[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4719-4720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2306]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Sandpoint Ranger District Noxious Weed Control Project, Idaho
Panhandle National Forests, Bonner County, Idaho
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) to disclose the potential environmental effects of
noxious weed treatment of the Sandpoint Ranger District. Treatment
sites would be at various locations across the district and are within
the Pend Oreille Ecosystem, Sandpoint Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle
National Forests, Bonner County, Idaho. Most treatment sites are
located near or along forest roads, trails, powerline corridors,
recreation sites and wildlife forage habits (i.e. dry sites).
The proposed action to control populations of noxious and
undesirable weeds on certain travel corridors and areas is designed to
prevent the spread of these weeds and promote the retention and health
of native and/or desirable plants within this ecosystem. The proposed
action would use an integrated pest management approach to control
weeds. This approach includes mechanical, biological, cultural, and
chemical control.
At least 16 species of noxious or undesirable weed will be
considered for control. The major species considered for control
include spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), orange hawkweed
(Hieracium aurantiacum), meadow hawkweed (Hieracium pratense),
dalmation toadflax (Linaria dalmatica), Canada thistle (Cirsium
arvense), common St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum), hound's tongue
(Cynoglossum officinale) and common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare). Other
species may include diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa), purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), ox-eye daisy (Chrysanthemum
leucanthemum), rush skeltonweed (Chondrilla juncea), sulphur cinquefoil
(Potentilla recta), yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), musk
thistle (Carduus nutans), and bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare).
This project level EIS will tier to the Idaho Panhandle National
Forests Weed Pest Management EIS, October 1989; the Idaho Panhandle
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan),
September 1987; the Final EIS Noxious Weed Management Project, Bonners
Ferry Ranger District, September 1995, and the Priest Lake Noxious Weed
Control Final EIS.
DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received no later
than March 3, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed
management activities or requests to be placed on the project mailing
list to Betsy Hammet, Project Leader, Sandpoint Ranger District, 1500
Hwy 2, Suite 110, Sandpoint, ID 83864.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betsy Hammet, EIS Team Leader,
Sandpoint Ranger District, phone number (208 263-5111.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Weed control is proposed on 46 sites that
have been identified on the Sandpoint Ranger District. These sites
range in size from single plants to approximately 300 acres and total
approximately 1,270 gross acres. These sites represent less than 1% of
the 315,420 acres in the Sandpoint Ranger District.
The primary purposes for weed control are as follows:
(1) Protect the natural condition and biodiversity of the Pend
Oreille
[[Page 4720]]
Ecosystem by preventing or limiting the spread of aggressive, non-
native plant species that displace native vegetation.
(2) Eliminate new invaders before they become established.
(3) Prevent or limit the spread of established weeds into areas
containing little or no infestation.
(4) Reduce weed seed sources on trail heads and dispersed
campsites, along main roads and trails, within powerline corridors, and
in wildlife forage habitat (i.e. dry sites).
(5) Protect sensitive and unique habitats including research
natural areas, wetlands, and sensitive plant populations.
The treatment sites are in scattered locations across the district.
Small infestations that are discovered in addition to the 46 sites
would be treated within the scope of the Final EIS and Record of
Decision. The Idaho Panhandle National Forests Land and Resource
Management Plan provides guidance for management activities within the
potentially affected area through its goals, objectives, standards and
guidelines, and management area direction. The Forest Plan directs that
forest pests be managed by an integrated pest management approach.
The decision to be made is what actions, if any, should be taken to
control weeds in the Pend Oreille Ecosystem, where treatment should be
applied, and what types of treatment should be used.
The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of
these will be the ``no action'' alternative in which none of the
proposed treatment activities would be implemented. Additional
alternatives will represent the range of control methods currently
available for treatment of weeds, including non-chemical methods.
Public participation is an important part of the analysis and will
play an important role in developing the alternatives. The initial
scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) will occur during February, March, and
April, 1997. The mailing list for public scoping will be developed from
responses to this NOI, and to a Scoping Notice sent out to interested
individuals, organizations and agencies. In addition, the public is
encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials during the analysis
and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will also be seeking
information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local
agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be interested
in or affected by the proposed actions.
Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in
preparation of the Draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to:
1. Identify potential issues.
2. Identify major issues to be analyzed in depth.
3. Eliminate minor issues or those which have been covered by a
relevant previous environmental analysis.
4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action
and alternatives (i.e., cumulative effects).
Some public concerns have already been identified from initial
interdisciplinary review of the weed control proposal. The following
significant issues have been identified so far:
1. Current and potential impacts of the spread of noxious weeds on
the physical, biological, and ecological environment within the
Sandpoint Ranger District.
2. Potential effectiveness, economics and impacts on natural
resources of various weed control methods.
3. Potential effects on human health from the application of
herbicides.
This list will be verified, expanded, or modified based on public
scoping and interdisciplinary review of this proposal.
The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public
review in June, 1997. At that time, the EPA will publish a Notice of
Availability of the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal
Register. The comment period on the draft environmental impact
statement 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 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 be raised at the
draft environmental statement stage but that are not raised until after
completion of the final environmental statement 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 scoping 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 environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns regarding the proposed action, comments on the draft
environmental impact statement 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
environmental impact statement 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.
I am the responsible official for this environmental impact
statement. My address is Sandpoint Ranger District, 1500 Hwy 2, Suite
110, Sandpoint, ID 83864.
Dated: January 21, 1997.
David S. Dillard,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 97-2306 Filed 1-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M