Spruce Ecosystem Recovery Project, Dixie National Forest, Iron and Kane Counties, Utah

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Spruce Ecosystem Recovery Project, Dixie National Forest, Iron

and Kane Counties, Utah

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Forest Service, USDA, will

prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Forest Service

to implement several proposals within the Spruce Ecosystem Recovery

Project area, on the Cedar City Ranger District, Dixie National Forest.

These proposals include: (1) Commercial salvage, sanitation and density

management timber harvest, and associated road construction/closures;

(2) commercial and non-commercial regeneration treatments of aspen

forests; (3) the establishment of defensible fire suppression zones;

and, (4) management ignited prescribed fire. Multiple decisions may be

issued upon completion of the analysis; however, the cumulative effects

of all the proposed actions will be disclosed in the EIS. The purpose

of these proposals is to initiate actions that would improve forest

health and diversity, accelerate reforestation, and meet woody debris

objectives within the project area. The project area is located

approximately 15 miles east of Cedar City, Utah. The project would be

implemented in accordance with direction in the Land and Resource

Management Plan (LRMP, 1986) for the Dixie National Forest.

In addition to the management activities proposed to be

implemented, an amendment to the LRMP is being proposed. This amendment

is necessary in order to make the LRMP conform to the Regional Guide.

The amendment is described below under Supplementary Information.

The agency gives notice that the environmental analysis process is

underway. During the analysis process, an issue surfaced that warranted

disclosure of effects under an EIS. This issue is the high degree of

interest associated with the potential to alter the undeveloped

character of a portion of the project area due to proposed road

construction and vegetable management treatments.

Interested and potentially affected persons, along with local,

state, and other federal agencies, are invited to participate in, and

contribute to, the environmental analysis. The Dixie National Forest

invites written input regarding issues specific to the proposed action.

DATES: Written comments to be considered in the preparation of the

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) should be submitted by

July, 1997, which is at least 30 days following the publication of this

notice in the Federal Register. The DEIS is expected to be available

for review by August, 1997. The Record of Decision and Final

Environmental Impact Statement are expected to be available by October,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: District Ranger, Cedar City

Ranger District, 82 North 100 East, P.O. Box 627, Cedar City, Utah

84721-0627; FAX: (801) 865-3791; E-mail: Brunswick__Nancy/

[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions about the proposed action and EIS to Phillip G.

Eisenhauer, Project Environmental Coordinator, by mail at 82 North 100

East, P.O. Box 627, Cedar City, Utah 84721-0627; or by phone at (801)

865-3700; FAX: (801) 865-3791; E-mail: Brunswick__Nancy/

[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed projects are located in an

analysis area of about 48,274 acres of National Forest System (NFS)

lands. Approximately 24,926 acres of the project area are forested and

13,348 acres are non-forest. The proposed commercial conifer treatment

areas were recently or are currently infested with spruce beetle

(Dendroctonus rufipennis). Spruce beetle populations are at epidemic

levels; they have killed thousands of spruce trees, on approximately

7,400 acres on the Cedar City Ranger District. In some sites where

spruce was the dominant overstory, few live trees remain. Because

spruce beetle populations have been expanding since the early 1990's,

an additional 15,000 acres of spruce forest are at risk of beetle

infestation.

The purpose of the project is to salvage the dead and dying

Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir trees to recover wood products that

would otherwise be lost, while still meeting desired resource

objectives for standing dead and down tree material. Also, spruce

dominated stands that are classified as moderate risk to spruce beetle

infestation would be treated by commercial and non-commercial

sanitation treatments to alter the forest conditions that contribute to

this risk. These stands were previously thinned with an even aged

silvicultural system to a residual basal area of about 130 square feet.

Reducing the risk in these stands would provide the best opportunity to

maintain a green, forested condition as well as maintain important

resource values associated with maintaining spruce forests, such as old

growth, wildlife habitat, and scenic quality near vistas and along

scenic highway corridors.

