This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

16596

Vol. 60, No. 62

Friday, March 31, 1995

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service

Committee of Nine; Meeting

In accordance with the Federal

Advisory Committee Act of October 6,

1972, (Public Law 92–463, 86 Stat. 770–

776), the Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service

announces the following meeting:

Name: Committee of Nine.

Date and Time: May 9, 1995, 1:00 p.m.—

5:00 p.m.; May 10, 1995, 8:30 a.m.—5:00

p.m.; May 11, 1995, 8:30 a.m.—Noon.

Place: USDA, CSREES, 14th &

Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 3854

South Building, Washington, D.C. 20250.

Type of Meeting: Open to the public.

Persons may participate in the meeting as

time and space permit.

Comments: The public may file written

comments before or after the meeting with

the contact person listed below.

Purpose: To evaluate and recommend

proposals for cooperative research on

problems that concern agriculture in two or

more States, and to make recommendations

for allocation of regional research funds

appropriated by Congress under the Hatch

Act for research at the State Agricultural

Experiment Stations.

Contact person for Agenda and more

information: Dr. Walter R. Woods, Executive

Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Cooperative State Research, Education, and

Extension Service, 14th & Independence

Avenue, S.W., Room 3341, South Building,

Washington, D.C. 20250, Telephone: 202–

720–4088.

Done at Washington, D.C., this 21st day of

March 1995.

William D. Carlson,

Acting Administrator, Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension Service.

[FR Doc. 95–7963 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–22–M

Forest Service

Notice of Intent to Prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement to

Amend the Land and Resource

Management Plan for the Toyable

National Forest Spring Mountains

National Recreation Area

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement.

Preparation of a general management

plan for the Spring Mountains National

Recreation area as an amendment to the

Toiyabe National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan (Forest

Plan); Toiyabe National Forest; Spring

Mountains National Recreation Area;

Clark and Nye Counties, Nevada.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Spring

Mountains National Recreation Area Act

(P.L. 103–63) and 36 CFR 219.10(f), the

Forest Supervisor for the Toiyabe

National Forest gives notice of the

agency’s intent to prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS)

for the decision to prepare a general

management plan for the Spring

Mountains National Recreation Area

(SMNRA) as an amendment to the Land

and Resource Management Plan for the

Toiyabe National Forest. This

amendment would make specific

changes in the Forest Plan, as it applies

to the SMNRA. This notice includes a

summary of the proposed changes to the

Forest Plan, a description of the need for

these changes, and a brief description of

preliminary issues and potential

alternatives to the proposed

amendment. This notice also provides

estimated dates for filing the draft and

final EIS; information on future public

involvement; the name and address of

the responsible official; and the name of

the person who can provide additional

information.

DECISION TO BE MADE: The Spring

Mountains National Recreation Area is

currently managed under three separate

land management plans, developed

independently by different agencies

under different authorities and

legislation. One of these is the Forest

Plan, which also provides direction for

the rest of the 4.5 million acre Toiyabe

National Forest. Public Law 103–63

directs the Forest Service to ‘‘develop a

general management plan for the

Recreation Area as an amendment to the

Toiyabe National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plan.’’

In January, 1995, the Forest Service

released the Analysis of the

Management Situation for the SMNRA.

This document reviews the best

available information on the ecosystems

and users of the Spring Mountains, and

identifies the need for change in current

management direction. Through the

process of environmental analysis, the

Forest Service will decide whether or

not to amend the Forest Plan to address

needs for change identified in the

Analysis of the Management Situation.

