Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Notices 21731

trails, prohibits new trails, and

institutes voluntary registration for

overnight and day use. This is a nonsignificant amendment. Public

involvement has been an important part

of the decision making process for this

proposal. Public comments were

gathered in 1992 through a survey of

users. In April 1993, a public scoping

letter was sent to over 400 interested

parties and a notice was published in

the local newspaper. On December 17,

1999, a second public scoping letter was

mailed to over 400 interested parties

and a legal notice was published in the

Escanaba Daily Press, Escanaba, MI. On

May 1, 2001, legal notice was published

in the Daily Press, Escanaba, MI,

notifying the public of the availability of

the EA for review. A 30-day comment

period follows release of the EA on May

1, 2001. Comments on the EA must be

received no later than May 21, 2001. A

final decision is expected by November

2001. this decision will be subject to

appeal pursuant to USDA Forest Service

regulations 36 CFR 217.3.

Dated: April 16, 2001.

Clyde N. Thompson,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 01–10500 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Garnet Stars & Sands Project; Idaho

Panhandle National Forests, Benewah

and Latah Counties, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement.

SUMMARY: The St. Joe Ranger District of

the Idaho Panhandle National Forests is

beginning an analysis and preparation

of an environmental Impact Statement

to address recreational digging, leasing

and/or sale of the garnet resource in the

Emerald, Hidden, Wood and Cat Spur

Creek drainages. The responsible official

is Forest Supervisor, Idaho Panhandle

National Forests, 3815 Schreiber Way,

Coeur d’ Alene, ID 83815.

The garnet resource consists of both

sands and gemstones. The sands are

used for industrial purposes, primarily

as abrasives. The Project Area produces

extraordinary quality and quantity of

large garnets, with some of the drainages

producing star garnets. These gemstones

are use commercially for jewelry and are

sought after by recreationists.

Much of the Emerald Creek drainage,

on public and private lands, has been

mined in the past. Two lease renewals,

one new lease application, one

prospecting permit extension, and eight

new prospecting permit applications

have been submitted. In addition, the

Forest Service currently manages a

public digging areas (by fee permit) in

281 Gulch, a tributary to Emerald Creek.

The Purpose and Need for this project

is based in the fact that the garnet

resource is finite and valuable and there

is considerable public interest in leasing

of gemstones and sands and retaining

the recreational digging area. The

Purpose and Need for this project is as

follows:

• Respond to public interest in

developing the mineral resource, while

conserving the garnet resource for future

generations.

• Gemstone deposits within the

current Forest Service recreational

digging area in 281 Gulch are becoming

depleted. If the Forest Service is going

to continue to provide this unique

recreational digging opportunity, other

areas need to be tested, identified and

developed.

• Resolve twelve pending mining

applications or extensions (lease

applications, permit applications and

permit extensions) for both garnets and

sand, dating back to 1996.

DATES: The Draft Environmental Impact

Statement is expected to be filed by

October 1, 2001. The Final

Environmental Impact Statement is

expected to be filed by June 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent

to: Garnet Stars & Sands, St. Joe Ranger

District, PO Box 407, St. Maries, ID

83861.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions should be referred to Tracy

Gravelle, St. Joe Ranger District, Avery

Office, HC Box 1, Avery, ID 83861.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Proposed Action

Public Recreational Gemstone Digging

Areas

(1) The Forest Service would reserve

Wood Creek and certain tributaries of

the East Fork of Emerald Creek (281

Gulch, Garnet Gulch, No Name, PeeWee

and Strom Creeks) and for public

recreational digging of gemstone

garnets. These areas would not be

available for commercial lease.

These drainages would be tested with

a combination of auger holes, hand or

machine-dug trenches. After testing,

drainages will be listed in order of

priority for development. Each drainage

would require different development.

The following activities are likely:

Only one drainage at a time would be

open.

All site may have trees cut and

removed and/or used for reclamation.

An average of 200–300 feet per year

would be opened and reclaimed

according to design features in Chapter

2 of the EIS.

Reclamation will follow Best

Management Practices and include sitespecific mitigations that will be

developed for this analysis.

Details by Drainage

281 Gulch: Progressive digging would

continue in the two forks to the

confluence of the East and West Forks.

Digging would then continue on the

main fork of 281 to Road 447.

Overburden removal would be needed.

Garnet Gulch: The original parking

area for Pee Wee and NoName creeks

would be used for this drainage. The aframe would be located at the parking

area and a toilet facility installed. An

estimated 1⁄2 mile trail would be

constructed. Some overburden removal

may be necessary.

PeeWee and No Name Creeks: These

drainages have been recreational digging

areas previously and are known to have

high quality gemstones. At the time,

there was no equipment brought in to

remove overburden and it is believed

that there may be more resource

available. Development would include a

toilet facility but the parking and other

site space still exist. These two areas

shared parking areas. Overburden

removal is likely going to be necessary.

Strom Gulch: Parking, the a-frame and

toilet may be developed on the upper

road (Rd. 1487) or this site would utilize

the facilities for Pee Wee and NoName

Creeks. No overburden removal is

expected.

Wood Creek: parking and a site for the

a-frame and toilet would be developed.

Some overburden removal may be

necessary.

Lease Application

(2) The pending lease application (ID

29529) for gemstones on Bechtel Butte

would be approved. This entails the

following: 5 to 6 pits 15 feet in diameter;

one backhoe trench 100 feet long by 20

feet wide and 8 feet deep on the ridge;

a bobcat excavator would be used to fill

in and dig smaller trenches (T42N, R1E,

Sections 9, 10, 15 & 16). It is expected

that these activities would begin in 2002

and continue through 2007.

Prospecting Permits

Prospecting permits also suggest that

there could be further development

applied for in the form of a lease

application. In order to perform an

efficient analysis, for some of the

permits we are assuming subsequent

21732 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2001 / Notices

development as long as analysis shows

that it can be done within relevant laws

and regulations. When or if a lease

application is filed, then another NEPA

decision would be required but it is

likely that much of the pre-work would

be complete with this document.

(3) The ending prospecting permit

applications (ID 31439, 31440, 31441,

31442, 31443, 31444) and prospecting

permit extension (ID 29619) would be

approved. Specifically this entails three

backhoe trenches.

For the area under these permits, ID

31439–31444 and 29619, the following

subsequent development is assumed:

National Forest lands along the East

and West Forks of Emerald Creek would

be developed for mining garnet sands.

This would include the wider and more

accessible portions of the East Fork from

the west line of T24N, R1E, Section 18

(between Flat Creek and Strom Gulch)

to near the confluence of the East and

West Forks of Emerald Creek. Some

portions of Road 447 would be removed

for mining and replaced afterward,

which would result in a temporary reroute around mining operations. Some

portions of the creek channel would be

temporarily relocated for mining and

then rebuilt. A similar mining scenario

would take place in the West Fork on

approximately 25 acres (1⁄2) mile of

stream). The West Fork operations

would begin at the upstream end and

take two summer seasons beginning in

the year 2003. The East Fork operations

would begin at the upstream end of the

creek and would last for a total of 7–10

years starting in the year 2003. West

Fork location: T43N, R1E, Section 33

and T42N, R1E, Section 4. East Fork

locations: T24N, R1W, Sections 13 and

14; T42N, R1E, Sections 3, 8, 9, 17, and

18.

Other areas would be explored for

possible future mining development.

However, the probability of mining

activity here is less certain and will not

be analyzed at this time. Any

development of these drainages would

likely be applied for after the mining in

the East and West Forks is complete.

(4) The pending prospecting permit

application (ID 33036/amended

application (4/2/2001)) for garnet

gemstones would be approved. This

entails hand-dug trenches in a tributary

to Cat Spur Creek. No assumptions for

further development will be made at

this time. (T42N, R2E, Section 19).

(5) The pending prospecting permit

application (ID 32421) for garnet sands

on Bechtel Butte would be approved.

This entails three hand-dug trenches 10

ft. × 12 ft. (T42N, R1E, Sections 9, 10,

15, 16).

Lease Renewal

(6) The pending lease renewal

applications (ID 016415 & 25554) would

be approved. This would include

development and mining for garnet

sands on approximately 8.0 acres in

Section 9 on the East Fork of Emerald

Creek; these operations would likely

occur in the last third of the 7–10 year

mining period for mining the East Fork.

The remaining areas of the lease have

already been mined and reclaimed.

(T42N, R1E, Section 9).

Conditions & Reclamation

(7) The conditions and reclamation

requirements under which any

recreational and commercial garnet

mining could be implemented would be

developed.

Forest Plan Amendment and Other

Agency Permits

It is possible that this proposal would

require a non-significant Forest Plan

amendment regarding mining

development.

The proposed action allows for

commercial leasing of gemstones and

sands, which requires permit approval

and implementation by the Bureau of

Land Management. Project

implementation with floodplains would

require Corps of Engineers Permits (404

permits).

Issues

We expect that maintaining fish and

water quality will be issues of primary

importance. Also, we expect that

whether or not to maintain recreational

digging areas is likely to be an issue.

Other issues will be developed during

this scoping period. A likely alternative

to the proposed action could be to allow

recreational digging only and not allow

commercial leasing of gemstone garnets.

Public Involvement

A scoping letter has been sent to

addresses on the mailing list in addition

to outreach to rockhound groups and

other interested parties. While public

participation is welcome at any time,

comments received during the 30-day

scoping comment period will be

especially useful in preparation of the

Draft EIS. News releases have been sent

out to the local and major newspapers

in northern Idaho. This project is also

listed on the Idaho Panhandled National

Forest web site (www.fs.fed.us/ipnf);

pertinent documents will be displayed

on this site. In addition, 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. It is

the reviewer’s obligation to comment

during the scoping and/or DEIS review.

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 (1973). 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 Amgoon 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: April 16, 2001.

Pat Aguilar,

Acting Forest Supervisor, Idaho Panhandle

National Forests.

[FR Doc. 01–10812 Filed 4–30–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M