[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 201 (Thursday, October 17, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64082-64084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-26381]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Crupina Vegetation Management, Okanogan and Wenatchee National 
Forests, Chelan County, WA

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

[[Page 64083]]

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) to disclose the environmental effects of treating 
populations of Crupina vulgaris, an aggressive, non-native plant 
species invading the north shore of Lake Chelan, Washington, using an 
integrated weed management approach. Approximately 500 acres of Crupina 
would be treated in the Lake Chelan-Sawtooth Wilderness and areas 
adjacent to the wilderness, and along the North Shore of Lake Chelan, 
including private land where landowners are willing. An additional 
4,500 acres could potentially be treated in the Rex Creek Fire area. 
Treatment would include manual, mechanical, cultural and chemical 
methods.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Crupina Project, Chelan Ranger 
District, 428 West Woodin Avenue, Chelan, Washington 98816.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Archambeault, Crupina Project Team 
Leader, Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, Forest Service, (509) 997-
9738 or Mallory Lenz, Wildlife Biologist, Chelan Ranger District (509) 
682-2576.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of this proposal is to contain and, if possible, 
ultimately eradicate Crupina vulgaris (Crupina) from the current area 
of infestation, thus preventing Crupina from further compromising the 
wilderness resource, other resource values, and ecosystem integrity and 
also preventing expansion of the current area of infestation. The need 
for this action is the result of the 55,000 acre Rex Creek fire of 
2001. The fire burned over the entire infested area and created 
favorable conditions for the continued spread of Crupina by reducing 
vegetation. Modeling of potential favorable habitat shows that there is 
approximately 4500 acres available for further weed invasion.
    Crupina vulgaris (Crupina) is an aggressive, non-native Class A 
noxious weed (eradicate were found) that has invaded the north shore of 
Lake Chelan, including portions of the Lake Chelan Sawtooth Wilderness, 
developed National Forest recreation sites, and private lands. In 
addition, the potential exists for Crupina to spread outside of the 
current infested areas onto the Lake Chelan National Recreation Area, 
other parts of the National Forest, and further infest additional 
private agriculture areas. The Rex Creek Fire of 2001 burned the entire 
infested area, reducing the vegetative cover and generally improving 
and expanding site conditions or an annual weed species such as 
Crupina. Since Crupina prefers unshaded sites, reduction of canopy 
cover, due to fires in 2001, has created thousands of acres of 
additional potentially suitable habitat for Crupina.
    This weed threatens the wilderness resource and other resource 
values because it displaces native plants, and changes plant community 
structure and function. Changes in plant community structure may alter 
fuel characteristics and ecosystems processes including: plant 
succession, nutrient cycling, hydrologic function and productivity.
    Over the last 15 years, 60-100 acres of the approximately 500 
infested acres have been treated by repeated hand pulling along the 
Lakeshore Trail corridor to reduce plant populations and seed 
production. These control efforts have successfully prevented Crupina 
from spreading outside the infested area. However, attempts to 
eradicate the entire infestation have been unsuccessful due to lack of 
consistent multiyear funding, ineffectiveness of hand pulling as the 
primary treatment method, and incomplete treatments where herbicide 
spraying was done on private land. The Wenatchee National Forest has 
previously entered into a memorandum of understanding with the State of 
Washington wherein WNF has agreed to comply with state law, which 
includes eradication of all Class A noxious weeds.
    Most treatment would occur within the Congressionally-designated 
Lake Chelan-Sawtooth Wilderness. Regulations identify the objective of 
Wilderness administration to preserve and protect wilderness character 
while allowing for public use, and state that wilderness resources 
shall be managed to promote, perpetuate and, where necessary, restore 
the wilderness character (36 CFR 293.2).
    According to the Wenatchee National Forest Land and Resource 
Management Plan (Forest Plan), existing populations of noxious weeds 
should be contained, controlled or eradicated as budget allows, with 
priority given to Class A weeds. The first priority for treatment is to 
be given to projects adjacent to agricultural lands, with second 
priority given to areas within or threatening Wilderness, both of which 
are present in the treatment area (Forestwide Standards and Guidelines, 
pages IV-89 and IV-92). The Forest Plan's goal for Wilderness is in 
part to preserve and protect the natural character for future 
generations. The Forest Plan also gives additional Wilderness direction 
to rehabilitate degraded sites caused by management activities or 
visitor use (Forest Plan, pages IV-227 and IV-230).
    Some additional treatment is proposed in the Dispersed Recreation, 
Unroaded, Non-motorized (RE-3) Management Area, adjacent to the Lake 
Chelan-Sawtooth Wilderness along the North Shore of Lake Chelan at 
Prince Creek and Moore Point. The goal for RE-3 is to provide dispersed 
recreation opportunities in a non-motorized setting where landscape 
changes are not generally evident with a natural or natural-appearing 
environment. All treatment areas along the lakeshore and other riparian 
areas are subject to riparian reserve standards and guidelines. 
Herbicides will be applied in a manner consistent with Aquatic 
Conservation Strategy objectives.
    In order to accomplish the goals set forth in the Wenatchee Forest 
Plan, the desired condition is to contain and ultimately eradicate 
Crupina from the current area of infestation, and create conditions 
where native plants will re-colonize the treated areas to support 
wilderness and recreation management objectives. Treatments would be 
designed to prevent Crupina from further compromising the wilderness 
resource, other resource values, and ecosystem integrity and also 
prevent expansion of the current area of infestation.

