Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation; Applicability to the National Forests in Idaho, 1135-1158 [07-6305]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Forest Service

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 4 (Monday, January 7, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1135-1158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-6305]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

36 CFR Part 294

RIN 0596-AC62


Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation; Applicability to the 
National Forests in Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), is 
proposing to establish a State-specific rule to provide management 
direction for conserving and enhancing the roadless characteristics for 
designated roadless areas in Idaho. The agency is particularly 
interested in receiving public input regarding the following topics: to 
what extent should the Forest Service allow building roads for the 
purpose of conducting limited forest health activities in areas 
designated as backcountry; are the limitations on sale

[[Page 1136]]

of common variety minerals and discretionary mineral leasing 
appropriate; and will the proposed mechanism for administrative 
corrections and modifications be sufficient to accommodate future 
adjustments necessary due to changed circumstances or public need?

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by April 7, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent via email to IDcomments@fsroadless.org. 
Comments also may be submitted via the world wide web/Internet at 
https://www.regulations.gov. Written comments concerning this notice 
should be addressed to Roadless Area Conservation-Idaho, P.O. Box 
162909, Sacramento, CA 95816-2909, or via facsimile to 916-456-6724.
    All comments, including names and addresses, when provided, are 
placed in the record and are available for public inspection and 
copying. The public may inspect comments received at https://
roadless.fs.fed.us.
    A copy of the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), the DEIS 
summary, and other information related to this rulemaking is available 
at the national roadless Web site (https://www.roadless.fs.fed.us) as 
well as by calling the number listed below, under the ``for further 
information'' heading. Reviewers may request printed copies or compact 
disks of the DEIS and the summary by writing to the Rocky Mountain 
Research Station, Publication and Distribution, 240 West Prospect Road, 
Fort Collins, CO 80526-2098. Fax orders will be accepted at 970-498-
1122. Order by e-mail from rschneider@fs.fed.us. When ordering, 
requesters must specify if they wish to receive the summary or full set 
of documents and if the material should be provided in print or on 
disk.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brad Gilbert, Idaho Roadless Rule Team 
Leader, at (208) 765-7438. Individuals using telecommunication devices 
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service 
(FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Eastern Standard 
Time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    As a leader in natural resource conservation, the Forest Service 
provides direction for the management and use of the Nation's forests, 
rangelands, and aquatic ecosystems. The Forest Service is charged to 
collaborate cooperatively with states, Tribes, and other interested 
parties regarding the use and management of the National Forest System 
(NFS).

State of Idaho Petition

    On June 23, 2005, the State of Idaho (hereafter referred to as 
State) announced it would submit a petition pursuant to the State 
Petitions Rule (70 FR 25654), requesting specific regulatory 
protections and certain management flexibility for the approximately 
9.3 million acres of NFS inventoried roadless areas in Idaho. As part 
of that announcement, the State invited affected county commissioners, 
Tribes, and members of the public to develop specific recommendations 
for the NFS inventoried roadless areas in their respective areas. 
Additionally, over 50 public meetings were held and the public was 
encouraged to send individual comments directly to the Governor's 
office for consideration.
    Idaho's petition, under the State Petition Rule, was submitted to 
the Secretary of Agriculture for consideration on September 20, 2006. 
Subsequently, Idaho submitted a new petition on October 5, 2006, under 
section 553(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act and Department 
regulations at 7 CFR Sec.  1.28. The Department has also received 
rulemaking petitions from the Nez Perce Tribe and other organizations 
and individuals requesting reinstatement of the 2001 rule.
    The Roadless Area Conservation National Advisory Committee (RACNAC) 
(72 FR 13469) reviewed the Idaho petition on November 29 and 30, 2006, 
in Washington, DC. Governor James Risch, on behalf of the State of 
Idaho, discussed his views on the scope and intent of the petition 
during the first day of the meeting. The committee also heard comments 
from other State and Forest Service officials, and members of the 
public.
    On December 19, 2006, the committee issued a unanimous consensus-
based recommendation that the Secretary direct the Forest Service, with 
the State as a cooperating agency, to proceed with rulemaking.
    On December 22, 2006, the Secretary accepted the petition based on 
the advisory committee's review and report, and directed the Forest 
Service to initiate rulemaking.
    The USDA is committed to conserving and managing inventoried 
roadless areas. The Department considers the proposed rule the most 
appropriate solution to address the challenges of inventoried roadless 
area management on NFS lands in the State of Idaho. Additional 
information, maps, and other materials concerning the Idaho Roadless 
Areas, as well as other roadless areas, can be found at https://
roadless.fs.fed.us/. Collaborating and cooperating with states and 
other interested parties regarding the long-term strategy for the 
conservation and management of inventoried roadless areas allows 
recognition of both national values and local situations.
    The State of Idaho petition included specific information and 
recommendations for the management of individual inventoried roadless 
areas in the State. This site-specific knowledge provided by the State 
and its citizens aids the USDA and Forest Service in accomplishing 
their objectives and is reflected in this proposed rulemaking. 
Additionally, the State of Idaho examined roadless areas sharing 
boundaries or overlapping with neighboring states and determined the 
need to coordinate with Montana and Utah to insure consistency of 
management themes assigned to these inventoried roadless areas. Lastly, 
the Forest Service and the State anticipate collaborating on 
implementing this proposed rulemaking. This commitment is reflected in 
the Governor's Roadless Rule Implementation Commission (Idaho Executive 
Order 2006-43), which is charged with the responsibility of working 
with the Forest Service to accomplish collaborative implementation of 
this proposed rule. The Executive Order can be found on the State of 
Idaho's roadless Web site https://gov.idaho.gov/roadless_petition.htm.

National Forest System Land Inventories in Idaho

    This rulemaking relies on the most recent inventory available for 
each national forest and grassland in the State to identify the 
inventoried roadless areas addressed by this rulemaking. Since 2001 the 
Agency has continued with forest plan revisions within Idaho and have 
continued to review and update their inventories using new technologies 
such as geographic information systems (GIS) providing better and more 
reliable data than was previously available., Therefore, the proposed 
rule is based on the most recent and reliable information available for 
land and resource management planning as well as using other 
assessments and the inventory contained in the 2000 Roadless Rule Final 
Environmental Impact Statement where that remained the best available 
information. Using these inventories, the Forest Service has identified 
9.3 million acres of inventoried roadless areas that are the subject of 
this rulemaking.

