Jump to main content.

Baylor Park Timber Blowdown Analysis, White River National Forest; Garfield County, CO

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 [Federal Register: February 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 29)]
[Notices]
[Page 6979-6981]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11fe00-37]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Baylor Park Timber Blowdown Analysis, White River National
Forest; Garfield County, CO

AGENCY:  Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION:  Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS).

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

SUMMARY:  The Baylor Park Area was affected by a windthrow event that
blew down Engelmann spruce, subalpine fir, and aspen trees on about
2,000-3,000 acres, on August 18th, 1999. The affected area is located
on the Sopris and Rifle Range Districts of the White River National
Forest. The area contains mature and overmature Engelmann spruce and
with an endemic population of spruce beetle. The purpose of and need
for this project is to treat the blowdown and damaged area to prevent
and control insect infestations. The spruce beetle is the most serious
pest of Engelmann spruce. It is restricted largely to mature and
overmature spruce, and epidemics have occurred throughout history. One
of the most damaging outbreaks was in Colorado from 1939 to 1951, when
beetles killed nearly 6 billion board feet of standing spruce. Damaging
attacks have been largely associated with extensive windthrow, where
downed trees provided an ample food supply for a rapid buildup of
beetle populations. The beetle progeny then emerge to attack living
trees, but if downed material is

[[Page 6980]]

not available, then standing trees may be attacked. Large, overmature
trees are attacked first, but if an infestation persists, beetles will
attack and kill smaller trees after the large trees in the stand are
killed.
    Proposed Action is to remove and/or treat damaged or windthrown
trees, by use of salvage sales and other treatment methods. Other
treatment methods include but are not limited to: bark peeling, pile
and burning and prescribed fire, to reduce the risk of insect
infestation outbreaks. In addition, the proposal would salvage or treat
Engelmann spruce trees affected by spruce beetles in the analysis area.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement to determine to what extent, if any,
that timber sale salvage operations or other methods of treatment, of
Engelmann spruce, sub alpine fir and aspen are to occur.

DATE:  Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received
in writing on or before March 13, 2000.

ADDRESSES:  Send written comments to Richard L. Doak, Acting District
Ranger, Sopris Ranger District, White River National Forest, PO Box
309, Carbondale, CO 81623. The Forest Supervisor Martha J. Ketelle,
P.O. Box 948, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 is the Responsible Official
for the Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Janice Spencer, Project Coordinator,
White River National Forest, P.O. Box 948, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Due to the difficulty in performing cultural
surveys, the close proximity of wetlands, and potential of a roadless
area entry to treat the down and damaged timber, An Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) is required as per Forest Service Handbook
1909.15, Section 20.6. The intent of the EIS is to determine to what
extent, if any, that timber sale salvage operations or other methods of
treatment, of Engelmann spruce, subalpine fir and aspen are to occur.
These trees were damaged during a wind event that occurred on August
18, 1999 in the Baylor Park area. The blowdown occurred over an area of
approximately 2,000-3,000 acres on the Sopris and Rifle Ranger
Districts of the White River National Forest. The proposed action will
be consistent with programmatic management direction contained in the
Rocky Mountain Regional Guide for Standards and Guidelines (1983) and
in the Land and Resource Management Plan for the White River National
Forest (LMP, 1984). The LMP allocated the proposed timber sale area to
wood fiber production and utilization of sawtimber products, with a
small portion of the sale area being allocated to be managed for
rangeland improvement and livestock grazing. All of the allocations
allow for timber harvest to occur.
    Based on internal Forest Service scoping, the preliminary issues
include the effects of the proposed action on: area wildlife and
wildlife habitat, recreation use and visual quality, watershed quality,
wetland management, cultural resources, risk of insect infestation
outbreaks, wildfire risk, and the transportation system--including
possible entry into a roadless area.
    Preliminary alternatives include, but are not limited to:
    1. No Action, existing management activities under the current
Forest Plan will continue.
    2. The proposed action is to remove and/or treat damaged or
windthrown trees, by use of salvage sales and other treatment methods,
such as bark peeling, pile and burning and prescribed fire, in order to
reduce the risk of insect infestation outbreaks. In addition, the
proposal would salvage or treat Englemann spruce trees affected by
spruce beetles in the analysis area.
    3. Live timber will be harvested above that which was damaged, to
treat all of the stands within the affected blowndown and damaged area
for both silvicultural and economic reasons.
    Alternatives will be carefully examined for their potential impacts
on the physical, biological, and social environments so that tradeoffs
are apparent to the decision maker. The decisions to be made by the
Forest Supervisor, based on the pending analysis to be documented in
this EIS are: Should the blowdown and damaged trees in the Baylor Park
area be treated to reduce possible spruce beetle infestation? And, if
so: Should road construction be allowed for timber harvest in this
area? How will cultural resources be best protected?
    Permits and licenses required to implement the proposed action
will, or may, include the following: Consultation with U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service for compliance with Section 7 of the Threatened &
Endangered Species Act; review from the Colorado Division of Wildlife,
consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers, and clearance from the
Colorado State Historic Preservation Office. Public participation will
be fully incorporated into preparation of the EIS. The first step is
the scoping process, during which the Forest Service will be seeking
information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local
agencies, and other individuals or groups who may be interested or
affected by the proposed action. Public comments received during
initial scoping for this project will be incorporated into this EIS.
The Forest Service predicts the draft environmental impact statement
will be filed during the summer of 2000 and the final environmental
impact statement and record of decision during the winter of 2000. The
comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be
forty-five 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
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 (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, 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 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.)

[[Page 6981]]

    Dated: February 2, 2000.
Martha J. Ketelle,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-3265 Filed 2-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-BW-M

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.