[Federal Register: April 1, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 63)]
[Notices]
[Page 17297-17300]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01ap08-22]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Klamath National Forest, California, Eddy Gulch Late-Successional
Reserve Fire/Habitat Protection Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Klamath National Forest will prepare an environmental
impact statement (EIS) to document and publicly disclose the
environmental effects of implementing mechanical, manual, and
prescribed burn treatments in the Eddy Gulch Late-Successional Reserve
(LSR).
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 EIS is expected in late fall of 2008, and the final
EIS and Forest Service Record of Decision are expected in spring of
2009.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to RED, Inc. Communications, the
contractor hired by the Forest Service to conduct project planning and
prepare the EIS. The mailing address is RED, Inc. Communications, P.O.
Box 3067, Idaho Falls, ID, 83403, ATTN: Eddy Gulch LSR Project. The
address for e-mailing comments is eddylsr@redinc.com. The project Web
site is http://www.eddylsrproject.com.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Visit the project Web site at http://
www.eddylsrproject.com or contact Ray Haupt, Scott and Salmon River
District Ranger, Klamath National Forest, 11263 N. Highway 3, Fort
Jones, California 96032 or call 530-468-5351
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 1, 2007, the Eddy Gulch LSR Project was included under the
category of ``developing proposal'' in the Klamath National Forest's
Schedule of Proposed Actions, which was posted on the Klamath National
Forest's Web site. The Healthy Forest Restoration Act, Northwest Forest
Plan (as incorporated in the Klamath National Forest Land and Resource
Management Plan of 1995), and National Fire Plan direct agencies to
conduct projects for habitat restoration and protection from
catastrophic wildfire. Section 7(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act
directs federal agencies to carry out programs for the conservation of
threatened and endangered species.
The Eddy Gulch LSR is on the Scott-Salmon River Ranger District,
Klamath National Forest, Siskiyou County, California. The LSR is
located mostly west of Etna Summit, south of North Russian Creek and
the town of Sawyers Bar, east of Forks of Salmon, and north of
Cecilville. The LSR encompasses much of the area between the North and
South Forks of the Salmon River, as well as headwaters of Etna Creek.
Elevations range from 1,100 feet to about 8,000 feet. The LSR is about
61,900 acres in size, making it one of the largest LSRs on the Klamath
National Forest. The Assessment Area (37,239 acres) for the EIS is the
Eddy Gulch LSR minus the portions in designated roadless areas and that
portion of the LSR east of Etna Summit.
The goal of the Eddy Gulch Late-Successional Reserve Fire/Habitat
Protection Project (Eddy Gulch LSR Project) EIS is to present an
ecosystem-based approach for ensuring the safety of persons and
communities and maintaining, protecting, and improving conditions of
late-successional forest ecosystems, which serve as habitat for late-
successional-associated species. This would be accomplished through
fuels reduction and habitat development treatments using mechanical,
manual, and prescribed fire treatment methods.
The initial mailing list for the project contained entities and
individuals who were interested in past Klamath National Forest
projects. Names and addresses were added to the mailing list based on
zip codes in the vicinity of the Eddy Gulch LSR and attendance records
from citizen collaboration meetings. The current mailing contains
approximately 1,200 names and addresses of potentially affected Native
American tribes, individuals, agencies with special expertise,
organizations, and businesses. The first project newsletter was mailed
in October 2007 to members of the mailing list, and a Web page was
developed to provide additional information on the project: http://
www.eddylsrproject.com.
On December 3, 2003, President Bush signed into law the Healthy
Forests Restoration Act to reduce the threat of destructive wildfires
while upholding environmental standards and encouraging early public
input during review and planning processes. The legislation is based on
sound science and helps further the President's Healthy Forests
Initiative pledge to care for America's forests and rangelands, reduce
the risk of catastrophic fire to communities, help save the lives of
firefighters and citizens, and protect threatened and endangered
species. The Healthy Forests Restoration Act contains a variety of
provisions to speed up hazardous fuels reduction and forest restoration
projects on specific types of federal lands that are at risk of
wildland fire and/or insect and disease epidemics. The Healthy Forests
Restoration Act established important objectives to fulfill that
pledge; a few of those objectives are to:
1. Strengthen public participation in developing high-priority
forest health projects by providing opportunities for earlier
participation, thus accomplishing projects in a more timely fashion.
