Jump to main content.

Revised Southeast Geographic Area Rangeland Allotment Management Plans on Some National Forest System Lands on the Buffalo Gap National Grassland in South Dakota

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

 [Federal Register: July 15, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 135)]
[Notices]
[Page 41779-41780]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15jy03-34]

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
 
Revised Southeast Geographic Area Rangeland Allotment Management 
Plans on Some National Forest System Lands on the Buffalo Gap National 
Grassland in South Dakota

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement 
in conjunction with the revision of allotment management plans.

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

SUMMARY: Revise Rangeland Allotment Management Plans (RAMP) for all 
allotments within the Fall River Southeast Geographic Area (FRSEGA) and 
the Fox Allotment whose boundary lies within the Fall River West 
Geographic Area (FRWGA), and analyze continuation of grazing within the 
constraints of the Revised Nebraska Land and Resource Management Plan 
(NLRMP).

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
within 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. The draft 
environmental impact statement is expected August 2003 and the final 
environmental impact statement is expected October 2003.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: Mike Erk, Interdisciplinary Team 
Leader, USDA Forest Service, PO Box 732, 1801 Highway 18 By-pass, Hot 
Springs, SD 57747.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Erk, Interdisciplinary Team 
Leader, USDA Forest Service, PO Box 732, 1801 Highway 18 By-pass, Hot 
Springs, SD 75547. Phone (605) 745-4107

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose and Need for Action: The purpose of the EIS is to determine 
current conditions, analyze environmental consequences of actions to 
these conditions, and assist the decision maker in selecting 
management/monitoring strategies consistent with meeting desired 
condition sin the NLRMP. The need for the action is to reverse 
undesirable conditions, and ensure that authorized uses and associated 
management activities move them towards desired NLRMP conditions.
    Proposed Action: The Fall River Ranger District proposes to 
implement best management practices and activities with adaptive 
management and monitoring strategies to ensure there are no disparities 
between current conditions and NLRMP desired conditions.
    Possible Alternatives: No-Action Alternative is to not change 
current permitted uses. No-Use alternative is to eliminate any uses on 
the project area.
    Responsible Official: Michael E. McNeill, District Ranger, Fall 
River Ranger District, PO Box 732, 1801 Highway 18 By-pass, Hot 
Springs, SD 57747.
    Nature Of Decision To Be Made: The decision to be made is whether 
or not to continue permitted uses within the project area. If uses are 
permitted, then adaptive management strategies and monitoring will be 
identified to ensure compliance with desired NLRMP conditions.
    Scoping Process: The agency sent a letter to interested parties on 
April 30, 2003 requesting comments concerning the scope of the 
analysis. Comments were due by May 20, 2003.
    Release and Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement: The 
draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) is expected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for 
public comment by August 2003. At that time, the EPA will publish a 
notice of availability for the DEIS in the Federal Register. The 
comment period on the DEIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA 
publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
    Reviewers of the DEIS 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 Com. v. NRDC. 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, 
environmental objections that could be raised at the DEIS stage but are 
not raised until after completion the Final Environmental Impact 
Statement (FEIS) 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

[[Page 41780]]

 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 FEIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed actions, comments on the DEIS should be a 
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 DEIS or the merits of the alternatives formulated and 
discussed in the statements. 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: July 1, 2003.
Michael E. McNeill,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 03-17850 Filed 7-14-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.