Pinaleño Ecosystem Restoration Project, Safford Ranger District, Coronado National Forest, Graham County, Arizona, 43225-43228 [07-3812]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 149 / Friday, August 3, 2007 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
• Salmon, Idaho—August 9, 2007,
4:30–8 p.m. Salmon, Idaho—Public
Lands Center, 1206 South Challis Street.
• Idaho Falls, Idaho—August 15,
2007, 4:30–8 p.m. Caribou-Targhee
National Forest, Supervisor’s Office,
1405 Hollipark Drive.
• Blackfoot, Idaho—August 16, 2007,
4:30–8 p.m. Blackfoot City Council
Room, Library Building, 157 No.
Broadway.
• North Fork, Idaho—August 22,
2007, 4:30–8 p.m. North Fork Fire
Station, Highway 93.
• Leadore, Idaho—August 28, 2007,
4:30–8 p.m. Leadore Community Center,
Highway 28.
Notice of all meetings will be posted
on the Forest’s website and advertised
in the Recorder Herald, Challis
Messenger, Arco Advertiser, and Post
Register newspapers.
Based on comments received as a
result of this notice and after the Forest
has conducted public meetings and
afforded the public sufficient time to
respond to the preliminary Proposed
Action, the Forest will use the public
scoping comments and concerns along
with resource-related input from the
interdisciplanary team and other agency
resource specialists to identify a set of
issues to carry forward into the
environmental analysis.
Preliminary Issues
The Forest Service has received some
indications of potential issues from the
initial public involvement process.
These potential issues include:
(1) Adverse resource impacts caused
by inappropriate types of vehicle use
and unrestricted season of use.
(2) Infringement on wildlife caused by
roads in important or critical habitat,
high density of roads in wildlife habitat
areas, and disturbance of wildlife during
critical lifecycle periods.
(3) Loss of recreational opportunity
when existing routes are closed to
motorized travel.
(4) Loss of semi-primitive and
primitive recreational opportunity if
more routes are open to motorized
travel.
(5) Failure to accommodate the
growing number of motorized users
desiring to use federal lands for
recreational riding of ATVs and
motorcycles.
(6) Inconsistencies between adjoining
public lands.
(7) Enforcement concerns centered on
whether the agency has the ability to
provide enforcement once decisions
have been made on allowed routes and
uses for motorized travel.
(8) Safety concerns on routes where
multiple vehicle types (full-sized trucks
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:17 Aug 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
and cars, ATVs, and motorcycles) are
allowed.
(9) Conflicts with landowners when
routes cross private lands to access
federally managed lands.
The Forest Service recognizes that
this list of issues may not be complete
and issues will be further defined and
refined as scoping continues. A
comprehensive list of key issues will be
determined before the range of
alternatives is developed and the
environmental analysis is started.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent begins the formal
scoping process in the development of
the environmental impact statement. All
comments received during the initial
comment period (April 2006–March
2007) will be brought forward into this
formal scoping, and those who
commented then need not comment
again to have their comments
considered, or to demonstrate their
interest in this planning process. Any
new or additional comments about the
proposed action would be most useful if
received by September 7, 2007. Persons
and organizations commenting during
the intitial scoping will be maintained
on the mailing list for future
information about Salmon-Challis
National Forest Travel Management
Planning.
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 (EPA) publishes the notice of
availability in the Federal Register.
Written comments are preferred and
should include the name and address of
the commenter. Comments submitted
for this proposed action will be
considered part of the public record.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43225
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
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: July 25, 2007.
