STEMMING THE

INVASIVE TIDE

Forest Service Strategy for Noxious and Nonnative 

Invasive Plant Management

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest 

Service

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

CURRENT DIRECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Feature: The Sheyenne National Grassland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Feature: Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Feature: Noxious Weed-Free Forage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

PROGRAM DIRECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Feature: Caribou and Sawtooth National Forests . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

I. PREVENTION AND EDUCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Feature: Siuslaw National Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Feature: Nez Perce National Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

II. CONTROL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Feature: Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

III. INVENTORY, MAPPING, AND MONITORING . . . . . . . . . 16

Feature: Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Feature: Los Padres and Stanislaus National Forests. . . . . . . . 18

IV. RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Feature: Biological Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

V. ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Feature: Ocala National Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Feature: Lincoln National Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Interdepartmental USDAActivities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Cooperation With Other Federal Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Non-Federal Partners and Cooperators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Forest Service Noxious Weed Coordinators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Forest Service Research Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

CONTENTS
USDA Forest Service. 1998. “Stemming the Invasive Tide: FS Strategy for Management of Noxious and Nonnative Plant Mgmt. pp.29.
INTRODUCTION

Noxious weeds and invasive plant species pose an

increasing threat to native ecosystems, croplands, 

and other plant communities throughout the United States.

While weeds have long been recognized as a problem for

agriculture, the potential impact to other plant communities,

including wildlands, is receiving greater attention.

There are an estimated 2,000 invasive and noxious weed

species already established in the United States. Escalating

worldwide trade and travel will only increase the risk of

further invasions. All ecosystems—urban, suburban and 

rural, including wildlands, rangelands, forests, riparian 

areas, and wetlands—are vulnerable to invasion.

Experience and research have shown that invasive and

noxious weeds can no longer be considered a problem only 

on disturbed sites. Noxious and invasive plant species have

become established within relatively undisturbed ecosystems,

including entire ecosystems such as the Florida Everglades.

Noxious weeds pose an increasing threat to the integrity of

wildland ecosystems, including specially designated areas

such as wilderness and research natural areas.

On Federal lands in the Western United States, it is

estimated that weeds occur on more than 17 million acres,

with similar infestations occurring in Canada and Mexico.

Good estimates are not available for the Eastern United 

States. On National Forest System (NFS) lands, an estimated

6–7 million acres are currently infested and potentially

increasing at a rate of 8 to 12 percent per year. The noxious

weed situation in the United States has been described by

many as a biological disaster, “an explosion in slow motion”

(Wyoming Department of Agriculture).

1
CURRENT

DIRECTION

The Forest Service (FS) is the largest landmanagement agency within the United States

Department of Agriculture (USDA), managing

191 million acres of national forests and grasslands. The FS has the lead responsibility for

noxious weed coordination for the Department

under the authority contained in the Noxious

Weed Act of 1974, the Hawaii Tropical Forest

Recovery Act, and the USDA Policy 9500-10.

Under this authority, the FS developed the

USDA Policy in 1990 and policy direction for 

the FS in 1991.

FS policy was revised in 1995 (FSM 2080) to

include new standards and refined direction for

integrated pest management (IPM). The revised

policy emphasizes the importance of integrating

noxious weed management in ecosystem analysis, assessment, and forest planning. The policy

further emphasizes the importance of coordinated noxious weed management through

cooperation with other agencies, State and local

governments, and private landowners.

Because the FS policy definition encompasses

invasive, aggressive, or harmful nonindigenous

or exotic plant species, this report hereafter uses

the term “noxious weeds” to include all variations included in the definition. The FS policy

defines noxious weeds as—

those plant species designated as noxious

weeds by the Secretary of Agriculture or by

the responsible State official. Noxious weeds

generally possess one or more of the following

characteristics: aggressive and difficult to

manage, poisonous, toxic, parasitic, a carrier

or host of serious insects or disease and being

native or new to or not common to the United

States or parts thereof. (FSM 2080)

Three Deputy Chief areas of the FS have

responsibilities for different aspects of noxious

weeds: Research, State and Private Forestry

(S&PF), and the NFS. The NFS has responsibility

to prevent, control, and eradicate noxious weeds

in 156 national forests and 20 national grasslands. To achieve this goal, the administrative

units of NFS work in conjunction with State and

local governments and private landowners for

the common purpose of noxious weed management across jurisdictional boundaries.