Changes are needed to:

—Meet the direction established in the

Spring Mountains National Recreation

Area Act;

—Improve ecosystem health and

sustainability by protecting riparian

areas, biodiversity hotspots, habitat

for threatened, endangered, and

candidate species, and soil and water

quality;

—Establish standards and guidelines to

protect heritage resources, wilderness

characteristics, scenic values, and

other resources affecting the public

use and enjoyment of the land;

—Respond to population growth and

development in Las Vegas and

southern Nevada, and changes in

public sentiment regarding

management of the Spring Mountains;

—Identify opportunities for sustainable

recreational use and development;

—Provide management direction for

lands transferred to the Forest Service

under the Nevada Enhancement Act

of 1988;

—Establish ecosystem management as

the organizing philosophy for

management of the SMNRA;

—Identify goals, objectives, and desired

future conditions for each ecological

unit of the SMNRA;

—Respond to changes in law and

direction in the eight years since the

Forest Plan was approved; and

—Establish a program of monitoring and

evaluation to support adaptive

management of the SMNRA.

The proposed amendment would not

make any changes in Forest-wide

direction, or in management of other

portions of the Toiyabe National Forest.

No irreversible or irretrievable

commitment of resources (site-specific

actions) will be made as a result of this

decision. The Forest Plan is a

programmatic document; projects to
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices 16597

implement it will involve site-specific

environmental analysis and appropriate

documentation.

DATES: The agency expects to file the

draft EIS (DEIS) with the Environmental

Protection Agency and make it available

for public comment by November, 1995.

The agency expects to file the final EIS

by July, 1996.

MEETINGS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT:

Based on public recommendations,

scientific analysis, and the Analysis of

the Management Situation, the Toiyabe

National Forest has prepared a proposed

amendment to the Forest Plan for

consideration. The Forest Service

invites comments and suggestions from

Federal, State and local agencies,

American Indian tribes, individuals,

and organizations on issues concerning

the effects of this proposal. The agency

has scheduled public meetings to

present and discuss the proposed Forest

Plan amendment at:

—Monday, April 10, 7:30 pm, Public

Library, Mt. Charleston, NV.

—Tuesday, April 18, 7:00 pm, Chamber

of Commerce, Pahrump, NV.

—Tuesday, April 25, 6:00 pm, Cashman

Field mtg rms, Las Vegas, NV.

—Date to be arranged, Fire Station,

Mountain Springs, NV.

The purpose of these meetings is to

discuss the proposed changes to the

Forest Plan and to identify issues

associated with those changes. Written

comments are encouraged. Additional

meetings with individuals or groups

will be arranged by request.

The Forest has an extensive public

mailing list of interested and affected

people, developed during preparation of

the Analysis of the Management

Situation, with additions based on

participation at each meeting. The

Forest Service will continue to contact

everyone on the mailing list at each

stage of the planning process to provide

information and solicit input. Those

interested in being added to the mailing

list should call or write to the address

below.

In addition, the Forest has continuing

contact with federal, state and local

agencies such as the Nevada Division of

Wildlife, the Nevada Division of State

Parks, the Bureau of Land Management,

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the

State Historic Preservation Office, the

Clark County Planning Commission,

and Congressional representatives.

These agencies, governments and

contacts will continue to be part of the

planning effort.

Additional public meetings will be

scheduled in June to develop a wide

range of alternatives to the Proposed

Amendment which address the needs

identified in the Analysis of the

Management Situation, and respond to

the significant issues.

Comments will be of most use to the

planning team if received before August,

1995. Refer to the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT in this notice for

the contact individual.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry

Ingersoll, Planning Team Leader, Spring

Mountains National Recreation Area,

2881 S. Valley View, Suite 16, Las

Vegas, NV 89102. (702) 873–8800.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: The Forest

Supervisor for the Toiyabe National

Forest, located at 1200 Franklin Way,

Sparks, NV 89431, is the Responsible

Official and deciding official for this

action. The Forest Supervisor may

delegate this responsibility to an

Assistant Forest Supervisor in Las

Vegas.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Forest

planning is a dynamic process that

builds upon new information and

conditions developed since adoption of

a Forest Plan. Forest Plans may be

amended as needed. The adoption of a

Forest Plan sets key decisions for the

long-term management of a National

Forest. These decisions can be described

as:

