This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

40601

Vol. 65, No. 127

Friday, June 30, 2000

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Land and Resource Management Plan

Direction for Canada Lynx in Colorado

and Southern Wyoming

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement in

conjunction with amendments to land

and resource management plans for the

Routt National Forest; Arapaho and

Roosevelt National Forests; Pike and

San Isabel National Forests; the Sun

Juan National Forest; Grand Mesa,

Uncompahgre and Gunnison National

Forests; and the Rio Grande National

Forest located in the State of Colorado;

and the Medicine Bow National Forest

located in the State of Wyoming. The

environmental impact statement will

also evaluate proposed management

direction pertaining to Canada lynx for

the draft revised land and resource

management plan for the White River

National Forest, located in the State of

Colorado. This notice replaces the

notice of March 28, 2000 titled Land

and Resource Management Plan

Amendments for Canada Lynx in

Colorado and Southern Wyoming.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to part 36 Code of

Federal Regulations (CFR) 219.10(g), the

Regional Forester for the Rocky

Mountain Region gives notice of the

agency’s intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS) in

conjunction with the establishment of

new management direction for the

Canada lynx on National Forests in

Colorado and Wyoming. On the basis of

new information regarding lynx biology

developed since the issuance of the land

and resource management plans

(hereafter referred to as Forest Plans or

Plans) mentioned above, the Forest

Service has identified a need to update

management direction. This notice

describes a proposal to change Forest

Plans to the extent necessary to respond

to recommendations in the Canada Lynx

Conservation Assessment and Strategy

(LCAS) and other new information

regarding the Canada lynx and its

habitat.

This new management direction will

be established by amending the Land

and Resource Management Plans for the

Routt National Forest; Arapaho and

Roosevelt National Forests; Pike and

San Isabel National Forests; the San

Juan National Forest; Grand Mesa,

Uncompahgre and Gunnison National

Forests; the Rio Grande National Forest,

and the Medicine Bow National Forest.

The White River National Forest will

include lynx management direction in

its final revised forest plan scheduled to

be completed in May 2001. However,

the proposed lynx management

direction for the White River will be

described and analyzed in this EIS in

order (1) properly evaluate cumulative

environmental effects, (2) adequately

disclose such effects to the public, and

(3) provide an opportunity for the

public to comment on the proposed

direction. The analysis of effects relating

to the White River National Forest will

be incorporated into the FEIS for that

Forest’s Revised Land and Resource

Management Plan.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope

of the analysis should be postmarked by

August 14, 2000. The agency expects to

file a draft environmental impact

statement with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and make it

available for public, agency, and tribal

government comment in the fall of 2000.

A final environmental impact statement

is expected to be filed in early 2001.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to:

Chris Liggett, Team Leader, Lynx Plan

Amendment Team, USDA Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Region, PO

Box 25127, Lakewood, Colorado 80225–

0127.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chris Liggett, Team Leader, (303) 275–

5158.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Lyle Laverty,

Rocky Mountain Regional Forester, P.O.

Box 25127, Lakewood, CO 80225–0127.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Regional Forester gives notice that the

Rocky Mountain Region of the USDA

Forest Service is beginning an

environmental analysis and decisionmaking process for this proposed action

so that interested or affected people can

participate in the analysis and

contribute to the final decision. The

Forest Service is seeking information,

comments, and assistance from

individuals, organizations, tribal

governments, and federal, state, and

local agencies who are interested in or

may be affected by the proposed action

(36 CFR 219.6). The public is invited to

help identify issues and define the range

of alternatives to be considered in the

environmental impact statement. The

range of alternatives to be considered in

the DEIS will be based on issues and

specific decisions to be made. Written

comments identifying issues for analysis

and the range of alternatives are

encouraged.

Proposed Action

The proposed action has two parts:

the first is to amend Forest Plans for the

Routt National Forest; Arapaho and

Roosevelt National Forests; Pike and

San Isabel National Forests; the San

Juan National Forest; Grand Mesa,

Uncompahgre and Gunnison National

Forests; the Rio Grande National Forest,

and the Medicine Bow National Forest

to, as necessary, establish or revise

goals, objectives, standards, guidelines,

and monitoring requirements that

respond to recommendations contained

in the LCAS and other new information

regarding the lynx and its habitat. The

decision to be made regarding this part

of the proposed action is how to amend

the Forest Plans listed above to

incorporate the new direction regarding

lynx, if at all.

