United States 

Department of

Agriculture 

Forest 

Service 

June 2012

Management Indicator 

Species

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds 

Management

Tonto National Forest

Phoenix, Arizona

For Information Contact: Gregg Dunn

28079 N AZ Hwy 188

Roosevelt, AZ 85545

928-467-3218
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on 

the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial 

status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because 

all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited 

bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of 

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 

720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 
Tonto National Forest Noxious Weed Management 1 

Summary

The Tonto National Forest (Tonto NF) proposes to conduct control treatments for invasive plants 

throughout the area of the National Forest. The project area is located on approximately 

2.9omillion acres in central Arizona and is within the Tonto NF. This action is needed, because of 

the occurrence of noxious weeds on and adjacent to the forest, whose populations are growing 

exponentially, and to meet the requirements of law, regulations, and policy. 

The proposed action is to use the approach of Integrated Vegetation Management to manage 

invasive plant species on the Tonto NF. The forest would use the complete range of methods 

associated with integrated vegetation management to eradicate or contain and control populations 

of invasive species. These control methods include manual/mechanical techniques, 

burning/flaming, cultural methods, biological control agents, and herbicides. Monitoring, 

prevention, education, and cooperation with other land managers are also incorporated into this 

proposal. 

We have determined that the alternatives will have “no effect” for the following species relevant 

to this project: 

• Elk

• Ash-throated flycatcher

• Spotted towhee

• Savannah sparrow

• Canyon towhee

• Bald eagle

• Bell’s vireo

• Hooded oriole

• Common black hawk

2 Tonto National Forest Noxious Weed Management

Introduction

The Forest Service is required to maintain viable populations of native and desired non-native 

species by evaluating a project’s effects on selected management indicator species (MIS). This 

MIS report will: 1) disclose the effects of each alternative on the habitat of each MIS, and 2) 

describe the relationship and magnitude of these effects on the forest level population and habitat 

trends.

Description of Alternatives

The Proposed Action: Integrated Vegetation Management to Treat Weed 

Infestations

The Forest Service proposes eradication, containment, and/or control of noxious weed and 

invasive plant species on parts of the Cave Creek, Globe, Mesa, Payson, Pleasant Valley, and 

Tonto Basin ranger districts. The Tonto NF is within Gila, Maricopa, Pinal, and Yavapai 

counties, and comprises a total of 2,872,876 acres. Known noxious weed infestations cover only a 

small percentage of acreage on the Tonto National Forest; however, unknown infestations may be 

found anywhere within the nearly 3 million acres of the forest thereby increasing the overall total 

of infested acreage. 

This project will be reviewed after 10 years. If weed control beyond the scope of this analysis 

becomes necessary, further analysis under NEPA will be conducted. 

Proposed noxious weed treatment measures are a part of a broad strategy of Integrated Vegetation 

Management (IVM) (FSM 2080.2), which is composed of five elements:

Prevention and Detection

• Conduct fire management activities in such a manner that noxious weeds are not 

introduced or spread during fire suppression or prescribed burn projects.

• Educate the public, employees, and permittees to identify and report noxious weeds.

• Ensure all contractors and permittees operating on the National Forest understand and 

comply with the forest’s Noxious Weed Policy.

• Conduct weed surveys, as funding allows.

Treatment of existing populations

• Implement an integrated vegetation management strategy using cultural, physical, 

mechanical, biological, or chemical methods of control. New populations are treated 

as they are found, and as long as the conditions of this analysis and decision are met, 

no further NEPA analysis will be performed.

Monitoring

• Monitor effectiveness of control methods annually for 5 years following treatment.

• Monitor all known populations at least every 3 years, noting density and area of 

infestation.
Management Indicator Species

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds Management

Restoration

• In areas where there are large infestations of an invasive species, where treatment 

would result in expanses of bare ground, restore native vegetation following 

treatment. Restoration efforts would mainly involve erosion control and planting of 

native species. Restoration may also be needed after large disturbance events such as 

floods or fire, to prevent invasive plants from establishing. 

Coordination, cooperation and education

• Continue ongoing cooperation efforts with other agencies and landowners, and 

encourage new cooperative efforts as appropriate. These efforts should include lands 

of all ownerships and jurisdictions to ensure overall weed control.

• Partner with the State of Arizona Department of Transportation and other road 

management agencies to cooperate on control of invasive exotic species and ensure 

mulches and seed mixes are weed free, including coordination of this treatment plan 

with the ongoing statewide plan for treatment of invasive exotic plants in state and 

federal highway rights-of-way. Ensure invasive plant surveys are conducted for new 

highway construction early in the planning process. Work with ADOT and other road 

management agencies to ensure weeds found are treated to prevent spread during 

construction. 

• Continue to develop and implement educational and public awareness materials.

Most of these elements require only administrative action to accomplish. This proposed action 

evaluates treatment and restoration of sites with noxious weed infestations. Noxious weed 

treatment methods in this Integrated Vegetation Management approach include:

Manual – hand pulling and using hand tools to selectively remove noxious weeds from 

native plant communities. These treatments are effective in controlling new infestations of 

many weeds; however, they are very labor-intensive and may be ineffective on some types of 

weeds such as deep-rooted species or ones with fibrous roots. This control method will be 

used on up to 400 acres each year.

Mechanical – Using motorized equipment to mow, clip, or till. Many mechanical treatments 

are expensive. This control method will be used on up to 500 acres each year.

Prescribed Burning – Burning is an inexpensive and often effective method to remove large 

quantities of seed of annual weeds. It can be used very effectively, in combination with other 

treatments, as an integral part of multi-year strategy, especially for annual weeds. This

control method will be used on up to 2,000 acres each year.

Cultural – Seeding with plants that prevent infestation by invasive plants. Establishment of 

desirable plants is essential to preventing areas of bare ground created by construction or 

other activities from being vulnerable to infestation of weeds. Fertilizers or mycorrhizal 

inoculants may be included in some revegetation projects to increase establishment success. 

This method will be used on up to 2,000 acres each year.

Biological – Use grazing animals, approved insects and pathogens to control weeds. 

Biological treatments are typically used when the objective is control and not eradication. 

The biological agent and the weed co-exist to the extent that spread of the weed is limited. 
Manager Indicator Species

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weed Management

Once biological control agents, such as insects or plant pathogens are released, they may 

cover a large number of acres, if there is a continuous infestation of their target weed plant. If 

grazing animals are used for biocontrol, impacts of the action will either be evaluated in a 

new analysis or authorized according to an existing grazing permit. 

Herbicidal – Application of approved chemicals to noxious weeds. Herbicides would be used 

to treat up to 9,000 acres per year (about 0.3 percent of the National Forest. Actual acreage of 

treatment would probably be much less, as it would be limited by funding each year. Annual 

weed management efforts will be coordinated with treatment efforts undertaken by other 

federal, state and local governments, and Weed Management Areas. The majority of 

treatments will occur along roads and other travel corridors. 

Twelve herbicides and carriers (or additives) are proposed for use: aminopyralid, 

chlorsulfuron, clopyralid, dicamba, glyphosate, imazapic, imazapyr, metsulfuron methyl, 

picloram, sethoxydim, sulfometuron methyl, and triclopyr. These herbicides have been 

approved for use on the three northern forests (Coconino, Kaibab, and Prescott) in Arizona, 

and/or on rights-of-way on federal and state highways in all National Forests in Arizona. 

In addition to the proposed action, the Forest Service also evaluated the following alternatives:

Alternative 1: No Action (continue ongoing treatments). This alternative allows all previous 

decisions regarding treatment of noxious weeds on the Tonto NF to continue. There are:

manual treatments forest wide, torching areas less than 10 acres in size adjacent to roads, 

herbicide use in areas allowed by categorical exclusion (administrative & recreation sites), 

treatment of yellow starthistle and diffuse knapweed by prescribed fire and herbicide at the 

Pleasant Valley Ranger Station, continuation of a burn program for Malta starthistle along 

SR 188, and use of herbicides along federal and state highways as approved in a decision 

notice dated May 2004. No new weed treatments are proposed.