—Establishment of forest-wide multipleuse goals and objectives (36 CFR

219.11(b));

—Establishment of forest-wide

management requirements, or

standards and guidelines (36 CFR

219.13);

—Establishment of management area

direction (prescriptions and

associated standards and guidelines)

applying to each specific management

area (36 CFR 219.11(c));

—Designation of lands suited or not

suited for timber production and

other resource management activities

(36 CFR 219.14, 219.15, 219.20 and

219.21);

—Establishment of monitoring and

evaluation requirements (36 CFR

219.11(d)); and

—Recommendations to Congress for the

establishment of Wilderness, Wild

and Scenic Rivers, Research Natural

Areas, and other special designations,

as appropriate.

This proposed Forest Plan

amendment is limited in scope. Changes

are proposed in management area

direction, suitability for resource

management, monitoring, and

recommendations for special

designations for the Spring Mountains

National Recreation Area (less than 10%

of the land area of the Toiyabe National

Forest). The proposed amendment

would make no changes in forest-wide

goals or standards, or in management

direction for any other lands on the

Toiyabe National Forest.

The amendment process began with

the development of an Analysis of the

Management Situation (AMS) for the

Spring Mountains National Recreation

Area (36 CFR 219.12(e)), which was

distributed on January 17, 1995. The

AMS:

—reflects the results of scientific

inventories and surveys;

—compiles public sentiment and

suggestions;

summarizes relevant law, regulation,

and policy; and

identifies the need for change in current

management.

The AMS brings together the best

available scientific information to

document the conditions and trends of

ecosystems and human uses in the

Spring Mountains. The public was

involved in identifying the need for

changes to the Forest Plan, and many

groups worked closely with the

planning team to develop the AMS.

Between May, 1994, and January, 1995,

the Forest Service held eight open

houses and public meetings, made more

than sixty presentations to groups and

individuals, and solicited ideas from

more than 600 people. Copies of the

AMS may be obtained by contacting the

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION contact

identified previously.

Based upon the needs for change

identified in the AMS, the Forest

Service is proposing specific changes to

the long-term management direction for

the Spring Mountains National

Recreation Area. The public is invited to

comment on the proposed changes and

to identify alternatives to the proposal

which address the needs identified in

the AMS.

Proposed Action

The Forest Service proposes to

provide new management direction for

the Spring Mountains National

Recreation Area, one of five districts on

the Toiyabe National Forest. The

proposal would:

—designate two new management areas

and realign one more to encompass

lands acquired through the

Enhancement Act;

—unify management direction for the

SMNRA under a single management

plan;

—provide new management

prescriptions for the SMNRA,

including goals, objectives, desired

future condition, standards, and

guidelines for each of the four

management areas involved;

—expand the Carpenter Canyon

Research Natural Area to provide
16598 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices

additional protection for the unique

resources of Carpenter Canyon;

—establish a program of monitoring and

evaluation specific to the SMNRA;

and

—identify opportunities for sustainable

recreational use and development.

The full text of the Proposed

Amendment to the Forest Plan is being

distributed to the Forest Service’s

mailing list of potentially interested and

affected parties. Copies are available

upon request from the Spring

Mountains National Recreation Area

Planning Team. See FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT above.

This proposal represents a starting

point for discussion; the Forest Service

will consider all reasonable alternatives

to the proposed Forest Plan amendment,

including no action (leaving

management direction as it is). Public

comment on this proposal will be used

to develop alternatives to the proposed

action. The responsible official may

select any alternative developed through

this process as the management plan for

the SMNRA; the proposed amendment

will not necessarily be the preferred

alternative.

Purpose and Need/Amendment Topics

Not every issue related to Forest

Service management is best addressed

through the Forest Plan. Public

comment, monitoring of current

activities, and direction from the Spring

Mountains National Recreation Area Act

led to the identification of many topics

which might lend themselves to Forest

Service action. These topics were

categorized as follows:

—Amendment Topics

—Implementation Topics

—Topics outside the jurisdiction of the

Forest Service

—Administrative Topics

—Research Topics

Amendment topics are identified and

discussed below. Only those topics

which fall into this category are

addressed in the proposed Forest Plan

amendment.

