Revised Land and Resource Management Plans for the National Forests in Alabama, Chattahoochee/Oconee National Forests, Cherokee National Forest, Jefferson National Forest, and the Sumter National Forest

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Revised Land and Resource Management Plans for the National

Forests in Alabama, Chattahoochee/Oconee National Forests, Cherokee

National Forest, Jefferson National Forest, and the Sumter National

Forest

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare Environmental Impact Statements

(NOI).

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 36 CFR 219.10(g), the Regional Forester for the

Southern Region gives notice of the agency's intent to prepare

Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for the revisions of the Forest

Land and Resource Management Plans (Forest Plans) for the above named

National Forests. For the Jefferson National Forest, this notice

revises their June 28, 1993 notice of intent to prepare an EIS to

revise their Forest Plan. According to 36 CFR 219.10(g), forest plans

are ordinarily revised on a 10-15 year cycle. Several amendments have

been made to each plan since it originated. The existing forest plans

were approved on the following dates:

National Forests in Alabama; March 10, 1986

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests; September 25, 1985

Cherokee National Forest; April 1, 1986

Jefferson National Forest; October 16, 1985

Sumter National Forest; August 2, 1985

The agency invites written comments within the scope of the

analysis described below. In addition, the agency gives notice that an

open and full environmental analysis and decision-making process will

occur on the proposed actions so that interested and affected people

are aware of how they may participate and contribute to the final

decision.

DATES: The agency expects to file the draft EISs (DEIS) with the

Environmental Protection Agency and make them available for public

comment in January of 1998. The Agency expects to file the final EISs

in December of 1998. Comments concerning the scope of the analysis

should be received by December 2, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Forest Supervisors of the

appropriate Forest at the following addresses:

National Forests in Alabama, 946 Chestnut, Montgomery, AL 36107-3010

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests, 508 Oak Street, NW, Gainesville,

GA 30501

Cherokee National Forest, 2800 N. Ocoee Street (P.O. Box 2010),

Cleveland, TN 37320-2010

Jefferson National Forest, 5162 Valleypointe Parkway, Roanoke, VA 24019

Sumter National Forest, 4931 Broad River Road, Columbia, SC 29210-4021

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

National Forests in Alabama: Planning Team Leader--Rick Morgan--phone:

(334) 832-4470

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests: Planning Staff Officer--Caren

Brisco--phone: (770) 536-0541

Cherokee National Forest: Planning Staff Officer--Keith Sandifer--

phone: (615) 476-9700

Jefferson National Forest: Planning Staff Officer--Kenneth Landgraf--

phone: (540) 265-5100

Sumter National Forest: Planning Team Leader--Tony White--phone: (803)

561-4000

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The Regional Forester for the Southern Region

located at 1720 Peachtree Road, NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30367, is the

responsible official.

Affected Counties

This Notice of Intent affects the following Counties:

[[Page 40184]]

National Forests in Alabama: Bibb, Calhoun, Cherokee, Chilton,

Clay, Cleburne, Dallas, Hale, Perry, Talladega, Tuscaloosa, Franklin,

Lawrence, Winston, Covington, Escambia, and Macon; Alabama.

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests: Banks, Catoosa, Chattooga,

Dawson, Fannin, Floyd, Gilmer, Gordon, Habersham, Lumpkin, Murray,

Rabun, Stephens, Towns, Union, Walker, White, Whitfield, Green, Jasper,

Jones, Monroe, Morgan, Oconee, Oglethorpe, and Putnam: Georgia.

Cherokee National Forest: Polk, McMinn, Monroe, Greene, Cocke,

Unicoi, Sullivan, Washington, Johnson, and Carter; Tennessee.

Jefferson National Forest: Letcher and Pike; Kentucky--Monroe; West

Virginia--Bedford, Bland, Botetourt, Carroll, Craig, Dickenson, Giles,

Grayson, Lee, Montgomery, Pulaski, Roanoke, Rockbridge, Scott, Smyth,

Tazewell, Washington, Wise, and Wythe; Virginia.

Sumter National Forest: Abbeville, Chester, Edgefield, Fairfield,

Greenwood, Laurens, McCormick, Newberry, Oconee, Saluda, and Union;

South Carolina.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background Information

1. An Ecological Approach to Planning

The general model for an ecological approach to land management

planning includes four iterative steps: assessment decision,

implementations, and monitoring. The first step involves assessment of

the forest situation that characterize the biophysical and social

ecosystem components at appropriate temporal and spatial scales. These

provide a comprehensive description and evaluation of ecosystem

structures, processes, functions, and social and economic conditions

that are critical to understanding the present conditions and

projecting future trends. From this information, decisions can be made

to establish ``desired future conditions'', set goals and objectives,

make resource allocations, establish standards and guidelines,

determine monitoring requirements, and establish priorities. Following

the implementation of those decisions, monitoring and evaluation will

determine if changes should be made in the implementation, if there is

a need for new decision, or if there is a need to re-assess the

situation.

In the Southern Appalachian area, a Southern Appalachian Assessment

has been completed. Also completed is the Chattooga Ecosystem

Management Demonstration Project (Chattooga Project) which was an

effort to consolidate and integrate ecological information for the

Chattooga River Watershed which is located at the junction of North

Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia; and includes three National

Forests.

