63350 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2004 / Notices 

extend beyond public land boundaries 

into the private communities lying on 

their periphery, understanding their 

response to the loss of public and 

private property is important. Public 

land management agencies need a better 

understanding of local preferences for 

management options and of community 

needs, particularly from those residing 

within the wildland—urban interface. 

Information will be collected from 

residents of communities adjacent to a 

National Forest in southern California 

and from visitors to the same National 

Forest area. The information collected 

will provide forest managers with 

greater understanding of public 

attitudes, preferences, and behaviors 

related to the Forest Service’s wildland 

fire management, including fire 

management practices and policies, 

information about respondents’ own 

behaviors related to hazard reduction 

and preparedness, and respondents’

knowledge of Forest Service fire 

management programs, such as 

Firewise. 

Researchers will use two primary 

methods of data collection: (a) a self 

administered questionnaire mailed to 

residents in forest proximate 

neighborhoods and (b) an onsite 

interview with a follow-up mail 

questionnaire. Both interview and 

questionnaire are voluntary. 

Experts in recreation, social science 

and fire management from the Forest 

Service and cooperating universities, in 

consultation with National Forest staff, 

will develop the surveys. The 

researchers will then administer the 

surveys to a random sample of residents 

drawn from adjacent communities and 

visitors to the Forest, analyze the 

information and incorporate the results 

and recommendations into reports for 

use by managers and other researchers. 

This survey is necessary to provide 

information about residents and visitors’

perceptions and preferences related to 

Forest Service fire management policy 

and practice, and will enable the Forest 

Service to better respond to community 

need. 

Estimate of Annual Burden: 20 

minutes per respondent. 

Type of Respondents: Randomly 

selected individuals that are residents 

living near a southern California 

National Forest and National Forest 

visitors. 

Estimated Annual Number of 

Respondents: 2,000. 

Estimated Annual Number of 

Responses per Respondent: 1. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 667 hours. 

Comment is invited on: (1) Whether 

this collection of information is 

necessary for the stated purposes and 

the proper performance of the functions 

of the agency, including whether the 

information will have practical or 

scientific utility; (2) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

collection of information, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (4) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including the use of 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

Use of Comments 

All comments received in response to 

this notice, including names and 

addresses when provided, will be a 

matter of public record. Comments will 

be summarized and included in the 

submission request toward Office of 

Management and Budget approval.

Dated: October 19, 2004. 

Barbara C. Weber, 

Associate Deputy Chief for Research & 

Development.

[FR Doc. 04–24299 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Conservation 

and Management on the Nebraska 

National Forest and Associated Units

AGENCY: USDA Forest Service.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare 

Environmental Impact Statement. 

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will 

prepare an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) for black-tailed prairie 

dog (Cynomys ludovicianus)

conservation and management on the 

Nebraska National Forest and associated 

units (NNF). The proposed action will 

tier to the Final EIS for the 2002 Revised 

Nebraska National Forest Land and 

Resource Management Plan (LRMP). 

The proposed action will utilize and 

adaptive management strategy to guide 

implementation of current LRMP 

direction for black-tailed prairie dogs 

(hereafter referred to as prairie dog) and 

additional new direction for reducing 

unwanted prairie dog colonization on 

agricultural lands adjoining National 

Forest System (NFS) lands. The 

proposed action is consistent with the 

commitment to be a good neighbor 

while continuing to conserve prairie dog 

and associated wildlife as prescribed in 

the LRMP. This action may require an 

amendment to the LRMP. The NNF 

includes the Buffalo Gap and Fort Pierre 

National Grasslands in South Dakota 

and the Oglala National Grassland, 

Nebraska National Forest and Samuel R. 

McKelvie National Forest in Nebraska.

DATES: Written comments must be 

received within 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register. The 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

(DEIS) is expected January, 2005 and the 

Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(FEIS) is expected June, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

proposed action must be sent to Donald 

J. Bright, Forest Supervisor, USDA 

Forest Service, 125 North Main, 

Chadron, Nebraska 69337.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William M. Perry, Team Leader, USDA 

Forest Service, at POB 425, Wall, South 

Dakota, or call (605) 279–2125.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action 

The LRMP provides general guidance 

and direction for conserving and 

managing black-tailed prairie dogs on 

NFS lands. This guidance and direction 

addresses use of rodenticides, 

landownership adjustment, vegetation 

management, livestock grazing, prairie 

dog shooting/hunting, and other 

management options to either expand or 

limit growth of prairie dog populations 

and colonies on NFS lands. A guideline 

under animal damage management in 

the LRMP (p. 1–21) directs the Forest 

Service to consult statewide prairie dog 

management plans for additional 

guidance on the appropriate response to 

complaints of unwanted prairie dog 

colonization on adjacent agricultural 

lands. The Record of Decision (ROD) for 

the LRMP stated that the Forest Service 

intended to implement state-wide 

prairie dog management plans to the 

extent allowable by law and policy in 

providing direction for the control of 

unwanted prairie dog colonization on 

adjacent lands through a LRMP 

amendment, if necessary. 

