Rangeland Allotment Management Planning on the Fall River and Oglala Geographic Areas, Pine Ridge Ranger and Fall River Ranger Districts, Nebraska National Forest, Nebraska and South Dakota, 36515-36517 [2011-15572]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
36515
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 22, 2011 / Notices
• Survey contacts will be personally
addressed, toll free numbers will be
provided for answering questions and
providing help. Confidentiality of
responses will be ensured and
respondents will know how to contact
the surveyor if they have questions on
security or other issues.
• All contacts will be personalized
and will emphasize why the study is
important and express appreciation for
respondents’ help. They will be
formally thanked for promptly
completing questionnaires.
• Small tangible token rewards
provided in advance and at the time of
the survey request will be further tested
with small businesses to encourage
response. Previous survey research has
shown that small cash token incentives
provided with the survey significantly
increase response rates and do much
better than promised rewards or
nonmonetary rewards.
A key component of tailored survey
design is considering and balancing
how features of questions,
questionnaires, mailings, interviewing,
and the context of the survey will
influence trust, cost, and rewards
associated with the survey
circumstances and respondents.
All study instruments will be kept as
simple and respondent-friendly as
possible. Responses are voluntary and
confidential. Responses will be used to
produce statistics and for no other
purpose. Data files from the survey will
not be released to the public.
Affected Public: Respondents include
business establishments with at least 5
employees in both nonmetropolitan and
metropolitan counties.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
The survey is cross-sectional and will be
completed at one point in time. The
survey will have a complex mixed
survey administration to include
telephone screening, pre-notification
letter with Web access, multi-contact
telephone interviewing, follow-up
nonrespondent mail questionnaires, and
simultaneous Web questionnaires
offered during all contacts. Completion
time for each questionnaire, based on
comparisons with similar mixed modes
is estimated at 30 minutes per
completion, including time for reading
correspondence, returning an eligibility
postcard or responding to a screening
call, reviewing instructions, gathering
data needed, and responding to
questionnaire items. It is also expected
that those choosing not to participate
will require 10 minutes to review the
materials and decide not to participate.
Full Study: The initial sample size for
the full study is 30,000 businesses. The
expected overall response rate is 80
percent for firms in the main study. The
total estimated response burden for all
of those participating in the study is
12,000 hours (30,000 respondents × 80
percent response rate × 0.50 hours) and
for the non-responding business is 1,000
hours (6000 respondents × 10 minutes).
Pilot Study: A pilot test of the survey
will be done in advance of the full study
survey. The purpose of the pilot is to
evaluate the survey protocol, and test
instruments and questionnaires. The
initial sample size for this phase of the
research is 4,000 businesses. The
expected response rate is 80% of firms.
The total estimated response burden for
the pilot testing is 1,600 hours (4,000
respondents × 80 percent × 0.5 hours).
Non-responding businesses will
experience 133 hours of burden (800
respondents × 10 minutes). Total
respondent burden is estimated at
14,733 hours (see table below).
Testing will be limited to a maximum
of 9 businesses which will be consulted
on the questionnaire and asked to
complete the questionnaire in a
cognitive interview test.
ESTIMATED RESPONDENT BURDEN FOR RURAL ESTABLISHMENT INNOVATION SURVEY
Responses
Survey
Sample
Size
Freq
Resp.
Count
Freq. ×
Count
Non-Response
Min./
Resp.
Burden
Hours
Nonresp
Count
Freq. ×
Count
Min./
Nonr.
Burden
Hours
Total
burden
hours
Pilot Study .............................
Pilot Study .............................
4,000
30,000
1
1
3,200
24,000
3,200
24,000
30
30
1,600
12,000
800
6,000
800
6,000
10
10
133
1,000
1,733
13,000
Total ...............................
34,000
................
................
................
................
13,600
................
................
................
1,133
14,733
Dated: May 9, 2011.
Katherine R. Smith,
Administrator, Economic Research Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–15474 Filed 6–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Forest Service
Rangeland Allotment Management
Planning on the Fall River and Oglala
Geographic Areas, Pine Ridge Ranger
and Fall River Ranger Districts,
Nebraska National Forest, Nebraska
and South Dakota
AGENCY:
Forest Service, USDA.
Request for an extension of the
proposed environmental impact
statement.
ACTION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:27 Jun 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
We are requesting an
extension of the proposed EIS for the
USDA Forest Service Rangeland
Allotment Management Planning on the
Fall River West Geographic Area of the
Fall River Ranger District and the Oglala
Geographic Area of the Pine Ridge
Ranger District, Nebraska National
Forest. Our initial Notice of Intent was
published in Vol. 75, No. 112 Friday,
June 11, 2010.