Information from these analyses that cross State boundaries and

involve multiple National Forests, along with the individual National

Forests efforts to update their `'analysis of the management

situation'' (AMS), are now being used by these National Forests to

determine what decisions in their Land and Resource Management Plans

(LRMP) should be re-analyzed or changed in revising their LRMPs.

2. The Southern Appalachian Assessment

Recently the U.S. Forest Service has participated in the

preparation of the Southern Appalachian Assessment (SAA). The

Assessment culminated in a final Summary Report and four Technical

Reports that are now available to the public. It was prepared by the

U.S. Forest Service (the Southern Region of the National Forest System

and the Southern Forest Experiment Station) in cooperation with the

other Federal and state agencies that are members of SAMBA (Southern

Appalachian Man and the Biosphere Cooperative). The Assessment included

National Forest system lands and private lands in the George

Washington/Jefferson, Nantahala-Pisgah, Cherokee, and Chattahoochee

National Forests; and parts of the Sumter and Talladega National

Forests. Also involved were the National Park Service lands in the

Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Shenandoah National Park, and the

Blue Ridge Parkway.

The Assessment facilitates an interagency ecological approach to

management in the Southern Appalachian area by collecting and analyzing

broad-scale biological, physical, social and economic data to

facilitate better, more ecologically based forest level resource

analysis and management decisions. The Assessment was organized around

four ``themes''--(1) Terrestrial (including Forest Health, and Plant

and Animal Resources); (2) Aquatic Resources; (3) Atmospheric Resources

and (4) Social/Cultural/Economic Resources (which includes the Human

Dimension; Roadless Areas and Wilderness; Recreation; and Timber Supply

and Demand).

As the National Forests in the Southern Appalachians were

conducting their forest level efforts to describe their ``Analysis of

the Management Situation'' (AMS), they were also providing information

for the larger-scale analysis in the Southern Appalachian Assessment.

The Assessment supports the revision of the LRMPs by describing how

the lands, resources, people and management of the National Forests

interrelate within the larger context of the Southern Appalachian area.

The SAA, however, is not a ``decision document'' and it did not involve

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. As broad-scale

issues were identified at the sub-regional level (Southern Appalachian

Mountain area) in the Assessment, the individual National Forest's role

in resolving these broad-scale issues becomes a part of the ``need for

change'' at the Forest level.

Public involvement has been important throughout both of these

processes. Continuing public involvement leading to formulation of

alternatives for the forest plan revision analysis efforts will now be

conducted through the ``scoping'' period that follows the issuance of

this Notice of Intent.

3. The Beginning of the Forest Plan Revision Efforts for the National

Forests in Alabama, the Chattahoochee-Oconee, the Cherokee, and the

Sumter National Forests

The National Forests in the Southern Appalachian area have applied

several efforts to begin their revisions. The main objective thus far

has been to do the analysis leading to a proposal to change forest

management direction. A key part of that analysis, for significant

portions of each of the forests, has been the SAA.

On February 24, 1995, a Notice was placed in the Federal Register

(Vol. 60, No. 37) that identified the relationships between the SAA and

the Forest Plan revisions of the National Forests in Alabama,

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests, Cherokee National Forest, and

the Sumter National Forest.

A February 24, 1995 Notice in the Federal Register (Vol. 60, No.

37) identified; (1) that the National Forests in Alabama,

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests, Cherokee National Forest, and

the Sumter National Forest were each preparing an Analysis of the

Management Situation (AMS), and (2) the relationship between the

Southern Appalachian Assessment and those efforts. Since then,

preparation of a Draft AMSs has included updating resource inventories,

defining the current situation, estimating supply capabilities and

resource demands, evaluating the results of monitoring, determining the

``Need for Change'' (36 CFR 219.12(e)(5)), review of previous public

comments, and public meetings or other outreach. These Draft AMSs are

[[Page 40185]]

now available for public review. Together with the results of the SAA,

they are the present basis of the issues/Forest Plan decisions that

will be examined during the plan revision process. Additional topics

will be developed as needed to respond to public comments received on

this Notice of Intent during the 120-day public comment period.

In the past, a ``Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement'' was issued prior to the development of the AMS.

However, for these Forest Plan revisions, an effort was made to first

define the current situation and estimate an ``initial need for

change'' in a Draft AMS prior to issuing a Notice of Intent to Prepare

an Environmental Impact Statement. We hope this will lead to improved

``scoping'', which will help the public provide more concise and

specific comments. This should make it possible to develop more

responsive alternatives to be analyzed in the Environmental Impact

Statements accompanying the individual Revised Forest Plans.

4. Status of the Jefferson, George Washington, and Nantahala-Pisgah

National Forests

The Jefferson National Forest previously issued a Notice of Intent

to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for its Revised LRMP on

June 28, 1993. This NOI revises that earlier notice, and provides

notification that the planning process on the Jefferson National Forest

will now coincide with the planning process and timelines for the other

National Forests in the Southern Appalachians.

