Knox-Brooks Timber Sales and Road Rehabilitation; Superior Ranger District, Lolo National Forest; Mineral County, Montana

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Knox-Brooks Timber Sales and Road Rehabilitation; Superior Ranger

District, Lolo National Forest; Mineral County, Montana

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

AUTHORITY: 40 CFR 1508.22.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) for timber harvesting, prescribed burning, road access

changes, and watershed rehabilitation in a 38,000-acre area near St.

Regis, Montana.

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

received in writing within 30 days following publication of this

notice. Comments received during the initial scoping will be considered

in the analysis and do not need to be resubmitted during this comment

time period.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Cindy Chapman Enstrom, District

Ranger, Superior Ranger District, Box 460, Superior, MT 59872.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bruce Erickson, Knox-Brooks Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Superior

Ranger District, as above, or phone: (406) 822-4233.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The responsible official who will make

decisions based on this EIS is Charles C. Wildes, Forest Supervisor,

Lolo National Forest, Building 24 Fort Missoula, Missoula, MT 59804. He

will decide on this proposal after considering comments and responses,

environmental consequences discussed in the Final EIS, and applicable

laws, regulations, and policies. The decision and reasons for the

decision will be documented in a Record of Decision.

The Forest Service proposes to harvest approximately 51,000 hundred

cubic feet of timber from about 3180 acres, (about 1050 of those acres

to be burned after harvest), to reconstruct or recondition about 50

miles of road and stabilize and/or obliterate about 37 miles of

existing road (primarily to mitigate existing water quality and fish

habitat impacts), and to add new yearlong road closures to about 4

miles of currently open roads. New road construction would be limited

to about 2 miles of permanent road and about 5 miles of temporary road.

Lands affected are within the Twelvemile Creek and Twin Creek

drainages, tributary to the St. Regis River, between DeBorgia and St.

Regis, Montana. The project area is bounded by Interstate 90 to the

south and the divide between Plains/Thompson Falls and Superior Ranger

Districts to the north.

The purpose of this proposal is to carry out the goals and

direction given in the Lolo National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan with ecosystem management principles. Key elements of

the purpose and need are:

(1) Treat pine stands considering the mountain pine beetle epidemic

moving through the area by altering timber stands to reduce mountain

pine beetle hazard and by providing a mix of age classes so the

continuity of susceptible stands is reduced for future outbreaks;

(2) Rehabilitate water quality and fisheries habitat through

improving channel stability, reducing sources of sediment, reducing

erosion and improving drainage on existing roads that are needed for

long-term management, and reclaiming roads that are not needed; and

(3) Contribute to the short-term output goals and long-term forest

plan expectations for timber production.

The decision to be made is to what extent, if at all, the Forest

Service should conduct timber harvest, prescribed burning, road

construction or reconstruction, road reclamation, and road closures in

the Twelvemile Creek and Twin Creek drainages, given the above purpose

and need. This is a site-specific project decision, not a general

management plan nor a programmatic analysis.

Public scoping has been conducted on most elements of this proposal

both with this proposal and an earlier version of this proposal.

While quite a number of issues have been identified for

environmental effects analysis, the following issues have been found

significant enough to guide alternative development and provide focus

for the EIS:

(1) Water quality and fisheries habitat effects resulting from

timber harvest and road construction and rehabilitation activities;

(2) Wildlife habitat effects (including hunting season bull elk

security) resulting from timber harvest and road construction and

rehabilitation activities; and

(3) Economic effect on local communities resulting from different

access methods and resulting timber values.

The proposed action could have both beneficial and adverse effects

on these resources. In addition to the proposed action, a range of

alternatives will be developed in response to issues identified during

scoping. Other alternatives planned for detailed study are:

(1) No action;

(2) Harvest only from existing roads (no new roads or temporary

roads) with no harvesting in bull elk security areas; and add year-

round road closures to three existing roads; and

(3) Harvest from existing roads and from short-term and temporary

roads on gentle ridgetops and upper sideslopes, harvest with no

regeneration cuts in bull elk security areas, and add year-round road

closures to three existing roads.

Public participation is important to the analysis. People may visit

with Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior

to the decision. No formal scoping meetings are planned. However, two

periods are specifically designated for comments on the analysis:

(1) During this scoping process and

(2) During the draft EIS comment period.

During the scoping process, the Forest Service is seeking

information and comments from Federal, State, and local agencies and

other individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected

by the proposed action. A scoping document will be mailed to parties

known to be interested in the proposed action. The agency invites

written comments and suggestions on this action, particularly in terms

of issues and alternatives.

The Forest Service will continue to involve the public and will

inform interested and affected parties as to how they may participate

and contribute to the final decision. Another formal opportunity for

response will be provided following completion of a draft EIS.

The draft EIS should be available for review in November, 1998. The

final EIS is scheduled for completion in February, 1999.

The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date

the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of

availability in the Federal Register.

The Forest Service believes it is important, at this early stage,

to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public

participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of

draft environmental impact statements must structure their

participation in the environmental review of the proposal so it is

meaningful and alerts the agency to the reviewer's position and

contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,

553 (1978). Also,

[[Page 36208]]

environmental objections that could be raised at the draft

environmental impact statement stage but are not raised until after

completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or

dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022

(9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334,

1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings, it is very

important those interested in this proposed action participate by the

close of the 45-day comment period so 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 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.

I am the responsible official for this environmental impact

statement. My address is Lolo National Forest, Building 24, Fort

Missoula, Missoula MT 59804.

Dated: June 18, 1998.

Charles C. Wildes,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 98-17665 Filed 7-1-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M