[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 16, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70954-70955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29552]


 ========================================================================
 Notices
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
 or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
 and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
 delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
 statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
 appearing in this section.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 16, 2011 / 
Notices  

[[Page 70954]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Idaho; Idaho Panhandle National 
Forest Noxious Weed Treatment Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) for a proposal to manage non-native invasive plant 
(NNIP) species on National Forest System (NFS) lands within the 
boundaries of the Idaho Panhandle National Forests (IPNF). This area is 
approximately 2.5 million acres in size and includes portions of the 
following states and counties; Benewah, Bonner, Boundary, Clearwater, 
Shoshone, Kootenai and Latah counties in Idaho; Lincoln and Sanders 
counties in Montana; and Pend Oreille County in Washington. The 
proposal includes both an Integrated Weed Management (IWM) approach as 
well as an adaptive management strategy to prevent or limit the 
introduction, establishment and/or spread of NNIP. The use of 
registered herbicides is one of the various treatment methods that are 
proposed. The overall project goal is to reduce the undesirable impacts 
that these invasive species can have on native plant communities and 
other ecological, social or economic values.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by December 16, 2011. The draft environmental impact statement is 
expected March 2012 and the final environmental impact statement is 
expected September 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to David Cobb, Idaho Panhandle 
National Forests Noxious Weed Treatment Project Team Leader, at the 
Priest Lake Ranger District, 32203 Highway 57, Priest River, ID 83856; 
Fax (208) 443-6845. You may also hand-deliver your comments to the 
above address during normal business hours from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 
Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays. Electronic comments 
may be submitted to [email protected]. in a format such as an email message, plain text 
(.txt), rich text format (.rtf), or Word (.doc).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Cobb, Priest Lake Ranger 
District, 32203 Highway 57, Priest River, ID 83856, phone (208) 443-
6854, email [email protected]. Individuals who use telecommunication 
devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay 
Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 
Time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The overall goal for proposing this project is to reduce the 
undesirable impacts that these NNIP species have on native plant 
communities and other ecological, social or economic values. The 
specific purpose of this project is to: (1) Reduce the likelihood that 
new NNIP species (i.e. potential invaders) are introduced and become 
established; (2) prevent or limit the spread of existing invaders and 
established NNIP species into areas with few or no infestations, and/or 
into areas where the potential to harm ecological, social or economic 
values is high; (3) rapidly respond to new, small or recently 
discovered infestations before they become well established, and 
respond utilizing the most efficient and effective treatment method(s); 
(4) encourage beneficial native vegetation and weed resistant plant 
communities and; (5) increase public and agency use of weed prevention 
practices and general awareness of weeds. Currently, each of the five 
Ranger Districts on the IPNF has an approved NNIP management plan and 
supporting EIS. Those plans were adopted between 11 and 16 years ago. 
Since then, numerous NNIP species have been added to the potential and 
new invader list, and new treatment tools, methods and adaptive 
management strategies have been developed that are currently not 
authorized for use on the IPNF. In order to be more effective and 
efficient in reducing the undesirable impacts of NNIP, the Forest needs 
to be able to utilize these newer tools and strategies. Given that 
funding for control has been declining in recent years, this need has 
become even stronger. The proposed action would allow the IPNF to 
become more responsive to Federal, State, and Forest Service laws, 
regulations, policies and direction regarding the management of NNIP.

Proposed Action

    The IPNF proposes to implement a Forest-wide, Integrated Weed 
Management (IWM) approach to manage NNIP species on National Forest 
System lands within the boundaries of the IPNF. The IWM approach 
incorporated into the proposal includes: Inventory and assessment 
activities, prevention and education elements, treatment actions, 
implementation and effectiveness monitoring, and restoration 
activities. The IWM program is based on ecological factors and includes 
consideration of site conditions, other resource values and uses, NNIP 
characteristics, and potential effectiveness of control measures for 
specific circumstances. The proposal includes both non-treatment and 
treatment practices such as: Strategies for awareness and education in 
order to prevent new infestations; early detection of and rapid 
response to newly discovered infestations; control of outbreaks of 
existing infestations that threaten sensitive and native habitats; 
containment of established infestations by maintaining treatments along 
spread pathways and previously treated areas; use of all treatment 
``tools'' such as chemical, manual and biological treatment followed by 
restoration and revegetation (as appropriate), as well as monitoring of 
NNIP-impacted lands; and close coordination across jurisdictional 
boundaries through cooperative partnerships. The treatment activities 
that are proposed are based on integrated pest management principles 
and methods known to be effective for each target NNIP species. They 
include, but are not limited to, manual techniques such as pulling; 
cultural practices such as the use of certified noxious weed-free hay; 
biological control agents such as pathogens and insects; and herbicides 
that target specific invasive plant species. The application of 
herbicides would be