Although the George Washington National Forest and the Nantahala-

Pisgah National Forests were part of the Southern Appalachian

Assessment, they are not beginning plan revisions at this time. The

George Washington National Forest completed its Final Revised Forest

Plan on January 21, 1993, and the Nantahala-Pasgah National Forests

completed a significant amendment, Amendment 5 to their Land and

Resource Management Plan on March 18, 1994. However, as information

from the Southern Appalachian Assessment and the other National Forest

planning process are being analyzed, a need to change these plans may

be identified to ensure consistency between the National Forests in the

Southern Appalachians.

5. The Role of Forest Plans

National Forest System resource allocation and management decisions

are made in two stages. The first stage is the forest plan, which

allocates lands and resources to various uses or conditions by

establishing management areas and management prescriptions for the land

and resources within the plan area. The second stage is approval of

project decisions.

Forest plans do not compel the agency to undertake any site-

specific projects; rather, they establish overall goals and objectives

(or desired resource conditions) that the individual National Forest

will strive to meet. Forest plans also establish limitations on what

actions may be authorized, and what conditions must be met, during

project decision-making.

The primary decisions made in a forest plan include:

(1) Establishment of the forest-wide multiple-use goals and

objectives (36 CFR 219.11(b)).

(2) Establishment of forest-wide management requirements (36 CFR

219.13 to 219.27).

(3) Establishment of multiple-use prescriptions and associated

standards and guidelines for each management area (36 CFR 219.11(c)).

(4) Determination of land that is suitable for the production of

timber (16 U.S.C. 1604(k) and 36 CFR 219.14).

(5) Establishment of allowable sale quantity for timber within a

time frame specified in the plan (36 CFR 219.16).

(6) Establishment of monitoring and evaluation requirements (36 CFR

219.11(d)).

(7) Recommendation of roadless areas as potential wilderness areas

(36 CFR 219.17).

(8) Where applicable, designate those lands administratively

available for oil and gas leasing; and when appropriate, authorize the

Bureau of Land Management to offer specific lands for leasing. (36 CFR

228.102 (d) and (e))

The authorization of site-specific activities within a plan area

occurs through project decision-making, the second stage of forest

planning. Project decision-making must comply with NEPA procedures and

must include a determination that the project is consistent with the

forest plan.

6. The Role of Scoping in Revising the Southern Appalachian Land and

Resource Management Plans

This NOI includes a description of the preliminary Issues and

``Proposed Actions'' for the five National Forests in the Southern

Appalachians that are revising their LRMPs. The ``Proposed Actions''

are actions within one or more of the plan decisions identified in the

purpose and need.

Scoping to receive public comments on the preliminary issues and

proposed actions will begin following the publication of this NOI. The

public comments received during this comment period will be used to

further refine the preliminary issues that should be addressed, the

forest plan decisions that need to be analyzed (the ``proposed

actions''/``need for change''), and to help define the range of

alternatives that will be developed.

For more information on how the public can become involved during

the Scoping period, see Section 6 of this NOI.

B. Purpose and Need for Action

This Notice applies to each of the 5 Forest Plans. The need to

revise these plans is driven by the changing conditions identified in

the SAA and in individual Forest assessments as well as the changing

public values associated with these National Forests. These conditions

and values make it appropriate that all of these Southern Appalachian

Forest Plan Revisions be done simultaneously.

The purpose for revision rests in the requirements of the National

Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning required by the

National Forest Management Act and its implementing regulations

contained in Chapter 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section

219. According to 36 CFR 219.10(g), forest plans are ordinarily revised

on a 10-15 year cycle. These five forests are all completing these

cycles.

C. Preliminary Issues

1. Introduction

Early in the process there are several sources of what are called

``preliminary issues''. These are issues stated so that the public,

when learning about the environmental analysis, can focus their needs

and preferences on the forest plan decisions. One source of information

leading to issue development has been the Southern Appalachian

Assessment. The Assessment has produced some findings and preliminary

issues of broad public interest which have implications that must be

considered. This consideration may involve one or more or all Forests,

depending on the issue. In addition, the Forests, working with their

publics, have identified preliminary issues specific to their Forest.

2. Findings of the Southern Appalachian Assessment

The Southern Appalachian Assessment (SAA) provides key information

concerning those portions of the National Forests that are within the

SAA area that will be used in plan

[[Page 40186]]

revisions. The SAA teams compiled existing region-wide information on

resource status and trends, conditions, and impacts of various land

management activities and resource uses that apply to portions of each

of the five forests that are revising Forest Plans. Several preliminary

issues are listed that are associated with the findings of the

Assessment. The findings include:

Aquatic Resources

Water Quality and Quantity

The Southern Appalachian ecosystem is widely recognized as one of

the most diverse in the temperate region. The headwaters of nine major

rivers lie within the boundaries of the Southern Appalachians, making

it a source of drinking water for much of the Southeast. In addition,

as a general finding, there has been a reduction in water use in the

Southern Appalachian area.

Preliminary issues or management opportunities:

--Protection, maintenance and improvement of water resources within the

SAA area in coordination with multiple use management.

--Coordination of water quality (and quantity on some forests) needs

with adjacent forests, land owners and other agencies with water

management responsibilities.

--Insuring water quality and quantity needs for channel maintenance and

biotic resources.

Stream Condition and Habitat Quality

The SAA aquatics report identified streams, water bodies, and

riparian habitat that were degraded to varied extent.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Restoration of degraded streams, habitat and riparian loss.

