South Quartzite Salvage Timber Sale Analysis, White River National Forest; Garfield County, CO

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

South Quartzite Salvage Timber Sale Analysis, White River

National Forest; Garfield 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 South Quartzite Salvage Timber

Sale Planning area, on the Rifle Ranger District of the White River

National Forest.

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

received on or before April 14, 1997.

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

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

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

this EIS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert W. Currie, Project Coordinator, Holy Cross Ranger District,

24747 U.S. Highway 24, PO Box 190, Minturn, CO 81645, (970) 827-5715.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 16, 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 an inventoried roadless area

entry. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is required as per

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 20.6. The proposed action

proposes to harvest approximately 4.0 to 5.0 million board feet from

approximately 1,280 acres of dead Engelmann spruce using a combination

of ground-based (approximately 110 acres) and helicopter yarding

(approximately 1,180 acres) and to construct approximately 0.9 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 motorized and 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. Alternative 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 in 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 and wildlife habitat, recreation resource

values, roadless area resource values, and watershed health resources.

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 alteratives 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 could be

analyzed which would harvest approximately 6.0 to 7.0 million board

feet of approximately 2,500 acres of dead Engelmann spruce using a

combination of ground-based and helicopter yarding and to construct

approximately 3.0 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 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 fall of 1997 and the final

environmental impact statement during the spring of 1998.

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.

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

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

[[Page 8925]]

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: February 19, 1997.

Gregory A. Kuyumjian,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 97-4839 Filed 2-26-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-BW-M