St. Joe Weed Control Project; Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Benewah, Shoshone and Latah Counties, Idaho

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

St. Joe Weed Control Project; Idaho Panhandle National Forests,

Benewah, Shoshone and Latah Counties, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA, Forest Service, will prepare an environmental impact

statement (EIS) to disclose the potential environmental effects of

using herbicides to treat noxious weeds on the St. Joe Ranger District.

Treatment sites would be located at various locations across the

district and are within the St. Maries River, St. Joe River, and North

Fork of the Clearwater River Ecosystems, St. Joe Ranger District, Idaho

Panhandle National Forests, Benewah, Shoshone and Latah Counties,

Idaho. Most treatment sites are located near or along forest roads,

trails or developed recreation sites.

The proposed action is designed to treat existing populations of

weeds to promote native and/or desirable plants within these

ecosystems, treat existing populations of weeds to reduce weed seed

sources, eradicate weeds found in identified weed-free zones, comply

with laws regarding management of noxious weeds, and cooperate with

other agencies and private individuals concerned with the management of

weeds. The proposed action would include the use of herbicides as part

of an integrated pest management approach to control weeds. An

integrated approach includes mechanical, biological, cultural and

chemical methods.

The weed species considered for control include spotted knapweed

[[Page 35781]]

(Centaurea maculosa), diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa), orange

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

purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), dalmation toadflax (Linaria

dalmatica) sulfur cinquefoil (Potentilla recta L.), yellow starthistle

(Centaurea solstitialis), hound's-tongue (cynoglossum officinale) and

common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare).

This project level EIS will tier to the Idaho Panhandle National

Forests Weed Pest Management EIS, 10/89; the Idaho Panhandle National

Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), 9/87; the

Final EIS Noxious Weed Management Projects, Bonner's Ferry Ranger

District, 9/95; and he Priest Lake Noxious Weed Control Project Final

EIS, 2/97.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received on or before

August 1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed

management activities or request to be placed on project mailing list

to Bradley J. Gilbert, District Ranger, St. Joe Ranger District, P.O.

Box 407, St. Maries, ID, 83861.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynette Myhre, EIS Team Leader, St.

Joe Ranger District, phone number 208-245-4517.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Weed control is proposed on 131 sites that

have been identified on the St. Joe Ranger District. These sites range

in size from approximately 0.10 acre to 35 acres and total

approximately 3,360 gross acres. These sites represent less than 0.47%

of the 720,000 acres of National Forest System Lands on the St. Joe

Ranger District.

There are a variety of purposes for treating existing populations

of weeds on the St. Joe Ranger District. The primary purposes are: (1)

Eradicate weeds found in weed free zones; (2) reduce weed seed sources

along main travel routes; (3) to promote native and diserable plants;

(4) comply with Federal and State Laws regulation management of noxious

weeds; and (5) cooperate with other agencies and private individuals

concerned with the management of weeds.

The treatment sites are located across the district. The greatest

number of sites are located in the St. Joe Ecosystem. Other sites are

located in the St. Maries River and the North Fork of the Clearwater

River Ecosystems. The Idaho Panhandle National Forest 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 by 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 current

management practices would continue. Additional alternatives will

represent the range of control methods currently available for

treatment of weeds, including non-chemical methods.

Public participation is an important part of the analysis and will

play an important role in developing the alternatives. The initial

scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) will occur during June and July, 1997.

A previous EIS was completed for this project. That EIS was appealed

and remanded back to the St. Joe District to be redone. The public

input from that analysis will be used for this analysis in addition to

response to this NOI and to the Idaho Panhandle National Forest

Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions, July, 1997. In addition, the

public is encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials 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 organization who may be interested in

or affected by the proposed actions. Public meetings may 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.

4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.

5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action

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

Some public concerns have already been identified from initial

interdisciplinary review of the weed control proposal. The following

major issues have been identified so far:

1. Current and potential impacts of noxious weeds 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 effects upon human health from the application of

herbicides.

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

scoping and interdisciplinary review of this proposal.

The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed

with the Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA) and available for

public review in August, 1997. At that time, the EPA will publish a

Notice of Availability of the draft environmental impact statement in

the Federal Register. The comment period on the draft environmental

impact statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental

Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal

Register.

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 statement stage but that are not raised until after

completion of the final environmental 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 objectives are made available to the Forest Service at a

time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the

final environmental impact instatement.

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

[[Page 35782]]

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 St. Joe Ranger District, P.O. Box 407, St.

Maries, ID, 83861.

Dated: June 23, 1997.

Bradley J. Gilbert,

District Ranger, St. Joe District, IPNF.

[FR Doc. 97-17250 Filed 7-1-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M