Sensitive Plant Program; Eldorado National Forest, CA

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Sensitive Plant Program; Eldorado National Forest, CA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Eldorado National Forest proposes to refine existing

sensitive plant direction in order to provide greater specificity,

promote program effectiveness, and improve the efficiency in which

Eldorado National Forest programs and activities are reviewed through

the biological evaluation process as required under FSM Sec. 2670.32.

The Forest Service will prepare an environment impact statement

(EIS) to consider the ramifications of implementing species-specific

standards and guidelines for the sensitive plant species found on the

Eldorado National Forest. The decision may include the following: an

amendment to the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management

Plan and/or the delisting of one or more species as sensitive. The

agency invites written comments and suggestions on the scope of the

analysis. The agency also gives notice of the full environmental

analysis and decision-making process that will occur on the proposal so

that interested ad affected people are aware of how they may

participate and contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received

by September 1, 1994. The public is invited to provide information

concerning the scope of the analysis at a meeting to be held on August

24, 1994, beginning at 1 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope

of the analysis to John Phipps, Forest Supervisor, 100 Forni Road,

Placerville, CA 95667. The meeting will be held at the Eldorado

National Forest Supervisor's Office located at 100 Forni Road,

Placerville, CA 95667.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions about the proposed action and EIS should be directed to Mike

Foster, Forest Botanist, 100 Forni Road, Placerville, CA 95667.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USDA regulations (9500-4), Forest Service

policy, and the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management

Plan (1989) require that the Eldorado National Forest maintain the

viability of sensitive plant species. Direction is provided (FSM

2670.22) to ``develop and implement management practices to ensure that

species do not become threatened or endangered because of Forest

Service actions.'' Additional policy includes (FSM 2670.32):

Establish management objectives in cooperation with the States

when projects on National Forest System lands may have significant

effect on sensitive species population numbers or distributions.

Establish objectives for Federal Candidate species, in cooperation

with FWS or NMFS and the States.

When the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan

was approved, little was known about the habitat requirements of the

ten sensitive plant species thought to occur on the Forest. General

Direction in the Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management

Plan was limited to the following (p.4-91):

Provide for protection and habitat needs of sensitive plants so

that Forest activities will not jeopardize the continued existence

of such species.

One Standard/Guideline applies:

Participate in the implementation of approved species recovery

plans and Species Management Guides as specified for the Eldorado.

Since that time, a considerable amount of information has been

gathered about the habitat requirements of the eight species documented

to occur on the Forest. The Forest now has sufficient information on

the range, distribution, and status of six of these species to enable

the development of species-specific conservation strategies. The

species to be considered are: Calochortus clavatus var. avius (Pleasant

Valley mariposa lily), Draba asterophora var. macrocarpa (Cup Lake

draba), Lewisia longipetala (long-petaled lewisia), Lewisia serrata

(saw-toothed lewisia), Navarretia prolifera ssp. lutea (yellow-bur

navarretia), Phacelia stebbinsii (Stebbins' phacelia), Silene invisa

(short-petaled campion), and Arctostaphylos nissenana (Nissenan

manzanita).

There are no known permits or licenses required to implement the

proposed action.

Preliminary issues identified during internal scoping include:

1. How will current and future habitat options for sensitive plant

species be managed to address Forest Service requirements (CFR 219.19)

to maintain viability?

2. What will be the economic consequences of implementing

mitigation measures for sensitive plant species?

3. Should plants species that are managed under the provisions of

conservation agreements and/or standards and guidelines still be listed

as sensitive?

4. How will fuel conditions that have a high probability of

contributing to catastrophic fire behavior be affected by sensitive

plant management practices?

5. Will other land uses be constrained or altered?

6. Will species-specific standards and guidelines improve the

efficiency of Forest project planning and implementation?

7. Will the efficiency and effectiveness of the Forest sensitive

plant program improve?

Based on the preliminary issues listed above and other issues that

may be developed, the Forest Service will identify and consider a range

of alternatives for managing sensitive plant species. These

alternatives will include a no action alternative (continuing with

existing Eldorado National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan

direction). Other alternatives to consider may include implementation

of species-specific standards and guidelines and/or delisting one or

more of the species under consideration. These preliminary alternatives

may be revised before the draft EIS is issued as new information is

developed or new comments are received:

Public participation will be especially important at several points

during the analysis. The first point is during the scoping process (40

CFR 1501.7).

The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments, and

assistance from federal, state, and local agencies and other

individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected by

the proposed project. This input will be used in preparation of the

draft EIS. The scoping process includes:

1. Defining the scope of the analysis and nature of the decision to

be made.

2. Identifying the issues and determining the significant issues

for consideration and analysis within the EIS.

3. Defining the proper interdisciplinary team make-up.

4. Determining the effective use of time and money in conducting

the analysis.

5. Identifying potential environmental, technical, and social

impacts of the EIS and alternatives.

6. Determining potential cooperating agencies.

7. Identifying groups or individuals interested or affected by the

decision.

John Phipps, Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National Forest, is the

responsible official.

The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review in

September 1994. 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 that EPA's notice of

availability appears 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 reviewers'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 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.

After the comment period ends on the draft EIS, the comments will

be analyzed and considered by the Forest Service in preparing the final

EIS. The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by January 1994. In the

final EIS the Forest Service is required to respond to the comments and

responses received (40 CFR 1503.4). The responsible official will

consider the comments, responses, and environmental consequences

discussed in the draft EIS; and applicable laws, regulations, and

policies in making a decision regarding this project. If a decision is

made to amend the Land and Resource Management Plan, the responsible

official will document the decision and reasons for the decision in the

Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to appeal pursuant to

36 CFR part 215.

Dated: July 21, 1994.

Rex Baumback,

Acting Forest Supervisor, Eldorado National Forest.

[FR Doc. 94-18319 Filed 7-27-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M