Revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Medicine Bow National Forest, Albany County, Carbon County, Converse County, Natrona County, Platte County, WY

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the

Medicine Bow National Forest, Albany County, Carbon County, Converse

County, Natrona County, Platte County, WY

AGENCY: USDA 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 Medicine Bow National Forest.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact

statement in conjunction with the revision of its Land and Resource

Management Plan (hereafter referred to as Forest Plan or Plan) for the

Medicine Bow National Forest. This notice describes the proposed

action, specific portions of the current Forest plan to be revised,

environmental issues considered in the revision, 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.

DATES: The public is asked to provide comments identifying and

considering issues, concerns, and the scope of analysis with regard to

the proposed action, in writing by November 15, 1999. The Forest

Service expects to file a Draft Environmental Impact Statement with the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and make it available for public

comment in October of 2000. The Forest Service expects to file a Final

Environmental Impact Statement in December of 2001.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Jerry E. Schmidt, Forest

Supervisor, Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest, 2468 Jackson Street,

Laramie, Wyoming 82070.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Dee Hines, Forest Planner, (307) 745-

2473.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Rocky Mountain Regional Forester at P.O. Box

25127, Lakewood, CO 80225-0127.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to part 36 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) 219.10(g), the Regional Forester for the Rocky

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

environmental impact statement for the revision of the Land and

Resource Management Plan (hereafter referred to as Forest Plan or

Plan--for the Medicine Bow National Forest. According to 36 CFR

219.10(g), land and resource management plans are ordinarily revised on

a 10 to 15 year cycle. The existing Forest Plan was approved on

November 20, 1985.

The Forest Service is the lead agency in this revision effort. The

state of Wyoming, by and through the Office of Federal Land Policy, is

a Cooperating Agency (40 CFR 1501.6) by virtue of special expertise.

The Rocky Mountain Regional Forester is the Deciding Officer and

Responsible Official.

Forest plans describe the intended management of National Forests.

Agency decisions in these plans do the following:

1. Establish multiple-use goals and objectives (36 CFR 219.11 (b)).

2. Establish forestwide management standards and guidelines

applying to future activities (resource integration requirements, 36

CFR 219.13 to 219.27).

3. Establish management areas and management area direction

(management area prescriptions)

[[Page 54610]]

applying to future activities in that management area (resource

integration and minimum specific management requirements) 36 CFR

219.11(c).

4. Establish monitoring and evaluation requirements (36 CFR

219.11(d)).

5. Determine suitability and potential capability of lands for

resource production. This includes designation of suitable timber land

and establishment of allowable timber sale quantity (36 CFR 219.14

through 219.26).

6. Where applicable, recommend designations of special areas such

as Wilderness (36 CFR 219.17) and Wild and Scenic Rivers (The Wild and

Scenic Rivers Act) to Congress.

Need for Change in the Current Forest Plan

The existing Forest Plan was approved in 1985. In addition to the

regulatory requirement to revise Forest Plans every 10 to 15 years, our

experience in implementing the plan and monitoring the effects of that

implementation indicates that we need to make some changes in

management direction. Several other sources have also highlighted the

need for changes in the current Forest Plan. These sources include the

following:

Public involvement which has identified new information

and public values.

Monitoring and scientific research which have identified

new information and knowledge gained.

Forest plan implementation which has identified management

concerns to find better ways for accomplishing desired conditions.

Many concerns about management direction in the current plan result

from a lack of integration of the various resources areas in the plan.

An ecosystems-based approach to strategic planning, also called

ecosystem management, offers an opportunity to address and achieve this

needed integration. Ecosystem management is the management of natural

resources to maintain or restore the sustainability of ecosystems,

thereby providing multiple benefits to present and future generations.

It recognizes the biological, physical, and human dimension of

ecosystems.

Since the Medicine Bow Plan was approved in 1985, the Forest

Service has adopted a new agenda. This new approach, A National

Resource Agenda for the 21st Century, will be the foundation for

national forest management into the 21st century. There are four key

areas in the new agenda:

1. Watershed health and restoration.

2. Sustainable forest ecosystem management.

3. Forest roads.

4. Recreation.

Other developments include the Government Performance and Results

Act (GPRA) which was passed in 1993. This act directs the preparation

of periodic strategic plans by federal agencies. The first strategic

plan for the Forest Service was written in 1997 and centers around the

following three goals:

1. Ensure sustainable ecosystems.

2. Provide multiple benefits for people within the capabilities of

ecosystems.

