North Fork Fire Salvage and Associated Activities, Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County, MT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

North Fork Fire Salvage and Associated Activities, Kootenai

National Forest, Lincoln County, MT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The North Fork, 336, and Maxine Wildfire burned over 8000

acres of Kootenai National Forest system lands in the late summer of

1994. The Forest intends to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) to assess and disclose the environment effects of opportunities

designed to recover economic value of burned timber, reduce future

fuels accumulations and the corresponding risk of severe reburn,

rehabilitate existing sediment sources, improve hydrologic conditions

in affected watersheds, and protect long-term soil productivity. These

objectives would be accomplished through salvage harvest of fire-killed

timber; reforestation of harvested and several burned areas; fuels

reduction in harvested areas; restoration of non-essential roads,

revegetation of road cuts and fill slopes, and drainage improvement on

existing roads; providing for immediate and long-term recruitment of

instream large woodly material within the North Fork decision area. The

North Fork decision area is located approximately 20 air miles

southwest of Eureka, Montana.

All proposals within the North Fork decision area would protect

visual quality on stream segments eligible for classification under the

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, provide for wildlife habitat, and conserve

fisheries habitat.

The proposal's actions to salvage fire-killed trees and reforest

burned area, construct, reconstruct, and restore roads, reduce fuels

and future fire hazard, and implement watershed recovery projects are

being considered together because they represent either connected or

cumulative actions as defined by the Council on Environmental Quality

(40 CFR 1508.25). The EIS will trier to the Kootenai National Forest

Land and Resource Management Plan and Final EIS of September 1987,

which provides overall guidance for achieving the desired forest

condition of the area.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be relieved by March 10,

1995.

ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Robert L. Schrenk, Forest

Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest. Written comments and suggestions

concerning the scope of the analysis should be sent to Robert J.

Thompson, District Ranger, Rexford Ranger District, 1299 Hwy 93 N,

Eureka, Montana, 59917.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Chute, Planner, Rexford Ranger

District. Phone (406) 296-2536.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the night of August 14-15, 1994, a

lightning stormed started 207 fires on the Kootenai National Forest in

northwest Montana. Several fires ranging in size from less than one

acre to over 7000 acres occurred on the Rexford Ranger District. The

North Fork Fire Recovery EIS is being prepared in response to

conditions resulting from the largest of these fires, the 8000+ acre

North Fork Fire Complex. An interdisciplinary landscape analysis team

is using an ecosystem based approach to assess the fires affects and

identify management opportunities that could be implemented to move the

postfire landscape toward a desired ecological condition.

Burn intensities in the North Fork wildfires varied considerably.

Within the fire perimeters approximately 5350 acres burned at high

intensity (average 90% tree mortality), 1400 burned at moderate

intensity (average 70% mortality), and 1300 acres burned at low

intensity (average 30% mortality). The fires burned into or adjacent to

the Wild and Scenic study corridors in Big Creek and South Fork Big

Creek (eligible for Recreation classification), and North Fork Big

Creek and Copeland Creek (eligible for Wild classification), all of

which are pending Wild and Scenic River study. The fires also burned

within the Big Creek Roadless area #701.

The North Fork decision area contains approximately 36,000 acres

within the Kootenai National Forest in Lincoln County, Montana. All of

the proposed projects are located in the Big Creek drainage with sub-

drainages of North Fork Big, South Fork Big, Good, Mesler, Roberts,

Copeland, and Drop Creeks, included. The legal location of the decision

area is as follows: Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,

14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29, and 30 of Township 34 North,

Range 30 West; Sections 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 24 of Township 34

North, Range 30 West; Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15,

16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33,

34, 35, and 36 of Township 35 North, Range 30 West; Sections 1, 12, 13,

14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35, and 36 of Township 35 North, Range 31 West; and

Sections 21 and 32 of Township 36 North, Range 30 West; Principle

Montana Meridian. The land in and adjacent to the decision area is

entirely federal ownership under the jurisdiction of the Forest

Service.

