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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.