Protection of Aquatic Species

Diversity of aquatic species across the Southern Appalachian area

is high, with a rich fauna of fish, molluscs, crayfish, and aquatic

insects. Approximately 39 percent of the SAA area is in the range for

wild trout, consisting of 33,088 miles of potential wild trout streams.

The three trout species within the SAA area are vulnerable to stream

acidification, which is increasing, particularly in the northern part

of the Assessment area and higher-elevation streams. The heritage

program files indicate there are 190 species that are endangered,

threatened, or of special concern within the SAA area. Mussel

populations may experience additional declines over the next 30 years

in the Tennessee River basin.

Preliminary issues or management opportunities:

--Protection for these aquatic species and maintenance of the water

quality supporting them.

--Management for trout in suitable habitat areas.

Human Induced Impacts on Aquatic Resources

Although human activities that impair aquatic habitat have

decreased, population growth and concomitant land development have the

potential to increase pressure on aquatic resources. More than 80

percent of the river miles in most watersheds representing 75 percent

of the river miles in the SAA area are rated as fully supporting their

uses (fully supporting is a measure which states that 90 percent of the

time the stream meets water quality criteria). Aquatic Resources within

the SAA are affected by acid mine waste, National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) facilities, sedimentation (in certain

localized situations), urban and rural development, and industrial

facilities.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--How the National Forests will manage human induced impacts to the

aquatic resources.

Atmospheric Resource

Air Pollution

The SAA found that visibility in the Southern Appalachians has

decreased since the 1940's as haziness has intensified due mainly to

sulfates in the air. Improvements are expected; however, once the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990 are implemented. It is expected that there

will be a 50 percent reduction in SO2 emissions nationwide. Acid

deposition is also a problem in the region and headwater streams are

most susceptible to acidification (see also, aquatic resource

discussion). In addition, nitrogen oxide emissions are expected to

increase, contributing to visibility impairment, acid deposition, and

ground level ozone, which can cause growth reduction and physiological

stress in trees. The greatest potential for growth loss due to the

ozone concentration is in the northern and southern ends of the

Southern Appalachian area and wherever sensitive hardwoods are located

at higher elevations. Particulate matter in the air is a concern, while

apparently not one that is increasing currently, especially while land

managers are anticipating accelerating the use of prescribed fire for

numerous purposes.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Adverse effects of air pollution on visibility, nitrogen oxide

emissions, and acid deposition.

--Management's increasing use of prescribed fire and particulate matter

in the atmosphere.

Social, Cultural, and Economics

Effects on Local Communities

The combined natural resource sector (wood-products manufacturing,

forestry, mining, and tourism) provides nearly 10 percent of SAA area

employment, 7 percent of wages, and 12 percent of the industry output.

The number of employees (including seasonal or part-time) associated

with tourism has doubled between 1977 and 1991.

Over 30,000 jobs are directly related to recreation facilities on

Federal land. The counties with the greatest number of these jobs are

located near the area's two National Parks and the large concentration

of National Forests in western North Carolina. Counties with white-

water rivers, such as the Chattooga, Nantahala, and Ocoee have seen

increases in recreation-related employment.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Resource allocation and its effect on local economies, including

stabilizing and helping the economies and social structure of local

communities.

Societal Changes in the Southern Appalachian Area

Changes in the social pattern has effects on the management of

natural resources in the region. Changing relative values between

commodity and non-commodity uses of forest resources and Southern

Appalachian ecosystems are cited by the SAA. While not consistent

across the Southern Appalachian area, the population has increased 27.8

percent in the region between 1970 and 1990. For natural resource

management, however, the increase in the area's population is less

significant than the economic development that accompanied the increase

and the attitudes and cultural attachment that exists here.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity.

--The mix of natural resource goods and services from National Forest

System lands that is sensitive to evolving demographics, attitudes, and

needs.

[[Page 40187]]

Wood products from public lands

The Federal share of timberland in individual counties ranges up to

69 percent. The decisions made by Federal agencies, therefore, can

strongly influence local timber production and the economy in certain

parts of the region.

The National Forests hold a large share of high-grade oak

sawtimber. Since this is the kind of timber that is in shortest supply

and greatest demand, National Forest timber sales can affect the

markets for high-quality oak. The terrain in National Forests is more

rugged and there are fewer roads, making the timber on these lands more

expensive to harvest.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--The role of the National Forests in supplying forest products, and

the association of these products to specific Desired Future Conditions

on individual Forests.

Recreation settings and use

Only around 8 percent of the Southern Appalachians, including the

Great Smokey Mountain National Park, can be classified as having

``remote'' recreation settings. About two-thirds of these settings are

on public lands. About 18 percent of the Southern Appalachians are

highly developed settings with 2 percent in urban, 4 percent in

suburban, and 12 percent in transition of emerging development

settings. About 45 prevent of the area is rural, and about 24 percent

is natural-appearing forests.

Congestion in recreation use tends to occur on the shores of lakes

and streams, because the settings are in high demand. Due to limited

sources of supply, settings and facilities for mountain biking,

horseback riding, off-highway vehicle driving, and white-water rafting

often are congested.

