[Federal Register: May 1, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 84)]
[Notices]
[Page 21621-21625]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01my02-33]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Ouachita
National Forest in Arkansas and Oklahoma
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that
(pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1604(f)(5) and 36 CFR 219.10(g)) the Regional
Forester for the Southern Region of the USDA Forest Service intends to
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to accompany a revision
of the Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) for the Ouachita
National Forest. The existing Forest Plan was approved on April 1,
1986. Since then, 37 amendments have been completed, including a
significant amendment that resulted in publication of the 1990 Amended
Land and Resource Management Plan. We now invite comments and
suggestions from American Indian tribes, Federal agencies, state and
local governments, individuals and organizations on the scope of the
analysis to be included in the draft EIS (DEIS) (40 CFR 1501.7).
DATES: Comments on this Notice of Intent (NOI) and, specifically, on
the scope of the analysis to be included in the EIS, should be received
in writing by August 2, 2002. The agency expects to file the DEIS with
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and make it available for
public comment in 2004. The Agency expects to file the final EIS (FEIS)
in September of 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Forest Plan, Ouachita National
Forest, P.O. Box 1270, Hot Springs, AR 71902. Electronic mail should
include ``FP Revision'' in the subject line and be sent to: ouachita
plan@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ouachita National Forest: Planning
Team Leader Bill Pell (phone 501-321-5320; TDD 501-321-5307).
Electronic mail should include ``FP Revision'' in the subject line and
be sent to: ouachita plan@fs.fed.us. Information about Forest Plan
revision and future opportunities to participate will be posted at the
following website: http://www.fs.fed.us/oonf/design planning.html. The
Regional Forester for the Southern Region, located at 1720 Peachtree
Road, NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, is the Responsible Official.
Affected Counties: This NOI affects the following counties: Ashley,
Garland, Hot Spring, Howard, Logan, Montgomery, Perry, Pike, Polk,
Saline, Scott, Sebastian, and Yell, Arkansas; and LeFlore and
McCurtain, Oklahoma.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background Information
1. The Role of Forest Plans
National Forest System resource allocation and management decisions
are made in two stages. The first stage is the Forest Plan, which
involves the establishment of management direction by allocating lands
and resources within the plan area to various uses or conditions
through management areas and management prescriptions. The second stage
is plan implementation through approval of project decisions. Forest
Plans do not compel the agency to undertake any site-specific projects;
rather, they establish overall goals and objectives (or desired
resource conditions) that the individual National Forest will strive to
meet. Forest Plans also establish limitations on what actions may be
authorized and what conditions must be met as part of project-level
decision-making.
The primary decisions made in a Forest Plan include: (1)
Establishment of forest-wide multiple-use goals and objectives (36 CFR
219.11(b)); (2) establishment of forest-wide management requirements
(36 CFR 219.13 to 219.27); (3) establishment of multiple-use
prescriptions and associated standards for each management area (36 CFR
219.11(c)); (4) determination of land that is suitable for the
production of timber (16 U.S.C. 1604(k) and 36 CFR 219.14); (5)
establishment of the allowable sale quantity for timber within a time
frame specified in the plan (36 CFR 219.16); (6) establishment of
monitoring and evaluation requirements (36 CFR 219.11(d)); (7)
recommendations concerning roadless areas that Congress could designate
as wilderness (36 CFR 219.17); and (8) where applicable, designation of
those lands administratively available for oil and gas leasing (36 CFR
228.102 (d) and (e)). The authorization of site-specific activities
within a plan area occurs through project decision-making, the second
stage of forest planning. Project decision-making must comply with NEPA
procedures and must include a
[[Page 21622]]
determination that the project is consistent with the Forest Plan.
(Note: The above citations are from the 1982 36 CFR 219 planning
regulations. See also section G.)
