[Federal Register: November 3, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 212)]
[Notices]
[Page 64020-64022]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03no04-33]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments, Coconino National
Forest; Coconino County, AZ
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 environmental effects of authorizing
cattle grazing on the Picket Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received
within 30 days of the date of publication of this Notice of Intent in
the Federal Register. The draft EIS is expected to be published in
December 2004 and the final EIS is expected in February 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Terri Marceron, Mormon Lake
District Ranger, 4373 South Lake Mary Road, Flagstaff, Arizona 86001,
Fax: (928) 214-2460, e-mail:
comments-southwestern-coconino-mormon-lake@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Hannemann, Range Staff, or
Katherine S[aacute]nchez Meador, Range Specialist, Peaks Ranger
District, 5075 N Highway 89, Flagstaff, Arizona 86004, (928) 526-0866.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments
are adjacent cattle grazing allotments located approximately nine miles
southeast of Flagstaff, Arizona. The Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon
Allotments consist of 34,814 and 20,993 acres, respectively. The
current Pickett Lake Allotment permit is of 758 cattle from June 1 to
October 31. The current Padre Canyon Allotment permit is for 87 cattle
from June 1 to October 31. Both Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon grazing
permits are issued to the same permittee. This joint ownership makes
management coordination between the two allotments possible.
Grazing has occurred continuously on the Pickett Lake and Padre
Canyon Allotments since the mid-1880s. Since that time, the Forest
Service has reduced cattle numbers and controlled cattle grazing
periods more strictly. Cattle grazing management has improved over time
with the construction of fences and waters by the Forest Service and
permittees. Over the last ten years, cattle numbers on the Pickett Lake
Allotment have varied from a high of 758 cattle in 1994 to a low of 300
cattle in 2002. Over the last ten years, cattle numbers on the Padre
Canyon Allotment have varied from a high of 87 in 1995 to non-use in
1996, 2000, 2002, 2003, and 2004.
The Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments are scheduled for
environmental analysis of grazing use on the Coconino National Forest,
as required by the Burns Amendment (1995). This project was initiated
in December 2000 as an EIS and the Proposed Action included cattle
grazing, pinyon and juniper treatments, and broadcast burning. After
initial public scoping and comment, the Forest Service decided to
narrow the scope of the project to analyze only cattle grazing under an
environmental assessment (EA). A revised Proposed Action was presented
for public scoping in August 2002 and a draft EA published in July
2003. On September 14, 2004, a notice to withdraw the NOI for the EIS
was published in the Federal Register (volume 69, number 177, page
55403), because it was imminent that a Decision Notice and FONSI were
to be signed.
Based on the controversy over the effects of cattle grazing on
pronghorn habitat on the Anderson Mesa portion of these allocation, the
responsible official has decided to initiate this analysis as an EIS.
This project is being completed in order to ensure cattle grazing on
the Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments is consistent with goals,
objectives, as well as the standards and guidelines of the Coconino
National
[[Page 64021]]
Forest Plan (1987, as amended). The Proposed Action for the EIS is
primarily based upon the preferred Alternative from the unreleased
final EA, Alternative E. This alternative was created after comments on
the draft EA were analyzed. The publication of this NOI begins the NEPA
process and initiates a 30 day scoping period.
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose of this project is to continue cattle grazing on the
Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments. There is a need to maintain
and/or improve rangeland conditions, and to maintain and protect
seasonal and semi-permanent wetlands which includes those wetlands with
emergent vegetation on the two allotments. There is also a need to
maintain the permittee's access to their water right and consider
current water claims within the allotments.
Proposed Action
The Proposed Action would authorize grazing on the Pickett Lake and
Padre Canyon allotments while reducing overall cattle use, reducing
cattle graze periods, and increasing pasture rest periods. Grazing
rotations would be adjusted so cattle do not graze in seasonal and
semi-permanent wetlands containing emergent vegetation from June 1 to
July 15. No cattle grazing would occur on these allotments at all
between May 1 and May 31.
Cattle use on the Pickett Lake Allotment would be reduced 14% by
combining the management of these two allotments and shortening the
grazing season (currently June 1 to October 31) from June 1 to
September 30. Combining the allotments would reduce the pasture graze
periods above the rim from five to three months above the Anderson Mesa
Rim and from five months to one month below the rim.