Implementation topics are those

where the existing Forest Plan is

adequate, but there have been problems

with implementation of the Plan. One

example is use of motor vehicles in the

Mr. Charleston Wilderness. Motor

vehicles are clearly prohibited in the

Wilderness by the Wilderness Act of

1964, the Nevada Wilderness Act, and

the Forest Plan. Nevertheless, some use

continues to occur, especially at Trough

Spring and Wallace Canyon, where old

roads cross the Wilderness boundary.

This problem is being addressed

through placement of barriers (boulders,

earth mounds) in road beds, and

increased law enforcement.

Topics outside the jurisdiction of the

Forest Service include those where the

Forest Service does not have authority

to act. These topics include issues

involving private land or land under the

management of other federal agencies

(such as the BLM). Some people in the

Mt. Charleston area, for example, are

concerned over development of

additional lots in Kyle Canyon. This is

a proper subject for Clark County, but

not for the Forest Service, which has no

jurisdiction over private land.

Administrative topics are those which

relate to budget, personnel, or

administrative procedures, rather than

land management. These are topics

which can be addressed through the

Forest Service directives system, and

which do not generally require

environmental analysis. Examples in

this category include fees charged by the

Forest Service for campground

reservations, group events, and other

special land uses. The Forest Service

sets these fees through administrative

direction, in accordance with existing

law and regulation.

Research topics are those where

additional information, through

research, is needed. Once research

topics are identified, they can be

investigated by the Forest Service’s

Intermountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station, or by public or

private universities. One example is the

need to learn more about the ecology of

the blackbrush community and its

successional pathways.

Amendment topics are those subjects

which can best be resolved by amending

the Forest Plan. These are also known

as ‘‘public issues, management

concerns, and resource use and

development opportunities’’ (36 CFR

219.12(b)). Through work with

interested publics, the Planning Team

identified the following fifteen

amendment topics in the Analysis of the

Management Situation.

• FOREST HEALTH/BIODIVERSITY—

The Spring Mountains provide a

unique and fragile ecosystem—an

island in the desert—which harbors

many endemic species of plants and

animals. As we have learned more

about ecosystem dynamics, and as

Las Vegas has grown, we have

become increasingly aware of

potential conflicts. The proposed

amendment includes goals,

objectives, and standards to assure

protection of ecological health and

diversity while providing for

sustainable recreation use and

development.

• THREATENED, ENDANGERED, AND

SENSITIVE SPECIES—The Spring

Mountains provide habitat for four

listed threatened and endangered

species, one species proposed for

listing, and 54 candidate species,

including 22 which occur nowhere

else in the world. Proposed

standards to protect these species

are needed to provide for recovery

of listed species, and to keep

candidate species from becoming

threatened or endangered. The

proposed amendment would

include a conservation agreement

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service which could provide a basis

for determinations not to list some

candidate species.

• WILDLIFE HABITAT—Wildlife of the

SMNRA includes native species

ranging from mule deer and desert

bighorn sheep to Palmers chipmunk

and chuckwalla. Several game

species have also been introduced

to the range, including elk, chukar,

and turkey. Wildlife populations

are managed by the Nevada

Division of Wildlife. Forest Plan

direction is needed, however, to

establish habitat management

objectives, and to set an appropriate

balance between native and nonnative species. Proposed objectives,

including Appropriate Management

Levels (AML’s) for elk, are needed

in order to provide direction for

habitat management, and for

improvements such as water

development.

