Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Wasatch-Cache National Forest, UT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Wasatch-Cache National

Forest, UT

AGENCY: Forest Service.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement

in conjunction with revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan

for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest located in Box Elder, Cache,

Davis, Duchesne, Morgan, Rich, Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, Wasatch, and

Weber counties, Utah; and Uinta County, Wyoming.

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

SUMMARY: the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement in conjunction with a revision of the

Land and Resource Management Plan (hereinafter referred to as Forest

Plan) for the Wasatch-Cache National Forest.

This notice describes the needs for change identified to this point

in the current Forest Plan to be revised, estimated dates for filing

the Environmental Impact Statement, information concerning public

participation, and the names and addresses of the agency officials who

can provide additional information. The purpose of the notice is to

begin the scoping phase of public involvement in the revision process.

DATES: Comments concerning the intent to prepare a revised Forest Plan

should be received in writing by November 1, 1999. The agency expects

to file a Draft Environmental Impact Statement in June of 2000 and a

Final Environmental Impact Statement in the December of 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Bernie Weingardt, Forest

Supervisor, Wasatch-Cache National Forest, 8236 Federal Building, 125

South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84138.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Blackwell, Planning Team

Leader, Wasatch-Cache National Forest (801) 524-3907.

Responsible official: Jack Blackwell, Intermountain Regional

Forester, at 324 25th Street, Ogden, UT 84401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to part 36 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) 219.10 (f) and (g), the Regional Forester for the

Intermountain Region gives notice of the agency's intent to prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement for the revision of the Wasatch-Cache

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. According to 36 CFR

219.10(g), Land and Resource Management Plans shall ordinarily be

revised on a 10- to 15-year cycle. The existing Forest Plan for the

Wasatch-Cache National Forest was approved on September 4, 1985.

The Regional Forester gives notice that the Wasatch-Cache National

Forest is beginning an environmental analysis and decision-making

process for the proposed programmatic action to revise the Wasatch-

Cache Forest Plan. Opportunities will be provided to discuss the Forest

Plan revision with the public. The public is invited to help identify

issues that will be considered in defining the range of alternatives in

the Environmental Impact Statement.

Forest plans describe the long-term direction for managing National

Forests. Agency decisions in these plans do the following:

Establish multiple-use goals and objectives (36 CFR

219.11);

Establish forest-wide management requirements (standards

and guidelines);

Establish management areas and management area direction

through the application of management prescriptions;

Identify lands not suited for timber production (36 CFR

219.3);

Establish monitoring and evaluation requirements; and

Recommend areas for official designation of wilderness.

The authorization of project-level activities on the Forest occurs

through project, or site-specific, decision-making. Project level

decisions must comply with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

procedures and must include a determination that the project is

consistent with the Forest Plan.

Need for Change in the Current Forest Plan

The Forest completed a monitoring report in 1992. The results of

the monitoring report, in addition to public input and Forest Plan

implementation experience, indicated that there is a need for change in

some management direction in the Forest Plan. Several sources were used

in determining the needed changes in the current Forest Plan. These

sources include:

Comments received from employees who have been

implementing the Plan.

Findings from the Forest Plan monitoring report;

Comparison of regulatory, manual, and handbook

requirements with current Plan direction;

National direction, policy and initiatives;

New information from research, and

Public comments received regarding the findings in the

[[Page 52275]]

Preliminary Analysis of the Management Situation.

Preliminary Analysis of the Management Situation

In April, 1999, the Wasatch-Cache National Forest published

Preliminary Analysis of the Management Situation (PAMS). The PAMS

summarized the current management and resource conditions of the

Forest, outlined a new ecosystem management framework for the Forest

Plan, and disclosed eight significant ``needs for change'' forest

managers and resource specialists identified. The PAMS was mailed and

distributed to nearly 500 interested individuals, non-government

organizations, city, county, state and other federal agencies. A series

of 11 information forums were held that over 200 people attended.

Public comments were encouraged regarding the findings disclosed in the

PAMS. The Forest Supervisor has identified two additional ``needs for

change'' that will be included in the revision of the Forest Plan. The

``needs for change'' topics include:

1. Watershed Health

Need to set objectives and direction for using a watershed

approach to land management planning and watershed restoration.

Need to develop watershed health goals for management

areas.

Need to set direction for establishing priority watersheds

for restoration and for setting individual project priorities within

watersheds.

Need to set direction for protection of forest wetland.

2. Biodiversity and Viability

Need to use the broader approach as identified in the

ecosystem management framework based on research and new best science.

Need to develop direction for habitat connectivity, links

between landscapes, corridors, habitat edge, and horizontal and

vertical diversity (structural stages).

Need to develop forest management direction that address

appropriate stocking levels, stand structure, and species composition

that incorporates the extent and frequency of all types of

disturbances.

Need for guidance on the use of native plant species

(including the collection of seed) in revegetation and/or

rehabilitation activities on the forest.

Need to consider and recognize the frequency, size,

intensity and severity of disturbance processes in determining

vegetative conditions and how management practices have altered them.

The positive effects of prescribed fire and wildland fire use also

needs to be recognized.

Need for management direction that addresses important

soil processes (erosion rates, mass stability, infiltration, nutrient

cycling, etc.) as they relate biological diversity.

Need for snag and coarse woody debris guidance that help

maintain ecosystem structure and function. Guidance needs to develop

and refine information to ensure an adequate diversity of size and

decay class of snags and coarse woody debris.