[[Page 1137]]

Proposed Roadless Area Conservation Rule for Idaho

    The Department believes this proposed Roadless Area Conservation 
Rule for Idaho represents a unique opportunity to resolve 
collaboratively and to provide certainty to the roadless issue in the 
State. First, the proposed rule enables the Forest Service to account 
for comments of those most affected or concerned about the contents of 
state-specific rulemaking. Second, it allows the Agency to consider the 
unique characteristics of each inventoried roadless area in the State. 
Third, it balances the integrity and natural beauty of these roadless 
areas with responsible stewardship.
    During his presentation to the RACNAC, Governor Risch expressed the 
need for stewardship of Idaho Roadless Areas focusing on limited forest 
health activities. Clarifying what stewardship means is vital to 
understanding the petition and subsequent rulemaking. The proposed rule 
clarifies this by providing discretion for conducting activities that 
maintain forest health by reducing the significant risk of wildland 
fire (also known as wildfire) to communities, municipal water supplies, 
threatened and endangered species, and to protect ecosystem components 
in the same manner as provided in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act 
(HFRA). All project activity will be subject to appropriate National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance procedures and public 
comment opportunities.
    The Department and the State believe a reduction in significant 
risk situations before they become imminent threats to local 
communities and water supplies can be better achieved by providing 
flexibility beyond the restrictions imposed by the January 12, 2001 
Roadless Area Conservation final rule (2001 rule) (66 FR 3244). 
Implementing these limited, but necessary projects allows the Forest 
Service to be a good neighbor for adjacent landowners and communities 
and to help insure continued forest health and protection for life and 
property.
    The Forest Service, in cooperation with the State, has completed a 
review of the social, economic, and environmental characteristics and 
values associated with the inventoried roadless areas in the State. 
With public input, the Agency has considered the question of how these 
roadless lands should be managed within the scope of the Agency's 
authority. Consistent with the 2001 rule's approach, the management 
direction proposed by these regulations would take precedence over any 
inconsistent regulatory provision or land and resource management plan. 
It is also consistent with the Secretary's authority to establish 
regulations to carry out the statutory requirements for planning and 
the Forest Service's practice that forest plans must yield to 
management direction of a higher order. Forest plan management 
direction that is consistent with these provisions remains intact and 
effective.

Discussion of the Proposed Management Themes

    The management themes described in Idaho's petition and reflected 
in Governor Risch's presentation before the RACNAC represent the 
foundation for this rulemaking, and are imperative to understanding the 
proposed rule. The proposed rule is structured around five themes: (1) 
Wild Land Recreation; (2) Special Areas of Historic or Tribal 
Significance; (3) Primitive; (4) Backcountry/Restoration; and (5) 
General Forest, Rangeland, and Grassland. These five themes were 
developed and refined through review of the existing and draft 
management prescriptions in each of Idaho's national forests.
    Specifically, the proposed themes span a continuum (see Figure 1) 
that includes at one end, a restrictive approach emphasizing passive 
management and natural restoration, and on the other end, active 
management designed to accomplish sustainable forest, rangeland, and 
grassland management. This continuum accounts for stewardship of each 
roadless area's unique landscape and the quality of roadless 
characteristics in that area.

[[Page 1138]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07JA08.001

    Allocation to a specific theme is not intended to mandate or direct 
the Forest Service to propose or implement any action; rather, the 
themes provide an array of permitted and prohibited activities 
regarding road construction, discretionary mineral activities, and 
timber cutting. The themes also serve as a reference point for future 
discussions between the Forest Service, the State, the Tribes, and the 
public. Themes may also influence other future management choices such 
as forest plan revisions or use determinations that are beyond the 
scope of these regulations.
    The State's petition identifies approximately 345,000 acres of 
roadless areas that are already part of other land classification 
systems (for example, Research Natural Areas) that are governed by 
specific agency directives and existing forest plan direction. The 
petition did not request the Forest Service impose additional or 
superseding management direction or restrictions for these forest plan 
special areas. Instead, the State identified a preference that these 
lands be administered under the laws, regulations, and other management 
direction unique to the special purpose of the applicable land 
classification. These lands are included in Sec.  294.28 for the sake 
of completeness; however, the proposed rule does not recommend 
management direction for those lands.
    The following describes the current and desired conditions for each 
management theme. While the ability of the Forest Service to conduct 
certain activities (road building, activities associated with mineral 
development, and timber cutting) typically varies from theme-to-theme, 
other activities (motorized travel, grazing activities, or use of 
motorized equipment and mechanical transport) are not changed by this 
proposed rule. While these other activities are not regulated by this 
proposed rule, such activities would be subject to future planning and 
decisionmaking processes of the Forest Service. Furthermore, when 
appropriate, wildland fire and prescribed fire are tools which would be 
available across all themes. Additionally, like the 2001 rule, timber 
cutting, sale, or removal in inventoried roadless areas is permitted 
when incidental to implementation of a management activity not 
otherwise prohibited by this proposed rule. Examples of these 
activities include, but are not limited to, trail construction or 
maintenance; removal of hazard trees adjacent to forest roads for 
public health and safety reasons; fire line construction for wildland 
fire suppression or control of prescribed fire; survey and maintenance 
of property boundaries; other authorized activities such as ski runs 
and utility corridors; or for road construction and reconstruction 
where allowed by this proposed rule.

Management Theme 1: Wild Land Recreation (WLR)

    Current Condition: WLR areas were generally identified during the 
forest planning process as recommended for wilderness designation. 
These areas show little evidence of historic or human use. Natural 
conditions and processes are predominant. People visiting these areas 
can find outstanding opportunities for solitude and challenge.
    Desired Condition: WLR areas show little evidence of human-caused 
disturbance and natural conditions and processes are predominant.