The second part of the proposed

action is to describe and evaluate

management direction for lynx in

relation to the draft revised Forest Plan

for the White River National Forest. A

final decision regarding the adoption of

that direction will be made when the

Record of Decision is issued for the

White River’s Revised Land and

Resource Management Plan. That

decision is expected in the spring of

2001.

Attachment 1 displays that key LCAS

recommendations phrased in terms of

goals, standards, and guidelines that

will be considered as part of the

environmental analysis process. Note

that existing and proposed Forest Plans

may already contain some direction that

is essentially the same as the LCAS

recommendations. Each plan will be

40602 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Notices

changed only to the extent necessary to

appropriately respond to the LCAS

recommendations and other new

information.

A range of alternatives that respond to

issues developed during scoping will be

considered when assessing the proposed

action. A reasonable range of

alternatives will be evaluated and

reasons will be given for eliminating

some alternatives from detailed study, if

that occurs. A ‘‘no-action alternative’’ is

required, meaning that new

management direction for the Canada

lynx would not be established in Forest

Plans.

Purpose and Need

The purpose and need for this

proposal is to establish Forest Plan

management direction designed to

respond to the recommendations in the

LCAS and other new information

concerning the lynx and its habitat. This

proposal is limited to the National

Forests in the Rocky Mountain Region

and Southern Rocky Mountain

Geographic Area that have lynx habitat

(see list above).

The Secretary of Interior listed the

Canada lynx as a threatened species on

March 24, 2000. That decision took

effect 30 days after publication, on April

24, 2000. A key finding of the listing

decision is that ‘‘the inadequacy of

existing regulatory mechanisms,

specifically the lack of guidance for

conservation of lynx in Federal land

management plans’’ (Department of the

Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 50

CFR part 17, Determination of

Threatened Status for the Contiguous

U.S. Distinct Population Segment of the

Canada Lynx and Related Rule, p. 147)

has contributed to the species’ decline.

When a species is listed, section 7(a)(2)

of the Endangered Species Act requires

Federal agencies to ensure that activities

they authorize, fund, or carry out are not

likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of the species or destroy or

adversely modify its critical habitat.

This action is also needed to assure

that land and resource management

plans are in compliance with species

viability requirements in the planning

regulations that implement the National

Forest Management Act. The Rocky

Mountain Region has identified the lynx

as a sensitive species, it is listed by the

State of Colorado as an endangered

species, and the State of Wyoming lists

the lynx as a ‘‘protected animal’’,

meaning it is protected from take.

A large amount of new information

about the lynx has become available in

the past two years. Key elements of this

new information to be considered

include: (1) The LCAS; (2) a

compendium and interpretation of

current scientific knowledge in

‘‘Ecology and Conservation of Lynx in

the United States, published in October

1999; (3) the Canada Lynx Conservation

Agreement, prepared in February 2000

and signed by the Forest Service

Regional Foresters and Fish and

Wildlife Service Regional Directors

responsible for the geographic areas

within the range of the lynx in the

conterminous United States; (4) the

release of lynx in Colorado by the

Colorado Division of Wildlife; and (5)

the decision by the US Fish and

Wildlife Service, effective April 24,

2000, to list the lynx as a threatened

species in the conterminous United

States, under the provisions of the

Endangered Species Act. This

information has provided a better

understanding of the lynx, its prey base

and habitat requirements, particularly

the forest communities it uses and the

ecology of those forests, and risk factors

affecting lynx productivity, mortality,

and movements. Forest Plans in the

Region were largely developed before

issues regarding the lynx were

identified and without the benefit of the

new information on the lynx and its

habitat.’’

Public Participation

The first formal opportunity to

comment took place during the initial

scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) which

began with the issuance of the original

notice of intent on March 28, 2000, and

ended on May 11, 2000. The issuance of

this revised notice marks the beginning

of a new scoping period, which will end

on August 14, 2000. The purpose of this

scoping period is to solicit comments on

issues relating to the addition of the

White River National Forest to the

proposed action and environmental

analysis, and the effect that may have on

any or all of the Forests listed in this

notice. Comments submitted during the

original scoping period do not need to

be resubmitted.

