![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Little Bear-Wilson Timber Sale, Gallatin National Forest, Gallatin County, MT
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: April 12, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 19735-19736]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12ap00-24]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
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.
========================================================================
[[Page 19735]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Little Bear-Wilson Timber Sale, Gallatin National Forest,
Gallatin County, MT
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service intends to prepare an environmental impact
statement to document the analysis and disclose the environmental
impacts of a proposed action to manipulate forest vegetation on about
500 acres. This area lies about 13 miles south of Bozeman, Montana.
The proposed action would harvest timber on about 500 acres. The
purpose of this timber harvest is to provide revenue to facilitate the
funding of land exchanges as directed in the Gallatin Land
Consolidation Act of 1998 (PL 105-267). Approximately 2.5 miles of
temporary roads will be constructed to facilitate removal of wood
products. These temporary roads will be obliterated following post-
harvest activities. Approximately 3.8 miles of existing road will be
reconstructed. As estimated 50 to 100 miles of existing road will be
closed to use by passenger vehicle (highway vehicles greater than 50
inches wide). Watershed restoration treatments would depend on the
individual road conditions but could include road closures by using
gates, berms or other barriers; installing water bars, removing
culverts, ripping/seeding/slashing, and in a few segments,
recontouring. Some roads may be converted to trails. All main roads
which have been historically open to the public, such as Little Bear
road, would remain open to motorized use. Where consistent with the
purpose of providing land exchange revenues, treatments to improve the
visual quality altered by past clearcutting will be used.
DATES: Initial comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be
received in writing no later than May 12, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Jan Lerum, District Ranger, 3710
Fallon Street, Suite C, Bozeman, MT 59718. The responsible official is
David P. Garber, Forest Supervisor, Gallatin National Forest.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marsha Hollander, Project Leader,
Bozeman Ranger District, at (406) 522-2558.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: No clearcutting or permanent road
construction is proposed. About 257 acres to be harvested in which 85%
of the mature trees are cut and 15% left. About 156 acres to be
harvested in which 60% of the mature trees are cut and 40% left. About
59 acres to be harvested in which 50% of the mature trees are cut and
50% left. About 28 acres to be harvested in which 90% of the mature
trees are cut and 10% left. Site-specific, forest plan amendments may
be proposed for visual quality, road Density and vegetation structural
diversity standards.
The project area is located in the Little Bear, Big Bear, Wilson,
and Jack Creek drainages (specifically, T3S, R5E, Section 32; T4S, R4E,
Sections 12, 16 and 24; and T4S, R5E, sections 4, 8, 14, 16, 18, 19 and
22, PMM). The scope of this proposal is limited to timber harvest, post
harvest regeneration treatments, area improvements, road restoration
and related mitigation requirements within the project area.
Public participation is important to this analysis. Part of the
goal of public involvement is to identify additional issues and to
refine the general, tentative issues. A scoping notice describing the
project was mailed to those who requested information on timber harvest
activities on the Gallatin National forests. The United States Fish and
Wildlife Service will be consulted concerning effects to threatened and
endangered species.
Preliminary issues identified by Forest Service specialists include
effects to water quality, sensitive, threatened, and endangered
wildlife species habitat, big game security, sensitive fish species
habitat, visual quality, recreational access, old growth forests, and
timber sale revenue. The analysis will consider all reasonably
foreseeable activities.
People may visit with Forest Service officials at any time during
the analysis and prior to the decision. Two periods are specifically
designated for comments on the analysis: (1) During the scoping process
and (2) during the draft EIS period.
During the scoping process, the Forest Service is seeking
information and comments from Federal, State and local agencies and
other individuals or organization who may be interested in or affected
by the proposed action. The agency invites written comments and
suggestions on this action, particularly in terms of identification of
issues and alternative development.
The draft EIS should be available for review in August, 2000. The
final EIS is scheduled for completion in January, 2001.
The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the date
the Environmental Protection Agency 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, reviewers of
the draft environmental impact statement 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. Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v.
Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338, (E.D. Wis. 1980) Because of these
court rulings, it is 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
[[Page 19736]]
as possible. It is 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.
The responsible official will make the decision on this proposal
after considering comments and responses, environmental consequences
discussed in the final EIS, and applicable laws, regulations, and
policies. The decision and reasons for the decision will be documented
in a Record of Decision.
Dated: March 24, 2000.
David P. Garber,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-9015 Filed 4-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M