2. Reduce dense undergrowth that fuels catastrophic [stand-
replacing] fires through thinning and prescribed burns.
3. Select projects on a collaborative basis, involving local,
tribal, state, and federal agencies and nongovernmental entities.
4. Focus projects on federal lands that meet strict criteria for
risk of wildfire.
The potential for large, high-intensity fire is a primary concern
in the Eddy Gulch LSR. Current management issues [needs] include the
reduction of high fire hazard conditions, protection and/or development
of late-successional habitat, and the protection of areas that may have
watershed-related features at risk. Also of concern is the protection
of private property and emergency access routes that pass through the
LSR. The Proposed Action addresses these management needs.
[[Page 17298]]
The proposed treatment locations and treatments were developed in
response to protection targets identified in the Salmon River Community
Wildfire Protection Plan, Black Bear Ranch Cooperative Fire Safe Plan,
Rainbow Cooperative Fire Safe Plan, the Stewardship Fireshed Analysis
that was conducted for the Eddy Gulch LSR Project, citizen
collaboration workshops for the Fireshed Analysis and Eddy Gulch LSR
Project, and direction provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
in Yreka, California. Numerous Forest Service documents guided
development of the Proposed Action: The Klamath National Forest Forest-
wide Late-Successional Reserve Assessment, Klamath National Forest Land
and Resource Management Plan, Upper South Fork Ecosystem Analysis,
North Fork Ecosystem Analysis, and Callahan (Main Salmon) Ecosystem
Analysis.
Purpose of and Need for Action
Three primary objectives (purposes) for the Eddy Gulch LSR Project
were developed based on differences between existing and desired
resource and social conditions (need for the project) in the Eddy Gulch
LSR, pertinent laws, and Forest Service direction.
1. Community Protection--to reduce wildfire threat to communities
and municipal water supplies and increase public and firefighter
safety. There is a need, consistent with objectives set forth in the
Healthy Forests Restoration Act, to protect wildland-urban interface
(WUI) structures, and related improvements and community access routes,
from the threat of high-intensity wildfire outside, or emanating from,
the Eddy Gulch LSR. Current and developing conditions in the LSR and
along sections of all access roads will likely lead to moderate- and
high-intensity fires caused by weather-related events (such as
lightening) that will threaten structures, improvements, water sources,
and travel routes.
2. Habitat Protection--to protect existing and future late-
successional habitat from threats (of habitat loss) that occur inside
and outside the Eddy Gulch LSR. There is a need to reduce fuel loading
and develop a control strategy to reduce the size and severity of
future wildfires in the Eddy Gulch LSR in order to continue to meet LSR
and Key Watershed objectives for late-successional habitat and the
delivery of high-quality cold water. The Eddy Gulch LSR is also within
the Salmon River Key Watershed identified under the Northwest Forest
Plan as critical for at-risk fish species--the watersheds provide high-
quality water and fish habitat. Current risks to forest health
throughout the Key Watersheds include vegetative stocking density,
insects, and diseases. The exclusion of fire, combined with climatic
conditions, has created overstocked stands. Due to fire exclusion and
other policies that required the control of all fires, there have been
changes in stand structures, including higher densities of ground and
ladders fuels such as brush, small trees, and shade-tolerant tree
species. Past fire suppression policies of controlling all fires have
interrupted the historic role of fire as a thinning agent and for
maintaining the volume of ground fuels. This has increased accumulation
of dead and down woody material and organic debris (duff and litter)
and has led to larger and more intense wildfires in the Klamath
Mountains. These intense wildfires can permanently damage soil, degrade
watersheds, and remove a high proportion of all vegetation over large
areas, thereby slowing natural recovery and increasing impacts. Fire
modeling, using current conditions, indicates that under 90th
percentile weather (a hot dry August day), 50 percent of the LSR would
experience active or passive crown fire. These models indicate the LSR
would benefit from treatments to reduce the potential for lethal fire
behavior to a level that would be more consistent with LSR, Key
Watershed, and community protection objectives.
