Boppin Basin Salvage Sale; Kootenai National Forest; Lincoln County, MT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Boppin Basin Salvage Sale; Kootenai National Forest; Lincoln

County, MT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts of a

proposal to harvest timber and construct and reconstruct roads in the

East and West Fork of Basin Creek located about 29 air miles northeast

of Troy, Montana. This EIS will tier to the Kootenai National Forest

Land and Resource Management Plan and EIS, which provide overall

guidance for achieving the desired forest condition of the area. The

purpose of the proposed action is to help reduce existing natural fuel

loadings of standing and down dead lodgepole pine, increase the

productivity on those suitable areas that sites currently are not

growing anywhere near full potential and increase the health and vigor

of proposed salvage stands which will help maintain a more equal

distribution of timber age classes.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received by February

28, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to John B. Righter, District Ranger,

Three Rivers Ranger District, 1437 North Highway 2, Troy, Montana,

59935.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Monte Fujishin, Supervisory Forester,

(406) 295-4693.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The timber salvage management activities

under consideration would occur within a 6,046 acre analysis area which

is immediately adjacent to the East and West Fork of Basin Creek.

The proposed action would harvest about 17.6 million board feet

from 10 harvest units totaling 1,258 acres. Approximately 4 miles of

new road would be constructed and 3 miles of existing road would be

reconstructed.

There are a variety of purposes for timber harvest and

reforestation in the Basin Creek area; the primary purposes are: (1) To

improve timber productivity by replacing stands of dead, down or dying

lodgepole pine with younger, more vigorously growing trees; (2) to

salvage the dead, down and dying lodgepole pine; and (3) to reduce

potentially catastrophic wildfire conditions by removal of natural

dead, down or dying fuels. Additionally, the purpose of road

construction and reconstruction is to facilitate access to the timber

stands to be harvested.

The project area consists of approximately 6,046 acres located in

Sections 20-22, 26-29, and 32-34, T36N, R30N, P.M.M., Lincoln County,

Montana.

The decision to be made is what, if anything, should be done in the

Basin Creek Project Area to: (a) Increase timber productivity and

contribute to the Forest's sustained yield of timber products through

salvage operations, (b) reduce natural fuel loadings of dead, down and

dying lodgepole pine as a result of past mountain pine beetle

infestations, (c) dispose of slash and reforest harvested lands, (d)

develop and manage the road system to facilitate removal of timber,

reforest stands and maintain or improve wildlife and (e) create a

situation of better age class distributions of stands within project

area.

The Kootenai Forest Plan provides guidance for management

activities within the potentially affected area through its goals,

objectives, standards and guidelines, and management area direction.

The areas of proposed timber harvest and reforestation would occur

within Management Areas 12 and 14. Timber harvest would occur only on

suitable timber land. Road construction and reconstruction would occur

in these two management areas plus Management Area 13 when crossing the

East Fork of Basin Creek. Below is a brief description of the

applicable management direction.

Management Area 12--These are areas that contain productive timber

lands which are suitable for timber harvest, provided that big game

summer habitat objectives are met.

Management Area 13--These are areas that contain special habitat

characteristics which are suitable for old-growth dependent wildlife.

Local road construction is permitted, providing that they are

restricted following use to protect snag characteristics.

Management Area 14--These are areas that contain productive timber

lands which are suitable for timber harvest, provided that grizzly bear

habitat objectives are met.

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.

The EIS will analyze the direct, indirect, and cumulative

environmental effects of the alternatives. Past, present, and projected

activities on National Forest Lands will be considered. The EIS will

disclose the analysis of site-specific mitigation measures and their

effectiveness.

Public participation is an important part of the analysis,

commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) which has

already occurred in March of 1992. In addition, public 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 and local agencies and

other individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected

by the proposed action. No public meetings are scheduled at this time.

Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in preparation

of the Draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to:

1. Identify potential issues.

2. Identify major issues to by analyzed in depth.

3. Eliminates minor issues or those which have been covered by a

relevant previous environmental analysis, such as the Kootenai Forest

Plan EIS.

4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.

5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action

and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects).

6. Determine potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.

Preliminary scoping, including public and agency participation, was

initiated in March, 1992, and has continued through this year. Until

recently, an Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No

Significant Impact (FONSI) were envisioned. However, it became apparent

to the Interdisciplinary Team that due to the size and scope of the

proposed action, that effects on the biological characteristics of the

area could be considered significant. In such cases, an EIS is

required.

The principal environmental issues identified to date are related

to:

1. Wildlife habitat and security maintenance.

2. Fuels treatment and accumulations in terms of potential

catastrophic wildfire situations.

Other issues commonly associated with timber harvesting and road

construction include: effects on water quality, cultural resources,

soils, old growth, and visuals. This list may be verified, expanded, or

modified based on public scoping for this proposal.

Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been

initiated with regard to listed species. The Montana Department of

Health and Welfare-Division of Environmental Quality, Montana

Department of Fish and Game, and the Kootenai Salish Indian Tribe will

also be consulted.

While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time,

comments received within 45 days of the publication of this notice will

be especially useful in the preparation of the draft EIS, which is

expected to be filed with the EPA and available for public review in

March, 1994. A 45-day comment period will follow publication of a

Notice of Availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The

comments received will be analyzed and considered in preparation of a

final EIS, which will be accompanied by a Record of Decision. The final

EIS is expected to be filed in June, 1994.

The Forest Service believes it is important at this early stage to

give reviewers notice 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 an agency to

the reviewer's position and contentions Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power

Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 513 (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

are available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully

consider them 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 should be as specific as

possible. 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.

I am the responsible official for this environmental impact

statement.

Dated: January 5, 1994.

Robert L. Schrenk,

Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.

[FR Doc. 94-916 Filed 1-13-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M