Since the July, 2002 ROD, several 

events have occurred that influence the 

management of prairie dogs and make 

this proposal timely: 

1. In the August 12, 2004, Federal 

Register, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (FWS) evaluated the black-tailed 

prairie dog for protection under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). FWS 

found that a proposed rule to list the 

black-tailed prairie dog is not 

warranted, and the black-tailed prairie 

dog is no longer considered a candidate 

species for listing. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2004 / Notices 63351

2. The South Dakota prairie dog 

management plan is in the final stages 

of completion and awaiting approval. It 

is unlikely that the State of Nebraska 

will issue a statewide prairie dog 

management plan, at least in the 

foreseeable future. 

3. Extended drought conditions have 

increased prairie dog colony expansion, 

prairie dog movement, and unwanted 

colonization of adjacent lands. 

4. In response to lethal prairie dog 

control conducted by USDA Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) 

in the fall of 2004, several conservation 

organizations expressed concern over 

the effects of lethal prairie dog control 

on the Conata Basin black-footed ferret 

population and other associated 

wildlife. 

Proposed Action 

The Forest Service is proposing an 

adaptive management approach to guide 

implementation of current LRMP 

direction for prairie dogs and additional 

new direction for reducing unwanted 

prairie dog colonization on adjacent 

agricultural lands. This proposed action 

will apply to all NFS lands 

administered by NNF. This proposed 

action may require an amendment to the 

LRMP. This proposed action may adjust 

direction regarding the use of lethal and 

non-lethal control methods while 

continuing to make progress in meeting 

the conservation goals, objectives and 

direction in the LRMP for prairie dogs 

and associated wildlife. The Forest 

Service intends to develop criteria to 

determine when, where, and how 

adaptive management may be used. 

Preliminary Issues 

The Forest Service has considerable 

experience conserving and managing 

prairie dogs and related issues on NFS 

lands. As a minimum, the following 

issues are anticipated: 

• Unwanted prairie dog colonization 

on adjacent lands and effects on 

landowners; 

• Conservation of black-tailed prairie 

dogs, a management indicator species 

and Region 2 sensitive species; 

• The importance of prairie dogs and 

these public lands, especially the 

Conata Basin/Badlands Ferret 

Reintroduction Area, to the recovery of 

the endangered black-footed ferret; 

• Effects on other wildlife species 

associated with prairie dogs; 

• Effects on livestock grazing 

permittees; 

• Humane treatment of prairie dogs 

and other associated wildlife; 

• Costs and effectiveness of 

management strategies.

Alternatives 

Possible alternatives for the 

conservation and management of prairie 

dogs while reducing their movement 

from NFS lands and unwanted 

colonization of adjacent lands may 

include but are not limited to the 

following: 

• Continue implementation of current 

LRMP direction for prairie dogs on a 

case-by-case basis. Only non-lethal 

strategies would be used in response to 

unwanted prairie dog colonization on 

adjacent agricultural lands (no action 

alternative); 

• Continue implementation of current 

LRMP direction for prairie dogs and 

develop a LRMP amendment and 

implementation plan that are in full 

accordance with state prairie dog 

management plans or recommendations. 

This may require an amendment to the 

LRMP; 

• Use an adaptive management 

strategy to guide implementation of 

prairie dog conservation and 

management direction in the current 

LRMP and additional new direction for 

reducing unwanted prairie dog 

colonization on adjacent agricultural 

lands. This will include appropriate 

management recommendations from the 

States of South Dakota and Nebraska, 

and this may require an amendment to 

the LRMP. 

Responsible Official 

Donald J. Bright, Forest Supervisor, 

USDA Forest Service, 125 North Main 

Street, Chadron, Nebraska 69337. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement (DEIS) is not a decision 

document. The purpose of the DEIS is 

to disclose the direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects of a proposed action 

and other alternative actions that are 

analyzed. After allowing the public an 

opportunity to comment on the specific 

activities described in the alternatives, 

the Forest Service reviews the proposed 

action, other alternatives, and the 

environmental consequences in order to 

make the following decisions: 

1. Determine whether an 

implementation plan is needed to guide 

management aimed at reducing conflicts 

resulting from prairie dog movement 

from NFS lands onto adjacent private 

lands; 

2. If an implementation plan is 

needed, determine when, where, and 

how management tools will be applied 

and monitored; 

3. Determine whether an amendment 

to the LRMP is needed to adjust the 

guidance for prairie dog management. 

Scoping Process 

The Forest Service will be consulting 

with federal, state, local agencies, tribes, 

and other individuals or organizations 

that may be interested in or affected by 

the proposal. Other federal and state 

agencies will have cooperating agency 

status. 

Comment Requested 

This notice of intent initiates the 

scoping process which guides the 

development of the environmental 

impact statement. Comments should 

focus on the nature of the action 

proposed and should be relevant to the 

decision under consideration. 

Comments received from the public will 

be evaluated for significant issues and 

used to assist in the development of 

additional alternatives. 

Early Notice of Importance of Public 

Participation in Subsequent 

Environmental Review 

A DEIS will be prepared for comment. 

