Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 105 / Friday, June 1, 2007 / Notices 30539 

Dated: May 25, 2007. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–10527 Filed 5–31–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Shasta-Trinity National Forest; 

California; Gemmill Thin Project 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: This notice for the Gemmill 

Thin project revises the first notice for 

the project which was published in the 

Federal Register on December 12, 2005 

(page 73430). Comments received 

during the first comment period 

(December 12, 2006 to January 13, 2007) 

as well comments received during the 

comment period for this notice will be 

considered by the Responsible Official 

in the development of the draft 

environmental impact statement. 

The Shasta-Trinity National Forest 

proposes to improve, maintain and 

protect wildlife habitat for latesuccessional and old-growth associated 

species in the Chanchelulla LateSuccessional Reserve on the South Fork 

Management Unit. The proposal 

includes thinning trees in overcrowded 

natural stands, thinning plantations and 

reducing the amount of existing fuels on 

a total of approximately 1,610 acres of 

National Forest System land. The 

project area is located on South Fork 

Management Unit in T.29 and 30 N., 

R.10 and 11 W., Mt. Diablo Meridian, 

northeast of the community of 

Wildwood, California and south of 

Chanchelulla Wilderness. Wildwood 

has bee listed as a Wildland Urban 

Interface (WUI), identifying it as a 

community at risk from the threat of 

wildfire and giving it higher priority for 

fuels reduction treatments. The Forest 

Land and Resource Management Plan 

allocates this area to Late-Successional 

Reserve, Riparian Reserve (wetlands and 

areas adjacent to streams), and Matrix 

(commercial timber harvest emphasis). 

The project area is within designated 

critical habitat for the Northern spotted 

owl (CA–36). 

DATES: Comments concerning the scope 

of the analysis must be received no later 

than 30 days after the publication of this 

notice in the Federal Register. The draft 

environmental impact statement is 

expected in July 2007 and the final 

environmental impact statement is 

expected in October 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

Gemmill Thin Comments, South Fork 

Management Unit, P.O. Box 159, 

Hayfork, CA 96041. Electronic 

comments can be sent via e-mail to: 

comments-pacificsouthwest-shastatrinity-yollabolla-hayfork@fs.fed.us. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeff Paulo, Gemmill Thin IDT Lead, 

South Fork Management Unit, 2555 

State Highway 36, Platina, CA 96076, 

Phone (530) 352–4211 or via E-mail at 

jpaulo@fs.fed.us, or visit the ShastTrinity National Forest Web site at 

www.fs.fed.us/r5/shastatrinity/projects. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action 

Over the past 100 years the practice 

of excluding fire and the lack of 

thinning treatments in the Chancuelulla 

Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) have 

resulted in a forest ecosytem that is 

densely stocked and slow-growing. 

Overcrowded conditions in mature 

stands (80 to 100 years old) are causing 

a delay in the establishment of healthy 

functioning old-growth habitat. 

Overcrowded conditions in old-growth 

stands (100 to 150 years old) do not 

promote long-term health and 

maintenance because the largest and 

oldest treesand their replacements are at 

risk of mortality due to the proximity 

and number of competing trees. In both 

cases, tree vigor is reduced because 

smaller trees are competing with larger 

trees for limited amounts of water, 

nutrients and sunlight. This leaves the 

ecosystem more prone to disease and 

less resilient to fire. Without treatment, 

overstocked stands are not likely to 

remain healthy or meet the need for 

more old-growth habitat in the LSR. 

Most of the existing plantations 

scattered throughout the LSR have never 

been thinned so they are also 

overcrowded and hindered in their 

development of future old-growth 

habitat characteristics. 

There is a need to thin overstocked 

mature stands that are 80–100 years old. 

Fewer and healthier trees per acre 

would serve two purposes: (1) Increase 

the rate of development of old-growth 

habitat characteristics and (2) reduce the 

loss of existing and developing oldgrowth habitat in the event of wildfire 

and outbreaks of disease. There is a 

need to thin below in old-growth stands 

over 100 years old. A thinning that 

leaves the oldest and largest trees would 

serve two purposes: (1) Decrease the risk 

of losing existing old-growth trees and 

(2) decrease the risk of losing future 

replacement old-growth trees. 

There is a need to thin plantations to 

increase their growing space and reduce 

density to levels where flames are not 

likely to reach the canopy of the 

adjacent overstory trees during a 

wildfire. 

There is also a need to spatially 

protect late-successional and old-growth 

habitat from the threat of fire that could 

start inside or outside the perimeter of 

the LSR. Current threats of fire include 

tree mortality from insect and disease in 

overcrowded stands, and natural or 

human-caused wildfire. The majority of 

private land closest to the Gemmill Thin 

project was harvested in the late 1960s 

to 1970s and more private harvesting is 

planned. Two public roads and a 

transmission line are within or directly 

adjacent to the project area. These linear 

features and past harvesting on private 

lands are associated with higher risk for 

fire starts that could affect the project 

area. 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action would include 

the following treatments: 

1. Thinning treatments on 

approximately 750 acres of stands 80 to 

100 year old. Implement a thinning from 

below in 14 stands of mature mixed 

conifer and hardwood forest. These are 

stands that do not yet exhibit oldgrowth characteristics, but have the 

potential to attain them. In these 

treatment units, the largest and 

healthiest trees would be retained. A 

sufficient number of trees would be 

removed to a level that maintains or 

increases growth rates of mature trees 

and removes fuel ladders. The post 

treatment stand would average 50% to 

60% tree canopy cover. 