Management Theme 2: Special Areas of Historic or Tribal Significance 
(SAHTS)

    Current Condition: SAHTS are relatively undisturbed by human 
management activities, and natural conditions and processes are 
predominant. This theme consists of three areas: (1) Pilot Knob 
(849), Nez Perce National Forest; (2) Nimiipuu and Lewis and 
Clark National Historic Trials, which includes portions of Bighorn-
Weitas (306), Eldorado Creek (312), Hoodoo 
(301), North Lochsa Slope (307), Weir-Post Office 
(308), Clearwater National Forest; and (3) Pioneer Area--
Mallard-Larkins (300), Idaho Panhandle National Forest. The

[[Page 1139]]

Nez Perce Tribe and others expressed the desire to protect these areas 
specifically based on their historic or Tribal significance. The RACNAC 
recommended clarifying whether this theme would alter or apply to the 
management of other ``special areas'' embedded in roadless areas in 
individual forest plans (such as, Wilderness Study Areas, Recommended 
and/or Designated Scenic, Wild, and Recreational Rivers, Research 
Natural Areas). Those areas will not be subject to this proposed rule 
and will continue to be managed by individual forest plan direction or 
specific congressional direction provided by statute.
    Desired Condition: SAHTS will continue to be relatively undisturbed 
by human management activities in order to maintain their unique Tribal 
or historic characteristics.

Management Theme 3: Primitive

    Current Condition: The current condition of areas designated as 
primitive generally reflects the undeveloped character described for 
the WLR theme. However, these areas generally fall short of the Forest 
Service's recommended wilderness suitability criteria.
    Desired Condition: Primitive areas are relatively undisturbed by 
human management activities while allowing for limited forest health 
activities including preserving biological strongholds for a variety of 
species and protecting ecological integrity.

Management Theme 4: Backcountry/Restoration (Backcountry)

    Current Condition: Areas designated as backcountry generally 
reflect the undeveloped character found in all roadless areas. However, 
there may be portions within these areas that have evidence of human 
use and occupancy or past vegetation manipulation.
    Desired Condition: Backcountry areas are managed to retain their 
undeveloped character, while providing a variety of recreation 
opportunities and allowing for limited forest health activities 
including preserving biological strongholds for a variety of species 
and maintaining or restoring the characteristics of ecosystem 
composition and structure.

Management Theme 5: General Forest, Rangeland, and Grassland (GFRG)

    Current Condition: Areas designated as GFRG include locations that 
may display relatively more evidence of human use, including roads, 
facilities, evidence of vegetative manipulation, and mineral 
exploration/extraction.
    Desired Condition: GFRG areas are managed to allow for a variety of 
goods and services, and conservation of natural resources.

Geothermal Energy

    During the development of the proposed rule, consideration was 
given to whether the rule is overly restrictive regarding potential 
exploration and/or development of geothermal energy resources in areas 
designated as backcountry. While Idaho has high geothermal energy 
potential, site-specific information on this resource in Idaho Roadless 
Areas is currently limited (see discussion in DEIS). At this time the 
Department has chosen not to include a special exemption for geothermal 
energy resources.
    The Department expects that more information about this energy 
resource will become available over the next 5 to 10 years. Once 
additional information becomes available, at that point, if necessary, 
the State or other parties can seek a change in the rule's 
restrictions. A site-specific modification to the rule could then be 
proposed and reviewed under Sec.  294.27(e)(2).

Specific Request for Public Comment

    With regard to road construction, discretionary mineral activities, 
and timber cutting, Idaho's proposed management continuum can be 
succinctly summarized as three themes; one theme more restrictive than 
the 2001 rule, one theme similar to the 2001 rule, and one theme less 
restrictive than the 2001 rule. The agency is particularly interested 
in receiving public input regarding the following topics: (1) To what 
extent should the Forest Service allow building roads for the purpose 
of conducting limited forest health activities in areas designated as 
backcountry; (2) are the limitations on sale of common variety minerals 
and discretionary mineral leasing appropriate; and (3) will the 
proposed mechanism for administrative corrections and modifications be 
sufficient to accommodate future adjustments necessary due to changed 
circumstances or public need? The following illustrates the additions 
and/or changes from the 2001 rule.

Limited Roads for Activities in Backcountry

    The proposed regulation at Sec.  294.23(b)(1)(i) allows limited 
road construction in Idaho Roadless Areas designated to be managed 
pursuant to the backcountry theme when a ``road is needed to protect 
public health and safety in cases of significant risk or imminent 
threat of flood, wildland fire, or other catastrophic event that, 
without intervention, would cause the loss of life or property; or to 
facilitate forest health activities permitted under Sec.  
294.25(c)(1).'' The phrase ``significant risk'' is an addition to the 
imminent threat language contained in the 2001 rule's exceptions and 
bears further explanation.
    During its presentation to the RACNAC, the State was under the 
impression that the ``imminent threat'' exception provides the needed 
flexibility to allow the Forest Service to build roads for the purpose 
of conducting what Governor Risch and other State representatives 
identified as ``stewardship activities.'' An example of such an 
activity would be a fuel treatment project to protect a municipal water 
supply system conducted cooperatively with the Forest Service through 
the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) (Pub. L. 108-148). However, 
when read in context of the 2001 rule's preamble language, the 
application of the ``imminent threat'' regulatory language may not 
always achieve the State's desire for more progress toward the 
congressional goals identified in HFRA.
    Referring to the ``imminent threat'' language, the preamble to the 
2001 rule stated that the exception ``does not constitute permission to 
engage in routine forest health activities, such as temporary road 
construction for thinning to reduce mortality due to insect and disease 
infestation'' (66 FR 3243, 3255). Like the 2001 rule, the Forest 
Service and State do not intend this change in language to be construed 
as giving permission to build roads in areas designated as backcountry 
for the purpose of engaging in routine forest management activities as 
shown by the use of the words ``significant risk.'' This addition is 
intended to provide additional flexibility where site-specific 
conditions pose a significant risk of wildland fire.
    Although the principal objective for this adjustment is to protect 
at-risk communities and municipal water supply systems from adverse 
effects of wildland fire, this provision also contemplates access for 
(1) areas where wind throw, blowdown, ice storm damage, or the 
existence or imminent threat of an insect or disease epidemic is 
significantly threatening ecosystem components or resource values that 
may contribute to significant risk of wildland fire; or (2) areas where 
wildland fire poses a threat to, and where the natural fire regimes are 
important for, threatened and endangered species or their habitat 
consistent with HFRA.