3. Ensure organizational effectiveness.

Ecosystem management, the Natural Resource Agenda for the 21st

Century, and the GPRA Strategic Plan each concentrate and focus on

outcomes and desired resource conditions, the results of management.

These changes need to be incorporated into the Forest Plan.

Prepearing the Plan and EIS

An interdisciplinary team is conducting the environmental analysis

and preparing an environmental impact statement associated with

revision of the Forest Plan. This interdisciplinary team will also

prepare the revised Forest Plan. As part of this effort, the

interdisciplinary team has already developed a list of forestwide

standards and guidelines; identified 32 management areas; and developed

the corresponding management area themes, settings, desired condition

statements, and management area-specific standards and guidelines.

These will be used to develop alternatives to the proposed action for

the revised Forest Plan. This material is available at the Medicine Bow

National Forest headquarters.

Proposed Action

The revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Medicine Bow

National Forest will be built on principles of ecosystem management.

This integrated approach will address many of the questions about and

concerns with the 1985 Plan. The revised Forest Plan and associated

analysis will also respond to the four points in the new Forest Service

agenda, a Natural Resource Agenda for the 21st Century. In addition,

the goals of the GPRA Strategic Plan will be featured in the revised

plan. Accordingly, the revised Forest Plan will concentrate on desired

conditions of the resource and the outcomes of management actions.

The Revised Forest Plan will include a monitoring strategy to

measure how effectively the Plan meets stated goals and objectives. In

keeping with the Natural Resource Agenda, this strategy will focus on

outcomes and desired resource conditions rather than outputs.

Major Revision Topics

We identified the following six revision topics through annual

Forest Plan monitoring reports, review of regulations, internal Forest

Service discussions, and discussions with the public through a series

of open houses in communities adjacent to the National Forest:

Biological Diversity.

Timber Suitability and Management of Forested Lands.

Recreation Opportunities.

Roadless Area Allocation and Management.

Wild and Scenic Rivers.

Oil and Gas Leasing.

The following sections discuss the current management direction,

the need for change, and a proposed action for each of the revision

topics.

Biological Diversity

Current Direction

Direction in the current Plan is intended to produce a diversity of

habitats well-distributed throughout the landscape. This approach to

managing biological diversity produces a very heterogeneous landscape

at a fine scale. Patches are small, with a high percentage of edge

habitat. Patches are areas where the vegetation is similar in species,

age, and size. Natural disturbance processes are generally controlled

or suppressed. All habitats, including late successional forests are

well-distributed but generally in small patches. The current plan

contains one Research Natural Area and 6 Special Interest Areas which

feature biological diversity-related features.

Need for Change

Public interest in biological diversity and how best to maintain it

has grown substantially since the current Forest Plan was approved in

1985. Biological diversity or various aspects of it (such as

threatened, endangered, and sensitive species management or forest

health) have been issues in environmental analyses in recent years. The

current plan's emphasis on heterogeneous habitats and exclusion of

natural disturbance events has caused concerns about sustainability of

the forested ecosystems.

Direction in the current plan does not fully reflect the latest

scientific information on land management planning. This new

information needs

[[Page 54611]]

to be incorporated into the revised plan, particularly the principles

of ecosystem management, with attention given to managing the system as

a whole.

Proposed Action

The proposed action is to increase the acreage where natural

disturbance events (fire, insects and disease) are tolerated, increase

the size of patches on the landscape, and provide increased acreage and

larger blocks in late successional habitats. These goals would be

accomplished through several methods, including the following:

Allocating inventoried roadless areas to prescriptions

with an emphasis on late successional forests and natural disturbance

processes.

Extending rotation ages and emulating natural landscape

patch size in many areas where timber harvest is allowed.

The use of fire as a management tool would also be increased,

especially in ecosystems with a short or moderate fire return interval.

In addition, the proposed action includes 5, and potentially 6

additional Research Natural Areas (the current plan has 1). The current

plan has 6 Special Interest Areas (SIAs); the proposed action adds 11.

There would be changes to two of the current SIAs. One would be renamed

and would increase in size; one would become an RNA. Many of the

resulting 16 proposed SIA's would also feature biological diversity

goals.