THE SHEYENNE

NATIONAL GRASSLAND

Approximately 11,000 acres of leafy spurge on

the 70,000-acre Sheyenne National Grassland

in North Dakota caused grassland managers to turn

to an IPM strategy to deal with the infestation.

While a full complement of management tools has

been employed—including biocontrol, herbicides,

and burning—the grazing of long-haired Angora

goats provides a unique twist to the successful leafy

spurge control program. Grassland managers’

observations and North Dakota State University

research findings indicate that it is the combination

of treatments that has proven most effective in combating leafy spurge in the national grassland.

The North Dakota Department of Agriculture’s

Weed Innovation Network helped match the grassland’s need with the opportunity for goat owners

throughout the State to expand their operations.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

2

Closeup of Aphthona nigriscutis, a biocontrol

agent, on leafy spurge. Photo by R. D. Richard, APHIS.

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL...
The grassland’s goat-grazing program involves

two herds of Angora and Angora-cross goats, with

1,200 animals in each herd. Under the watchful eyes

of two dedicated herders, goats graze on designated spurge patches during the day and at night

are returned to movable corrals. The use of herders,

dogs, and corrals allows grassland managers to target specific areas for grazing, thereby reducing or

eliminating impacts to sensitive areas like

aspen/oak woodlands, or threatened species like

the western prairie fringed orchid. In fact, the

grassland’s herders have been trained to identify

and inventory orchids they encounter, thus adding

to the species’ information base.

After 5 years, managers have observed a reduction in stem densities of spurge patches. This reduction allows livestock forage plants to become

reestablished.

The Sheyenne Valley Grazing Association is a

key partner in successful leafy spurge control

efforts on the grassland. The grazing association

has participated in a 50–50 cost-share grant to cover

both the herbicide and goat-grazing program.

Grazing permittees also pay additional money for

herbicide treatments beyond what is required in the

grant. As a reflection of their personal commitment

to furthering IPM efforts on the Sheyenne National

Grassland, association members have also contributed many workdays to the collection and distribution of biocontrol insects.

National grassland staff and grazing association members

collecting biocontrol agents.

Angora goats grazing on leafy spurge. Photo by Bryan Stotts, USDA-FS.

3
CURRENT

DIRECTION

The primary emphasis of FS Research has been in

the development of biological controls. The

research program is concentrated in Bozeman,

Montana, and Hilo, Hawaii, operating in cooperation with other State and Federal agencies and universities. FS Research works in conjunction with the

USDAAgricultural Research Service (ARS) weed

control project. FS Research augments the ARS

effort by concentrating on sites and ecosystems

common to FS lands.

Weed ecology is also a component of forest and

rangeland ecology research for the Western Forest

and Range Experiment Stations. Studies are ongoing on germination rates and life cycles of noxious

weeds, on restoration methods for areas infested

with weeds, and on the use of burning, grazing,

and fertilization as alternative treatments to pesticide use.

Within State and Private Forestry, Forest Health

Protection (FHP) has historically provided technical

support and assistance in the pesticide and integrated pest management programs and now has

begun to provide field units with entomological

and pathological technical assistance for noxious

weeds, including biological control. Technical assistance is also provided to the various State Foresters

and private cooperators, and FHP assists with forest health monitoring. In Hawaii, FHP staff responsibilities now include some financial support and

assistance in treating noxious weeds.

FHP is responsible for reporting all pesticide use

in the annual Report of the Forest Service to Congress.

FHP participates in the National Agricultural

Pesticide Impact Assessment Program (NAPIAP),

which provides the necessary research for potential

data gaps for pesticides currently registered with

the Environmental Protection Agency. FHP has prepared and is currently updating pesticide background statements and risk assessments for

pesticides commonly used in noxious weed control.

These risk assessments are used to analyze and

determine the potential impacts of pesticide use,

such as potential adverse effects on health and

safety, on NFS lands.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

4

Biocontrol research for kudzu, a serious problem species in the

Southeastern United States, includes cooperators in China and

FHP test plots at the Savannah River Institute, North Carolina.
NOXIOUS WEED RESEARCH...