William A. Wood,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. E7–14977 Filed 8–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
˜
Pinaleno Ecosystem Restoration
Project, Safford Ranger District,
Coronado National Forest, Graham
County, Arizona
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
President’s Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) Regulations
Implementing the Procedural Provisions
of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) of 1969, the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Coronado National Forest,
announces its intent to prepare an
E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM
03AUN1
43226
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 149 / Friday, August 3, 2007 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
to evaluate a proposed action to thin
dense forests, remove standing dead
trees and down woody debris, and use
prescribed fire on approximately 3,705
˜
acres in the Pinaleno Mountains in
Graham County, Arizona, within
Townships 8 and 9 South, Ranges 23
and 24 East, Gila and Salt River
Meridian. These treatments would be
carried out over a 10-year period for the
purposes of restoring a fire-adapted
ecosystem and aiding in the recovery of
the Mount Graham red squirrel
population and habitat.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the EIS analysis must be received by
30 days following the publication of this
notice. The Draft EIS is expected to be
filed with the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) in the spring of 2008. At
that time, EPA will publish a Notice of
Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIS in
the Federal Register, which will begin
a period of public review of the Draft
EIS. The review period will comprise 45
days from the date of publication of the
NOA in the Federal Register. The Final
EIS is scheduled to be completed in the
summer of 2008.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this
notice may be mailed to the Craig
Wilcox, Forest Silviculturist, Coronado
National Forest, Safford Ranger District,
711 S. 14th Ave., Suite D, Safford, AZ
85546. Written comments may also be
sent by facsimile to Mr. Wilcox at (928)
428–2393. Comments may be submitted
by electronic mail to
cpwilcox@fs.fed.us. Envelopes and the
subject line of electronic mail messages
˜
or faxes should be labeled ‘‘Pinaleno
Ecosystem Restoration Project EIS.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
˜
information on the Pinaleno Ecosystem
Restoration Project, please contact Mr.
Craig Wilcox, Forest Silviculturist,
Coronado National Forest, at the above
address, and telephone (928) 348–1961.
Questions on the Forest Service NEPA
process may be directed to Ms. Andrea
Wargo Campbell, Forest NEPA
Coordinator, at 300 W. Congress St.,
Tucson, AZ 85701, and telephone (520)
388–8352.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Over the past 100 years, fire
suppression and other factors have
diminished the natural ecological role of
˜
fire in the Pinaleno Mountains on the
Safford Ranger District of the Coronado
National Forest, resulting in a higher
than average stand density and a heavy
accumulation of dead and downed trees
(fuel load). Both of these forest
conditions increase the probability and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:17 Aug 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
consequences of severe wildland fire
occurrence in the area.
In 1996 and 2004, large-acreage, highintensity wildland fires exacerbated a
reduction in the population of the
Federally endangered Mount Graham
red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus
grahamensis) through habitat loss and
mortality. Also, since 1996, progressive
insect infestations have defoliated and
killed trees in the spruce-fir and mixed˜
conifer forests of the Pinaleno
Mountains. Tree mortality associated
with these outbreaks has exacerbated
the probability of wildland fire and
contributed further to a decline in the
red squirrel population through habitat
loss. Today, the population of the red
squirrel is at its lowest point since
censuses were initiated in 1986, and the
viability of the species is of paramount
concern to both the Forest Service and
other Federal and state wildlife
management agencies.
In May 2005, the Forest Service
developed a tentative proposal to treat
this area of the Forest to decrease the
probability of severe wildland fire and
improve general forest health. At that
time, a scoping notice was distributed to
the public requesting comments on the
proposal, and two open house meetings
were held to explain the nature of the
treatments that were planned to be
implemented. Based on public input
and a continued decline in the squirrel
population, the Forest Service has since
recognized the need for further
refinement of the proposed action to
achieve a balance between short-term
protection of squirrel habitat and longterm forest restoration. Thus, in 2007, a
refined proposed action was developed
to emphasize a concurrent reduction in
the potential for severe wildland fire
impacts and insect and disease
outbreaks, while managing for long-term
sustainability of red squirrel habitat.
Given the sensitive nature of any
proposed Forest treatments to the red
squirrel and its habitat, the Forest
Service decided to prepare an EIS that
would provide a robust analysis to the
decisionmaker, cooperating agencies
and the public.
Proposed Action
The proposed action that will be
evaluated in this EIS includes both onthe-ground treatments to improve Forest
health and improve or protect red
squirrel habitat; and administrative
actions to incorporate amendments to
the governing Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan (Forest Plan), the
latter of which will allow on-the-ground
treatments to be implemented.
On the ground, approximately 3,705
acres of Forest would receive various
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
combinations of silvicultural
prescriptive treatments and/or fuel
reduction actions, which include
mechanical treatments and prescribed
fire. To accomplish the proposed action,
the Forest Plan must be amended to
allow Christmas tree removal and public
fuelwood gathering and to establish less
restrictive Visual Quality Objectives
(VQO) in the project area. Thus, the EIS
will also evaluate proposed action of
amending the Forest Plan to change
current standards and guidelines for the
project area.