More specifically, sanitation treatments would involve the removal

of uninfested conifer trees of varying sizes in order to alter forest

densities, species composition, and size class. Currently, stands in

the moderate risk class contain about 130 square feet of basal area per

[[Page 33825]]

acre. These treatments would involve reducing the overall stand basal

area per acre (all species) to 100 square feet or less. This will

reduce risk of future infestation by bark beetles.

Rehabilitation of areas heavily impacted by bark beetle mortality

through the completion of natural and artificial regeneration

activities would occur as needed. An estimated 585 acres will be

artificially regenerated. Reforestation is essential to providing for

the most rapid progression toward the desired future condition for

forest cover in the project area.

In addition to commercial and non-commercial treatments, and

related rehabilitation treatments, wildland fuel reduction treatments

are proposed in areas where fuel loadings exceed levels necessary to

meet desired fire suppression objectives. Treatments proposed include

management ignited prescribed fire and the establishment of Defensible

Fire Suppression (DFS) Zones. Both treatments are intended to reduce

the risk of catastrophic fire, especially in wildland-urban interface

areas.

The use of prescribed fire would occur within two areas in the

project area. One area is located in the Center Creek drainage and the

other in the Hancock Peak Roadless Inventory Area. The purpose of the

reintroduction of fire is to reduce loadings, to create diversity in

the landscape vegetation, and reduce the risk of catastrophic fire.

DFS Zones would be established along the perimeter of the Meadow

Lake subdivision. Where fuel conditions in this location currently meet

the desired conditions, no treatments would occur. DFS Zones are

created by implementing fuel ladder (vertical continuity of fuels from

ground level to the forest crowns) and fuel loading reduction

treatments; that is, thinning all species of vegetation in order to

reduce the probability of crown fires carrying through these Zones. The

treatments would include the use of commercial and non-commercial tree

removal, chipping, hand and machine piling and burning of piles; and

broadcast burning of fuels. The DFS Zones would be between 100 to 300

feet wide depending upon the vegetation, fire occurrence, and

topography, and would be located entirely on NFS lands. It is estimated

that the number of acres proposed for establishment of DFS Zones would

not exceed 50 acres.

Regeneration treatment of aspen forests is also included in this

proposal. Treatments would include both commercial harvest and non-

commercial site preparation (i.e.; cut and burn, broadcast burn). About

8,176 acres of forest are dominated by aspen in the project area. Most

are being converted to conifers by natural succession and the lack of

fire in the ecosystem. Most vegetation management treatments would lead

to an increase in the abundance of aspen, which is the desired goal for

resource values identified in the project area (i.e.; wildlife habitat

improvement, vegetation diversity, and visual variety and color in the

landscape). Up to 1,000 acres would be regenerated over the next five-

year period.

Vegetation management treatments involving salvage/sanitation,

density management, aspen regeneration, prescribed fire, and

establishment of DFS Zones would occur on National Forest lands located

within portions of Sections 28-33 of Township(T) 35 South(S), Range(R)

8 West(W); Sections 3-17, 20-24, 26-35 of T.36 S., R8 W.; Sections 3-

10, 15-21, 30-32 of T.37 S., R.8. W.; Sections 1, 2, 11-14, 23-26, 35-

36 of T.37 S., R.8\1/2\ W.; Sections 1-6, 8-15, 24-25 and 36 of T.36

S., R.9 W.; Sections 10-16, 22-27, 35-36 of T.37 S., R.9 W.; Salt Lake

City (SLC) Meridian, Iron County, UT; Sections 1-2 of T.38 S., R.9 W.;

and Sections 5-6 of T.38 S., R.8W., SLC Meridian, Kane County, UT.

The transportation system required to access commercial harvest

areas is largely in place. However, to access all identified moderate

to high risk stands, about five miles of temporary and specified road

construction would be required. The specified road construction is

proposed to occur in an area having undeveloped character.

