[Federal Register: May 11, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 92)]
[Notices]
[Page 24098-24099]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11my01-21]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Idaho Panhandle/Kootenai/Lolo National Forests Grizzly Bear
Forest Plan Amendment; Idaho Panhandle, Kootenai and Lolo National
Forests; Lincoln and Sanders Counties, MT; Boundary and Bonner
Counties; Idaho; and Pend Oreille County, WA
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement to
amend land and resource management plans for the Idaho Panhandle,
Kootenai, and Lolo National Forests.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Supervisors of the Idaho Panhandle, Kootenai and
Lolo National Forests give notice of the agency's intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement (EIS) in conjunction with the
establishment of new management direction for the grizzly bear within
the Selkirk and Cabinet/Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Zones. The Forest
Service has identified the need to update management direction, based
on new information regarding grizzly bear biology.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be
postmarked by June 11, 2001. The agency expects to file a draft EIS
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and make it available
for public, agency, and tribal government comment in the summer of
2001. A final EIS is expected to be filed in February 2002.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Bob Castaneda, Forest Supervisor,
Kootenai National Forest, 1101 US Hwy 2 West, Libby, MT 59923.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob Carlin, Grizzly Bear Plan
Amendment Interdisciplinary Team Leader (406) 882-4451.
Responsible Officials: Pat Aguilar, Idaho Panhandle National
Forests--Acting Forest Supervisor; Bob Castaneda, Kootenai National
Forests--Forest Supervisor; and Deborah Austin, Lolo National Forest--
Forest Supervisor.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1998, the Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak grizzly
Bear Subcommittee recommended new access management direction to aid in
the recovery of the threatened grizzly bear within the Selkirk/Cabinet-
Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Zones. This direction was titled the
``Interim Access Management Strategy''. Additional information was
provided in an ``Interim Access Management Rule Set.'' This new
direction is based on new information regarding grizzly bear habitat
needs, including the need for core security areas. The purpose for the
amendment is to update Forest Plan management direction to respond to
the recommendations and new information presented by the Selkirk/
Cabinet Yaak Grizzly Bear Subcommittee.
Proposed Action
The Forest Supervisors are proposing to amend their respective
Forest Plans regarding Forest Plan standards and monitoring
requirements that respond to the recommendations of the Interim Access
Management Strategy and Interim Access Management Rule Set. The
decision to be made is whether to adopt the proposed action as
designed, with different requirements, or not at all.
This amendment would result in a new appendix to the Idaho
Panhandle and Lolo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans
(Forest Plans). It will be an addendum to the Kootenai National Forest,
Forest Plan, Appendix 8.
The Interim Access Management Strategy and Interim Access
Management Rule Set comprise a set of access related guidelines
developed over the past few years by the Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak
Subcommittee of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC). The
guidelines address the following access management parameters: (1)
Habitat security, (2) core area, (3) trial use of access related to
habitat quality/season, (4) motorized access route density, (5)
monitoring, and (6) coordination with state wildlife agencies. The Rule
Set also clearly discloses definitions of terminology related to each
specific parameter. The complete text of these two documents is
available on the IGBC internet website at http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/
wildlife/igbc/scy/main.htm. Copies may also be requested by contacting
Rob Carlin, ID Team Leader, at 406-882-4451.
Preliminary Issues and Alternatives
Some preliminary issues have already been identified and are listed
below. These issues apply only to National Forest System lands on the
units listed previously in this notice.
The interim access management strategy and rule set may affect the
ability to use roads and trails, the construction of roads and trails,
and the closure and decommissioning of roads and trails. This
potentially influences activities such as timber harvest, recreation
use, administrative management activities, and other uses associated
with Forest Service roads and trails.
The interim access management strategy and rule set did not
recommend standards for total and open motorized route density.
Therefore, some people are concerned that the strategy and rule set do
not fully address the habitat needs of grizzly bears.
Public Involvement
The first public participation efforts involving the Interim Access
Management Strategy and Rule Set began in the spring and summer of 1997
with a series of seven workshops held throughout Washington, Idaho, and
Montana. Nearly 300 individuals either sent letters or asked to be
placed on the project mailing list. The key public concerns identified
at the workshops were: (1) The need to consider habitat needs in
relation to timing of road access restrictions; (2) the need to
consider hunting regulations and law enforcement; and (3) the need to
consider access options to provide the public a reasonable level of
access to the National Forests.
The Forest Supervisors are giving notice that the Idaho Panhandle,
Kootenai, and Lolo National Forests are beginning an environmental
analysis and decision-making process for this proposed action so that
interested or affected people can participate in the analysis and
contribute to the final decision. The Forest Service is seeking
comments from individuals, organizations, tribal governments, and
Federal, State, and local agencies that are interested or may be
affected by the proposed action. The public is invited
[[Page 24099]]
to help identify issues that define the range of alternatives to be
considered in the environmental impact statement. The range of
alternatives considered in the DEIS will be based on the issues and
specific decisions to be made. Written comments identifying issues for
analysis and the range of alternatives are encouraged.
Estimated Dates for Filing
The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the EPA and to be
available for public review in the summer of 2001. The comment period
on the draft environmental impact statement will be 90 days from the
date the EPA publishes the Notice of Availability in the Federal
Register.
The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by February 2002. In the
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments
received during the comment period that pertain to the environmental
consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable laws,
regulations, and policies considered in making a decision regarding the
proposal.
The Reviewer's Obligation To Comment
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice at this early stage 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 [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 90-day comment period
so that substantive comments and objects are made available to the
Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and
respond to them in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of the Natural Environmental Policy Act at 40
CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Dated: April 24, 2001.
Bob Castaneda,
Forest Supervisor--Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 01-11813 Filed 5-10-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2001/05/11 EST