A high proportion of recreation use on Federally owned land occurs

at the outer edges of the Appalachian chain. As population centers

grow, use patterns will creep toward the center of the mountain ranges.

Wilderness and roadless areas account for 4 percent of all land in

the Southern Appalachians. As population increases and urban areas

expand, there is concern that the wilderness resource will be affected

by overuse.

Preliminary issues or management opportunities:

--The mix of recreation settings on National Forest system lands and

the management of each.

--Increasing urbanization of lands adjacent to the National Forests and

the effects on Forest Service management.

--Access to public lands.

Roadless and Wilderness

A total of 752,654 acres of inventoried roadless areas were

identified in the SAA National Forests ranging in size from 2,035 acres

to 27,293 acres and representing 61 percent of all roadless areas

within the SAA area.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Management of these and other areas to meet wilderness, recreational,

and other resource demands.

Terrestrial--Plant and Animal Resources

Current conditions and trends of forest landscapes

The Southern Appalachian Assessment described current conditions

and trends of forested landscapes. These were applied to 9 forest

classes and 4 successional classes. The Assessment found that currently

National Forests contain 17 percent of the region's forests, 7 percent

of the early successional habitats and 42 percent of the late

successional habitats.

Currently around 3 percent of National Forest system land is in

early successional habitat. This is 4 percent below mid 1970s National

Forest levels. There were 10 species associates identified for this

habitat. Forty-five percent of the National Forest System lands in the

SAA area are in late successional habitat. This represents an increase

of 34 percent since 1970.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Desired future conditions for the mix of these habitat conditions

must be determined, as well as the larger landscape conditions

(forested as opposed to agriculture).

Old Growth forests

Around 1.1 million acres of possible old-growth forest were

identified in an initial inventory of SAA National Forests. Patches

identified vary from 1 acre to 13,000 acres in size and across a full

range of vegetative communities.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Management of these areas, as well as other types of areas, and their

spacial allocation to meet the biological, social, and cultural

objectives associated with this condition.

Rare Communities

The Assessment found that 31 rare communities are key to the

conservation of 65 percent of the Federally listed T&E species and 66

percent of the species with viability concern (globally ranked G1, G2,

G3) in the Southern Appalachians. Examples of these rare communities

are high elevation grassy and heath balds, mountain longleaf pine

woodlands, granitic domes, high elevation rocky summits, and sphagnum

and shrub bogs.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Management of rare communities.

Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered (T&E) and Viability Concern

Species

The Assessment looks at 51 Federally listed T&E species (11 habitat

associations) and the needs of 366 viability concern species (17

habitat associations). While not all of these species and habitats

occur on National Forest system lands, the importance of this listing

lies in the fact that the Forest Service manages habitat that is often

key to preservation and recovery of many species.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Recovery and management of Federally listed T&E species and Forest

Service sensitive species.

Game Species

The SAA provided population trends, current status, and some future

forecasts for 10 major game species.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--The role of the National Forests in sustaining habitats to support

the major game species identified in the SAA for public hunting and

viewing.

Black Bear Habitat

The SAA determined that National Forests contain around 4 million

acres of potentially suitable black bear habitat, of which about 77

percent has relatively low road density (less than 1.6 miles of road

length per square mile) and 51 percent has less than 0.8 miles per

square mile. Habitat parameters include open road density, early

successional habitats, late successional habitats capable of producing

denning sites, and oak mast. Black bear have experienced a moderate

range expansion in some parts of the Southern Appalachians over the

last 25 years.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--The Desired Future Condition of black bear habitat in the Southern

Appalachian National Forests.

Area-Sensitive Forest Bird Habitats

A total of 15.8 million acres of mid- to late-successional

deciduous forest

[[Page 40188]]

habitat is contained in the SAA area. Approximately 66 percent of these

acres are suitable forest interior habitat. Around 8.2 million acres

are in forest tracts greater than 5,000 acres in size. These larger

tracts have the potential to support all 16 area sensitive landbirds

(primarily neotropical migrants). Habitat fragmentation and edge effect

were considered. It is estimated that National Forests are currently

providing 39 percent of the acreage in these large forest tracts in the

SAA area. Taking into account the conditions of the larger landscape,

the SAA estimated that around 90 percent of the habitat on National

Forest system land is forest interior.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Management of area-sensitive forest bird habitats.

High Elevation Forest Habitats

About 32 percent of the high elevation montane spruce-fir/northern

hardwood habitats in the Southern Appalachian area are found on

National Forest system land and 23 plant and animal species are

included in this habitat association. The Southern Appalachian National

Forests are facing possible declines, caused by balsam woolly adelgid

and air pollution, in this rare high elevation forest community.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--Possible declines in high elevation forest habitats due to balsam

wooly adelgid.

Riparian Habitat

The SAA looked at seeps, springs, and streamside areas. A total 1.5

million acres of these types are in forested cover. Of this, the SAA

estimated that National Forests contain around 219,000 acres of

forested riparian habitat. The future quality of these habitats is

uncertain and may decline due to threats from hemlock wooly adelgid, an

exotic insect.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--The Desired Future Conditions for both terrestrial and aquatic

riparian habitats, including the specific management of threats to

these habitats from hemlock wooly adelgid.