The proposed action would
implement more than 50 combinations
of vegetation treatment options,
depending on stand density and other
physical conditions. These
combinations will follow two general
treatment strategies tiered from
management guidance for the Mount
Graham red squirrel and the Mexican
spotted owl.
Live-tree thinning, using a
combination of variable density,
thinning from below, and group
selection thinning techniques, is
proposed as a silvicultural treatment on
approximately 2,862 acres. In this
treatment area, no live or dead trees
larger than 18-inches diameter at breast
height (dbh) would be removed on 1,773
acres; larger than 12-inches dbh on 47
acres; and larger than 9 inches dbh on
1,042 acres. Pockets of standing dead
trees (up to 18-inches dbh) would be
removed in areas where high tree
mortality has occurred because of
wildland fire and/or insect infestations.
Forest fuel reduction treatments
would generally occur in the same areas
where silvicultural treatments are
proposed. These actions include
masticating small trees (461 acres);
lopping and scattering of trees less than
9 inches diameter (3,092 acres);
underburning (2,642 acres); hand piling
and burning small trees (1,612 acres);
and pruning trees in treatment units that
are along major roads.
Vegetation that is not mechanically
reduced onsite would be removed from
treatment units and transferred to
collection points (landings) using
ground-based mechanical removal
equipment, cable logging systems, and/
or manual, hand-based labor. The
transfer method for each treatment unit
would depend upon topography,
availability of road access, cost, and
resource protection needs. After
material is removed from treatment
units and taken to landings, it would be
processed into sawlogs, firewood, or
chips, and trucked from the project area.
Some material may be piled and burned
at the landing site.
E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM
03AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 149 / Friday, August 3, 2007 / Notices
All proposed treatments would
include resource-specific design criteria
to guide the manner in which the
actions are implemented in order to
minimize or reduce anticipated effects.
Treatments are expected to continue in
the project area for up to a period of ten
years.
Purpose of and Need for Action
The purpose of this proposed action
is to restore Forest ecosystem health and
to protect habitat or restore degraded
habitat for the endangered Mount
Graham red squirrel.
Current fuel loads and stand densities
in the project area are much greater than
historic forest conditions, leaving the
forest increasingly vulnerable to disease,
insect infestations, and fire. The
ecological implications of these shifts
have led to increased susceptibility of
the Forest to insect outbreaks and standreplacing fires. Therefore, there is a
need to initiate restoration of natural
ecological processes and to treat the
causes of declining ecosystem health by
reducing stand densities, changing
understory species composition, and
reducing fuel loading. Restoration seeks
to return forests, or to initiate an
ecological trajectory to return forests, to
a condition that is self-sustaining and
compatible with the conditions under
which they naturally evolved.
According to the Mount Graham Red
Squirrel Recovery Plan (USDI Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1993, Arizona
Ecological Services State Office,
Phoenix, AZ), the main threats to this
endangered subspecies are habitat loss
and catastrophic wildland fire. Over the
past 20 years, approximately 50% of
previously occupied red squirrel habitat
has been rendered unsuitable due to
insect outbreaks and fire. Associated
with this reduction in habitat, there is
an accompanying decline in population
size; the current population estimate is
216 squirrels. As such, the remaining
habitat, most of which falls within the
project area, is of high importance.
Therefore, a need exists to protect red
squirrel habitat within the project area
from losses due to fire, insect outbreaks,
and diseases, and to restore areas of
degraded habitat for this subspecies.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Preliminary Identification of Issues
Based on a preliminary review of the
proposed action, the following issues
were identified:
1. Short term impacts to the Mexican
spotted owl may occur.
2. The efficacy of fuel reduction
treatments proposed in this project is
limited by the need to protect the Mount
Graham red squirrel.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:17 Aug 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
3. An increase of interspecies
competition from the introduced Abert’s
squirrel with the Mount Graham red
squirrel may result due to an increase in
pine species.
4. An increase of avian predation on
the Mount Graham red squirrel may
result due to a reduction in hiding
cover.
Responsible Official
Jeanine Derby, Forest Supervisor,
Coronado National Forest, will be the
Responsible Official who prepares the
Record of Decision at the conclusion of
this NEPA review. The address for the
Coronado National Forest is 300 W.
Congress St., Tucson, AZ 85701.
