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

noxious weed

[[Page 58325]]

treatment 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 to control populations of noxious and

undesirable weeds on certain travel corridors and areas is designed to

prevent the spread of these weeds and promote the retention and health

of native and/or desirable plants within these ecosystems. The proposed

action would use an integrated pest management approach to control

weeds. This approach includes mechanical, biological, cultural and

chemical control.

Over 28 established, new or potential species of weed will be

considered for control. The major species considered for control

include spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), diffuse knapweed

(Centaurea diffusa), orange hawkweed (Hieracium aurantiacum), meadow

hawkweed (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, October 1989, the Idaho Panhandle

National Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan),

September 1987, and the Final EIS Noxious Weed Management Projects,

Bonners Ferry Ranger District, September 1995.

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

January 11, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed

management activities or request to be placed on project mailing list

to Brad J. Gilbert, District Ranger, St. Joe Ranger District, P.O. Box

407, St. Maries, ID 83861.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Laws, 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 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 weed control on the St. Joe

Ranger District. The primary purposes are: (1) To protect the natural

condition and biodiversity of the St. Maries River, St. Joe River and

North Fork of the Clearwater River ecosystems by preventing the spread

of aggressive, non-native species that displace native vegetation; (2)

prevent or limit the spread of weeds to areas identified as weed free;

(3) reduce weed seed sources along main travel routes; while also

complying with Federal and State Laws regulating management of noxious

weeds; and cooperating 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 North Fork of the Clearwater River

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

control weeds in these ecosystems, where treatment should be applied,

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

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 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 November and

December, 1995. The mailing list for public scoping will be developed

from response to this NOI and to the Idaho Panhandle National Forest

Quarterly Schedule of Proposed Actions, October, 1995. 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 organizations 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

significant 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 week 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 March, 1996. 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 ruling 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

[[Page 58326]]

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 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.

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: November 6, 1995.

Bradley J. Gilbert,

District Ranger.

[FR Doc. 28774 Filed 11-24-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M