Proposed Action

The primary purpose of the project is to recover valuable timber

products from trees burned by wildfires that occurred in 1994, with the

secondary benefit of reducing the potential for future uncontrollable

wildfires. Actions are also proposed to enhance watershed recovery and

improve grizzly bear habitat security. The Forest Service proposes to

harvest approximately 24-27 million board feet of timber by salvaging

fire-killed timber and imminently dead trees on approximately 2119

acres of forest land outside riparian protection areas (draft PACFISH

criteria) and wild and scenic eligible corridors. Only trees that were

killed, or are expected to die as a result of the fires, would be

harvested. The proposal includes prescribed burning of about 2006

acres, and excavator piling [[Page 7517]] on about 113 acres to reduce

fuel loads in harvested areas, which would reduce the risk of future

large, uncontrollable wildfires. An estimated 2000 acres of proposed

salvage units would be planted with conifer seedlings to help meet

desired conditions for species diversity. The Forest Service proposal

also includes approximately 0.5 miles of temporary road construction,

1.8 miles of permanent road construction, and 2.5 miles of road

reconstruction to access the specific harvest units. All temporary

roads constructed for this project, as well as an estimated 39 miles of

existing non-essential road are proposed for restoration to reduce

sediment and water yields, and improve grizzly bear habitat security.

Non-essential roads are those that are no longer considered a necessary

part of the permanent transportation system. Drainage improvement

activities (such as surface ripping, drainage structure improvement,

seeding) would be implemented on an additional 4 miles of existing

system roads, with the intent of restoring natural drainage and

reducing sediment. These roads will be needed for future management

access, and would remain a part of the permanent transportation system.

Additional road access restrictions may be needed to provide adequate

security areas for grizzly bears, however identification of specific

road closure proposals is pending further analysis. In addition,

projects to improve watershed recovery, reforestation of 475-550 acres

of severely burned areas not proposed for salvage, revegetation of road

cut and fill slopes, and repair of damaged hiking trails would be

accomplished if adequate funds are available.

The decision area includes all or a portion of three roadless

areas: the entire Big Creek Roadless Area #701, and portions of the

Zulu Roadless Area #166 and Mt. Henry Roadless Area #666. Some timber

salvage, fuels reduction activities, and reforestation would occur

within the Big Creek Roadless Area; no activities are proposed within

the Zulu or Mt. Henry Roadless Areas. No road construction is proposed

within any roadless area. No proposed activities are located in areas

considered for inclusion to the National Wilderness System as

recommended by the Kootenai National Forest Plan or by any past or

present legislative wilderness proposals.

Due to the high level of tree mortality in proposed harvest units,

most harvested areas would resemble clearcut, seed-tree, or shelterwood

silvicultural methods. Only those live trees which must be cut to

facilitate logging fire-killed trees would be harvested. In addition to

most live trees, 10-15 snags per acre would be retained in all

harvested areas if available. Timber harvest would be done by skyline,

forwarder or winter tractor, and helicopter, and designated to result

in minimal ground disturbance, risk of erosion, and compaction.

The Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan

provides overall management objectives in individual delineated

management areas (MA's). The decision area contains nine MA's: 2, 3,

10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, and 24. Briefly described, MA 2 is managed to

protect and enhance roadless recreation use and provide wildlife

values. MA 3 is managed to provide opportunities for dispersed

recreation in naturally appearing environments using trails and

primitive roads for access. MA 10 is managed to maintain or enhance

habitat effectiveness for winter use by big-game animals and protect

scenic quality in areas visible from major travel routes. MA 12 is

managed to maintain or enhance the summer-range habitat effectiveness

for big-game species and produce a programmed yield of timber. MA 13 is

managed to provide the special habitat necessary for old growth

dependent wildlife. MA 14 focuses on maintaining or enhancing grizzly

bear habitat, reducing grizzly/human conflicts, assisting in the

recovery of the grizzly bear, realizing a programmed yield of timber

production, and providing for the maintenance or enhancement of other

wildlife species, especially big game. MA 15 is managed primarily for

timber production while providing for other resource values. MA 19 is

managed to protect soil stability and water quality by maintaining the

vegetation in a healthy condition and minimizing surface disturbance.

MA 24 is managed to protect mid to high elevation sites with rocky,

thin soils. This MA is also managed for any wildlife resources that may

occur. Timber salvage and fuels reduction is proposed in MA 12, MA 14,

and MA 24.

Preliminary Issues

Several preliminary issues of concern have been identified by the

Forest Service. These issues are briefly described below:

Water Quality--Streams in the decision area have been

impacted by past management and large wildfires. How would the proposed

action affect water yield, sediment production, stream stability, and

recovery from past impacts?

Timber Supply--An estimated 92 million board feet of

timber was killed in the North Fork Fire complex. Much of this fire-

killed timber will quickly lose its commercial value due to rapid

deterioration. To what extent does the proposed action recover the

commercial value of fire-killed timber to help meet local and national

needs?

Activity in Roadless Areas--What effect would the proposal

have on the roadless character of the Big Creek Roadless Area and other

roadless areas?