Public participation will be solicited

with news releases or by notifying

people in person or by mail. All

comments, including the names and

addresses when provided, are placed in

the record and are available for public

inspection and copying at the Forest

Service Regional Office. Persons

wishing to inspect the comments are

encouraged to call ahead (303–275–

5103) to facilitate entrance into the

building.

The Forest Service will work with

tribal governments to address issues

concerning Indian tribal selfgovernment and sovereignty, natural

and cultural resources held in trust,

Indian tribal treaty and Executive order

rights, and any issues that significantly

or uniquely affect their communities.

Preliminary Issues

Some preliminary issues have already

been identified and are listed below.

These issues apply only to National

Forest System lands on the units listed

previously in this notice.

• The adoption of new Forest Plan

goals, objectives, standards, guidelines

and monitoring requirements (hereafter

referred to as ‘‘management direction’’)

is expected to maintain or enhance

habitat conditions for the lynx on

National Forest lands. Project

implementation is expected to facilitate

the development of landscape and site

characteristics suitable for lynx and its

principal prey, the snowshoe hare.

• The adoption of new management

direction may affect the areas where

winter and summer recreation take

place and how and when these activities

are conducted. Activities like cross

country skiing, snowmobiling, off-road

vehicle use and developed recreation

facilities could be affected. New

direction could also affect ski area

operations and expansions.

• The adoption of new management

direction may affect the ability to use

roads and trails, the construction of

roads and trails and the closure or

decommissioning of roads and trails.

This potentially influences activities

like recreational use, oil and gas leasing,

mineral development or other uses

associated with Forest Service roads and

trails.

• The adoption of new management

direction may affect timber harvest

practices in order to protect lynx

denning sites and foraging areas or to

minimize disturbance in key habitat

linkage areas. New plan direction may

also affect the type of harvest or the

timing of harvest in order to preserve or

enhance the habitat of the snowshoe

hare, a key prey species.

• The adoption of new management

direction may affect livestock grazing by

requiring that vegetation conditions be

maintained to support lynx prey

species.

The Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Region is the lead agency. No joint lead

agencies have been identified at this

time. The Forest Service will continue

to cooperate with other federal and state

agencies as this action proceeds. There

are no permits or licenses required to

implement the proposed action.

Release and Review of the EIS

The Forest Service expects the DEIS

to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and to be

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Notices 40603

available for public, agency, and tribal

government comment in the fall of 2000.

At that time, the EPA will publish a

notice of availability for the DEIS in the

Federal Register. The comment period

on the DEIS will be 45 days from the

date the EPA 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,

potential reviewers of the DEIS must

participate in the environmental review

of the proposal, including this initial

scoping period, in such a way that their

participation 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 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 throughout the process, 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 FEIS.

To assist the Forest Service in

identifying and considering issues and

concerns relating to the proposed

actions, comments on the DEIS, when it

becomes available, 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 statements. In

addressing these points, 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. After the

comment period on the DEIS ends,

comments will be analyzed, considered,

and responded to by the Forest Service

in preparing the Final EIS. The FEIS is

scheduled to be completed in early

2001. The responsible official will

consider the comments, responses,

environmental consequences discussed

in the FEIS, and applicable laws,

regulations and policies in making

decisions regarding these amendments.

The FEIS will be the basis for one or

more decisions regarding Forest Plans

within the range of the Canada lynx in

the Southern Rockies geographic area.

The responsible official will decide

whether or not to implement

management direction for the lynx in

Forest Plans for the Routt National

Forest; Arapaho and Roosevelt National

Forests; Pike and San Isabel National

Forests; the San Juan National Forest;

Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and

Gunnison National Forests; the Rio

Grande National Forest, and the

Medicine Bow National Forest. The

responsible official will document these

decisions and reasons for the decisions

in one or more Records of Decision. The

decisions will be subject to appeal in

accordance with 36 CFR 215 in

accordance with 36 CFR 217 depending

on whether the amendments are

significant under the National Forest

Management Act requirements at 36

CFR 219.10(f). In addition, the Rocky

Mountain Regional Forester will make a

separate decision regarding revision of

the Forest Plan for the White River

National Forest, and document it in

another Record of Decision. That

decision will be based primarily on the

FEIS for the revised White River Land

and Resource Management Plan, but

will also utilize information contained

in this FEIS.

