Jacobs/Swale Vegetation Management Project, Dixie National Forest, Garfield County, UT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Jacobs/Swale Vegetation Management Project, Dixie National

Forest, Garfield County, UT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Forest Service, USDA, will

prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a Forest Service

proposal to implement a vegetation management and associated road

construction project on the Escalante Ranger District, Dixie National

Forest. The area is located approximately 25 miles north of Escalante,

Utah. The project would be implemented in accordance with direction in

the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Dixie National Forest

(LRMP).

The agency gives notice that the environmental analysis process is

underway. Interested and potentially affected persons, along with

local, state, and other federal agencies, are invited to participate

and contribute to the environmental analysis. The Dixie National Forest

invites written input regarding issues specific to the proposed action.

DATES: Written comments to be considered in the preparation of the

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) should be submitted by May

20, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: District Ranger, Escalante

Ranger District, 755 West Main, P.O. Box 246, Escalante, Utah 84726.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions about the proposed action and EIS to Kevin R.

Schulkoski, District Ranger, 801-826-5400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed project covers an analysis area

of 15,563 acres of National Forest System Lands. Approximately 1,012

acres of the 6,251 acre McGath Lake-Auger Hole Roadless Area is within

the project boundary. Treatments are proposed on 669 acres within the

roadless area. Timber stands in the project area cover 11,739 acres.

Vegetatative treatments are proposed on 6,668 of the timbered acres.

Unevenaged stands of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir are the

dominant timber type. A few stands of even-aged aspen are also present.

Aspen remnants are scattered throughout the Engelmann spruce/subalpine

fir stands. Vegetation management treatments would occur in stands

located within sections 31 and 32, Township 31, Range 3 East; sections

3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21, Township 32

South, Range 3 East; sections 34, 35, and 36, Township 31 South 31,

Range 2 East; and sections 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 24,

Township 32 South, Range 2 East, Salt Lake Base Meridian.

The proposed action would implement management direction and

projects identified in the LRMP. This project EIS will be tiered to the

LRMP EIS, provides goals, objectives, standards and guidelines for the

various activities and land allocations on the Forest.

The purpose of the proposed action is to improve forest health by

harvesting diseased trees, to improve individual tree and stand vigor

conditions through stocking control, to improve wildlife habitat for

game and non-game species by creating a greater variety of size classes

and habitats, to enhance visual quality by increasing species

diversity, and to reduce damage in meadow areas by closing and

rehabilitating primitive roads. These treatments would be designed to

move the project area towards the desired future habitat conditions as

described in the ``Management Recommendations for the Northern Goshawk

in the Southwestern United States'' (Reynolds, 1992). The proposed

action would be located in Management Areas 7A (Wood Products and

Utilization), 6A (Livestock Grazing), and 2B (Rural and Roaded

Recreation Opportunities).

The proposed action consists of commercial timber harvest within

Management Areas 7A, 6A, and 2B using uneven-aged and even-aged

management and yielding approximately 21.1 MMBF of Engelmann spruce,

subalpine fir, and aspen sawtimber. Post sale cultural activities would

include brush disposal, precommercial thinning and reforestation.

Approximately 1,530 acres (9.8% of the project area) would be

managed to enhance its' old growth attributes.

Prescribed fire would be used on approximately 55 acres to improve

wildlife habitat and regenerate decadent aspen stands being replaced by

the conifers. Snag recruitment by burning individual trees would occur

on 256 acres.

Road management would include development of a transportation

system requiring approximately 33 miles of road construction and 4

miles of road reconstruction. Two trailheads would be established

providing access for both motorized and non-motorized users. Upon the

completion of management activities the area would be closed to

motorized vehicles except over the snow machines. Designated routes

would remain open to provide access to recreation facilities.

Six timber sales are proposed ranging in size from 118 MBF to 7,331

MBF.

Preliminary issues that have been identified through scoping to

date include project effects on wildlife habitat particularly the

critical elk calving and deer fawning areas and the effects of the

proposal on the roadless area characteristics.

Tentative alternatives to the proposed action include: No action

(the project will not take place but current management will continue);

elimination of management activities within the critical elk calving

and deer fawning areas; and restriction of management activities in the

roadless area to closing and rehabilitating the primitive roads.

As lead agency, the Forest Service will analyze and document

direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of a range of

alternatives. Each alternative will include mitigation measures and

monitoring requirements.

Hugh C. Thompson, Forest Supervisor, Dixie National Forest, is the

responsible official.

The Forest Service is seeking comments from individuals,

organizations, and local, state, and Federal agencies who may be

interested in or affected by the proposed action.

Scoping notices have been sent to the Dixie National Forest NEPA

mailing list. Other interested individuals, organizations, or agencies

may have their names added to the mailing list for this project at any

time by submitting a request to: Kevin R. Schulkoski, District Ranger,

Escalante Ranger District, 755 West Main, P.O. Box 246, Escalante, Utah

84726.

A public field review of the proposed project was held on October

21, 1993. Eight people representing different organizational, business,

governmental and individual interests participated in the meeting.

The entire analysis area lies within National Forest System lands.

No federal or local permits, licenses or entitlements would be needed.

There are no potential conflicts with the plans and policies of other

jurisdictions.

The comment on the DEIS will be 45 days from the date the 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

the DEIS's 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. versus NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental

objections that could have been raised at the DEIS stage but that are

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

dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon versus Hodel, (9th Circuit,

1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. versus 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 the time 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 on the DEIS 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 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.

The DEIS is expected to be available for review by June 30, 1994.

The Record of Decision and Final Environmental Impact Statement are

expected to be available by September, 1994.

Dated: April 14, 1994.

Daniel H. Deiss,

Timber/Planning Staff, Dixie National Forest.

[FR Doc. 94-9506 Filed 4-19-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M