Nature of NEPA Decision To Be Made
The Coronado National Forest
Supervisor’s decision will address
implementation of: (1) The proposed
action, including Forest Plan
amendments, (2) (an) alternative(s) to
the proposed action and/or amendments
if any exist, or (3) the no-action
alternative; and approve or disapprove
each of three proposed amendments to
the Forest Plan.
Comments Requested
The Forest Service encourages
citizens to express issues, concerns, and
suggestions they may have about this
proposed action. Comments should be
directly related to the proposed action
to best assist us in our environmental
impacts analysis. Although comments
are welcome at any time, they will be
most useful to us if they are received by
30 days following the publication of this
notice If you have any questions about
this notice or the comment process,
please contact Craig Wilcox, Forest
Silviculturist, Coronado National Forest,
Safford Ranger District, at telephone
(928) 348–1961, prior to submitting your
comments.
Written comments on this notice may
be mailed to Craig Wilcox, Forest
Silviculturist, Coronado National Forest,
Stafford Ranger District, 711 S. 14th
Ave., Suite D, Safford, AZ 85546. You
may also submit written comments by
facsimile to Mr. Wilcox at (928) 428–
2393. Comments may be submitted by
electronic mail to cpwilcox@fs.fed.us.
Envelopes and the subject line of
electronic mail messages or faxes should
˜
be labeled ‘‘Pinaleno Ecosystem
Restoration Project EIS.’’
Comments and personal information
associated with them, such as names
and addresses, will become part of the
administrative project record for this
NEPA review. As such, they may be
made available to a third-party upon
request pursuant to the Freedom of
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43227
Infomation act (FOIA). If you do not
wish your personal information to be
subject to release under FOIA, you may
choose not to include it with your
comments. Alternatively, you may
request an exemption from FOIA with
your comments submittal. Should you
choose the latter, you will be informed
by the Forest Service as to whether or
not your request qualifies for an
exemption. If it does not, you will be
afforded the opportunity to resubmit
your comments without personal
information or to withhold them.
Early Notice of the Importance of
Public Participation in the NEPA
Process
Following the 30-day scoping period
announced in this notice, the Forest
Service will prepare a draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS).
Upon completion, the DEIS will be
made available for a 45-day public
review and comment period that will
begin on the date that the EPA publishes
a Notice of Availability of the DEIS in
the Federal Register. The Forest Service
believes that, at this early stage, it is
important to provide the public with
notice about several court rulings
related to public participation in the
NEPA environmental review process.
First, reviewers of a DEIS must
structure their participation in the
NEPA review so that it is meaningful
and alerts the 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 DEIS stage but are not
raised until after completion of the final
environmental impact statement (FEIS)
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. Wisc. 1980)].
Because of these court rulings, it is very
important that those parties who are
interested in this proposed action
participate before the close of a public
comment period so that substantive
comments and objections are available
to the Forest Service in a timely manner
that will allow them to be meaningfully
considered and subsequently addressed
in the FEIS.
To assist the Forest Service in
identifying and considering issues and
concerns about the proposed action,
comments on a DEIS should be as
specific as possible. It is also helpful if
comments refer to specific line
numbers, pages, and/or chapters of the
DEIS. Comments may address the
adequacy of the DEIS or the merits of
the alternatives formulated and
E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM
03AUN1
43228
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 149 / Friday, August 3, 2007 / Notices
discussed in it. For comments of this
nature, reviewers may choose to refer to
CEQ regulations at 40 CFR 1503.3.
Comments received, including the
names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the
public record of this NEPA review and
will be available for public inspection
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22;
FSF 1909.15, Section 21).
Authorization: National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4321–4346);
Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508);
U.S. Department of Agriculture NEPA
Policies and Procedures (7 CFR part 1b).
Dated: July 30, 2007.
Jeanine A. Derby,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 07–3812 Filed 8–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Manti-La Sal National Forest, Utah, EIS
for Oil and Gas Leasing
Forest Service, USDA, and
Bureau of Land Management, USDI.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Manti-La Sal National
Forest gives notice of the intent to
prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to document the
analysis and disclose the environmental
and human effects of oil and gas leasing
on lands administered by the Manti-La
Sal National Forest. The Federal
Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform
Act of 1987 (FOOGLRA) requires the
Forest Service to evaluate National
Forest System (NFS) lands for potential
oil and gas leasing.
