[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 3, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64022-64023]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24507]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Noxious Weed Project; Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Box Elder, 
Cache, Davis, Duchesne, Morgan, Rich, Salt lake, Summit, Tooele, 
Wasatch, Weber Counties, Utah and Uinta County, WY

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Supervisor of the Wasatch-Cache National Forest 
(WCNF) gives notice of the agency's intent to prepare an environmental 
impact statement on a proposal to eradicate (elimination), control 
(reducing the population over time), and contain (preventing the 
population from spreading) known infestations and future potential 
invasions of noxious weed populations on the Forest.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
in writing by November 23, 2004. A draft environmental impact statement 
is expected to be published in April 2006, with public comment on the 
draft material requested for a period of 45 days, and completion of a 
final environmental impact statement is expected in October, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to. Wasatch-Cache National Forest, 
8236 Federal Building, 125 S. State St., Salt Lake City, Utach 84138, 
ATTN: Noxious Weeds.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Duncan, Team Leader, (801) 236-
3415.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose of this proposal is to move forward in achieving the 
desired conditions, goals, and objectives of the 2003 Wasatch-Cache 
National Forest Revised Forest Plan. Specifically the purpose of this 
proposal is to eliminate new invaders (weed species not previously 
reported in an area) before they become established, prevent or limit 
the spread of established weeds into areas containing little or no 
infestation while meeting multiple use objectives, and contain and 
reduce known and potential weed seed sources throughout the WCNF.
    The need for this proposal is evident by reviewing maps of known 
infestations of noxious weeds within the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. 
The number of infestations and species is growing yearly. Results of 
uncontrolled weed spread are well documented. Without treatment, weeds 
increase about 14% a year under national conditions. The spread of 
weeds can primarily be attributed to human activities associated with 
vehicles and roads, trails, contaminated livestock feed, contaminated 
seed, and ineffective revegetation practices on disturbed lands. Wind, 
water, birds, wildlife, and livestock also contribute to week spread. 
According to the recent scientific assessment of the Interior Columbia 
River Basin, invading weeds can alter ecosystem processes, including 
productivity, decomposition, hydrology, nutrient cycling, and natural 
disturbance patterns such as frequency and intensity of wild fires. 
Changing these processes can lead to displacement of native plant 
species, eventually impacting wildlife and plant habitat, recreational 
opportunities, natural hydrologic processes, and scenic beauty.

Proposed Action

    A number of steps would be followed under this Proposed Action to 
determine and implement the most appropriate treatment method for each 
weed infestation site. They include the following: detection of the 
weed, prioritization of the site for weed treatment, determination if 
sensitive environmental receptors are present, determination of the 
appropriate treatment method for the weed, and monitoring the 
treatment/restoration site to determine if follow-up or alternative 
treatment is warranted.
    The following priorities will be followed for treating sites. 
Priority I--Potential or New Invaders: Noxious weeds that are known 
from only a few, small sites (less than about 10) on the Forest would 
be highest priority for treatment. These are species for whom 
eradication is most likely, and whose elimination is likely to be most 
cost-effective in the long term. Priority II--Satellite Infestations: 
Small, satellite infestations, particularly on the edges of the local 
range of a noxious weed species, would be next highest priority for 
treatment. Treating these satellite infestations is likely to be most 
effective in halting the spread of noxious weeds into weed-free areas. 
Priority III--Established Infestations: Relatively large established 
populations are managed by a containment strategy. Treatment efforts 
may focus on working in from

[[Page 64023]]

the edges, or treating specific areas identified as a particular seed/
plant spreading source (ex: trailhead).
    Treatment practices available for use in eradicating, controlling, 
and/or containing noxious, invasive, and non-native weeds include 
mechanical, biological, controlled grazing, chemical (aerial and 
ground-based), and combinations of these treatments. Selection of the 
most appropriate treatment practice depends on numerous factors, 
including the risk of weed expansion, weed species biology, time of 
year, environmental setting, soil type, and management objective.

Responsible Official

    The Responsible Official is Thomas L. Tidwell, Forest Supervisor, 
Wasatch-Cache National Forest, 8236 Federal Building, 125 South State 
Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84138.

Nature of Decision to Be Made

    The decision to be made is whether or not to treat noxious weeds, 
and if so, determining the priority for treating populations and the 
appropriate treatment option for different weed species.

Scoping Process

    The Forest Service invites comments and suggestions on the scope of 
the analysis to be included in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement 
(DEIS). In addition, the Forest Service gives notice that it is 
beginning a full environmental analysis and decision-making process for 
this proposal so that interested or affected people may know how they 
can participate in the environmental analysis and contribute to the 
final decision. This notice of intent initiates the scoping process 
which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The 
Forest Service welcomes any public comments on the proposal.

Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review

    A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for 
comment. The comment period on the draft environment impact statement 
will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency's 
notice of availability appears in the Federal Register. It is very 
important that those interested in this proposed action participate at 
that time. To be the most helpful, comments on the draft environmental 
impact statement should be as specific as possible and may address the 
adequacy of the statement or the merits of the alternatives discussed.
    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 
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, 
533 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the 
draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised 
until after completion of the final environmental impact 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, Inv. 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 them and consider 
them and respond to them in the final environmental impact statement.
    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.) Comments received, including 
the names and addresses of those who comment, will be considered part 
of the public record on this proposal and will be available for public 
inspection.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 
1909.15, Section 21)

    Dated: October 27, 2004.
Faye L. Krueger,
Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 04-24507 Filed 11-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M