![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Helena National Forest, Montana Travel Management Plan for the South Belts, Divide, and Blackfoot Project Areas
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: April 18, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 75)]
[Notices]
[Page 19185-19187]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18ap03-28]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Helena National Forest, Montana Travel Management Plan for the
South Belts, Divide, and Blackfoot Project Areas
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice of Intent (NOI) describes the Helena National
Forest's proposal to revise the existing travel management on National
Forest System lands in the South Belts, Divide, and Blackfoot project
areas. The decisions to be made focus on what routes (both motorized
and non-motorized) will be open or restricted depending on other
resource needs. Signing or other physical structure will be used to
implement the decision to reach chosen management objective. No route
obliterations or relocations will be analyzed under this decision.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
by May 15, 2003. The draft environmental impact statement is expected
late June 2003 and the final environmental impact statement is expected
April 2004.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Kimberly Delgado-Public Affairs
Officer c/o Helena National Forest, 2880 Skyway Drive, Helena, MT
59602.
For further information contact Chuck Neal-Forest Travel Planner or
call at (406) 449-5201.
If you prefer, a ``scoping'' letter is available on the Web at r1_
Helena_webmaster@fs.fed.us. You can submit comments at this location
by typing on the subject line ``Attention Public Affairs Officer.''
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Forest wide travel management planning update originally was
proposed in November 2000. Formal public involvement for that planning
effort began with the publication of the NOI to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement in the Federal Register in December of
2000. A scoping letter describing that proposal was mailed to over
1,300 individuals and groups and public meetings were held in the
communities of Lincoln, Townsend, and Helena in December 2000.
In response to that NOI and scoping effort many letters, postcards,
e-mails, petitions, and maps were received commenting on the proposal.
A private contractor conducted a content analysis to identify the
issues and concerns and grouped them into main categories. This content
analysis was completed in March 2001. These responses are retained in
the record.
In 2001, a number of factors influenced the Helena National Forest
to set aside the 2000 Forest wide travel planning effort. These factors
included the requirements to complete a Forest Roads Analysis and the
need to place priority on restoration and timber salvage in response to
the severe fires of 2000.
An additional change that influenced the complexity of the 2000
Forest wide travel planning effort was the July 2001 off-highway
vehicle regulations affecting National Forests and BLM lands in
Montana, North Dakota, and portions of South Dakota. This direction
applies to all government lands where a site-specific travel plan has
not been implemented and restricts wheeled motorized travel to roads
and trails where evidence of motorized use existed at that time.
The Forest Wide Travel Plan of 2000 was rescinded in March of 2003
due to elapsed time since the appearance of the NOI in the Federal
Register and changed scope of the proposal.
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose for initiating this proposal is to have a network of
open roads and trails that addresses the need for a variety of
vehicular and non-vehicular use while meeting goals, objectives, and
standards for the multiple resources present within the project areas.
The Helena Forest Plan, signed in 1986, did not fully anticipate
the growing popularity of ATV's and snowmobiles. Subsequently, off-road
travel and user-created routes were increasing until the 2001 OHV
decision prohibited cross-country motorized travel. The decision
amended the Helena Forest Plan to eliminate this activity and further
directed the Forests to prioritize areas for subsequent site-specific
travel planning. Therefore, there is a need to update the Forest Travel
Plan to address both motorized and non-motorized uses.
The Helena National Forest visitor map displays 23 different time
blocks for restrictions. This makes understanding, implementing, and
enforcing the travel plan complex both for the users and the Forest
Service. Therefore, there is a need for a more clear, simplified travel
plan that is easier to understand and enforce.
Proposed Action
The Helena National Forest proposes to implement a travel plan for
the South Belts, Divide, and Blackfoot project areas that provides
motorized and non-motorized opportunities for both roads and trails.
Forest Plan goals, objectives, and standards for other resources were
key to the development of this proposed action such as providing
adequate seasonal habitat for wildlife and maintaining water quality.
The proposed action is summarized below. Site-specific, route-by-
route detail for each project area is available upon request. The
proposed action includes the following elements:
1. Motorized and non-motorized roads and trails are identified and
include the following four route types:
* Roads open to vehicles that meet the requirements of state laws,
* Motorized trails open to vehicles 50 inches wide or less,
* Non-motorized trails, and
* Snowmobile routes.
2. Potential ``connector'' local road or trail locations are
identified for possible future decisions.
3. Open and restricted routes and areas for snowmobiles are
delineated. Big game winter range areas are not open to snowmobile use;
however, designated snowmobile routes through winter range are
identified.
4. Vehicle access within 300 feet of an open, designated road is
allowed primarily to access dispersed camping sites and other uses as
long it does not result in unacceptable resource damage
[[Page 19186]]
such as rutting, crossing of wet meadows, or notable noxious weed
spread.
To protect resources, the proposed action features the flexibility
to restrict motorized use in the 300-foot zone in local situations if
unacceptable resource damage occurs.