Dated: June 26, 2000.

Lyle Laverty,

Regional Forester, Rocky Mountain Region,

U.S. Forest Service.

Attachment 1—Key Recommendations

of the LCAS, Phrased in Terms of

Potential Goals, Standards, and

Guidelines

Goals, Standards, and Guidelines

The goals, standards, and guidelines

generally apply only to lynx habitat

within a Lynx Analysis Unit. Lynx

habitat occurs in mesic coniferous

forests that have cold, snowy winters

and provide a prey base of snowshoe

hare. Lynx habitat is a mosaic within

the Engelmann spruce, subalpine fir,

lodgepole pine, aspen, mesic Douglas-fir

and mesic white fir forested landscapes,

generally between 8,000 and 12,000 feet.

High elevation sagebrush and mountain

shrub communities found adjacent to or

intermixed with the forest communities

may be potentially important as habitat

for alternative prey species.

Category: Physical

Water and Aquatic Resources—Riparian

Areas and Wetlands

Standard:

Refer to:

• Range, standard #1.

Category: Biological

Range

Goals:

1. Mange grazing to maintain or move

toward the composition and structure of

native plant communities within lynx

habitat and adjacent shrub-steppe

habitats.

Standards:

1. Within lynx habitat, manage

livestock grazing in riparian areas and

willow carrs to maintain or achieve

mid-seral or later condition to provide

cover and forage for lynx prey species.

2. Delay livestock use in post-fire and

post-harvest created openings until

successful regeneration of the shrub and

tree components occurs.

Guidelines:

1. Ensure that ungulate grazing does

not impede the development of

snowshoe hare habitat in natural or

created openings within lynx habitat.

2. Manage grazing in aspen stands to

ensure sprouting and sprout survival

sufficient to perpetuate the long-term

viability of the clones.

3. Maintain or achieve mid-seral or

higher condition in shrub-steppe habitat

that is within the elevational range of

forested lynx habitat or that provides

landscape connectivity between blocks

of primary lynx habitat.

Silviculture

Goals:

1. Design regeneration harvest,

planting, and thinning to develop

characteristics suitable for lynx and

snowshoe hare habitat.

2. Maintain suitable acres or lynx

habitat and juxtaposition of habitat

through time when planning timber

sales and related activities.

Standards:

1. Pre-commercial thinning will be

allowed only when stands no longer

provide snowshoe hare habitat (e.g.,

self-pruning processes have eliminated

snowshoe hare cover and forage

availability during winter conditions

with average snowpack).

2. In aspen stands within lynx habitat,

favor regeneration of aspen.

3. Following a disturbance such as

blowdown, fires, insects, and disease,

where lynx denning habitat is less than

10% of a Lynx Analysis Unit, do not

salvage harvest when the affected area is

smaller than 5 acres if it could

contribute to lynx denning habitat.

(Exceptions are developed recreation

sites or other sites of high human

concentration.) Where larger areas are

affected, retain a minimum of 10% of

the affected area per Lynx Analysis Unit

in patches of at least 5 acres to provide

future denning habitat. In such areas,

40604 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Notices

defer or modify management activities

that would prevent development or

maintenance of lynx foraging habitat.

Also refer to:

• Threatened, Endangered, and

Sensitive Species, Lynx Analysis Units,

standards 1 and 2.

• Threatened, Endangered, and

Sensitive Species, Denning and

Foraging Habitat, standard #1.

• Travelways, standard #1.

Guidelines:

1. Management activities retain

adequate amounts of coarse woody

debris for lynx and snowshoe hare

cover, if it exists on site.

2. Commercial thinning projects shall

maintain or enhance lynx habitat.

3. Design vegetation management

activities that consider retaining or

encouraging tree species composition

and structure that will provide habitat

for red squirrels or other lynx alternate

prey species.

Also refer to:

• Range, guideline #2.

• Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive

Species, Denning and Foraging Habitat,

guideline #1.

