Opportunity To Comment on the Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement To Salvage Fire-Killed Timber on the Almanor Ranger District, Lassen National Forest

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Opportunity To Comment on the Preparation of a Draft

Environmental Impact Statement To Salvage Fire-Killed Timber on the

Almanor Ranger District, Lassen National Forest

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement

for the Barkley Fire Salvage.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will prepare an

environmental impact statement for a proposal to salvage approximately

2.6 million board feet (MMBF) of fire killed timber on 250 acres within

the 44,000 acres burned by the Barkley Fire during September 1994 on

the Lassen National Forest, Almanor Ranger District, Tehama County,

California. The proposed project area is bordered by private timber

land on the north, Deer Creek Canyon on the east, and the Ishi

Wilderness to the west. The legal description is Sections 5, 6, 9, and

19 of T.26N., R.3E. M.D.M. The decision to be made is whether to

salvage fire-killed timber from the Barkley Fire as proposed, and what

mitigation measures will be in effect.

DATEs: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis and

significant issues should be received by March 6, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send comments about the proposed action and scope of the

analysis to: Michael R. Williams, District Ranger, Almanor Ranger

District, P.O. Box 767, Chester, California 96020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Phil Tuma, District Forest Land Manager, Almanor Ranger District, P.O.

Box 767, Chester, California 96020, (916) 258-2141.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed fire salvage areas are within

the former Polk Springs Roadless Area, which was released to non-

wilderness management by the California Wilderness Act of 1984. The

Lassen National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) was

completed in 1993. The management direction in the LRMP for the

proposed salvage area has management prescriptions of timber and semi-

primitive non-motorized.

The proposal is whether or not to implement restoration projects

on 250 acres within the Lower Deer Creek Management Area, including

salvage timber harvest, fuels treatments and reforestation

activities to restore the area to its natural vegetation type, and

reduce fuel loading and the associated risk for future catastrophic

intensity fires.

Public participation will be especially important at several

points during the analysis. The first point is during the scoping

process (40 CFR 1501.7). The Forest Service will be seeking

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

agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be

interested in affected by the proposed action. This input will be

used in the preparation of the draft environmental impact statement

(DEIS).

The scoping process includes:

1. Identifying potential issues.

2. Eliminating insignificant issues or those which have been covered by

a relevant previous environmental analysis.

3. Exploring additional alternatives.

4. Identifying potential environmental effects of the proposed action

and alternatives.

5. Determining potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.

A public field trip to the proposed project area will be announced

to the public to discuss issues, alternatives, and mitigations.

The following preliminary issues and alternatives have the been

developed.

Issues

(1) Timber harvesting and road construction create soil disturbance

which may result in stream sedimentation. Sedimentation may affect

water quality, anadromous fisheries habitat, and other aquatic

resources. These activities may contribute to existing cumulative

watershed effects, occurring from preceding fire impacts and recent

salvage logging on private land.

(2) Salvage logging and associated road construction activities

could affect the roadless characteristics of the area.

(3) Untreated excess fules could increase the risk of another

catastrophic fire that would damage or destroy resource values on

public and private land.

(4) Vegetative biodiversity, viability, and recovery rates may be

affected by the proposed projects.

Alternatives

(1) No Action. No timber salvage or restoration activities are

proposed.

(2) This alternative proposes to salvage approximately 2.6 MMBF of

fire

[[Page 6503]]

killed sawtimber and 1500 tons of fire killed biomass on approximately

250 acres using tractor and mechanical thinning logging systems. A

total of 2.4 milses of road construction would be required.

(3) This alternative proposes to salvage 2.6 MMBF of fire killed

timber and 1500 tons of biomass on approximately 250 acres using

helicopter logging systems. The purchaser would be required to remove

all the 4 inch dbh and larger fire killed trees in excess of wildlife

requirements. No new roads would be constructed.

(4) This alternative proposes to salvage 2.6 MMBF of fire killed

timber on approximately 250 acres using helicopter logging systems. The

purchaser would remove all 10 inch dbh and larger fire killed trees in

excess of wildlife requirements. A service contract would thin the sub-

merchantable trees and treat excess slash. No new roads would be

constructed.

The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will

be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes

the notice of availability in the Federal Register. The draft

environmental impact statement is expected to be available by March of

1995.

The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important

to give reviewer's notice of several court rulings related to public

participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewer's of

the draft environmental impact statement must structure their

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

meaningful and alerts an agency to the veviewer's position and

contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,

553 (1978). Also, 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, 495 F.

Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these 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 a time when it

can meaningful consider them and respond to them in the final

environmental impact statement.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issue

and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the drart

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

CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.

The responsible official for the Forest Service is Michael R.

Williams, Dirtrict Ranger, Almanor Ranger District, Lassen National

Forest, P.O. Box 767, Chester, California 96020.

Dated: December 22, 1994.

Elizabeth Norton,

Acting Forest Supervisor, Lassen National Forest.

[FR Doc. 95-2670 Filed 2-1-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M