[[Page 70955]]

ground based only. No aerial treatment activities are proposed. Spot 
and selective spraying would be the primary method of applying 
herbicide in order to target individual and groups of invasive plants; 
however some broadcast herbicide spraying (from trucks or ATV 
equipment) would occur. Specific design features would be applied to 
minimize or eliminate the potential for plant treatments to adversely 
affect non-target plants, animals, human health, water quality and 
aquatic organisms. Mulching, seeding and planting of competitive, 
desirable vegetation may occur to restore previously infested sites. In 
addition to using an IWM approach, the proposal incorporates an 
adaptive management strategy in order to quickly respond to new NNIP 
species and new infestations that are located during the life of the 
project. This quick reaction is known as an Early Detection Rapid 
Response (EDRR) and is designed to allow timely control so that new 
infestations can be treated when they are small in order to reduce 
costs as well as any detrimental effects of treatment. The adaptive 
strategy would also allow the use of new treatment tools and methods 
that are developed during the life of the project. The proposal allows 
most types of treatments to occur anywhere on Forest Service system 
lands on the IPNF. However, the use of herbicides in the Salmo-Priest 
wilderness area would be restricted to trailheads, roads immediately 
adjacent to the wilderness boundary, and short distances along trails 
near trailhead locations. Based on current funding levels, it is 
expected that approximately 3,000 acres would be treated annually 
across the Forest with the majority of these acres being treated using 
some form of a ground-based herbicide application method. If a 
significant amount of additional funding were available and monitoring 
efforts identify the need, up to an additional 3,000 acres could 
potentially be treated annually. The proposal would treat a maximum of 
5,500 acres annually with herbicides (less than a quarter of one 
percent of the IPNF). No limit is proposed on the number of acres that 
may be treated using non-herbicide treatment methods. Most of the 
treatment activities would occur along travel or utility corridors 
(e.g. roads, trails, powerline clearings) or other disturbed areas such 
as campgrounds, trailheads, recent timber harvest areas, gravel pits, 
ski areas, fire camps, mines, helispots, ranger stations and burned 
areas. One of the prevention elements incorporated into the proposed 
action includes requiring any hay or straw type products that are 
stored or possessed on NFS lands be state certified weed free. Where 
opportunities exist, activities would be planned and implemented in 
cooperation with other federal, state, and local agencies as well as 
private individuals.

Responsible Official

    Forest Supervisor, Idaho Panhandle National Forests, 3815 Schreiber 
Way, Coeur d'Alene, ID 83815.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Given the purpose and need, the environmental analysis in the EIS 
and consideration of public comments, the Forest Supervisor will make 
the following decisions; (1) Whether or not to expand or modify the 
current efforts to manage NNIP species; (2) whether to use one, or a 
combination of several methods of control including mechanical, 
chemical, or biological methods, and if so: (a) When and under what 
terms and conditions the Forest Service would conduct such activities; 
(b) what, if any, measures would be needed to meet Forest Plan Goals 
and Standards; and (c) what mitigation and monitoring measures would be 
required? Decisions that would not be made based on the analysis are: 
(1) Changes in land use and Forest Plan direction; (2) changes in the 
level of wildfire suppression, strategies, tactics, and whether or not 
to control wildfire; (3) changes in travel management, road use, and 
forest access; (4) prevention measures that minimize the establishment 
and spread of NNIP that are already part of Forest Service policy and 
recent decisions; (5) environmental protection agency established 
Reference Doses and related EPA toxicological thresholds; and (6) 
ecological and toxicological conclusions and data included in the 
Forest Service/Syracuse Environmental Research Associates Human Health 
and Ecological Risk Assessments.

Permits or Licenses Required

    Pesticide application licenses will be required for those 
implementing this project. Pesticide Use Proposals for wilderness areas 
would need to be signed by the Regional Forester; otherwise Pesticide 
Use Proposals are signed by the Forest Supervisor. This project may 
involve riparian herbicide applications that are subject to the 
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit 
requirements. If needed, NPDES permits would be acquired prior to 
project implementation.

Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement. Comments that 
would be most useful are those concerning developing or refining the 
proposed action, in particular those that can help us develop 
treatments that would be responsive to our goal to control, contain, or 
eradicate NNIP. It is important that reviewers provide their comments 
at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's 
preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments 
should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should 
clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions. No public 
meetings are planned for the scoping effort.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names 
and addresses of those who comment, become part of the public record 
for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be 
accepted and considered, however.

    Dated: October 21, 2011.
Mary Farnsworth,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2011-29552 Filed 11-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P