• Fire, guidelines 4 and 7.

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive

Species

Lynx Analysis Units

Goals:

1. Maintain effectiveness of lynx

habitat. (Effectiveness is primarily

affected by high level of human use.)

Standards:

1. If more than 30% of the lynx

habitat in a Lynx Analysis Unit (LAU)

is currently in unsuitable condition, no

further reduction of suitable habitat

shall occur as a result of vegetation

management activities.

2. Vegetation management shall not

change more than 15 percent of lynx

habitat within a LAU to unsuitable

condition within a 10-year period.

Denning and Foraging Habitat

Goal:

1. Provide a landscape with

interconnected blocks of high quality

foraging and denning habitat that allows

lynx movement between these habitats.

Standard:

1. Within a Lynx Analysis Unit,

maintain denning habitat on at least

10% of the area that is capable of

producing stands with characteristics

suitable for denning habitat. Denning

habitat should be well distributed, in

patches generally larger than 5 acres.

This applies to vegetation treatment,

timber harvest, prescribed fire, fire

suppression actions, and other similar

activities.

Guidelines:

1. In areas where future denning

habitat is desired, or to extend the

production of snowshoe hare foraging

habitat where forage quality and

quantity is declining due to plant

succession, consider improvement of

habitat through activities such as

commercial thinning and selection

harvesting. Use harvesting and thinning

to retain and recruit understories of

small diameter conifers and shrubs

preferred by hares and to retain and

recruit coarse woody debris. 2. Maintain or improve the

juxtaposition of denning to foraging

habitat. This can be important in large

wildfire events in late seral.

3. Design vegetation and fire

management activities to retain or

restore lynx denning habitat on

landscapes with the highest probability

of escaping stand-replacing fire events.

Connectivity and Fragmentation

Goals:

1. Maintain and, where necessary and

feasible, restore lynx habitat

connectivity across forested landscapes

and within and between Lynx Analysis

Units. Facilitate wildlife movement

within key linkage areas considering

highway crossing structures when

feasible.

2. Within Lynx Analysis Units that

have been fragmented by past

management activities that reduced the

quality of lynx habitat, management

practices will be implemented to move

toward forest composition, structure

and patterns more similar to those that

would have occurred under historical

conditions and natural disturbance

processes.

Predation/Competition

Goal:

1. Avoid management practices that

would increase competition with and

predation on lynx

Prey Species:

Goals:

1. Reduce incidental harm or capture

of lynx during predator control

activities and ensure retention of

adequate prey base. 2. Retain and enhance existing habitat

conditions for important lynx prey

species and alternate prey species, such

as the red squirrel.

Category: Disturbance Processes

Fire

Goal:

1. Restore fire as an ecological process

through time and use fire as a tool to

maintain, enhance, or restore lynx

habitat.

Standards:

Refer to:

• Silviculture, standard #3.

• Threatened, Endangered, and

Sensitive Species, Lynx Analysis Units,

standards 1 and 2.

• Threatened, Endangered, and

Sensitive Species, Denning and

Foraging Habitat, standard #1.

Guidelines:

1. Consider prescriptions that can

result in regeneration and the creation

of snowshoe hare habitat when

developing burn prescriptions,

especially for lodgepole pine and aspen.

2. Design burn prescriptions to

promote response by shrub and tree

species that are favored by snowshoe

hare.

3. Consider the need for pre-treatment

of fuels before conducting management

ignitions.

4. In lynx habitat, avoid constructing

permanent firebreaks on ridges or

saddles.

5. Minimize construction of

temporary roads and machine fire lines

to the extent possible during fire

suppression activities in lynx habitat.

6. In the event of a large wildfire in

stands that were formally late seral,

during the post-disturbance assessment

prior to restoration or salvage

harvesting, evaluate the potential for

providing for lynx denning and foraging

habitat.

Also refer to:

• Silviculture, guideline #3.

• Threatened, Endangered, and

Sensitive Species, Denning and

Foraging Habitat, guidelines 2 and 3.

Category: Social

Recreation—Developed Recreation

Standard:

1. Locate new or relocated trails,

roads, and ski lift termini to direct

winter use away from diurnal security

habitat.

