are established.
This new fee will be reviewed by a
Recreation Resource Advisory
Committee prior to a final decision and
implementation. The Arizona Bureau of
Land Management Resource Advisory
Council serves as the Recreation
Resource Advisory Committee for this
project.
The Tonto National Forest currently
has over 50 recreation sites where use
fees are charged. A business analysis
has shown that people desire having
this sort of recreation experience on the
Tonto National Forest. A market
analysis indicates that the $6 per
vehicle fee is both reasonable and
acceptable for camping and day-use at
Haigler Canyon. Once the site is
complete, visitors wanting to use
facilities at Haigler Canyon Recreation
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM
30APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 82 (Monday, April 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21205-21206]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8160]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Pacific Southwest Region, Regional Office, California, Sierra
Nevada Forests--Management Indicator Species Amendment
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Pacific Southwest Region of the U.S. Forest Service
proposes to adopt a common list of Management Indicator Species (MIS)
and associated monitoring strategies by amending the Land and Resource
Management Plans (LRMPs) for the Eldorado, Inyo, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas,
Sequoia, Sierra, Stanislaus, and Tahoe National Forests and Lake Tahoe
Basin Management Unit. These will likely be non-significant forest plan
amendments.
DATES: To be most effective, comments concerning the scope of the
analysis should be received by May 21, 2007. Public scoping for this
analysis, originally expected to be documented in an Environmental
Assessment, began on February 21, 2007. Unless response to this notice
raises concerns not yet expressed, the draft environmental impact
statement is expected in late May 2007 and the final environmental
impact statement is expected in July 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to the Forest Service at the following
addresses. Hardcopy mail: U.S. Forest Service, 1323 Club Drive,
Vallejo, CA 94592, ATTN: Brenda Kendrix. Electronic mail: comments-
pacificsouthwest-regional-office@fs.fed.us, Subject Line: Sierra Nevada
Forests MIS Amendment. Use Rich Text Format (.rtf) or Word (.doc).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Diana
Craig, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, at U.S. Forest Service, 1323 Club
Drive, Vallejo, CA, or at the e-mail address above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
This proposed action responds to a need for a more suitable and
manageable list of MIS, while maintaining a sufficient number of
species to cover the range of habitats in the Sierra Nevada affected by
Forest Service management activities. Monitoring and recent judicial
interpretations have led to the conclusion that the Forest plan
provisions related to MIS and MIS monitoring are in need of
reconsideration. Specifically, some MIS currently identified in the
LRMPs are problematic because (1) no tested monitoring methodology
exists or the methodology is prohibitively expensive, (2) some MIS
currently identified in the LRMPs are not strongly linked to habitats
or ecosystem components that are affected by national forest management
activities, or (3) some MIS do not occur on or occur only incidentally
on a Forest and, therefore, neither populations nor habitat
relationships can be monitored for MIS objectives.
In addition, the current lists provide no coordination or
standardization across the Sierra Nevada Forests. Each national forest
has a different, and often unrelated, MIS list. Often forest scale
information does not provide the most meaningful biological data.
Maintaining a monitoring program on each individual forest is not
strategic and is an inefficient use of money and resources.
The purpose of this action is to improve the ability of the
national forests to provide for the diversity of plant and animal
communities, as identified in the National Forest Management Act
(NFMA). This will be accomplished by identifying MIS for the 10
national forests (1) that are clearly linked to habitats or ecosystem
components that are affected by national forest management activities,
and (2) for which population or habitat status and change can be
effectively and affordably monitored and evaluated.
Proposed Action
The Forest Service proposes to adopt common list of MIS and
associated monitoring strategies by amending, via non-significant
forest plan amendment, the LRMPs for the ten Sierra Nevada National
Forests in the Pacific Southwest Region (Eldorado, Inyo, Lassen, Modoc,
Plumas, Sequoia, Sierra, Stanislaus, and Tahoe National Forests and
Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit). These ten national forests occur in
Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Inyo, Kern,
Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta,
Sierra, Siskiyou, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yuba, and Douglas Counties in
California and Esmeralda and Mineral Counties in Nevada.
This action will replace the existing MIS lists and associated
monitoring strategies identified in the LRMPs for each of the 10
national forests. Other MIS-related parts of the LRMPs (e.g., habitat
objectives, desired conditions, standards and guidelines) will NOT be
changed by this proposal; therefore, habitat and species-specific
protection measures will continue for all current MIS.
The proposed action will have the following components: (1) Major
habitats or ecosystem components that are affected by national forest
management activities on the ten national forests; (2) suitability and
feasability criteria to assess whether a species meets the identified
need; (3) MIS for major habitats or ecosystem components identified in
component 1; and (4) appropriate monitoring strategies for each
identified MIS (habitat or population monitoring, including the
specific type of population monitoring).
Possible Alternatives
Public comment has suggested an alternative analyzing all species
identified as MIS in Appendix E of the 2001 Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (2001 SNFPA FEIS)
and associated monitoring. We will analyze this alternative, called
SNFPA Appendix E, in detail.
[[Page 21206]]
Responsible Official
Bernard Weingardt, Regional Forester, Pacific Southwest Region,
U.S. Forest Service, 1323 Club Drive, Vallejo, California 94592, is the
Responsible Official.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Responsible Official will decide whether to amend by adopting a
common list of MIS and associated monitoring strategies for each of the
10 LRMPs as proposed, to amend with an alternative MIS list and
associated strategies, or retain the existing MIS lists and associated
monitoring strategies. Although non-significant Forest Plan amendments
are normally signed by Forest Supervisors, the Regional Forester for
the Pacific Southwest Region will be the Deciding Officer for this
decision.
Scoping Process
The analysis of this proposed action was originally expected to be
documented in an Environmental Assessment (EA). Formal scoping for this
analysis began on February 21, 2007 when a scoping letter was sent to
over 4,000 addresses. The Forest Service used the last known
distribution list of the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forests Plan Amendment
Record of Decision because the current amendment covers roughly the
same area and communities of interest. An open house was held on March
23, 2007. The proposed action was first published in the Schedules of
Proposed Actions for each of the ten Forests for the Second Quarter of
Fiscal Year 2007. An Internet Web site (https://www.fs.fed.us/r5/
snfmisa) displays comprehensive information about the project. This
notice of intent offers the opportunity to comment to a larger
audience.
Preliminary Issues
Comments about implementing the existing monitoring requirements in
the Sierra Nevada Forests Plan Amendment and concerns that those
requirements should not be weakened will drive development of an
alternative as described above in the Possible Alternatives section.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent continues the scoping process which now
guides the development of an 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 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 24, 2007.
Beth G. Pendleton,
Deputy Regional Forester, Pacific Southwest Region.
[FR Doc. E7-8160 Filed 4-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P