Bonners Ferry Noxious Weed EIS; Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Boundary County, ID

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Bonners Ferry Noxious Weed EIS; Idaho Panhandle National Forests,

Boundary County, ID

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare 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 on the Bonners Ferry Ranger District. Treatment

sites would be located at various locations across the district and

within the Selkirk Mountain and Kootenai River Ecosystems, Bonners

Ferry Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle National Forest, Boundary

County, Idaho. Part of the proposed project's activities are within the

Kootenai Peak Roadless Area 1-126 and the Selkirk Roadless Area 1-125.

Most treatment sites are located near or along forest roads.

The proposed action to control selected known populations of

noxious weeds in certain areas within these ecosystems is designed to

promote the retention and health of the native plants within these

ecosystems. The proposed action would use an integrated pest management

approach to control noxious weeds. The integrated pest management

approaches of the proposed action include mechanical, biological, and

chemical control. The noxious weed species considered for control

include spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), rush skeleton weed

(Chondrilla juncea), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), orange hawkweed

(Hieracium aurantiacum), meadow hawkweed (Hieracium pratense), common

St. Johns-wort (Hypericum perforatum), Dalmation toadflax (Linaria

dalmatica), and common tansy (tanacetum vulgare).

This project level EIS will tier to the Idaho National Forests Weed

Pest Management EIS of October 1989 and Idaho Panhandle National

Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) of September

1987.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received by February

13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed

management activities or request to be placed on project mailing list

to Debbie Norton, District Ranger, Bonners Ferry Ranger District, Route

4, Box 4860, Bonners Ferry, ID 83805-9764.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bob Klarich, EIS Team Leader, Bonners Ferry Ranger District, phone

number 208-267-5561.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Noxious weed control is proposed on 41 sites

on the Bonners Ferry Ranger District. The 41 sites range in size from

approximately 0.24 acre to 33 acres and together total about 336 gross

acres. These sites represent 0.08% of the 410,000 acres of National

Forest System Lands on the Bonners Ferry District.

There are a variety of purposes for noxious weed control on the

Bonners Ferry Ranger District. The primary purposes are: (1) To protect

the natural condition and biodiversity of the Selkirk Mountain

ecosystem and Cabinet Mountain portion of the Kootenai River Ecosystem

by preventing the spread of aggressive, non-native plant species that

displace native vegetation; (2) prevent or limit the spread of noxious

weeds to important low elevation lakes in the Purcell Mountain segment

of the Kootenai River ecosystem; (3) comply with Federal and State laws

regulating management of noxious weeds; and (4) cooperate with other

agencies and private individuals concerned with the management of

noxious weeds.

The treatment sites are located across the district. The greatest

number of sites are located in the Selkirk Mountain Ecosystem. Other

sites are located in the Kootenai River Ecosystem.

The decision to be made is what actions, if any, should be taken to

control noxious weeds in these ecosystems, where treatment should be

applied, and what type of treatment(s) should be used.

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 directed that forest pests be managed by an

integrated pest management approach.

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 represent the range of control methods currently available

for treatment of noxious weeds. Some of the action alternatives will

involve only non-chemical methods of control.

Public participation is an important part of the analysis,

commencing with the initial scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7), which will

occur during November and December of 1994. In addition, the public is

encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials at any time during

the analysis and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will 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. Public meetings will

be held, but have not been scheduled at this time.

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, such as the Idaho Panhandle

Forest Plan EIS or Idaho Panhandle Weed Pest Management EIS.

4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.

5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action

and alternatives (i.e., cumulative effects).

6. Determine potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.

Some public comments 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 noxious weeds (and their

spread) on ecosystem communities and processes; threatened, endangered,

and sensitive plants and animals; soils; water quality; aesthetics;

wildlife and fish; and recreational opportunities.

2. Potential impacts of weed control.

3. Potential affects upon human health from the application of

herbicides.

This list will be verified, expanded, or modified based on public

scoping interdisciplinary review of this proposal.

The Draft EIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public review in May of 1995.

At that time, 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's notice of availability appears

in the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in

noxious weed management participate at that time. To be most helpful,

comments on the Draft EIS should be as site-specific as possible. The

Final EIS is scheduled to be completed by August of 1995.

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 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, 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 developing issues and alternatives.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

on the proposed action, comments should be as specific as possible.

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 Bonners Ferry Ranger District, Route 4, Box 4860, Bonners

Ferry, ID 83805-9764.

Dated: December 16, 1994.

Allen B. Chrisman,

Acting District Ranger.

[FR Doc. 94-32148 Filed 12-29-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M