Big Bend Ridge Vegetation Management Project, Targhee National Forest, Fremont County, ID

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Big Bend Ridge Vegetation Management Project, Targhee National

Forest, Fremont County, ID

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Supervisor of the Targhee National Forest gives

notice of the agency's intent to prepare an environmental impact

statement for the Big Bend Ridge Vegetation Management Project. After

conducting a Properly Functioning Condition (PFC) assessment and a

Landscape Assessment, Forest Service personnel found several concerns

with various ecosystems that comprise the Big Bend Ridge Project Area.

These included:

Presence of dense stands of mature Douglas-fir trees that

are susceptible to insect, disease and fire outbreaks. These dense

stands are losing their crowns.

Consistent lack of Douglas-fir seedling establishment.

Lack of rejuvenation of bigtooth and mountain maple plant

communities.

Lack of rejuvenation and the decline in seral aspen plant

communities.

Decline in potential forage values for big game.

Increased risks associated with wildfire along the

adjacent and expanding urban interface.

An interdisciplinary team developed a proposal to address these

concerns. The Big Bend Ridge Vegetation Management Project proposes to:

Commercially thin (thinning from below--larger diameter

trees would be left) approximately 2,500 acres (about 9 million board

feet) of densely stocked Douglas-fir stands (thinning would also

regenerate seral aspen communities that occur in these treatment

areas). Approximately 70% of the harvest would be done with cable or

helicopter yarding methods; the remainder being done with crawler

tractors or rubber-tired skidders.

Establish a 200 acre demonstration area to test and

monitor the use of prescribed fire and mechanical treatments in

establishing Douglas-fir seedlings.

Use prescribed fire and hand methods, as a demonstration

project, to treat and monitor rejuvenation of 100 acres of big tooth

and mountain maple plant communities.

Use prescribed fire to rejuvenate aspen and reduce fuels

and fire hazards along the wildland urban interface on 700 acres of

mixed conifer and seral aspen plant communities.

Use prescribed fire to improve 900 acres of big-game range

(treatment areas would also benefit urban interface considerations).

Areas treated silviculturally, 3.3 miles of non-system road

reconstruction and 3 miles of non-system road construction. Big Bend

Ridge Project Area is located 5 miles north of Ashton, Idaho and

contains 30,000 acres of National Forest lands on the Ashton/Island

Park Ranger District, Alternatives to this proposal, including No-

Action, will be developed by an interdisciplinary team to respond to

significant issues generated during the scoping process. A more

detailed description of the proposed action is available from the

Ashton/Island Park Ranger District; see address below.

DATES: Send written comments and suggestions on the issues concerning

the proposed action by August 31, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Adrienne Keller, District Ranger,

Ashton/Island Park Ranger District, P.O. Box 858, Ashton, ID 83420.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Jenkins, phone (208) 558-7301

or Duane Monte, phone (208) 624-3151--Interdisciplinary Team Leaders.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Revised Forest Plan (RFP) for the

Targhee National Forest was approved in 1997. Management direction for

the Big Bend Ridge Project Area is primarily for timber management with

emphasis on big game security (Management Prescriptions 5.1.4[a] &

5.2.4[c]). Management on the remainder of the project area is governed

by prescriptions 2.2--Research Natural Areas; 2.8.3--Aquatic Influence

Zone; 5.1[c]--Timber Management; and 5.2.1--Visual Quality Improvement.

Initial public involvement will include mailing a project

description and maps to interested parties to solicit comments on the

proposal. Preliminary issues include: Access management, elk security/

vulnerability, visuals, urban interface, and forest health.

Additional opportunity to comment on the project will occur on the

draft Environmental Impact Statement (draft EIS). The draft EIS is

expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency and

available for public review in mid December 1998.

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

the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in

the Federal Register. At the same time, copies of the draft EIS will be

distributed to interested and affected agencies, organizations, tribes,

and members of the public for their review and comment. It is very

important that those interested in the proposed action participate at

that time.

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

to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to the 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 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 draft stage but that are raised until after completion of the

final environmental impact statement 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 a time when it can meaningful

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. 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.

The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in March 1999. In the

final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments

received during the comment period that pertain to the environmental

consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable laws,

regulations, and policies considered in making the decisions on this

proposal.

[[Page 40877]]

Responsible Official

Jerry B. Reese, Forest Supervisor, is the responsible official. As

responsible official, he will document the selected alternative for the

Big Bend Ridge Vegetation Management Project EIS and his rationale in a

Record of Decision.

The decision for the Big Bend Ridge Vegetation Management Project

will be subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR Part 215).

Dated: July 17, 1998.

Jerry Reese,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 98-20084 Filed 7-27-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M