• WILD HORSES AND BURROS—Wild

horses and burros on the SMNRA

are managed by the Forest Service

under the authority of the Wild

Horses and Burros Protection Act of

1971. Like elk, wild horses and

burros have been introduced to the

Spring Mountains, and are

maintained there to provide for

public enjoyment. In some areas of

the SMNRA, wild horse

populations have increased to the

point where riparian and spring

sites are affected; in other areas,

forage is so limiting that animal

condition is poor. Proposed

objectives, including Appropriate

Management Levels (AML’s) are

needed in order to provide

direction for management of habitat

and populations, and for

improvements such as water

development.

• ARCHAEOLOGY—Many places in the

AMNRA have been used by people

for thousands of years. Often, these

people have left behind evidence of

their use of the land, including

American Indian rock art and
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices 16599

roasting pits, historic cabins and

sawmills, and a section of the

Spanish Trail/Mormon Road. These

artifacts and sites offer us a glimpse

of our history and culture, and

provide a window on the dynamics

and use of the ecosystem. Proposed

management direction is needed to

protect these resources while also

allowing for appropriate

interpretation and enjoyment.

• RECREATION AND

ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES—

All of the developed recreation

facilities in the SMNRA are located

within the old ‘‘Developed

Canyons’’ management area—

15,500 acres in Kyle Canyon, Lee

Canyon, and Deer Creek. Most of

the fire and administrative facilities

of the SMNRA are in these same

canyons. In Cold Creek, heavy

recreation use occurs with very

limited service, facilities, or

management. Many people have

suggested dispersing recreation use

and facilities over a wider area; the

Nevada Division of State Parks

commissioned a 1991 study which

identified suitable areas for

cooperative development of state

park facilities. The Proposed

Amendment includes

determinations of suitability for

recreation development, as well as

standards and guidelines for

development and management of

recreation and administrative

facilities.

• WILDLAND/URBAN INTERFACE—

The SMNRA, and particularly the

developed canyons of the east

slope, are heavily influenced by

urban development centered in Las

Vegas. Four small communities are

located within the boundaries of the

SMNRA, and further subdivision

and development on private land is

likely. Semi-urban areas

surrounded by National Forest

System lands often present such

issues as fire suppression and

conflict with recreation users.

Standards are proposed to address

fire prevention and suppression,

scenic quality, water quality

degradation, and loss of wildlife

habitat in and around the wildland/

urban interface.

• SCENIC QUALITY—One of the

principal resources of the SMNRA,

and one of the main reasons for its

popularity, is the unique quality of

the area’s scenery. Cliffs, towering

ponderosa pines, ancient

bristlecones, meadows, and snowcovered peaks all form part of the

attraction of the Spring Mountains

to visitors. proposed visual quality

objectives are needed in order to

establish standards for management

activities which might affect scenic

quality.

• WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT—The

43,000 acre Mt. Charleston

Wilderness forms the core of the

Spring Mountains National

Recreation Area, and includes the

highest peaks in the range. The

Wilderness also includes most of

the bristlecone pine forests, and

many species of rare plants and

butterflies. Proposed standards and

guidelines for recreational use of

Wilderness are needed to protect

these fragile resources.

• RECREATION MANAGEMENT—In

addition to camping and picnicking

at developed recreation sites, many

people enjoy the SMNRA as a place

for sightseeing, horseback riding,

mountain biking, off-highway

vehicle use, rock climbing, cave

exploration, hiking, backpacking,

cross-country skiing, and group

outings. As the population of

southern Nevada grows, these uses

can cause damage to natural and

cultural features, and sometimes

conflict a bit. Proposed standards

are needed to provide direction for

management of these uses in a

sustainable manner, within the

capacity of the land.

• TRAILS—Of approximately 50 miles

of designated trails in the SMNRA,

less than 7 miles are outside the Mt.

Charleston Wilderness. Trail riding

opportunities for mountain bikes

and off-highway vehicles (which

are excluded from the Wilderness),

and for equestrians are limited. The

Spring Mountains offer a great deal

of potentially suitable terrain for

multiple-use trails, including

opportunities for development of

regional trail networks. Proposed

goals and standards for trail

development are needed to suggest

appropriate locations and

management for trails.