As the agency responsible for lease
issuance and administration, the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) will
participate as a cooperating agency.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis should be received by
September 10, 2007, to be most helpful.
The draft environmental impact
statement is scheduled for completion
by the spring of 2008, and the final
environmental impact statement is
scheduled for completion by the fall of
2008.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to:
Dale Harber, Oil and Gas Team Leader,
Manti-La Sal National Forest, 599 West
Price River Drive, Price, UT 84501;
phone (435) 636–3548; fax (435) 637–
4940; email comments-intermtn-mantilasal@fs.fed.us. Please include ‘‘Oil and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:17 Aug 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
Gas Leasing Analysis Project’’ on the
subject line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann
King, Public Affairs Officer, Manti-La
Sal National Forest, 599 West Price
River Drive, Price, UT 84501; phone
(435) 636–3535.
Fore technical information contact
Dale Harber, Oil and Gas Team Leader,
(435) 636–3548.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
FOOGLRA requires the Forest Service
to evaluate NFS lands for potential oil
and gas leasing and establishes Forest
Service consent authority for leasing
prior to the BLM offering NFS lands for
lease. A leasing EIS was prepared in the
early 1990s, with the Record of Decision
(ROD) signed January 12, 1993, and a
ROD modifying specific aspects of the
original ROD signed on January 4, 1994.
Due to the length of time since the last
EIS was prepared and the increased
interest by the industry due to the
increased demand for oil and gas, high
prices, and discoveries of oil and gas
reserves in nearby areas with similar
geologic conditions, it is now time to
prepare an updated EIS to continue
leasing. The BLM Utah State Office has
received, and continues to receive,
numerous Expressions of Interest for
leasing portions of the Manti-La Sal
Natioal Forest.
Proposed Action
The Forest Supervisor of the Manti-La
Sal National Forest and the Utah State
Director, Bureau of Land Management,
propose to conduct that analysis and
decide which lands to make available
for oil and gas leasing. The analysis area
includes all NFS lands administered by
the Manti-La Sal National Forest. As
part of the analysis, the Forest Service
will identify those areas that would be
available for leasing subject to the terms
and conditions of the standard oil and
gas lease form, or the use of lease
stipulations such as those prohibiting
surface occupancy. The analysis will
also: (1) Identify alternatives to the
proposed action, including that of not
allowing leasing (no action), (2) project
the type/amount of post-leasing activity
that is reasonably foreseeable, and (3)
analyze the reasonably foreseeable
impacts of projected post-leasing
activity [36 CFR 228.102(c)].
Possible Alternatives
All alternatives studied in detail must
fall within the scope of the purpose and
need for action and will generally tier to
and comply with the Manti-La Sal
Forest Plan. Law requires evaluation of
a ‘‘no action alternative’’. Under the No
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Action/No Lease alternative, no
additional oil and gas leasing would
occur. Alternatives to be evaluated
would range from the No Action/No
Lease alternative (most restrictive) to the
Standard Lease Terms alterative (least
restrictive) where all lands legally open
to leasing would be made
administratively available for leasing
with only the standard BLM terms and
conditions contained on BLM Lease
Form 3100–11. Other alternatives which
fall somewhere between the No Action/
No Lease alternative and Lease with
Standard Terms alternative would also
be developed and evaluated, which
would involve making some lands
unavailable for leasing and other lands
available for leasing with stipulations
for the protection of other resources and
interests.
The Forest is expecting that the public
input will generate either thematic
concerns or area-specific issues that
may be addressed by modifying the
proposed action to create a new
alternative or alternatives.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies
The Forest Service is the lead agency.
The Bureau of Land Management will
participate as a cooperating agency.
Responsible Officials
Rodney L. Player, Forest Supervisor,
Manti-La Sal National Forest, 599 West
Price River Drive, Price, UT 84501.
Selma Sierra, Utah State Director,
Bureau of Land Management, 440 West
200 South, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, UT
84145.
Nature of Decision to be Made
The Forest Supervisor, Manti-La Sal
National Forest, will decide which
lands administered by the Manti-La Sal
National Forest will be administratively
available for oil and gas leasing, along
with associated conditions or
constraints for the protection of nonmineral interests [36 CFR 228.102(d)].