The USDA, Forest Service, will
prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) analyzing the
management of rangeland vegetation
resources, which includes livestock
grazing, on the National Forest System
(NFS) lands within the Oglala
Geographic Area (OGA) of the Oglala
National Grassland on the Pine Ridge
Ranger District and the West Geographic
Area (WGA) of the Buffalo Gap National
Grassland on the Fall River Ranger
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
District of the Nebraska National Forest
(Analysis Area) areas as mapped by the
2001 Nebraska National Forest Revised
Land and Resource Management Plan
(Forest Plan). A Notice of Intent (NOI)
for this project was published June 11,
2010 (75 No. 112 FR 33239–33241). This
revised NOI is being issued to update
the project schedule. There will be a
record of decision (ROD) for each
geographic area.
Proposed management actions would
be implemented beginning in the year
2013. The agency gives notice of the full
environmental analysis and decisionmaking process that will occur on the
proposal so interested and affected
people may become aware of how they
may participate in the process and
contribute to the final decision.
Comments concerning the scope
of the analysis were received by July 30,
2010. The initial scoping period has
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
36516
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 22, 2011 / Notices
been completed. The draft
environmental impact statement is
expected [January 2012] and the final
environmental impact statement is
expected [July 2012].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information about the Oglala
Geographic Area on the Oglala National
Grassland call Lora O’Rourke,
Co-Interdisciplinary Team Leader, at
308–432–0300. For further information
about the West Geographic Area on the
Buffalo Gap National Grassland, call
Robert Novotny, Co-Interdisciplinary
Team Leader at 605–745–4107.
Individuals who use
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
Time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Vegetation
resources on approximately 94,174 acres
of NFS lands lying within the Oglala
National Grassland in Sioux and Dawes
Counties of northwest Nebraska, and
approximately 117,548 acres of NFS
lands lying within the Buffalo Gap
National Grassland in Fall River County
of southwest South Dakota, are being
analyzed to determine if and how
existing conditions differ from desired
conditions outlined in the 2001
Nebraska National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan (Forest
Plan).
Vegetation in the Analysis Area is
characteristic of mixed-grass prairie and
lesser amounts of ponderosa pine/
juniper habitats. Short-grass species
include blue grama, buffalograss, and
upland sedges. Mid-grass species
include western wheatgrass, green
needlegrass, and to a lesser extent
sideoats grama. Shrubs include
Wyoming big sagebrush, greasewood,
and yucca glauca. Some creeks
transverse the area and support plains
cottonwood, green ash, and willow.
A large portion of the Analysis Area
evolved under a history of
homesteading in the early twentieth
century, and a prolonged drought period
combined with the economic depression
of the late 1920’s and early 1930’s
caused many of these homesteads to
fail. Starting in the 1930’s, land was
purchased through northwestern
Nebraska and southwestern South
Dakota under the Land Utilization
Project initiated by the Agricultural
Adjustment Administration. This
continued with the Bankhead Jones
Farm Tenant Act of 1937, which was
designed to develop a program of land
conservation. Administration of these
lands was turned over to the Soil
Conservation Service the following year
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 Jun 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
and transferred to the United States
Forest Service in 1954.
Today the Oglala and Buffalo Gap
National Grasslands support and
provide a variety of multiple resource
uses and values. Livestock ranching
operations in the area depend on
National Grassland acreage to create
logical and efficient management units.
Cattle and sheep, in accordance with
10-year term and/or annual temporary
livestock grazing permits, are currently
authorized to graze the allotments
within the Analysis Area. In order to
determine how existing resource
conditions compare to desired
conditions, data from monitoring and
analysis (historical and present) will be
used. During the past 5–7 years, drought
conditions have impacted plant vigor,
canopy, and litter cover in most parts of
the Analysis Area.