2. The Beginning of the Forest Plan Revision Effort for the Oauchital
National Forest
For this Forest Plan revision, an effort was made to first define
the current situation and estimate an ``initial need for change.'' A
key part of defining the current situation was the Ozark-Ouachita
Highlands Assessment, a multi-agency effort in which Ouachita National
Forest employees actively participated. On October 16, 1996, a Notice
was published in the Federal Register (Vol. 61. No. 201) that
identified the relationships between the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands
Assessment and Forest Plan revisions for the National Forest in
Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma. In addition to reviewing the results
of this broad-scale assessment, which were made widely available in
early 2000, and the draft conclusions of a more recent assessment
(described below), the ``initial need for change'' was evaluated in
light of the results of monitoring and relevant research, public
comments received from 1990 through early 2002, and the experience of
employees responsible for implementing the Forest Plan. These
evaluations are the basis for the preliminary issues and proposed
action identified in this notice. Additional issues or topics will be
developed as needed to respond to public comments received in response
to this NOI and subsequent scoping efforts.
3. The Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment and the Southern Forest
Resource Assessment
The USDA Forest Service and many other agencies participated in the
preparation of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment, which
culminated in a final summary report and four technical reports that
were made available to the public in early 2000 (available now at the
Forest Plan address provided near the beginning of this document). This
Assessment included National Forest System lands and private lands
within the highlands of Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma.
The Assessment facilitated ecologically based approaches to public
lands management in the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands by collecting and
analyzing broadscale biological, physical, social and economic data.
The Assessment supports the revision of the Forest Plans by describing
how the lands, resources, people and management of the National Forest
interrelated within the larger context of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands
area. This Assessment, however, is not a ``decision document,'' and it
did not involve the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.
The Southern Forest Resource Assessment was initiated in May 1999
to examine the status, trends, and potential future of southern
forests. The USDA Forest Service led the effort in cooperation with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, EPA, Tennessee Valley Authority, and
southern States represented by their forestry and fish and wildlife
agencies. This Assessment addresses the sustainability of southern
forest in light of increasing urbanization and timber harvests,
changing technologies (including chip mills), forest pests, climatic
changes, and other factors that influence the region's forests. In late
2001, draft reports from the Southern Forest Resource Assessment were
made available on the following website: http://www.srs.fs.fed.us/
sustain/report/index.htm.
4. Relationship of the Forest Plan revision for the Ouachita National
Forest to revision efforts for the Mark Twain and Ozark-St. Francis
National Forest
Forest plan revision will be conducted simultaneously on these
National Forests. We anticipate that a separate EIS and revised Forest
Plan will be produced for each administrative unit. The respective
Forest Supervisors have agreed to coordinate the revisions to the
extent feasible and practical. The respective planning teams will work
together to address common issues.
5. The Role of Scoping in Revising the Land and Resource Management
Plan
This NOI includes a description of a Proposed Action in terms of
preliminary ``needs for change'' for the revision of the Forest Plan
and preliminary issues associated with those needed changes. The
Proposed Action entails one or more of the plan decisions identified in
the ``The Role of Forest Plans.'' Scoping to receive public comments on
the preliminary issues and proposed action will begin following the
publication of this NOI. Comments received during this period will be
used to further refine the preliminary issues that should be addressed,
the Forest Plan decisions that need to be analyzed (the ``proposed
action'' and ``need for change''), and the range of alternatives that
will be developed. For more information on how the public can become
involved during the scoping period, see Section F of this NOI.
B. Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose for revising the Forest Plan derives from the
requirements for land and resource management planning in the National
Forest Management Act and its implementing regulations, which are
contained in 36 CFR 219. According to 36 CFR 219.10(g), Forest Plans
are ordinarily revised on a 10-15 year cycle. The need to revise this
Forest Plan is also driven by the changing conditions identified in the
Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment, the Southern Forest Resource
Assessment, and ongoing monitoring and evaluation results specific to
the Ouachita National Forest.
C. Preliminary Issues
Preliminary issues for the Ouachita National Forest Plan revision
focus on parts of the current Forest Plan where change may be needed.
The preliminary issues were derived from the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands
Assessment, the Southern Forest Resource Assessment, internal comments
from forest managers, results of monitoring, the mid-plan review and
comments received from the public. The Proposed Action in section D
describes these issues in more detail.
1. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability
a. Changes may be needed in management direction for maintaining or
restoring healthy forest ecosystems in the face of new threats from
insect outbreaks and diseases. (36 CFR 219.27)
b. Changes may be needed in Forest Plan direction for maintaining
habitats for viable populations of all native plant and animal species.
(36 CFR 219.19)
c. Management standards for the use (and/or projected levels) of
prescribed burning may need to be modified in light of changing air
quality standards.
d. Changes in management standards and desired conditions for the
transportation system within the Ouachita National Forest may be needed
in order to respond to the findings of a forest scale roads analysis.
