From: Subject: FR Doc E8-749 Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:01:14 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-749.htm X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 FR Doc E8-749 
[Federal Register: January 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 12)]
[Notices]              =20
[Page 3234-3236]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17ja08-27]                        =20

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

=20
San Juan National Forest; Columbine Ranger District; Colorado;=20
Hermosa Landscape Grazing Analysis

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The San Juan National Forest proposes to continue to authorize=20
livestock grazing on all or portions of the Missionary Ridge-Lakes=20
Landscape in a manner that moves resource conditions toward desired on-
the-ground conditions and is consistent with Forest Plan standards and=20
guidelines. The analysis area encompasses approximately 119,000 acres=20
on 12 active cattle allotments: Bear Creek, Coon Creek, Elkhorn, Graham=20
Creek, Haflin Creek, Jack Creek, Lemon, Lion Creek, Red Creek, Stevens/
Shearer, Vallecito, and Waldner Allotments. The area is located north=20
of Durango and Bayfield, Colorado; from the Animas Valley on the west=20
to just past the La Plata County line on the east; in T35N and T36N,=20
R5-9W, N.M.P.M. and is within the Columbine Ranger District, San Juan=20
National Forest, Colorado.
    The proposed action is designed to increase the flexibility of=20
livestock grazing systems through adaptive management, which will allow=20
quicker and more effective response to problems areas when they are=20
revealed. Problems will be revealed through the use of short and long=20
term monitoring. Application of adaptive management practices should=20
result in healthier soil, watershed, and vegetative conditions.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received=20
on or before February 19, 2008. The draft environmental impact=20
statement is expected in June 2008 and the final environmental impact=20
statement is expected in September 2008.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Cam Hooley, Environmental=20
Coordinator, Columbine Public Lands, POB 439, 367 South Pearl Street,=20
Bayfield, CO 81122; e-mail chooley@fs.fed.us.

[[Page 3235]]

    For further information, mail correspondence to Rowdy Wood,=20
Rangeland Management Specialist, Columbine Public Lands, POB 439, 367=20
South Pearl Street, Bayfield, CO 81122; e-mail rwood03@fs.fed.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rowdy Wood, Rangeland Management=20
Specialist, Columbine Public Lands, 970-884-1416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of this project is to reauthorize grazing on all or=20
portions of the Hermosa Landscape in such a manner that will move=20
resource conditions toward desired conditions and be consistent with=20
Forest Plan standards and guidelines. There is a need to move some=20
existing conditions towards desired conditions. Livestock grazing has=20
been identified in the Forest Plan as an appropriate use of the Forest=20
and falls under the multiple-use mandate of the Forest Service. This=20
action is needed at this time because in the early 1990's, the courts=20
determined that livestock grazing permits should not be re-issued=20
without a NEPA analysis. This put many livestock operations at risk=20
until such time as these analyses could be completed. In response,=20
Congress passed the Rescissions Act of 1995, which provided for=20
continuation of permit issuance if the only reason they could not be=20
issued was lack of a NEPA analysis. The Act directed the Forest Service=20
to develop and adhere to a schedule for completion of the analyses.=20
This project analysis is being undertaken as part of the schedule that=20
was developed for the San Juan National Forest.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to continue to permit livestock grazing by=20
incorporating adaptive management strategies across the Hermosa=20
Landscape. Adaptive Management is defined as the process of making use=20
of monitoring information to determine if management changes are=20
needed, and if so, what changes, and to what degree. An adaptive=20
management strategy would define the desired resource conditions,=20
monitoring requirements, resource triggers or thresholds, and actions=20
to be taken if triggers are reached. Site-specific actions to move the=20
existing ground conditions toward desired conditions could also be=20
identified.

Possible Alternatives

    The following alternatives have been preliminarily identified: No=20
Action Alternative. The proposed project as described above would not=20
occur. Grazing would not be reauthorized on these allotments.=20
Traditional Management Alternative (No change from current). This=20
alternative is based on analyzing a specific number of livestock and=20
specific grazing dates in specific pastures. This has been the=20
conventional approach to grazing analysis. Adaptive Management=20
Alternative (Proposed Action). Described above. This alternative is=20
based on meeting certain resource conditions using a variety of=20
``tools'', or actions, to reach or maintain those conditions.

Responsible Official

    Pauline E. Ellis, Columbine District Ranger/Field Office Manager,=20
POB 439, 367 South Pearl Street, Bayfield, CO, 81122.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Given the purpose and need, the deciding official reviews the=20
proposed action and the other alternatives in order to make the=20
following decisions: Will livestock grazing will proceed as proposed,=20
as modified, or not at all, on all or part of the Missionary Ridge-
Lakes landscape? If livestock grazing proceeds: Where will on-the-
ground activities occur, and what types of associated activities will=20
occur? What mitigation measures and monitoring requirements will the=20
Forest Service apply to the project? If Adaptive Management is chosen,=20
how will monitoring be used to guide when adaptive options will be=20
activated?

Scoping Process

    Scoping is initiated with the publication of this notice in the=20
Federal Register. A news release will be issued and scoping letters=20
will be mailed to affected individuals during January 2008, and the=20
project has been posted in the San Juan National Forest Quarterly=20
Schedule of Proposed Actions since January 2008. A meeting with the=20
current term grazing permit holders in the project landscape was held=20
on March 15, 2007, and another will be held on January 25, 2008 at 2:30=20
p.m. the Lavena McCoy Public Library in Bayfield, Colorado.

Preliminary Issues

    During internal review and analysis of monitoring data, the=20
Columbine District/Field Office has already identified the following=20
concerns or issues with the proposal: Livestock can affect plant=20
community species composition and vigor; Livestock can impact riparian=20
areas and watershed conditions; Livestock can impact wildlife habitat,=20
including habitat for special status species such as Canada lynx and=20
Colorado River cutthroat trout; Livestock can conflict with recreation=20
in developed campgrounds and trailheads.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides=20
the development of the environmental impact statement. Comments=20
regarding the scope of issues to be analyzed in the Environmental=20
Impact Statement are requested, and should be relevant to the nature of=20
the decision to be made.
    Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent=20
Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement will be=20
prepared for comment. The comment period on the draft environmental=20
impact statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental=20
Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal=20
Register.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important=20
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public=20
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of=20
draft environmental impact statements must structure their=20
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is=20
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and=20
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,=20
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the=20
draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised=20
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may=20
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d=20
1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490=20
F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings,=20
it is very important that those interested in this proposed action=20
participate by the close of the 45 day comment period so that comments=20
and objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when=20
it can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final=20
environmental impact statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues=20
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft=20
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is=20
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the=20
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft=20
environmental impact statement or the merits of the

[[Page 3236]]

alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may=20
wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for=20
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental=20
Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
    Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who=20
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal=20
and will be available for public inspection.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook=20
1909.15, Section 21)

    Dated: January 9, 2008.
Pauline E. Ellis,
District Ranger/Field Office Manager.
[FR Doc. E8-749 Filed 1-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-P