Purpose and Need for Action: The
purpose of this project is to determine
if livestock grazing will continue to be
authorized on all, none, or portions, of
the 41 allotments in the Fall River West
GA and the 35 allotments in the Oglala
GA. And if livestock grazing is to
continue, how to best maintain or
achieve desired conditions and meet
forest plan objectives, standards and
guidelines. The action is needed to
ensure that the project areas are meeting
forest plan desired conditions for plant
species composition, vegetation
structure, and habitat for sharp-tailed
grouse, sage grouse, black-tailed prairie
dog (management indicator species) and
swift fox (r2 sensitive species). There is
also a need to review existing livestock
management strategies and, if necessary,
update them to implement 2001 Forest
Plan direction and meet the
requirements of section 504 of Public
Law 104–19 (Rescissions Act, signed
7/27/95). The 2001 Forest Plan states
that livestock grazing may occur as one
of the multiple uses on the Nebraska
National Forest, consistent with
standards and guidelines. Livestock
grazing is currently occurring in the
analysis area under the direction of
existing Allotment Management Plans
(AMPs) and through direction provided
in annual operating instructions (AOIs).
The results of this analysis may require
issuing or modifying grazing permits
and AMPs including reductions of
permitted livestock numbers and/or
modifications of the grazing season.
Modifications would be documented in
updated term grazing permits and/or
grazing agreements and associated
AMPs for the allotments.
The Forest Plan identifies lands
within the OGA and FRWGA as
containing lands that are capable and
suitable for grazing by domestic
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
livestock. These lands are to be
monitored to evaluate both
implementation and effectiveness of
management actions.
In all cases, vegetation management
tools will be used that meet Forest Plan
objectives, standards, and guidelines
and that will maintain or move existing
resource conditions toward desired
conditions for that geographic area. If
monitoring indicates that practices are
being properly implemented and that
resource trends are moving toward
meeting desired conditions in a timely
manner, management may continue
unchanged. If monitoring indicates that
there is a need to modify management
practices, adaptive options as analyzed
in the EIS will be selected and
implemented.
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, as required by the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), will be
completed on all proposed activities.
An interdisciplinary team has been
selected to do the environmental
analysis, as well as prepare and
accomplish scoping and public
involvement activities.
Possible Alternatives: Potential
alternatives include:
1. No action, No change from
authorized grazing use or current
situation.
2. No Grazing.
3. Livestock grazing incorporating
adaptive management to meet the Forest
Plan goals, objectives, standards, and
guidelines.
Responsible Officials: District Ranger
at the Pine Ridge Ranger District, 125
North Main Street, Chadron, Nebraska
69337; and Michael E. McNeill, District
Ranger at the Fall River Ranger District,
1801 Highway 18 Truck Bypass, Hot
Springs, South Dakota 57747–0732 are
the Responsible Officials for making the
decision on this action. They will
document their decision and rationale
in a Record of Decision.
The Responsible Officials will
consider the results of the analysis and
its findings and then document their
decisions in two separate Records of
Decision (ROD), one for the OGA and
one for the FRWGA. The decisions will
determine whether or not to authorize
livestock grazing on all, part, or none of
the Analysis Area, and if so, what
adaptive management design criteria,
adaptive options, and monitoring will
be implemented so as to meet or move
toward the desired conditions as
specified in the Forest Plan.
Nature of Decision To Be Made: The
EIS is not a decision document. The
purpose of the EIS document is to
disclose the direct, indirect, and
cumulative effects of the proposed
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 22, 2011 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
action and other alternatives that are
analyzed. After providing the public an
opportunity to comment on the specific
activities described in the alternatives,
the Responsible Officials will review all
alternatives and the anticipated
environmental consequences of each in
order to make the following decisions:
• Whether or not to authorize
livestock grazing within the Analysis
Area in whole or in part.
• If grazing is to be Authorized, (a)
what grazing systems and prescribed
livestock use would be implemented; (b)
what structural and non-structural range
improvements would be necessary; and
(c) what type of monitoring program
would be proposed.
• If necessary, identify any
‘‘mitigation measure(s)’’ needed to
implement the decision.
Individual Allotment Management
Plans (AMPs) would then be developed
to incorporate conditions outlined in
the Record of Decision. These AMPs
will become part of each associated term
permit and/or grazing agreement issued.
Public Scoping Process: Comments
and input regarding this proposal were
requested from the public, other groups
and agencies via direct mailing on
March 10, 2008. Comments received
during this first scoping process have
been made part of the project record and
will be addressed in the analysis
process. With this second revised NOI,
additional comments were received by
July 30, 2010. Anyone who has
provided comments to the draft EIS or
expressed interest during the two
comment periods will have standing in
the process.
Public involvement will be especially
important at several points during the
analysis, beginning with the scoping
process. The Forest Service will seek
information, comments, and assistance
from Federal, State, local agencies,
Tribes, and other individuals or
organizations that may be interested in,
or affected by, the proposal. The scoping
activities will include: (1) Engaging
potentially affected or interested parties
by written correspondence, (2)
contacting those on our Forest media
list, and (3) hosting public information
meeting(s).
