High Uintas Wilderness Management Plan; Ashley and Wasatch-Cache National Forests, Duchesne and Summit Counties, UT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

High Uintas Wilderness Management Plan; Ashley and Wasatch-Cache

National Forests, Duchesne and Summit Counties, UT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS).

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement on a proposal to preserve the values in the High Uintas

Wilderness at the resource, social, and managerial conditions described

in the 1964 Wilderness Act.

DATES: To be most useful, comments concerning the scope of the analysis

should be received in writing by June 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Joseph R. Bistryski, District

Ranger, Duchesne Ranger District, Ashley National Forest, PO Box 981,

Duchesne, Utah 84021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gayne Sears, ID Team Leader, (801) 722-5018 at the address above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1984, 460,000 acres of the Ashley and

Wasatch-Cache National Forests were designated as the High Uintas

Wilderness with the passage of the Utah Wilderness Act. The High Uintas

Wilderness is located within the Uintas Range in northeastern Utah. It

is the largest designated wilderness in the State of Utah.

The 1964 Wilderness Act defines wilderness as a place affected

primarily by nature, where people are visitors who do not remain, and

where natural ecological processes operate freely. Outstanding

opportunities for solitude and primitive recreation are available. As

human use increases and the demand for this type of opportunity grows,

some areas in the High Uintas Wilderness no longer possess these

wilderness attributes. Other more remote areas are at risk of losing

existing wilderness qualities.

In order to meet the intent of the Wilderness Act, we propose to

amend the Ashley and Wasatch-Cache Forest Plans to define resource,

social, and managerial desired conditions to (A) maintain a wilderness

where ecosystems are influenced primarily by the forces of nature, and

(B) as consistent with (A) above, provide a diversity of opportunities

for public use, enjoyment and understanding of wilderness so a high

quality wilderness resource is preserved for present and future

generations.

The proposed action is programmatic in nature and will not result

in on the ground actions (further NEPA analysis will be required for on

the ground proposals.) The proposed action divides the wilderness into

management zones designed to achieve desired wilderness conditions.

Class I zones are characterized by an unmodified natural environment

where encounters with others are rare and human impact not evident.

Class II zones are characterized by a predominantly unmodified natural

environment where some human impact is evident (but will recover).

Class III zones are characterized by a predominantly unmodified natural

environment, however some sites are substantially affected by the

actions of users. Encounters with others are common; trails are

developed, maintained, and signed.

The proposed action assigns class descriptions to portions of the

wilderness depending upon desired conditions. Alternatives might

include a map divided into zones favoring human use opportunities, a

map divided into zones favoring less human influence on natural

processes, and maps displaying zones with a combination of natural

processes and human uses. Proposed action maps are available upon

request.

In response to existing laws and authorities, the scope of the

analysis will not include the following: (1) Fish Stocking. As directed

in Forest Service Manual 2323.34, the Regional Forester will develop a

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the state outlining a stocking

policy for the High Uintas Wilderness. (2) Livestock Grazing. Grazing

decisions (stocking rates, grazing systems, boundary changes, etc.)

will continue to be made in Allotment Management Plans or the

[[Page 26021]] equivalent (resource planning decisions). Further public

participation will be sought during Allotment Management Planning NEPA

analysis and public scoping.

Preliminary planning assessments (initiated in 1990) included:

public sensing, data collection, and analysis for development of

desired conditions. Public participation is especially important at

several points during the analysis. Individuals, organizations,

federal, state, and local agencies who are interested in, or affected

by the decision are invited to participate in the scoping process. Your

responses will be used in preparation of the draft EIS.

The Responsible Officials for this decision are Bert Kulesza,

Forest Supervisor, Ashley National Forest, 355 N. Vernal Ave., Vernal

UT 84078, and Bernie Weingardt, Forest Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache

National Forest, 8230 Federal Building, 125 South State St., Salt Lake

City, UT 84138.

To complete the scoping process, we need your comments by June 19,

1995. The next major opportunity for public input is the draft EIS. The

draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and be available for public review in July, 1995. The

Final EIS and Record of Decision is expected in November, 1995.

The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement is

45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of

availability appears in the Federal Register. It is very important that

those interested in this proposed action participate at that time. To

be the most helpful, comments on the draft environmental impact

statement 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 the National Environmental Policy Act at

40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points).

In addition, Federal court decisions have established that

reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their

participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is

meaningful and alerts the 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 environmental impact statement. 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 to the Forest

Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to

them in a final.

Dated: May 5, 1995.

Bert Kulesza,

Forest Supervisor, Ashley National Forest.

[FR Doc. 95-11935 Filed 5-15-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M