Need to develop management direction that describes

desired structure and density for each structural stage, from opening

to mature and old growth.

Need to provide integrated management guidance and

direction for species and communities in which they occur (the whole

instead of pieces). This includes TES, Fish and Wildlife Service

candidate species, species (and habitats) at risk, MIS, and other rare

and unique plant, fish and animal species.

3. Road/Trail/Access Management

Need to incorporate goals and direction of the new

transportation policy as appropriate.

Need for the appropriate forest road system to be a

primary component of the desired future for a management area.

Need goals to achieve an integrated transportation system

with multiple functions not serving a single resource need.

Need adaptive standards for road construction rather than

a static, outdated list.

Need to delete road density standards as a stand-alone

requirement, rather use them as a component of desired future.

Need to delete specific travel management guidelines and

establish criteria (standards) for making future site-specific travel

management decisions.

4. Recreation Niche

Need to address the trends in population growth and how

the Wasatch-Cache can best meet growing demands for outdoor recreation

opportunities.

Need to provide guidance for resource use preference

within a management area or prescription area.

Need to determine the Wasatch-Cache niche as a outdoor

recreation provider.

Need to address management of dispersed recreation in

order to sustain healthy eco-systems.

5. Wild and Scenic Rivers

Need to provide for interim protection of eligible segment

values until suitability studies are completed. Suitability will not be

addressed in the Forest plan revision.

6. Roadless Areas/Wilderness Recommendations

Need to make wilderness recommendation for roadless areas

thought to be appropriate addition.

Need to develop management direction to protect roadless

values where appropriate.

7. Appropriate Timberlands

Need to reassess tentatively suited/unsuited lands for

timber production.

Need to incorporate new standards and guidelines added for

sensitive species habitat (e.g. northern goshawk).

Need to address correction of growth and yield errors

identified in the 5 year monitoring report.

8. Rangeland Capability and Suitability

Need to reassess rangeland capability.

Need to reassess rangeland suitability.

9. Research Natural Areas

Need to identify potential areas in the Forest that could

contribute to diversity within the RNA system in Utah.

10. Oil and Gas Leasing

Need to make leasing decisions for the portion of the

north slope of the Uinta Mountains which was not decided in the 1994

Forest Plan amendment.

More detailed information on the ``need for change'' topics is

available upon request.

Programmatic Proposed Action

At this early stage in the revision process, the proposed action

consists of these elements: (1) Proposed forestwide goals and

monitoring; and (2) management prescription maps and highlights of 36

management areas. Details of the proposed action are available upon

request. The proposed action is also available on the forest website at

www.fs.fed.us/wcnf.

Framework for Alternatives To Be Considered

Through a range of alternatives economic and social community

stability will be considered in revising the Forest Plan. The

alternatives will address different options to resolve the issues

identified in the revision topics listed above. Alternatives must meet

the

[[Page 52276]]

purpose and need for revision to be considered valid. One of the

alternatives to be examined is the ``no-action alternative.'' This is a

required alternative that represents continuation of management under

the 1985 Forest Plan, as amended. Alternatives are developed in

response to public issues, management concerns, and resource

opportunities identified during the scoping process. In describing

alternatives, desired vegetation and resource conditions will be

defined.

Involving the Public

The Forest Service is seeking information and comments from

individuals, organizations and federal, state, and local agencies who

may be interested in or affected by the proposed action (36 CFR 219.6).

Public participation will be solicited by notifying in person and/

or by mail, known interested and affected publics. News releases will

be used to give the public general notice, and public involvement

opportunities will be offered at various locations. Public

participation activities may include written comments, open houses,

focus groups and collaborative forums.

Public participation will be sought throughout the revision process

and will be especially important at several points along the way. The

first formal opportunity to comment is during the scoping process (40

CFR 1501.7). Public open houses are scheduled in four communities at

the following locations and dates.

October 12--Weber County Library, 131 South 7400 East, Huntsville,

Utah, 4:00-7:00 p.m.

October 13--Salt Lake City-County Building, 451 South State Street,

Salt Lake City, 4:00-7:00 p.m.

October 14--Logan Ranger District Office, 1500 East Highway 89, Logan,

Utah, 4:00-7:00 p.m.

October 19--School Board Room, 129 2nd Street, Mountain View, Wyoming,

5:00-8:00 p.m.

Release and Review of the EIS

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is expected to be

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

available for public comment in June of 2000. At that time, the EPA

will publish a notice of availability in the Federal Register. The

comment period on the Draft EIS will be at least 90 days from the date

the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register,

as required by the planning regulations.

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 Draft EIS 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 DEIS stage but are not raised until after

completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) 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 comment period so that

substantive comments and objectives are made available to the Forest

Service at a time when 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 programmatic actions, comments on the

Draft EIS 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 EIS or the merits

of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statements.

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.

After the comment period ends on the Draft EIS, comments will be

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

preparing the Final EIS. The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed in

December of 2000. The responsible official will consider the comments,

responses, and environmental consequences discussed in the Final EIS,

and applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making decisions

regarding the revision. The responsible official will document the

decisions and reasons for the decisions in a Record of Decision for the

revised plan. The decisions will be subject to appeal in accordance

with 36 CFR part 217. Jack A. Blackwell, Intermountain Regional

Forester, is the responsible official for this EIS.

Dated: September 21, 1999.

Pam Gardiner,

Deputy Wasatch-Cache Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 99-25027 Filed 9-27-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M