HAWAII

Hawaiian ecosystems are especially vulnerable

to adverse impacts from introduced species. In

fact, the main threat to Hawaii’s surviving native

species and natural communities is considered to

be the destructive effect of invasive introduced

species. To translate research data into successful,

on-the-ground weed control methodologies, the

FS’s Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry Alien

Species Team, based at Hilo, Hawaii, combines its

basic research on the resiliency of Hawaii’s ecosystems in the face of invasive alien species with technology transfer.

FS Research, through the work of the Institute of

Pacific Islands Forestry, expands its research and

management program to tackle alien species problems. Biological control research programs are placing more emphasis on the detailed, pre-release

monitoring of target weeds and post-release assessment of the impact of control agents. Investigations

have been started on the dynamics of weed invasions and their impacts on forest structure and

processes. As part of the Alien Species Team, the

FHP program coordinates and manages weed control programs to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of statewide forest weed control.

One such program is Operation Miconia. Miconia

calvescens is an invasive tree species which forms

interlocking, closed canopies that can displace

native forests by overtopping and shading out

existing trees and plants. Miconia is shallow rooted

and susceptible to being blown down in windstorms and causing significant risks to watersheds,

as has occurred in Tahiti, where it is a major problem. A statewide collaborative effort, Operation

Miconia was kicked off in 1996 by Governor Ben

Caeyetano to inform the public about the potential

impacts of Miconia and to coordinate control efforts

throughout the State.

Approximately 10,000 acres on the island of

Hawaii are infested with Miconia. Operation

Miconia’s control and eradication efforts on the 

Big Island are supervised by FHP staff on the Alien

Species Team and are funded through a variety of

sources, including National Fish and Wildlife

Foundation “Pulling Together” cost-share grants;

County of Hawaii funds; in-kind contributions

from the State of Hawaii, Division of Forestry and

Wildlife and Department of Agriculture; and

contributions from the Campbell Estate.

The Big Island’s six-member control team starts

its operations at the outside edges of infestations

and works toward the species’ “epicenter,” located

near the Hamakua coast. The team uses a combination of pulling-by-hand and chemical treatments. It

is also testing various chemical application techniques to determine the most effective methods to

use in very rugged country. In addition, Operation

Miconia uses satellite and computer technology to

locate and map infestations, and then disseminates

this information through the Hawaii Ecosystems at

Risk Project, University of Hawaii, Department of

Botany.

Since the beginning of Operation Miconia, more

than 180,000 acres have been surveyed and approximately 700 acres have been treated. Some 2,000

mature or flowering plants have been killed, and

38,000 seedlings have been destroyed. However,

since seeds can remain viable in the soil for up to 6

years, continued vigilance is needed in treated areas

to control the emergence of new plants. Current projections indicate that Miconia control activities are

required for another 10 to 15 years to eradicate the

last flowering plants and to control seedlings.

5
CURRENT

DIRECTION

Management of the noxious weed program has

been delegated to the Director of Range

Management within NFS. Until 1995, the Range

Management budget included a budget line item

for noxious weed activity, with a corresponding

Management Attainment Report target for number

of acres treated.

However, with the reorganization of the budget

in 1995, the line item was consolidated into the general range budget and some activities previously

covered in range, such as inventory, were moved to

the Ecosystem Management budget. This created

confusion regarding sources of funding for weed

activities and prompted a clarification letter by the

Chief. The Chief’s letter stated that any resource

area that engages in ground-disturbing activities

could use its funds for noxious weed activities associated with the planned ground-disturbing activity.

A management target for noxious weeds was

retained.

The FS’s approach to the growing problem of

noxious weeds has varied. Noxious weed concerns

and activities have historically been based at the

regional, forest, and district levels, under the

umbrella of national policy. Initiatives and control

programs are developed and implemented at this

level often independently of other administrative

units. Some regions have had active programs since

the early 1970’s, working closely with State and

local officials on a consolidated noxious weed

approach. Other regions are in the process of developing a strategy.

The FS has often played a key role at the local,

county, and ranger district level. In many rural

communities, the FS is a valuable resource, providing the necessary scientific expertise and organizational skills to assist county weed boards,

conservation districts, and other partners in developing weed plans and applying for grants. One FS

program has provided a market for a new agricultural specialty product: weed-free forage.

Some examples of programs and initiatives

developed by local FS units include the following:

D Requiring State-certified weed-free forage for

pack animals on NFS lands.

D Requiring cleaning of equipment prior to entering NFS lands.

