Aquarius Ecosystem Restoration Project, Dixie National Forest, Garfield County, UT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Aquarius Ecosystem Restoration Project, Dixie National Forest,

Garfield County, UT

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 a Forest Service

proposal to implement an ecosystem restoration and associated road

construction project on the Escalante Ranger District, Dixie National

Forest. The area is located approximately 18 miles northwest of

Escalante, Utah. The project would be implemented in accordance with

direction in the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Dixie

National Forest (LRMP).

The agency gives notice that the environmental analysis process is

underway. Interested and potentially affected persons, along with

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

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 on or

before December 13, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: District Ranger Escalante Ranger

District 755 West Main, P.O. Box 246, Escalante, Utah 84726.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions about the proposed action and EIS to Kevin R.

Schulkoski, District Ranger, 435-826-5400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Aquarius Ecosystem Restoration Project

[[Page 63665]]

(AERP) is located within the Dixie National Forest, Escalante and

Teasdale Ranger Districts. It is approximately 18 miles northwest of

Escalante, Utah. The 81,104 acre project area is comprised of 4 major

watersheds; Pleasant Creek, Boulder Creek, Antimony Creek, and

Escalante River. The project is located in parts of Township 30 South,

Range 2 East; Township 30 South, Range 3 East; Township 31 South, Range

1 West; Township 31 South, Range 1 East; Township 31 South, Range 2

East; Township 31 South, Range 3 East; Township 32 South, Range 1 West;

Township 32 South, Range 1 East; Township 32 South, Range 2 East;

Township 32 South, Range 3 East; Township 33 South, Range 1 West;

Township 33 South, Range 1 East; Township 34 South, Range 1 West;

Township 35 South, Range 1 West; and Township 36 South, Range 1 West.

Elevations range from 9,000 to 11,000 feet. The forest type is

primarily Englemann spruce/subalpine fir, with a strong component of

aspen. Other vegetation types represented include sagebrush, blue

spruce, mixed conifer and ponderosa pine.

Dixie Forest LRMP management areas within the analysis area are: 1

General Forest Direction, 10A Research Natural Area, 2A Semi-Primitive

Recreation Opportunities, 2B Rural and Roaded Recreation Opportunities,

4B Wildlife Habitat Management, 4D Aspen Management for Wildlife, 6A

Livestock Grazing, 7A Timber Management, 9A Riparian Management.

Several actions are proposed within the project area to move

existing conditions toward desired future conditions. These activities

include commercial timber harvest, aspen regeneration, management

ignited prescribed fire and travel management.

Activities proposed within the project area contribute to meeting

the goals and objectives, management direction and standards and

guidelines found in the Dixie LRMP.

Proposed Actions within 16,215 total acres of aspen forest would

include using prescribed fire only, on an estimated 50 acres to

regenerate a young healthy stand.

Use mechanical treatments with or without fire on approximately

3,100 acres of aspen forest. This includes both commercial treatments.

Patch cuts or clear cut harvest treatments may be used in blocks of 40

acres or less where aspen areas are accessible (within \1/4\ mile of an

existing road) and contain sufficient quality and volume to make it

economical to harvest. Fire would be used after cutting treatments to

remove residual conifer and stimulate additional aspen suckering.

Approximately 50% of the harvest areas will be followed up by fire.

These activities are needed because the desired condition of the

area is to maintain a mosaic of aspen and conifer stands with a variety

of age classes across the landscape. Currently, many aspen dominated

stands have either a growing component of understory conifer trees or

lack of an aspen seedling class capable of replacing the maturing

aspen. Most of the aspen stands across the landscape are of similar

size and age class. The proposed treatments are designed to convert

deteriorating aspen stands to young healthy aspen seedlings on

approximately 20% of the existing aspen stands. This will enhance the

opportunity to sustain aspen forests over the long-term in properly

functioning condition and provide forest projects to forest industry.

The aspen acres proposed for prescribed fire are isolated and do

not provide economic commercial opportunities.

The objectives of the treatments in the aspen component include:

increase species diversity across the landscape to reduce catastrophic

losses associated with forest pests and fire; increase the amount of

aspen clones in the early to young stage on up to 20% of the existing

stands; maintain aspen component within spruce/fir dominated stands;

reduce conifer invasion in the aspen type; improve or maintain the

visual form, color and textural diversity in the landscape viewed by

forest users; improve structural diversity associated with wildlife

habitat; and provide opportunity for community based forestry

businesses. Proposed Actions within the 31,827 total acres of Englemann

spruce/subalpine fir forests would include:

Approximately 200 acres of aspen within the spruce/fir type would

be treated with prescribed stand replacement fire only to stimulate

aspen regeneration and eliminate existing aspen and conifer trees.

Approximately 12,000 acres would be treated with commercial

mechanical harvest. Tree thinning or an intermediate treatment under an

individual tree selection system (reducing stand densities while

maintaining a variety of tree sizes), would be implemented. An uneven

aged structure is desired.

Approximately 1,600 acres of seral aspen within the spruce/fir

would be regenerated with commercial harvest treatments with or without

fire. Fire would be used after the cutting treatments to remove

residual conifer and stimulate additional aspen suckering.

Approximately 50% of the harvest areas will be followed up with fire.