Alternative 2: Integrated Vegetation Management Excluding the Use of Herbicides. This 

alternative provides for use of mechanical, manual, prescribed burning/flaming, cultural and 

biological control agents to manage existing invasive plant populations and to control new 

infestations, as they occur.

Action Area

We assume that the type of vegetation occurring in the project area is similar to the potential 

vegetation layer. Therefore, we will use the potential vegetation layer to describe the type of 

habitat that will be impacted by the project. Below is the list of habitat types affected by the 

alternatives (table 1). 

Table 1. Vegetation types present within the Tonto National Forest, and known weeds

Terrestrial Ecosystems Acres within 

the Tonto NF

Percent of 

Tonto NF

Total Weed 

Species

Known 

Acres 

Mapped

Streamside vegetation 49,021 2% 26 653

Sonoran Desert 771,286 26% 18 865

Velvet mesquite grasslands 359,061 12% 14 97
Management Indicator Species

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds Management

Terrestrial Ecosystems Acres within 

the Tonto NF

Percent of 

Tonto NF

Total Weed 

Species

Known 

Acres 

Mapped

Piñyon/juniper/oak woodlands 654,122 22% 25 122

Alligator juniper savannas 85,275 3% 4 1

Alligator juniper woodlands 43,034 1% 5 12

Chaparral and chaparral 

woodlands 634,685 21% 27 86 

Arizona cypress woodlands 23,002 1% 2 1

Ponderosa pine forests 241,602 8% 21 8,228

Mixed conifer forests 61,642 2% 6 12,884

Private land/disturbed land 22,663 1% 32 49

Water 19,913 1% 2 25

Total Area* 2,965,322 10% 23,024

* Acreage includes some private lands within the boundary of the Tonto National Forest. A map of general 

potential natural vegetation types on the Tonto NF is included in the appendix. Characteristics of the vegetation 

types in the project area are described below, with discussions of their natural fire regimes. Weed infestation 

information is based on data as of December, 2011. Weed totals do not include acres of annual grasses which can 

vary widely from year to year depending on climatic conditions.

Management Indicator Species

In general, MIS were selected to serve as barometers of management effects on other 

species with similar habitat requirements. Tonto NF’s has 30 habitat features represented 

by 29 species, which consist mostly of birds. For more detailed information of each MIS, 

refer to the Tonto National Forest MIS Report (version 2). However, the project 

alternatives will not affect all habitat features. The table below lists Tonto NF’s 30 

habitat features and reasons why some MIS were excluded from analysis.
Management Indicator Species

Table 2. Impacts of project alternatives on vegetation types used by Management Indicator Species

Species Vegetation 

Type Indicator of: Primary Reasons for Selection Considered impacted by project alternatives?

Elk PP/MC general forest 

conditions 

Indicates early successional stages, 

grass, openings, water distribution, road 

density and disturbance, thermal or 

hiding cover, and the overall job of 

wildlife coordination with timber 

management. Basis for state strategic 

plan and of economic importance.

Yes. Project alternatives do affect general forest 

conditions. 

Turkey PP/MC

Vertical 

diversity – 

forest mix

Indicates forest openings, grass, insects 

for poults and well-distributed waters.

Turkeys require a minimum of four 

roosts per section (large trees in clumps 

with large lateral limbs on sidehills).

Good production requires fair or better 

range condition with rest-rotation and 

proper stocking. Indicates good nesting 

cover near water and open stocking.

Indicates good nesting cover near water 

and open foraging areas.

No. Project alternatives do not affect vertical 

diversity. 

Pygmy 

nuthatch PP/MC Old growth pine 

Requires vertical diversity and specific 

old growth characteristics in the upper 

range of the sawtimber stage. Sensitive 

to silvicultural treatments in old growth.

No. Project alternatives do not affect old growth 

pine. 

Violet-green 

swallow PP/MC

Cavitynesting 

habitat

Indicates old growth, water and snags. No. Project alternatives do not affect cavity nesting 

habitat.

Western 

bluebird Pp/mc Forest openings

May indicate heavy cutting of the 

conifer type and too many openings in 

one area.

No. Project alternatives do not affect forest 

openings 
Management Indicator Species

Species Vegetation 

Type Indicator of: Primary Reasons for Selection Considered impacted by project alternatives?

Hairy 

woodpecker PP/MC Snags

Species chosen to indicate the minimum 

legal compliance standard for snag 

densities. High densities at upper 

elevations may indicate insect outbreaks.

Primary excavator, utilizing a variety of 

species snags.

No. Project alternatives do not affect snags 

Goshawk PP/MC Vertical 

diversity 

Requires 20% of 5,000 acre management 

units to be managed for vertical diversity 

“old growth” characteristics.

No. Project alternatives do not affect vertical 

diversity. 

Abert 

squirrel PP/MC Successional stages of pine Dependent on pole sized ponderosa pine. No. Project alternatives do not affect successional stages of pine.

Ash-throated 

flycatcher P/J Ground cover Indicator of grassland modification, public issue. Yes. Project alternatives may affect ground cover. 

Gray vireo P/J Tree density Sensitive indicator of livestock grazing 

in wetlands, economically important. No. Project alternatives do not affect tree density.

Townsend’s 

solitaire P/J Juniper berry 

production 

Probably was designed to measure 

changes in acreage of mature juniper, 

although no notes are available on why 

the species was selected. Species was not

in final May 1982 list as candidate MIS.

No. Project alternatives do not affect juniper berry 

production.

Plain 

titmouse P/J

General 

woodland 

conditions 

Requires old growth characteristics in 

the piñyon-juniper type. Sensitive 

indicator of P-J woodland modification, 

utilizes juniper snags

No. Project alternatives do not affect general 

woodland conditions.

Common 

flicker P/J Snags Snag availability and ants. No. Project alternatives do not affect snags.

Spotted 

towhee P/J

Successional 

stages of 

piñyonjuniper

Indicates high, mid-story and shrub 

densities. Requires mid-successional 

stages in the piñyon/juniper type.

Yes. Project alternatives may affect successional 

stages of piñyon-juniper.
Manager Indicator Species

Species Vegetation 

Type Indicator of: Primary Reasons for Selection Considered impacted by project alternatives?

Spotted 

towhee Chaparral Shrub density

Indicates overstory composition and 

crown density. Indicates species 

diversity.

No. Project alternatives do not affect shrub density.

Blackchinned 

sparrow

Chaparral Shrub 

diversity 

Indicates overstory composition and 

crown density. Indicates species 

diversity.

No. Project alternatives do not affect shrub 

diversity. 

Savannah 

sparrow

Desert 

grassland

Grass species 

diversity

Species was not in final May 1982 list as 

candidate MIS.

Yes. Project alternatives do affect grass species 

diversity.

Horned lark Desert 

grassland

Vegetation 

aspect

Increases with moderate to heavy 

grazing. No. Project alternatives do affect vegetation aspect. 

Blackthroated 

sparrow

DesertscrubShrub 

diversity 

Increases in density as grazing pressure 

decreases, but this species increases in 

overgrazed desert grassland.

No. Project alternatives do not affect shrub 

diversity. 

Canyon 

towhee

Desertscrub Ground cover Decreases with overgrazing. Yes. Project alternatives may affect ground cover.

Bald eagle Low elev. 

riparian

General 

riparian

An increase in nesting or winter use 

along the Salt and Verde Rivers may 

indicate the riparian condition is 

improving.

Yes. Project alternatives may affect general riparian.

Bell’s vireo Low elev. 

riparian

Welldeveloped 

understory

Indicates a well-developed understory Yes. Project alternatives do affect well-developed 

understory. 

Summer 

tanager

Low elev. 

riparian

Tall, mature 

trees Indicates a good overstory No. Project alternatives do not affect tall, mature trees.

Hooded 

oriole

Low elev. 

riparian

Medium-sized

trees Indicates a good overstory Yes. Project alternatives do affect medium-sized trees.

Hairy 

woodpecker

High elev. 

riparian

Snags, 

cavities Indicates the snag components No. Project alternatives do not affect snags and cavities.
Management Indicator Species

Species Vegetation 

Type Indicator of: Primary Reasons for Selection Considered impacted by project alternatives?

