[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 156 (Friday, August 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50168-50170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20496]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Coconino and Kaibab National Forests, Arizona, Four-Forest 
Restoration Initiative

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: On January 25, 2011, the Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) was published in the Federal 
Register (76 FR 4279-4281). From January, 2011 to June, 2011, six 
public meetings and workshops were held for the purposes of receiving 
comments and recommendations that would inform the development of a 
refined proposed action. As a result, the Forest Service is revising 
the NOI document, Federal Register of January 25, 2011 (76 FR 4279-
4281) to read as follows:
    Revision: The Forest Service is preparing an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) that proposes to conduct restoration activities on 
approximately 600,000 acres on the Coconino NF and Kaibab NF. Of this 
total, approximately 361,379 acres would be treated on the Coconino NF 
and 233,991 acres would be treated on the Kaibab NF. Restoration 
actions would be focused on the Flagstaff district with fewer acres 
included on the Mogollon Rim and Red Rock districts of the Coconino NF. 
On the Kaibab NF, activities would occur on the Williams and Tusayan 
districts. The objective of the project is to re-establish forest 
structure, pattern and composition, which will lead to increased forest 
resiliency and function. Resiliency increases the ability of the 
ponderosa pine forest to survive natural disturbances such as insect 
and disease, fire and climate change (FSM 2020.5). This project is 
expected to put the project area on a trajectory towards comprehensive, 
landscape-scale restoration with benefits that include improved 
vegetation biodiversity, wildlife habitat, soil productivity, and 
watershed function.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by August 26, 2011. The draft environmental impact statement is 
expected by January of 2012 and the final environmental impact 
statement is expected in the summer of 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Coconino National Forest, 
Attention: 4FRI, 1824 S. Thompson Street, Flagstaff, Arizona 86001. 
Comments may also be sent via e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ad99ebffe4f2cec2c0c0c8c3d9deedcbde83cbc8c983d8de"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dfeb998d9680bcb0b2b2bab1abac9fb9acf1b9babbf1aaac">[email protected]</span></a>, or 
via facsimile to (928) 527-3620.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Henry Provencio, 4 FRI Team Leader at 
(928) 226-4684 or via e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f09880829f86959e93999fb09683de969594de8583"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ec849c9e839a89828f8583ac8a9fc28a8988c2999f">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Extensive research has demonstrated that current ponderosa pine 
forests of the Southwest are greatly altered in terms of forest 
structure, density, and ecological function. Most pine forests in the 
Southwest are at much higher risk of high intensity and severe fire 
than they were prior to European settlement (Covington 1993, Moore et 
al. 1999). A century ago the pine forests had widely-spaced large trees 
with a more open, herbaceous forest floor (Cooper 1960). These 
conditions were maintained by fairly frequent low-severity surface 
fires that did not kill the large trees (Fiedler et al. 1996). These 
fires occurred every 2 to 21 years and maintained an open canopy 
structure (Moir et al. 1997). Fire suppression, cattle grazing, timber 
production, and general human habitation in and near the forests over 
the last 100 years interrupted fire's natural role in these fire-
adapted ponderosa pine forests. As a result, the forests have shifted 
from naturally open conditions to high densities of small diameter 
trees (Covington and Moore 1994) dramatically increasing the size and 
severity of wildland fires (Swetnam and Betancourt 1998). The forests 
have become less resilient to natural disturbances and are vulnerable 
to large-scale disturbances such as changing climatic conditions 
(drought), fire, insect, and disease.

Purpose and Need for Action

    In contrast to having a ponderosa pine ecosystem consisting of 
groups of trees with an open tree canopy density mixed with 
interspaces, approximately 75 percent of the ponderosa pine forest type 
within the project area has a moderately closed to closed tree canopy 
density. An open tree canopy mixed with interspaces which mimic 
historical spatial patterns and provide for tree regeneration and the 
development of grass and forbs are lacking. There is a need to use 
management strategies that promote tree regeneration and understory 
vegetation. There is a need to move towards the historic range of 
variability for tree canopy density and patterns of tree groups and 
interspaces. Forest resiliency and diversity is dependent on the 
distribution of age and size classes. Currently, over 50 percent of the 
project area lacks age and size class diversity and is in an even-aged 
structure. The desired condition is to have a forest structure that 
represents all age classes necessary for a sustainable balance of 
regeneration, growth, mortality and all age classes necessary for a 
sustainable balance of regeneration, growth, mortality and 
decomposition. There is a need to implement un-even aged management 
strategies where appropriate. In goshawk habitat, habitat components 
such as an intermix of vegetation structural stages are lacking or 
limited in most stands.There is a need to manage for a balanced 
interspersion of age classes in goshawk foraging and PFA/nest stand 
habitat. Forest structure in Mexican spotted owl (MSO) habitat has an 
excess of the smaller size classes (12'' to 18-) and is deficit in 
trees 18'' to 24'' dbh in restricted habitat and in target/threshold, a 
component of restricted habitat. There is a need to implement uneven-
aged management strategies and manage for high-density, relatively 
uneven-aged stands in MSO restricted habitat, including target/
threshold habitats.
    In both gohsawk and MSO habitat, stand conditions are on a 
trajectory

