Poorman Project; Including Timber Harvest, Prescribed Fire, Fish and Wildlife Habitat Improvement, and Road and Trail Construction, Helena National Forest, Lewis & Clark County, MT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Poorman Project; Including Timber Harvest, Prescribed Fire, Fish

and Wildlife Habitat Improvement, and Road and Trail Construction,

Helena National Forest, Lewis & Clark County, MT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service is gathering information and

preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Poorman

Project located approximately 26 air miles northwest of Helena,

Montana.

The Forest Service proposes to treat approximately 1450 acres with

regeneration harvest treatments, 750 acres with stand replacement fire,

650 acres with commercial thinning, 4950 acres with grass/shrub/

underburning, close three miles of existing road, relocate \1/4\ miles

of existing road, construct one mile of new trail, hydromulch erosive

sites along existing roads, and install other erosion control

structures within the project area. Approximately 16 miles of new

system road construction, and two miles of temporary road construction

is needed to access treatment areas. All temporary roads will be

obliterated after harvest. All new system road will be closed.

The proposal is designed to help achieve the goals and objectives

of the 1986 Helena National Forest Plan and move selected areas towards

the desired conditions identified from the Forest Plan. These needs are

supported by the findings of the Blackfoot Landscape Analysis. The

purpose is to maintain healthy, sustainable ecosystems that (1) reduce

fire risk, (2) provide wildlife habitat similar to the habitat that

existed when fire was a natural component of the ecosystem, (3) protect

soil and water, (4) provide recreation opportunities, and (5) provide

wood for people's use.

A Forest Plan amendment is proposed to change management direction

for the M-1 management area. Further analysis of the proposed action

and alternatives to that proposal may result in a decision(s) that

include amendments to the Forest Plan.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received

in writing on or before April 8, 1996.

ADDRESSES: The responsible official is Thomas J. Clifford, Forest

Supervisor, Helena National Forest, Supervisor's Office, 2880 Skyway

Drive, Helena, MT 59601. Phone: (406) 449-5201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gilbert Zepeda, District Ranger, Lincoln Ranger District, P.O. Box 219,

Lincoln, MT 59639. Phone: (406) 362-4265; or Tom Andersen,

Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Helena National Forest, 2880 Skyway

Drive, Helena, MT 59601. Phone: (406) 449-5201.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The prescribed burning, and timber sale(s)

with associated road construction, would occur on National Forest lands

in portions of the Poorman Creek, South Fork of Humbug Creek, and Bear

Creek of the Lincoln Ranger District. Included in the area being

analyzed is all or portions of T.14N., R.8W., Section 26 and 32;

T.14N., R.7W., Sections 30-32; T.13N., R.9W., Sections 12-14, 23 and

24; T.13N., R.8W., Sections 1-36; T.13N., R.7W., Sections 4-9, 16-23,

26-34, Montana Principle Meridian.

Portions of the prescribed fire treatment units, road construction

and tree harvest are within the Crater Mountain roadless area (1604)

and Nevada Mountain roadless area (1606). Approximately 3050 acres of

prescribed burning, 1150 acres of tree harvest and 13 miles of

specified road construction and one mile of temporary road construction

are proposed in the roadless areas.

The areas of proposed tree harvest are within the following

management areas:

T-1 Management areas are available and suitable for timber

harvest.

T-2 Should be maintained or enhanced for big game winter range for

which programmed timber harvest and prescribed fire may be used.

T-3 Should be managed in such a way to maintain and/or enhance

habitat characteristics favoring elk and other big game species

allowing the use of programmed timber harvest and prescribed fire.

T-5 Timber management ground that increased forage production is

favored in which timber harvest and prescribed fire can be used.

W-1 Wildlife (summer and winter range) and old growth potential is

optimized in the long run. Timber harvest and prescribed fire can be

used only if they can be used as tools to maintain or enhance wildlife

habitat values. These areas are generally classified as unsuitable for

timber management.

W-2 Important spring, summer and fall habitat for big game, such

as elk and deer. Forage for both big game and livestock must be

provided. Timber harvest and prescribed fire can be used only to

maintain or enhance habitat values.