• MONITORING AND RESEARCH—

During preparation of the Analysis

of the Management Situation, the

Forest Service recognized many

fields in which information to

predict environmental effects is

limited. As the Spring Mountains

receive unprecedented levels of use,

how will ecosystem health and

function be affected? If we continue

to suppress fires, how will

vegetation and wildlife habitat

change? How is increasing

recreational use affecting historic

and prehistoric sites? Our

inventories have often left us with

more questions than they have

answered. The proposed program of

monitoring and research is needed

to assess the impacts of the

management courses we choose,

and to permit us to change course

if needed.

• LAND ACQUISITION AND

DISPOSAL—The boundaries of the

SMNRA include 315,648 acres of

national forest system land, and

7,171 acres of private land. The

Spring Mountains National

Recreation Area Act directs the

Forest Service to prepare ‘‘an

inventory of all lands within the

Recreation Act not presently

managed as National Forest lands

that will permit the Secretary to

evaluate possible future

acquisitions.’’ Land purchases and

exchanges are carried out on an

equal value basis with willing

buyers and sellers. Proposed

direction for land adjustment is

needed to identify which private

parcels are suitable for acquisition,

and which national forest parcels, if

any, are available for disposal.

• FIRE MANAGEMENT—With

increased subdivision and

development of private land within

the SMNRA boundaries,

management of wildfires assumes

importance beyond simply the

protection of national forest

resources. At the same time,

successful fire suppression can

often lead to dangerous buildups of

fuels, and may result in unwanted

changes in vegetation and wildlife

habitat. Proposed direction for fire

suppression, controlled burning,

and fuel reduction is needed in

order to retain the historic role of

fire in the ecosystem while

protecting lives, property, and

natural resources.

• PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENTS—From time to

time, the Forest Service receives

requests for private, commercial

developments or uses of national

forest system land. These may

include electronic sites and public

utilities, outfitter/guide uses,

competitive trail rides and other

group activities, and even

substantial commercial

developments. The Lee Canyon ski

area, the electronic sites on Angel

Peak and Mt. Potosi, and several

organizational camps are among the

most visible examples of such uses.

Proposed standards for special uses

are needed to assist Forest Service

managers in identifying which uses

are appropriate.
16600 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices

The Forest Service prepared the

proposed action as a starting point for

analysis and scoping. The proposed

action is one way to respond to the need

for change—to the above amendment

topics. The Forest Service will use

public comment on the proposal to

identify significant issues, and to

develop to wide range of alternative

solutions to address these needs.

Preliminary Issues

Through initial scoping, the Forest

Service has identified the following

issues relating to the effects of the

proposed Forest Plan amendment.

These are preliminary issues—

additional scoping and public

involvement will be used to refine and

add to this list to develop a complete

understanding of all significant issues

related to this proposal.

—UNCERTAIN EFFECTS TO

SENSITIVE SPECIES—For many rare

species of plants and animals, current

research and inventories are not

sufficient to identify whether existing

uses or alterations to the ecosystem

pose a threat to their existence. While

we can sometimes identify

‘‘biodiversity hotspots,’’ we do not

completely understand the critical

factors necessary to ensure their

protection. Scientists and others are

concerned that introduced species

(including wild horses and burros),

rock climbing, and proposed

expansion of recreational facilities

and trails, especially in Kyle and Lee

Canyons and the Wilderness, may

affect rare plants and animals in ways

which we do not fully understand.

—LIMITS TO RECREATIONAL USE—

The proposal would limit some

opportunities for recreational use of

the Spring Mountains. Proposed

restrictions on equestrian use above

timberline, rock climbing in the

Wilderness, expansion of the ski area

and other commercial developments,

closure of the Carpenter Canyon road,

and restrictions on development of

recreation facilities are, in some

peoples’ minds, contrary to the spirit

of a national recreation area. Some

people are concerned that the

proposed limits on recreational

activities go too far, unnecessarily

restricting public use within adequate

scientific basis.