5. Stream fording by motorized vehicles is not allowed unless it is
a part of a designated route (over snow vehicles are excluded from this
feature as long as a stream is frozen).
6. Three categories of restrictions have been applied to identified
routes. They are:
* October 15-December 1 (big game security),
* December 2-May 15 (winter range protection), and
* Yearlong.
Unique situations generating a need to temporarily modify the
travel plan will use special orders or other methods on a case-by-case
basis. These may include but are not limited to spring thaw, game
retrieval, Grizzly Bear emergence, calving areas, firewood gathering,
and non-ambulatory disabled access.
7. Off-route travel with respect to wheeled motorized vehicles is
restricted per the 2001 State-wide OHV decision or as otherwise
described in this proposed action.
8. Canada lynx conservation strategy has been applied resulting in
no net increase in designated and/or groomed over-the-snow routes and
snowmobile play areas in lynx habitat (generally higher elevation
spruce/fir forest).
9. Access to private land holding within the National Forest
Boundary was considered in developing the proposed action.
10. Routes with mixed traffic (street-legal and non-street-legal
and licensed and unlicensed drivers) have been identified and typically
are short segments. Some of these situations may be a mix of highway
vehicles with ORVs or snowmobiles. These potential shared uses are
highlighted to heighten the awareness to users of these routes. This
shared use will be addressed as an administrative decision and is
therefore not appealable within this process.
11. Routes that are open for motorized use, restricted yearlong, or
restricted seasonally will be signed accordingly. Sites that have
unique concerns or high resource values at risk, such as a bald eagle
nest site, will be gated to increase closure effectiveness. Existing
gates will continue to be used where appropriate.
12. To guide decisions about access to private lands that are
located within the National Forest Boundary, the proposed action
includes guidelines that consider private landowner needs as well as
protection of resources on the National Forest System lands.
This proposal may not meet all Forest Plan standards such as
wildlife security direction. These potential concerns will be fully
analyzed in the EIS. If not fully compliant with the Forest Plan,
appropriate actions will be taken; e.g. modify the alternative or
propose site-specific Forest Plan amendments.
Project Area Descriptions
South Belts: The South Belts project area includes federal land
administered by the USDA Forest Service from Mt. Boulder-Baldy near
Confederate Gulch south to the Dry Creek watershed, west to the Forest
boundary to other ownership and east to the Forest boundary to other
ownership.
Divide: The Divide project area includes federal lands administered
by the USDA Forest Service. It includes those National Forest system
lands within the 10-Mile Creek drainage and the Little Blackfoot River
drainage. Also included are those Federal lands that lie north of State
Highway 12 to the Helena Ranger District-Lincoln Ranger District
boundary near Nevada Mountain. The portion of the Helena Ranger
District that lies within the Little Prickly Pear drainage is excluded
from this analysis.
Blackfoot: The Blackfoot project area includes federal land
administered by the USDA Forest Service. It includes the Helena
National Forest Boundary north of the Scapegoat Wilderness, south to
the Lincoln and Helena Ranger District boundary near Nevada Mountain,
west to the Lolo National Forest boundary and east over the Continental
Divide.
Responsible Official
The decisionmaker for these three project areas is the Forest
Supervisor for the Helena National Forest.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
Incorporated in the following decisions is Forest Plan direction in
providing a range of quality recreation, including motorized and non-
motorized opportunities while implementing multiple Forest land and
resource objectives and visitors' needs. The key decision points will
include the following:
* Which roads, trails, and areas are appropriate for which types of
public motorized and non-motorized use?
* Which roads, trails, and areas would have seasonal restrictions
to protect wildlife or other resources?
* Whether or not a Forest Plan amendment(s) would be required?
The identified travel corridor connectors for local route systems
will be evaluated and analyzed for future site-specific decisions.
Scoping Process
There are several options for you and/or your organization to make
comments and participate in the process.
1. If you have substantive comments to the proposed action, please
request a scoping package where you may fill out the attached Comment
Sheet and return it to us. Your substantive comment must be specific to
this proposed action to be helpful in this process. If possible, typed
comments are most readily scanned for content identification purposes
and comments can also be e-mailed, using the same general outline as
the comment sheet, to: r1_helena_webmaster@fs.fed.us. In the subject
line at this site, please include the following: Attention Public
Affairs Officer.
2. Information about the Forest Travel Plan, including this scoping
statement and the comment sheet, will be posted on the Helena National
Forest Web site at http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/helena/projects. 
Information will be on the Web site by April 21, 2003.
3. There will be some public meetings in June and July of 2003.
Please contact this office for specifics.
Your substantive response will be included in this analysis
process. Your response should be specific and include reasons why you
feel it should be considered. The key or significant responses will be
used to formulate alternatives, prescribe mitigation measures, or be
analyzed in environmental effects.
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement will be
prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental
impact statement will begin in July of 2003 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 (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
[[Page 19187]]
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 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.
Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal
and will be available for public inspection.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook
1909.15, Section 21)
Dated: April 14, 2003.
Allen L. Christophersen,
Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-9571 Filed 4-17-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P