Forest Vegetation Health

The SAA addresses changes in forest vegetation or soil productivity

in response to human-caused disturbances or natural processes,

potential effects of presence and absence of fire, how the health of

the forest ecosystem is being affected by air pollution and native and

exotic pests, and how current and past management affecting the health

and integrity of forest vegetation in the Southern Appalachians.

The SAA predicts that the European gypsy moth will spread as far

south as northern Georgia by the year 2020. Other identified threats to

forest ecosystem health include dogwood anthracnose, butternut canker,

beech bark disease, southern pine beetle, and asiatic gypsy moth.

Preliminary issue or management opportunity:

--The role of fire in sustaining forest ecosystems.

--Management of identified threats to forest health.

3. Preliminary Issues That May Be Common to the Five Forests

Preliminary issues from the SAA and Forests have been identified

that apply to one or more or all of the National Forests in this

Notice. Some of these include aquatic resources, forest health,

inventoried roadless areas, scenery management, T&E and Sensitive

species, terrestrial resources, and wood products. Public response to

scoping will be used to develop the actual issues and the forest or

forests to which they apply.

4. Preliminary Issues on Individual National Forests

The Southern Appalachian area National Forests have also developed

some preliminary issues locally. Since each National Forest must

develop its own issues, the following lists will appear in somewhat

different formats. The forests will further refine these, incorporate

the findings of the SAA and finally, determine the significant issues

to carry forward into the NEPA analysis. The following issues are

identified by topics and more specific information is available at the

individual Forest by contacting the planners listed at the beginning of

this Notice.

National Forests in Alabama

Trails and associated facilities and their management

Wilderness area management

Special area designations

Forest cover types, old growth and rotations

Management tools to use in achieving desired future conditions

Mix of goods and services from the Forest

Longleaf restoration for RCW recovery

Habitat types

Fire management

Road density

Land acquisition and exchange

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests

Timber management

Road access management and resource protection

Trails

Water quality and increasing forest use

Biological diversity and timber harvesting

Biological diversity, visual quality and hardwood harvesting

Pesticide use and biological and social effects

Balance between rural and urban public demands

Cherokee National Forest

Public road planning, development and management

Timber resource management

Outdoor recreation settings

Trail network management

Forest uses and water quality

Management for biological diversity

Forest health and ecosystems and timber harvesting

Management and scenic attractiveness--landscape patterns

Mix of management intensities across the landscape

Jefferson National Forest

Biological Diversity

Old growth

Habitat fragmentation

Riparian areas/Aquatic ecosystems

Air quality

Special interest Areas

Proposed, endangered, threatened, and sensitive species

Wildlife and fish management

Tree health

Wilderness and rivers

Wilderness

Wild and Scenic Rivers

Mount Rogers National Recreation Area

Recreation opportunities

Recreation opportunities

Management practices

Timber management

Fire management

Grazing

Timber production

Transportation system

Access

Off-highway vehicles

Minerals, oil and gas

Oil and gas

Minerals

Special Uses

Social and economic concerns

Below cost timber sales

Subsurface property rights

Local community economies

Sumter National Forest

Biodiversity

Variety of communities

Old growth

Proposed threatened, endangered, and

[[Page 40189]]

sensitive species

Rare and underrepresented plan communities

Riparian areas

Landscape patterns

Role of fires in forest ecosystems

Mineral development

Protection of water and other resource values

Recreation

Mix and emphasis of opportunities

Chattooga Wild and Scenic River values

Timber Management

Lands available for timber management and

Desired timber products

D. Proposed Actions

Each National Forest did an initial analysis of its management

situation focusing on changes that have taken place during the current

ten-year planning period. During the past decade Forest Plan

Amendments, annual monitoring, five year reviews of implementing Forest

Plans, and working with the public have provided the Forests with

valuable information about changes that are needed in existing Forest

Plans. This initiates the determination of the need to establish or

change management direction as required under the NFMA regulations at

36 CFR 219.12.(e)(5). From this information each Forest compiled a

preliminary list of subject areas, or revision items, which will be

used to guide their plan revision. The proposed action is to develop or

revalidate goals, objectives, standards and guidelines, and

prescriptions.

1. Proposals that are Common to all Five Forests

When revising a forest plan, roadless areas of public lands within

and adjacent to the forest shall be evaluated and considered for

recommendation for wilderness areas 36 CFR 219.17(a). At least every 10

years each forest must review the designation of lands not suited for

timber production (36 CFR 219.14(d). For these forests, the ten-year

review is being done in this revision process so all alternatives will

evaluate existing suitability designations in light of current

conditions. The following list includes additional items that are

shared by all of the five National Forests listed in this Notice.

--Establish desired future condition(s), goals, and objectives for

resource management.

--Establish, where appropriate, consistent management direction across

adjacent National Forest boundaries.

--Establish new management areas;

--Determine suitability of lands for resource management;

--Determine timber allowable sale quantity (i.e., Timber ASQ);

--Analyze and recommend rivers and streams for eligibility and/or

suitability for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers

System;

--Replace the current Visual Management System with the new Scenery

Management System and establish new visual objectives;

--Adjust the plan monitoring and evaluation requirements to address the

elements of the revised plans;

--Identify any needed new special or unique areas;

--Address management needs for all forms of forest access; and

--Address the question of oil and gas leasing on the National Forest

system lands.