[[Page 1140]]

    The proposed rule is programmatic in nature, establishing the types 
of prohibitions and conditions where future projects may occur under 
the appropriate theme. As stated by Governor Risch, this proposed rule 
``does not cut one tree or plow one road.'' Further, not every acre 
experiencing significant risk is expected to receive treatment because 
of funding limitations and mitigation measures needed for other 
resource protection. After the rule becomes effective, site-specific 
proposed projects must still undergo project planning procedures before 
they can be implemented. This includes compliance with HFRA (if 
applicable), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Forest 
Management Act (NFMA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and other 
environmental laws and regulations. Public involvement under NEPA will 
be undertaken for these site-specific proposals.
    The Idaho Roadless Rule DEIS discloses the effects of roads and 
projections of the types and amounts of possible treatments over the 
next 15 years. Treatments will be designed based on site-specific needs 
to reduce any significant risks, or to maintain or restore the 
characteristics of ecosystem composition and structure. Determination 
of a significant risk would be guided by the interagency Healthy 
Forests Initiative and Healthy Forests Restoration Act: Interim Field 
Guide (2004).

Mineral Activities

    The laws governing disposal of Federal minerals on NFS lands are 
complex. Responsibility for management of these resources is often 
shared between USDA and the Department of the Interior (DOI). Generally 
speaking, Federal minerals are divided into three categories with 
different legal authorities, responsibilities, and controls applying in 
each instance. The three basic systems are: locatable, saleable, and 
leasable minerals.
    Locatable minerals are generally metals (like gold and silver) but 
also include rare earth elements such as uranium and special uncommon 
varieties of sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, and cinders. 
Development of such minerals is subject to the General Mining Law of 
1872. Like the 2001 rule, this proposed rule does not seek to impose 
any limits regarding activities undertaken regarding locatable 
minerals. In the long term, it is reasonable to assume that future 
exploration, mining, and mineral processing activities would continue 
to occur in Idaho Roadless Areas where valuable deposits exist. When 
necessary, construction or reconstruction of roads for locatable 
mineral exploration or development is part of the reasonable right of 
access provided under the General Mining Law. Therefore, this rule does 
not propose to affect rights of reasonable access to prospect and 
explore lands open to mineral entry and develop valid claims. All 
proposals for locatable mineral exploration or development are subject 
to the planning and design requirements governing locatable minerals in 
36 CFR part 228, subpart A and the appropriate level of environmental 
analysis. The plan of operations would be approved subject to 
modifications identified in the environmental analysis and would be 
binding on the operator.
    Saleable minerals, also known as common variety mineral materials, 
are common varieties of sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, cinders, 
and clay. The Secretary of Agriculture is solely responsible for 
disposal of saleable minerals on NFS lands. The Forest Service has 
complete discretion to refrain from authorizing the disposal of 
saleable minerals.
    The proposed rule would prohibit the sale of common variety mineral 
materials in Idaho Roadless Areas that are designated to be managed 
pursuant to WLR, SAHTS, or primitive themes. This prohibition would be 
more restrictive than the 2001 rule for these three themes. However, 
under the proposed Sec.  294.23(b)(1)(vii), the Forest Service would be 
allowed to build roads associated with the sale or administrative use 
of common variety mineral materials in areas designated as backcountry 
``if the use of these mineral materials is incidental to an activity 
otherwise allowed under the rule'' (Sec.  294.24(e)). Road construction 
and reconstruction associated with the sale or administrative use of 
common variety mineral materials is allowed in GFRG.
    Leasable minerals include oil, gas, coal, phosphate, potassium, 
sodium, sulphur, gilsonite, oil shale, geothermal resources, and 
hardrock minerals. There are two general umbrella authorities governing 
the leasing of these minerals, except for sulphur, geothermal 
resources, and hardrock minerals, on NFS lands. One of these umbrella 
authorities, the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, applies exclusively, and 
by its terms applies comprehensively, to NFS lands reserved from the 
public domain. The other, the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands, 
applies exclusively, and by its terms applies comprehensively, to 
acquired NFS lands. The leasing of geothermal resources is governed by 
free standing statutory authority which applies to all NFS lands. 
Collectively, these authorities are known as the mineral leasing laws.
    Despite the many authorities governing mineral leasing on NFS 
lands, there are basic commonalties among the mineral leasing laws. The 
most fundamental is that the Secretary of the Interior is statutorily 
charged with the administration of the mineral leasing laws. 
Consequently, the Department of the Interior (DOI) issues all mineral 
leases for NFS lands. The Secretary of the Interior also has complete 
discretion to refrain from leasing any leasable mineral.
    This is not to say that the Forest Service lacks a role with 
respect to mineral leasing on NFS lands. DOI is statutorily required to 
obtain the Forest Service's consent before it issues leases for many 
leasable minerals. The Forest Service also has the right to regulate 
operations conducted for certain leasable minerals.
    The proposed rule would not seek to restrict retroactively any 
existing authorizations. The proposed rule would establish limitations 
on the future exercise of discretion available to Forest Service line 
officers. It does not impose restrictions on decisions that Congress 
has allocated to DOI. Nor does the proposed rule effect or seek a 
withdrawal of the mineral estate as such matters are subject to a 
separate statutory process established under the Federal Land Policy 
Management Act. Instead, the proposed rule would instruct Forest 
Service line officers when exercising their discretionary authority 
concerning disposal of different mineral materials.
    The Forest Service and State see an opportunity to clarify and 
remove confusion regarding expectations for mineral leasing and 
associated road construction activities across the management themes 
set out in this proposed rule. This is a refinement of the 2001 rule 
which permitted the leasing and the surface use or occupancy across all 
roadless areas, but did not allow new roads to be constructed pursuant 
to new leases. Using the management spectrum associated with the 
proposed themes, the Forest Service and the State are seeking a balance 
between the protection of roadless values and the responsible 
development of mineral resources.
    If promulgated, in designated WLR, SAHTS, or primitive areas, the 
Forest Service would not recommend, authorize or consent to road

