[Federal Register: March 13, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 49)]
[Notices]
[Page 14515-14518]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13mr01-23]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Kelsey-Beaver EIS; Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County,
Montana
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts of
fire recovery activities. The project is located on the Three Rivers
Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County, Montana,
approximately 30 air miles northeast of Troy, Montana.
The Proposed Action was developed in response to major fire events
that burned over 12,100 acres in the Kelsey Creek, Roderick South, and
Upper Beaver Cr. areas in August 2000. These fires resulted in
significant tree mortality as well as increases in future fuel levels.
The fires burned within approximately 1,200 acres of designated old
growth. Increases in peak water flows in many streams are predicted to
exceed maximum levels allowed by the Kootenai Forest Plan as a result
of vegetation loss associated with the fires.
Following the fires, the forest conducted an assessment to develop
a framework upon which to base further recovery efforts (Forest
Assessment of Major Fires 2000, October 2000). This assessment
identified opportunities for rehabilitation and restoration that have
been carried forward into this proposal.
This project proposes to salvage timber, revegetate burned areas,
improve road drainage conditions, and implement access management
decisions.
The purpose and need for these activities is to: (1) Reduce fuel
accumulations and the potential for reburn; (2) Recover the economic
value of dead timber; (3) Increase the mature forest component in the
project area; (4) Restore vegetative species appropriate to burned
sites; (5) Contribute to watershed recovery processes by correcting
chronic sources of sediment; (6) Provide access for fire recovery
projects and public use while maintaining wildlife security.
Overall guidance of land management activities on the Kootenai
National Forest, including timber harvest and road management, is
provided by the Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management
Plan (Forest Plan, September, 1987). Harvest activities may take place
in the following Management Areas (MA) 10 and 11--Big Game Winter
Range, MA 12--Big Game Summer Range, MA 14--Grizzly Habitat Management,
MA 15--Timber Production, MA 16--Timber with Viewing, MA 17--Viewing
with Timber, and MA 19--Steep Lands, as defined by the Kootenai
National Forest Plan.
The Proposed Action may require a Kootenai National Forest Plan
project-specific amendment to suspend MA 12 standards that require
movement corridors and adjacent hiding cover be retained. The wildfires
burned around some pre-fire openings, removing cover in corridors and
creating larger openings. The proposed activities would remove burned
material that previously provided corridor cover. Live trees and some
snags and coarse woody material would be left to provide wildlife
habitat and maintain soil productivity. In the larger openings, patches
and corridors would be left to provide some level of security for
wildlife movement through the fire areas. Openings over 40 acres would
result from these proposed activities or when considered with openings
created by fire.
The DEIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative
environmental effects of the alternatives. Past, present, and projected
activities on National
[[Page 14516]]
Forest Lands will be considered. The DEIS will disclose the analysis of
site-specific mitigation measures and their effectiveness. The DEIS is
expected to be filed with the EPA and available for public review by
July 2001.
Scoping Comment Date: While public participation in this analysis
is welcome at any time, comments received within 30 days of the
publication of this notice will be especially useful in the preparation
of the Draft EIS.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the
analysis should be sent to Michael L. Balboni, District Ranger, Three
Rivers Ranger District, 1437 Hwy 2, Troy, MT 59935.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mike Giesey, Team Leader,
Three Rivers Ranger District. Phone: (406) 295-4693.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The project area is approximately 61,700
acres and encompasses the Lang, Vinal, Bunker Hill, Yodkin, Beaver,
Browning, Fowler, Hartman, Fix, Kelsey, Can, Zulu, Smoot, Clay, Rene
Tributary, and Dutch Cr. drainages. Proposed activities within the
decision area include portions of the following areas: T35N, R32W;
T35N; R31W; and T36N, R30W; PMM; Lincoln County, Montana.
The Kelsey Creek (2,770 acres), Roderick South (315 acres), and
Upper Beaver (9,015 acres) fires burned within this project area in
August 2000, ignited by lightning strikes. A total of over 12,100 acres
burned in these fires with varying severity.