2. Proposed Actions That are Unique to the Individual Forests

In addition to those items listed in A., above, there are a number

of other proposed actions that the individual forests have developed.

The following lists are not complete; however, at this point they

contain many of the more specific actions that the forests have

determined to be important and that should be incorporated in the

respective plan revisions. Additional actions will be added and some

may be deleted as a result of scoping.

National Forests in Alabama

--Identify, maintain and/or restore the LLP/wiregrass community on the

Conecuh National Forest where it is appropriate to do so;

--Address the 3-5 year burning rotation on the sandy soil types found

primarily on the Tuskegee and Conecuh Districts and conflicts with

ecosystem relationships;

--Incorporate into the Forest Plan, recovery plans for 9 T&E species;

--Incorporate conservation agreements for sensitive species--as needed;

--Incorporate the new RCW EIS into plan revision;

--Examine land ownership adjustment needs across the Forest;

--Incorporate new management direction for over-used areas, especially

wilderness areas and trails, and encourage use of alternate trailheads

and areas associated with the Sipsey Wilderness;

--Upgrade existing developed recreation sites to meet current

standards, and provide greater accessibility for people with

disabilities;

--Provide guidance for increased interpretative services and maps for

wilderness areas and trails; and

--Provide management direction for regeneration and conversion to

address changing conditions/emphases.

--Establish management guidelines for the fisheries program to consider

where and when to install habitat structures and to fertilize lakes.

--Establish guidelines for addressing noxious weeds and exotic species,

especially where they impact sensitive species or rare communities.

--Determine if grazing should be continued on the Conecuh National

Forest, and if it should be woods grazing or pasture grazing.

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests

--Establish Forest Plan goals and objectives, and management direction

for special forest products (medicinal herbs, craft material, etc.);

--Incorporate management requirements of the Regional Forester's June

1995, decision and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Recovery Plan

(when completed) for the red cockaded woodpecker which apply to the

Oconee National Forest.

--General forest lands need different management emphasis across the

forests. Currently, the general forest area (MA-16) has the same goals

and objectives for all lands. This could be true for other MA's as

well.

--Clarify the use of timber harvesting to meet Forest Plan goals and

objectives. The revised Forest Plan should incorporate standards and

guidelines to assist the Districts in determining those conditions and

situations that would enable a sale to be classified as forest

stewardship (timber purposes, personal use, wildlife habitat, etc.)

--Add timber quality as a objective of timber management.

--Adjust acres on which planned timber harvesting could occur due to

reductions for resource protection such as: riparian areas, cultural

resources, Proposed, Endangered, and Sensitive Species (PETS), and any

other factors which would effectively reduce the suitable land base.

--Establish standards, guidelines, and monitoring requirements for

single-tree selection.

--Update direction for timber harvest in riparian areas.

--Establish recreational carrying capacities.

--Establish management direction for the Chattahoochee National Forest

to restore appropriate streams to native brook trout.

[[Page 40190]]

--Establish management direction for rare communities identified in the

Southern Appalachian Assessment.

--Establish coordinated desired future conditions, goals, objectives

and direction for the Chattooga River Watershed between the Sumter, the

Chattahoochee-Oconee, and National Forests in North Carolina.

--Revise other management direction to incorporate new information

about: range management; transportation systems; development of

monitoring and recovery plans for PETS; redesign shade protection

guidelines for aquatic habitat needs and establish direction for woody

debris and aquatic habitat management; review and update air quality

direction to clarify needs for Wilderness, non-Wilderness, problem

areas, and relationship to State permitting process.

Cherokee National Forest

--Identify special or unique areas, and establish goals for management

of such areas;

--Establish guidelines for production of special forest products, and

minerals.

--Establish, where appropriate, consistent management direction across

adjacent National Forest boundaries.

--Revise guidelines that respond to threats from pests and noxious

species.

--Clarify the use of timber harvesting and other planned human-caused

disturbances to meet Forest Plan goals and objectives.

Jefferson National Forest

--Develop goals, objectives, standards and guidelines for salvage of

dead and dying timber where deemed appropriate. Determine and clearly

describe priorities for salvage;

--Consider the effects of long-term fire suppression on ecosystems and

the role of prescribed fire as a management tool;

--Address the use and effects of livestock grazing to achieve multiple-

use goals and objectives;

--Add direction to provide for new Federal regulations and the 1987

Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act;

--Consider subsurface ownership when evaluating land allocations; and

--Provide minimum management requirements and direction for special

uses (e.g., linear rights-of-way, military exercises, electronic sites

and commercial services.)

Sumter National Forest

--Coordinate with the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest and the

National Forests in North Carolina to establish goals, objectives, and

desired future conditions for the Chattooga River Watershed.

--Link land ownership adjustment priorities with desired future

condition, goals, and objective establishment.

--Establish, where appropriate, consistent management direction across

adjacent National Forest boundaries.

--Consider insect and disease in development and evaluation of

alternatives and effects.

--Consider historical Forest budget trends in alternative analysis.

--Incorporate carrying capacity (biological, physical, and social) of

the Chattooga River in establishment of desired future condition,

goals, and objectives for the Wild and Scenic River.