(36 CFR 212.5)
2. Roadless Areas, Recreation, Motorized Access
a. Remaining roadless areas need to be considered for possible
wilderness recommendation(s). (36 CFR 219.17)
b. Changes may be needed to address existing and likely future
conflicts among dispersed recreation activities.
c. The mix of developed and dispersed recreation opportunities on
the forest may need to be reevaluated.
[[Page 21623]]
d. Forest Plan direction concerning off-highway vehicle use may
need to be changed in light of increasing demands for and concerns
about this recreation activity.
3. Silvicultural Practices
a. Changes may be needed in the standards for implementing
different reproduction cutting methods and other silvicultural
practices and the predicted levels at which such methods and practices
will be implemented on the Ouachita National Forest.
b. There may be a need to re-examine the relationships between
silvicultural practices and desired conditions for the National Forest.
4. Relationship of National Forest Management to Local Communities and
Economies.
a. Changes may be needed to enable the National Forest to more
fully support long-term community development needs in the vicinity of
the Ouachita National Forest.
D. Proposed Action
Since 1990, Forest Plan amendments, annual monitoring reports, a
five-year review of plan implementation, and working with the public
and other agencies have provided the Ouachita National Forest with
valuable information about changes that are needed in the existing
Forest Plan. This initiates the determination of the need to establish
or change management direction as required under the NFMA regulations
at 36 CFR 219.12(e)(5). The Proposed Action is that revision of the
Forest Plan for the Ouachita National Forest focus primarily on the
following ``needs for change''.
1. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability
a. Oak Decline and Oak Mortality
Oak decline and oak mortality are occurring on an estimated 30,000
acres of hardwood forests on national forest lands in Montgomery, Polk,
Scott and Logan Counties, Arkansas. Although some oak mortality has
been observed over a wide variety of sites, significant mortality is
primarily occurring in oak-hickory stands at higher elevations on
north-facing slopes. These stands are comprised of older trees
(approaching 100 years of age), have high basal areas, and exist on
relatively poor sites. There are approximately 500,000 acres of
hardwood and hardwood-pine forests on the Forest, however, and all are
potentially at risk for oak decline; the area affected by excessive oak
mortality is expected to increase.
The Forest Plan provides broad goals and management standards to
``reduce insect and disease-caused losses'' but does not specifically
address oak mortality. Although the Forest Plan addresses desired
hardwood components of various management areas in detail, specific
mention of a desired oak component is found in the management goal
statements of only five management areas (9, 11, 15, 16, and 19).
Current management direction needs to be reviewed in light of the
growing incidence of oak mortality on this National Forest.
b. Threatened, Endangered and Species of Viability Concerns
For the most part, the populations of threatened, endangered, and
species of viability concern that occupy portions of the Ouachita
National Forest (or nearby downstream reaches) appear to be stable,
fluctuating normally, or increasing. However, the viability of some of
these species or groups of species (e.g., amphibians, birds) may need
to be reconsidered in light of research or monitoring conducted since
1990. Another concern is that the Ouachita National Forest continues to
fall short of providing the amounts of early seral habitat that are
called for by the current Forest Plan. Over the past decade, the
shortfall has risen to nearly 80,000 acres. The viability of species
dependent on such habitats needs to be reevaluated.
c. Prescribed Burning
EPA will soon establish new National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for ozone and particulate matter 2.5 microns and smaller in size. One
or more ``non-attainment'' areas for one or both of these pollutants
may be designated near or partially encompassing the Ouachita National
Forest. Projections of desired and feasible levels of annual prescribed
burning may need to be adjusted based on these new circumstances.
d. Transportation System
New direction for National Forest transportation system planning
was issued in January of 2001. In May, an interim directive delayed
implementation of the new regulations until 2002. The Ouachita National
Forest will start implementing the new direction concerning roads
analysis this year, including initiation of a forest-wide roads
analysis. Doing so will bring even greater focus on roads maintenance
needs, opportunities to obliterate unneeded roads, and public interest
in motorized access to this national forest. The decision to revise the
forest plan must be informed by a roads analysis (36 CFR 212.5).
