Jump to main content.

West Maurys Fuels and Vegetation Management Project, Ochoco National Forest, Crook County, Oregon

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

 [Federal Register: January 16, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 11)]
[Notices]
[Page 2563-2564]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16ja04-27]

========================================================================
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.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
 
West Maurys Fuels and Vegetation Management Project, Ochoco 
National Forest, Crook County, Oregon

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

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

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) on a proposal to manage the fuels and vegetation in the 
west half of the West Maury Mountains. The proposed action will 
decrease high-intensity fire conditions, maintain low intensity fire 
conditions where they exist, and maintain and increase old growth 
habitat. This will entail changing the forest density and species 
composition to maintain and increase forest stand resistance to high 
intensity fire, insects, and disease. This will be achieved by applying 
a prescription comprising pre-commercial and commercial thinning of the 
under-story, grapple piling of slash thinning, and prescribed burns. 
Timber harvest and prescribed burning prescriptions will be conducted 
on estimated 18,508 acres. Juniper thinning, part of the prescription 
throughout the entire project area, would help restore upland grass and 
shrub communities. The agency will give notice of the full 
environmental analysis and decision making process so interested and 
affected people may participate and contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis would be most 
helpful if received by February 16, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Arthur Currier, District Ranger, 
Lookout Mountain District, Ochoco National Forest, 3160 NE Third 
Street, Prineville, Oregon 97754.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bryan Scholz, Interdisciplinary Team 
leader, Phone: (541) 416-6500, or e-mail: 
comments-pacificnorthwest-ochoco@fs.fed.us

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    Existing vegetation comprises excessively dense, small tree stands 
which reduce habitat for old-growth-dependent species such as the 
pileated and white-headed woodpeckers and goshawks. The crowded 
conditions foster bark beetle infestations and prevent small trees from 
growing into large ones. Dense tree stands are ripe for intense fires 
because they are often diseased and compacted with dead fuel. When 
trees are permitted to grow large in more open conditions, the stands 
emulate the conditions found prior to fire suppression.

Proposed Action

    The Proposed Action consists of the following actions: 7,750 acres 
of commercial thinning, 11,700 acres of noncommercial thinning, 7,650 
acres of fuels treatment of which 4,200 is underburning of natural 
fuels, and 6 miles of new roads, 6 miles of temporary roads, and 10 
miles of roads to be decommissioned. The Proposed Action will move the 
distribution of fire regimes towards the historic range of variability 
by decreasing high-intensity fire conditions and maintaining low 
intensity fire conditions where they exist. This action will entail 
changing forest conditions to maintain and increase forest stand 
resistance to high intensity fire, insects and disease by applying a 
prescription comprising pre-commercial, and commercial thinning and 
prescribed burns. Slash from thinning will be treated with prescribed 
fire and grapple piling. The proposed action would increase the amount 
of forested area dominated by fire-tolerant species, maintain and 
enhance stands dominated by large and old structure (LOS) 
characteristics, move forested vegetation closer towards historic 
conditions, and would decrease the number of acres with potential for 
high-severity stand replacement fire. New and temporary road 
construction will be kept to a minimum, thus reducing the potential for 
harmful resource effects.

Issues

    Preliminary issues that have been identified include: habitat 
quality for pileated and white-headed woodpeckers, goshawk nest cores 
and elk security. In addition, mitigation measures will be developed 
for issues regarding erosive soils, sedimentation and water quality. 
There are cultural and heritage issues as well. An alternative to the 
Proposed Action is being developed to address significant issues, and 
options also include a no-action alternative.

Alternatives

    At a minimum, two action alternatives and a no action alternative 
will be analyzed in detail in the draft EIS. The action alternatives 
examine combinations and degrees of activities in order to meet the 
purpose of and need for action and concerns stated during the public 
scoping process. Under the no action alternative (Alternative A), pre-
commercial and commercial timber harvest and other vegetation 
treatments, would not occur. Ongoing activities, such as road 
maintenance, noxious weeds abeyance, and recreational use, would 
continue. Access for public and administrative purposes would continue 
on the existing transportation system. Resource protection activities 
(such as road maintenance and fire suppression) would continue.
    Alternative 2 is the Proposed Action.
    Alternative 3 makes unit-by-unit alterations from the Proposed 
Action to accommodate concerns about wildlife, hydrology and soils. 
This alternative eliminates activities in habitat for pileated and 
white-headed woodpeckers, closes roads, reduces road density to retain 
or create wildlife connectivity corridors or security. Where necessary, 
Alternative 3 would promote intermingling crown compositions and/or 
augments or retains 70 percent crown closure for satisfactory elk 
cover. In other areas, units are dropped from treatments altogether to 
alleviate sediment increase or soil erosion. Harvest will be conducted 
minimally in stands with large and old growth characteristics, and 
snags and down wood will remain to foster habitat.

Scoping

    Initial scoping began February 6, 2003, when the scoping letter, 
which included a description of the proposed action and stated the 
purpose and need for the project, was mailed to interested

[[Page 2564]]

parties. The proposal was listed in the Schedule of Proposed Actions 
for Spring 2003, Summer 2003, Fall 2003 and Winter 2004. Using the 
comments from the public, agencies, coalitions and Native Americans, 
the interdisciplinary team developed the list of issues to address 
which, subsequently, generated alternative three.

Comments

    The Forest Service is seeking information, comments, and assistance 
from other agencies, organizations, Native Americans, and individuals 
who may be interested in or affected by the Proposed Action. This input 
will be used to prepare the EIS. Comments are appreciated throughout 
the analysis process; however, comments received in response to this 
notice, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be 
considered a matter of public record on this Proposed Action and will 
be available for public inspection. Anonymous comments will be 
considered; however, those who submit anonymous comments will not have 
standing to appeal the subsequent decision under 36 CFR part 215. 
Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR 1.27(d), any person may request the 
agency to withhold a submission from the public record by showing how 
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) permits such confidentiality. If 
the request for anonymity is denied, the agency will notify the person 
and resubmission is possible.
    The draft EIS will be filed with the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) and available for public review by March 2004. The EPA 
will publish a Notice of Availability of the EIS in the Federal 
Register. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from the 
date the EPA notice appears in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of several related to public participation in 
the environmental review process. First, reviewers of a draft must 
structure their participation in the environmental review of the 
proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts the 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 have been raised at the EIS stage but are not expressed until 
after the EIS is completed 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 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 EIS.
    To assist the Forest Service in identification and consideration of 
issues and concerns on the Proposed Action, comments on the EIS should 
be specific, and refer to exact page numbers or chapters of the EIS. 
Comments may also be complimentary and address adequacies and merits of 
the alternatives formulated and discussed. Reviewers may wish to 
consult the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations on procedural 
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 
when addressing these points.
    The Forest Service is the lead agency and the responsible official 
is the Forest Supervisor, Ochoco National Forest. He will decide which, 
if any, of the alternatives will be implemented. His decision and 
rationale for the West Maurys Fuels and Vegetation Management Project 
will be documented in the Record of Decision, which will be subject to 
Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR part 215).

    Dated: January 6, 2004.
Larry Timchak,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 04-958 Filed 1-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.