Arizona gray 

squirrel

High elev. 

riparian

General 

riparian May indicate alder component No. Project alternatives do not affect general riparian.

Warbling 

vireo

High elev. 

riparian Tall overstory Indicates a tall tree overstory No. Project alternatives do not affect tall overstory.

Western 

wood pewee

High elev. 

riparian

Medium 

overstory Indicates mid-story No. Project alternatives do not affect medium overstory.

Common 

black-hawk

High elev. 

riparian

Riparian 

streamside

Indicates upper elevation riparian in a 

good condition with perennial stream 

and fish prey base available.

Yes. Project alternatives do affect riparian 

streamside.

Marcroinvertebrates Aquatic Water quality

Presence and composition reflects water 

quality, management practices, 

permanent water

No. Project alternatives do not affect water quality.
Management Indicator Species

MIS Impacted by Action Alternatives 

We have determined only nine MIS will be potentially affected by the project alternatives. A 

crosswalk between the potential vegetation classification and the 1985 Forest Plan vegetation 

types are listed below:

Table 3. Management Indicator Species potentially affected by project alternatives

MIS Forest Plan habitat 

classification Potential Vegetation Classification

Elk Conifer forest Ponderosa pine and mixed conifer

Ash-throated flycatcher Piñyon-juniper Piñyon-juniper grassland & piñyon-juniper 

chaparral

Spotted towhee Piñyonjuniper/chaparral

Piñyon-juniper grassland & piñyon-juniper 

chaparral

Savannah sparrow Desert grassland Colorado Plateau Grassland & semi-desert 

grassland

Canyon towhee Desert scrub Desert communities

Bald eagle Riparian Low elevation riparian

Bell’s vireo Riparian Low elevation riparian

Hooded oriole Riparian Low elevation riparian

Common black hawk Riparian Low elevation riparian

Table 4. MIS habitat & population trends and acreage impacts comparison of alternatives 

and proposed action

Tonto NF 

MIS Species

Vegetation 

Type Habitat Trend Population Trend

Alternative 

1 (No 

Action)

Alternative 

2 (No 

Herbicide)

Proposed 

Action

Elk Mixed 

conifer Static Stable 2,600 5,250 10,566 

Ash-throated 

flycatcher PJ Static Stable 17 35 75 

Spotted 

towhee PJ/chaparral Static Stable 27 55 110 

Savannah 

sparrow

Desert 

grassland Upward/static Stable 12 25 50 

Canyon 

towhee Desert scrub Downward/static Decrease 108 216 432 

Bald eagle Riparian Static Stable 81 162 325

Bell’s vireo Riparian Static Decrease 81 162 325

Hooded 

oriole Riparian Static Stable 81 162 325 

Common 

black hawk Riparian Static Decrease 81 162 325 
Management Indicator Species

Project Alternative Impacts Relative to Existing Forestwide 

Habitat Type Acreage Totals 

We have calculated the acreage impacts to MIS habitat types relative to the total habitat that 

exists currently. Because treatment of noxious weeds will not convert the habitat type into 

another habitat type, we consider the percent (%) change a change in quality and not quantity. 

Table 5. Percent change of acreage impacts to MIS habitat types relative to total habitat

MIS Determinations

Due to the small changes relative to current forestwide habitat, we have determined that the 

project alternatives will have a “no effect” to the nine MIS.

Table 6. Summary of project alternatives’ effects on nine MIS

Tonto NF 

MIS 

Species

Tonto NF 

Habitat Trend

Tonto NF 

Population 

Trend

Alternative 1 

Net change 

(determination)

Alternative 2 

Net change 

(determination)

Proposed 

Action 

(determination)

Elk Static Stable Trace (no effect) 1.8% (no effect) 3.7% (no effect)

Ashthroated 

flycatcher

Static Stable Trace (no effect) trace (no effect) trace (no effect)

Spotted 

towhee Static Stable Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect)

Savannah 

sparrow Upward /static Stable Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect)

Canyon 

towhee Downward/static Decrease Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect)

Tonto NF MIS 

Species

Current Forestwide 

Habitat (acres)

Alternative 1 (No 

Action)

Alternative 2 (No 

Herbicide)

Proposed 

Action

Elk 283,204 2,600(trace) 5,250(1.8%) 10,566

(3.7%)

Ash-throated 

flycatcher 1,155,722 17 (trace) 35 (trace) 75 (trace) 

Spotted towhee 1,421,202 27 (trace) 55 (trace) 110 (trace)

Savannah 

sparrow 316,894 12 (trace) 25(1.3%) 50 (1.2%)

Canyon towhee 605,363 108 (trace) 216 (trace) 432 (trace)

Bald eagle 35,022 81 (trace) 162 (trace) 325 (1%)

Bell’s vireo 35,022 81 (trace) 162 (trace) 325 (1%)

Hooded oriole 35,022 81 (trace) 162 (trace) 325 (1%)

Common black 

hawk 35,022 81 (trace) 162 (trace) 325 (1%)
Manager Indicator Species

Tonto NF 

MIS 

Species

Tonto NF 

Habitat Trend

Tonto NF 

Population 

Trend

Alternative 1 

Net change 

(determination)

Alternative 2 

Net change 

(determination)

Proposed 

Action 

(determination)

Bald eagle Static Stable Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect)

Bell’s vireo Static Decrease Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect)

Hooded 

oriole Static Stable Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect)

Common 

black hawk Static Decrease Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect) Trace (no effect)

Determinations Approved by:

/s/ Gregg Dunn July 1, 2012 

Gregg Dunn Date

Wildlife Biologist – Tonto Basin Ranger District

List of Contacts/Contributors/Preparers 

Fred Wong – Tonto National Forest, Forest Biologist
United States 

Department of

Agriculture 

Forest 

Service 

June 2012

Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds 

Integrated Management

Tonto National Forest

Phoenix, Arizona

For Information Contact: Gregg Dunn

28079 N AZ Hwy 188

Roosevelt, Arizona 85545

(928) 467-3218
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of 

race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, 

religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s 

income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with 

disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, 

etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). 

 To file a complaint of discrimination, 

write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or 

call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer
Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Contents

Background............................................................................................................................. 1

PROPOSED ACTION AREA DESCRIPTION....................................................................... 1

Project Actions ....................................................................................................................... 1

Alternative 1 – No Action .............................................................................................. 3

Alternative 2..................................................................................................................... 4

MBTA Species of Concern.................................................................................................... 4

Important Bird Areas ............................................................................................................. 6

Over-wintering Areas......................................................................................................... 6

Potential Direct and Indirect Effects of the Proposed Action and Alternatives . Error! 

Bookmark not defined.

Mitigation Measures Common to the Proposed Action and Alternative 2 .............. 6

Mitigation Measures Involving the Use of Herbicides................................................. 7

SIGNATURES ........................................................................................................................23

References.............................................................................................................................24

Background

Executive Order 13186 imposes procedural requirements on project level analyses for migratory 

birds. This Order requires the analyses to:

• Evaluate the effects of agency actions and plans on migratory birds, with emphasis on 

species of concern;

• Identify where unintentional take reasonably attributable to agency action is having, or is 

likely to have, a measurable negative effect on migratory bird populations.

This Executive Order is implemented in three ways. First, bird species of concern within the 

Tonto NF were identified. A list of species was compiled from two sources: APIF (Latta, et al., 

1999) and BCC (USFWS, 2008). From the BCC, we drew from three Biological Conservation 

Regions: 33 (Sonoran & Mojave Desert), 34 (Sierra Madre Occidental), and 16 (Southern 

Rockies and Colorado Plateau). The birds on those lists were compared with the Tonto NF bird 

checklist (U.S. Forest Service, 2009). Bird species on the APIF/USFWS combined list that were 

also on the Tonto NF bird checklist were selected. 

Once the list was compiled, it was determined whether these species of concern on the Tonto NF

occupy or have habitat within the project area (table 2). Secondly, IBAs or overwintering areas 

that exist within or in proximity to the project area were identified. Finally, opportunities to 

restore or enhance migratory bird habitat or mitigate negative project effects were developed and 

these activities were included in the project plan. 