The Forest Supervisor will also
authorize the BLM to offer specific
lands for lease, subject to the Forest
Service ensuring that the required
stipulations are attached to the leases
[36 CFR 228.102(e)].
The BLM is responsible for issuing
and administration of oil and gas leases
under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920,
as amended, and Federal Regulations in
43 CFR 3101.7. The BLM Utah State
Director must decide whether or not to
offer for lease specific lands authorized
for leasing by the Manti-La Sal National
Forest and with what stipulations.
E:\FR\FM\03AUN1.SGM
03AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 149 (Friday, August 3, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43225-43228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3812]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Pinale[ntilde]o Ecosystem Restoration Project, Safford Ranger
District, Coronado National Forest, Graham County, Arizona
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the President's Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, the U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Forest Service, Coronado National Forest, announces its
intent to prepare an
[[Page 43226]]
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate a proposed action to
thin dense forests, remove standing dead trees and down woody debris,
and use prescribed fire on approximately 3,705 acres in the
Pinale[ntilde]o Mountains in Graham County, Arizona, within Townships 8
and 9 South, Ranges 23 and 24 East, Gila and Salt River Meridian. These
treatments would be carried out over a 10-year period for the purposes
of restoring a fire-adapted ecosystem and aiding in the recovery of the
Mount Graham red squirrel population and habitat.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the EIS analysis must be
received by 30 days following the publication of this notice. The Draft
EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) in the spring of 2008. At that time, EPA will publish a Notice of
Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIS in the Federal Register, which will
begin a period of public review of the Draft EIS. The review period
will comprise 45 days from the date of publication of the NOA in the
Federal Register. The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed in the
summer of 2008.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this notice may be mailed to the Craig
Wilcox, Forest Silviculturist, Coronado National Forest, Safford Ranger
District, 711 S. 14th Ave., Suite D, Safford, AZ 85546. Written
comments may also be sent by facsimile to Mr. Wilcox at (928) 428-2393.
Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to cpwilcox@fs.fed.us.
Envelopes and the subject line of electronic mail messages or faxes
should be labeled ``Pinale[ntilde]o Ecosystem Restoration Project
EIS.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the Pinale[ntilde]o
Ecosystem Restoration Project, please contact Mr. Craig Wilcox, Forest
Silviculturist, Coronado National Forest, at the above address, and
telephone (928) 348-1961. Questions on the Forest Service NEPA process
may be directed to Ms. Andrea Wargo Campbell, Forest NEPA Coordinator,
at 300 W. Congress St., Tucson, AZ 85701, and telephone (520) 388-8352.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Over the past 100 years, fire suppression and other factors have
diminished the natural ecological role of fire in the Pinale[ntilde]o
Mountains on the Safford Ranger District of the Coronado National
Forest, resulting in a higher than average stand density and a heavy
accumulation of dead and downed trees (fuel load). Both of these forest
conditions increase the probability and consequences of severe wildland
fire occurrence in the area.
In 1996 and 2004, large-acreage, high-intensity wildland fires
exacerbated a reduction in the population of the Federally endangered
Mount Graham red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus grahamensis) through
habitat loss and mortality. Also, since 1996, progressive insect
infestations have defoliated and killed trees in the spruce-fir and
mixed-conifer forests of the Pinale[ntilde]o Mountains. Tree mortality
associated with these outbreaks has exacerbated the probability of
wildland fire and contributed further to a decline in the red squirrel
population through habitat loss. Today, the population of the red
squirrel is at its lowest point since censuses were initiated in 1986,
and the viability of the species is of paramount concern to both the
Forest Service and other Federal and state wildlife management
agencies.
In May 2005, the Forest Service developed a tentative proposal to
treat this area of the Forest to decrease the probability of severe
wildland fire and improve general forest health. At that time, a
scoping notice was distributed to the public requesting comments on the
proposal, and two open house meetings were held to explain the nature
of the treatments that were planned to be implemented. Based on public
input and a continued decline in the squirrel population, the Forest
Service has since recognized the need for further refinement of the
proposed action to achieve a balance between short-term protection of
squirrel habitat and long-term forest restoration. Thus, in 2007, a
refined proposed action was developed to emphasize a concurrent
reduction in the potential for severe wildland fire impacts and insect
and disease outbreaks, while managing for long-term sustainability of
red squirrel habitat. Given the sensitive nature of any proposed Forest
treatments to the red squirrel and its habitat, the Forest Service
decided to prepare an EIS that would provide a robust analysis to the
decisionmaker, cooperating agencies and the public.