M-1 Timber management and range or wildlife habitat improvements

are currently uneconomical or environmentally infeasible.

The decisions to be made, based on this environmental analysis,

are:

1. Whether or not to treat the vegetation at this time, and if so,

how would the treatments be accomplished.

2. What type of transportation system will be necessary to

accomplish the vegetation management objectives, while considering

other resource transportation needs and objectives.

If it is decided to treat the vegetation at this time, activities

may begin as early as 1997 and take up to 10 years to implement.

This EIS will tier to the Helena Forest Plan Final EIS of April

1986, that

[[Page 10723]]

provides program goals, objectives and standards and guidelines for

conducting management activities in this area. All activities

associated with the proposal will be designed to maintain or enhance

the resource objectives identified in the Forest Plan and further

refined in the Blackfoot Landscape Analysis.

The Forest Service is seeking information and comments from

Federal, State, local agencies and other organizations or individuals

who may be interested in or affected by the proposed action. The Forest

Service invites written comments and suggestions on the issues for the

proposal and the area being analyzed. Information received will be used

in preparation of the Draft EIS. Preparation of the EIS will include

the following steps:

1. Identification of potential issues.

2. Identification of issues to be analyzed in depth.

3. Elimination of insignificant issues or those that have been

covered by a relevant previous environmental analysis.

4. Identification of additional reasonable alternatives.

5. Identification of potential environmental effects of the

alternatives.

Prescribed harvest treatments in this proposal include evenaged

management techniques of clearcutting, with reserves, seed tree with

reserves and shelterwood with reserves. Intermediate treatments such as

commercial thinning will also be considered. Prescribed burning will be

used to treat nonforested and forested vegetation. Alternatives to this

proposal will include the ``no action'' alternative, in which none of

the proposed treatments would be implemented. Other alternatives will

examine variations in the location, amount and method of vegetative

management.

The preliminary issues identified are:

1. The effects on forest health and sustaining ecosystems.

2. The effects on recreation and visual resources.

3. The effects on wildlife.

4. The effects on the roadless and wilderness character of the

Crater Mountain and Nevada Mountain Roadless Areas.

5. The effects on fish, water quality, and riparian areas.

6. The effects on project area economics.

The Forest Service will analyze and disclose in the DEIS and FEIS

the environmental effects of the proposed action and a reasonable range

of alternatives. The DEIS and FEIS will disclose the direct, indirect

and cumulative environmental effects of each alternative and its

associated site specific mitigation measures.

Public participation is especially important at several points of

the analysis. Interested parties may visit with the Forest Service

officials at any time during the analysis. However, two periods of time

are specifically identified for the receipt of comments. The first

comment period is during the scoping process when the public is invited

to give written comments to the Forest Service. The Forest Service will

also conduct public open houses in Helena on March 27, 1996 at the

Helena National Forest Supervisors Office, 2880 Skyway Drive, and in

Lincoln on March 28, 1996 at the Lincoln Community Center. Open houses

will be between 6 and 8 p.m. The scoping period ends on April 8, 1996.

The second review period is during the 45 day review of the DEIS when

the public is invited to comment on the DEIS.

The DEIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and available for public review in September 1996. At that

time, the EPA will publish a notice of availability of the DEIS in the

Federal Register.

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

notice of availability is published in the Federal Register.

At this early stage in the scoping process, the Forest Service

believes it is important to give reviewers notice of several court

rulings related to public participation in the environmental review

process. First, reviews of 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). Secondly,

environmental objections that could be raised at the draft

environmental impact statement stage, but that are not raised until

after completion of the 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. 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 them and respond to them in the FEIS.

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.)

After the comment period ends on the DEIS, the comments will be

analyzed and considered by the Forest Service in preparing the FEIS.

The FEIS is expected to be filed in February 1997.

Dated: March 6, 1996.

Thomas J. Clifford,

Forest Supervisor, Helena National Forest.

[FR Doc. 96-6165 Filed 3-14-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M