East Shore Project, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (LTBMU), Washoe County, Douglas County, and Carson City Rural Area, NV

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

East Shore Project, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (LTBMU),

Washoe County, Douglas County, and Carson City Rural Area, NV

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice, intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement on a proposal to harvest 30-40 million board feet of both

merchantable and unmerchantable wood products from approximately 8,000

acres of National Forest System lands on the east side of Lake Tahoe in

Nevada. Dead and dying trees would be cut, and a green tree thinning

component is also proposed to improve forest health. Jeffrey pine

beetle suppression comprises part of the project. The proposed action

also uses prescribed fire and analyzes post sale treatments, including

watershed improvement projects.

DATES: Agencies and the public are invited to participate at any stage

of the process; however, the Forest Supervisor requests that

individuals concerned with the scope of the analysis comment by

February 14, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning the DEIS should be sent to the

responsible official, Forest Supervisor, LTBMU, 870 Emerald Bay Road,

Suite 1, South Lake Tahoe, California, 96150.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions concerning the proposed action and alternatives to

Scott Parsons, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, (916) 573-2600 or the

above address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action harvests dead, dying,

and diseased trees, many of which are beetle-infested, over

approximately 8,000 acres of an 11,000-acre study area. Green trees

would be thinned from overstocked stands, over about 2,000 acres, some

of which overlap the salvage acreage, and some of which is separate.

Some of the 30 to 40 million board feet removed will be useful lumber;

much of the timber removed will have no commercial value.

Trees would be removed from gentle slopes by tractor skidding

systems. Trees would be flown from steeper terrain by helicopter. No

new permanent roads would be constructed; however, construction of

additional temporary access roads and landing sites would be required,

as well as reconstruction and restoration of existing historic roads.

This proposed action includes treatments that will follow removal

of the trees. This includes (but is not limited to) site preparation,

planting, treatment of slash generated by the project, obliteration of

temporary and unneeded roads, and restoration of landings. Monitoring

how effectively the project prevents future beetle attacks is part of

``post sale'' work. The use of prescribed fire will be analyzed, both

as a post-harvest treatment and as a long-term management tool. This

alternative treats the most acres with prescribed fire.

Heritage (historic archaeological) resources are dispersed

throughout the study area. Most are the remains of 19th century

logging, and not all of them will be protected. In addition to

mitigation negotiated with the Advisory Council of Historic

Preservation, a key component of the analysis is to seek and address

enhancement opportunities for representative heritage properties.

Watershed restoration projects, road closures, and mistletoe

reduction opportunities may also be included in the proposed action if

they are, in the language of the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA), ``connected'', ``cumulative'' in their effects with the removal

of dead trees, or are ``ripe for decision''.

This action is proposed because of current forest mortality

stemming from historical activities. Beginning in the 1850's many of

the 200-500 year old pine trees around Lake Tahoe were harvested in

support of silver mining activities of the Comstock Lode. Earlier, the

forest and consisted of diverse species that resisted drought and

insect attacks. After logging slowed in the 1890's, the area began to

revegetate naturally. But a new and different forest grew to replace

the old. In the absence of frequently recurring fires, dense thickets

of moisture-loving fir trees replaced much of the open pine forest that

had been cut. The drought that began in 1987 weakened and killed those

fir trees that had sprouted after the massive Comstock cutting.

Forty years of fire suppression has dramatically increased the

density of trees and the amount of dead wood, standing or on the

ground. Members of the public have expressed concern over the large

numbers of dead trees the amount of forest fuels now present. Many

requests have been made for projects to remove timber to reduce safety

hazards, fire danger, and to improve visual quality. Such projects

would reduce the ``fuel loading'' and could decrease the risk and

severity of a catastrophic fire. Additionally, thinning of overstocked

stands can be an effective way to prevent future catastrophic insect

and disease outbreaks.

The environmental analysis provides the decisionmaker--the LTBMU

Forest Supervisor with an evaluation of what will happen if nothing is

done, and what may result from the proposed action, and other

alternatives Such disclosure will allow a reasoned choice between

management options. If an alternative other than No Action is

preferable, then the work has to proceed quickly. If actively infested

trees are removed before the onset of summer when the beetles fly, then

fewer healthy trees may be attacked. On small scale, high value areas,

such as the East Shore beaches, beetle suppression work may reduce the

number of large Jeffrey pines that die. Further, trees that are

harvested quickly will have more commercial value. The high cost of a

predominantly helicopter operation could deter potential bidders as the

soundness of the trees declines. Consequently, project implementation

is expected to begin during the summer or fall of 1994.

Over sixty agencies, organizations, and individuals were notified

of this proposed project through the LTBMU NEPA Status Report. A public

meeting was held on October 5, 1993 as part of the scoping process.

Some people also provided written comments. Tahoe Regional Planning

Agency staff was briefed about the project on November 10, 1993. The

Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer has also been briefed.

