Environmental Impact Statement, Bohemia Timber Sale, Tongass National Forest, AL

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Environmental Impact Statement, Bohemia Timber Sale, Tongass

National Forest, AL

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Revised notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact

statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will issue a supplemental Draft and Final

EIS for the Bohemia Timber Sale, hereafter referred to as the 95

Supplement. The 95 Supplement will reroute Road 6031 around LUD II

lands; include additional analysis of Unit 541; and identify management

objectives for sensitive species in the Bohemia Project Area. This

Notice of Intent (NOI) updates and replaces the March 2, 1992 Notice.

The original NOI was published at 55 FR 2123-01 in the 1/22/90 Federal

Register. The second NOI was published at 57 FR 7363-01 in the

3/2/92 Federal Register.

Other than rerouting Road 6031, the proposed action remains the

same, to harvest 10-40 million board feet of commercial timber within

the Bohemia area and construct the associated road system. The timber

would be sold in one or more timber sales beginning in September 1995.

The purpose of this project is to meet the goals of the Forest Plan

by providing 10 to 40 million board feet of timber for harvest. Current

inventories show that the area could provide this much volume while

meeting all existing standards and guidelines for timber harvest and

road construction. The Tongass Timber Reform Act directed the Forest

Service, through the Secretary of Agriculture, ``to the extent

consistent with providing for multiple use and sustained use of all

renewable forest resources, seek to provide a supply of timber from the

Tongass National Forest which (1) Meets the annual market demand for

timber and (2) meets the market demand from such forest for each

planning cycle.'' This project is part of a timber management program

designed to meet that direction. A recent timber market assessment

(Morse, K. 1994) confirms that there is available capacity and strong

market demand for this timber volume.

The study area includes Value Comparison Units 424, 441.1, and 442

on Kupreanof Island in southeast Alaska. This area, encompassing

approximately 68,000 acres, has been allocated by the Tongass Land

Management Plan to Land Use Designations (LUDs) II and IV. LUD II areas

are to be managed in a roadless state except for specifically

authorized uses. LUD IV areas are to be managed to emphasize primarily

commodity or market resources.

The decision to be made is whether to harvest 10-40 million board

feet of timber from the Bohemia Study Area, construct the associated

road system, and if so, in which locations and under what conditions.

This decision will be made by Abigail R. Kimbell, the Stikine Area

Forest Supervisor.

[[Page 11068]] EFFECTIVE DATE: Public scoping began in January 1990 and

has been ongoing since that time. Interested publics are invited to

comment. The comment period on the supplemental Draft EIS will be 45

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

availability appears in the Federal Register. The supplemental Draft

EIS is scheduled for publication in March 1995 and the Final EIS in May

1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bohemia analysis is being

conducted by the Petersburg Ranger District, Stikine Area of the

Tongass National Forest. Questions and comments can be directed to Dave

Helmick, Forest Service, P.O. Box 309, Petersburg, AK 99833, phone

(907) 772-3841.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A public scoping letter was sent to all

persons who indicated an interest in the project by responding to the

Stikine Area Project Schedule, or who otherwise notified the Stikine

Area that they were interested in the Bohemia Timber Sale(s).

Alternatives include the no-action alternative and four action

alternatives that would harvest from 10 to 35 million board feet of

timber from 339 to 1,381 acres and construct 0.4 to 28 miles of

specified road.

The following issues were identified in the previous supplement and

will be addressed in the 95 Supplement only to the extent that they are

affected by the proposed modifications.

1. Water quality, fisheries, and soils.

2. Wildlife and wildlife habitat.

3. Subsistence resources and users.

4. Recreation resources and users.

5. Wilderness area and associated values.

6. Cultural resources.

7. Scenic quality.

8. Timber sale economics.

9. Transportation.

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 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,

533 [1978]). Also, environmental objections that could have been raised

at the Draft EIS stage may be waived or dismissed by the courts if not

raised until after completing the Final EIS. (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 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

helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft

environmental impact 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 in 40 CFR 1503.3 while addressing these points.

The responsible official for the decision is Abigail R. Kimbell,

Forest Supervisor, Stikine Area of the Tongass National Forest, Alaska

Region, Petersburg, Alaska.

Dated: February 14, 1995.

Abigail R. Kimbell,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95-4929 Filed 2-28-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M