2. Protect key linkage areas when

planning new or expanding recreational

developments.

Guidelines:

1. Provide adequately sized

coniferous inter-trail islands, including

the retention of coarse woody material,

to maintain snowshoe hare habitat when

designing ski area expansions.

2. Identify and protect potential lynx

security habitats in and around

proposed developments or expansions.

3. Evaluate, and adjust as necessary,

ski operations in expanded or newly

developed areas to provide nocturnal

foraging opportunities for lynx in a

manner consistent with operational

needs, especially in landscapes where

lynx habitat occurs as narrow bands of

coniferous forest across the mountain

slopes.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Notices 40605

Recreation—Dispersed Recreation

Standards:

1. Allow no net increase in groomed

or designated over-the-snow routes and

designated snowmobile play areas by

Lynx Analysis Units unless the

designation serves to consolidate

unregulated use and improves lynx

habitat. Winter logging activity would

be an exception.

Guidelines:

1. Limit or discourage activities that

result in snow compaction in areas

where it is shown to compromise lynx

habitat. Such actions should be

undertaken on a priority basis

considering habitat function and

importance.

Also refer to:

• Travelways, guidelines 3 and 4.

Category: Administrative

Infrastructure—Travelways

Standard:

1. Close temporary roads constructed

for timber sale activities in lynx habitat

to public use during the winter.

Guidelines:

1. Design new roads that could impact

lynx habitat, especially the entrance, for

effective closure and subsequent

decommissioning, if it meets overall

management objectives.

2. Minimize roadside brushing on low

speed, low volume roads in order to

provide snowshoe hare habitat.

3. Locate trails and roads away from

forested stringers to avoid

fragmentation.

4. Minimize creation of permanent

travelways on ridgetops and saddles

that could facilitate increased access by

lynx competitors in lynx habitat.

Real Estate—Land Adjustments

Goal:

1. Retain key wildlife linkage areas on

National Forest System lands in public

ownership. Cooperate with other

ownerships to establish unified

management direction via habitat

conservation plans, conservation

easements or agreements, and land

acquisition.

Special Uses

Goal:

1. Design activities and facilities to

minimize impacts on lynx habitat.

Standard:

1. Restrict authorized use under

permits to designated routes when in

lynx habitat on projects where oversnow access is required. Close newly

constructed roads to public access

during project activities. Upon project

completion, evaluate the need to

reclaim these roads.

Guideline:

1. Encourage remote monitoring of

sites that are located in lynx habitat, so

that they do not have to be visited daily.

Transportation and Utility Corridors

Goals:

1. Reduce the potential for lynx

mortality related to highways.

2. Work cooperatively with the

Federal Highway Administration and

State Departments of Transportation to

address the movement needs of lynx.

Standard:

Maintain connectivity of lynx habitat

during the planning for highway rightsof-ways, construction, reconstruction,

and other possible transportation

corridors.

GLOSSARY

Fragmentation—Human alteration of

natural landscape patterns, resulting in

reduction of total area, increased

isolation of patches, and reduced

connectivity between patches of natural

vegetation.

Highway—A road that is at least 2

lanes wide, paved with asphalt or

concrete. Average daily traffic may

exceed 5,000 vehicles and speeds are 45

mph or greater.

Key Linkage Areas—Critical areas for

lynx habitat. Usually, the factors that

place connectivity at risk are highways

or private land developments. Special

management emphasis is recommended

to maintain or increase the permeability

of key linkage areas.

Lynx Analysis Unit (LAU)—The LAU

is a project analysis unit upon which

direct, indirect, and cumulative effects

analyses are performed. LAU

boundaries should remain constant to

facilitate planning and allow effective

monitoring of habitat changes over time.

an area of at least the size used by an

individual lynx, about 25–50 square

miles in contiguous habitat (should be

larger in less contiguous, poorer quality,

or naturally fragmented habitat.

Lynx Denning Habitat—Habitat used

during parturition and rearing of young

until they are mobile. The common

component appears to be large amounts

of coarse woody debris, either down

logs or root wads. The coarse woody

debris provides escape and thermal

cover for kittens. Denning habitat may

be found either in older mature forest of

conifer or mixed conifer/deciduous

types, or in regenerating stands (greater

than 20 years since disturbance).