Preliminary Issues
Effects of proposed management
strategies on natural ecosystems. This
includes elements such as native and
desirable nonnative plant and animal
communities; black-tailed prairie dog
management; riparian areas; upland
grasslands; wooded draws; ponderosa
pine forested areas; areas of hazardous
fuels; and threatened, endangered,
sensitive, and management indicator
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 Jun 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
species. Social-economic effects
(positive or negative) on livestock
grazing permittees and the local
economy from changes in livestock
management. Effects of proposed
livestock grazing strategies on
recreational activities and/or
experiences.
Comment Requested: The notice of
intent published on June 11, 2010,
initiated the formal scoping process that
guides the development of the
environmental impact statement. Initial
public comments were due and have
been received by July 30, 2010.
Early Notice of Importance for Public
Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review: A draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS)
will be prepared for comment. The
comment period on the draft
environmental impact statement will be
45 days from the date the
Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability in
the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this
early stage, it is important to give
reviewers notice of several court rulings
related to public participation in the
environmental review process. First,
reviewers of draft environmental impact
statements must structure their
participation in the environmental
review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts an agency to the
reviewer’s position and contentions.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v.
NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also,
environmental objections that could be
raised at the draft environmental impact
statement stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final
environmental impact statement may be
waived or dismissed by the courts. City
of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016,
1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin
Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp.
1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of
these court rulings, it is very important
that those interested in this proposed
action participate by the close of the 45day comment period so that substantive
comments and objections are made
available to the Forest Service at a time
when it can meaningfully consider them
and respond to them in the final
environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in
identifying and considering issues and
concerns on the proposed action,
comments on the draft environmental
impact statement should be as specific
as possible. It is also helpful if
comments refer to specific pages or
chapters of the draft statement.
Comments may also address the
adequacy of the draft environmental
impact statement or the merits of the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
36517
alternatives formulated and discussed in
the document. 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: June 15, 2011.
Jane D. Darnell,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2011–15572 Filed 6–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Plumas County Resource Advisory
Committee (RAC)
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
The Plumas County Resource
Advisory Committee (RAC) will hold a
meeting on July 8, 2011 in Quincy, CA.
The purpose of the meeting is to review
applications for Cycle 11 funding and
select projects to be recommended to
the Plumas National Forest Supervisor
for calendar year 2012 funding
consideration. The funding is made
available under Title II provisions of the
Secure Rural Schools and Community
Self-Determination Act of 2000.
SUMMARY:
The meeting will
take place from 9–1:30 at the Mineral
Building-Plumas/Sierra County
Fairgrounds, 208 Fairgrounds Road,
Quincy, CA.
DATES AND ADDRESSES:
(or
for special needs): Lee Anne Schramel
Taylor, Forest Coordinator, USDA,
Plumas National Forest, P.O. Box
11500/159 Lawrence Street, Quincy, CA
95971; (530) 283–7850; or by e-mail
eataylor@fs.fed.us. Other RAC
information may be obtained at https://
www.fs.fed.us/srs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dated: June 15, 2011.
Matt Janowiak,
Acting Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2011–15542 Filed 6–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36515-36517]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15572]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Rangeland Allotment Management Planning on the Fall River and
Oglala Geographic Areas, Pine Ridge Ranger and Fall River Ranger
Districts, Nebraska National Forest, Nebraska and South Dakota
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Request for an extension of the proposed environmental impact
statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are requesting an extension of the proposed EIS for the
USDA Forest Service Rangeland Allotment Management Planning on the Fall
River West Geographic Area of the Fall River Ranger District and the
Oglala Geographic Area of the Pine Ridge Ranger District, Nebraska
National Forest. Our initial Notice of Intent was published in Vol. 75,
No. 112 Friday, June 11, 2010.
The USDA, Forest Service, will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) analyzing the management of rangeland vegetation
resources, which includes livestock grazing, on the National Forest
System (NFS) lands within the Oglala Geographic Area (OGA) of the
Oglala National Grassland on the Pine Ridge Ranger District and the
West Geographic Area (WGA) of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland on the
Fall River Ranger District of the Nebraska National Forest (Analysis
Area) areas as mapped by the 2001 Nebraska National Forest Revised Land
and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan). A Notice of Intent (NOI)
for this project was published June 11, 2010 (75 No. 112 FR 33239-
33241). This revised NOI is being issued to update the project
schedule. There will be a record of decision (ROD) for each geographic
area.