Originally conceived and publicly scoped as a project whose

environmental analysis would be documented in an environmental

assessment, it was determined in late December 1993 that its potential

environmental effects warrant an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

Project activities will adversely affect heritage resources in a

National Register-eligible historic district.

While the type of NEPA documentation has changed since the

project's conception, the project itself has not changed. Consequently,

only minimal additional public scoping will occur. A public and agency

briefing on the project, to be announced in the Tahoe Daily Tribune and

through letters sent to those parties who have expressed interest in

the East Shore Project, will be held on January 26, 1994, at the El

Dorado County Library at 1000 Rufus Allen Boulevard in South Lake

Tahoe. Participants in the planning process will be sent copies of the

draft EIS for the public comment period. Availability of the draft EIS

will also be noticed in the Federal Register, and the Tahoe Daily

Tribune, the LTBMU's newspaper of record. Written comments and

suggestions received by January 24, 1994 will be addressed in the draft

EIS.

The ``no action'' alternative proposes a continuation of the

current types of management activities currently conducted in the study

areas, without imposing impacts from logging to heritage resources.

Trees which pose hazards to life and property will be taken down. While

the long-term management of the Genoa Peak road system is primarily for

off-highway vehicle use, road reconstruction and maintenance at a

logging truck standard along a portion of the road will be required to

accommodate log haul for timber sales on the adjacent Toiyabe National

Forest, as analyzed in the Carson District's Spooner Salvage Sale

environmental assessment. Short-term road closures will prevent public

recreation use of parts of the area during timber sale operations.

Obliteration of nonhistoric nonsystem roads, maintenance of existing

system roads and trails, watershed improvement projects, and study and

management of the proposed National Register District will continue as

part of ongoing programs.

The ``salvage only'' alternative harvests dead, dying, and diseased

trees, many of which are beetle-infested, over approximately 6,600

acres. No green tree thinning will occur. Removal of about 30 MMBF of

both merchantable and unmerchantable material is anticipated. This

alternative includes all components of the proposed action, except when

modified as described: (1) While treatment of activity fuels will

occur, only limited use of prescribed fire as a management tool is

proposed, in selected areas, such as for use as a fuelbreak near urban

areas; (2) site preparation and planting will occur on high value areas

only (such as at the beaches and along roadway corridors) and natural

regeneration only will occur in general forest zones; and (3) only

temporary roads and landings used as part of the project will be

obliterated.

The fourth alternative emphasizes helicopter harvesting in areas

with significant heritage resources. It harvests dead, dying, and

diseased trees, many of which are beetle-infested, over approximately

6,750 acres--with approximately 550 acres less tractor logging than

alternatives two or three. Green trees would be thinned from

overstocked stands only within those areas entered for salvage

activities. Removal of 30 to 35 MMBF of both merchantable and

unmerchantable material is anticipated. This alternative includes all

components of the proposed action, except when modified as described:

(1) While treatment of activity fuels will occur, only limited use of

prescribed fire as a management tool is proposed, in selected areas,

such as for use as a fuelbreak near urban areas.

Implementation of this project requires a permit from the Tahoe

Regional Planning Agency (TRPA). It is in a classification of actions

requiring TRPA Governing Board review and approval. Additionally,

encroachment permits from the Nevada Department of Transportation are

required for project implementation. Consultation with the Nevada State

Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation (ACHP) in accordance with the National Historic

Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) is required.

Concurrence from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is needed if the

Forest Service Biological Assessment results in a ``may affect''

determination.

The decision on this analysis, pursuant to NEPA, is made by Lake

Tahoe Basin Management Unit Forest Supervisor, Robert Harris, as the

Forest Service is the lead agency under NEPA. There is no other joint

lead agency and no cooperating agencies under NEPA.

The draft EIS is anticipated to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency and made available to the public for comment in

February of 1994. The final EIS and its Record of Decision is expected

in May of 1994. The decision will be appealable under Forest Service

regulations found at 36 CFR part 215.

The comment period for the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date

the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in

the Federal Register. The public will also be informed of the

availability of the DEIS by news releases issued to the media in the

Lake Tahoe region. It is very important that those interested in this

proposed action participate at that time. To be the most helpful,

comments on the draft EIS should be as specific as possible and may

address the adequacy of the statement or the merits of the alternatives

discussed (see the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for

implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA at 40 CFR 1503.3).

In addition, Federal court decisions have established that

reviewers of draft EIS' must structure their participation in the

environmental review of the proposal so that it is meaningful and

alerts an agency to the reviewers' position and contentions. Vermont

Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978).

Environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage

may be waived if not raised until after completion of the final EIS.

City of Angoon v. Hodel, (9th Circuit, 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages,

Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). The reason

for this is to ensure that substantive comments and objections are made

available for the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully

consider them and respond to them in the final.

Dated: January 4, 1994.

John R. Swanson,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 94-917 Filed 1-13-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M