[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 159 (Monday, August 18, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49429-49431]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20962]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Custer National Forest Weed Treatment EIS, Custer National 
Forest, Stillwater, Park, Carbon, Sweetgrass, Rosebud, Powder River, 
and Carter Counties, Montana, and Harding County, SD

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Custer National Forest is proposing to continue control of 
undesirable vegetation (weeds) through the integration of mechanical, 
biological, ground and aerial (helicopter) herbicide control methods. 
The Custer National Forest is currently treating weeds under decisions 
made in the 1987 Custer National Forest Noxious Weed Environmental 
Impact Statement and Records of Decision.
    Weeds are considered undesirable vegetation that can alter 
ecosystems or cause economic loss. Undesirable vegetation includes 
invasive plants that can alter ecosystem processes, including 
productivity, hydrologic function, nutrient cycling, and natural 
disturbance patterns such as frequency and intensity of wildfires. 
Changing these processes can lead to displacement of native plant 
species,

[[Page 49430]]

eventually impacting wildlife and plant habitat, recreational 
opportunities, livestock forage, and scenic values. Impacts to these 
values can result in economic loss due to costs of treatment and 
opportunities foregone. Other undesirable vegetation includes poisonous 
plants that can cause economic loss to holders of grazing permits.
    The Forest Service has identified that at least 1,300 net acres 
across the Custer National Forest that are in a downward trend from 
desired conditions due to the infestation of undesirable vegetation. 
The Forest Service will evaluate these known infestations and high-risk 
areas or conditions that may cause infestations over the next ten to 
fifteen years with the goal of reducing the spread and density of 
undesirable vegetation to allow desirable native vegetation to re-
establish and regain vigor and reduce economic loss. Based on previous 
trend information, it is estimated that infestations could double to 
approximately 2,600 net acres over the next ten to fifteen years based 
on the Forest Service's ability to treat weeds at historic funding 
levels. The purpose and need for this project is for the Forest Service 
to improve the trend of the ecological condition toward desirable 
vegetation, reduce economic loss, and allow for adaptive management to 
treat anticipated new infestations across the Custer National Forest 
over the next ten to fifteen years. The proposed actions being 
considered to achieve the purpose and need include implementing an 
integrated pest management program aimed at controlling new starts, 
priority areas and areas of minor infestations, and implementing 
holding actions on areas of existing large infestations.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis should be received 
in writing on or before September 15, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Forest Supervisor, Custer National 
Forest, 1310 Main St., Billings, Montana 59105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct questions about the proposed 
action and EIS to Kim Reid, Project Coordinator, 1310 Main St., 
Billings, Montana 59105, phone (406) 657-6200 ext. 233, or e-mail 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These management activities would be 
administered by the Custer National Forest in Stillwater, Park, Carbon, 
Sweetgrass, Rosebud, Powder River, and Carter Counties, Montana, and 
Harding County, South Dakota. The EIS will tier to the 1987 Custer 
National Forest and Grasslands Land and Resource Management Plan 
(Forest Plan), which provide the overall management direction for the 
area. The proposed action is consistent with the Forest Plan. The 
purpose of the Forest Service proposal is to further movement towards 
desired conditions outlined in the Forest Plan, by:
    [sbull] Protecting the natural condition and biodiversity of the 
Custer National Forest by preventing or limiting the spread of 
aggressive, non-native plant species that displace native vegetation.
    [sbull] Promptly eliminating new invaders (species not previously 
reported in the area) before they become established.
    [sbull] Reducing known and potential weed seed sources on 
trailheads and campsites, along main roads and trails, within powerline 
corridors, and in wildlife and livestock use areas.
    [sbull] Preventing or limiting the spread of established weed into 
areas containing little or no infestation.
    [sbull] Protecting sensitive and unique habitats including the 
Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Area, West Fork of Rock Creek (municipal 
watershed for Red Lodge), critical winter ranges, research natural 
areas, riparian areas, and sensitive plant populations.
    [sbull] Reducing economic loss from livestock poisoning.
    The proposed actions will be consistent with the Forest Plan, which 
provides goals, objectives, standards and guidelines of the various 
activities and land allocations on the forest. The Forest Plan 
allocates the project area into twenty management areas; Weeds occur 
within all twenty management areas. Private lands are also included 
within the project area boundary. Although excluded from Forest Service 
activities, project access and the condition of private lands will be 
considered during alternative development and when analyzing potential 
cumulative effects.
    The key issue topics identified to date include:
    [sbull] The current and potential impacts of weeds on natural 
resources such as critical big game habitat, native plant communities, 
wilderness values, watersheds, and threatened, endangered, or sensitive 
species, as well as impacts to economic factors.
    [sbull] Economics, effectiveness, and potential impacts of various 
control methods on natural resources.
    [sbull] Potential effects on non-target native plants and 
associated values, wildlife and fish populations, and human health from 
the application of herbicides.
    The areas the Forest Service plan to analyze include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Maximum
        Ranger district             treatment       Location township,
                                   acreage \1\            range
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beartooth......................             400  Between T35--T9S and
                                                  between R13E-R20E;
                                                  Between T7S-T8S and
                                                  between R25E to R28E
                                                  (Principle Meridian).
Sioux..........................             500  Between TIN-T2N and
                                                  between R57E-R59E; T1S
                                                  and between R57E to
                                                  R58E; Between T1S-T3S
                                                  and between R60-62
                                                  (Principle Meridian);
                                                  T16N-T22N and between
                                                  R1E-R9E (Black Hills
                                                  Meridian).
Ashland........................           1,700  Between T1S-T7S and
                                                  between R43E-R48E
                                                  (Principle Meridian).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 These are the maximum projected treatment acres. Actual treatment
  acres may be less.

    A range of reasonable alternatives will be considered, including a 
no action alternative. Other alternatives will examine various 
combinations of weed treatment. Based on the issues gathered through 
scoping, the action alternatives will vary in the amount and location 
of acres considered for treatment and the number, type, and location of 
activity.
    Public participation will be especially important at several points 
during the analysis, beginning with the scoping process (40 CFR 
1501.7). 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 proposed project. This input will be used in preparation of the 
draft EIS. Continued scoping and public participation efforts will be 
used by the interdisciplinary team to identify new

[[Page 49431]]

issues, determine alternatives in response to the issues, and determine 
the level of analysis needed to disclose potential biological, 
physical, economic, and social impacts associated with this project.
    The draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review by Spring 
2004. The EPA will publish a notice of availability of the draft EIS in 
the Federal Register. The comment period on the draft EIS will be 45 
days from the date the EPA notice appears in the Federal Register. At 
that time, copies of the draft EIS will be distributed to interested 
and affected agencies, organizations, and members of the public for 
their review and comment. It is important that those interested in this 
proposal on the Custer National Forest participate at that time.
    The Forest Service believes it is important to give reviewers 
notice, at this early stage, 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 the 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 45-day comment period so that 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 actions, 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 EIS. Comments may also address 
the adequacy of the draft EIS or 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.)
    The final EIS is scheduled for completion by the fall of 2004. In 
the final EIS, the Forest Service is required to respond to substantive 
comments received during the comment period for the draft EIS. Nancy T. 
Curriden, Forest Supervisor of the Custer National Forest, is the 
responsible official. The Forest Supervisor will decide which, if any, 
of the proposed project alternatives will be implemented. The decision 
and reasons for the decision will be documented in appropriate Records 
of Decision. Those decisions will be subject to Forest Service appeal 
regualtions (36 CFR part 215).

    Dated: August 12, 2003.
Nancy T. Curriden,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 03-20962 Filed 8-15-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-00-M