[Federal Register: July 9, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 131)]
[Notices]
[Page 40900-40901]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09jy03-50]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Lower Tucannon Ecosystem Maintenance Project, Umatilla National
Forest, Columbia County, WA
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of watershed
restoration and ecosystem maintenance actions in the Little Tucannon
sub-watershed of the Upper Tucannon watershed located on the Umatilla
National Forest. The Lower Tucannon analysis area is located
approximately 12 air miles southwest of Pomeroy, Washington. Proposed
Actions include: landscape prescribed fire, commercial timber harvest,
and native plant species re-vegetation to promote and improve ecosystem
sustainability, reducing fuels to historic levels in dry forest types,
through mechanical methods and prescribed fire; move dry and moist
forest types, in the analysis area, closer to historic vegetative
stocking levels and species composition; and conduct road obliteration,
road reconstruction, and construction of temporary roads. The Proposed
Actions are being considered together because they represent either
connected or cumulative actions. This EIS will be consistent with the
1990 Umatilla National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest
Plan) for the, which provides overall guidance for forest management of
the area. All activities associated with this proposal will be designed
for maintenance or improvement of the forest ecosystems, watersheds,
vegetation, wildlife, and fisheries resources.
DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be
received by August 30, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions to Monte Fujishin,
District Ranger, Pomeroy Ranger District, 71 West Main, Pomeroy,
Washington 99347.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randall Walker, Project Team Leader,
Pomeroy Ranger District. Phone: (509) 843-1891.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The project area contains approximately
16,300 acres within the Umatilla National Forest in Columbia County,
Washington. It encompasses an area of the Upper Tucannon watershed from
San Sousi Spring along the Little Tucannon and Tucannon Rivers north to
the National Forest Boundary. Legal description is as follows: portions
of Sections 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, and 14 of Township 8 North, Range 40
East; Sections 5 and 6 of Township 8 North, Range 41 East; Sections 24,
25, 26, 35, and 36 of Township 9 North, Range 40 East; Sections 2, 3,
4, 9-24, and 26-35 of Township 9 North, Range 41 East, W.M. surveyed.
All proposed activities are outside the boundaries of any wilderness
area. Approximately 7,360 acres of the analysis area are within
Inventoried Roadless Areas (Willow Springs (6,100 acres) and Meadows
Creek (1,250 acres)).
Purpose and Need for Action. Findings from the Tucannon Watershed
Assessment identify that past fire suppression activities, selective
harvest, and recent drought conditions have contributed to the ongoing
degradation of forest ecosystem sustainability in the watershed. These
past activities and climate conditions have transformed the ecosystem
processes and altered stand structure, tree species composition, and
the tree stocking levels of forest stands in the watershed to non-
historic levels, and have directly contributed to increased fuel
loading. The purpose of this project is to develop and analyze a
combination of actions that best responds to the recommendations of the
responsible official and the findings of the Tucannon Watershed
Assessment. The need for prompt action emphasizes implementation of
ecosystem management projects to promote healthy watershed conditions.
To promote ecosystem based management there is a need to provide
direction to encourage and sustain long-term vegetation enhancement,
wildlife habit improvements, long-term recreation use planning, and the
maintenance and/or improvement of sustainable fish and wildlife
habitat.
Propose Action. The Proposed Action will be consistent with the
Forest Plan, as amended, which provides goals, objectives, standards,
and guidelines for the various activities and land allocations on the
forest. The following acres of various land allocations located within
the analysis area will be affected: A3-Viewshed 1 (54 acres); A6-
Developed Recreation (7 acres); C1-Dedicated Old Growth (508 acres);
C3-Big Game Winter Range (8,847 acres); C4-Wildlife Habitat (4,256
acres); C5-Riparian and Wildlife (523 acres); C8-Grass-Tree Mosaic
(1,280 acres); and E2-Timber and Big Game (775 acres). The total
analysis area is 16,251 acres. Timber management (harvest) for the
project is only proposed in management area C3, C4, and E2. Fuels
treatment for this project are proposed in all management allocations.
The Forest Service proposes to reduce conifer stocking levels on
approximately 10,000 acres of forested land (5,000 acres of which are
within roadless) by removing diseased, overstocked, or high risk trees
through manual thinning and prescribed burning. Approximately 4,500 (no
acres within roadless) of the above 10,000 acres may be commercial
thinned, yielding approximately 20 million board feet of timber.