All newly constructed temporary roads would be obliterated upon

completion of the project, and any new permanent or systems road would

be physically closed. In addition, approximately eight miles or

existing roads that would be used or are located within treatment areas

would be closed upon completion of project activities to meet the

desired condition for other resources.

In addition to the vegetation management treatments, and related

activities, and amendment to the Dixie National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan is being proposed.

Size of Created Openings

Proposed changes to DNF-LRMP Management Direction and Standards and

Guidelines:

a. The following changes are proposed to general direction E03, 06,

and 07, section 6(a), (b) and (c) found on page IV-40 of the DNF-LRMP:

``6. The maximum size of openings created by the application of

clearcut even-aged silvicultural treatments will be 40 acres regardless

of forest cover type. A proposal for larger openings created by the

application of clearcut even-aged silvicultural treatment are subject

to a 60-day public review and require approval by the Regional Forester

as specified in the Regional Guide of 1984. Exceptions to this are:

(a) Larger openings which are the result of natural catastrophic

events such as fire, insect or disease attach, and windstorm. These

larger openings may be commercially salvaged in blocks larger than 60

acres without requirement for 60-day public review and approval by the

Regional Forester. This does not preclude public notification and

participation requirements as outlined under the National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA).

(b) The area does not meet the definition of a created opening.

b. In addition to this change under the general direction of the

DNF-LRMP at page IV-40, the proposed E03, 06, and 07, section 6 (a) and

(b) just defined is proposed to be added to each specific Management

Area direction, where applicable.

The proposed actions would implement management direction,

contribute to meeting the goals and objectives identified in the DNF-

LRMP, and move the project area toward the desired condition. This

project EIS would be tiered to the Dixie National Forest LRMP EIS

(1986), which provides goals, objectives, standards and guidelines for

the various activities and land allocations on the Forest.

Based upon the responses to the public scoping effort conducted in

April, 1997, the issues that have been identified include: the effects

of activities on the undeveloped character of areas within the project

area; the effects of the activities on the economic livelihood of local

communities (Brian Head Town); the effects of an increase/decrease in

access in the area; and, the effects on the Hancock Peak Roadless Area.

Tentative alternatives to the proposed action include: (1) No

action (the project would not take place, but current management would

continue); (2) no harvest activities associated with road construction

within the undeveloped areas and no prescribed fire treatment within

the focus area in Center Creek; and, (3) no treatments within the

Hancock Peak Roadless Area.

As lead agency, the Forest Service would analyze and document

direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects for a range of

alternatives. Each alternative would include mitigation measures and

monitoring requirements.

[[Page 33826]]

Hugh C. Thompson, Forest Supervisor, Dixie National Forest, is the

responsible official. He can be reached by mail at 82 North 100 East,

P.O. Box 580, Cedar City, Utah, 84720-0580.

The Forest Service is seeking comments from individuals,

organizations, and local, state, and Federal agencies who may be

interested in or affected by the proposed action. Scoping notices have

been sent to potentially affected persons and those currently on the

Dixie National Forest mailing list that have expressed interest in

timber management proposals, proposals relating to wildlife habitat

modifications and Forest Plan amendments. Other interested individuals,

organizations, or agencies may have their names added to the mailing

list for this project at any time by submitting a request to: Phillip

G. Eisenhauer, Project Environmental Coordinator, 82 North 100 East,

P.O. Box 627, Cedar City, UT 84720-0627.

The analysis area includes both National Forest System lands and

private lands. Proposed treatments would occur only on National Forest

system lands. No federal or local permits, licenses or entitlements

would be needed.

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

reviewers' position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.

v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that

could have been 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, (9th Circuit, 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 the time 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 about 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 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: June 13, 1997.

Hugh C. Thompson,

Forest Supervisor, Dixie National Forest.

[FR Doc. 97-16260 Filed 6-20-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M