WSP09638 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" UlJllii~ 72774 Federal Register/ Vol. 67, No, 235/ Friday, December 6. 2002/ Proposed Rules J codified rule. Pursuant to NFt-..lA, the Forest Service will provide notice and give Uw public an opportunity to comment on the proposed Fores! Service Manual direclion for this proposed rule because of the substantial public interest in this direction (36 CFR 216,4), The agency must improve its planning processes so that direction and resources will be in place to manage the National Forest Svstem (NF5) lands more effectively. The trend in planning (lver the past 20 years has been towards nIore complexity with the result that limited funds and personnel available to the agency are being disproportionately spent on planning and analysis. With tlus proposal. the agency seeks to produce a planning rule that sets the stage for planning to be done in a reasonable manner, at reasonable costs, in a reasonable amount of time. and thus provide a sound and rational framework for managing National Forest System lands. The ag~ncv has evaluated the entire cost of planning for both the 2000 rule and proposed rule. The evaluation shows that there will be efficiencies and reduced costs associated with il11plementation of the proposed rule. Increasing eHiciency and reducing costs are important. The Forest Service believes that the public's primary e;.:pectation is Lhat the agency do a good job of land management. The agency nHeds to balance its planning eHorts with its eHorts to actually manage the land through the application of plan direction to subsequent actions. There is urgency to make planning more efficient, as there are issues, activities, and resource concerns that are not halted during the planning process and which may pose increased concerns when planning occurs over excessively long limeframes. There is a growing population that will recreate on National Forest System lands whether the agency is prepared to deal with these uses or not. There are growing needs for watershed restoration for such purposes as prevention of nooding and the attendant adverse effects on people, property, and resource health. There are increasing demands for energy resources. Many NFS lands have a critical wildfire problem. Spending disproportionate agency time and money on planning and analysis that is not commensurate with the scope and effect of the decision to be made reduces the agency's ability to address serious land management issues. Additionally. the Forest Service has seldom been able to revise its plans prior to NFMA's 15-year deadline. There have been several reasons for this delay, but one consistent C..luse has been the excessive length of time needed to plan under existing procedures. Please refee to the November 30, 2001, Federal Register notice (66 FR 59775). which contains the agency's schedule to systematically approach the NFMA 15- year revision deadline for NFS units, considering critical resource and sociaU economic issues. Reviewers may also refer to the Forest Service Ecosystem Management Coordination staff Web site at w>>'J,I/,fs,fed.us/emc/nfma for the latest update of the agency-wide land and resource management plan (LRMP) revision schedule. The Forest Service believes this proposed rule, if adopted, would improve and streamline the planning process. In accordance NFMA. plans are to be revised frolll time to time when the Secretary finds conditions on a unit have significantly changed. but at least every 15 years. Plan revisions that take four, five. or six or more years to complete are not responsive to the vision ofNFMA, are not responsive to changing issues, and are in danger of exhausting public interest and involvement. When plans cannot be easily amended, many people feel that they need to have all their concerns resolved in a plan revision, because tllat will be the direction in place for many years. This viewpoint Ilul only can increase contentlousness i.n plann\ng, but also result in unreasonably high expectations of what a plan does. Several aspects Df this proposed rule will improve the ability to not only revise plans more easily, but also to amend them more easily. As stated, the proposed rule is intended to reflect the programmatic nature of planning and provide a process that is within the agency's ability to implement. Fundamental to programmatic planning is the premise that plans are permissive; that is, they allow. but do not mandate. certain activities to take place within the plan area. Consequently, the proposed rule emphasizes that plans themselves generally are not actionslhat significantly affect the quality of ilie human environment, nor do they dictate site-specific actions. The agency must align its planning processes and performance responsibly. 'This means targeting dollars spent on planning tD those activities that will yield clear benefits. Programmatic land and resource management planning cannot do more than establish a framework for management in an ever- changing environment. The Forest Service believes that the proposed rule provides as efficient a planning process as possible within the framework of NFMA direction. A detailed explanation of !.he proposed rule that would amend the rules at 36 CFR Part 219 follows. Section-by-Sectiort Explanation of the Proposed Rule Table I at the end of this document provides a section~by.section comparison of the 2000 rule and the propDsed rule. Proposed section 219.1-Purpose and applicability. The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 IMUSY A) establishes that NFS lands must be administered for outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish values. The Act authorizes and directs the Secretary to develop and administer these resources for multiple use and the sustained vield of the several products and services that are obtained from management of the surface resources. The Act defines multiple use as the management of all the various renewable surface resources of the NFS lands so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the need:> of the American people. The Act further provides that sustaine.d yield of the several products and services means the achievement and maintenance in perpetuity of a high-level annual or regular periodic output of the \'arious renewable resources of the NFS without impairment of the productivity of the land. The Forest Service has embraced the concept of sustain ability to guide the agency in meeting requiremenls of MUSY A. Sustainabilitv addres:>es the "sustained yield" asp~ct of MUSY A because it requires balancing resource management with the needs of current and future generations "in perpetuity." The concept of sustainability will assist the Re5ponsible OHicial in assuring that Forest Service management of the various renewable resources will be administered without impairmont of the produc.tivity of the land, as required by MUSY A. Sustaining the productivity of the land and its renewable resources means meeting present needs withuut compromising the ability to meet the needs of future generations. Meeting present and future needs dDes not imply all individual needs can be met at one time, either now or in the futuro. The concepts of multiple use and sustainability are addressed in 9 219.1 of the 2000 rule. Because these concepts are so fundamental to planning, they are retained in S 219.1 of this proposed rule. As does the 2000 rule, this proposed rule arrirms the health of the land and sustaining its resources within the