[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 28 (Thursday, February 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6580-6581]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3101]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Meadow Tolan Vegetation Management Project; Bitterroot National 
Forest, Ravalli County, MT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of management 
activities proposed in the Meadow-Tolan area on the Sula Ranger 
District of the Bitterroot National Forest. Proposed management 
activities include management ignited prescribed fire, timber harvest, 
reforestation, pre-commercial thinning, aspen restoration, and road 
reconstruction. The Meadow-Tolan area is located in Ravalli County, 
Montana, approximately 40 miles southeast of Hamilton. The Meadow-Tolan 
area includes the Meadow and Tolan Creek drainages and several other 
tributary drainages between them.
    A variety of management activities proposed in the project are 
being considered together because they represent either connected or 
cumulative actions as defined by the Council on Environmental Quality 
(40 CFR 1508.25). The purposes of the project are (1) To restore fire 
and its associated ecological benefits, (2) to harvest merchantable 
timber, (3) to reduce fuel accumulations, especially in an area 
adjacent to a rural subdivision, (4) to modify forest stand structure 
and species composition in order to maintain or restore ecosystem 
diversity, (5) to reduce motorized travel to comply with Forest Plan 
standard, (6) to amend the Forest Plan motorized access standards in an 
area where other resource benefits outweigh the benefits of restricting 
travel, (7) to thin young stands that are overstocked, and (8) to 
restore aspen clones that show signs of deterioration. This project 
level EIS will tier to the Bitterroot National Forest Land and Resource 
Management Plan (Forest Plan) and Final EIS (September 1987), which 
provides overall guidance for all land management activities on the 
Bitterroot National Forest.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received by March 24, 
2000.

ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is Rodd Richardson, Forest 
Supervisor, Bitterroot National Forest, 1801 North First, Hamilton MT 
59840.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Written comments and suggestions 
concerning the scope of the analysis or a request to be included on the 
project mailing list should be sent to John Ormiston, Acting Resource 
Team Leader, Sula Ranger District, Bitterroot National Forest, Phone 
(406) 821-3201.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The project area encompasses approximately 
45,000 acres of land in west-central Montana on the Bitterroot National 
Forest. The Meadow-Tolan area includes the Meadow and Tolan Creek 
drainages and several other tributary drainages of the East Fort 
Bitterroot River, including Vapor Creek, Swift Creek, Bugle Creek, 
Kerlee Creek, Springer Creek, Mink Creek, and Bruce Creek. A map and 
legal descriptions are available on request.
    An analysis of the Meadow-Tolan area reveals changes in how the 
forest vegetation currently looks and functions compared to the past. 
Natural patterns and stand structures have changed, largely due to the 
absence of fire during the 1900's in this fire dependent ecosystem. The 
result is notable changes in plant species composition and density, 
stand structures, fuels, seral species regeneration, and the health and 
vigor of forest stands. The primary purposes of prescribed fire and 
timber harvest in the Meadow-Tolan area is to maintain or restore 
ecosystem diversity, function, and health. There is also an opportunity 
to address ecological trends and at the same time utilize surplus 
biomass for forest products. Maintaining plant community diversity will 
promote the range of habitats that native plants and animals evolved 
in. Management prescriptions to promote diversity include low to 
moderate intensity management ignited prescribed fire; and on some 
sites prescribed fire in combination with silvicultural treatments. 
Silvicultural treatments proposed include pre-commercial thinning, 
timber harvest, and reforestation.
    Managing fuels using fire and silvicultural practices would 
decrease the risk of uncharacteristically intense fires and associated 
undesirable effects. These activities could also increase the ability 
of the Forest Service to allow more naturally occurring fires to burn 
in the adjoining Anaconda-Pintler Wilderness Area by reducing fuels 
near private property at lower elevations. This would to some degree 
reduce the risks to private property from natural fires allowed to burn 
in the wilderness.
    Vegetation treatments with commercial timber harvest and management 
ignited prescribed fire are proposed on approximately 2530 acres and 
1430 acres, respectively. Proposed management ignited fire and harvest 
activities focus primarily on low- to mid-elevations and dry aspects; 
those considered at ecological risk due to fire absence.
    The prescribed fire would focus on the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir 
community, which have been most altered due to fire absence. Most of 
these treated acres will also include slashing of undesired and 
unmerchantable trees.
    Big game forage, including some winter range areas, would be 
improved in the areas to be understory burned. Intermediate harvests 
will also be prescribed on about 1100 acres in the ponderosa pine/
Douglas-fir communities to open forest canopies, reduce Douglas-fir 
encroachment, improve overall productivity and health. Following 
harvest, all areas would be treated with understory burning in order to 
reduce fuels, prepare sites for regeneration, rejuvenate the shrub 
component, and maintain fire as an ecosystem process.
    Pre-commercial thinning is also needed on about 320 acres of 
densely stocked submerchantable trees in order to enhance tree growth 
and vigor. One area of approximately 20 acres will be treated with hand 
thinning and piling for the purpose of fuel reduction.
    Approximately 1210 acres in the moist Douglas-fir forest community 
would be treated using intermediate harvests to reduce stand densities, 
increase health and vigor of the residual stand, salvage dead and dying 
trees from Douglas-fir bark beetle caused mortality or root rot, and 
increase resilience to other insects and diseases. Approximately 160 
acres would be

