[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49076-49077]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-24550]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Control of Noxious Weeds on Remote Sites, Wallowa-Whitman
National Forest and Umatilla National Forest; Columbia and Asotin
Counties, Washington; Union, Baker, and Wallowa Counties, OR; Idaho
County, ID
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service, will prepare an environmental impact
statement (EIS) on control of noxious weeds on remote sites on two
National Forests including aerial application of herbicides as a
treatment on specific sites and under specific constraints. These sites
are generally unroaded, back-country sites with difficult access.
National Forest System lands within the Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman
National Forests, including lands within the Hells Canyon National
Recreation Area (NRA) and Hells Canyon Wilderness, will be considered
in the proposal. Management actions are planned to be implemented
beginning in 2000. The agency gives notice of the full environmental
analysis and decision-making process that will occur on the proposal so
that interested and affected people may become aware of how they may
participate and contribute to the final decision.
DATE: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received
in writing by October 31, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments and suggestions concerning this
proposal to Karyn L. Wood, Forest Supervisor, Wallowa-Whitman National
Forest, P.O. Box 907, Baker City, OR 97814.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Direct questions about the proposed action and
EIS to Chuck Quimby, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, Wallowa-Whitman
National Forest, P.O. Box 907, Baker City, OR 97814, phone (541) 523-
6391.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action is designed to treat
existing populations of weeds to promote native and/or desirable
plants, and treat existing populations of weeds to reduce weed seed
sources. Projects will also evaluate means of avoiding the potential
for spread of the existing infestations off-site. The action is needed
to respond to the increased incidence, extent, and spread of unwanted
nonnative noxious weeds in remote sites where access is difficult and
hazardous, and where management of these infestations for control,
containment, and reduction is consequently limited in effectiveness.
These kinds of unwanted vegetation are legally designated as noxious
weeds by State and Federal laws because they are generally unsuited as
forage for either wildlife or livestock, may be hazardous if ingested,
are often nonnative intrusions, compete with native plants, impact
recreation and aesthetic values, and negatively impact wildlife
habitat.
Treatment sites included in this proposal are scattered across
uplands on the Wallowa-Whitman and Umatilla National Forests in
northeastern Oregon. The primary management areas from the Forest Plans
affected by this proposal include general forest, big game winter
range, HCNRA dispersed recreation/native vegetation, and wilderness.
The primary targeted weed species for aerial application of herbicide
is yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitalis), although other noxious
weeds will be included. All of the proposed treatment sites are being
negatively impacted by the invading noxious weeds. For some of the
sites, past impacts to the plant community may have contributed to the
susceptibility of invasion by the noxious weeds through a reduction in
native plant cover and vigor. Of the 14 sites to be considered in this
analysis, six are within allotments where grazing by domestic livestock
may occur, while the remainder are in areas either closed to domestic
livestock or where no livestock have grazed for a number of years. All
of the lands are used by big game, including elk and deer. Some of the
sites are used by backcountry recreationists, while others are seldom
used. All sites are upland sites located away from perennial water.
These sites range in size from approximately 10 acres to 500 acres net,
but cover several thousand gross acres because the weeds are scattered
and do not necessarily fill all growing space. Estimated gross acreage
covered for the 14 sites ranges from 4000 to 5000 acres with weed
spread increasing this number each year.
The proposed action is intended to implement the Wallowa-Whitman
Forest-wide integrated noxious weed environment (EA) and management
plan, including supplemental decisions to incorporate additional sites,
and the Umatilla integrated noxious weed EA. Both documents provide for
management of noxious weeds throughout the Forests but have proven most
effective on the more accessible sites (for example, along roads). The
affected Forests are adjacent and share common habitats, noxious weed
species, and problems associated with management of these infestations.
These current environmental analyses and decisions for integrated
noxious weed management on the two Forests provide for treatments
described in an integrated weed management program. These include
chemical, biological, manual, mechanical, and cultural. The treatment
methods include backpack sprayer, wick application, and boom sprayer
application of herbicides; release of approved biological agents; hand
[[Page 49077]]
pulling; lopping seed heads; discing or tilling; prescribed fire;
revegetation; etc. However, aerial application of herbicide was not
considered in prior analyses. This analysis will include aerial
application as a possible treatment of the selected sites using an
integrated weed management program.