PROPOSED ACTION AREA DESCRIPTION

The Forest Service proposes eradication, containment, and/or control of noxious weed and 

invasive plant species on parts of the Cave Creek, Globe, Mesa, Payson, Pleasant Valley, and 

Tonto Basin ranger districts. The Tonto NF is within Gila, Maricopa, Pinal, and Yavapai 

counties, and comprises a total of 2,872,876 acres. Known noxious weed infestations cover only a 

small percentage of acreage on the Tonto National Forest; however, unknown infestations may be 

found anywhere within the nearly 3 million acres of the Forest thereby increasing the overall total 

of infested acreage. 

Project Actions

Proposed noxious weed treatment measures are a part of a broad strategy of Integrated Vegetation 

Management (IVM) (FSM 2080.2), which is composed of five elements:

Prevention and Detection

• Conduct fire management activities in such a manner that noxious weeds are not 

introduced or spread during fire suppression or prescribed burn projects.

• Educate the public, employees, and permittees to identify and report noxious weeds. 

• Ensure all contractors and permittees operating on the National Forest understand and 

comply with the Forest’s Noxious Weed Policy.

• Conduct weed surveys, as funding allows.

Treatment of existing populations

• Implement an integrated vegetation management strategy using cultural, physical, 

mechanical, biological, or chemical methods of control. New populations are treated 
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

as they are found, and as long as the conditions of this analysis and decision are met, 

no further NEPA analysis will be performed.

Monitoring

• Monitor effectiveness of control methods annually for 5 years following treatment.

• Monitor all known populations at least every 3 years, noting density and area of 

infestation.

Restoration

• In areas where there are large infestations of an invasive species, where treatment 

would result in expanses of bare ground, restore native vegetation following 

treatment. Restoration efforts would mainly involve erosion control and planting of 

native species. Restoration may also be needed after large disturbance events such as 

floods or fire, to prevent invasive plants from establishing. 

Coordination, cooperation and education

• Continue ongoing cooperation efforts with other agencies and landowners, and 

encourage new cooperative efforts as appropriate. These efforts should include lands 

of all ownerships and jurisdictions to ensure overall weed control.

• Partner with the State of Arizona Department of Transportation and other road 

management agencies to cooperate on control of invasive exotic species and ensure 

mulches and seed mixes are weed free, including coordination of this treatment plan 

with the ongoing statewide plan for treatment of invasive exotic plants in state and 

federal highway rights-of-way. Ensure invasive plant surveys are conducted for new 

highway construction early in the planning process. Work with ADOT and other road 

management agencies to ensure weeds found are treated to prevent spread during 

construction. 

• Continue to develop and implement educational and public awareness materials.

Most of these elements require only administrative action to accomplish. This proposed action 

evaluates treatment and restoration of sites with noxious weed infestations. Noxious weed 

treatment methods in this Integrated Vegetation Management approach include:

Manual – hand pulling and using hand tools to selectively remove noxious weeds from 

native plant communities. These treatments are effective in controlling new infestations of 

many weeds; however, they are very labor-intensive and may be ineffective on some types of 

weeds such as deep-rooted species or ones with fibrous roots. This control method will be 

used on up to 400 acres each year.

Mechanical – Using motorized equipment to mow, clip, or till. Many mechanical treatments 

are expensive. This control method will be used on up to 500 acres each year.

Prescribed Burning – Burning is an inexpensive and often effective method to remove large 

quantities of seed of annual weeds. It can be used very effectively, in combination with other 

treatments, as an integral part of multi-year strategy, especially for annual weeds. This 

control method will be used on up to 2,000 acres each year.
Migratory Bird Report

Cultural – Seeding with plants that prevent infestation by invasive plants. Establishment of 

desirable plants is essential to preventing areas of bare ground created by construction or 

other activities from being vulnerable to infestation of weeds. Fertilizers or mycorrhizal 

inoculants may be included in some revegetation projects to increase establishment success. 

This method will be used on up to 2,000 acres each year.

Biological – Use grazing animals, approved insects and pathogens to control weeds. 

Biological treatments are typically used when the objective is control and not eradication. 

The biological agent and the weed co-exist to the extent that spread of the weed is limited. 

Once biological control agents, such as insects or plant pathogens are released, they may 

cover a large number of acres, if there is a continuous infestation of their target weed plant. If 

grazing animals are used for biocontrol, impacts of the action will either be evaluated in a 

new analysis or authorized according to an existing grazing permit. 

Herbicidal – Application of approved chemicals to noxious weeds. Herbicides would be used 

to treat up to 9,000 acres per year (about 0.3 percent of the National Forest. Actual acreage of 

treatment would probably be much less, as it would be limited by funding each year. Annual 

weed management efforts will be coordinated with treatment efforts undertaken by other 

Federal, State and local governments, and Weed Management Areas. The majority of 

treatments will occur along roads and other travel corridors. 

Twelve herbicides and carriers (or additives) are proposed for use: aminopyralid, 

chlorsulfuron, clopyralid, dicamba, glyphosate, imazapic, imazapyr, metsulfuron methyl, 

picloram, sethoxydim, sulfometuron methyl, and triclopyr. These herbicides have been 

approved for use on the three northern forests (Coconino, Kaibab, and Prescott) in Arizona, 

and/or on rights-of-way on federal and state highways in all National Forests in Arizona. The 

effects of each proposed herbicide to be used and its toxicity on birds is shown in table 1.

Alternative 1 – No Action

This alternative allows all previous decisions regarding treatment of noxious weeds on the Tonto 

NF to continue. These actions include: 

 Continuation of a prescribed burning program to prevent spread of Malta starthistle along 

Highway 188 from the junction with the Beeline Highway to Cholla Recreation Site 

(U.S.F.S., Tonto NF, 2004, Oct.). 

 Treatment of yellow starthistle and diffuse knapweed with prescribed fire, grubbing, and 

herbicides at the Pleasant Valley Ranger Station Administrative Site (U.S.F.S., Tonto NF, 

2004, Mar.).

 Use of hand tools and hand-pulling to remove weeds forestwide (U.S.F.S., Tonto NF, 

2005b). 

 Use of prescribed fires less than 10 acres in size, within 50 feet of forest System Roads 

(U.S.F.S., Tonto NF, 2005b).

 Use of herbicides along all federal and state highways through the Tonto NF. Herbicides 

may be sprayed with ground-based equipment on rights-of-way, and 200 feet beyond the 

right-of-way onto National Forest system land (U.S.F.S., May 2004).

 Use of herbicides in sites covered by Categorical Exclusions, that is to say administrative 

and recreation sites.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Under this alternative, the Forest’s weed management program will be limited to manual weed 

removal, use of prescribed fire only in blocks of 10 acres or smaller, and along a portion of 

Highway 188, and use of herbicides and prescribed fire at the Pleasant Valley Ranger Station 

horse pasture. Prescribed burns greater than 10 acres in size and herbicides will not be used 

(although some “housekeeping” uses may be categorically excluded from documentation at 

administrative and recreation sites), and no mechanical, cultural, or biological weed control 

measures will be used.

Up to 200 acres per year would be treated by manual control, up to 1,000 acres would be treated 

with herbicides under projects already approved, up to 2,000 acres could be treated with 

prescribed burning under existing project documentation, and up to 300 acres could be treated 

with herbicides at administrative or recreation sites. 

The No Action alternative is required by law. It addresses both Issues 1 and 2 as described above 

in the Issues section, but does not fulfill the purpose and need to effectively address the 

introduction and spread of invasive plants according to Forest Service policy and law. 