--Consider ecological classification in developing management areas and

desired future conditions.

--Develop desired future conditions that integrate coordinated resource

goals and objectives that will facilitate the development of multiple-

use projects.

--Revise the monitoring and evaluation direction to include

effectiveness monitoring for Forest Plan goals, objectives, and desired

future conditions.

--Develop two separate indicator lists (mountains and piedmont) to

incorporate new PETS species that are readily monitored, forest

interior species, area-sensitive species, and species that may indicate

effects at a landscape scale.

E. Preliminary Alternatives

The actual alternatives presented in each forest's draft EIS will

portray a full range of responses to issues which are significant on

the individual Forest. The five separate draft EIS's will examine the

effects of implementing strategies to achieve different desired future

conditions for each forest and will develop possible management

objectives and opportunities that would move the forests toward desired

conditions. A preferred alternative will be identified in each draft

EIS.

The range of alternatives presented in each DEIS will include one

that continues current management direction and others will also be

provided to address the range of issues developed in the scoping

process.

F. Involving the Public

The objective in this process for public involvement is to create

an atmosphere of openess where all members of the public feel free to

share information with the Forest Service and its employees on a

regular basis. All parts of this process will be structured to maintain

this openess.

The Forest Service is seeking information, comments, and assistance

from Federal, State, and local agencies, and other individuals or

organizations who may be interested in or affected by the proposed

action. This input will be utilized in the preparation of the draft

environmental impact statements. The range of alternatives to be

considered in the EIS will be based on the identification of

significant public issues, management concerns, resource management

opportunities, and plan decisions specific to each of the National

Forests. Public participation will be solicited by notifying in person

and/or by mail, known interested and affected publics. News releases

will be used to give the public general notice, and public scoping

meetings will be conducted on each National Forest.

Public participation will be sought throughout the plan revision

process and will be especially important at several points along the

way. The first opportunity to comment will be during the scoping

process (40 CFR 1501.7). Scoping includes: (1) Identifying additional

potential issues (other than those previously described), (2) from

these, identifying significant issues or those which have been covered

by prior environmental review, (4) exploring additional alternatives,

and (5) identifying potential environmental effects of the proposed

action and alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative

effects).

As part of the first step in scoping, a series of public

opportunities are scheduled to explain the public role in the planning

process and provide an opportunity for public input. Formats, times and

places will vary. These are determined by the individual forest to meet

the needs of their publics. For more specific information on times and

locations, please contact the Forests. These meetings will occur as

follows:

National Forest in Alabama

Proposed Locations and Dates:

Double Springs, Alabama; August 6, 1996

Brent, Alabama; August 8, 1996

Heflin, Alabama; August 13, 1996

Talladega, Alabama; August 14, 1996

Andalusia, Alabama; August 20, 1996

Tuskegee, Alabama; August 22, 1996

Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests

Proposed Locations and Dates:

Madison, Georgia; September 5, 1996

Gainesville, Georgia; September 7,

[[Page 40191]]

1996

Dalton, Georgia; September 10, 1996

Cherokee National Forest

Proposed Locations and Dates:

Elizabethton, Tennessee; October 7, 1996

Greeneville, Tennessee; October 8, 1996

Alcoa, Tennessee; October 10, 1996

Tellico Plains; October 15, 1996

Ducktown, Tennessee; October 16, 1996

Cleveland, Tennessee; October 17, 1996

Nashville, Tennessee; October 21, 1996

Jefferson National Forest

Proposed Location and Date:

Mt. Rogers NRA, Jefferson National Forest, Virginia; August 17,

1996

Sumter National Forest

Proposed Locations and Dates:

Columbia, South Carolina; August 22, 1996

Edgefield, South Carolina; August 26, 1996

Newberry, South Carolina; September 10, 1996

Walhalla, South Carolina; September 21, 1996

G. Release and Review of the EISs

Each Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is expected to be

filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be

available for public comment by January, 1998. At that time, the EPA

will publish a notice of availability of each DEIS (one for each

Forest's DEIS) in the Federal Register. The comment period on each DEIS

will be 3 months from the date the EPA publishes the notice of

availability 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. First, reviewers of

the DEIS 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, environmental objections that

could be raised at the DEIS stage but that are not raised until after

completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) 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 3 month comment period so 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 each FEIS.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

and concerns on the proposed actions, comments on each DEIS 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 DEIS or the merits of the alternatives

formulated and discussed in the statements. 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.

After the comment periods end on each DEIS, the comments will be

analyzed, considered, and responded to by the Forest Service in

preparing each FEIS. The FEISs are scheduled to be completed in

December, 1998. The responsible official will consider the comments,

responses, environmental consequences discussed in each FEIS, and

applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making a decision

regarding these revisions. The responsible official will document the

decision and reasons for the decision in a Record of Decision for each

Forest Plan. Each decision will be subject to appeal in accordance with

36 CFR 217.

The responsible official for each of the Forest Plans is the

Regional Forester, Southern Region, 1720 Peachtree Road, NW., Atlanta,

Georgia 30367.

Dated: July 25, 1996.

Gloria Manning,

Deputy Regional Forester, NRT.

[FR Doc. 96-19429 Filed 7-31-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M