Pend Oreille Priest Beetle Project; Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Bonner County Idaho and Pend Oreille County, Washington; Colville National Forests, Pend Oreille County, Washington

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Pend Oreille Priest Beetle Project; Idaho Panhandle National

Forests, Bonner County Idaho and Pend Oreille County, Washington;

Colville National Forests, Pend Oreille County, Washington

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to disclose the potential environmental effects of

proposed activities in forest stands infested with Douglas-fir bark

beetle. Activities include reducing fuels in urban interface areas,

restoring historic vegetation patterns in areas of significant

mortality, and accomplishing other ecosystem restoration opportunities

to benefit aquatic, watershed and wildlife habitat areas in the

southern portion of the Priest Lake and the Newport Ranger Districts.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before

December 17, 1998. The draft environmental impact statement is expected

to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and

available for public review in January, 1999. A Final Environmental

Impact Statement will be published no sooner than February 16, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposal or

requests to be placed on the project mailing list to Kent Dunstan,

Priest Lake Ranger District, 32203 Hwy. 57, Priest River, ID 83856.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Pete Zimmerman, Sandpoint Ranger District, 1500 Hwy. 2, Suite 110,

Sandpoint, ID 83864, (208) 263-5111.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Snow, ice and wind during the winter of

1996-97 damaged trees on the Idaho Panhandle (IPNF) and Colville

National Forests. These events created a tremendous amount of forest

debris on the ground in many areas including tops, limbs, and standing

dead and down trees. Douglas-fir bark beetle populations increased

after breeding in the winter storm damaged and weakened trees. Standing

trees were attacked in the spring and summer of 1998. Aerial detection

surveys conducted in 1998 showed extensive numbers of dead, mature

Douglas-fir trees on national forest system, state, and private lands,

especially in areas of past ice and winter storm damage.

Since the bark beetle outbreak is so widespread, we recognize there

is not much we can do to control or stop it. There is, however, an

opportunity to care for the lands affected by the beetle by focusing on

restoration of the ecosystems where the beetle is causing significant

amounts of the Douglas-fir trees to die.

With the amount of downed fuels and high level of public use in

certain areas, the risk of severe fires is much higher. Fires igniting

in these areas will be more difficult to control and the increased fuel

loading is likely to result in more intense fires. Highly used

recreation areas and areas adjacent to private land are particularly

vulnerable because the potential for ignition is greater. In areas

where urban or private values are at risk due to fuel accumulations

related to the Douglas-fir beetle outbreak, fuels would be treated by

timber harvest, burning and/or piling so as to reduce the risk of

losing these values to wildfire.

In many of the beetle-attacked stands, there is almost twice as

much Douglas-fir on the landscape than what was historically present,

and a significant decrease of seral species such as ponderosa pine,

white pine and larch, which are more resistant to insects and some

diseases. In these areas, the intent would be to restore stand

composition and structure to more closely resemble historic vegetation

conditions. Regeneration harvest activities would be proposed in stands

of at least five acres in size where greater than 50% of the stand

within the area is projected to die from the current Douglas-fir beetle

outbreak. Activities include harvest, site preparation and/or fuels

hazard reduction with fire or by mechanical methods and tree planting.

In stands affected by Douglas-fir beetle that do not meet criteria

for urban interface or vegetation restoration, selective harvest

treatment activities would be proposed in stands where less than 50% of

the stand within the area is projected to die from the current Douglas-

fir beetle outbreak and also in areas of special management need or

where public safety issues are a concern. Activities include harvest

and fuel hazard reduction by fire or mechanical methods.

Aquatic, watershed and wildlife restoration activities would

include closing or obliterating roads for watershed health and wildlife

security and modifying, by reconstruction, other road elements that

pose risks to watersheds. These activities may not be associated with

timber sales. Where activities are associated with timber sales and

along haul routes, watershed restoration would be achieved when

practical.

Prescribed fire use to reduce fuel hazard and to prepare sites for

regeneration would not be limited to timber harvest areas but may also

be used where harvest is not practical.

Pest management techniques, including application of pheromones to

protect high valued stands, would be used in those areas where such

treatment would likely be effective.

As part of the proposed action, timber harvest will not occur in:

(1) Allocated old-growth that maintains old-growth characteristics, (2)

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas, (3) Inventoried Roadless Areas,

(4) stands where a minimum number of snags cannot be maintained, (5)

areas of known populations of sensitive plant species, (6) areas where

they result in a likely to adversely affect determination for

Threatened or Endangered Species, (7)

[[Page 63831]]

areas where harvest can affect sphagnum peatlands, and (8) proposed or

designated Research Natural Areas. In addition, no permanent roads will

be constructed as part of the Proposed Action. Temporary roads may be a

part of the proposed action.

Preliminary issues identified are loss of road access, risk of fire

in untreated areas, loss of timber value, effects on plants, wildlife

and fish, and amount of ecosystem restoration accomplished.

The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of

these will be the ``no action'' alternative, under which there would be

no change from current management of the Forest. Additional

alternatives will represent a range of strategies to accomplish the

goals of this project. The Idaho Panhandle National Forests Land and

Resource Management Plan and the Colville National Forest Plan as

amended provide guidance for management objectives within the

potentially affected area through its goals, objectives, standards and

guidelines, and management area direction. Inland Native Fish Strategy

guidelines (USDA Forest Service, 1995) supercede Forest Plan guidelines

established for riparian areas.

Public participation will begin with the publication of this

notice. Comments provided by the public and other agencies will be used

to develop alternative strategies to this proposal. The public is

encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials during the analysis

and prior to the decision. The Forest Service is also seeking

information, comments, and assistance from federal, state and local

agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be interested

in or affected by the proposed actions.

The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public

review in January, 1999. At that time, the EPA will publish a Notice of

Availability of the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal

Register. The comment period on the draft environmental impact

statement will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of

Availability in the Federal Register. A final environmental impact

statement will be published after all comments are reviewed and

responded to. Two Records of Decision will be published at that time:

one for the Priest Lake Ranger District and one for the Newport Ranger

District.

The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will

be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes

the Notice of Availability 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

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 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

draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised

until after completion of the final environmental 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, 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 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 regarding 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 environmental impact 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.

Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names

and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the

public record on this proposed action and will be available for public

inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and

considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments may not have

standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR part 215.

Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request the

agency ti withhold a submission from the public record by showing how

the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality.

Persons requesting such confidentiality should be aware that, under the

FOIA, confidentiality may be granted in only very limited

circumstances, such as to protect trade secrets. The Forest Service

will inform the requester of the agency's decision regarding the

request for confidentiality, and where the request is denies, the

agency will return the submission and notify the requester that the

comments may be resubmitted with or without name and address within a

specified number of days.

We are the responsible officials for this environmental impact

statement and will decide which projects will be implemented. Addresses

are: Priests Lake Ranger District, 32203 Hwy 57, Priest River, ID 83856

and Colville National Forest, 765 S. Main St., Colville, WA 99114.

Dated: November 9, 1998.

Kent L. Dunstan,

District Ranger, Priest Lake Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle National

Forests.

Dated: November 10, 1998.

Robert L. Vaught,

Forest Supervisor, Colville National Forest.

[FR Doc. 98-30656 Filed 11-16-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M