Proposed management actions would be implemented beginning in the
year 2013. The agency gives notice of the full environmental analysis
and decision-making process that will occur on the proposal so
interested and affected people may become aware of how they may
participate in the process and contribute to the final decision.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis were received by
July 30, 2010. The initial scoping period has
[[Page 36516]]
been completed. The draft environmental impact statement is expected
[January 2012] and the final environmental impact statement is expected
[July 2012].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about the
Oglala Geographic Area on the Oglala National Grassland call Lora
O'Rourke, Co-Interdisciplinary Team Leader, at 308-432-0300. For
further information about the West Geographic Area on the Buffalo Gap
National Grassland, call Robert Novotny, Co-Interdisciplinary Team
Leader at 605-745-4107.
Individuals who use 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 Time, Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Vegetation resources on approximately 94,174
acres of NFS lands lying within the Oglala National Grassland in Sioux
and Dawes Counties of northwest Nebraska, and approximately 117,548
acres of NFS lands lying within the Buffalo Gap National Grassland in
Fall River County of southwest South Dakota, are being analyzed to
determine if and how existing conditions differ from desired conditions
outlined in the 2001 Nebraska National Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan (Forest Plan).
Vegetation in the Analysis Area is characteristic of mixed-grass
prairie and lesser amounts of ponderosa pine/juniper habitats. Short-
grass species include blue grama, buffalograss, and upland sedges. Mid-
grass species include western wheatgrass, green needlegrass, and to a
lesser extent sideoats grama. Shrubs include Wyoming big sagebrush,
greasewood, and yucca glauca. Some creeks transverse the area and
support plains cottonwood, green ash, and willow.
A large portion of the Analysis Area evolved under a history of
homesteading in the early twentieth century, and a prolonged drought
period combined with the economic depression of the late 1920's and
early 1930's caused many of these homesteads to fail. Starting in the
1930's, land was purchased through northwestern Nebraska and
southwestern South Dakota under the Land Utilization Project initiated
by the Agricultural Adjustment Administration. This continued with the
Bankhead Jones Farm Tenant Act of 1937, which was designed to develop a
program of land conservation. Administration of these lands was turned
over to the Soil Conservation Service the following year and
transferred to the United States Forest Service in 1954.
Today the Oglala and Buffalo Gap National Grasslands support and
provide a variety of multiple resource uses and values. Livestock
ranching operations in the area depend on National Grassland acreage to
create logical and efficient management units. Cattle and sheep, in
accordance with 10-year term and/or annual temporary livestock grazing
permits, are currently authorized to graze the allotments within the
Analysis Area. In order to determine how existing resource conditions
compare to desired conditions, data from monitoring and analysis
(historical and present) will be used. During the past 5-7 years,
drought conditions have impacted plant vigor, canopy, and litter cover
in most parts of the Analysis Area.
Purpose and Need for Action: The purpose of this project is to
determine if livestock grazing will continue to be authorized on all,
none, or portions, of the 41 allotments in the Fall River West GA and
the 35 allotments in the Oglala GA. And if livestock grazing is to
continue, how to best maintain or achieve desired conditions and meet
forest plan objectives, standards and guidelines. The action is needed
to ensure that the project areas are meeting forest plan desired
conditions for plant species composition, vegetation structure, and
habitat for sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, black-tailed prairie dog
(management indicator species) and swift fox (r2 sensitive species).
There is also a need to review existing livestock management strategies
and, if necessary, update them to implement 2001 Forest Plan direction
and meet the requirements of section 504 of Public Law 104-19
(Rescissions Act, signed 7/27/95). The 2001 Forest Plan states that
livestock grazing may occur as one of the multiple uses on the Nebraska
National Forest, consistent with standards and guidelines. Livestock
grazing is currently occurring in the analysis area under the direction
of existing Allotment Management Plans (AMPs) and through direction
provided in annual operating instructions (AOIs). The results of this
analysis may require issuing or modifying grazing permits and AMPs
including reductions of permitted livestock numbers and/or
modifications of the grazing season. Modifications would be documented
in updated term grazing permits and/or grazing agreements and
associated AMPs for the allotments.
The Forest Plan identifies lands within the OGA and FRWGA as
containing lands that are capable and suitable for grazing by domestic
livestock. These lands are to be monitored to evaluate both
implementation and effectiveness of management actions.
