Prince John Project, Boise National Forest, ID

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Prince John Project, Boise National Forest, ID

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Cascade Ranger District of the Boise National Forest will

prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for an integrated

resource management project in the headwaters of Big Creek, a tributary

of the North Fork Payette River below Cascade Reservoir. The project

area is located 15 miles east of Cascade, Idaho, and about 100 road

miles north of Boise, Idaho.

The agency invites written comments and suggestions on the scope of

the analysis. The agency also hereby gives notice of the environmental

analysis and decision-making process that will occur on the proposal so

interested and affected people are aware of how they may participate

and contribute to the final decision.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An environmental assessment (EA) for this

project was released for a 30-day public review and comment period in

April 1996 under the auspices of Public Law 104-19. Since that time,

and prior to the release of the Decision Notice, clarification on

implementation of Public Law 104-19 has made it necessary to prepare an

EIS for the project (Secretary of Agriculture Glickman, July 2, 1996).

Proposed Action

Five primary objectives have been identified for the project: (1)

Salvage the dead and imminently dead trees from the area; (2) achieve

the desired future condition of a healthy diverse forest in which

important resource values, including healthy timber stands, are

sustained; (3) improve big-game forage habitat, thin overcrowded stands

of plantations, and reduce natural fuel loads through the use of

prescribed fire; (4) reduce current sediment delivery from existing

roads by obliterating sections of these roads located immediately

adjacent to perennial streams; and (5) provide sawlogs and other wood

products to help sustain local sawmills and economies.

The proposed action would treat, either with timber harvest or

prescribed fire, a total of 3,695 acres in the 67,637-acre Gold Fork/

Clear Creek Management Area. An estimated 15 MMBF of timber would be

harvested through silvicultural treatment of the stands. Approximately

2,856 acres would be harvested by ground-based (916 acres), cable (772

acres), or helicopter (1,168 acres) yarding systems. The proposed

action would employ a variety of silvicultural systems including

clearcutting with reserve trees (9 percent), irregular shelterwood (74

percent), and individual tree selection (17 percent). Prescribed fire

would occur on another 839 acres to improve big-game forage habitat

(110 acres), thin overcrowded plantations (385 acres), and/or reduce

natural fuel loads (344 acres). The existing transportation system

would be improved to facilitate harvest and reduce sedimentation, with

individual sections of 28 miles of road being reconstructed, 4.7 miles

of new specified road construction, and 2 miles of temporary road

construction. An estimated 6.1 miles of existing roads, most of which

lie immediately adjacent to perennial streams, would be obliterated.

Portions of the new specified road construction would be necessary to

access heavily used recreational areas, such as Gold Fork Meadows.

Preliminary Issues

Anticipated concerns with the proposed action are: (1) The

project's visual impacts to the area as seen from Forest Highway 22;

(2) timber harvest and associated road construction could impact the

undeveloped characteristics and wilderness attributes of the Needles

and Stony Meadows Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRA's); (3) proposed

activities could result in a low likelihood of persistence of pileated

woodpecker, northern goshawk, and fisher within the analysis area; and

(4)

[[Page 43729]]

proposed activities could increase water yield in amounts that would

decrease bank stability, thus increasing sediment in Johnson Creek and

lower Big Creek.

Possible Alternatives to the Proposed Action

Three alternatives to the proposed action have been identified: (1)

A no action alternative; (2) An alternative that would exclude timber

harvesting and road construction in the IRA's; and (3) an alternative

that would mitigate increases in water yield and loss of pileated

woodpecker, northern goshawk, and fisher habitat. Other alternatives

may be developed as issues are raised and information is received.

Decisions To Be Made

The Boise National Forest Supervisor will decide the following:

Should roads be built and timber harvested within the Prince John

Project area at this time, and if so; where within the project area,

and how many miles of road should be built; and which stands should be

treated and what silvicultural systems should be used?

Should prescribed fire be used within the Prince John Project area

at this time, and if so; where within the project area; and what

mitigation/watershed enhancement measures should be applied to the

project?

Should the obliteration of portions of roads 497, 497A, 497A2,

497F, 497J1, and 497L be implemented at this time?

Schedule

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), September 1996. Final

EIS, November 1996.

Public Involvement

The proposal has been previously scoped by two public meetings. The

first was at the Cascade Ranger District office on December 6, 1995,

with the second meeting at the Boise National Forest Supervisor's

Office on December 7, 1995. In addition, the Cascade Ranger District

mailed a scoping package in November 1995 to over 180 individuals and/

or groups who may be affected by the decision. Further, the EA was

released for a 30-day public review and comment period in April 1996 to

75 interested groups and/or individuals. Comments received from these

public involvement efforts will be incorporated into the analysis

process.

Comments

Written comments concerning the proposed project and analysis are

encouraged and should be postmarked within 30 days following

publication of this announcement in the Federal Register. Mail comments

to Steve Patterson, Cascade Ranger District, Boise National Forest,

P.O. Box 696, Cascade, ID 83611, telephone, 208-382-7430. Further

information can be obtained at the same location.

The comment period on the DEIS will be 45 days from the date the

Environmental Protection Agency 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 are not raised until after

completion of the final EIS may be waived or dismissed by the courts.

City of Angoon. v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1002 (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 section 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 them and respond to them in the final EIS.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the 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 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.

Responsible Official

David D. Rittenhouse, Forest Supervisor, Boise National Forest,

1750 Front Street, Boise, ID 83702.

Dated: August 14, 1996.

Milton D. Coffman,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 96-21684 Filed 8-23-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M