Modoc National Forest Noxious Weed Control Project

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Modoc National Forest Noxious Weed Control 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 to eradicate between 100 and 300 acres of noxious weeds

annually, beginning 1999 for a period of 10 to 20 years, within site

specific areas of the Modoc, Lassen, and Siskiyou Counties in

northeastern California. The proposed 26 target weeds are Plumeless

thistle, Musk thistle, Canada thistle, Yellowspine thistle, Scotch

thistle, Russian knapweed, Rush skeletonweed, Diffuse knapweed, Spotted

knapweed, Yellow starthistle, Hoary cress or whitetop, Squarrose

knapweed, Marlahan mustard, Leafy spurge, Halogeton, St. Johnswort,

Dalmation toadflax, Purple loosestrife, Mediterranean sage, Puncture

vine, Perennial pepperweed, Medusahead, Jointed goatgrass, Barbed

goatgrass, Common crupina, and Wavyleaf thistle. The proposed treatment

methods are mechanical, biological, cultural, preventive, chemical, and

through land management practices such as livestock grazing. The

herbicides which will be used are chloraulfuron, dicamba, clopyralid,

2,4-D, picloram, hexazinone, glyphosate, triclopyr, sulfometuron

methyl, and simazine. The proposed herbicides are distributed under a

number of trade names and strengths. The agency invites written

comments and suggestions on the proposed project.

In preparing the environmental impact statement, the Forest Service

will identify and consider a range of alternatives. Possible

alternatives to this proposal are no action, utilize all treatments

except aerial, and all treatments except chemical.

DATES: Comments concerning the proposal should be received in writing

by May 25, 1998, to receive timely consideration in the preparation of

the draft EIS. The draft EIS will be filed with the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review in August

1998. The final EIS and Record of Decision are expected to be issued in

November 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the scope

of the analysis to Steven F. Bishop, Acting Forest Supervisor, Modoc

National Forest, 800 West 12th Street, Alturas, CA 96101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct questions about the proposed

action and environmental impact statement to Jim Irvin, or Allison

Sanger, Project Leader, Modoc National Forest, 800 West 12th Street,

Alturas, CA 96101, 530-233-5811.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: There are 26 noxious weed species which

receiving intensive control in or near the Modoc National Forest.

Thirteen of the 26 species are listed as ``A'' rated weed pests which

means they have limited distribution in California and are subject to

eradication, quarantine, or other holding actions at the State and

County levels. All 26 of these are exotic pests, not native to

California and thus replace the native species then they invade

different plant communities.

In 1997, approximately 90 acres of noxious weeds were treated on

the Modoc National Forest in Modoc, Lassen, and Siskiyou Counties.

Infestations are scattered primarily over Lassen and Modoc Counties,

the largest being the common crupina infestation above Round Valley

which covers a total of 740 acres of private and Forest Service lands.

Most infestations are less than one acre in size.

An Integrated Weed Pest Management approach will be use to control

and eradicate these weeds species. This approach uses a combination of

control methods which include; mechanical control such as hand pulling,

clipping, mowing, and burning of weeds; cultural control such as

fertilization, seeding, and cultivation; biological control through the

use of parasites and pathogens; preventive through the use of education

and guidelines to increase awareness and prevent new infestations onto

Forest lands; chemical control through the use of herbicides; and

control by land management practices such as livestock grazing.

Chemical methods include the use of backpack sprayers, truck

mounted power sprayers, or aerial application of a specific area only.

The chemicals (herbicides) would be in either liquid or granular form.

Helicopters are used for aerial application to minimize resource damage

in areas with limited access, and large infestations. To obtain the

greatest reduction of weeds from chemical control, selection of the

proper herbicide with application at the proper time and method are of

the utmost importance.

Aerial application is being proposed for only one area on the

Forest, a 160 acre (740 acre total) infestation of common crupina found

on private and

[[Page 20376]]

Forest Service lands in the northeastern corner of Round Valley. This

will be a one-time aerial application of herbicides with follow-up by

ground treatment. No other aerial application of herbicides will be

analyzed in this document.

Public participation is especially important at several points

during the analysis. The first point is during the scoping process (40

CFR 1501.7). 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 action. This input will be used in preparation of the

draft environmental impact Statement (DEIS). The scoping process

includes:

1. Identifying potential issues.

2. Identifying issues to be analyzed in depth.

3. Eliminating insignificant issues or those which have been

covered by a relevant previous environmental analysis.

4. Exploring additional alternatives.

5. Identifying potential environmental effects of the proposed

action and alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, cumulative effects and

connected actions).

The Modoc County Agriculture Department will be invited to

participate as a cooperating agency to supervise the eradication of

this weed.

The DEIS is expected to be filed with the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and to be available for public review in August 1998. The

comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be 45

days from the date the EPA 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 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 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 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.

After the comment period ends on the draft EIS, the comments will

be analyzed and considered by the Forest Service in preparing the final

environmental impact statement. In the final EIS the Forest Service is

required to respond to the comments received (40 CFR 1503.4). The

responsible official will consider the comments, responses,

environmental consequences discussed in the EIS, and applicable laws,

regulation, and policies in making a decision.

Dated: April 9, 1998.

Stephen F. Bishop,

Acting Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 98-10954 Filed 4-23-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-32-P