[Federal Register: June 26, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 123)]
[Notices]
[Page 38004-38006]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26jn03-35]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Grasshopper Fuels Management Project, Beaverhead-Deerlodge
National Forests, Beaverhead County, MT
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest (FS) and the Dillon
Area Office, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will prepare an
environmental impact statement to document the analysis and disclose
the environmental impacts of a proposed action to reduce hazardous
fuels that pose a risk of wildfire on about 3900 acres administered by
both agencies in the Grasshopper Valley, 35 miles northwest of Dillon,
Montana. The purpose of the ``Grasshopper Fuels Management'' project is
to: ``Provide an increased margin of safety to the public; reduce
threats to dwellings, structures, and improvements in the Grasshopper
Valley, and create areas of defensible space providing a safer
environment for firefighters when fires do occur.'' The decisions to be
made are the location, design, and scheduling of the proposed hazardous
fuel reduction activity, and associated silvicultural practices; the
[[Page 38005]]
estimated timber volume, if any, to make available from the project
area; any access management measures (road construction,
reconstruction, area restrictions and closures if connected to fuels
reduction), mitigation measures and monitoring requirements.
Alternatives: This EIS will evaluate alternative methods to meet
the designated Purpose and Need for action. The ``Proposed Action''
Alternative 1 (3900 acres) is essentially the proposed action that was
identified in the scoping letter to the public in May 2002. It includes
hazardous fuels reduction on 1700 acres of FS and BLM lands to reduce
stand density, remove ladder fuels, and treat fuels buildup using a
combination of mechanical treatments and prescribed fire. Thinning,
Group Selection, Salvage and Sanitation are treatments proposed, using
commercial timber harvest where appropriate to remove and utilize
merchantable trees. On another 700 acres, a combination of cutting
encroaching conifers and applying prescribed fire would maintain non-
forest vegetation types and provide areas of defensible space. On 1500
acres located in an Inventoried Roadless Area, a combination of
chainsaw felling of small diameter trees and prescribed fire would be
used to remove ladder fuels and treat fuels buildup. Over 8,000 acres
in the western and southwestern portion of the project area are part of
an inventoried roadless area. No commercial timber harvest, permanent
or temporary road construction is proposed within the inventoried
roadless area. No permanent road construction is proposed in the
project area; however, approximately 5 miles of temporary road and 1-2
miles of private land road maintenance are proposed for access
purposes. Helicopter yarding to remove merchantable trees is proposed
on a small BLM tract in the southern portion of the project area. As
required by NEPA, ``No Action'' Alternative 2 will be analyzed as a
baseline for gauging the potential impacts of action alternatives.
Alternative 3 (2300 acres) will exclude any treatments within the
inventoried roadless area and use less temporary road. Alternative 4
(3400 acres) will be the prescribed fire alternative, utilizing the
felling of small diameter trees; ladder fuels and brush reduction,
followed by low intensity underburns, broadcast or jackpot burning (of
fuels concentrations). No temporary road construction is proposed in
Alternative 4.
DATES: Initial comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be
received in writing no later than 30 days from the publication of this
notice of intent.
ADDRESSES: The responsible official is Bradley Powell, Regional
Forester-Northern Region. Please send written comments to Thomas D.
Osen, Dillon District Ranger, 420 Barrett Street, Dillon, Montana
59725. Comments may also be electronically submitted to rl_b-d_
coments@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Clark, project leader,
Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, 420 Barrett Street, Dillon,
Montana 59725 or phone (406) 683-3935 or by e-mail to
giclark@fs.fed.us.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BLM is a cooperating agency in the
development of the EIS for the Grasshopper Fuels Management project.
The project area is located in the upper Grasshopper Creek watershed
within the Pioneer Mountains in southwestern Montana (Townships 4, 5, 6
South, Range 12 West and Townships 5, 6 South, Range 13 West, Big Hole
Guide Meridian). The scope of this proposal is limited to the analysis
area covering approximately 17,000 acres. The analysis area abuts 3,100
acres BLM, 4,600 acres State and over 23,000 acres of country and
privately owned lands.
Public participation is important to this analysis. Part of the
goal of public involvement is to identify additional issues and to
refine the general, tentative issues. In March 2002 a postcard
providing project information was mailed to 525 individuals and groups.
A total of 50 responses to this initial mailing were received. From the
initial mailing, a scoping notice describing the proposed action and
purpose/need was mailed in May 2002 to 65 individuals, organizations,
Native Americans groups, federal and state agencies. Key issues for the
Grasshopper Fuels Management project were identified through public and
internal scoping. The following key issues were used in the development
of alternatives to the proposed action:
(1) Analyze alternative effects on potential lynx habitat and
habitat connectivity.
(2) Consider alternative effects on various resource values and
roadless characteristics in inventoried roadless areas.
A number of other resource issues or concerns were identified
during scoping and will be considered during the development of the
draft EIS. The analysis will consider all reasonably foreseeable
activities.
People may visit with Forest Service officials at any time during
the analysis and prior to the decision. Two periods are specifically
designated for comments on the analysis: (1) During the scoping
process, and (2) during the draft EIS period.
During the scoping process, the Forest Service seeks additional
information and comments from individuals or organization that may be
interested in or affected by the proposed action, and Federal, State
and local agencies. The Forest Service invites written comments and
suggestions on this action, particularly in terms of identification of
issues and alternative development.
The draft EIS is anticipated to be available for review in August
2003. The final EIS is planned for completion in December 2003.
The Environmental Protection Agency will publish the Notice of
Availability of the draft Environmental Impact Statement in the Federal
Register. The Forest will also publish a Legal Notice of its
availability in the Montana Standard Newspaper, Butte, Montana. A 45-
day comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will
begin the day following the Legal Notice.
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
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
[[Page 38006]]
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. The responsible official will make the
decision on this proposal after considering comments and responses,
environmental consequences discussed in the final EIS, applicable laws,
regulations, and policies. The decision and reasons for the decision
will be documented in a Record of Decision.
Dated: June 19, 2003.
Thomas K. Reilly,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-16151 Filed 6-25-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M