[[Page 1141]]

construction or reconstruction or surface use and occupancy associated 
with mineral leases. This leasing restriction is more restrictive than 
the 2001 rule.
    In backcountry areas, road construction or reconstruction is 
prohibited except for the leasing of phosphate materials. Surface use 
or occupancy without road construction or reconstruction is permissible 
for all mineral leasing.
    In areas designated as GFRG, leasing approvals, including road 
construction, reconstruction, surface use and occupancy, and associated 
road access requests are permissible.
    Where authorized, all road construction or reconstruction 
associated with mining activities allowed under this management theme 
must be conducted in a way that minimizes effects on surface resources, 
prevents unnecessary or unreasonable surface disturbance, and complies 
with all applicable lease requirements, land and resource management 
plan direction, regulations, and laws. Roads constructed or 
reconstructed pursuant to this management theme must be decommissioned 
when no longer needed or when the lease, contract, or permit expires, 
whichever is sooner.
    There has been considerable debate among various parties offering 
competing interpretations of the 2001 rule provisions about whether or 
not ongoing leasing activities can be geographically expanded beyond 
current lease boundaries; particularly phosphate leasing in the 
Caribou-Targhee National Forest. The proposed rule contains text at 
Sec.  294.24(d) that resolves this question in the affirmative. At the 
effective date of a final rule, existing operations could expand beyond 
their current boundaries, including such lands as are necessary for 
access. The DEIS estimates an additional 12,100 acres above the acres 
under existing lease will potentially be affected. The DEIS also 
discusses the importance and value of this phosphate leasing to the 
local communities, the State, and the Nation.

Accommodating Change

    The Forest Service, State of Idaho, and members of the public have 
expressed confusion over how boundary or other changes were expected to 
be made under the 2001 rule. The State of Colorado in its roadless area 
rulemaking petition similarly identified the need for a process to 
allow future modifications of the management direction to be 
established in that rulemaking. Based on Forest Service experience with 
the 2001 rule, as well as other land and resource management and 
classification systems, the Agency has included in the proposed rule a 
system to address future corrections and modifications of the 
allocations made through this rulemaking. The Forest Service is 
proposing a system that parallels the National Forest Management Act 
forest plan amendment process, allowing for technical corrections as 
well as minor or even significant changes. All changes are noticed to 
the public and public involvement requirements vary depending on the 
magnitude of the change being made.
    The proposed rule applies a two tiered approach. Like the 2001 
rule, Sec.  294.27(e)(1) expressly provides that technical errors, such 
as clerical mistakes, errant maps, and so on, can be corrected by the 
Chief and are effective upon public notice. This provision could also 
be applied when changes are necessitated by events beyond the scope of 
this proposed rule, such as Congressional legislation or a conveyance 
of land by sale, exchange or interchange.
    The second tier of the approach involves a mechanism for modifying 
boundaries or management direction in other circumstances. The 
Department believes the proposed rule should allow for changes in 
management direction due to changed conditions or circumstances. Any 
modification would be effective only after the Chief provides public 
notice in the Federal Register. Modifications would be subject to a 30-
day notice requirement in all instances; and if the change is 
determined to be significant by the Chief, notice and comment 
rulemaking must be undertaken.
    The proposed rule provides factors to assess whether a proposed 
change is of sufficient magnitude to warrant additional rulemaking or 
so limited as to not merit such a procedure. This is an admittedly 
subjective assessment and the expectation is that the Agency will keep 
foremost in its mind the implications of the change to the roadless 
character of the area(s). Again, the Forest Service has implemented a 
similar sliding scale approach for amendment of forest plans for three 
decades and is confident such a system is workable.
    Examples of when rulemaking would not be expected: (1) 
Establishment by the Forest Service of a research natural area in a 
roadless area designated as primitive; (2) changing the designation of 
a small portion of backcountry adjacent to a large block of GFRG into 
the GFRG designation; (3) changing the designation of a small portion 
of backcountry adjacent to a large block of primitive into the 
primitive designation.
    Examples where rulemaking would be expected: (1) Approving the use 
of lands designated as primitive to construct and operate an all-season 
recreation resort complex; (2) geothermal exploration has discovered a 
significant energy field in an area designated as primitive and the 
Forest Service proposes that a portion of the roadless area be 
designated as GFRG to allow development and transmission line 
corridors; (3) during a forest plan revision the Forest Service 
recommends two primitive areas for wilderness designation; therefore, 
the Agency proposes their designations be changed to WLR.
    The Department does not anticipate extensive adjustments will occur 
under this provision. The provision would provide public confidence 
that if adjustments need to be considered, the process will be both 
open to and understood by all interested parties.

Conclusion

    The USDA, Forest Service, and the State of Idaho are committed to 
conserving and managing Idaho Roadless Areas under the context of the 
Agency's multiple-use mandate and consider roadless areas an important 
component of the NFS. The Department, Agency, and State believe that 
establishing a state-specific rule, based on the petition submitted by 
the State, allows state-specific consideration of the needs of these 
areas and is an appropriate solution to address the challenges of 
managing Idaho Roadless Areas.
    Collaborating with the State on the long-term strategy for the 
management of Idaho Roadless Areas allows for the recognition of 
national values and local situations and resolution of unique resource 
management challenges. Collaboration with others who have a strong 
interest in the conservation and management of inventoried roadless 
areas will also help to ensure balanced management decisions that 
maintain the most important characteristics and values of those areas.
    The proposed rule envisions a sliding scale of designating themes 
for the management of Idaho Roadless Areas. From most restrictive to 
least restrictive, the themes are Wild Land Recreation; Special Areas 
of Historic or Tribal Significance; Primitive; Backcountry/Restoration; 
and General Forest, Rangeland, and Grassland. Prohibitions with 
exceptions or permissions with conditions for road construction, 
discretionary mineral development, and timber cutting are proposed for 
each theme.

[[Page 1142]]

    USDA invites written comments on both the proposed rule and the 
draft environmental impact statement and will consider those comments 
in developing the final rule and final environmental impact statement. 
The final rule will be published in the Federal Register.

