Quiero saber acerca de...

47470

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 25, 2021 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

standards, guidelines, and suitability of lands.
Identifying the types of decisions that will not be made within the revised LMP is important. The revised LMP will represent decisions that are strategic in natures but will not make site-specific project decisions and will not dictate the day-to-day administrative activities needed to carry on the Forest Services internal operations. Although the authorization of project-level activities will be based on the guidance and direction contained in the revised LMP, analysis will occur through subsequent project-specific National Environmental Policy Act NEPA analysis and decision-making.
The revised LMP will provide broad, strategic guidance designed to supplement, not replace, overarching laws and regulations. Though strategic guidance will be provided, no decisions will be made regarding the management of individual roads or trails, such as those that might be associated with a travel management plan under 36 CFR
212. Some issues e.g., hunting regulations, although important, are beyond the authority or control of the National Forest System and will not be considered. No decision regarding oil and gas leasing availability will be made, though standards will be brought forward or developed that would serve as mitigation should an availability decision be necessary in the future.
Purpose and Need and Preliminary Need for Change According to the National Forest Management Act NFMA, LMPs are to be revised on a 10- to 15-year cycle. The purpose and need for revising the current LMP is 1 the LMP is over 35
years old, 2 since the LMP was approved in 1986, there have been changes in economic, social, and ecological conditions, new policies and priorities, and new information based on monitoring and scientific research, and 3 to address the identified need for change to the existing LMP
summarized below. Extensive public and employee involvement and sciencebased evaluations have helped to identify the need for change to the existing LMP.
The complete description of the preliminary need for change is available for review on the plan revision website at: www.fs.usda.gov/main/mantilasal/
landmanagement/planning. The needs for change have been organized into four topics:
1. Legal and Regulatory Environment There is a need to change the current LMP to bring it into compliance with
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:54 Aug 24, 2021

Jkt 253001

the law, regulation, and policy.
Examples include the need to revise the plan every 15 years NFMA 16 U.S.C.
1604i; there is a need to identify lands not suitable for timber production NFMA 16 U.S.C. 1604k; there is a need to inform the LMP with the best available scientific information 2012
Planning Rule at 219.3.
2. Resource Management Themes There is a need to change the current LMP to address numerous resource management themes identified by monitoring; by trends described in the assessment; and by public, cooperating agency, and tribal comments. Seven themes were identified: 1 Recreation Management; 2 Access and Transportation Infrastructure; 3
Watershed Health; 4 Forest Vegetation Management; 5 Rangeland Health; 6
Terrestrial and Aquatic Species Habitats; and 7 Energy and Minerals Management.
3. Social and Environmental Conditions There is a need to change the current LMP to address social and environmental conditions that have the potential to affect the National Forest.
These items may not be under the agencys direct control but may influence our ability to effectively carry out our mission. Six conditions have been identified: 1 Areas of Tribal Importance: Maintain Tribal partnerships to protect traditional properties and uses; 2 Climate:
Monitor effect of changing conditions on critical resources; 3 Cultural and Historic Resources: Avoid destabilizing and destroying sites by surveying and monitoring; 4 Invasive Species:
Mitigate establishment and spread through treatment and monitoring; 5
Wildfire: Protect human health and safety while managing natural fire; and 6 Wildlife: Provide conditions to maintain populations while managing for multiple uses.
4. Topics the New LMP Will Not Cover A revised LMP does not commit the Manti-La Sal National Forest to any sitespecific action, does not it change boundaries set by legislation or rulemaking, and does not affect valid existing rights.
The preliminary need to change information has led to development of the Proposal to Revise the Land Management Plan. Public review and comments on these documents will help the Manti-La Sal National Forests responsible official and planning team refine the need to change the LMP and develop a proposed revised LMP that will be analyzed in a draft EIS.

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Proposed Action The proposed action is to revise the current LMP to address the aboveidentified needs for change to the existing LMP. Alternatives to the proposed action will be developed to address the significant issues that will be identified through scoping. In response to the above needs for change, a preliminary draft LMP has been developed. This more fully developed description of the proposed action is available for review at:
www.fs.usda.gov/main/mantilasal/
landmanagement/planning.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies The Manti-La Sal National Forest is the lead agency for the environmental analysis process during the revision of the LMP. The following entities have been formally identified as cooperating agencies: Carbon, Grand, Juab, San Juan, Sanpete, Sevier, and Utah counties in Utah; Montrose County in Colorado; the State of Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office; Juab, Price River, San Juan, Sanpete, San Rafael, and Sevier Conservation Districts; Town of Castle Valley; cities of Monticello and Blanding; and the National Park Service.
No formal agreements exist with Native American Tribes, but they are treated like cooperators because of their sovereign status.
Responsible Official Ryan Nehl, Forest Supervisor, MantiLa Sal National Forest Scoping Comments and the Objection Process This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides the development of the EIS. Written comments received in response to this notice will be analyzed to complete the identification of the need for change to the existing LMP, further develop the proposed action preliminary draft LMP
and identify potential significant issues.
Significant issues will, in turn, form the basis for developing alternatives to the proposed action.
Reviewers should provide comments at such times and in such a manner that they are useful to the agencys preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments are best provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewers concerns and contentions. Comments received in response to this notice, including the names and addresses of persons and organizations who comment, will be part of the public record. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered, however, they
E:FRFM25AUN1.SGM

25AUN1