3. Habitat Development--to promote the continued development of
late-successional characteristics. There is a need to accelerate the
development of late-successional forest characteristics in some
existing mid-successional forest stands. Approximately 45,220 acres of
the 61,900-acre Eddy Gulch LSR (73 percent) are capable of producing
late-successional habitat. Currently, 18,780 acres (or about 42 percent
of the 45,220 acres) are currently vegetated by late-successional
habitat. The combined acres vegetated by late- and mid-successional
forest total 35,710 acres (or about 79 percent of the 45,220 acres).
Based on interpretation of stand conditions, past management, expected
fire losses, early photos, and an understanding of the disturbance
regimes, it has been estimated that the amount of late-successional
forest reasonably sustainable in the Eddy Gulch LSR is 45-65 percent of
the capable area at any one time. The LSR would be considered
functioning if it falls within this identified range. The Klamath
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan specifies that LSRs
are to be managed to maximize the amount of late-successional forest to
a level reasonably sustainable because surrounding areas of Matrix and
private lands are expected to contain relatively little late-
successional forest habitat.
The above three objectives helped guide the development of the
proposed treatments and activities designed to maintain or establish a
trend towards desired resource and social conditions.
Proposed Action
The Proposed Action has been designed to meet the purpose
(objectives) of the Eddy LSR Project and satisfy the need for action by
using mechanical, manual, and prescribed burn treatments.
The proposed treatment acres across the Eddy Gulch LSR Assessment
Area are summarized below. The various treatment areas overlap, so the
total area proposed for treatment is less than the sum of the acreages
shown below:
1,999 acres in 69 mechanical treatment areas in the 20 proposed
Fuel Reduction Zones (FRZs).
8,583 acres of underburning in the 20 FRZs.
17,808 acres of underburning in the 11 prescribed burn areas (areas
other than in FRZs).
2,251 acres in 6 mechanical treatment areas in the 11 prescribed
burn areas.
102 acres in 6 mechanical treatment areas not in an FRZ or
prescribed burn area.
70 miles of mechanical treatments along roads.
4.5 miles of temporary road construction to access 885 acres in 14
of the mechanical treatment areas.
Twenty Fuel Reduction Zones. An FRZ is a strategically located and
designed strip of land on which a portion of the surface fuels (both
living and dead), ladder fuels, and canopy fuels are treated (removed,
burned, or masticated) in order to limit the potential size of and loss
of resources (including homes) from large, high-intensity wildfire.
FRZs are wide enough to capture most short-range spot fires within the
treated areas and are designed to bring crown fires into surface
(ground) fire conditions, as well as to provide safe locations for
fire-suppression personnel to take fire-suppression actions during 90th
percentile weather conditions.
Eighty-one Mechanical Treatment Areas. Thinning to reduce density--
mechanical treatments would be used to remove or rearrange fuels to
reduce crown, ladder, and ground fuels and to shorten the time to reach
the desired future conditions compared to the use of prescribed fire
alone. Stands would be thinned to reduce stand densities,
[[Page 17299]]
thereby reducing canopy cover (and the potential for passive and active
crown fires. The resulting fuels from thinning would be removed or
piled and burned. Thinning activities would also provide an opportunity
for biomass utilization of the material. Thinning to reduce ladder
fuels--thinning smaller diameter trees would increase the distance
between the lower limbs of residual trees and brush or ground fuels.
