[Federal Register: July 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 141)]
[Notices]
[Page 42533-42535]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25jy05-29]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 060705C]
Notice of Intent to Conduct Public Scoping Meetings and to
Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement Related to the Family Forest
Habitat Conservation Plan
AGENCIES: Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Interior; National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of intent to conduct scoping meetings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service (Services) advise interested parties of their intent
to conduct public scoping under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) to gather information to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) related to a permit application from Lewis County,
Washington for the incidental take of listed species. The permit
application would be associated with the Family Forest Habitat
Conservation Plan in the Chehalis and Cowlitz River watersheds located
in Lewis County, Washington.
DATES: The public scoping meeting will be held on July 28, 2005, from 5
p.m. - 8 p.m.
Written comments should be received on or before September 8, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Forest Grange, 3397 Jackson
Highway, Chehalis, WA 98532.
All comments concerning the preparation of the EIS and the NEPA
process should be addressed to: Mark Ostwald, FWS, 510 Desmond Drive
S.E., Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503, facsimile (360)753-9518 or Laura
Hamilton, NMFS, 510 Desmond Drive S.E., Suite 103, Lacey, WA 98503-
1273, facsimile (360)753-9517. Comments may be submitted by e-mail to
the following address: FamilyForest.nwr@noaa.gov. In the subject line
of the e-mail, include the document identifier: The Family Forest HCP -
EIS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Ostwald, FWS, (360)753-9564, or
Laura Hamilton, NMFS, (360)753-5820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Reasonable Accommodation
Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and
participate in the public meeting should contact Mark Ostwald (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In order to allow sufficient time to
process requests, please call no later than July 21, 2005. Information
regarding the applicant's proposed action is available in alternative
formats upon request.
Statutory Authority
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1532 et seq.)
and implementing regulations prohibit the taking of animal species
listed as endangered or threatened. The term ``take'' is defined under
the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(19)) as to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage
in any such conduct. ``Harm'' is defined by the FWS to include
significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills
or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral
patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering (50 CFR 17.3).
NMFS' definition of ``harm'' includes significant habitat modification
or degradation where it actually kills or injures fish or wildlife by
significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including
breeding, feeding, spawning, migrating, rearing, and sheltering (64 FR
60727, November 8, 1999).
Section 10 of the ESA specifies requirements for the issuance of
incidental take permits (ITPs) to non-Federal landowners for the take
of endangered and threatened species. Any proposed take must be
incidental to otherwise lawful activities, not appreciably reduce the
likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild and
minimize and mitigate the impacts of such take to the maximum extent
practicable. In addition, an applicant must prepare a habitat
conservation plan describing the impact that will likely result from
such taking, the strategy for minimizing and mitigating the incidental
take, the funding available to implement such steps, alternatives to
such taking, and the reason such alternatives are not being
implemented.
NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) requires that Federal agencies
conduct an environmental analysis of their proposed actions to
determine if the actions may significantly affect the human
environment. Under NEPA, a reasonable range of alternatives to proposed
projects is developed and considered in the Services' environmental
review. Alternatives considered for analysis in an EIS may include:
variations in the scope of covered activities; variations in the
location, amount, and type of conservation; variations in permit
duration; or, a combination of these elements. In addition, the EIS
will identify potentially significant direct, indirect, and cumulative
impacts on biological resources, land use, air quality, water quality,
water resources, socioeconomics, and other environmental issues that
could occur with the implementation of the applicant's proposed actions
and alternatives. For all potentially significant impacts, the EIS will
identify avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reduce
these impacts, where feasible, to a level below significance.
[[Page 42534]]
Background
The EIS will analyze the potential issuance of two ITPs, one by
NMFS and one by the FWS. To obtain an ITP, the applicant must prepare a
habitat conservation plan that meets the issuance criteria established
by the ESA and Service regulations (50 CFR 17.22(b)(2) and 222.307).
Should a permit or permits be issued, the permit(s) may include
assurances under the Services' ``No Surprises'' regulations.
On June 29, 2000, NMFS and the FWS published a notice in the
Federal Register stating the Services' joint intent to prepare an EIS
on this action (65 FR 40078). However, the Services are now providing
new notice of public scoping because of changes in the applicant's
proposed action and to the affected environment.
Lewis County is seeking ITPs from the Services that would provide
regulatory certainty for family forest landowners making long-term
commitments to forest resource protection. Lewis County believes these
assurances may encourage family forest landowners to remain in forest
management instead of converting lands to non-forest uses. As currently
proposed, incidental take permits would be issued to Lewis County. The
county would in turn provide certificates of inclusion to landowners
after verifying they meet eligibility criteria and agree to comply with
the HCP. Eligible landowners would be those that hold lands below
elevation of 1,250 feet within the Chehalis and Cowlitz River
watersheds in Lewis County, and harvest less than two million board
feet of timber per calendar year.
As of 2004, approximately 133,000 acres were owned by small forest
landowners who met these criteria in Lewis County. The permits, if
issued would provide incidental take coverage for activities on a
maximum of 200,000 acres in the County. A permit amendment would be
required to exceed the acreage, which could be subject to additional
NEPA review. The Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) would
verify compliance with the HCP concurrent with harvest activities, and
Lewis County and the Services would conduct additional compliance
monitoring at other times. Annual Implementation reports would be
provided by Lewis County to the Services.