Timber Suitability and Management of Forested Lands

Current Direction

The current Forest Plan allocates approximately two-thirds of the

tentatively suited lands in 7 management area prescriptions to timber

management. Timber management is practiced across these 7 management

areas, with differing management emphases and intentions.

Need for Change

The following indicate a need for change in the management of

forested lands:

Projected harvest levels in the current plan are not being

achieved.

There is concern over what constitutes sustainable harvest

levels.

Reevaluation of the tentatively suited lands is required

at 10 years (36 CFR 219.12(k)(5)(ii)).

Allocation of existing roadless areas to timber management

prescriptions continues to be very controversial.

Silvicultural prescriptions specified in various

management areas are in conflict with other multiple use management

activities in those areas.

Current forest conditions indicate treatments for products

other than sawlogs are needed.

Proposed Action

Under the proposed action, timber harvest would continue in areas

with an existing network of roads and past timber management

activities. Timber management would not take place in areas where trees

were not harvested in the past. Forest management actions would stress

sustainable forest ecosystems and healthy watersheds. Timber stands

would be managed as vigorous green forests. These forest health goals

would be achieved through a variety of even- and uneven-aged

silvicultural practices, including an emphasis on products other than

sawlogs. Management intensity would vary across those lands allocated

to timber production through a mix of silvicultural prescriptions and

rotation ages.

Recreation Opportunities

Current Direction

The current plan emphasizes roaded natural recreation opportunities

which are accommodated by an extensive road system. Following project

implementation, many roads have been closed but not obliterated to

allow their use in future management activities. These road closures,

combined with the Forest's off-road policy, have facilitated a new road

system created by users.

Under the current plan, there was an increase in semi-primitive ROS

class opportunities. A key concern is the sporadic distribution of

these opportunities which precludes true semi-primitive experiences.

Need for Change

Recreation opportunities have not kept pace with increasingly

diverse demands, and these demands are expected to increase as the

population increases. Recreation-related controversy (i.e., conflicts

between recreationists and management activities, conflicts between

recreation users) have increased over the last 15 years. In many cases,

management actions in the current Forest Plan are in conflict with the

recreation objectives for a given management area.

Motorized use has changed since the current plan was signed. In

particular, there is more off-highway vehicle use on the Forest,

creating a need to re-evaluate current travel management policies.

Rather than imposing blanket restrictions, motorized uses and their

distribution need to be addressed through management area allocations.

Proposed Action

Under the proposed action, recreation opportunities would

accommodate new and diverse demands. This would be achieved by the

following:

Increasing the amount of semi-primitive ROS classes.

Connecting semi-primitive areas by way of new and existing

roads and trails.

Increasing and improving dispersed recreation

opportunities using existing roads and trails and those developed for

other management actions.

Improving the settings in and around current facilities

and providing opportunities and readily available amenities from these

sites.

The proposed action would maintain current dispersed recreation

opportunities, and include consideration for these opportunities in

future management activities. It would also include specific management

area allocations for both motorized and nonmotorized activities. In

addition, the proposed action would include direction to improve public

access.

The proposed action would not include additional developed

facilities, rather the focus would be on improvements and bringing

current facilities up to standard. Renovation of current facilities

would focus on accessibility, improving setting amenities and other

recreation opportunities, and providing areas for larger recreational

vehicles.

Roadless Area Allocation and Management

Current Direction

The President signed the Wyoming Wilderness Act of 1984 (PL 98-550)

which designated three new wilderness areas on the Medicine Bow

National Forest, in addition to the existing Savage Run Wilderness

(14,930 acres). Areas designated by the 1984 Act include the Platte

River Wilderness (22,749 acres), the Encampment River Wilderness

(10,124 acres), and the Huston Park Wilderness (30,726 acres). The Act

also released all remaining areas (those areas not designated as

wilderness by the Act) to multiple-use management. The current plan

allocates many of these remaining roadless areas to prescriptions which

allow road building.

Need for Change

Inventory of roadless areas is a requirement in the revision

process (36 CFR 219.17). Management of inventoried roadless areas

continues to be controversial. These conflicts are a

[[Page 54612]]

result of varying resource demands on the roadless areas.