The Proposed Action would establish a 35% utilization limit by
cattle and/or elk during cattle grazing season. When pasture use
approaches 35% by cattle and/or elk, cattle would move to the next
pasture in the rotation. If elk use exceeds 35% in a pasture before
cattle enter a pasture, cattle would skip this pasture and move to the
next pasture in the rotation.
Up to 1.5 miles of fence, in sections, would be constructed in the
Elliot Driveway pasture to keep cattle from moving down the Anderson
Mesa Rim, and for a small holding pasture in the western corner of the
Elliot Driveway pasture. Four miles of pipeline (connected to a well on
private land) and five drinkers would be constructed to improve water
distribution below the Anderson Mesa Rim. Exclosure fences would be
built to protect the hardstem bulrush and surrounding upland buffer at
Post and Perry Lakes, with a lane to the stock tank water right at
Perry Lake. Exclosure fences would also be built around the emergent
vegetation and surrounding upland buffer at Ducknest and Indian Tank
Lakes, with a lane to the stock tank water in Indian Tank Lake. Two
short road segments within or near Post and Perry Lakes would be
closed.
The Proposed Action also includes an adaptive management option to
fence Boot, Breezy, West Breezy and Indian Lakes, with a lane to the
stock tank waters in Boot and Indian Lakes. To maintain rangeland
condition, or for increased flexibility in pasture rotations, the
emergent vegetation and the surrounding upland buffer would be fenced
at these four wetlands. Fencing would be completed as funding becomes
available. These wetlands would likely be fenced within three years. Up
to 20% use by cattle on emergent and woody vegetation at Boot and Billy
Back Springs would be allowed. If use, by cattle, exceeds this a fence
would be constructed by the permittee to exclude cattle use at these
two springs.
Possible Alternatives
In addition to the Proposed Action, three other alternatives have
been developed for preliminary analysis. One alternative (Current
Management) will consider the effects of continuing the current cattle
grazing management system on the two allotments. Another alternative
(No Action/No Grazing) will consider the effects of closing Pickett
Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments to cattle grazing for a ten-year
period. Another alternative (Reduction in Utilization) will study the
effects of reducing the cattle and/or elk utilization standard (during
the cattle grazing season) to 20% on both allotments. The cattle
numbers would also be reduced by 15% in this alternative. The
development of any other alternatives will be completed following
public response to scoping and published in the draft EIS.
Responsible Official
The responsible official for this project is the Mormon Lake
District Ranger.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
Based upon the effects of the different alternatives, the
responsible official will either decide to implement the Proposed
Action, another action alternative, combinations of components from
several alternatives, or to not reauthorize grazing for a ten-year
period on the allotments at this time.
Scoping Process
Scoping is an ongoing process throughout the planning process. This
Notice of Intent serves as the scoping process under NEPA, which will
guide development of the EIS. A copy of this Notice of Intent will be
mailed to those people and organizations on The Coconino National
Forest's mailing list that have indicated a specific interest in the
Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon Allotments or grazing management in
general. A press release announcing the filing of this Notice of Intent
will be sent to local newspapers and media. The public will be notified
of any meetings regarding this proposal by mailings and press releases
sent to the local newspaper and media. No meetings are planned at this
time.
Preliminary Issues
During development of the draft EA, two issues were identified. The
first issue involves wetlands and how the proposed cattle grazing
system and utilization levels affect seasonal and semi-permanent
wetlands habitat for ground-nesting birds and riparian vegetative
health within wetlands. The second issue is concerned with the proposed
utilization level of 35%, which may inhibit grass plants' growth,
reduce vertical height, and remove too many seed heads. A 35%
utilization level may also lessen plants' ability to grow to maturity,
build necessary root mass, or propagate. the Proposed Action and a
Reduction in Utilization Alternative have been developed to address
these issues.
Comments Requested
A draft EIS will be prepared for comments. The comment period on
the draft EIS 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
a 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 draft EIS stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final EIS may be waived or dismissed by
[[Page 64022]]
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 EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, 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 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, including the names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal
and will be available for public inspection. Comments submitted
anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, those who submit
anonymous comments will 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 to 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 if the request is denied, 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.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook
1909.15, Section 21.)
Dated: October 28, 2004.
Joseph P. Stringer,
Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 04-24510 Filed 11-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M