[[Page 50169]]

towards density-related mortality. The desired condition is to improve 
forest health by reducing the potential for density-related mortality 
and move towards forest plan desired conditions for snags and course 
woody debris. There is a need to reduce stand densities in all habitats 
except MSO restricted and target threshold.
    Approximately 25 percent to 35 percent of the project area has some 
level of infection ranging from light to extreme. The desired condition 
is to have a varied level of mistletoe across the landscape that is 
comparable with historic reference conditions. There is a need to use 
management strategies that would reduce stand densities in order to 
reduce (but not eliminate) the level of dwarf mistletoe infection.
    Vegetation diversity throughout the project area has declined (USDA 
2009). A lack of fire, which ultimately allowed for increased stand 
densities, has allowed Gambel oak to become overtopped by fast growing 
ponderosa pine. The desired condition is to develop and maintain a 
variety of oak size classes and forms, where they occur, that range 
from shrubby thickets and pole-sized clumps to large trees across the 
landscape. There is a need to use management strategies that stimulate 
new growth and maintain growth in large diameter trees.
    There are approximately 7,700 acres of aspen in the project area. 
Aspen is dying or rapidly declining on both forests due to the combined 
effects of conifer encroachment, browsing, insect, disease, severe 
weather events, and lack of fire disturbance (USDA 2008 2009). The 
desired condition is to maintain and/or regenerate aspen. Where 
possible, there is a need to stimulate growth and increase individual 
recruitment of aspen. On the Coconino NF, grasslands have decreased 
from approximately 8 percent to percent since historic conditions 
(generally pre-1900). On the Kaibab NF, grasslands have decreased from 
approximately 15 to 7 percent (USDA 2008) (USDA 2009). The desired 
condition is to move towards the historic range of variability of tree 
canopy cover that ranges from 0 to 9 percent. Fire should function as a 
natural disturbance across the landscape without causing loss to 
ecosystem function or to human safety, lives, and values. There is a 
need to reduce (and in some cases remove) tree encroachment which has 
reduced the size and function of landscapes that were historically 
grasslands. Big sage and ponderosa pine co-occur on approximately 6,094 
acres of the Tusayan district portion of the project area. The desired 
condition for the pine/sage understory community is a shifting mosaic 
of sagebrush with a mix of age classes averaging from 3 to 5 percent 
cover. With other shrub canopies combined, the percent cover would 
average around 9 to 14 percent under a 25 to 30 percent canopy of 
ponderosa pine. The mosaic pattern would be largely regulated by low 
intensity fires. On approximately 40 percent of the pine-sage cover 
type, there is a need to retain vegetation age class diversity in big 
sage and promote a shifting mosaic of shrub cover.
    Approximately 41 percent of the project area has the potential to 
sustain crown fire and about 58 percent has the potential for surface 
fire. Dense forest conditions (numerous trees with interlocking crowns) 
are common within the project area and would support active crown fire. 
Even without crown fire, a high intensity surface fire burning though 
this area could scorch the canopy sufficiently to cause widespread 
mortality.The current fire return interval is approximately 43 years, 
about four times longer than the desired fire return interval which is 
between 2 and 21 years. The desired condition is to have fire, as a 
disturbance process, maintain a mosaic of diverse native plant 
communities. No more than 10 percent of the analysis area should be 
prone to crown fire. When crown fire does occur, it would be mostly 
passive crown fire, occurring in single trees, groups, or clumps, or 
areas where there had been mortality (wind throw, insects, etc.). There 
is a need to reduce the potential for crown and high intensity surface 
fire.
    Across the entire analysis area, 75 percent is currently rated as 
condition class 3 which indicates the fire regime is significantly 
departed from historical ranges. In a condition class 3, the risk of 
losing key ecosystem components is high. Fire frequencies have departed 
from historical frequencies by multiple return intervals resulting in 
dramatic alterations to fire size, intensity, severity, landscape 
patterns, and/or vegetation attributes. The desired condition is to 
have 99 percent of the analysis area in FRCC 1. There is a need to 
reduce the percent of area in FRCC 3 and move the fire regimes towards 
FRCC 1.
    Springs and seeps play an important role on the landscape for 
hydrological function of watersheds and they are very important for 
wildlife and plant diversity. Fifty-one developed springs on the 
Coconino NF are not functioning at or near potential and 27 springs on 
the Kaibab NF have reduced function. The desired condition is to have 
the necessary soil, water, and vegetation attributes to be healthy and 
functioning at or near potential. Ephemeral streams are important for 
hydrological function of watersheds and provide important seasonal 
habitat for a variety of wildlife, in particular, migratory birds and 
dispersing amphibians. On the Coconino NF, approximately 36 miles of 
channels are heavily eroded with excessive bare ground, denuded 
vegetation, and head cuts. Of the total miles, approximately 6 miles 
are riparian streams and 30 miles are non-riparian streams. The Kaibab 
NF has approximately 7 miles of channels in this condition and all are 
non-riparian reaches. The desired condition is to restore the 
functionality of both springs and ephemeral streams. On all springs and 
streams and channels, there is a need to return fire, a natural 
disturbance processes, to the system.
    Both forests have identified the needed road system for public and 
administrative motorized use through the Travel Management Rule (TMR) 
process. As a precursor to the TMR process, the Coconino NF identified 
roads that should be closed to public travel, decommissioned, or 
considered for other uses because they were no longer needed to meet 
resource management objectives (USDA 2010). A review of 2010 data 
indicates there is a need to decommission approximately 941 miles of 
existing system and unauthorized roads on the Coconino NF. Similar to 
the Coconino process, the Kaibab NF identified resource risks and 
access benefits associated with all roads. A review of Kaibab NF data 
indicates approximately 170 miles of unauthorized roads are recommended 
for decommissioning. The desired condition is to have soils in 
satisfactory condition so that the soil can resist erosion, recycle 
nutrients and absorb water. There is a need to decommission the roads 
that have been identified.
    In addition to the need for decommissioning roads, there is a need 
to have adequate access to the project area for implementation. There 
is a need to upgrade road segments which have resource or health and 
human safety concerns, construct temporary roads that could be used for 
access, and temporarily open existing closed roads. Once the project is 
completed, there is a need to decommission the temporary roads and 
closed roads.