[[Page 6581]]

treated with a regeneration harvest where heavy mortality exists due to 
the Douglas-fir bark beetle. Douglas-fir beetles have been particularly 
active on north slopes in the area in the last few years and have 
reached epidemic population levels on the Sula Ranger District. Because 
of the uncertainty of future beetle populations, some of the area 
prescribed for intermediate harvests may require regenerating. About 
half the area would be understory burned following harvest. Activity 
fuels in remainder would be limbed and lopped or yarded to the landing 
to burn.
    Due to the current level of beetle caused mortality and the 
expected future mortality, there are two units needing regeneration 
that will exceed 40 acres.
    Eleven aspen stands on about 60 acres have matured and are showing 
signs of deterioration in the absence of fire. We propose to remove 
encroaching conifers by girdling or harvest and apply prescribed fire 
to restore aspen vigor and presence on the landscape.
    We propose to establish a defensible perimeter around a cluster of 
private dwellings in the Echo Gulch area; thinning, pruning and 
prescribing fire to reduce fuels and therefore the risk of fire moving 
rapidly through the perimeter.
    The Bitterroot Forest Plan provides guidance for management 
activities through its goals, objectives, standards, and management 
area direction. The areas of proposed management activities occur in 
Management Areas 1, 2, and 3a. Prescribed burning is proposed on lands 
within Forest Plan Management Areas 1, 2, 3a, and 3b. The management 
direction for these areas are briefly described, as follows. Management 
Area 1 emphasizes timber management, livestock and big game forage 
production, and roaded dispersed recreation activities. Management Area 
2 emphasizes elk winter range habitat, allows for timber management and 
provides roaded dispersed recreation opportunities. Management Area 3a 
emphasizes visual quality, allows timber management, and provides 
roaded dispersed recreation opportunities. Management Area 3b 
emphasizes protection of riparian habitat and water quality and 
provides for water-related recreation.
    Public scoping meetings and opportunities for interested parties to 
review and comment on the proposals for management were provided in 
Fall, 1998. Comments received have been retained and will be considered 
during the preparation of the Meadow Tolan EIS. Public participation is 
an important part of this analysis, continuing with additional scoping 
(40 CFR 1501.7), in February and March, 2000. In addition, the public 
is encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials at any time during 
the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will be 
seeking information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and 
local agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be 
interested in or affected by the proposed action.
    Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in 
preparation of the Draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to 
identify issues and alternatives to the proposed action. Some public 
comments have already been received in conjunction with scoping 
documented in the Meadow-Tolan Project File. The following issues have 
already been identified: 1. What effects would the proposed timber 
harvest, road construction, and prescribed fire have on the water and 
fishery resources in the area? 2. What effects would the proposed 
actions have on ecosystem health, productivity and forest products. 3. 
How would road construction, timber harvesting, and prescribed burning 
affect wildlife species in the area? 4. How would the proposed actions 
affect the Tolan roadless area and adjacent undeveloped lands? 5. How 
would the proposed actions affect recreation and motorized access 
opportunities? 6. How would visual quality be affected? This list may 
be verified; expanded, or modified based on continued public scoping.
    The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives in the 
EIS. One of these will be the ``no action'' alternative, in which none 
of the proposed activities would be implemented. Additional 
alternatives will examine varying levels and locations for the proposed 
activities to achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to 
the issues and other resource values. The EIS will analyze the direct, 
indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of the alternatives. 
Past, present, and scheduled activities on both private and National 
Forest lands will be considered. The EIS will disclose the analysis of 
site specific mitigation measures and their effectiveness.
    The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in July, 2000. 
At that time, the EPA will publish a Notice of Availability of the 
Draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the Draft EIS 
will be 45 days from the date the EPA's notice of availability appears 
in the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in 
management of the Meadow-Tolan area participate at that time. To be 
most helpful, comments on the Draft EIS should be as specific as 
possible. The Final EIS is scheduled to be completed in December, 2000.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
draft environmental impact statements must structure their 
participation in the Environmental review of the proposal so that it is 
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and 
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 
519,553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at 
the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may 
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 
1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages 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 scoping 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 developing issues and alternatives.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as possible. 
Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality 
Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National 
Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
    The responsible official for this environmental impact statement is 
Rodd Richardson, Forest Supervisor, Bitterroot National Forest, 1801 
North First, Hamilton, MT 59840. He will decide which, if any, of the 
proposed actions will be implemented and will document the decision and 
reasons for the decision in a Record of Decision. That decision will be 
subject to Forest Service Appeal Regulations.

    Dated: February 1, 2000.
Rodd Richardson,
Forest Supervisor, Bitterroot National Forest.
[FR Doc. 00-3101 Filed 2-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-83-M