—WILD HORSES AND BURROS—The

proposed amendment would set

appropriate management levels

(AML’s) for wild horses and burros.

Some people are concerned that the

proposed AML’s are unnecessarily

low, and many threaten the long-term

survival of these species in southern

Nevada by reducing genetic diversity.

This concern includes the cumulative

effects of other agencies’ actions in

managing wild horse and burro herds.

—ELK AND OTHER WILDLIFE—The

proposed amendment would set an

AML for elk, and restrict introduction

of new non-native species and

augmentation of existing species.

Some people believe that the

proposed restrictions on wildlife

habitat management will restrict

wildlife populations far below levels

that the ecosystem could support, and

will limit the ability of Nevadans to

view and hunt game and non-game

wildlife.

—CONTROLLED BURNING—The

proposed amendment would

encourage controlled burning in some

areas of the Spring Mountains under

certain specific conditions. Some

people are concerned that any

deliberately set fires could escape and

pose a risk to life and property. This

concern also includes the effects of

fire on vegetation, scenery, and

wildlife.

Preliminary Alternatives

The Forest Service will evaluate a

wide range of alternatives to the

proposed amendment to the Forest Plan,

in response to issues identified in the

scoping process. The agency expects to

consider at least the following

alternatives, which respond to

preliminary issues identified to date. As

new issues are identified through public

involvement, new alternatives may be

created, and existing alternatives

modified. Some of these preliminary

alternatives may not be analyzed in

detail. The Responsible Official may

select the original Proposed

Amendment or any of the alternatives to

it as the final management plan for the

Spring Mountains National Recreation

Area.

—Alternative A—Continue to manage

the Spring Mountains National

Recreation Area under current

management plans. Do not amend the

Forest Plan. This is the ‘‘no action’’

alternative.

—Alternative B—Maximize protection

of natural resources, heritage

resources, and ecosystem health.

When in doubt over effects, choose

standards which will involve the least

risk to rare species, natural ecological

processes, and heritage resource sites,

even if this involves closing many

areas or activities to recreational use.

Favor native species and natural

processes, but use prescribed fire to

mimic historic fire regime. Provide for

little or no expansion of recreation

opportunities. Close the Spring

Mountains Wild Horse Territory, and

place the horses for adoption or

remove them to other territories.

—Alternative C—Within the capacity of

the ecosystem, maximize

opportunities for recreation (both

developed and undeveloped) and

customer service, including trails.

roads, campgrounds, and other

facilities. This alternative would still

provide basic protection for

threatened and endangered species,

and would not permit activities which

endanger the long-term health of the

ecosystem. However, public uses

would not be prohibited or restricted

without hard scientific evidence that

they are harmful.

—Alternative D—Maintain the same

balance of protection and

development as the Proposed

Amendment, but provide for the

maximum sustainable populations of

wild horses and burros consistent

with maintaining ecosystem health.

Provide for water development and

other habitat improvements, and favor

wild horses over elk, other wildlife,

and recreation development.

—Alternative E—Maintain the same

balance of protection and

development as the Proposed

Amendment, but provide for the

maximum sustainable diversity and

productivity of wildlife habitat,

especially for game animals,

consistent with maintaining

ecosystem health. Encourage

introduction of new species which

show the potential to naturalize, as

appropriate. Provide for water

development and other habitat

improvements, and favor wildlife over

wild horses and recreation

development.

—Alternative F—Maintain the same

balance of protection and

development as the Proposed

Amendment, but do not use

controlled burns or allow natural fires

to burn. Suppress all wildfires

aggressively, and use only vegetative

treatments to minimize risk to

property from fire.

Public Comments on the Draft EIS

After the Draft Environmental Impact

Statement has been published, the

Forest Service will again be actively

seeking information, comments and

assistance from Federal, State and local

agencies and from individuals and

organizations who may be interested in

or affected by the proposed action. It is

very important that those interested in

this proposed action participate at that

time.