Denning habitat must be located within

daily travel distance of foraging habitat.

Lynx Diurnal Security Habitat—In

lynx habitat, areas that provide secure

winter daytime bedding sites for lynx in

highly disturbed landscapes, e.g., large

developed winter recreational sites or

areas of concentrated winter

recreational use. It is presumed that

lynx may be able to adapt to the

presence of regular and concentrated

human use during winter, so long as

other critical habitat needs are being

met, and security habitat blocks are

present and adequately distributed in

such disturbed landscapes. Security

habitat will provide lynx the ability to

retreat from human disturbance during

winter daytime hours, emerging at dusk

to hunt when most human activity

ceases. Security habitats will generally

be sites that naturally discourage winter

human activity because of extensive

forest floor structure, or stand

conditions that otherwise make human

access difficult, and should be protected

to the degree necessary. Security

habitats are likely to be most effective if

they are sufficiently large to provide

effective visual and acoustic insulation

from winter human activity and to

easily allow movement away from

infrequent human intrusion. These

winter habitats must be distributed such

that they are in proximity to foraging

habitat.

Lynx Foraging Habitat—Habitat that

supports primary prey (snowshoe hare)

and/or important alternate prey

(especially red squirrels) that are

available to lynx. The highest quality

snowshoe hare habitats are those that

support a high density of young trees or

shrubs (greater than 4,500 stems or

branches per acre), tall enough to

protrude above the snow. These

conditions may occur in early

successional stands following some type

of disturbance, or in older forests with

a substantial understory of shrubs and

young conifer trees. Coarse wood debris,

especially in early successional stages

(created by harvest regeneration units

and large fires), provides important

cover for snowshoe hares and other

prey. Red squirrel densities tend to be

highest in mature cone-bearing forests

with substantial quantities of coarse

woody debris.

Lynx Habitat—Lynx occur in mesic

coniferous forest that have cold, snowy

winters and provide a prey base of

snowshoe hare. Lynx records occur

predominantly in lodgepole pine,

subalphine fir, Engelmann spruce, and

aspen vegetation cover types on

subalpine fir habitat types in the

western United States. Cool, moist

Double-fir, grand fir, or western larch

forest, where they are interspersed with

subalphine forests, also provide habitat

for lynx.

Primary Lynx Habitat—Habitat that

must be present to support foraging,

denning, and rearing of young (in the

40606 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 127 / Friday, June 30, 2000 / Notices

western U.S. primary habitat is

lodgepole pine or subalphine fir habitat

types).

Secondary Lynx Habitat—Other

vegetation types, when intermingled

with or immediately adjacent to primary

habitat, that contribute to lynx annual

needs (cool/moist Douglas-fir habitat

types adjacent to primary habitat).

Unsuitable Habitat Condition—An

area that is capable of producing lynx

foraging or denning habitat, but which

currently does not have the necessary

vegetation composition, structure and/

or denisyt ot support lynx and

snowshoe hare populations during all

seasons. For example, during the winter,

vegetation must provide dense cover

that extends above (greater than 6 feet)

the average snow depth. Timber harvest,

salvage harvest, commercial thinning,

and prescribed fire may or may not

result in unsuitable habitat conditions.

Snowshow Hare Habitat—See

foraging habitat.

[FR Doc. 00–16546 Filed 6–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–81–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Opal Creek Scenic Recreation Area

(SRA) Advisory Council

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The second Opal Creek

Scenic Recreation Area Advisory

Council meeting will convene in

Stayton, Oregon on Monday, July 17,

2000. The meeting is scheduled to begin

at 6 p.m., and will conclude at

approximately 8:30 p.m. The meeting

will be held in the South Room of the

Stayton Community Center, 400 West

Virginia Street, Stayton, Oregon.

The Opal Creek Wilderness and Opal

Creek Scenic Recreation Area Act of

1996 (Opal Creek Act) (Pub. L. 104–208)

directed the Secretary of Agriculture to

establish the Opal Creek Scenic

Recreation Area Advisory Council. The

Advisory Council is comprised of

thirteen members representing state,

county and city governments, and

representatives of various organizations,

which include mining industry,

environmental organizations, inholders

in Opal Creek Scenic Recreation Area,

economic development, Indian tribes,

adjacent landowners and recreation

interests. The council provides advice to

the Secretary of Agriculture on

preparation of a comprehensive Opal

Creek Management Plan for the SRA,

and consults on a periodic and regular

basis on the management of the area.