To meet the purpose and need, this project proposes:
1. Treatments in areas of high severity fire (70% or more
mortality) and moderate severity (20-70% mortality) to reduce fuels,
recover economic value of dead trees, and where appropriate trend
forest vegetation toward mature forest:
Dead trees would be salvaged where economically feasible, while
protecting other resources; mortality would be based on amount of crown
scorch, and/or cambium and root damage. Approximately 60% of the Kelsey
Creek and Upper Beaver fire acres and 30% of the Roderick South fire
acres have been dropped from further consideration for harvest because
they are either in riparian areas, low fire severity areas, in
unsuitable MAs, or were previously harvested. The remaining acreage is
being site-specifically reviewed for inclusion in the Proposed Action.
Salvage would be accomplished by helicopter logging, and by ground
based logging systems. Treatment in the high severity fire areas would
resemble a regeneration clearcut or seedtree harvest due to few
surviving trees in the units. Treatments in moderate severity areas
would vary depending on the amount of fire mortality. Where mortality
is low (20-30%), treatment would be a light commercial thinning from
below. Where mortality is moderate to high (30-70%), treatments would
range from commercial thinning from below to shelterwood harvest. After
harvest, fuels reduction and site preparation would be accomplished
through machine piling and burning or underburning.
To expedite hydrologic and vegetative recovery from the fires,
salvage harvest units in high severity fire areas would be planted.
Salvage harvest units in moderate severity areas may or may not be
planted depending on extent of harvest, species composition present,
and availability of a desirable, natural seed source. Various native
tree species would be planted, with an emphasis on blister rust
resistant white pine which historically occurred in greater numbers in
the Yaak than found presently.
Up to a total of 9 miles of temporary road may be built, averaging
\1/2\ mile in length. Temporary roads would be obliterated after post
harvest activities are completed. Existing roads needed for haul may
receive reconstruction work such as brushing, blading, road drainage
work, and realignment.
To ensure protection of water, fish and wildlife habitat, and other
resources, the following design criteria would be employed:
Soil, Water, Fisheries Protections: All harvest proposals will meet
objectives in the Soil and Water Conservation Practices Handbook
2509.22 (USDA Forest Service, 1988). Harvest proposals will be designed
to minimize peak flow conditions in watersheds already exceeding Forest
Plan standards.
Wildlife Corridors: The maintenance of landscape-level connectivity
and the minimization of fragmentation will be incorporated into the
design of all harvest alternatives.
Old Growth Protection and Enhancement: Stands with potential to
become mature forest will be managed in order to develop mature forest
characteristics over time, including development of large tree size,
complex stand structure, large down logs, large snags and multistoried
closed canopy. To encourage this development, removal of understories
killed by the fire may be necessary to reduce fuel levels and the risk
of a lethal reburn. Post-fire designated old growth, and replacement
old growth, will not be proposed for harvest.
Roadless Area Protection: No harvest or road construction is
proposed in roadless areas.
Cavity Habitat, Small Mammal Habitat and Soils Protection:
Retention of snags will be a priority in order to retain an acceptable
level of both hard and soft snags and of downed woody debris for
wildlife and hydrological purposes, and soil productivity. In
regeneration harvest units, 6-20 trees per acre will be left as snags.
Approximately 5-30 tons per acre of coarse woody debris would be left
for long-term soil productivity and as small mammal habitat. Two to
three small slash piles per acre would be left unburned to provide
habitat for small mammals.
Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Protection: No
salvage harvest would occur in areas where harvest would result in a
``will impact sensitive species * * * '' or ``likely to adversely
affect threatened and endangered'' determination for these species.
2. Areas that experienced high severity fire, but are not salvaged
may be planted, depending on wildlife requirements for cover,
availability and type of seed sources and soil, hydrology and safety
considerations. This includes past harvest units in which planted trees
were destroyed by fire. Burned plantations with fuel loads that present
a future fire risk to planted trees would be slashed and burned prior
to replanting. These areas would be planted with various native tree
species, with an emphasis on blister rust resistant white pine.
Riparian areas that experienced high severity fire would be planted
with a combination of native shrubs and trees. These revegetation
activities may occur in high severity burn areas of the Mount Henry
Roadless Area as well as areas outside this roadless area.
3. Watershed improvement activities would be implemented to reduce
water routing and sediment transport from existing roads. This would be
accomplished through application of Best Management Practices and
activities such as outsloping, waterbarring, culvert replacement/
removal or removal of the actual prism to restore a more natural
surface flow pattern to the landscape. Road decommissioning and other
watershed improvement activities will be identified and analyzed in the
DEIS.