The DEIS and draft Forest Plan

amendment should be available for

public review by about November, 1995.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices 16601

After a comment period of 90 days, the

Final Environmental Impact Statement

and Forest Plan amendment should be

completed by September, 1996.

The comment period on the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement will

extend 90 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, 553 (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 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 90

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: March 17, 1995.

R.M. ‘‘Jim’’ Nelson,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95–7886 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

Environmental Impact Statement

Helicopter Landings in Wilderness,

Tongass National Forest, Alaska

AGENCY: Forst Service, USDA.

ACTION: Revised notice of intent to

prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS).

SUMMARY: The original notice of intent

to prepare an environmental impact

statement for helicopter landings in

Wilderness, Tongass National Forest,

Alaska was published in the August 31,

1994 Federal Register (pages 44964–

44965).

The purpose of this revised notice is

to clarify the scope of activities to be

analyzed in the helicopter landings in

wilderness EIS. The EIS will include all

helicopter access for recreational

purposes including tours, sightseeing,

guiding and other commercial

recreation purposes. The environmental

consequences of helicopter landing for

general public access will be addressed.

If helicopter landings are approved

within Tongass wildernesses, allocation

of those landings between commercial

visitor service providers and other

members of the public would be made

in a separate process.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Written comments

concerning the revised proposed action

to approve helicopter landing areas in

Tongass National Forest wilderness

should be received on or before May 1,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to

Bill Tremblay, Team Leader USDA

Forest Service, P.O. Box 309, Petersburg,

AK 99833.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions concerning the

environmental impact statement should

be directed to Bill Tremblay, Team

Leader, USDA Forest Service, P.O. Box

309, Petersburg, AK 99833, phone: (907)

772–3841.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

purpose of the project is to provide for

use of helicopters for general public

access where this use was established

prior to designation of Wilderness while

managing Tongass National Forest

wilderness to provide high quality

Wilderness opportunities. In this

context, general public access is for

activities such as hiking, camping,

photography, fishing, skiing,

sightseeing, guiding, and other

Wilderness-oriented forms of recreation.

The Regional Forester, Phil Janik, will

decide whether to allow helicopter

landings for access in areas that were

used prior to Wilderness designation. If

helicopter landings are approved, the

Regional Forester will decide which

areas will be designated and what

restrictions, if any, will be established.

Issuance of the final environmental

impact statement is projected in the

spring of 1996. The Responsible official

for the decision is Phil Janik, Regional

Forester, Alaska Region, P.O. Box

21628, Juneau Alaska, 99802–1628.

Dated: March 22, 1995.

Phil Janik,

Regional Forester.

[FR Doc. 95–7888 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M

Sequoia National Forest; California

Spotted Owl DEIS

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces an

open house in which the public is

invited to participate in an information

exchange regarding alternatives being

considered in the California Spotted

Owl Draft Environmental Impact

Statement, as they affect the Sequoia

National Forest area.

DATES AND TIME: April 11, from 7:00 p.m.

to 9:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Springville Veterans

Memorial Building, 35944 Highway 190,

Springville, CA 93265.

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION: Judy Schutza, Hot Springs

Ranger District, Route 4, Box 548,

California Hot Springs, CA 93207, (805)

548–6503.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Forest

Service has released a Draft

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)

to amend the Pacific Southwest

Regional Guide Sierran Province Forest

Plans with new management direction

for the California Spotted Owl. The

purpose of this meeting is to exchange

information with the public regarding

the Draft Environmental Impact

Statement and the preferred alternative.

The meeting will be informally

structured. A member of the team that

prepared the DEIS will be available to

answer questions and discuss the DEIS.

Visual media depicting the alternatives

and selected environmental

consequences will be displayed.

March 27, 1995.

Linda C. Brett,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 95–7907 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M