The tentative agenda includes:

(1) Overview of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act (FACA); (2) overview of

the planning process including the

National Environmental Policy Act,

National Forest Management Act, and

amending the Forest Plan; and (3) a

presentation on the Cultural and

Historic Resource Inventory.

The public comment period is

tentatively scheduled to begin at 8 p.m.

Time allotted for individual

presentations will be limited to 3

minutes. Written comments are

encouraged, particularly if the material

cannot be presented within the time

limits of the comment period. Written

comments may be submitted prior to the

July 17 meeting by sending them to

Designated Federal Official Stephanie

Phillips at the address given below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

more information regarding this

meeting, contact Designated Federal

Official Stephanie Phillips; Williamette

National Forest, Detroit Ranger District,

HC 73 Box 320, Mill City, OR 97360;

(503) 854–3366.

Dated: June 26, 2000.

Y. Robert Iwamoto,

Deputy Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 00–16547 Filed 6–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Grain Inspection, Packers and

Stockyards Administration

Amendment to Certification of Central

Filing System—Oklahoma

The Statewide central filing system of

Oklahoma has been previously certified,

pursuant to Section 1324 of the Food

Security Act of 1985, on the basis of

information submitted by the Oklahoma

Secretary of State, for farm products

produced in that State (52 FR 49056,

December 29, 1987).

The certification is hereby amended

on the basis of information submitted in

a May 23, 2000 letter by Anita Charlson,

Supervisor, Central Filing System for

Agriculture Liens, for additional farm

products used or produced in farming

operations, or a product of such crop or

livestock in its unmanufactured state

that is in the possession of a person

engaged in farming operations in that

State as follows: echinacea, broccoli,

eggplant.

This is issued pursuant to authority

delegated by the Secretary of

Agriculture.

Authority: Sec. 1324(c)(2), Pub. L. 99–198,

99 Stat. 1535, 7 U.S.C. 1631(c)(2); 7 CFR

2.22(a)(3)(v), 2.81(a)(5), 55 FR 22795.

Dated: June 23, 2000.

John Stencel,

Acting Deputy Administrator, Packers and

Stockyards Programs.

[FR Doc. 00–16540 Filed 6–29–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–EN–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation

Service

Forest Service

Notice of Meeting

SUMMARY: Maintaining Agriculture and

Forestry in Rapidly Growing Areas

Listening Forums hosted by members of

the USDA Policy Advisory Committee

on Farmland Protection. The USDA

Policy Advisory Committee on Farm

and Forest Lands Protection is holding

listening forums this summer to solicit

policy feedback and anecdotal

information on what works and what

doesn’t from a community’s perspective

in working with federal tools designed

to maintain land as farmland and forest

land. The input received from these

forums will be synthesized into a report

that USDA will issue on this subject

later this year.

Specifically, the forums will ask for

public comment on the following

questions:

1. What are the economic,

environmental and social benefits of

farms and forested lands for

communities, especially those in

rapidly growing regions?

2. What are the challenges that

communities and individuals face in

trying to maintain farms and forested

lands, especially in rapidly growing

areas;

3. What sorts of opportunities exist to

capitalize on market opportunities (e.g.

direct marketing and agri-tourism) to

encourage maintenance of farmland and

forestland.

4. What role could the federal

government play to better support

farmers and forest operators in taking

advantage of these opportunities?

DATES: The first forum will convene

Thursday, July 13, 2000, at 9:00 a.m.

and conclude at 12:00 p.m.. It will be

held at the Dekalb County Farm Bureau

Center for Agriculture, 1350 West

Prairie Drive, Sycamore, Illinois 60178.

The second forum is scheduled for

Friday, July 21, 2000, beginning at 9:00

a.m. and continuing until 12:00 p.m., at

the University of California, Davis,

Alumni and Visitors Center, in Room

AGR, located on Old Davis Road and

Mrak Hall Drive, Davis California. The