2. Thinning treatments on 

approximately 530 acres of stands 100–

150 years old. Implement a thinning 

from below in 10 stands of old-growth 

mixed conifer and hardwood forest over 

100 years old. The largest and oldest 

trees within each stand would be 

retained. A sufficient number of smaller 

trees would be removed to reduce the 

number of trees per acre to a level that 

provides an improved competitive 

advantage for the larger, older trees and 

removes fuel ladders that may threaten 

the remaining trees. The post treatment 

stands would average 60% or more tree 

canopy cover. 

3. Thinning treatments in 

approximately 45 acres of 20 year old 

plantations. Thinning and release 

treatments would be accomplished 

through mastication (grinding up excess 

trees) in three plantations. Sufficient 

numbers of trees would be removed to 

maintain an average of 150 trees per 

acre, a level that maintains stand growth 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES
30540 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 105 / Friday, June 1, 2007 / Notices 

rate and reduces the amount ladder 

fuels. 

4. Thinning from below to reconstruct 

fuelbreaks implemented 20 years ago on 

approximately 260 acres of stands aged 

80 to 150 years old. Implement a 

thinning from below to retain 

approximately 40% canopy closure, and 

remove most understory vegetation. 

Shaded fuelbreaks are approximately 

150 to 300 foot-wide strips on which 

vegetation has been modified so that 

fires burning into them can be more 

readily controlled. The residual canopy 

closure provides sufficient shade to 

reduce the growth of brush species in 

the understory. 

5. Reduce hazardous fuels on 

approximately 25 acres of existing fuels 

buffers. All live trees would be retained. 

Dead trees under 10 inches in diameter 

would be removed. These small dead 

trees and ground fuels would be 

concentrated for burning by handtreatment methods. 

All proposed treatments would 

remove excess trees as commercial 

wood products wherever possible. No 

trees over 150 years old would be 

harvested. On approximately 1,460 

acres small trees (5 to 10 inches in 

diameter) would be removed and most 

trees less than 5 inches in diameter 

would be removed as activity-generated 

fuels. The harvest systems used in the 

proposed action would include 

mechanized equipment, cable systems, 

and helicopter. There would be no road 

construction of new system roads. The 

project may include reconstruction of 

road segments, construction of short 

lengths of temporary roads and 

decommissioning of other roads. Based 

on public comment another alternative 

may be developed that places a diameter 

limit on all thinning. 

Responsible Official 

J. Sharon Heywood, Forest 

Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity National 

Forest, 3644 Avtech Parkway, Redding, 

CA 96002. (530) 226–2500. 

Nature of Decision To Be Made 

The Forest Supervisor will decide 

whether to implement the proposed 

action, implement an alternative action 

that meets the purpose and need or take 

no action. The decision may include a 

non-significant forest plan amendment 

that permits treatment of stands older 

than 80 years within Late-Successional 

Reserves. 

Scoping Process 

Notice of the proposed action will be 

published in the newspaper of record, 

the Redding Record Searchlight. It will 

also be published in the Trinity Journal. 

Scoping letters will be mailed to 

interested and affected public 

coincident with publication of this 

notice of intent in the Federal Register 

and information on the proposed action 

will be posted on the Forest Web site at 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/shastatrinity/ 

projects. The Trinity County Firesafe 

Council has reviewed this proposal and 

a public meeting was held at the 

Harrison Gulch Ranger Station on 

Wednesday, September 28, 2005. This 

notice of intent initiates the current 

scoping process, which guides the 

development of the environmental 

impact statement. Comments submitted 

during this scoping process should be in 

writing and should be specific to the 

proposed action. The comments should 

describe as clearly and completely as 

possible any issues the commenter has 

with the proposal. The results of 

scoping include: (a) Identifying 

potential issues, (b) identifying issues to 

be analyzed in depth, (c) eliminating 

non-significant issues or those 

previously covered by another 

environmental analysis, (d) exploring 

additional alternatives, and (e) 

identifying potential environmental 

effects of the proposed action and 

alternatives. 

Preliminary Issues 

Potential issues identified during the 

first public comment period include: 

• Development of an alternative with 

a diameter limit for harvesting 

• The potential for increased vehicle 

use as a result of proposed road 

activities 

• Decommissioning roads that 

provide access for public use and fire 

fighting 

Early Notice of Public Participation in 

Subsequent Environmental Review 

The comment period on the draft 

environmental impact statement 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 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, 533 

(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 

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. 

Dated: May 25, 2007. 

Scott G. Armentrout, 

Deputy Forest Supervisor, Shasta-Trinity 

National Forest. 

[FR Doc. 07–2718 Filed 5–31–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Forest Service 

Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, 

Oregon; Wallowa-Whitman National 

Forest Travel Management Plan 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Revised notice of intent to 

prepare an environmental impact 

statement. 

SUMMARY: On May 3, 2007, the USDA, 

Forest Service, Wallowa-Whitman 

National Forest, published a Notice of 

Intent in Federal Register (72 FR 24558) 

to prepare an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) for the Forest Travel 

Management Plan. The Notice of Intent 

is being revised to change the end of the 

scoping period for receiving comments 

on the proposed action. The end of the 

scoping period was originally June 30, 

2007. The revised end of the scoping 

period is August 17, 2007. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES