[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21731-21732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10812]


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

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:
    <bullet> Respond to public interest in developing the mineral 
resource, while conserving the garnet resource for future generations.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> 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 site-
specific 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 a-frame 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

[[Page 21732]]

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 re-route 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.  x  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