Proposed Action
The proposed action that will be evaluated in this EIS includes
both on-the-ground treatments to improve Forest health and improve or
protect red squirrel habitat; and administrative actions to incorporate
amendments to the governing Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
(Forest Plan), the latter of which will allow on-the-ground treatments
to be implemented.
On the ground, approximately 3,705 acres of Forest would receive
various combinations of silvicultural prescriptive treatments and/or
fuel reduction actions, which include mechanical treatments and
prescribed fire. To accomplish the proposed action, the Forest Plan
must be amended to allow Christmas tree removal and public fuelwood
gathering and to establish less restrictive Visual Quality Objectives
(VQO) in the project area. Thus, the EIS will also evaluate proposed
action of amending the Forest Plan to change current standards and
guidelines for the project area.
The proposed action would implement more than 50 combinations of
vegetation treatment options, depending on stand density and other
physical conditions. These combinations will follow two general
treatment strategies tiered from management guidance for the Mount
Graham red squirrel and the Mexican spotted owl.
Live-tree thinning, using a combination of variable density,
thinning from below, and group selection thinning techniques, is
proposed as a silvicultural treatment on approximately 2,862 acres. In
this treatment area, no live or dead trees larger than 18-inches
diameter at breast height (dbh) would be removed on 1,773 acres; larger
than 12-inches dbh on 47 acres; and larger than 9 inches dbh on 1,042
acres. Pockets of standing dead trees (up to 18-inches dbh) would be
removed in areas where high tree mortality has occurred because of
wildland fire and/or insect infestations.
Forest fuel reduction treatments would generally occur in the same
areas where silvicultural treatments are proposed. These actions
include masticating small trees (461 acres); lopping and scattering of
trees less than 9 inches diameter (3,092 acres); underburning (2,642
acres); hand piling and burning small trees (1,612 acres); and pruning
trees in treatment units that are along major roads.
Vegetation that is not mechanically reduced onsite would be removed
from treatment units and transferred to collection points (landings)
using ground-based mechanical removal equipment, cable logging systems,
and/or manual, hand-based labor. The transfer method for each treatment
unit would depend upon topography, availability of road access, cost,
and resource protection needs. After material is removed from treatment
units and taken to landings, it would be processed into sawlogs,
firewood, or chips, and trucked from the project area. Some material
may be piled and burned at the landing site.
[[Page 43227]]
All proposed treatments would include resource-specific design
criteria to guide the manner in which the actions are implemented in
order to minimize or reduce anticipated effects. Treatments are
expected to continue in the project area for up to a period of ten
years.
Purpose of and Need for Action
The purpose of this proposed action is to restore Forest ecosystem
health and to protect habitat or restore degraded habitat for the
endangered Mount Graham red squirrel.
Current fuel loads and stand densities in the project area are much
greater than historic forest conditions, leaving the forest
increasingly vulnerable to disease, insect infestations, and fire. The
ecological implications of these shifts have led to increased
susceptibility of the Forest to insect outbreaks and stand-replacing
fires. Therefore, there is a need to initiate restoration of natural
ecological processes and to treat the causes of declining ecosystem
health by reducing stand densities, changing understory species
composition, and reducing fuel loading. Restoration seeks to return
forests, or to initiate an ecological trajectory to return forests, to
a condition that is self-sustaining and compatible with the conditions
under which they naturally evolved.
According to the Mount Graham Red Squirrel Recovery Plan (USDI Fish
and Wildlife Service, 1993, Arizona Ecological Services State Office,
Phoenix, AZ), the main threats to this endangered subspecies are
habitat loss and catastrophic wildland fire. Over the past 20 years,
approximately 50% of previously occupied red squirrel habitat has been
rendered unsuitable due to insect outbreaks and fire. Associated with
this reduction in habitat, there is an accompanying decline in
population size; the current population estimate is 216 squirrels. As
such, the remaining habitat, most of which falls within the project
area, is of high importance. Therefore, a need exists to protect red
squirrel habitat within the project area from losses due to fire,
insect outbreaks, and diseases, and to restore areas of degraded
habitat for this subspecies.
