Dome Peak Timber Sale Analysis, White River National Forest; Routt County, CO

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Dome Peak Timber Sale Analysis, White River National Forest;

Routt County, CO

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS).

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will

prepare an Environmental Impact Statement to disclose effects of

alternative decisions it may make to harvest dead Engelmann spruce and

associated road construction within the Dome Peak Timber Sale planning

area, on the Eagle Ranger District of the White River National Forest.

DATES: Written comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be

received on or before March 1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Veto J. LaSalle, Forest Supervisor,

White River National Forest, P.O. Box 948, 9th and Grand Ave., Glenwood

Springs, Colorado 81602. Mr. LaSalle is the Responsible Official for

this EIS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Van Norman, Project Coordinator,

Holy Cross Ranger District, 24747 U.S. Highway 24, P.O. Box 190,

Minturn, CO 81645, (970) 827-5715.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 28, 1996 the White River National

Forest released a Draft Environmental Assessment for the proposed

action and alternatives to that proposed action under Public Law 104-

19. Based on comments received from members of the public, the

Interdisciplinary Team has determined that the proposed action and

alternatives to that action represent a roadless area entry. Therefore,

and Environmental Impact Statement is required as per Forest Service

Handbook 1909.15, Section 20.6. The proposed action proposes to harvest

approximately 2.5 million board feet from approximately 650 acres of

dead Engelmann spruce using a combination of ground-based and

helicopter yarding and to construct approximately 1.1 miles of new

specified road.

The proposed action is consistent with governing programmatic

management direction contained in the Rocky Mountain Regional Guide and

FEIS for Standards and Guidelines (1983) and in the Final EIS and Land

and Resource Management Plan for the White River National Forest (LMP,

1984). The LMP allocated the proposed timber sale area to semi-

primitive non-motorized use and allows for timber harvest. The site-

specific environmental analysis provided by the EIS will assist the

Responsible Official in determining which improvements are needed to

meet the following objectives: Reduce natural fuel loadings and to

provide wood products for the nation and opportunities for timber

related jobs. Alternatives will be carefully examined for their

potential impacts on the physical, biological, and social environments

so that tradeoffs are apparent to the decisionmaker.

Public participation will be fully incorporated into preparation of

the EIS. The first step is the scoping process, during which the Forest

Service will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from

Federal, State, and local agencies, and other individuals or groups who

may be interested or affected by the proposed action. This information

will be used in preparing the EIS. No public meetings are planned for

this project. Public comments received during initial scoping and those

raised during public review of the Draft Environmental Assessment for

this project will be incorporated into this EIS. Individuals who have

provided comments during initial scoping, on the Draft Environmental

Assessment, and those who provide comments on this EIS will receive

copies of the Draft EIS for their review.

Preliminary issues include the potential effects of proposed

actions on the following elements of the biological, physical and

social environments: Wildlife habitat, and overall biological

diversity; wetlands and riparian areas; scenic quality; air quality;

roadless area resource values; recreation resource values, range

resource values, and social and economic values. The direct, indirect,

cumulative, short-term, and long-term aspects of impacts on national

forest lands and resources, and those of connected or related effects

off-site, will be fully disclosed.

Preliminary alternatives include the proposed action (described

above) and No Action, which in this case is deferring treatment of the

area until the future. A third preliminary alternative will be analyzed

which would harvest approximately 0.4 million board feet of dead

Engelmann spruce from approximately 100 acres using ground-based

yarding and to construct

[[Page 67304]]

approximately 1.1 miles of new specified road. Additional alternatives

may be developed after the significant issues are clarified and

management objectives are fully defined. The Responsible Official will

be presented with a range of feasible and practical alternatives.

Permits and licenses required to implement the proposed action

will, or may, include the following: consultation with U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service for compliance with Section 7 of the Threatened &

Endangered Species Act; review from the Colorado Division of Wildlife,

and clearance from the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office.

The Forest Service predicts the draft environmental impact

statement will be filed during the spring of 1997 and the final

environmental impact statement during the summer of 1997.

The Forest Service will seek comments on the draft environmental

impact statement for a period of 45 days after its publication in the

Federal Register. Comments will then be summarized and responded to 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

also 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 at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.)

The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers

notice at this early stage of several court rulings related to public

participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of

the draft environmental impact statement 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

EIS 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 they 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

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

40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.

Dated: December 13, 1996.

Ben DelVillar,

Deputy Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 96-32342 Filed 12-19-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-BW-M