The Regional EIS for Managing Competing and Unwanted Vegetation
(1998) and its associated mediated agreement, along with the Forest-
wide environmental assessments, the biological assessments, and
concurrence documents from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
and National Marine Fisheries Service, all provide a strong background
for controlling or mitigating the effects of treatment actions. Sites
will be surveyed for the presence of threatened, endangered, proposed
or sensitive species, and any necessary protective measures will be
developed through the consultation process with the regulatory
agencies.
This decision is needed due to the increasing incidence and spread
of noxious weeds into back-country areas. These sites are remote and
difficult to access with equipment and supplies used for treatment
measures. In addition, they are difficult to treat effectively due to
the hazardous conditions for on-the-ground workers and the difficulty
in covering the site thoroughly enough to ensure that no plants are
missed and allowed to go to seed. For these reasons, treatments allowed
under the existing decisions have been shown to be inadequate, have
caused individual hazards to applicators, and have been expensive to
use on these less accessible sites.
This proposal tiers to the Regional FEIS for Managing Competing and
Unwanted Vegetation and to the EIS for each Forest's Land and Resources
Management Plan (Forest Plan), as amended through completion of the
integrated noxious weed plans for the Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman
National Forests. This project will also be consistent with all
pertinent Forest Plan amendments, including; (1) Interim Strategies for
Managing Anadromous Fish-Producing Watersheds in Eastern Oregon and
Washington, Idaho, and Portions of California (commonly referred to as
PACFISH) and (2) Inland Native Strategies for Managing Fish-producing
Watersheds in Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, Western Montana,
and Portions of Nevada (commonly referred to as INFISH). The project
also evaluates and incorporates scientific findings from the Interior
Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Program.
Public involvement will be especially important at several points
during the analysis, beginning with the scoping process. The Forest
Service will be seeking information, comments, and assistance from
Federal, State, local agencies, tribes, and other individuals or
organizations who may be interested in or affected by the proposals.
The scoping process includes:
1. Identifying and clarifying issues.
2. Identifying key issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Exploring alternatives based on themes which will be derived
from issues recognized during scoping activities.
4. Identifying potential environmental effects of the proposals and
alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and
connected actions).
5. Determining potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.
6. Developing a list of interested people to keep apprised of
opportunities to participate through meetings, personal contacts, or
written comments.
7. Developing a means of informing the public through the media
and/or written material (e.g., newsletters, correspondence, etc.).
Preliminary public issues identified during scoping to date
include: risks to applicators while working on steep remote sites;
treatment effectiveness and cost effectiveness; and risks of nontarget
effects relative to the use of aerial application of herbicides as a
treatment method.
Public comments are appreciated throughout the analysis process.
The draft EIS is expected to be completed about February 1999. The
final EIS is scheduled for completion about June 1999. The comment
period on the draft EIS will be 90 days from the date the Environmental
Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal
Register.
The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers
notice of this early stage of public participation and of several court
rulings related to public participation in the environmental review
process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements 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, 553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that
could have been raised at the draft stage may be waived or dismissed by
the court if not raised until after completion of the final EIS. City
of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 f.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir, 1986) and Wisconsin
Heritage, 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 90-
day comment period so substantive comments and objections are made
available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully
consider 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 pages or chapters 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 Act at
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.)
In the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to
substantive comments and responses received during the comment period
that pertain to the environmental consequences discussed in the draft
EIS and applicable laws, regulations, and policies considered in making
a decision regarding the proposal. The Responsible Officials are Karyn
L. Wood, Forest Supervisor for the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, and
Jeff D. Blackwood, Forest Supervisor for the Umatilla National Forest.
The inclusion of management activities in Congressionally designated
areas (such as wilderness) may require a different signing authority
depending on the final decision. The responsible officials will
document the decision and reasons for the decision in the Record of
Decision. That decision will be subject to appeal under 36 CFR 215.
Dated: August 28, 1998.
Karyn L. Wood,
Forest Supervisor, Wallowa-Whitman NF.
Dated: September 3, 1998.
Jeff D. Blackwood,
Forest Supervisor, Umatilla NF.
[FR Doc. 98-24550 Filed 9-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