Preliminary Identification of Issues
Based on a preliminary review of the proposed action, the following
issues were identified:
1. Short term impacts to the Mexican spotted owl may occur.
2. The efficacy of fuel reduction treatments proposed in this
project is limited by the need to protect the Mount Graham red
squirrel.
3. An increase of interspecies competition from the introduced
Abert's squirrel with the Mount Graham red squirrel may result due to
an increase in pine species.
4. An increase of avian predation on the Mount Graham red squirrel
may result due to a reduction in hiding cover.
Responsible Official
Jeanine Derby, Forest Supervisor, Coronado National Forest, will be
the Responsible Official who prepares the Record of Decision at the
conclusion of this NEPA review. The address for the Coronado National
Forest is 300 W. Congress St., Tucson, AZ 85701.
Nature of NEPA Decision To Be Made
The Coronado National Forest Supervisor's decision will address
implementation of: (1) The proposed action, including Forest Plan
amendments, (2) (an) alternative(s) to the proposed action and/or
amendments if any exist, or (3) the no-action alternative; and approve
or disapprove each of three proposed amendments to the Forest Plan.
Comments Requested
The Forest Service encourages citizens to express issues, concerns,
and suggestions they may have about this proposed action. Comments
should be directly related to the proposed action to best assist us in
our environmental impacts analysis. Although comments are welcome at
any time, they will be most useful to us if they are received by 30
days following the publication of this notice If you have any questions
about this notice or the comment process, please contact Craig Wilcox,
Forest Silviculturist, Coronado National Forest, Safford Ranger
District, at telephone (928) 348-1961, prior to submitting your
comments.
Written comments on this notice may be mailed to Craig Wilcox,
Forest Silviculturist, Coronado National Forest, Stafford Ranger
District, 711 S. 14th Ave., Suite D, Safford, AZ 85546. You may also
submit written comments by facsimile to Mr. Wilcox at (928) 428-2393.
Comments may be submitted by electronic mail to cpwilcox@fs.fed.us.
Envelopes and the subject line of electronic mail messages or faxes
should be labeled ``Pinale[ntilde]o Ecosystem Restoration Project
EIS.''
Comments and personal information associated with them, such as
names and addresses, will become part of the administrative project
record for this NEPA review. As such, they may be made available to a
third-party upon request pursuant to the Freedom of Infomation act
(FOIA). If you do not wish your personal information to be subject to
release under FOIA, you may choose not to include it with your
comments. Alternatively, you may request an exemption from FOIA with
your comments submittal. Should you choose the latter, you will be
informed by the Forest Service as to whether or not your request
qualifies for an exemption. If it does not, you will be afforded the
opportunity to resubmit your comments without personal information or
to withhold them.
Early Notice of the Importance of Public Participation in the NEPA
Process
Following the 30-day scoping period announced in this notice, the
Forest Service will prepare a draft environmental impact statement
(DEIS). Upon completion, the DEIS will be made available for a 45-day
public review and comment period that will begin on the date that the
EPA publishes a Notice of Availability of the DEIS in the Federal
Register. The Forest Service believes that, at this early stage, it is
important to provide the public with notice about several court rulings
related to public participation in the NEPA environmental review
process.
First, reviewers of a DEIS must structure their participation in
the NEPA review so that it is meaningful and alerts the 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 DEIS stage but are not raised until after
completion of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) 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. Wisc. 1980)]. Because of these court rulings,
it is very important that those parties who are interested in this
proposed action participate before the close of a public comment period
so that substantive comments and objections are available to the Forest
Service in a timely manner that will allow them to be meaningfully
considered and subsequently addressed in the FEIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns about the proposed action, comments on a DEIS should be as
specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific
line numbers, pages, and/or chapters of the DEIS. Comments may address
the adequacy of the DEIS or the merits of the alternatives formulated
and
[[Page 43228]]
discussed in it. For comments of this nature, reviewers may choose to
refer to CEQ regulations at 40 CFR 1503.3.
Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the public record of this NEPA
review and will be available for public inspection (Authority: 40 CFR
1501.7 and 1508.22; FSF 1909.15, Section 21).
Authorization: National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4346); Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40
CFR parts 1500-1508); U.S. Department of Agriculture NEPA Policies and
Procedures (7 CFR part 1b).
Dated: July 30, 2007.
Jeanine A. Derby,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 07-3812 Filed 8-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M