Supplement for Hamm-Hasloe Reforestation; Stanislaus National Forest, Groveland Ranger District; Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplement to an Environmental Impact Statement

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Supplement for Hamm-Hasloe Reforestation; Stanislaus National

Forest, Groveland Ranger District; Notice of Intent To Prepare a

Supplement to an Environmental Impact Statement

The Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will prepare a

supplement to the Hamm-Hasloe environmental impact statement (EIS) for

a proposal to reforest the Hamm-Hasloe Fire Area which was burned in

the Stanislaus Complex Fires of 1987. An estimated 45 units,

approximately 1,500 acres, (the original project area totals 15,045

acres) will be analyzed due to changing conditions on the ground since

the original decision was made.

The project area is located in both Tuolumne and Mariposa Counties

in the following townships, ranges and sections (Mount Diablo

Meridian): Portions of sections 25, 26, T.1S., R.16E.. Portions of

sections 7, 16, 17, 21, 26-28, 34-36, T.1S., R.17E.. Portions of

sections 1, 3-5, 10-12, 14, 22-26, 32, 34, 35, T.2S., R.17E.. Portions

of sections 5-8, 17, 18, 30, T.2S., R.18E.. Portions of sections 1, 5,

T.3S., R.17E..

This analysis and referenced document will follow the direction

contained in the Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact

Statement for Vegetation Management for Reforestation in Region Five,

California which was signed February 13, 1989 by Regional Forester Paul

Barker. The selected alternative in this Record of Decision calls for

local management flexibility in selecting the appropriate vegetation

management methods for reforestation. The actions proposed in the Hamm-

Hasloe Reforestation EIS Supplement will also be consistent with the

Stanislaus National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.

Units will be evaluated for site preparation prior to tree

planting. Only these treatments will be modified under this supplement,

subsequent tree planting and release treatments are already covered in

the existing EIS and will still be implemented as analyzed under that

document. Treatments analyzed will include; mechanical and hand

treatments, aerial and ground application of herbicides, and control

burning. Alternatives developed could include combinations of

treatments as well as no action. Most of the new treatment

prescriptions will involve removal of brush which is now too tall to

spray by hand.

Federal, State, and local agencies, and interested individuals or

groups are invited to participate in the scoping process. Letters will

be sent to all individuals and groups who received a copy of the

original EIS and expressed interest and concerns during the original

project scoping. No scoping meetings are planned for this project. This

process will include:

1. Identification of potential issues or concerns.

2. Identification of issues to be analyzed in depth.

3. Elimination of issues which have been covered by a previous

environmental review.

4. Determination of potential cooperating agencies and assignment of

responsibilities.

Following the environmental analysis the Supplement is expected to

be made available for public review by October 1997. The Supplement and

Record of Decision is estimated to be completed by November 1997.

The comment period on the draft supplement will be 45 days from the

date the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability

appears in the Federal Register. It is very important that those

interested in the management of the Hamm-Hasloe area participate at

that time. To be the most helpful, comments should be as specific as

possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merits of

the alternatives discussed (see The Council on Environmental Quality

Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National

Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3). In addition, Federal court

decisions have established that reviewers 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), and that environmental objections that could have been

raised at the draft stage may be waived if not raised until after

completion of the final document. Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v Harris,

490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). The reason for this is to

ensure 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 document.

Glenn Gottschall, Acting Forest Supervisor, Stanislaus National

Forest, Sonora, California is the responsible official.

Written comments and suggestions concerning this project or

analysis should be addressed to Calvin Bird, Groveland District Ranger,

24545 Highway 120, Groveland, CA, 95321. Additional information can be

obtained through John Schmechel, District Silviculturist, at the above

address.

Dated: July 30, 1997.

David M. Freeland,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 97-20931 Filed 8-7-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M