[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 12 (Tuesday, January 20, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2946-2947]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1198]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Christy Basin Timber Sales, Willamette National Forest, Lane 
County, Oregon

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) on a Proposal Action to harvest and regenerate timber, 
thin young stands created by past regeneration harvest. The proposal 
also calls for the construction, reconstruction, and decommissioning of 
roads, restoration of degraded stream channels, and improvement of big 
game forage within the Christy Creek drainage of the North Fork of the 
Middle Fork of the Willamette River watershed. The planning area is 
bounded by the North Fork of the Middle Fork of the Willamette River on 
the south, Hiyu Ridge (the watershed boundary between the North Fork 
and the McKenzie River) on the east, Sinker Mountain and Sardine Butte 
on the northwest and north (the watershed boundary between the North 
Fork and Fall Creek) and Alpine Ridge on the west. The area is 
approximately 40 air miles east of the City of Eugene and 16 air miles 
northeast of the City of Oakridge. The Forest Service proposal will be 
in compliance with the 1990 Willamette National Forest Land and 
Resource Management Plan as amended by the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan, 
which provides the overall guidance for management of this area. These 
proposals are tentatively planned for implementation in fiscal years 
1999-2003.
    The Willamette National Forest invites written comments and 
suggestions on the scope of the analysis in addition to those comments 
already received as a result of local public participation activities. 
The agency will also give notice of the full environmental analysis and 
decision-making process so that interested and affected people are made 
aware as to how they may participate and contribute to the final 
decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope and implementation of the analysis 
should be received in writing by February 28, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions concerning the 
management of this area to Rick Scott, District Ranger, Rigdon Ranger 
District, Willamette National Forest, P.O. Box 1410, Oakridge, Oregon 
97463.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Direct questions about the proposed action and the scope of analysis to 
Kristy Miller, Planning Resource Management Assistant or Tim Bailey, 
Project Coordinator, Oakridge Ranger District, phone 541-782-2283.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Christy Basin Planning area is entirely 
within the North Fork of the Middle Fork of the Willamette River 
watershed, which is designed as a Tier 2 Key watershed by the Northwest 
Forest Plan (ROD, C-7). Tier 2 Key watersheds contain important sources 
of high quality water. A Watershed Analysis was completed for the North 
Fork of the Middle Fork of the Willamette River in September, 1995.
    The purpose of this project is to harvest timber in a manner that 
implements the management objectives, and to implement various resource 
restoration activities to meet Key Watershed objectives.
    The proposal includes harvesting timber by thinning in nine 
separate timber sales over the next five years, and regeneration 
harvest methods in four separate timber sales over the next four years. 
Both thinning and regeneration timber sale proposals would involve road 
construction, reconstruction, and decommissioning. This analysis will 
evaluate a range of alternatives addressing the Forest Service 
proposals to harvest approximately 70.0 million board feet; 
approximately 43.4 million board feet would be generated from thinning 
some 3900 acres of young stands created by past clearout harvest, and 
approximately 26.4 million board feet would be generated by 
regeneration harvest on approximately 550 acres. All the above proposed 
harvest would require a total of 8 miles of temporary road construction 
and 21 miles of road reconstruction.
    The Christy Basin planning area comprises about 34,000 acres, all 
of which is federal land. Of the 34,000 acres about 18,500 acres (54%) 
have been previously harvested and regenerated. Of the remaining acres, 
approximately 5300 (15%) acres is in a mature stand condition, ranging 
in ages from 90 to 170 years, and 10,000 acres is in an old-growth 
stand condition, stand ages exceeding 200 years. The planning area 
contains about 600 acres (1.7%) of non-forested vegetation types and 
rock outcrops. Management areas that provide for programmed timber 
harvest are Scenic (11c) and General Forest (14a). Other land 
allocations in this planning area are Late-Successional Reserves, 
Riparian Reserves, Wild and Scenic River Corridor, and Dispersed 
Recreation--Semi-primitive Nonmotorized Use.
    The project area includes a small portion (about 700 acres) of the 
Chucksney Mountain inventoried roadless area, which was considered but 
not selected for wilderness designation. Most of this inventoried 
roadless area is included within the above Dispersed Recreation--Semi-
Primitive Nonmotorized Recreation Management Area.
    Issues identified for this analysis are water and stream quality, 
habitat fragmentation, economic benefit, old-growth habitat reduction, 
big game habitat quality, biodiversity effects, road management, and 
soil compaction.
    Initial scoping for this analysis began in 1990 but the project was 
put on hold due to a Federal Court injunction. Scoping was initiated 
again in March of 1996. Alternatives were developed and

[[Page 2947]]

preliminary analysis was completed during the summer and fall of 1997. 
The developed alternative consisted of: (A) low management intensity; 
retention of more than the prescribed amount of standing green trees 
and down logs (20-30% retention), (B) conventional management 
intensity; retention of prescribed amounts of standing green trees and 
down logs (15% retention), (C) No old-growth harvest, and (D) No 
Action. All action alternatives were developed to avoid forest 
fragmentation and system road construction. Results of the above 
analysis indicated a potential for significant effects to the human 
environment, hence the need for documentation with the Environmental 
Impact Statement.
    The Forest Service will be seeking additional information, comment 
and assistance from Federal, State, local agencies, tribes, and other 
individuals or organizations who may be interested or affected by the 
proposed project. Additional input will be used to help verify the 
existing analysis and determine if additional issues and alternatives 
should be developed. This input will be used in preparation of the 
draft EIS.
    The scoping process will include the following:
    <bullet> Identification of potential additional issues;
    <bullet> Identification of issues to be analyzed in depth;
    <bullet> Elimination of insignificant issues or those which have 
been covered by a relevant previous environmental process;
    <bullet> Exploration of potential additional alternatives based on 
the issues identified during the scoping process; and
    <bullet> Verification of and potential addition to environmental 
effects of the proposed action and alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, 
and cumulative effects and connected actions).
    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by 
February 28, 1998. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days 
from the date the EPA publishes the notice of availability in the 
Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers 
notice at this early stage of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, a reviewer of 
a draft EIS 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 EIS stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final EIS 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 EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft EIS 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 EIS 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.)
    The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in June, 1998. In the 
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and 
responses received during the comment period that pertain to the 
environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and applicable 
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making the decision 
regarding this proposal. Rick Scott, District Ranger, is the 
responsible official and as responsible official, he will document the 
Christy Basin Timber Sales and restoration project decision and 
rationale in a Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to 
Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR Part 215).

    Dated: January 5, 1998.
Rick Scott,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 98-1198 Filed 1-16-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M