The comment period on the draft 

environmental impact statement will be 

at least 45 days from the date the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

publishes the notice of availability in 

the Federal Register. The length of the 

comment period will be determined by 

the ‘‘significance’’ of a potential LRMP 

amendment. The purpose and need for 

the proposed action is to reduce prairie 

dog movement from NFS lands and 

unwanted colonization of adjacent 

lands. We believe that this issue can be 

addressed without deviating from the 

present goals and objectives in the 

LRMP. 

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 DEIS stage but that 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. 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 

63352 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2004 / Notices 

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 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.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; 

Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 

21)

Dated: October 22, 2004. 

Donald J. Bright, 

Forest Supervisor, Nebraska National Forest.

[FR Doc. 04–24295 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Deschutes Provincial Advisory 

Committee (DPAC)

AGENCY: Forest Service.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Deschutes Advisory 

Committee will meet on November 9, 

2004, starting at 9 a.m. at the Jefferson 

County Firehall on the corner of Adam 

and ‘‘J’’ Street in Madras, Oregon. 

Agenda items will include approval of 

this year’s Northwest Forest Plan 

Monitoring report, Understanding 

Landscape Processes in Central Oregon, 

Local Community Protection Plans, B 

and B Project Update, and a discussion 

on upcoming topics and meeting dates. 

All Deschutes Province Advisory 

Committee Meetings are open to the 

public and an open public forum is 

scheduled from 2:30 to 3 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chris Mickle, Province Liaison, 

Deschutes NF, Crescent RD, P.O. Box 

208, Crescent, OR 97754, phone (541) 

433–3216.

Leslie A.C. Weldon, 

Deschutes National Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 04–24316 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Fresno County Resource Advisory 

Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Fresno County Resource 

Advisory Committee will meet in 

Prather, CA. The purpose of the meeting 

is to discuss and to recommend project 

proposals for FY2005 funds regarding 

the Secure Rural Schools and 

Community Self-Determination Act of 

2000 (Pub. L. 106–393) for expenditure 

of Payments to States Fresno County 

title II funds.

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

December 14, 2004, from 6:30 p.m. to 

9:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Sierra National Forest, High Sierra 

Ranger District, 29688 Auberry Road, 

Prather, CA 93651. Send written 

comments to Robbin Ekman, Fresno 

County Resource Advisory Committee 

Coordinator, c/o Sierra National Forest, 

High Sierra Ranger District, 29688 

Auberry Road, Prather, CA 93651 or 

electronically to rekman@fs.fed.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robbin Ekman, Fresno County Resource 

Advisory Committee Coordinator, (559) 

855–5355 ext. 3341.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

meeting is open to the public. 

Committee discussion is limited to 

Forest Service staff and Committee 

members. However, persons who wish 

to bring Payments to States Fresno 

County title II project matters to the 

attention of the Committee may file 

written statements with the Committee 

staff before or after the meeting. 

Public sessions will be provided and 

individuals who made written requests 

by October 12, 2004 will have the 

opportunity to address the Committee at 

those sessions. Agenda items to be 

covered include: (1) Call for new 

projects; (2) report back from project 

recipients; (3) public comment.

Dated: October 26, 2004. 

Ray Porter, 

District Ranger.

[FR Doc. 04–24315 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service 

Privacy Act of 1974; Abolish Obsolete 

Systems of Records

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of abolishment of records 

systems. 

SUMMARY: A review of several Privacy 

Act Systems of Records has concluded 

that those systems are no longer in effect 

or are obsolete. Those systems are being 

abolished from the Forest Service 

Systems of Records in accordance with 

the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), 

as amended.

DATES: This notice is effective on 

November 1, 2004.

ADDRESSES: For additional information 

contact Rita Morgan, Freedom of 

Information and Privacy Act Officer, 

SW., Mail Stop 1143, 1400 

Independence Avenue, Washington, DC 

20250–1143.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rita 

Morgan, Freedom of Information and 

Privacy Act Officer, Telephone: (703) 

605–4913.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as 

amended, requires that each agency 

publish a notice of the existence and 

character of each new or altered ‘‘system 

of records.’’ 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(5). This 

notice identifies and abolishes the 

Forest Service’s discontinued and 

obsolete systems of records. The Forest 

Service is abolishing the following 10 

sytems of records which, upon review, 

are no longer used or are not properly 

Privacy Act records, and are, therefore, 

obsolete: USDA/FS–01—Appeals and 

Administrative Reviews; USDA/FS–

17—Mineral Operations; USDA/FS–

18—Mineral Claimants; USDA/FS–20—

Public Correspondence Concerning 

Timber Management; USDA/FS–21—

Public Involvement Respondents on 

Forest Service Activities; USDA/FS–23 

FILL IN NAME; USDA/FS–32—

Professional Registration and 

Professional Society Affiliation, 

Engineering-Related Personnel-Eastern 

Region; USDA/FS–48—YCC Long-Term 

Benefit Evaluation; USDA/FS–49—

International Skills Roster of Forestry 

and Natural Resources Expertise; 

USDA/FS–50—Skills Bank Data Base.

Dated: October 20, 2004. 

Irving W. Thomas, 

Associate Deputy Chief, OPS.

[FR Doc. 04–24298 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P