Approximately one half of these commercial acres would require
helicopter yarding. Less than two miles of temporary road construction
would be needed to access timber harvest areas. All temporary roads
would be obliterated following completion of sale activities. No road
construction or reconstruction is being proposed within the roadless
areas. An additional 3.5 miles of existing roads that are no longer in
use could be obliterated by natural or mechanical methods. The
obliteration method used would be based on site-specific conditions.
Some of the proposed road to be obliterated is located within the
roadless areas. An estimated 17.5 miles of road resurfacing/
reconstruction would be needed to haul timber and accomplish other
treatments. This proposal also includes prescribed burning of 4,500
acres within harvest units and 5,500 acres of forested land outside of
harvest units. Approximately 5,000 acres of non-forested grasslands are
also proposed for prescribed burning.
[[Page 40901]]
A primary result of these activities would be a reduction of
accumulated down fuel loadings, which would dramatically decrease the
potential for future high intensity wildfires and improve the chance to
keep fires that do start to a smaller size. Furthermore, it would
prepare the sites for regeneration, enhance wildlife habitat and
maintain forest health by bringing fuel levels closer to historic
levels. Some thinning of saplings would occur to reduce excessive
ladder fuels and lower the risk of crown fire and catastrophic wildfire
while allowing residual trees to grow at a sustainable rate. The only
ground disturbing activity proposed is the obliteration of 3.5 miles of
existing road. Ladder fuel reduction using chainsaws and prescribed
fire is proposed for those areas that have become overgrown with
smaller diameter trees thus creating a fuel profile that acts as a
``fire ladder'' to the crowns of the dominant overstory trees.
Issues. The following are the preliminary issues identified:
Wildlife habitat; Fuels/Catastrophic Wildfire Risk; Ecosystem
Sustainability; Air Quality; Water Quality/Riparian Habitat;
Threatened; Endangered and Sensitive (TES) Species; Road Management;
Noxious Weeds; Recreation; and Urban interface. This list will be
verified, expanded, or modified based on public scoping and
interdisciplinary review of this proposal.
Alternative. The Forest Service will consider a full range of
alternatives. One of these will be the ``no action'' alternative in
which no active management activities would take place. Another
alternative will examine restoration involving no commercial timber
harvest. Additional alternatives will examine varying levels,
locations, and methods for the proposed activities to achieve the
proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the issues and other
resource values. The Forest Service has begun discussions with the
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife with the objective of
looking at all watershed activities in a concerted cooperative process
for comprehensive watershed restoration between ownerships.
Scoping Process. Public participation will be especially important
at several points during the analysis, beginning with the scoping
process. Initial scoping began with the project listing in the 1997
Winter Edition of the Umatilla National Forest's Schedule of Proposed
Actions. A public meeting will be scheduled for fall 2003, to discuss
the project and other meetings will be scheduled as needed. This
environmental analysis and decision making process will enable
additional interested and affected people to participate and contribute
to the final decision. The public is encouraged to take part in the
process and is encouraged 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, local agencies, and other individuals or organizations that may
be interested in, or affected by the proposal. This input will be used
in preparation of the draft EIS.
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review: The draft EIS expected to be filed with the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available to the public
for review February 2004. The comment period on the draft EIS will be
45 days from the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the
Federal Register. The final EIS is scheduled to be released September
2004.
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 EIS's must structure their participation in the environmental
review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts the 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 EIS stage but that are not
raised until after completion of the final EIS 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 and made available to the Forest Service at a time when it
can meaningful consider and respond to them in the Final EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the Draft EIS should
be as specified as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to
specific pages or chapters of the draft EIS. Comments may also address
the adequacy of the draft EIS or 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 National Environmental Policy Act at 40
CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.)
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 at the draft EIS and
applicable laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a
decision regarding the proposal.
The Forest Service is the lead agency. Monte Fujishin, Pomeroy
District Ranger, is the responsible official. The responsible official
will decide which, if any, of the proposed projects will be
implemented. The decision and reasons for the decision will be
documented in the Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to
Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR part 215).
Dated: June 27, 2003.
Jeff D. Blackwood,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-17300 Filed 7-8-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2003/07/10 EST