![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Plumas National Forest, Feather River Ranger District, California, Bald Mountain Project
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: February 10, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 27)]
[Notices]
[Page 7074-7075]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10fe05-32]
========================================================================
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
Plumas National Forest, Feather River Ranger District,
California, Bald Mountain Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact
statement on a proposal to harvest trees from approximately 90 acres
using group selection silviculture methods, from approximately 100
acres using individual tree selection silviculture methods, and perform
associated road system improvements within the pilot project area
defined in the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery
Act, October 1998 (HFQLGFRA).
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
within 30 days of the publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. The draft environmental impact statement is expected by May,
2005 and the final environmental impact statement is expected by
August, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Karen L. Hayden, District Ranger,
Feather River Ranger District, 875 Mitchell Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965.
Submit electronic comments to
comments-pacificsouthwest-plumas-featherrvr@fs.fed.us. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for file formats and other information about filing comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Worn, Project Leader, at the
above address or call (530) 534-6500.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The project area is approximately 8,000
acres and is entirely located within Plumas County, California. It is
generally situated around Little Grass Valley Reservoir and the South
Fork of the Feather River. The LaPorte/Quincy Road borders the project
area to the east while Lumpkin Road and Forest Service Roads 22N27 and
22N57 transect the western half of the project area. The legal
description of the project area is as follows: T.22N, R.8E, part of
Section 24; T.22N., R.9E., portions of Sections 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20,
24, 27, 28, 29 and 34; and T.22N., R.10E. portions of Sections 7, 8,
17, 18, of the Mount Diablo Base Meridian. The project area ranges in
elevation from 5,000 to 6,500 feet above mean sea level.
Purpose and Need for Action
Resource specialists examined the project area to determine the
existing condition and to identify opportunities and specific
management practices that could be implemented to accomplish management
direction and goals described in the Plumas National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan, August 1988, as amended by the August 1999
Record of Decision for the HFQLGFRA, as well as the Sierra Nevada
Framework Forest Plan Amendment of January 2004, which amended the
Sierra Nevada Framework Forest Plan Amendment of January 2001.
Within the project area, treatment is needed to increase
representation of fire-adapted tree species, improve forest health and
vigor, reduce fuels, and increase canopy layer, seral stage, and age
class diversity. The purpose of the project is to meet those needs by
implementing group selection and individual tree selection
silvicultural systems as directed in the HFQLGFRA and the Sierra Nevada
Forest Plan Amendment 2004 Record of Decision.
The project is designed to: (1) Test the effectiveness of group
selection and individual tree selection treatments in achieving an all-
aged, multistory, fire-resilient forest, (2) provide an adequate timber
supply that contributes to the economic stability of rural communities,
and (3) promote ecological health of the forest.
Proposed Action
The Forest Service proposes to conduct group selection timber
harvest in approximately 50 groups covering approximately 90 acres.
Group selection involves harvest of trees up to 30-inches in diameter
from small (less than two acres) areas, resulting in uneven-aged (all-
aged) forests made up of a patchwork of small groups of same-aged
trees. Undamaged, healthy, shade-tolerant conifers would be retained in
groups. Individual tree selection would be used to remove individually-
selected trees less than 30-inches in diameter from approximately 100
acres. Non-merchantable trees (small trees less than nine inches in
diameter) would be masticated or removed for biomass to reduce ladder
fuels and increase crown base height.
Responsible Official
Karen L. Hayden, District Ranger, Feather River Ranger District,
875 Mitchell Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965 is the Responsible Official.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Forest Service must decide whether it will implement this
proposal, an alternative design that moves the area towards the desired
condition, or not to implement any project at this time.
Scoping Process
Notice of the proposed action was first listed in the Plumas
National Forest's Schedule of Proposed Actions in October, 1997. In
August of 1998, a scoping letter was sent to interest and affected
tribes, individuals, organizations, and Federal, State, and local
agencies with responsibilities for local resource management. The Bald
Mountain Landscape Analysis was completed in October, 1998 to: (1)
Evaluate the condition of the landscape, (2) develop desired conditions
for the Bald Mountain landscape, and (3) identify opportunities for
moving the landscape toward desired conditions. An Environmental
Assessment for the project was completed in March, 1999 and distributed
for public review. A Decision Notice to proceed with the Bald Mountain
Project was signed in June of 1999. The project was designed to treat
approximately 1,907 acres by thinning and 66 acres by modified group
selection. The resulting Decision (June, 1999) was never implemented.
In December of 2004, a new proposed action for the Bald Mountain
project was mailed to 192 individuals, groups, organizations, tribes,
and Federal, State, and local agencies. The scoping letter was sent to
those who expressed interest in the proposal, those who owned property
or held mining claims in and
[[Page 7075]]
adjacent to the project area, and to agencies with responsibilities for
local resource management. The revised proposal called for harvesting
trees using group selection methods on approximately 90 acres and by
individual tree selection on approximately 100 acres within the
HFQLGFRA pilot project area. A Legal Notice announcing the start of the
scoping process was published in the Oroville Mercury-Register on
December 17, 2004. Eight comments have been received since the start of
the scoping period.
After evaluating responses to the December 2004 scoping, the Forest
Service has decided to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS)
for the Bald Mountain project. This notice of intent invites additional
public comment on this proposal and initiates the preparation of the
environmental impact statement. The proposal has not been changed since
scoping in December 24. Comments submitted at that time will be used in
the environmental analysis process. Due to the extensive scoping
efforts already conducted, no scoping meeting is planned.
The scoping process will include identification of potential
issues, in depth analysis of significant issues, development of
alternatives to the proposed action, and determination of potential
environmental effects of the proposal and alternatives. While public
participation in this analysis is welcome at any time, comments
received within 30 days of the publication of this notice will be
especially useful in the preparation of the draft environmental impact
statement. The public is encouraged to take part in the planning
process and to visit with Forest Service officials at any time during
the analysis and prior to the decision.
Addresses
Comments may be: (1) Mailed to the Responsible Official; (2) hand
delivered between the hours of 8 a.m.-4:30 p.m. weekdays Pacific Time;
(3) faxed to (530) 532-1210; or (4) electronically mailed to:
comments-pacificsouthwest-plumas-featherrvr@fs.fed.us. Comments submitted
electronically must be in Rich Text Format (.rtf).
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides
the development of the environmental impact statement. Comments
submitted during the December 2004 scoping period will be used in the
environmental analysis process. Those who submitted comments at that
time do not need to comment again, unless they have new comments they
would like to provide. The public is encouraged to take part in the
process and is encouraged 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 and other individuals or organizations that
may be interested in, or affected by, the proposed vegetation
management activities.
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 be forty-five days 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 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 forty-five 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.
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: February 3, 2005.
Terri Simon-Jackson,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 05-2605 Filed 2-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M