Alternative 2

This alternative provides for use of all integrated vegetation management tools, as described 

under the proposed action, except the use of herbicides would be excluded. Mechanical, manual, 

prescribed burning and cultural control methods would be used to manage existing invasive plant 

populations and to control new infestations as they occur. Mechanical methods would include 

mowing, or using equipment to cut tops off invasive plants. Up to 2,000 acres of mechanical 

treatments would be conducted. Manual methods would include cutting off seed heads and 

severing taproots, digging, or pulling plants. Up to 400 acres per year could be treated by manual 

control. Cultural control methods would be used to improve ground cover and heal disturbed 

ground locations, to reduce vulnerability of sites to new weed infestations. Acres treated by 

cultural control methods would be approximately the same as for the proposed action, or up to 

2,000 acres. Acreage of mechanical and prescribed burn treatments would be increased from the 

proposed action, in an attempt to meet objectives of the program. Up to 2,000 acres would be 

treated by mechanical methods, and up to 2,000 acres would be treated with prescribed fire. 

Monitoring would be conducted to assess effectiveness of treatments. Surveys would be 

conducted to locate new weed infestations. Education, prevention, and cooperation would occur 

as described under the proposed action. 

This action was developed to address concerns for effects of chemical herbicides on non-target 

species and human health (both issues 1 and 2 in the Issues section above). 

MBTA Species of Concern

Determination of the effects of the Proposed Action to migratory birds was accomplished by 

considering: 1) effects to PSCAPIF, 2) effects to IBAs, and 3) effects to important over-wintering 

areas (U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008). APIF identified Priority Species of Concern (PSC) 

by associated vegetation type. Sixty-three avian species categories (some species are listed more 

than once because they occur in more than one vegetation type) have been identified on Tonto NF 

by the Forest Biologist (F. Wong, pers. com. to K. Harbour). These species are listed in tables 2 

and 3 by vegetation type. In these tables, we also provide our determination of the potential for 
Migratory Bird Report

each species to occur in the Proposed Action Area based upon their vegetation type preference 

listed. 

Table 1: Showing effects of each proposed herbicide to be used and the toxicity on birds.

Herbicide Evaluation (Research Based)

Aminopyralid

Practically non-toxic to avian species by acute oral exposure (U.S. EPA/OPPEFED, 2004, p. 31). Gallagher, et al., (2001a) noted sub lethal but still adverse 

effects included decreased responsiveness, incoordination, lower limb 

weakness and other signs of toxicity

Tested doses are above levels used for the treatment of noxious weeds.

Chlorsulfurin

No treatment related mortalities or overt signs of toxicity, no apparent 

treatment related effects on body weight, food consumption, or reproductive 

parameters. (Beavers, et al.,1992b) 

Tested doses are above levels used for the treatment of noxious weeds.

Clopyralid

No signs of toxicity were reported. No mortality at highest dose tested (Fink,

1973b). 

Tested doses are above levels used for the treatment of noxious weeds.

Dicamba

At the typical application rate of 0.3 lbs. /acre, no adverse effects birds are 

plausible for either acute or chronic exposures. At the highest application rate 

of 2 lbs. /acre, adverse reproductive effects are plausible in acute exposure 

scenarios birds consuming contaminated vegetation or contaminated insects 

(Durkin & Bosch, 2004).

Glyphosate At application rate of 1 to 4lbs/acre no effects on birds. 

Tested doses are above levels used for the treatment of noxious weeds.

Imazapyr Imazapyr is in animal toxicity category IV, the lowest toxicity category.

Metasulfuron 

Methyl

Studies have not been completed for toxicity to birds. Based on the formula 

these are relatively nontoxic to birds because this chemical affects an enzyme 

that is not found in animals.

Picloram Practically nontoxic to birds. Low in toxicity and does not accumulate in the 

body since it is excreted rapidly in the urine (Ahrens, 1994).

Sethoxydim 

Studies have not been completed for toxicity to birds. Based on the formula 

these are relatively nontoxic to birds because this chemical affects an enzyme 

that is not found in animals

Sulfameturon 

Methyl

Studies have not been completed for toxicity to birds. Based on the formula 

these are relatively nontoxic to birds because this chemical affects an enzyme 

that is not found in animals

Triclopyr

The typical application rate of triclopyr resulted in a dose to herbivorous and 

insectivorous birds that exceeded the threshold value, but did not reach a 

lethal dose.

However, at the highest application rate, the upper range of estimated doses to 

birds exceeded the acute lethal dose measure (Harrington & Reichart, 2007).

Imazapic

Low toxicity rate to birds. Chronic exposure found losses in body weight in 

small and large avians (BLM, 2005). 

Tested doses are above levels used for the treatment of noxious weeds.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Important Bird Areas

The Audubon Society has designated 3 Important Bird Areas (IBA) located within Tonto NF.

They are the Cave Creek IBA, Salt and Verde Riparian Ecosystem IBA, and the Arnett Creek 

portion (boundaries not finalized) of the Boyce Thompson-Arnett Creek IBA. 

Over-wintering Areas

Arizona Game and Fish Department designated an overwintering area for waterfowl at Roosevelt 

Lake.

Mitigation Measures Common to the Proposed Action and 

Alternative 2

In response to public comments on the proposal, mitigation measures were developed to ease 

some of the potential impacts the various alternatives may cause. 

• Invasive species populations would be treated only after the area has been evaluated and 

surveyed for federally listed and sensitive plant and animal species. Field surveys will be 

conducted within occupied and potential habitat for sensitive species. The scope of the 

survey will be dependent on the type of treatment proposed, but will be sufficient to 

provide for the identification and protection of sensitive species within the project area. 

Individuals and populations of sensitive plants will be flagged or otherwise identified so 

they can be avoided during treatment. If necessary, a buffer zone of sufficient size will be 

established to protect sensitive species from mechanical disturbance or spray drift.

• Spray trucks, all-terrain-vehicles (ATVs), tractor-mounted mowers and other equipment 

used for invasive plant management will not be used in such a way that would increase 

erosion. Steep or highly erodible slopes will be avoided, and soil disturbance will be 

minimized.

• Heavy equipment will not be used within 30 feet of any stream bank. Handheld or ATVmounted equipment will be used within this zone.

• Prevention measures prescribed in Appendix C will be followed during agency activities 

to the degree possible to minimize invasive plant introduction and spread on the Forest. 

This is the single most effective and least expensive weed management option available.

• The only biological control agents that would be considered for use would be those 

selective for the target species, and approved by the APHIS for use on that species. No 

biological control agents will be used to control salt cedar. 

• If restoration of treated areas includes establishing new plants, this would be 

accomplished by broadcast seeding of native species or non-persistent, nonnative cover 

crops.

• All seed used for revegetation will be checked for presence of the Tonto NF’s list of 

invasive species, in addition to routine weed seed testing performed by seed companies.

• All sites treated for invasive species will be monitored and retreated as necessary. 

Monitoring is a follow-up part of each treatment activity. Baseline monitoring to 

determine existing conditions will occur prior to treatment. 
Migratory Bird Report

Mitigation Measures Involving the Use of Herbicides

The application of herbicides is tightly controlled by state and federal agencies. The Forest 

Service is required to follow all state and federal laws and regulations concerning the use of 

herbicides. The following measures will be followed for the proposed action:

• Herbicides will be used when it is determined that they offer the most practical, timely 

and economical method for control, and/or that they are an integral part of an integrated 

treatment strategy.

• All applicable state and federal laws, including herbicide label requirements will be 

followed. 

• Projects will be supervised by a Forest Service certified applicator, who will be 

responsible for ensuring safe storage, handling, application, and disposal of herbicides.

• Herbicides will be applied only by ground-based equipment, including hand painting or 

daubing, backpack sprayers, and spray units on ATVs or trucks. 

• Picloram will not be used where the water table is within 40 inches of the surface, or 

where soil permeability would be conducive to water contamination.

• Persons involved in mixing, loading, and applying herbicides will be required to wear 

appropriate personal protective equipment as required on the label.

• Areas used for mixing herbicides and cleaning equipment shall be located where spillage 

will not run into surface waters or result in ground water contamination.

• Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be followed.

• All requirements of a Safety and Spill Plan (Appendix E) will be followed

• Forest Supervisor approval of the Pesticide Use Proposal (Form FS 2100-2) will be 

necessary for the application of any herbicide, unless this authority has been delegated to 

the District Ranger. Use of herbicides in wilderness areas or wilderness study areas 

requires approval by the Regional Forester as per Forest Service Manual 2151.04a. 