2. Roadless Areas, Recreation Needs and Conflicts, Motorized Access
a. Roadless Areas
Six inventoried roadless areas within the Ouachita National Forest
were identified in the Forest Service's FEIS, Roadless Area
Conservation, dated November 2000. The Forest Plan for the Ouachita
National Forest currently prohibits or strictly limits road
construction in these six roadless areas, and no timber sales have been
planned in recent years in these areas. These six areas and two
additional roadless areas in McCurtain Co., Oklahoma, will be evaluated
as potential wilderness areas during Forest Plan revision per 36 CFR
219.17. Any other lands meeting the criteria for inventoried roadless
areas will also be evaluated.
b. Recreation Opportunities
According to Report 4 of the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands Assessment,
``Demand for nearly all categories of recreational activities is
expected to increase in the next decade. Researchers project that the
increase in the Highlands will be greater than the national average.
Recreational activities with the largest projected increases in both
percentage of the population and number of people participating include
sightseeing, picnicking, visiting historical sites, and visiting
beaches or other water sites.'' Horseback riding and off-highway
vehicle use are also expected to increase. These demands and uses may
increase the rate of user conflicts and environmental problems. In
addition to the kinds of conflicts and problems associated with
dispersed recreation activities, there are major concerns about
developed recreation areas on the Ouachita National Forest. Because of
their age and heavy use, many of these recreational facilities are
deteriorating. Lack of funds to maintain and repair them may point to a
need to close some areas and strictly limit designation of new ones.
c. Off-Highway Vehicle Use
Cross-country off-highway vehicle (OHV) travel is presently allowed
over large portions of the Ouachita National Forest. Areas of
concentrated use where OHV impacts pose persistent problems include
Wolf Pen Gap, Little Missouri River watershed, the Lake Ouachita area,
Poteau Mountain Wilderness, and some power line rights of way. There is
no common understanding (externally or internally) of what constitutes
``resource damage'' due to OHVs (i.e., what is and isn't acceptable).
User conflicts, such as those experienced when some hunters and hikers
[[Page 21624]]
encounter OHV riders are increasing, as is demand for OHV access.
Current Forest Plan direction includes guidelines to ``provide for off-
road vehicle use'' and ``designate special areas for ORV use.'' More
specific guidance many be needed.
3. Silvicultural Practices
When uneven-aged and irregular even-aged management practices were
implemented on portions of the Ouachita National Forest in the early
1990s, there was little scientific information concerning the
feasibility or environmental consequences of such practices. Now, most
forest managers have 10 or more years of experience with these
silvicultural methods. Moreover, multi-disciplinary research focused on
stand-level silvicultural treatments (alternatives to clearcutting) has
been conducted on the Ouachita National Forest since 1991. Post-
treatment results will be available during Forest Plan revision and may
point to needed changes in the Forest Plan. The mix and projected
annual use of silvicultural practices may need to be reexamined.
4. Relationship of National Forest Management to Local Communities and
Economies
The National Forest-Dependent Rural Communities Economic
Diversification Act of 1990 directs the Forest Service to help national
forest-dependent communities organize, plan, and implement actions that
diversify local economies and to ensure that USDA-funded community
action plans are consistent with national forest land and resource
management plans. There may be a need to reexamine the relationships
between national forest management direction and local community
development (including economic development) needs.
5. Other Needs for Change
In addition to addressing the needs for change described in parts
D.1. through D.4., the Proposed Action also includes the following:
a. Reevaluate management area definitions and boundaries.
b. Reevaluate road density standards in management area
prescriptions.
c. Replace the current Visual Management System with the national
Scenery Management System and consider the need for new visual
objectives.
d. Examine and update land ownership adjustment needs across the
Forest.
e. Consider any change needed to better address tribal rights and
needs.
f. Review current direction for monitoring and evalaution and bring
it in line with current needs.
g. Update the research needs identified in the 1990 Amended Plan.
h. Evaluate watershed health and consider changes in standards and
guidelines to address priority needs.
i. Clarify standards for identifying lands suitable for timber
production (as part of the management direction for certain management
areas) and review the designation of lands not suited for timber
production (36 CFR 219.14(d)); for the Ouachita National Forest, the
required ten-year review of lands not suitable for timber production is
being done in this revision.
j. Re-determine the allowable sale quantity (ASQ) for timber.
k. Determine whether changes are needed in definitions and forest
plan direction for riparian areas and streamside management zones.
l. Determine whether changes are needed in management direction for
existing wild and scenic river corridors.
m. Review forest plan direction concerning old growth to determine
whether it is consistent with Southern Region direction.