Proposed Action

The proposed action is to complete an inventory of roadless areas,

evaluate these areas to determine wilderness potential (36 CFR 219.17),

and allocate most of the roadless areas to varying management area

prescriptions which retain the roadless character. Exceptions might be

made on the Laramie Peak unit where ecosystem health goals may require

more active management with limited road building.

Wild and Scenic Rivers

Proposed Action

In the current plan, there is no management area used specifically

for Wild and Scenic Rivers. Designation of the North Platte and

Encampment Rivers was recommended to Congress. Congress has not acted

to officially designate either river, however they remain under the

wilderness prescription, and their unique qualities are safeguarded by

the wilderness standards and guidelines.

Need for Change

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, as amended (December 31, 1992) and

Forest Service Handbook 1909.12, Chapter 8, direct the Forest Service

to evaluate rivers for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River

System during forest planning. Proposed designation of two eligible

rivers, the North Platte and the Encampment, has not been acted on by

Congress. These two rivers, as well as other rivers on the forest, need

to be evaluated to determine their eligibility for inclusion in the

Wild and Scenic River System.

Proposed Action

The proposed action is to allocate all eligible rivers to wild and

scenic river prescriptions accordingly. Two rivers, the North Platte

and the Encampment, qualified for inclusion in the wild and scenic

rivers program and would be protected under wild and scenic management

prescriptions until a suitability determination is made. Both rivers

have stretches that would qualify under the wild river prescription as

well as scenic river prescription. Suitability determinations would be

made with future site-specific analysis when the need arises.

Oil and Gas Leasing

Current Direction

In the current plan, most of the analysis area is available for

leasing, but no lands are authorized for leasing. Current Forest Plan

standards and guidelines are followed, and leases would be issued on a

lease by lease basis.

Need for Change

In 1987, Congress passed the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing

Reform Act (Leasing Reform Act). The Leasing Reform Act requires

analysis that was not conducted for the 1985 Forest Plan.

Proposed Action

The proposed action is to make most land available for leasing with

specified stipulations. Stipulations would vary according to resource

needs and the desired conditions of associated management areas.

Involving the Public

The Regional Forester gives notice that the Forest is beginning an

environmental analysis and decision making process for this proposed

action. We encourage any interested or affected people to participate

in the analysis and contribute to the final decision.

We will provide opportunities for open public discussion of the

proposed action including changes to the revision topics. We encourage

the public to comment on this specific proposal. Focusing on the

proposal will generate specific scoping comments on the revision topics

and decisions to be made, and make the revision process more effective.

The Analysis of the Management Situation contains baseline information,

including the 32 management areas and the No Action Alternative, to

help evaluate how the proposed action and the alternatives address the

revision topics and the six decisions (listed previously) made in

forest plan revisions. This information will be available in late 1999.

We will develop a broad range of alternatives (including the No

Action Alternative) to the proposed action based on the comment

received and on further analysis. Accordingly, we expect the

alternative considered and the final decision to vary from what is put

forth in the proposed action.

Public participation is invited throughout the revision process and

will be especially important at several points during the process. We

will make information available through periodic newsletters, news

releases, the Internet (http://www.fs.fed.us/mrnf/rev/medrev/

medrev.htm), and various public meetings. The first public meetings

will be held after the Analysis of the Management Situation is

completed in late 1999. Meeting dates will be well published through

the media mentioned above.

Cooperative Agencies

The state of Wyoming, by and through the Office of Federal Land

Policy, is a Cooperating Agency (40 CFR 1501.6) by virtue of special

expertise in the areas of social assessment, public participation, and

wildlife management.

Release and Review of the EIS

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

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

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

will publish a notice of availability for the DEIS in the Federal

Register. The comment period on the DEIS will be 90 days from the date

the EPA 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

the DEIS 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 contention; 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 (FEIS) 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. 1335, 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 three-month 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 FEIS.

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. Comments may also address the

adequacy of the DEIS 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.

[[Page 54613]]

After the comment period ends on the DEIS, comments will be

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

the Final EIS. The FEIS, is scheduled to be completed in December of

2001. The responsible official will consider the comments, responses,

environmental consequences discussed in the FEIS, 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

decision will be subject to appeal in accordance with 36 CFR Part 217.

Dated: September 23, 1999.

Tom L. Thompson,

Acting Regional Forester, Rocky Mountain Region.

[FR Doc. 99-26175 Filed 10-6-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M