# East Shore Project, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (LTBMU), Washoe County, Douglas County, and Carson City Rural Area, NV > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-917 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Uncategorized Document - **Published:** January 14, 1994 ## Text 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 --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-917. Public record. Not legal advice.