4. In order to implement this proposal and provide for grizzly bear
security during the proposed activities, several miles of road
currently restricted to public access would be opened for harvest
activities and public use. To offset this, some roads that are
currently open would be restricted. The Solo Joe road or the Basin Cr.
road may be closed
[[Page 14517]]
in order to open the Turner Cr. road for salvage and reforestation
activities. Several more roads may be identified for access management
changes during the course of the analysis.
Range of Alternatives
The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of
these will be the ``no action'' alternative in which none of the
proposed activities will be implemented. Additional alternatives will
examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to
achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the issues
and other resource values.
Preliminary Issues
Tentatively, several preliminary issues of concern have been
identified. These issues are briefly described below:
Watershed and fisheries: Past management activities and wildfire
events have resulted in predicted peak flows that exceed Forest Plan
standards. Water Quality Limited Segments (WQLS), as defined by the
state of Montana, exist within the analysis area. Though the intent of
harvest and road construction design is to minimize additional impacts,
there may be concerns that additional management activities could
result in short-term increased peak flows and sediment production.
While the intent is to maintain or improve long-term aquatic
conditions, westslope cutthroat trout and other aquatic species may
experience short-term impacts.
Wildlife: The proposed action could potentially reduce existing
cavity habitat in snags and reduce suitable hiding cover for wildlife
security.
Public Access: The implementation of the proposed action would
change access within the Kelsey-Beaver Analysis Area and may affect the
public's ability to use traditional routes.
Economic Value: Preliminary public comments expressed concern that
the value of burned timber will be lost unless salvage logging occurs.
Additional comment have voiced concern over the timeframe proposed for
addressing salvage logging and expressed the need to recover the
economic value of affected trees in a timely manner.
Decisions to be Made
The Kootenai Forest Supervisor will decide the following:
1. Whether or not to salvage timber and, if so, the selection and
site-specific location of, appropriate timber management practices
(silvicultural prescription, logging system, fuels treatment, and
reforestation); road construction/reconstruction necessary to provide
access and achieve other resource objectives; and appropriate
mitigation measures.
2. Whether or not to revegetate riparian or other burned areas not
harvested to expedite recovery.
3. Whether or not water quality improvement projects (including
road decommissioning) should be implemented and, if so, to what extent.
4. Whether road access restrictions, or other actions, are
necessary to meet wildlife security needs.
5. Whether or not project specific Forest Plan amendments are
necessary to meet the specific purpose and need of this project, and
whether those amendments are significant under NFMA.
6. What, if any, specific project monitoring requirements would be
needed to assure mitigation measures are implemented and effective.
Public Involvement and Scoping
In November 2000, preliminary efforts were made to involve the
public in looking at restoration and salvage opportunities within the
fire areas. Comments received prior to this notice will be included in
the documentation for the EIS. The public is encouraged to take part in
the process and to visit with Forest Service officials at any time
during the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will
be seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State,
and local agencies, and other individuals or organizations that may be
interested in, or affected by, the proposed action. This input will be
used in preparation of the draft and final EIS. The scoping process
will include:
Identify potential issues.
Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.
Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
Explore additional alternatives which will be derived from
issues recognized during scoping activities.
Identify potential environmental effects of this project
and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and
connected actions).
Estimated Dates for Filing
The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by July
2001. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of Availability of the
draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the draft EIS
will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of
Availability in the Federal Register. It is very important that those
interested in the management of this area participate at that time.
The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by October 2001. In the
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and
responses received during the comment period that pertain to the
environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and to applicable
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision
regarding the proposal.
Reviewer's Obligations
The Forest Service believes 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 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 and respond to them in the final EIS.
To be most helpful, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific
as possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merit
of the alternatives discussed. 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.
Responsible Official
As the Forest Supervisor of the Kootenai National Forest, 1101 US
Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923, I am the Responsible Official. As the
Responsible Official I will decide if the proposed project will be
implemented. I will document the decision and reasons for the decision
in the Record of Decision. I have delegated the responsibility to
prepare the EIS to
[[Page 14518]]
Michael L. Balboni, District Ranger, Three Rivers Ranger District.
Dated: March 5, 2001.
Bob Castaneda,
Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 01-6123 Filed 3-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2001/03/14 EST