Jump to main content.

West Troy EIS; Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County, MT

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

 [Federal Register: July 24, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 142)]
[Notices]
[Page 43709-43710]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24jy03-60]

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
 
West Troy EIS; Kootenai National Forest, Lincoln County, MT

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) for a proposal for urban interface fuels treatments, 
vegetation management, watershed rehabilitation activities, and access 
management changes, including road decommissioning. The project is 
located on the Three Rivers Ranger District, Kootenai National Forest, 
Lincoln County, Montana, west of Troy, Montana.

Scoping Comment Date

    Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received by 
August 31, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and suggestions concerning the scope of the 
analysis should be sent to Michael L. Balboni, District Ranger, Three 
Rivers Ranger District, 1437 Hwy 2, Troy, MT 59935.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Jim Benedict or Steve Straley, 
Team Leaders, Three Rivers Ranger District, 1437 Hwy 2, Troy, MT 59935. 
Phone: (406) 295-4693.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The project area is immediately west of 
Troy, Montana, within T31N, R34W; T32N, R34W; T32N, R35W; PMM, Lincoln 
County, Montana; T58N, R3E; T59N, R2E; T59N, R3E; PMM, Bonner County, 
Idaho, and T60N, R3E, PMM, Boundary County, Idaho. The project area 
runs from the Kootenai River west to the boundary between the Kootenai 
and Idaho Panhandle National Forests. The project area is 90,770 acres, 
of which 49,270 acres are in Montana and 41,500 acres are in Idaho. 
Callahan Creek, Brush Creek, Ruby Creek, and Star Creek are the major 
drainages in the project area.
    The purpose and need for this project is to: (1) Reduce fuels in 
the urban interface and adjacent to private timberlands in accordance 
with the National Fire Plan; (2) Manage for vegetative conditions that 
are more suitable to a fire-dependent ecosystem and, in the long term, 
encourage more resilient and sustainable forest conditions; (3) 
Contribute forest products to the economy and provide employment 
opportunities; (4) Improve conditions in old growth habitat; (5) 
Improve growing conditions and long-term management options for 
overstocked sampling/pole stands; and (6) Reduce adverse effects of 
roads on fish and water quality in the Callahan Creek drainage by 
treating unneeded roads.
    To meet this purpose and need this project proposes:

[[Page 43710]]

    (1) Intermediate tree harvest and fuels reduction treatments on 
approximately 1,036 acres to reduce fuels, create a more open forest 
structure, promote fire-adapted species, retain large overstory 
structure, and reduce vulnerability to insects, and disease. Stand 
replacement harvest and supplemental conifer planting would occur in 
areas with high insect and disease levels or where it is desirable to 
promote a more diverse species mix (approximately 216 acres). 
Approximately 1,087 acres of the total 1,242 acres of intermediate and 
regeneration harvest and associated fuels treatments would occur in the 
urban interface area west of Troy. Approximately 165 acres of the 
proposed harvest and fuels treatments would result in fuels reduction 
adjacent to private timberlands outside of the area of urban interface.
    No new permanent roads will be built. It is estimated that 4 
temporary roads ranging from 0.2 to 0.6 miles would be constructed to 
accomplish this harvest and would be decommissioned following 
activities. Best Management Practice work and road maintenance work 
would be implemented on identified roads.
    Proposed harvest will contribute approximately 8 million board feet 
(MMBF) or 19,500 hundred cubic feet (CCF) of timber products to the 
economy. This project would also result in employment associated with 
timber sales and service contracts.
    (2) Mechanical fuels reduction treatments on approximately 43 acres 
in Forest Plan designated old growth located within the urban 
interface.
    (3) Maintenance burning within the next 10 years on approximately 
757 acres, including some of the harvest and mechanical fuels treatment 
units.
    A maintenance burn is proposed on National Forest and State of 
Montana lands to reduce fuels, thin encroaching conifers, use fire as 
an ecological agent of disturbance, and to rejuvenate browse (30 
acres). Implementation of this burn would be dependent on the State 
receiving direct funding or funding from a private agency.
    (4) Pre-commercial thinning on approximately 230 acres to improve 
growing conditions.
    (5) Decommissioning portions of five roads (approximately 6 miles) 
which were determined through an interdisciplinary process to be 
unneeded and at high risk of contributing sediment to Callahan Creek. 
The decommissioning work would include outsloping portions of the road 
prism, installing waterbars, and reestablishing stream crossings.
    (6) Design features and mitigations to maintain and protect 
resource values.

Range of Alternatives

    The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of 
these will be the ``no action'' alternative in which none of the 
proposed activities will be implemented. Additional alternatives will 
examine varying levels and locations for the proposed activities to 
achieve the proposal's purposes, as well as to respond to the issues 
and other resource values.

Public Involvement and Scoping

    The public is encouraged to take part in the process and to visit 
with Forest Service officials at any time during the analysis and prior 
to the decision. The Forest Service will be seeking information, 
comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, 
Tribal governments, and other individuals or organizations that may be 
interested in, or affected by, the proposed action. This input will be 
used in preparation of the draft and final EIS. The scoping process 
will include:
    1. Identifying potential issues.
    2. Identifying major issues to be analyzed in depth.
    3. Identifying alternatives to the proposed action.
    4. Exploring additional alternatives that will be derived from 
issues recognized during scoping activities.
    5. Identifying potential environmental effects of this proposal 
(i.e. direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and connected actions).

Estimated Dates for Filing

    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review in 
December 2003. At that time EPA will publish a Notice of Availability 
of the draft EIS in the Federal Register. The comment period on the 
draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the EPA publishes the Notice of 
Availability in the Federal Register. It is very important that those 
interested in the management of this area participate at that time.
    The final EIS is scheduled to be completed in April 2004. In the 
final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to comments and 
responses received during the comment period that pertain to the 
environmental consequences discussed in the draft EIS and to applicable 
laws, regulations, and policies considered in making a decision 
regarding the proposal.

Reviewer's Obligations

    The Forest Service believes 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 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 and respond to them in the final EIS.
    To be most helpful, comments on the draft EIS should be as specific 
as possible and may address the adequacy of the statement or the merit 
of the alternatives discussed. 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.

Responsible Official

    The District Ranger of the Three Rivers Ranger District, Michael L. 
Balboni, is the Responsible Official. As Responsible Official, he will 
decide if the proposed project will be implemented and will document 
the decision and reasons for the decision in the Record of Decision.

    Dated: July 15, 2003.
Bob Castaneda,
Forest Supervisor, Kootenai National Forest.
[FR Doc. 03-18834 Filed 7-23-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.