Forestry activities that Lewis County is proposing for ITP
coverage, and for which minimization and mitigation measures are being
developed, include the following:
All activities involved in timber management and harvest
including: mechanical site preparation, prescribed burning,
reforestation, vegetation management (other than with herbicides), pre-
commercial thinning, commercial thinning, timber salvage, other
commercial harvest (felling, bucking, limbing, yarding, skidding,
processing, loading, and hauling) of timber, fire prevention, fire
suppression (including mop-up activities), and non-chemical pest
control;
Construction, reconstruction, improvement, maintenance,
abandonment, closure, and use of logging roads, spurs, landings, and
decking areas;
Quarrying, processing, and transporting of stone, gravel,
and/or dirt for use in roads;
Administrative activities, such as land surveying, timber
cruising, and other resource inventorying;
All activities required by the HCP or ITP; and
Entering into and administering access rights, utility
rights-of-ways, and recreational and hunting leases.
Species for which Lewis County seeks coverage include 33 species of
fish and up to 44 species of wildlife. Seven of the species are
currently listed as threatened under the ESA, including: Lower Columbia
River Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Columbia River chum
salmon (O. keta), Lower Columbia River steelhead/rainbow trout (O.
mykiss), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), marbled murrelet
(Brachyramphus marmoratus), northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis
caurina), and gray wolf (Canis lupus). Lower Columbia River coho salmon
(O. kisutch) are proposed for listing and yellow-billed cuckoo
(Coccyzus americanus) is a candidate species. Thirteen species proposed
for permit coverage are Federal species of concern.
The draft HCP to be prepared by Lewis County in support of the ITP
applications will describe the impacts of take on proposed covered
species, and will propose a conservation strategy to minimize and
mitigate those impacts on each covered species to the maximum extent
practicable. This conservation strategy would follow the basic
strategies employed in the current State Forest Practices Rules with
modifications to address site-specific ecological conditions of the
eligible lands. Streams would be protected with combinations of no-
harvest and partial harvest buffers; roads would be designed,
constructed, and maintained to minimize erosion and mass wasting;
specified numbers of snags, logs, and residual live trees would be
retained in uplands; and the size of timber harvests would be
constrained to minimize potential cumulative effects. Protection of
steep and unstable slopes, road construction, and road maintenance
would follow State Forest Practices Rules, including any changes made
to those rules through the adaptive management process associated with
the Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan. Harvest unit size would
be restricted to a maximum of 60 acres.
The draft HCP will identify HCP alternatives considered by Lewis
County and will explain why those alternatives were not selected. The
Services are responsible for determining whether the HCP satisfies ESA
section 10 permit issuance criteria.
Under NEPA, a reasonable range of alternatives to a proposed
project must be developed and considered in the Services' environmental
review. The Services have identified the following preliminary
alternatives for public comment during the public scoping period:
Alternative 1: No Action - Under the No Action Alternative, an ITP
would not be issued by the Services and the HCP would not be approved.
Family forest landowners in Lewis County wishing to continue practicing
forestry would be required to comply with Washington State Forest
Practices Rules (WAC 222) concerning the protection of listed fish and
wildlife;
Alternative 2: The Proposed Action - There would be full
implementation of the HCP, which includes a set of site-specific
riparian and upland habitat conservation measures that would be
specific to eligible family forest parcels in Lewis County;
Alternative 3: The proposed HCP would be modified by changing or
adding measures to further reduce the amount and risk of incidental
take. These measures could include different approaches to ESA
compliance, conservation commitments, adaptive management, permit
timeframes, covered lands, covered species, eligible parties, or
covered activities; and
Additional project alternatives may be developed based on input
received from the public scoping process.
Request for Comments
The primary purpose of the scoping process is for the public to
assist the Services in developing the EIS by identifying important
issues and alternatives related to the applicant's proposed action. A
scoping workshop will allocate time for informal discussion and
questions with presentations by the Services and Lewis County.
[[Page 42535]]
Written comments from interested parties are welcome to ensure that
the full range of issues related to the proposed ITP are identified.
All comments and materials received, including names and addresses,
will become part of the administrative record and may be released to
the public.
Comments and materials received will be available for public
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the offices
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
The Services request that comments be specific. In particular, we
request information regarding: direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts
that implementation of the proposed HCP or other alternatives could
have on endangered and threatened and other covered species, and their
communities and habitats; other possible alternatives that meet the
purpose and need; potential adaptive management and/or monitoring
provisions; funding issues; existing environmental conditions in the
plan area; other plans or projects that might be relevant to this
proposed project; permit duration; maximum acreage that should be
covered; limited entry time-frame for issuing certificates of
inclusion; specific species that should or should not be covered;
specific landforms that should or should not be covered; and
minimization and mitigation efforts. NMFS and FWS estimate that the
draft EIS will be available for public review in the spring of 2006.
The environmental review of this project will be conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the NEPA of 1969 as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), Council on the Environmental Quality Regulations
(40 CFR parts 1500 - 1518), other applicable Federal laws and
regulations, and applicable policies and procedures of the Services.
This notice is being furnished in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.7 to
obtain suggestions and information from other agencies and the public
on the scope of issues and alternatives to be addressed in the EIS.
Dated: July 1, 2005.
Chris McKay,
Acting Deputy Regional Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1,
Portland, Oregon.
Dated: July 20, 2005.
P. Michael Payne
Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-14621 Filed 7-22-05; 8:45 am]