Proposed Action

    In response to the purpose and need, the Coconino and Kaibab 
National Forests propose to conduct approximately 595,370 acres of 
restoration activities (within the 988,764 acre project area) over 
approximately 10

[[Page 50170]]

years or until objectives are met. Approximately 20,000 to 30,000 acres 
of vegetation would be treated annually and up to 60,000 acres 
prescribed burned annually across the two forests. Restoration 
activities would: (1) Mechanically cut trees and prescribe burn on 
approximately 389,993 aces, (2) cut trees by hand and prescribe burn on 
slopes greater than 40 percent on approximately 99 acres, (3) prescribe 
burn only on approximately 205,278 acres, (4) decommission 941 miles of 
roads designated ``closed'', (5) decommission 170 miles of unauthorized 
roads, (6) construct 46 miles of temporary roads for haul access and 
obliterate when treatments are finished, (7) reconstruct 27 miles of 
existing open roads for natural resource, health and human safety 
concerns, (8) open 183 miles of existing closed roads in order to 
conduct treatments and close and rehabilitate as needed when treatments 
are finished, (9) restore 78 springs, (10) restore 43 miles of 
ephemeral channels, and (11) construct 82 miles of protective (aspen 
and springs) fencing.
    An old tree and large tree implementation strategy, that are 
integral to the proposed action, are included as appendices B and C in 
the proposed action document. Forest plan amendments are integral to 
the proposed action. Three non-significant forest plan amendments would 
be required on the Coconino NF to implement the proposed action. One 
non-significant forest plan amendment would be required on the Kaibab 
NF. The proposed amendments are located at appendix F in the proposed 
action document.

Possible Alternatives

    A full range of alternatives to the proposed action, including a 
no-action alternative, will be considered. The no-action alternative 
represents no change and serves as the baseline for the comparison 
among the action alternatives.

Responsible Official

    The Responsible Officials are the Coconino Forest Supervisor and 
Kaibab Forest Supervisor.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Given the purpose and need of the project, the forest supervisors 
will review the proposed action, other alternatives and the 
environmental consequences in order to make the following decisions 
including determining: (1) Whether to select the proposed action or 
another alternative; (2) the location, design, and scheduling of 
proposed restoration activities; (3) the estimated products, if any, to 
be made available from the project; (4) mitigation measures, monitoring 
requirements and adaptive management actions; and (5) whether forest 
plan amendments are needed.

Scoping Process

    This corrected notice of intent initiates the scoping process, 
which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. Two 
open houses are planned during the comment period. The first open house 
will be held on August 18, 2011 at the Williams Ranger District, 742 
South Clover Road, Williams, Arizona, from 4 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. The 
second open house will be held on August 20, 2011 at the Coconino 
National Forest Supervisor's Office, 1824 S. Thompson Street, 
Flagstaff, AZ 86101, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Please contact Paula Cote 
at (928) 226-4686 for additional information.
    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times 
and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of 
the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be 
provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly 
articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names 
and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record 
for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be 
accepted and considered, however.

    Dated: August 5, 2011.
M. Earl Stewart,
Forest Supervisor, Coconino National Forest.
[FR Doc. 2011-20496 Filed 8-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>