Meadow Smith Project Environmental Impact Statement; Flathead National Forest, Swan Lake Ranger District, Lake and Missoula Counties, State of Montana

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Meadow Smith Project Environmental Impact Statement; Flathead

National Forest, Swan Lake Ranger District, Lake and Missoula Counties,

State of Montana

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) for a proposal to harvest timber, commercial and pre-

commercial tree thinning, burn brush fields or forest understory trees,

reclaim and construct roads, change road access, improve fish passages,

wet land restoration, and reduce sediment sources within the Meadow

Smith Project area. The project area is located in the upper Swan

Valley and is approximately 35 miles air miles southeast of Bigfork,

Montana in the vicinity of the community of Condon.

The Forest Service is seeking further information and comments from

Federal, State, and local agencies and other individuals or

organizations who may be interested in or affected by the proposed

actions. These comments will be used to prepare the draft EIS.

DATES: The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency and made available for public review in August, 1999.

No date has yet been determined for filing the final EIS.

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.

ADDRESSES: You may request to be placed on the project mailing list or

direct questions, comments, and suggestions about the proposed action

and EIS to Keith Soderstrom, EIS Team Leader, or Chuck Harris, District

Ranger, Swan Lake Ranger District, 200 Ranger Station Road, Bigfork, MT

59911. Phone: (406) 837-7500.

The proposal's actions listed above are being considered together

because they represent either connected or cumulative actions as

defined by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1508.25).

The Forest Service believes the current forest conditions resulting

from large wildfires that occurred near the turn of the century and

subsequent management decisions are causing adverse effects.

Specifically, the encroachment of shade tolerant tree species on dry

sites historically dominated by open-grown, large-tree communities has

caused an overall reduction of individual tree health; increased risk

of property damage on both national forest and adjacent private land

from large and intense wildfires; and, a decrease in the presence of

open-grown, large tree ponderosa pine and western larch forests. The

Forest Service also believes implementing a no action alternative will

further increase these effects in the future. The proposed actions may

have short term significant effects on wildlife, but long term benefits

to the function of the ecosystem are more desirable.

The EIS will tier to the Flathead National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan (LRMP) and EIS of January, 1986, and its subsequent

amendments, which provide overall guidance of all land management

activities on the Flathead National Forest.

Decision To Be Made

Should the Forest Service implement the proposed action or any

action to meet the purpose and need or to defer any action at this time

within the Meadow Smith Project area? The deciding official for this

project is Chuck Harris, Swan Lake District Ranger, Flathead National

Forest.

Preliminary Issues and Alternatives

Public and internal scoping which has already occurred for this

project includes two public meetings, four public field trips; three

mailings to Federal, State, and local agencies and other individuals or

organizations; personal conversations with interdisciplinary team

members and members of the public, and news media releases. An

Environmental Assessment has been completed for this proposal and made

available for public comment;

[[Page 37094]]

based on comments received, the Forest Service has decided to prepare

an Environmental Impact Statement. Through public and internal scoping,

the following significant issues emerged:

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Nature and Scope of the Proposed Action

Ponderosa pine and western larch forests in the Swan Valley were

once a mosaic of open, park like stands that supported large trees.

Fire suppression and timber harvesting in this century have changed

these forests. Many of the remaining stands of ponderosa pine and

western larch have become densely overgrown with mid-story and

understory Douglas-fir, subalpine fir, spruce, and grand fir trees.

These shade tolerant species are growing into the crowns of the older

ponderosa pine and western larch. This creates ``fuel ladders'' that

put ponderosa pine and western larch at increased risk should a fire

occur. Historically, the low intensity ground fires will have thinned

out these shades tolerant species. Trees in these dense stands are also

susceptible to insects and pathogens. Dead or diseased trees increase

the risk of fire. The closed forest canopy is also shading and reducing

the vigor of shrub, grass, and forb populations associated with open

forest conditions.

This proposal addresses the need to restore old growth forest

characteristics within the Upper Swan Valley. The proposed management

actions are intended to increase the presence of open-grown, large-tree

ponderosa pine and western larch forests; lower the risks of loss of

mature large trees from insects, disease, and lethal fire; and return

fire, in the form of prescribed fire, as a process of forest

succession.

The proposed action outlines 2,090 acres of vegetation treatments

which include prescribed burning, pre-commercial thinning, and varying

intensities of timber harvest with associated fuels treatments and

preparation for reforestation. The proposed action includes 2.9 miles

of road reclamation, 3.3 miles of temporary road construction and

subsequent restoration, improved fish passages at 3 sites, culvert

replacement at one site, wetland restoration (filling a man-made ditch)

at one site, and approximately 5.5 miles of fuel breaks on upland sites

adjacent to private lands. In addition, road access changes are

proposed for 3.0 miles, and establishing approximately 5.5 miles of

fuel breaks on upland sites adjacent to private lands.

1. Effects of vegetation treatments on big game winter range

habitat.

2. Effects of vegetation treatments on existing and future old

growth forest communities. The interdisciplinary team has developed

alternatives to the proposed action that respond to these significant

issues.

The Forest Service believes 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 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, 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 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.

Following this comment period, the comments received will be

analyzed, considered, and responded to by the Forest Service in the

final environmental impact statement (FEIS). Chuck Harris, District

Ranger, Swan Lake Ranger District, 200 Ranger Station Road, Bigfork, MT

59911 is the responsible official for the preparation of the EIS and

will make a decision regarding this proposal considering the comments

and responses, environmental consequences discussed in the FEIS, and

applicable laws, regulations, and policies. The decision and rational

for the decision will be documented in a Record of Decision. That

decision will be subject to appeal under applicable Forest Service

regulations.

Dated: July 2, 1999.

Chuck Harris,

District Ranger, Swan Lake Ranger District, Flathead National Forest.

[FR Doc. 99-17476 Filed 7-8-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M