In all cases, vegetation management tools will be used that meet
Forest Plan objectives, standards, and guidelines and that will
maintain or move existing resource conditions toward desired conditions
for that geographic area. If monitoring indicates that practices are
being properly implemented and that resource trends are moving toward
meeting desired conditions in a timely manner, management may continue
unchanged. If monitoring indicates that there is a need to modify
management practices, adaptive options as analyzed in the EIS will be
selected and implemented.
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as required
by the Endangered Species Act (ESA), will be completed on all proposed
activities.
An interdisciplinary team has been selected to do the environmental
analysis, as well as prepare and accomplish scoping and public
involvement activities.
Possible Alternatives: Potential alternatives include:
1. No action, No change from authorized grazing use or current
situation.
2. No Grazing.
3. Livestock grazing incorporating adaptive management to meet the
Forest Plan goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines.
Responsible Officials: District Ranger at the Pine Ridge Ranger
District, 125 North Main Street, Chadron, Nebraska 69337; and Michael
E. McNeill, District Ranger at the Fall River Ranger District, 1801
Highway 18 Truck Bypass, Hot Springs, South Dakota 57747-0732 are the
Responsible Officials for making the decision on this action. They will
document their decision and rationale in a Record of Decision.
The Responsible Officials will consider the results of the analysis
and its findings and then document their decisions in two separate
Records of Decision (ROD), one for the OGA and one for the FRWGA. The
decisions will determine whether or not to authorize livestock grazing
on all, part, or none of the Analysis Area, and if so, what adaptive
management design criteria, adaptive options, and monitoring will be
implemented so as to meet or move toward the desired conditions as
specified in the Forest Plan.
Nature of Decision To Be Made: The EIS is not a decision document.
The purpose of the EIS document is to disclose the direct, indirect,
and cumulative effects of the proposed
[[Page 36517]]
action and other alternatives that are analyzed. After providing the
public an opportunity to comment on the specific activities described
in the alternatives, the Responsible Officials will review all
alternatives and the anticipated environmental consequences of each in
order to make the following decisions:
Whether or not to authorize livestock grazing within the
Analysis Area in whole or in part.
If grazing is to be Authorized, (a) what grazing systems
and prescribed livestock use would be implemented; (b) what structural
and non-structural range improvements would be necessary; and (c) what
type of monitoring program would be proposed.
If necessary, identify any ``mitigation measure(s)''
needed to implement the decision.
Individual Allotment Management Plans (AMPs) would then be
developed to incorporate conditions outlined in the Record of Decision.
These AMPs will become part of each associated term permit and/or
grazing agreement issued.
Public Scoping Process: Comments and input regarding this proposal
were requested from the public, other groups and agencies via direct
mailing on March 10, 2008. Comments received during this first scoping
process have been made part of the project record and will be addressed
in the analysis process. With this second revised NOI, additional
comments were received by July 30, 2010. Anyone who has provided
comments to the draft EIS or expressed interest during the two comment
periods will have standing in the process.
Public involvement will be especially important at several points
during the analysis, beginning with the scoping process. The Forest
Service will seek information, comments, and assistance from Federal,
State, local agencies, Tribes, and other individuals or organizations
that may be interested in, or affected by, the proposal. The scoping
activities will include: (1) Engaging potentially affected or
interested parties by written correspondence, (2) contacting those on
our Forest media list, and (3) hosting public information meeting(s).
Preliminary Issues
Effects of proposed management strategies on natural ecosystems.
This includes elements such as native and desirable nonnative plant and
animal communities; black-tailed prairie dog management; riparian
areas; upland grasslands; wooded draws; ponderosa pine forested areas;
areas of hazardous fuels; and threatened, endangered, sensitive, and
management indicator species. Social-economic effects (positive or
negative) on livestock grazing permittees and the local economy from
changes in livestock management. Effects of proposed livestock grazing
strategies on recreational activities and/or experiences.
Comment Requested: The notice of intent published on June 11, 2010,
initiated the formal scoping process that guides the development of the
environmental impact statement. Initial public comments were due and
have been received by July 30, 2010.
Early Notice of Importance for Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement (DEIS)
will be prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft
environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date the
Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in
the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
draft environmental impact statements must structure their
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the
draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d
1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490
F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings,
it is very important that those interested in this proposed action
participate by the close of the 45-day comment period so that
substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest
Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to
them in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives
formulated and discussed in the document. 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: June 15, 2011.
Jane D. Darnell,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2011-15572 Filed 6-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