Regulatory Certifications

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule was reviewed under USDA procedures, Executive 
Order 12866 issued September 30, 1993 (E.O. 12866), as amended by E.O. 
13422 on Regulatory Planning and Review, and the major rule provisions 
of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 
800). It has been determined that this proposed rule is not an 
economically significant rule. This proposed rule will not have an 
annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy nor adversely 
affect productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health 
or safety, nor state or local governments. This proposed rule is not 
expected to interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency 
nor raise new legal or policy issues. This proposed rule will not alter 
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients of such programs. 
However, due to the level of interest in inventoried roadless areas 
management, this proposed rule has been designated as significant and 
is therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget review under 
E.O. 13422.
    A regulatory impact analysis has been prepared for this proposed 
rule. The benefits, costs, and distributional effects of three 
alternatives referred to as follows: 2001 Roadless Rule (2001 rule), 
existing forest plans (existing plans), and the Idaho State Petition 
(proposed rule) are analyzed over a 15-year time period. As of the 
printing of this proposed rule, the 2001 rule is in operation by court 
order and represents the legal status quo. In absence of the 2001 rule, 
management would be governed by existing plans and agency interim 
direction. As such, for the purpose of regulatory impact analysis, the 
2001 rule and existing forest plans are assumed to represent a range of 
baseline conditions or goods and services provided by national forests 
and grasslands in the near future in the absence of the proposed rule.
    The proposed rule is programmatic in nature, consisting of 
direction for road construction, road reconstruction, timber cutting, 
and discretionary mineral activities, which would be applied to future 
management activities in Idaho Roadless Areas. The purpose of the 
proposed rule is to provide State-specific direction for the 
conservation and management of inventoried roadless areas within the 
State. The proposed rule integrates local management concerns with the 
national objectives for protecting roadless area values and 
characteristics.
    The proposed rule would establish five management themes to clarify 
direction within Idaho Roadless Areas in contrast to the single 
management strategy assigned to all Idaho Roadless Areas under the 2001 
rule. The five themes are Wild Land Recreation (WLR), Primitive, 
Special Areas of Heritage and Tribal Significance (SAHTS), Backcountry/
Restoration (backcountry), and General Forest, Rangeland, and Grassland 
(GFRG). Management direction under the 2001 rule is most similar to the 
backcountry/ restoration theme under the proposed rule. The proposed 
rule does not prescribe site-specific activities on the ground, nor 
does it irreversibly commit resources. Direct effects of site-specific 
activities would be disclosed through NEPA project-level analysis when 
site-specific decisions are made.
    In general, the proposed rule does not affect the efficiency of 
individual operations or activities (such as, an individual timber 
sale) associated with forest resources and/or services, but may instead 
affect the number or extent of opportunities as a function of 
activities permitted within Idaho Roadless Areas on NFS lands. Because 
the proposed rule does not prescribe site-specific activities, it is 
difficult to quantify the benefits of the alternatives. It should also 
be emphasized that the types of benefits derived from roadless 
characteristics and the uses of roadless areas are far ranging and 
include a number of non-market and non-use benefit categories. 
Consequently, benefits are not monetized, nor are net present values or 
benefit cost ratios estimated. Instead, increases and/or losses in 
benefits are discussed separately for each resource area in a 
quantitative or qualitative manner. Benefits and costs are organized 
and discussed in the context of `local resource concerns' and `roadless 
characteristics' in an effort to remain consistent with overall purpose 
of the proposed rule, recognizing that benefits associated with local 
concerns may trigger indirect benefits in roadless characteristics in 
some cases (such as, forest health). Table 1 summarizes the potential 
benefits and costs of the proposed rule, the 2001 roadless rule, and 
existing plan alternatives.
    Distributional effects or economic impacts, in terms of jobs and 
labor income, are quantified for five economic areas (EAs) for the 
State using regional impact models (IMPLAN). Economic impacts are 
evaluated only for changes in activities directly affected by the 
proposed rule (timber cutting, minerals extraction, and road 
construction and reconstruction). Distributional effects are also 
discussed in relation to revenue sharing, small entities, and to the 
resource dependent communities (counties) most likely to be affected by 
the proposed rule. Table 2 summarizes distributional effects and 
economic impacts of the proposed rule and alternatives.
    Details about the environmental effects of the proposed rule can be 
found in the Roadless Area Conservation; National Forest System Lands 
in Idaho Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Effects on 
opportunities for small entities under the proposed rule are discussed 
in the context of Executive Order 13272 regarding proper consideration 
of small entities and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), which amended the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.).

Local Resource Concerns

    Local resource concerns include ensuring access, protecting 
communities, property, and resources from risk of wildfire; as well as 
protecting forests from the adverse effects of wildfire, insects, and 
disease.
    Approximately 1.4 million acres within Idaho Roadless Areas are 
estimated to be at risk of 25% or more tree mortality (that is, high 
risk) over the next 15 years. Of the 1.4 million acres at risk, 
approximately 26,000 acres are within the GFRG and 939,000 acres in the 
backcountry theme under the proposed rule. The areas identified within 
the GFRG theme would have the most potential to be treated given their 
treatment flexibility. Timber cutting in the backcountry theme would be 
done on a limited basis and would be done to retain roadless 
characteristics. Under existing plans, the high-risk acreage assigned 
to the GRFG theme increases to 190,000 acres while 730,000 acres are 
assigned to backcountry. Existing plans provide flexible opportunities 
to treat high-risk acres through timber cutting on lands assigned to 
both of these themes without constraints associated with roadless 
characteristic retention. Projected levels of treatment, involving 
timber cutting, are greatest under

[[Page 1143]]