• Mitigation measures prescribed for federally-listed and sensitive species will be followed.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Table 2. Migratory bird species of concern in Sonoran and Sierra Madre Occidental ecological regions of the Tonto National Forest, and 

estimated trend response to the proposed action and the two alternatives

Species Vegetation Type Habitat Examples of Invasive Plant 

Species in or near Habitat

Current 

condition/trend 

forestwide 

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

the Proposed 

Action

Estimated 

Trend in 

Habitat and 

Population 

Under 

Alternative 1

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

Alternative 2

Yellow-billed 

cuckoo 

Scientific 

Name also

Low elevation 

riparian 

Cottonwood 

and willow 

with dense 

patches

Saltcedar, tree of heaven, 

mustards, fountain grass, 

oleander, giant reed, Russian 

knapweed, camelthorn, 

yellow sweetclover, African 

sumac

No Change/Stable No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Elf owl

Sonoran Desert 

scrub, riparian, 

piñyon/juniper 

Cavity nester

Starthistles, saltcedar, tree of 

heaven, mustards, yellow 

sweetclover, African sumac, 

Siberian elm

Static/Increase No change No change No change

Burrowing 

owl

Semi-desert 

grassland, 

grasslands

Nests in animal 

burrows in 

open ground

Mustards, Schismus, 

buffelgrass, fountain grass, 

bromes, sandbur

Static/Stable No change No change No change

Loggerhead 

shrike 

Sonoran 

desertscrub, 

semi-desert 

grassland

Open areas

Mustards, Schismus, 

buffelgrass, fountain grass, 

bromes, sandbur

Static/Decreasing No change No change No change

Gray vireo

Piñyon/juniper 

with broadleafed shrubs

Low and tall 

shrubs with a 

tree 

component; 

drier, rocky, 

steep slopes

Bromes, knapweeds, 

starthistles, mustards Static/Stable No change No change No change

Bendire’s 

thrasher

Sonoran Desert 

scrub, semidesert grassland

Open habitat 

with large 

cacti, shrubs

Mustards, Schismus, 

buffelgrass, fountain grass, 

bromes, sandbur

No Change/Stable No change No change No change
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Vegetation Type Habitat Examples of Invasive Plant 

Species in or near Habitat

Current 

condition/trend 

forestwide 

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

the Proposed 

Action

Estimated 

Trend in 

Habitat and 

Population 

Under 

Alternative 1

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

Alternative 2

Yellow 

warbler Riparian Willows

Saltcedar, tree of heaven, 

giant reed, knapweeds, 

Siberian elm, oleander, 

fountain grass

Static/Increase No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Blackchinned 

sparrow 

Sonoran 

desertscrub, P/Jturbinella oak

Dense shrub w/ 

passages

Malta starthistle, bromes, 

Lehmann’s lovegrass, 

Jerusalem thorn, buffelgrass, 

Russian thistle

Static/Stable No change No change No change

Lark bunting

Sonoran Desert 

scrub, semidesert grassland

Grass cover 

less than 30 

centimeters

Mustards, Schismus, 

buffelgrass, fountain grass, 

bromes, sandbur, Jerusalem 

thorn

No Change/Stable No change No change No change

Lawrence’s 

goldfinch 

Riparian, 

piñyon/juniper 

Woodland near 

water

Starthistles, saltcedar, tree of 

heaven, mustards, yellow 

sweetclover, African sumac, 

Siberian elm

Static/Increase No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Northern 

goshawk Ponderosa pine

Denser 

portions of 

conifer stands

Oxeye daisy, Dalmatian 

toadflax, biennial thistles, 

Canada thistle, yellow 

starthistle, field bindweed, 

Japanese knotweed

No Change/Stable No change No change No change

Gray hawk Riparian 

Woodlands 

with open 

areas

Starthistles, saltcedar, tree of 

heaven, mustards, yellow 

sweetclover, African sumac, 

Siberian elm

No 

Change/Increase No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Common 

blackhawk Riparian 

Mature riparian 

woodlands 

with permanent 

water

Starthistles, saltcedar, tree of 

heaven, mustards, yellow

sweetclover, African sumac, 

Siberian elm

Static/Decrease No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Vegetation Type Habitat Examples of Invasive Plant 

Species in or near Habitat

Current 

condition/trend 

forestwide 

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

the Proposed 

Action

Estimated 

Trend in 

Habitat and 

Population 

Under 

Alternative 1

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

Alternative 2

Ferruginous 

hawk

Riparian, 

Sonoran Desert 

scrub, semidesert grassland

Varied

Starthistles, saltcedar, tree of 

heaven, mustards, yellow 

sweetclover, African sumac, 

Siberian elm, Jerusalem thorn

Static/Increase No change No change No change

Peregrine 

Falcon

Sonoran Desert 

scrub, piñyonjuniper, 

chaparral

Cliffs, rocky 

outcroppings in 

open areas

Mustards, bromes, Schismus, 

Jerusalem thorn, camelthorn, 

white bietou, resinbush

No Change/Stable No change No change No change

Flammulated 

Owl

Ponderosa pine, 

mixed Conifer

Open 

woodlands 

with brushy 

understory 

Oxeye daisy, Dalmatian 

toadflax, biennial thistles, 

Canada thistle, yellow 

starthistle, field bindweed, 

curveseed butterwort, diffuse 

knapweed, Japanese 

knotweed

Static/Increase No change No change No change

Lucy’s 

warbler

Low elevation 

riparian 

Mesquite, 

willow, 

cottonwood 

with dense 

midstory

Giant reed, Jerusalem thorn, 

oleander, tree of heaven, 

Saltcedar, fountain grass

Static/Increase No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Broad-billed 

hummingbird

Riparian, 

piñyon/juniper 

Small tree, 

shrub, vines

Giant reed, Jerusalem thorn, 

oleander, tree of heaven, 

Saltcedar, fountain grass, 

knapweeds

Static/Increase No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Costa’s 

hummingbird

Sonoran Desert 

scrub

Small dense 

trees or shrubs 

near riparian 

zone and 

flowering 

plants

Buffelgrass, bromes, 

mustards, Malta starthistle, 

camelthorn, Schismus, 

fountain grass, sandbur, 

Jerusalem thorn

No Change/Stable No change No change No change
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Vegetation Type Habitat Examples of Invasive Plant 

Species in or near Habitat

Current 

condition/trend 

forestwide 

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

the Proposed 

Action

Estimated 

Trend in 

Habitat and 

Population 

Under 

Alternative 1

Estimated Trend 

in Habitat and 

Population Under 

Alternative 2

Northern 

beardlesstyrannuletRiparian 

Cottonwood 

groves adjacent 

to water

Giant reed, Jerusalem thorn, 

oleander, tree of heaven, 

Saltcedar, fountain grass

No 

Change/Increase No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Greater 

pewee Riparian Woodland 

Giant reed, Jerusalem thorn, 

oleander, tree of heaven, 

Saltcedar, fountain grass, 

teasel

Static/Stable No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease

Purple martin Sonoran Desert 

scrub

Large saguaros 

with numerous 

holes in denser 

stands

Mustards, Schismus, 

buffelgrass, fountain grass, 

bromes, sandbur, Jerusalem 

thorn

No Change/Stable No change No change No change

Baird’s 

sparrow

Semi-desert 

grassland 

Grass with no 

woody canopy

Buffelgrass, bromes, 

mustards, Lehmann’s 

lovegrass

Static/Decrease No change No change No change

Common 

blackhawk

Low and high 

elevation 

riparian

Perennial 

streams with 

tree galleries

Giant reed, Jerusalem thorn, 

oleander, tree of heaven, 

Saltcedar, fountain grass

Static/Increase No change Potential 

Decrease

Potential 

Decrease
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Table 3: Proposed Action Impact Analysis for Tonto NF Migratory Bird Priority Species of Concern

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Band-tailed 

pigeon (Columba 

Fasciata)

Mixed conifer 

woodland 

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest

Nest in forested areas and feed 

primarily in oak forest and meadows 

primarily on acorns and berry crops 

such as manzanita, madrone and 

elderberry. Dependent on oaks, they 

are rare in pure ponderosa forest.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Cordilleran 

flycatcher

(Empidonax 

occidentalis)

Mixed conifer 

woodland 

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest

Breeding habitat includes spruce, fir, 

aspen, and pine forests, preferably in 

moist and shaded forests. It also 

inhabits hollows, canyon bottoms, 

and riparian woodlands. Natural nest 

sites include rock crevices, niches 

formed by scars in trunks (especially 

aspen), tree roots, cavities in small 

trees, and in forks of small branches

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 

Flammulated owl 

(Otus flammeolus)

Mixed conifer 

woodland 

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest 

They are associated with dry 

coniferous forests. Require an 

abundance of natural or abandoned 

cavities in snags, large dead limbs, 

or live trees in which to select a nest 

site. Prefer old growth forests 

dominated by ponderosa pine and 

large Gambel’s oaks for nesting and 

foraging.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Golden-crowned 

kinglet (Regulus 

satrapa)

Mixed conifer 

woodland 

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest

Breed primarily in mixed conifer, 

deciduous, and single-species stands. 

