Beaverhead and Deerlodge Forest Plan Amendments; Beaverhead and Most of Deerlodge National Forests; Beaverhead, Madison, Gallatin, Silver Bow, Deerlodge, Powell, Granite and Jefferson Counties, Montana

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to amend the Forest Plans of the Beaverhead and

Deerlodge National Forests to include further riparian area direction.

The purpose is to determine what combination of goals, objectives and

standards will restore and/or maintain riparian function.

DATES: Initial comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be

received in writing no later than November 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Deborah L.R. Austin, Forest

Supervisor, Beaverhead National Forest, 420 Barrett Street, Dillon, MT,

59725.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Diane Petroni, Environmental Analysis Team Leader, Madison Ranger

District, 5 Forest Service Road, Ennis, MT, 59729, or phone: (406)682-

4253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest Service proposes to amend the

Beaverhead and Deerlodge Forest Plans to include a goal statement

calling for restoration and maintenance of riparian function of all

streams on the forest. Also included would be objectives stated as

parameters within which riparian attributes would need to fall for the

stream to be considered functioning. The only numerical standard would

be a riparian forage utilization table applied to areas without site-

specific riparian direction. This would result in non-significant

amendments to the plans.

Lands affected are riparian areas within the entire Beaverhead

National Forest, and all of the Deerlodge except the Elkhorn Wildlife

Management Unit. The analysis will include Bureau of Land Management

(BLM) lands located within grazing allotments administered jointly by

the Forest Service and BLM. The affected lands are roughly within 75

air miles of Dillon, Montana, or within 65 air miles of Butte, Montana.

Riparian areas comprise about 5% of the total forest acreage.

A lawsuit against the Beaverhead National Forest grazing program

resulted in a court approved settlement agreement stipulating that the

Forest would propose an amendment to the Forest Plan to incorporate

revised riparian guidelines.

Since the Beaverhead Forest Plan was adopted in 1986, monitoring

has shown ``(t)he one quantifiable forest plan standard (Range #7) is

not adequately protecting riparian dependent values'' (1993 Beaverhead

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Five Year Review).

The Beaverhead Forest Supervisor recommended to ``Amend the Forest

Plan to include specific riparian goals and objectives (including

Desired Future Condition statements describing a fully functioning

riparian ecosystem). In the Forest Plan, detail the analysis process

(through a procedural guideline and an appendix document) to be used in

the determination of site specific riparian management in the

development of Allotment Management Plans.''

The Deerlodge Forest Plan was adopted in 1987. Since then,

monitoring has been conducted to determine and evaluate the effects of

management practices. Based on initial findings, riparian standard #8,

which states grazing utilization standards in riparian areas, does not

appear to meet the physical and biological needs of all riparian areas

within grazing allotments.

Potential issues identified are the effects of the amendment on

sensitive and other fish species, water quality, economics, wildlife

habitat, recreation opportunity, lifestyle, and grazing capacity.

Public participation will be important to the analysis. Part of the

goal of public involvement is to identify additional issues and to

refine the general, tentative issues identified above. People may visit

with Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior

to the decision. Two periods are specifically designated for comments

on the analysis: (1) During the scoping process and (2) during the

draft EIS comment period.

During the scoping process, the Forest Service is seeking

information and comments from Federal, State, and local agencies and

other individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected

by the proposed action. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service

will be consulted concerning effects to threatened and endangered

species. A scoping document will be prepared and mailed to parties

known to be interested in the proposed action by September 29, 1995.

The agency invites written comments and suggestions on this action,

particularly in terms of identification of issues and alternative

development.

In addition to the proposed action, a range of alternatives will be

developed in response to issues identified during scoping. One of these

will be the ``no-action'' alternative, in which no changes would be

made to the forest plans. The Forest Service will analyze and document

the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of all alternatives.

The Forest Service will continue to involve the public and will

inform interested and affected parties as to how they may participate

and contribute to the final decision. Another formal opportunity for

response will be provided following completion of a DEIS.

The draft EIS should be available for review in November, 1996. The

final EIS is scheduled for completion in August, 1997.

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

the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of

availability in the Federal Register.

The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers

notice at this early stage of several court rulings related to public

participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of

draft environmental impact statements must structure their

participation in the environmental review of the proposal so it is

meaningful and alerts an agency to the

[[Page 49394]]

reviewer's position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.

v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that

could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but

are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact

statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v.

Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages,

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

these court rulings, it is very important those interested in this

proposed action participate by the close of the 45-day comment period

so 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 environmental impact statement.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft

environmental impact statement 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 draft

environmental impact 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 Forest Supervisors of the Beaverhead and Deerlodge National

Forests are the responsible officials who will make the decision. They

will decide on this proposal after considering comments and responses,

environmental consequences discussed in the Final EIS, and applicable

laws, regulations, and policies. The decision and reasons for the

decision will be documented in a Record of Decision.

Dated: September 18, 1995.

Deborah L.R. Austin,

Forest Supervisor, Beaverhead National Forest and Acting Forest

Supervisor, Deerlodge National Forest.

[FR Doc. 95-23655 Filed 9-22-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M