existing plans (2,800 acres per year; 42,000 acres over 15 years) 
followed by the proposed rule (800 acres per year; 12,000 acres over 15 
years). Treatments associated with projected harvests over the next 15 
years are likely to be effective in reducing the risks from insects and 
disease in areas treated.
    Timber cutting associated with treatments are estimated to be 0.5 
million board feet (MMBF), 14 MMBF, and 4 MMBF per year for the 2001 
rule, existing plans, and the proposed rule respectively and account 
for 0.5%, 11.5%, and 3% of average annual harvests from National Forest 
land in Idaho. A majority of the volume under the proposed rule is 
projected to occur within the northern economic area (EA).
    Approximately 1 million acres of Idaho Roadless Areas are within 
the wildland urban interface (WUI), and about 40% of those acres 
(450,000) are in high priority fire risk areas as defined by fire 
regime and condition class. Opportunities to use a full range of 
treatment methods to address severe wildfire risk, particularly within 
the WUI, are substantially greater under the proposed rule relative to 
the 2001 rule. Treatment flexibility expands only slightly under the 
proposed rule compared to existing plans. Approximately 71% of WUI 
acreage within Idaho Roadless Areas is assigned to management themes 
that permit flexible treatment methods that include road construction 
under the proposed rule, compared to 69% under existing plans. However, 
fewer overall acres are projected for treatment under the proposed rule 
due to other constraints (such as, maintenance of roadless 
characteristics). Projected harvests could treat the equivalent of 
approximately 5% of high priority areas within the WUI under the 
proposed rule over a 15-year period. In contrast, approximately 14% of 
high priority WUI areas could be treated under existing plans. An 
insignificant amount of high priority WUI acreage would be treated 
under the 2001 rule.
    Phosphate mining activity on existing leases will be similar across 
the alternatives over the next 15 years. However, 12,100 acres of 
unleased known phosphate reserves within Idaho Roadless Areas will be 
made available for future leasing or lease expansion under the proposed 
rule that would not be accessible under the 2001 rule. Mining in these 
areas could generate an estimated 545 million tons of phosphate ore, 
but development of these areas is expected to occur over an extended 
period (50+ years). All unleased areas with known phosphate reserves 
(approximately 13,400 acres; estimated 603 million tons) will be 
available for leasing over an extended period under existing plans.
    There are negligible opportunities for geothermal development under 
the 2001 rule. Geothermal opportunities increase under the proposed 
rule where 233,600 acres of high geothermal potential, on land with 
feasible slopes, are made available because of GFRG theme assignments. 
These opportunities increase slightly under existing plans to 249,500 
acres. The existing plans provide for greater development opportunities 
in areas of medium geothermal potential with feasible slopes (457,700 
acres) compared to the proposed rule (140,800 acres). There are 
currently no existing geothermal leases on National Forest land in 
Idaho.
    The proposed rule is not expected to have a significant impact on 
other local resource issues or concerns including livestock grazing, 
saleable minerals, other leasable minerals (oil, gas, and coal), 
locatable minerals, or energy corridors.

Roadless Characteristics

    Roadless characteristics include high quality soil, water 
(including drinking water), and air; plant and animal diversity; 
habitat for sensitive species; reference landscapes and high scenic 
quality; primitive and semi-primitive recreation; cultural resources; 
and other locally identified unique characteristics. Shifts in the 
number of roadless area acres assigned to more permissive management 
themes can increase the potential for adverse effects to roadless 
characteristics. However, reasonably foreseeable effects in the next 15 
years are likely to be limited by levels of road construction/
reconstruction, timber cutting, and leasable minerals activity actually 
projected to occur during that time.
    Based on the relative acreage assigned to different management 
themes, the proposed rule creates greater potential for reductions in 
scenic integrity compared to the 2001 rule but lower potential relative 
to existing plans. The proposed rule assigns 5.5 million acres to 
management themes (GFRG, backcountry) that permit activities that could 
trigger moderate reductions in scenic integrity. Theme assignments 
under existing plans create potential for triggering similar integrity 
reductions on 5.9 million acres. Potential reductions would be 
moderated under the backcountry theme due to more restrictive 
management requirements relative to GFRG. There is little potential for 
reductions in scenic integrity under the 2001 rule. Reasonably 
foreseeable reductions in scenic integrity from timber cutting are 
limited to those resulting from projected harvest levels. Foreseeable 
reductions in scenic integrity from high to low levels from long-term 
development (50+ years) of unleased phosphate reserves are similar for 
the proposed rule (12,100 acres) and existing plans (13,400 acres) and 
confined to the Caribou Targhee National Forest. Reductions in scenic 
integrity associated with development of existing phosphate leases are 
similar across the three alternatives.
    The proposed rule does not directly affect wilderness designations 
in the context of the National Wilderness Preservation System, but the 
changes in activities permitted within Idaho Roadless Areas under the 
proposed rule have the potential to affect the degree to which Idaho 
Roadless Areas are considered for future wilderness designation. 
Reductions in wilderness characteristics are most likely to occur in 
areas assigned to the GFRG theme (1.262 million acres under existing 
plans; 609,500 acres under the proposed rule). Activities may not 
change wilderness characteristics if the effects of prior activities 
are still evident within GFRG areas. Acreage recommended for wilderness 
increases from 1,320,900 under existing plans (that is, current 
wilderness recommendations) to 1,378,600 under the proposed rule, 
primarily through assignment of areas to the wild land recreation 
theme. A vast majority of acreage is likely to retain existing 
wilderness characteristics under the 2001 rule, and no changes occur 
regarding recommended wilderness under the 2001 rule.
    No measurable differences in dispersed recreation opportunities are 
expected across alternatives. Losses in dispersed recreation associated 
with development of existing phosphate leases are equal for all 
alternatives; development of future leases will affect opportunities 
but not within 15 years (that is, >50 years). Perceptions of remoteness 
and solitude may be affected in dispersed recreation areas where timber 
cutting and road construction occur, but effects are constrained by 
projected levels of these activities.
    Opportunities for developed recreation are limited under the 
proposed rule but increase to some extent under existing plans, though 
reasonably foreseeable development is minimal. Opportunities for 
maintaining dispersed recreation opportunities are high under the 2001 
rule, with little potential for increases in developed recreation 
opportunities. Concerns about access and designations for motorized 
versus non-motorized recreation were raised in comments

[[Page 1144]]

during scoping, however, the proposed rule does not provide direction 
on where and when off highway vehicle (OHV) use would be permissible 
and makes clear that travel planning-related actions should be 
addressed through travel management planning and individual forest 
plans.
    The potential for adverse effects to plant, wildlife, and aquatic 
species and habitat is lower under the proposed rule, compared to 
existing plans due to fewer acres assigned to more permissive themes. 
However, reasonably foreseeable effects are constrained by projected 
levels of road construction/reconstruction, timber cutting, and 
leasable minerals activity over the next 15 years. Acreage assigned to 
wild land, primitive, and SAHTS themes should have a beneficial effect 
on sensitive species and habitat. Acreage under these themes contains 
289 occurrences of known sensitive plant populations (out of a total of 
666) compared to 293 occurrences on similar themes under existing 
plans. The management prescriptions under the 2001 rule are likely to 
have beneficial effects on sensitive species, as well as biodiversity.
    Road building associated with timber cutting will have a negligible 
effect on high hazard soils under all alternatives. Road building is 
likely to affect high hazard soils in areas associated with existing 
phosphate leases but effects are equivalent across alternatives. 
Similar effects associated with future leases are possible but not 
likely to occur within the next 15 years under the proposed rule and 
existing plans (future leases are not feasible under the 2001 rule).
    The proposed rule is expected to have negligible adverse effects on 
other resources associated with roadless characteristics including 
cultural resources, air, water, climate change, non-timber products, 
and outfitter and guide opportunities based on reasonably foreseeable 
activity projections. Any adverse impacts to these resources and 
services would be addressed through analysis conducted in accordance 
with NEPA and minimized through compliance with forest plan guidelines.