They prefer to nest near water or 

edges of clearings in closed or open 

canopies. Density of understory is 

not important. In Arizona, goldencrowned kinglets sometimes nest in 

riparian cottonwood and Gooding’s 

willow stands.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term

population trends within

Tonto NF. 

Northern 

goshawk 

(Accipiter 

Gentilis)

Mixed conifer 

woodland 

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest

Mature forests with interspersed 

openings. Moderately dense to

Dense over story for

Nesting. Fairly open mid and

Understory. Snags and dead and

Down (plucking posts, observation 

perches, prey

Habitat). Drainages important (nest 

tree base often in lower third of 

drainage). Nest often level with 

ridge. Elevation spans entire range 

of mixed conifer. Mosaic of dense 

stands interspersed with openings

With a wide variety of

Patch sizes. Edge (roads, forest cuts) 

good for prey availability

Wide variety of successional stages 

with the majority in the mature to 

old growth stage and irregular tree 

spacing

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Olive-sided 

flycatcher

(Contopus 

Cooperi)

Mixed conifer 

woodland; montane 

riparian wetland

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest; 

montane riparian wetland

Prefer coniferous forests offering tall 

prominent trees and snags. Prefers 

forest edge habitats with semi-open 

canopies naturally created by 

montane streams, lakes, and beaver 

ponds. 

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Red-faced 

warbler 

(Cardellina 

Rubrifrons)

Mixed conifer 

woodland, montane 

riparian wetland

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest; 

montane riparian wetland

Prefer deep, heavily forested 

canyons and cool, steeply sloping 

drainages. Nesting areas are on the 

ground, typically low on steep slope, 

bank, or among forbs on rock faces.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Red-naped 

sapsucker 

(Sphyrapicus 

nuchalis)

Mixed conifer 

woodland; montane 

riparian wetland

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest; 

montane riparian wetland

This woodpecker typically breeds 

higher elevation mixed conifer 

forests and associated montane 

drainages. During the winter it may 

be found at lower elevations in 

riparian areas and adjacent 

vegetation, including Madrean 

evergreen woodlands.

This species occurs within 

the Proposed Action Area. 

Direct or significant indirect 

impacts to this species are 

unlikely. The Proposed 

Action will have no effect on 

long-term population trends 

within Tonto NF.

Grace’s warbler

(Dendroica 

graciae)

Mixed conifer 

woodland 

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest

Prefer park like stands of mature 

trees and favor open conifer forests 

that are dominated by ponderosa 

pine. 

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Olive warbler

(Peucedramus 

Taeniatus)

Mixed conifer 

woodland 

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest

Closely associated with open pine 

forests particularly those on 

mountain slopes and ridges 

containing ponderosa pine.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Lewis’s 

woodpecker 

(Melanerpes 

Lewis)

Mixed conifer 

woodland: piñyonjuniper

Rocky Mountain 

montane conifer forest

Prefer open ponderosa pine or 

riparian woodlands that offer a 

brushy understory, open foraging 

areas, and snags for perching.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Macgillivray’s 

warbler 

(Oporornis 

Tolmiei)

Montane riparian

wetland Montane riparian wetland

Nesting along mountain drainages, 

springs, or slopes with a mixture of 

coniferous and deciduous trees and 

shrubs. Associated with drainages 

and canyons consisting of varying 

combinations of Douglas fir, 

ponderosa pine, and quaking aspen 

with a fairly dense understory. 

Required to have short, dense 

vegetation available for nesting and 

foraging substrates.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Golden eagle 

(Aquila 

chrysaetos)

Piñyon-juniper; 

Madrean evergreen 

woodland. Sonoran 

desertscrub

Great Basin conifer 

woodland, Madrean 

evergreen woodland,

Arizona upland 

subdivision 

This raptor is usually found in open 

country, in prairies, open wooded 

country and barren areas, especially 

in hilly or mountainous regions. 

They nest on rock ledges, cliffs or in 

large trees.

This species is known from 

the Arizona upland 

subdivision. Direct or 

significant indirect impacts 

to this species are unlikely. 

The Proposed Action will 

have no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Peregrine falcon 

(Falco peregrinus)

Piñyon-juniper; 

Sonoran desertscrub

Great Basin conifer 

woodland; Arizona 

upland subdivision

Optimum peregrine habitat is 

generally considered to be steep, 

sheer cliffs overlooking woodlands, 

riparian areas or other habitats 

supporting avian prey species in 

abundance. 

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Gray flycatcher 

(Empidonax 

wrightii)

Piñyon-juniper Great Basin conifer 

woodland 

This flycatcher is most commonly 

associated with larger stands of 

piñyon-juniper with sagebrush 

understory and ponderosa overstory. 

Occasionally found in areas with 

Madrean evergreen species. Nest 

height generally at 2 to 9 ft. This 

species may need some ground 

cover to support insect populations 

for foraging.

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Gray vireo

(Vireo vicinior) Piñyon-juniper Great Basin conifer woodland 

This vireo prefers relatively arid, 

open areas dominated by piñyon and 

juniper with a shrubby understory. 

Associated to a lesser extent with 

Madrean evergreen woodland and 

chaparral-covered slopes. 

Commonly nests and forages at 2 to 

8 ft.

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Black-throated 

gray warbler 

(Dendroica 

nigrescens)

Piñyon-juniper; 

Madrean evergreeen 

woodland 

Great Basin conifer 

woodland, Madrean 

evergreen woodland

This warbler is generally associated 

with open piñyon-juniper or oak 

woodlands. It is most closely 

associated with piñyon pine; and it is 

not usually found where juniper 

becomes dominant. 

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Juniper titmouse 

(Baeolophus 

ridgwayi)

Piñyon-juniper Great Basin conifer 

woodland 

This titmouse is primarily found in 

arid, juniper-dominated woodland 

communities; infrequently forages 

and nests on the edges of other 

communities including chaparral. 

Observed nest heights have ranged 

from approximately 4 to 14 ft.

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Costa’s 

hummingbird 

(Calypte costae)

Sonoran desertscrub; 

Sonoran riparian 

deciduous forest and 

woodlands 

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub, Sonoran 

riparian deciduous forest 

and woodlands 

This hummingbird is generally 

associated with well vegetated 

Sonoran and Mojave Desert scrub

uplands, particularly near desert 

washes. Nesting often occurs in a 

variety of trees, including palo

verde, at heights of approximately 1 

to 16 ft. 

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Bendire’s 

thrasher 

(Toxostoma 

bendirei) 

Sonoran desertscrub

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub

This thrasher is most commonly 

found in Sonoran desertscrub, 

usually in areas with an abundance 

of trees, shrubs, and cacti that are 

adjacent to more open areas. They 

are often found in xeroriparian 

conditions, and they may use rural 

agricultural areas. They will use 

grasslands if enough shrubs are 

present.