E. Preliminary Alternatives
The actual alternatives presented in the DEIS will portray a full
range of responses to the significant issues. The DEIS will examine the
effects of implementing strategies to achieve different desired
conditions and will develop possible management objectives and
opportunities that would move the forest toward those desired
conditions. A preferred alternative will be identified in the DEIS. The
range of alternatives presented in the DEIS will include one that
continues current management direction and others that will address the
range of issues developed in the scoping process.
F. Involving the Public
The objective in this process for public involvement is to create
an atmosphere of openness where all members of the public feel free to
share information with the Forest Service and its employees on a
regular basis. All parts of this process will be structured to maintain
openness and trust. The Forest Service is seeking information,
comments, and assistance from tribal governments, Federal, State and
local agencies, and other individuals and organizations that may be
interested in or affected by the proposed action. This input will be
utilized in the preparation of the DEIS. The range of alternatives to
be considered in the EIS will be based on the identification of
significant issues, management concerns, resource management
opportunities, and plan decisions. Public participation will be
solicited by notifying in person and/or by mail, known interested and
affected publics. News releases will be used to give the public general
notice, and public scoping meetings will be conducted at several
locations. Public participation will be sought throughout the plan
revision process and will be important at several points along the way.
The first opportunity to comment will be during the scoping process (40
CFR 1501.7). Scoping includes identifying additional potential issues
(other than those previously described). The second step is to identify
which issues are significant and which have either been covered by
prior environmental review or are non-significant for revision. the
list of significant issues will be available for public review and
comment before the DEIS is prepared. Significant issues are used to
develop and explore Forest Plan alternatives. Finally, the potential
environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives (i.e.,
direct, indirect, and cumulative effects) will be thoroughly analyzed
and disclosed in the DEIS, which will be available for public comment
for at least 90 days. As part of the first step in scoping, a series of
public opportunities have been scheduled to explain the planning
process and provide an opportunity for public input. Following are the
proposed locations and dates for these meetings: Broken Bow, Oklahoma,
June 3, 2002; Poteau, Oklahoma, June 6, 2002; Hot Springs, Arkansas,
June 10, 2002; Mena, Arkansas, June 11, 2002.
G. Planning Regulations
The Department of Agriculture published new planning regulations in
November 2000. Concerns regarding the ability of the agency to
implement these regulations prompted a review, and another revision of
these regulations is now being developed. On May 10, 2001, Secretary
Veneman signed an interim final rule allowing Forest Plan amendments or
revisions initiated before May 9, 2002, to proceed under the new
(November 2000) planning rule or under the 1982 planning regulations.
The Ouachita National Forest Plan revision will be initiated under the
1982 planning regulations.
H. Release and Review of EIS
The DEIS is expected to be filed with the EPA and be available for
public comment by September 2004. At that time, the EPA will publish a
notice of availability of the DEIS in the Federal Register, The comment
period will be
[[Page 21625]]
90 days from the date the EPA 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
the DEIS 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 DEIS stage but that are not raised until after
completion of the FEIS may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City
of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin
Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F.Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. 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-
0day 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 FEIS. To assist the Forest
Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the
proposed actions, comments on the DEIS should be as specific as
possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or
chapters of the DEIS. Comments may also address the adequacy of the
DEIS or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the
statements. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental
Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the
NEPA at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. After the comment
period on the DEIS ends, the comments will be analyzed, considered, and
responded to by the Forest Service in preparing the FEIS. The FEIS is
scheduled to be completed in September 2005. the Responsible Official
(the Regional Forester, Southern Region, 1720 Peachtree Road, NW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30309) will consider the comments, responses, and
environmental consequences discussed in the FEIS together with all
applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making a decision
regarding revision. The Responsible Official will document the decision
and reasons for the decision in a Record of Decision. This decision may
be subject to appeal in accordance with 36 CFR 217.
Dated: April 25, 2002.
R. Gary Pierson,
Acting Deputy Regional Forester.
[FR Doc. 02-10779 Filed 4-30-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2002/05/01 EST