Starbucky Restoration Project; Nez Perce National Forest, Idaho County, Idaho

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Starbucky Restoration Project; Nez Perce National Forest, Idaho

County, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The project area is located in the Buckhorn, Santiam, Rabbit,

and Center Star watersheds, along with South Fork Clearwater River face

drainages, T28N, R6E, Sections 1 and 12; T28N, R7E, Sections 3-10;

T29N, R6E, Section 36; T29N, R7E, Sections 23 and 25-35, Boise

Meridian.

The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact statement

(EIS) to analyze and disclose the environmental effects of the project.

The primary purpose of this project is to maintain the project

area's forest ecosystems ecological structure and function within a

natural and sustainable condition. The projected ecological succession

within these watersheds will not maintain desired conditions, because

of the limited role natural fire has been allowed to perform, and could

pose a risk to watershed condition, fish, wildlife, and sensitive plant

habitat.

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

January 12, 2000 to receive timely consideration in the preparation of

the draft EIS.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions on the proposed action

or requests for a map of the proposed action or to be placed on the

project mailing list to Kevin Martin, District Ranger, Red River

District, P.O. Box 416, Elk City, Idaho 83525.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kara Chadwick, District

Silviculturist, Red River Ranger District, P.O. Box 416, Elk City,

Idaho 83525, phone (208) 842-2245.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action includes the following

possible actions: (1) Maintaining the desired vegetation condition

through timber harvest and/or prescribed burning; priority will be

given to treat those vegetative ecosystems most at risk of moving

outside the natural range of variability; this includes western larch,

lodgepole pine, and ponderosa pine forest types, and candystick

habitat; these actions may or may not provide timber products; (2)

reducing the risk of adverse effects from wildfire to the aquatic

resources and firefighter safety, again through timber harvest and/or

prescribed burning; (3) improving fish habitat and stream morphology

and function by reducing sediment production through road obliteration

and other watershed improvement activities; (4) rehabilitating

abandoned mine sites that pose a threat to the public or the

environment; and (5) providing dispersed and roaded recreation

opportunities compatible with other resources.

The scope of this analysis is limited to activities related to the

purpose and need and measures necessary to mitigate the effects these

activities may have on the environment. The decision will include if,

when, how, and where to schedule: timber harvest, watershed improvement

activities, road obliteration, prescribed burning, recreation site

improvement and access management, resource protection measures,

monitoring, and other K-V activities.

This project was originally scoped beginning in February of 1998

prior to undertaking preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA).

The EA was sent out for a 30-day comment period in May 1998. Due to the

issues raised during the comment period, both internally and

externally, the decision has been made to prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS). This Notice of Intent serves as notice of the

intent to prepare an EIS for the Starbucky Restoration Project. The

issues raised and the alternatives developed as a result of the public

participation for the EA will be brought forward for the EIS. The

general categories of issues already identified, and the alternatives

developed from the public participation are as follows:

Issues

Current vegetative patterns, structures, and species

composition, and effects of activities on these components.

Effects on Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES)

wildlife species and their habitat.

Effects on TES plant species, especially candystick, due

to the presence of a Priority One Conservation Unit for candystick.

Effects on big game summer and winter range, security

areas, and big game summer forage.

Effects on water yield and peak flows, and effects of

sedimentation to streams, all of which affect water quality and fish

habitat.

Concern for road densities.

Concern over limited number of recreation sites/

opportunities, and resulting impacts of these limitations to resources.

Economics of proposal.

Effect from cumulative effects.

Current old growth allocation and effects of project on.

Effects on not only visuals of area, but also in respect

to the South Fork Clearwater River corridor.

Access to active mining claims.

Safety of public in regards to old, abandoned mine sites.

Relationship of this proposal to the Interim Roads Rule.

Alternatives

In addition to the ``No Action'' alternative, five action

alternatives have been identified for analysis:

(a) No action.

(b) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed

burning of approximately 1338 acres; verification and allocation of

Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 5.0 miles of

temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing

road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine

reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.

(c) Vegetative treatment through prescribed burning only of

approximately 330 acres of winter range; no road construction;

verification and allocation of Forest Plan old growth; obliteration of

approximately 4.1 miles of existing road, along with other watershed

improvement activities; mine reclamation; recreation site improvement;

and access management.

[[Page 69474]]

(d) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed

burning of approximately 675 acres; verification and allocation of

Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 0.7 miles of

temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing

road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine

reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.

(e) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed

burning of approximately 1338 acres; verification and allocation of

Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 6.1 miles of

temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing

road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine

reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.

(f) Vegetative treatment through timber harvest and/or prescribed

burning of approximately 1338 acres; verification and allocation of

Forest Plan old growth; construction of approximately 8.6 miles of

temporary road; obliteration of approximately 4.1 miles of existing

road, along with other watershed improvement activities; mine

reclamation; recreation site improvement; and access management.

Note that the acreages, the miles of temporary road construction

and miles of road obliteration are approximate only and may change

during the analysis.

Public participation will continue to be an important part of the

project, commencing with the EIS initial scoping process (40 CFR

1501.7), which starts with publication of this notice and continues for

the next 30 days. In addition, the public is encouraged to visit with

Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior to

the decision. The Forest Service will be seeking information, comments,

and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, the Nez Perce

Tribe, and other individuals or organizations who may be interested in

or affected by the proposed action.

Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in

preparation of the draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to:

1. Identify additional potential issues;

2. Identify additional major issues to be analyzed in depth;

3. Eliminate minor issues or those which have been covered by a

relevant previous environmental analysis, such as the Nez Perce

National Forest Plan EIS;

4. Identify additional alternatives to the proposed action;

5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action

and alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects).

While public participation in this analysis is welcome at any time,

comments received within 30 days of the publication of this notice will

be especially useful in the preparation of the draft EIS, which is

expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection Agency and

available for public review in March 2000. A 45-day comment period will

follow publication of a Notice of Availability of the draft EIS in the

Federal Register. The comments received will be analyzed and considered

in preparation of a final EIS, which is expected to be filed in July

2000. A Record of Decision will be issued not less than 30 days after

publication of a Notice of Availability of the final EIS in the Federal

Register.

The Forest Service believes it is important at this early stage to

give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public

participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of

draft EISs must structure their participation in the environmental

review of the proposal in such a way 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, 513 (1978). Also,

environmental objections that could be raised at the draft EIS stage

but that are not raised until after completion of the 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 45-day comment period in order that

substantive comments and objections are 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 action, comments should

be as specific as possible. 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.

Bruce Bernhardt is the responsible official for this environmental

impact statement.

Dated: November 29, 1999.

Bruce Bernhardt,

Forest Supervisor, Nez Perce National Forest.

[FR Doc. 99-32214 Filed 12-10-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M