Coconino National Forest, Arizona; Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Pocket/Baker Ecosystem

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Coconino National Forest, Arizona; Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) for Pocket/Baker Ecosystem

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Long Valley Ranger District of the Coconino National

Forest is planning to prepare an environmental impact statement on a

proposal to manage lands within the Pocket/Baker Ecosystem. Some of the

projects to be considered include thinning the understory in ponderosa

pine stands to reduce the high levels of dwarf mistletoe infection;

prescribing controlled fire for the reduction of forest fuels, nutrient

cycling, and stimulation of fire dependent grasses and forbes;

reconfiguring the grazing patterns of cattle to improve the range

vegetation and the watershed condition; thinning of trees along state

highways 87 and 260 to feature the more prominent large trees and for

the reduction of shade that causes ice hazards on the roadway; reducing

the use and/or improving the dispersed recreation sites for sustainable

future use; reversing the declining health and vigor of remnant quaking

aspen stands; restoring and protecting historic drainage structures;

and closing and/or rehabilitating roads located within stream courses

or their associated filter strips.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The District Ranger, Bruce C. Greco, will be the

responsible official and will select one of the alternatives presented

in the environmental impact statement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce Greco, Long Valley District

Ranger or John Gerritsma, Planning Team Leader at (602) 354-2216.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Analysis work began on the Pocket portion of

the Pocket/Baker 20K in 1991. In 1993 the scope of the project was

broadened to include the Baker portion to create a more logical

ecosystem for analysis. The interdisciplinary planning team followed a

formal NEPA evaluation process with active, detailed scoping and

involvement for a wide range of interests. Because of the complexity

and diversity of this ecosystem, and the potential significance of

several resource issues, we are evaluating completion of the analysis

through an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The issues include:

(1) Sustaining vegetative conditions for threatened, endangered,

and sensitive species (TE&S). Many of the ponderosa pine sites are

heavily infected with Southwestern dwarf mistletoe, a parasitic disease

common throughout the Forest. Current tree densities needed for the

Mexican spotted owl (MSO) cannot be sustained due to mortality induced

by dwarf mistletoe. Harvesting trees now to reduce dwarf mistletoe

infection will decrease tree crown densities, modify MSO habitat, and

result in adverse effects to the proposed critical habitat of the MSO.

The consequences of no treatment is also declining canopy closures as

trees die, that after 30-60 years will result in the same impacts as

reducing dwarf mistletoe now. In addition, delaying these treatments

now will increase the costs (in dollars and environmental impacts) and

reduce future options for maintaining desired conditions.

(2) Absence of fire in the ecosystem. Past aggressive fire

suppression, limited prescribed burning, and incomplete treatment of

forest litter has resulted in heavy forest fuels along the Mogollan

Rim. Potentially catastrophic fire could occur in this area given the

proximity to the communities of Pine and Strawberry, fuel loading,

prevailing winds, topography, and heavy public recreation use.

(3) Treatment of small diameter ponderosa pine trees. Dense

ponderosa pine sites are at a higher risk of catastrophic events such

as fire and disease than less dense sites. Also, without natural or

management thinning actions, trees on these sites will not grow into

the desired mature yellow pines within a reasonable amount of time.

(4) Demand for recreation opportunities on the Mogollon Rim. The

expressed need for an increased variety and amount of yearlong

recreational activities is increasing faster than the ecosystem can

handle. This situation is evident by the increasing number of people

trying to play in the snow along Highway 87 each winter, almost

continuous summer camping and vehicle use within meadows and the more

popular camping areas, and increasing firewood cutting (both legal and

illegal).

(5) Decline of aspen in the ecosystem. Aspen is declining in this

ecosystem for several reasons. Lack of fire is retarding aspen

sprouting and increasing competition from both grasses and other tree

species. Also, the large elk populations seek out young aspen shoots,

thereby limiting reproduction success. Options to reverse the declining

presence of aspen are limited by environmental and social concerns.

Preparing an EIS will allow us to fully evaluate the significance

of the environmental effects of these resource components and issues.

Scoping for comments and field trips were previously accomplished prior

to this analysis becoming an EIS. However, comments on the issues and

suggestions for additional issues are welcome in response to the draft

environmental impact statement which will follow this Notice of Intent,

shortly. The Interdisciplinary Team will reconvene to consider new

comments.

The draft environmental impact statement can be expected in June

1995. A forty-five-day comment period pursuant to 36 CFR 219.10(b) will

be provided for the public to make comments on the draft environmental

impact statement. A record of decision will be prepared and filed with

the final environmental impact statement. A forty-five-day appeal

period pursuant to 36 CFR 217.8(a) will be applicable.

The forty-five day comment period on the draft environmental impact

statement will begin when the Environmental Protection Agency'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. To be 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 Council on Environmental

Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the

National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3).

In addition, Federal court decisions have established that

reviewers of draft [[Page 27271]] environmental impact statements 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, 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 the final.

Dated: May 15, 1995.

Bruce C. Greco,

District Ranger, Long Valley Ranger District, Coconino National Forest.

[FR Doc. 95-12537 Filed 5-22-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M