Agency Costs and Revenues

    Agency costs and revenues are summarized in Table 1. Aggregate 
timber program costs under the proposed rule are expected to be greater 
than costs under the 2001 rule and lower than costs under existing 
plans when considering projected levels of timber cutting. Treatment 
costs per acre are expected to be lower under the proposed rule and 
existing plans compared to the 2001 rule due to greater flexibility 
regarding treatment methods under the GFRG theme. Greater acreage 
assigned to GFRG under existing plans implies potential for some gains 
in treatment cost effectiveness relative to the proposed rule. Lower 
costs imply greater capacity for generating viable sales and positive 
net revenues for a given project. Net revenues may increase under the 
proposed rule relative to the 2001 rule, primarily for the Idaho 
Panhandle NF and the Northern economic area (EA) based on projected 
levels of timber cutting. However, net revenues may decrease under the 
proposed rule when compared to revenues generated by projected timber 
cutting under existing plans for the Idaho Panhandle, Clearwater, and 
Nez Perce National Forests.
    Projected total miles of new roads (constructed and reconstructed) 
are 15, 180, and 60 miles over the next 15 years under the 2001 rule, 
existing plans, and the proposed rule respectively. Today, 
approximately 1,800 miles of roads (include forest, other public, 
private, and unauthorized roads) exist on 5% of the land within Idaho 
Roadless Areas. Agency costs related to roads (e.g., administration, 
planning, maintenance) are not likely to change significantly under the 
proposed rule based on projected construction/reconstruction levels, 
and due to the types of roads constructed (such as, temporary, single-
purpose).

Distributional Effects

    The distributional effects of the proposed rule are quantified for 
reasonably foreseeable levels of timber cutting and road construction 
projected to occur over the next 15 years (see Table 2). The majority 
of employment and income impacts are projected to occur in the 
southeastern EA (due to leasable minerals), the northern EA (due to 
timber cutting), and to some extent in the central EA. Predicted 
amounts of phosphate output from Idaho Roadless Areas are not expected 
to differ across alternatives over the next 15 years, implying that 
jobs and labor income contributed by phosphate activities are constant 
across alternatives.
    Phosphate mining on existing leases is estimated to contribute the 
greatest number of jobs and income, but jobs from this sector will not 
differ by alternative. Timber cutting is primarily responsible for 
differences in jobs and income across alternatives. Projected harvest 
and accompanying road construction under the proposed rule is estimated 
to contribute an additional 80 jobs and $1.6 million in income per 
year, relative to conditions under the 2001 rule. These changes are 
expected to occur in the northern (Idaho Panhandle NF) and southeastern 
(Caribou/Targhee NF) economic areas. In contrast, annual employment and 
income are estimated to be lower under the proposed rule compared to 
existing plans by 221 jobs and $6 million in labor income. These 
effects are likely to occur within the northern, southeastern, and 
central (Clearwater NF) economic areas.
    Timber-dependent counties where changes in harvest opportunities 
and corresponding jobs and income may have the most significant impact 
on local economies are identified by economic area. Nine counties are 
identified for the northern EA, while five such counties are located in 
the central EA, one of which is located in the State of Washington. One 
additional county is located in the southeastern EA. Little or no 
potential for adverse impacts to the local economy is predicted for 
these counties under the proposed rule relative to the 2001 rule, but 
some potential for adverse impacts exists compared to existing plans.
    Payments to counties are expected to remain the same under all 
alternatives as long as the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-
Determination Act (SRSA) remains in effect. If SRSA is allowed to 
lapse, the timber-dependent counties noted above are likely to 
experience the greatest loss. Mineral-based payments to states are a 
function of receipts from leasable minerals, including receipts from 
phosphate operations, but no differences in phosphate production are 
projected across alternatives.

[[Page 1145]]



                     Table 1.--Summary of Net Benefits of the Proposed Rule and Alternatives
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                  2001 Roadless rule          Existing plans             Proposed rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             LOCAL RESOURCE CONCERNS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Forest Health
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Insects and Disease..............  Most of the 1.4 million    Opportunities for         Opportunities for
                                    acres currently at risk    treatment under GFRG      treatment under GFRG
                                    of 25% mortality or        and backcountry themes:   and backcountry themes:
                                    significant growth loss     190,000 acres     26,000 acres
                                    will remain untreated.     of high risk (9) forest   of high risk (9) forest
                                                               assigned to GFRG.         assigned to GFRG.
                                                                730,000 acres     940,000 acres
                                                               of high risk forest       of high risk forest
                                                               assigned to backcountry.  assigned to
                                                                                         backcountry.
                                                              Projected treatments on   Backcountry treatments
                                                               42,000 acres likely to    must be for forest
                                                               be effective over 15      health and/or hazardous
                                                               years.                    fuels reductions, and
                                                                                         retain roadless
                                                                                         characteristics.
                                                                                        Projected treatments on
                                                                                         12,000 acres likely to
                                                                                         be effective over 15
                                                                                         years.
Noxious Weeds....................  Spreading is unlikely      Some potential for        Some potential for
                                    given limited potential    spreading based on        spreading based on
                                    for soil disturbance.      acreage assigned to       acreage assigned to
                                    28,000 acres of weeds      GFRG (1.262 million);     GFRG (609,500 acres);
                                    currently found in Idaho   the limited degree of     the limited degree of
                                    Roadless Areas.            projected road            projected construction,
                                                               construction, timber      harvest and mineral
                                                               cutting, and mineral      activity would minimize
                                                               activity will minimize    the potential for
                                                               the potential for         spreading. 2,600 acres
                                                               spreading. 8,300 acres    of noxious weeds
                                                               of weeds currently        currently found in
                                                               found in GFRG.            GFRG.
Fuel Management..................  Road construction not      Road construction         Road construction
                                    permitted in conjunction   permitted in              permitted in
                                    w