Ladder fuels consist of denser conifer vegetation and brush near the
forest floor that can extend into residual trees. Ladder fuels increase
the likelihood of a ground fire creating enough heat to ignite the
ladder fuels (torching), with the subsequent fire reaching the crowns
of the largest trees. Crown fires are more intense, harder for
firefighters to suppress, and result in more devastating effects. In an
effort to reduce the potential for crown fires, ladder fuels would be
mechanically treated. After mechanical treatments, the fuels would be
removed and treated with prescribed fire or masticated. Thinning to
develop habitat--Overstocked mid-successional stands experience inter-
tree competition that slows the stand's development into late-
successional habitat. Thinning these stands from below would maintain
or increase growth on the residual trees, thus accelerating the stand's
development into late-successional habitat. In an LSR, stands would be
considered for treatment only where thinning would increase, by 30
years, the stand's development into late-successional habitat, when
compared to the stand's projected natural (unthinned) development.
Eleven Prescribed Burn Treatment Areas. Prescribed fire would be
used to reduce hazardous fuels and interrupt the horizontal, and
sometimes vertical, continuity of flammable materials on the forest
floor. Pile burning--naturally occurring fuels and thinning residues
(branches and limbs) would be piled and burned. Underburning--a
prescribed burn under an existing canopy of trees (hardwoods or
conifers) would be designed to reduce excess live and dead vegetation
and scorch to kill vegetation to reduce ladder fuel conditions.
Firelines would be constructed by mechanical or manual treatment
methods.
The mechanical, manual, and prescribed burn treatments are proposed
for the following locations:
1. Along ridges--these are the FRZs, which contain plantations,
Riparian Reserves, roads, and habitat development areas.
2. Along roads--emergency access routes, open National Forest
System roads, and county roads (roads occur inside and outside FRZs).
Treatments would occur 200 feet above and 200 feet below roads; some
areas along roads could be less than 200 feet due to variability in
fuel types (such as brush, grass, or barren areas).
3. CWPP and other fire plan/community protection areas, FWS
priority areas, and northern spotted owl activity centers.
4. Areas outside FRZs--includes the underburn areas, which contain
plantations; Riparian Reserves; mechanical treatment areas and roads;
and owl habitat development areas.
Responsible Official
Patricia Grantham, Acting Forest Supervisor, USDA Forest Service,
1312 Fairlane Road, Yreka, California 96097, will prepare and sign the
Record of Decision at the conclusion of the NEPA review.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The Forest Service is the lead agency for the Project. Based on the
results of the NEPA analysis, the Forest Supervisor's Record of
Decision regarding the Eddy Gulch LSR Project will recommend
implementation of one of the following: (1) The proposed action and
mitigation necessary to minimize or avoid adverse impacts; (2) an
alternative to the proposed action and mitigation necessary to minimize
or avoid adverse impacts, or (3) the no-action alternative. The Record
of Decision will also document the consistency of the proposed action
with the Klamath National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan
(Forest Plan) (1995, as amended).
Collaboration Process
The Forest Service and contractor facilitated 14 collaboration
meetings during the planning phase (September 2007-March 2008) for the
Proposed Action. The meetings were held in the communities of Sawyers
Bar, Forks of Salmon, Orleans, Fort Jones, and Yreka, California.
Numerous collaboration meetings were also held with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service in Yreka, California. Comments and suggestions
provided at the collaboration meetings were used, in part, to design
the Proposed Action. Scoping comments will be used to refine the
Proposed Action, as will additional data collected during extensive
field reconnaissance during the spring and early summer of 2008.
Scoping Process--Comments Requested
Publication of this Notice of Intent initiates the scoping process
for the Eddy Gulch LSR Project. The public is encouraged to take part
in the process by reading the scoping information that was distributed
by mail, with additional information and maps available on the project
website (http://www.eddylsrproject.com). Comments are welcome
throughout the environmental analysis process, but to be most useful
for refining the Proposed Action, comments should be post-marked by
April 28, 2008.
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
Following the 30-day scoping period announced in this notice, the
Forest Service and Contractor will begin preparation of the draft EIS.
The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 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 EISs 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, 533 (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 EIS 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 them and respond to them in the final EIS.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft EIS should
be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to
specific line and page numbers of the draft statement.
Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft EIS 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
[[Page 17300]]
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: March 25, 2008.
Patricia A. Grantham,
Deputy Forest Supervisor, Klamath National Forest.
[FR Doc. E8-6628 Filed 3-31-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P