Treatments in blocks of 40 acres or less would be used.

These activities are needed because the desired conditions for the

spruce/fir stands are to maintain land densities at moderate levels

with a variety of age classes and to provide for a mix of aspen clones

within this type. Forest management can prevent large scale mortality

and loss caused by the spruce beetle. Many spruce/fir stands are

densely stocked with trees and are declining in tree growth and vigor

and lack larger size classes due to past spruce beetle activity. Seral

aspen clones are maturing and succeeding to conifer trees.

The seral aspen component is being replaced by spruce/fir forest

type. There is a lack of aspen clones in the early to young stage. More

aspen is currently being lost than replaced by aspen regeneration. The

invading conifer needs to be removed so that aspen regeneration may be

initiated to sustain prue stand conditions for aspen.

The purpose of the proposed action in the coniferous forest is to:

improve species diversity and forest structure and pattern

characteristics; increase the number of mature (old) stage spruce;

manage risk of bark beetles infestations and other insects and diseases

at endemic levels; increase seral aspen and representation of young

aspen clones in the spruce/fir type; and provide opportunity for

community based forestry business.

Transportation Management would include the following road

closures: 16.3 miles of existing roads would be utilized for harvest

and regeneration activities and would be closed with physical barriers

upon project completion; 39.6 miles of existing roads would be improved

for project activities and would be obliterated and revegetated upon

project completion; 13.25 miles of new road construction would be

required for project implementation and then would be closed with

physical barriers upon project completion; 7.6 miles of new road

construction would be required for project implementation and then

obliterated and revegetated upon project completion; approximately 15

miles of roads that are not being utilized for harvest activities will

be closed and obliterated.

These activities are needed because many travel routes throughout

the area were not properly located and constructed with proper drainage

devices and have created erosion problems. Road densities are excessive

[[Page 63666]]

to the Forest Service ability to maintain roads to agency standards.

The purpose of the proposed travel management plan is to restore

watershed values in areas where unacceptable soil and water resource

damage is occurring (closing and rehabilitating unneeded roads will

reduce the occurring adverse impacts); reduce long-term maintenance

costs; provide access to treatment areas, trailheads, dispersed

recreation areas, and other areas of high recreation use; provide for

safe travel on Forest roads; and reduce road densities to maintain or

improve wildlife habitat effectiveness.

Trailhead development is proposed as follows: Construction of a

trailhead for the Powell Point trail (#6.0) at the junction of the

Powell Point non-motorized trail and the end of FS road (#1516).

Construction would include a parking area, signs and information kiosk.

Construction of a trailhead for the Gap trail (#1.51) at the end of

Forest road (#1370). Construction would include a parking area, signs

and information kiosk. Construction of a trailhead at Clayton Guard

Station to serve Grass Lakes (#1.61), Pacer Lake (#4.0), Poison Creek

(#3.0) and Antimony Lake (#2.0) motorized trails. Construction would

include a parking area, signs and an information kiosk. Construction of

a trailhead for the North Creek lakes non-motorized trail (#1.5)

Construction would include a parking area, signs and an information

kiosk. Construct a parking area at the end of the road #0176 at Row

Lakes.

The activities are needed because: a comparison of the desired

future condition and the existing forest condition indicated that

motorized and non-motorized recreation use is increasing. There is a

need to provide safe public access for this use. Existing trailheads

are essentially rudimentary and undeveloped. There is a need to design

and construct trailheads which include information kiosk, parking and

signing. Due to the absence of designated trailheads, damage to the

soil and water resources has occurred. There is a need to reduce and

prevent resource damage.

Preliminary issues that have been identified through scoping to

date include road closures, management activities in areas which have

unroaded characteristics, prescribed burning versus cutting in aspen

stands and managing timber stands to favor aspen over spruce.

Tentative alternatives to the proposed action include: No Action

(the project will not take place, but current management will

continue); elimination of timber harvest in areas which have unroaded

characteristics; and an alternative which regenerates aspen by burning

and does not include commercial aspen timber harvest.

As lead agency, the Forest Service will analyze and document

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

alternatives. Each alternative will include mitigation measures and

monitoring requirements. Hugh C. Thompson, Forest Supervisor, Dixie

National Forest, is the responsible official.

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 the Dixie National Forest NEPA

mailing list. 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: Kevin R. Schulkoski, District Ranger,

Escalante Ranger District, 755 West Main, PO Box 246, Escalante, Utah

84726.

A public field review of the proposed project was held on September

29, 1998. Twenty one people representing different organizational,

business, governmental and individual interests participated in the

meeting.

Approximately 120 acres of private land lie within the analysis

area. No actions are proposed on private land. The remaining acres lie

within National Forest System lands. No federal or local permits,

licenses or entitlements would be needed. There are no known conflicts

with the plans and policies of other jurisdictions. The comment period

for the DEIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA's notice of

availability appears in the Federal Register.

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's 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. Versus 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 Versus

Hodel, (9th Circuit, 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc versus 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 on 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. 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 DEIS is expected to be available for review by March 1999. The

Record of Decision and Final Environmental Impact Statement are

expected to be available by May 1999.

Dated: November 4, 1998.

Hugh C. Thompson,

Forester Supervisor, Dixie National Forest.

[FR Doc. 98-30509 Filed 11-13-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M