Proposed Action

    The proposal is to develop and implement a multi-year integrated 
weed management approach to treat approximately 500 acres of the Class 
A noxious weed Crupina vulgaris (Crupina) located within and adjacent 
to the Lake Chelan-Sawtooth Wilderness on the north shore of Lake 
Chelan in Washington State. Up to 4500 acres of new infestation could 
also be treated within the Rex Creek Fire Area. Within the proposed 
treatment area, Crupina occurs as scattered patches in predominantly 
non-forested sites between Prince Creek and Hunt's Bluff. The Crupina 
patches occur at elevations ranging between the shore of Lake Chelan 
(11000 feet) up to 3000 feet, and occasionally up to 4000 feet. Patch 
size varies between 55 acres and approximately 400 square feet. 
Surrounding the areas of historic infestation are approximately 4500 
acres of potentially suitable habitat. This habitat, all of which lies 
within the Rex Creek fire area, has been modeled using suitable habitat 
characteristics: aspect (south, southwest, and west), soils (generally 
rocky outcrops and alluvial fans), slope (0-60%), and elevation (1100' 
to 4000').

[[Page 64084]]

    The treatment methods for each infested site would include some 
combination of the following methods:

    [sbull] Chemical: Spot application (backpack spraying) of 
herbicides: picloram in upland areas, glyphosate near waterways
    [sbull] Manual: Hand pulling, grubbing
    [sbull] Mechanical: Heat treatment (propane heated disk), 
helicopter staging of personnel and materials
    [sbull] Cultural: Reseeding treated areas, using native seed, where 
the other non-native vegetation might re-occupy the treated areas.

    The appropriate treatment method for each site will be selected 
based on the following criteria:

    [sbull] Proximity of Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive plants 
(hand pull only) that would be impacted by chemical spray or drift
    [sbull] Riparian areas (hand pulling and/or glyphosate)
    [sbull] Sensitive or erodible soils (herbicide treatment to 
minimize foot traffic)
    [sbull] Composition of existing native plant community (herbicide/
reseed where native plant population is already compromised)
    [sbull] Accessibility for foot traffic (prioritize treatment in 
adjacent areas). Treatment priority will be placed on sites with the 
greatest risk of spread.

Possible Alternatives

    Additional alternative to be analyzed is the use of all treatment 
methods listed in the proposed action except herbicides or mechanical. 
All action alternatives will consider treatments on adjacent private 
lands, which would require cooperation from willing landowners.

Scoping Process

    Scoping is an ongoing process throughout the planning process. A 
scoping letter was mailed in early June to individuals and 
organizations on the Chelan Ranger District's mailing list and adjacent 
landowners. The Chelan District Ranger has been on the local radio and 
the local paper has covered the project. The draft EIS will be 
circulated to those who indicated an interest in this specific project.

Preliminary Issues

    Previous environmental analysis and decisions made in previous 
Environmental Assessments have provided a preliminary list of issues, 
and these have been reviewed and supplemented by Forest staff. These 
issues include:
    [sbull] The potential continued spread of this weed, particularly 
in light of conditions created by the Red Creek Fire of 2001.
    [sbull] Concern about the use of, and application methods of, 
herbicides and the effects on surrounding vegetation and other 
resources.
    [sbull] The project area is located mostly in the Lake Chelan-
Sawtooth Wilderness and the use of mechanical methods of control and 
the presence of control personnel could affect wilderness resources.
    [sbull] Concern that, based on the results of past control 
measures, the proposed control measures might not be effective.
    [sbull] Concern that mechanical and manual control efforts could 
cause soil disturbance.
    [sbull] Concern about the effects of treatments on recreation use 
in the project area and adjacent areas.

    Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review: A draft EIS will be released for public comment 
November 2002. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 days from 
the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of 
availability in the Federal Register. The final EIS is to be released 
in January 2003.
    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 
a draft EIS 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 EIS stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final EIS 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 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 EIS. To assist the 
Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on 
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. (40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22).
    The Forest Service is the lead agency. The Regional Forester for 
the Pacific Northwest Region is the Responsible Official. The 
Responsible Official will decide which, if any, of the proposed 
projects will be implemented. The Crupina Vegetation Management 
decision and the reasons for the decision will be documented in the 
Record of Decision. That decision will be subject to Forest Service 
Appeal Regulations (36 CFR part 215).

    Dated: October 9, 2002.
Richard W. Sowa,
Acting Deputy Regional Forester.
[FR Doc. 02-26381 Filed 10-16-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M