Grizzly Bear--The decision area lies within the recovery

area for the Cabinet/Yaak grizzly bear ecosystem. How would the

proposal maintain and enhance grizzly bear habitat, and contribute to

recovery efforts?

Old Growth--An estimated 1500 acres of designated old

growth was destroyed by intense, stand replacing wildfire. What options

are available to manage for suitable levels of old growth habitat in

the decision area?

Fisheries--Some streams contain fisheries habitat and

resident fish populations, including torrent sculpin (a Region 1

sensitive species), possibly bull trout (currently being considered for

listing as a threatened or endangered species), and westslope cutthroat

trout (likely hybridized). How would the proposed action affect

fisheries habitat and populations?

Future Fire Risk--The wildfires of 1994 killed more trees

over a larger area than would be expected in this ecosystem. Over the

next 20 years most of these fire killed trees will fall, creating high

fuel loadings over an area that is unprecedented in scale. Recurrence

of wildfires are anticipated within the next 50 years, and could

produce more severe effects to soils, water resources, and vegetation

than the 1994 fires. How would the proposed action reduce future fuel

loads and the corresponding risk of severe, uncontrollable wildfire?

Forest Plan Amendment

The Kootenai National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan has

specific management direction for the North Fork decision area. The

North Fork proposed action is designed to maintain or improve resource

conditions and move towards achieving desired ecological conditions,

and is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Forest Plan.

Prior to making a NEPA decision, a thorough examination of all

standards and guidelines of the Forest Plan would be completed and, if

necessary, plan exceptions or amendments would be addressed in the EIS.

Decision To Be Made

The Kootenai National Forest Supervisor will decide the following:

[[Page 7518]]

Should dead and imminently dead trees within fire areas be

harvested and if so how and where,

What amount, type, and distribution of watershed restoration

projects, including road restoration, would be implemented,

What burned areas need to be replanted,

What road access restrictions would be implemented to provide

security for grizzly bears, and

If Forest Plan exception or amendments are necessary to proceed

with the Proposal Action within the decisions area.

Public Involvement and Scoping

Some public participation efforts have already been initiated. On

October 1, 1994 a public field trip to the North Fork Decision Area was

held to provide interested people with an opportunity to view the fire

areas and ask questions of fire managers and resource specialists. On

January 10, 1995, an open house and slide presentation was held with 25

individuals attending. Comments were requested during both of these

public involvement efforts. An open house will be held from 10:00 a.m.

to 7:00 p.m. on February 21, 1995 at the Rexford Ranger District

office, 1299 Hwy 93 N, Eureka, MT 59917, to provide an opportunity for

the public to review of the proposed action. Consultation with

appropriate State and Federal agencies has been initiated. Preliminary

effects analysis indicated that the wildfires may significantly affect

the quality of the human environment, and fire recovery activities have

the potential to both intensify and reduce effects. These potential

effects prompted the decision to prepare an EIS for the North Fork Fire

Salvage.

This environmental analysis and decision making process will enable

additional interested and affected people to participate and contribute

to the final decision. Public participation will be requested at

several points during the analysis. The Forest Service will be seeking

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

agencies, and other individuals or organizations who may be interested

in or affected by the proposed projects. This input will be used in

preparation of the draft and final EIS. The scoping process will

include:

Identifying potential issues.

Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.

Exploring addition alternatives which will be derived from

issues recognized during scoping activities.

Identifying potential environmental effects of this

project and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects

and connected actions).

The analysis will consider a range of alternatives, including the

proposed action, no action, and other reasonable action alternatives.

Estimated Dates for Filing

The draft North Fork Fire Recovery EIS is expected to be filed with

the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for

public review by April, 1995. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of

Availability of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment

period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes

the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register.

The final EIS is scheduled to be completed by August, 1995. In the

final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and

responses received during the comment period that pertain to the

environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable

laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision

regarding the proposal.

Reviewer's Obligations

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

draft 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). Also environment objections that could be raised at the

draft environmental impact statement stage 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

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 meaningfully consider and respond to them in the final EIS.

To be most helpful, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific

as possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merit

of the alternatives discussed. 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.

Responsible Official

Robert L. Schrenk, Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest, 506

US Highway 2 West, Libby, MT 59923 is the responsible Official. I have

delegated the responsibility to prepare the North Fork Fire Salvage

Environmental Impact Statement to Robert J. Thompson, District Ranger,

Rexford Ranger District. As the Responsible Office I will decide which,

if any, of the proposed projects will be implemented. I will document

the decision and reasons for the decisions in the Record of Decision.

That decision will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations.

Dated: January 30, 1995.

Robert L. Schrenk,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95-3046 Filed 2-7-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M