This species could be present 

on the Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 

Canyon towhee 

(Pipilo fuscus) Sonoran desertscrub

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub

This towhee is generally found in 

arid and brushy conditions, and it is 

most common in Sonoran 

desertscrub, including more densely 

vegetated dry washes and rocky 

foothill slopes. It is occasionally 

found in chaparral, Madrean

evergreen woodland, and sparsely 

populated rural communities.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Elf owl 

(Micrathene 

whitneyi) 

Sonoran desertscrub

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub

This small owl is commonly found 

in Arizona upland vegetation, but it 

is also common in other habitats 

with woody vegetation, including 

Madrean evergreen woodland. It 

requires cavities in saguaros or trees 

for nest sites.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Gila woodpecker

(Melanerpes

uropygialis) 

Sonoran desertscrub

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub

This woodpecker is most commonly 

found in the Arizona upland 

subdivision, although it will also use 

riparian areas with large 

cottonwoods, willows, sycamores, 

and mesquites. It requires saguaros 

or large trees for excavation of its 

nest cavities.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Gilded flicker 

(Colaptes 

chrysoides)

Sonoran desertscrub

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub

This woodpecker is found primarily 

in Sonoran Desert uplands, 

particularly in areas containing 

saguaro cacti. It commonly nests in 

cavities in saguaros greater than 15 

ft. tall or riparian trees.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Phainopepla

(Phainopepla 

nitens) 

Sonoran desertscrub

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub

Mistletoe is a key habitat 

requirement for this species, and it is 

able to use a variety of vegetation 

types if mistletoe is present. The 

phainopepla is most common in 

Sonoran desertscrub, but it may also 

be found in riparian woodlands. It is 

less common in piñyon-juniper 

woodlands and in Madrean

evergreen woodlands.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 

Prairie falcon 

(Falco mexicanus) Sonoran desertscrub

Arizona upland 

subdivision, Sonoran 

desertscrub

This raptor is mainly found in 

deserts and grasslands, where it 

prefers more arid and more open 

conditions than the peregrine falcon. 

Nesting areas have been reported in 

piñyon-juniper areas and in Madrean

evergreen woodlands.

This species could be present 

in the Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within 

Tonto NF.

Purple martin 

(Progne subis) Sonoran desertscrub Sonoran desertscrub

Depending on subspecies, this large 

swallow is found in Sonoran Desert 

scrub with numerous saguaro 

cavities or in higher elevation 

woodlands. It nests primarily in 

cavities above approximately 15 ft. 

in saguaros and 30 ft. in trees.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Black-chinned 

sparrow (Spizella 

atrogularis)

Chaparral Interior chaparral

This sparrow is closely associated 

with arid, brushy, and generally 

sloping chaparral habitats. It 

generally nests in dense shrubs at a 

height of 1 to 7 ft. 

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Bell’s vireo (Vireo 

bellii) 

Sonoran riparian 

scrubland; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous 

forest and woodlands 

Sonoran riparian 

scrubland; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous forest 

and woodlands 

This vireo prefers dense, low, 

shrubby vegetation in lowland 

riparian areas, with willows, 

mesquite and seep willows. 

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have a 

positive effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Lucy’s warbler 

(Vermivora luciae)

Sonoran riparian 

scrubland 

Sonoran riparian 

scrubland 

Although this warbler will breed in 

dryer conditions than other north 

American warblers, it is most 

abundant along perennial or 

intermittent drainages with 

mesquite. They are primarily found 

in Sonoran desertscrub, but they 

may also use cottonwood-willow 

riparian areas.

This species is also known to 

occur throughout the action 

area. Direct or significant 

indirect impacts to this 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

Species Tonto NF Vegetation 

Type Designation

Brown’s (1994) Biotic 

Community Equivalent Habitat Preferences* Potential Habitat and Disturbance Impacts

Common 

blackhawk 

(Buteogallus 

Anthracinus)

Interior riparian 

deciduous forests and 

woodlands; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous 

forest and woodlands 

Interior riparian 

deciduous forests and 

woodlands; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous forest 

and woodlands 

Riparian obligate raptors, nesting 

primarily along perennial drainages 

with mature gallery forests of 

broadleaf deciduous trees. Favor 

continuous flowing streams less than 

8 inches deep with low to moderate 

gradients and riffles, runs, and pools. 

Need abundance of low, streamside 

perches such as boulders, logs, and 

branches.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF. 

Northern 

beardless 

tyrannulet 

(Camptostoma 

Imberbe) 

Interior riparian 

deciduous forests and 

woodlands; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous 

forest and woodlands 

Interior riparian 

deciduous forests and 

woodlands; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous forest 

and woodlands 

Primarily inhabit fairly open riparian 

woodlands, including lower canyons 

and heavily wooded dry washes. The 

dominant tree species are Fremont 

cottonwood and Goodding’s willow 

stands.

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

Yellow warbler 

(Dendroica 

Petechia)

Interior riparian 

deciduous forests and 

woodlands; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous 

forest and woodlands 

Interior riparian 

deciduous forests and 

woodlands; Sonoran 

riparian deciduous forest 

and woodlands 

Closely associated with moistureloving deciduous trees dominated by 

cottonwood and willow. Areas often 

include a dense understory of 

deciduous saplings, seep willow, and 

mesquite. 

This species is present in the 

Proposed Action Area. 

Significant impacts to the 

species are unlikely. The 

Proposed Action will have 

no effect on long-term 

population trends within

Tonto NF.

* Sources:

Latta, M.J., C.J. Beardmore, and T.E. Corman, 1999. Arizona Partners in Flight Bird Conservation Plan. Version 1.0. Nongame and Endangered 

Wildlife Program Technical Report 142. Arizona Game and Fish Department. Phoenix, Arizona.

Corman, T.E. and C. Wise-Gervais. 2005. Arizona Breeding Bird Atlas. University of New Mexico Press. Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA Migratory Bird Treaty Act Report

The Proposed Action will likely impact local birds, but only minimally through small scale disturbance 

over a short time period. Any unintentional take reasonably attributable to the implementation of this 

action alternative is not likely to have any measurable negative effect on migratory bird populations. 

Alternative 1 would negatively affect local birds as habitat quality would diminish if invasive weeds are 

allowed to go unchecked.

Alternative 2 would be most beneficial to migratory birds as take would not occur with herbicide use. 

However, habitat quality would diminish over time, although slower than alternative 1, as other means of 

controlling weeds could only be done at a smaller scale.

SIGNATURES

Determinations for the Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds Report prepared by:

Prepared 

By: //S// Gregg Dunn Date: 29 June 2012

Gregg Dunn

Wildlife Biologist

Tonto Basin Ranger District
Migratory Bird Report

Tonto National Forest Noxious Weeds EA

References

Beavers J.; Foster J.; Lynn S.; et., al. (1992b). H-18,053 (Chlorsulfuron): A One-generation reproduction 

study with the mallard (Anas platyrhynchos). Lab Project Number: 112-267: 565-92. Unpublished 

study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 185 p. MRID 42634002.

Brown, D. E. (ed.). (1994). Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. 

University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City, Utah.

Brown, D. E. & Lowe, C. H. (1980). Biotic Communities – Southwestern United States and Northwestern 

Mexico. Map. University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City, Utah.

Durkin, P., & Bosch, S. (2004). Dicamba – human health and ecological risk assessment – final report.

Syracuse Environmental Research Associates. NY. 179 pp.

Fink R. (1973b). Final report: Eight-day dietary LC50--mallard ducks: Project No. 103-104. Unpublished 

study received November 12, 1980 under 464-563; prepared by Truslow Farms, Inc., submitted by 

Dow Chemical USA, Midland, MI; CDL:099724-D. MRID No. 00073641.

Gallagher S; Grimes J; & Beavers J. (2001a). XDE-750: An Acute oral toxicity study with the Northern 

bobwhite. Project Number: 379/106, 011046. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, 

Ltd. 33 p. MRID No. 46235808.

U.S. EPA/OPP-EFED (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/Office of Pesticide Programs – 

Environmental Fate and Effects Division). (2004). EFED Science Chapter: Environmental fate and 

ecological risk assessment for the registration of Aminopyralid.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2008). Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. United States Department 

of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. 

85 pp. [Online version available at <http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/>]