D Requiring State-certified weed-free straw for

construction and rehabilitation efforts such as

road building, fire rehabilitation, watershed

restoration, riparian restoration, and minerals

reclamation projects.

D Requiring weed-free gravel for use in road

building.

D Requiring airports and landing areas used in fire

control to be weed-free.

D Working with lumber mills to have weed-free

mill sites.

D Cooperating with State, local, and interested

partners in developing educational materials and

training courses.

D Cooperating on interagency, multi-State, and

multijurisdictional noxious weed management

plans (for example, the Greater Yellowstone Area

Weed Management Plan).

D Working with local highway departments and

county road crews to cooperatively spray road

rights-of-way across jurisdictional boundaries.

D Working cooperatively with ARS and State

researchers by providing secure research sites for

the release of biological control agents on NFS

lands.

D Working cooperatively with Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and State

weed associations by providing secure insectary

sites for mass rearing of biological control

insects.

D Considering the potential effects of FS actions on

noxious weeds, using mitigation measures in

control and project design.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

6
NOXIOUS WEED-FREE

FORAGE

I

n the early 1980’s, FS staff recognized that some

of the noxious weed species becoming established at trailheads, at campsites, and along trails

were directly attributable to the use of livestock

feed infested with noxious weed seeds. Some individual forests in Montana and Wyoming instituted

requirements that only noxious weed-free forage be

used on those forests. By the early 1990’s, the Forest

Service and the Utah Department of Agriculture

formed a partnership that led to the development

of the Nation’s first statewide noxious weed-free

forage certification process and to the requirement

that only noxious weed-free forage be used on

national forests in Utah.

Forest Service staff throughout the Western

States are convinced this prevention effort is a key

component in their work to slow the spread of noxious weeds on national forests. Some national

forests tested a similar noxious weed-free feed

requirement in wilderness or other sensitive areas

before going to statewide requirements. Noxious

weed-free feed is now required on national forests

in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah.

Efforts are currently underway in California,

Nevada, and North Dakota for the Forest Service

and State agriculture offices to develop a similar

certification process and use requirement on

national forest lands.

The requirement to use only noxious weed-free

feed on national forests is authorized through

“closure orders,” which can be legally enforced.

Under a typical noxious weed-free feed program,

the involved State is responsible for running the

certification process through local agricultural

offices. A Noxious Weed-Free Forage Producers List

is published by States with closures on national

forests so the public can quickly locate a source for

noxious weed-free feed in their area. National

forest offices help distribute the Producers List to

national forest users.

In the five Western States where noxious weedfree feed is required, Forest Service staff participate

in public information campaigns about noxious

weed problems on public lands caused by the use of

infested feed. These campaigns often focus on

hunters by publishing advisories in State hunting

regulations and by visiting hunters in the field and

at check stations. These actions ensure that hunters

are aware of noxious weed-free feed requirements if

they plan to hunt with stock on the national forest.

NOXIOUS WEED PREVENTION AND EDUCATION...
PROGRAM

DIRECTION

Four primary goals have been identified for the

noxious weed program.

D Increase the understanding and awareness of

noxious weeds and the adverse effects they

have on wildland ecosystems.

D Develop and promote implementation of a

consistent IPM noxious weed program as a

high priority at all levels of the agency.

D Institutionalize consideration of noxious

weeds in planning and project analysis.

D Develop strong partnerships and cooperation

with private landowners, county governments, State Foresters, State and Federal agencies, extension services, universities, and the

research community for a consolidated united

approach.

A Forest Service model noxious weed program incorporates currently successful elements

from the NFS, S&PF, and Research. All natural

resource areas are responsible for cooperation in

noxious weed programs and activities relating to

their staff areas. Such a program requires the

maintenance of close ties with private landowners, local weed boards, professional groups,

other agencies, and State governments. The coordinated efforts of these groups leads to strong

support in State legislatures and among congressional representatives. These efforts produce

State weed legislation, State and local funding,

joint public information campaigns, commitment

from private landowners and a high degree of

awareness from the public.

In professional societies, employees serve as

active members and officers, and they support

organizational activities by providing scientific

expertise as well as support and sponsorship of

group activities. In evaluating current and

needed adjustments to the noxious weed program, it is useful to divide the noxious weed program into five areas: (1) Prevention and Education;

(2) Control; (3) Inventory, Mapping, and

Monitoring; (4) Research; and (5) Administration

and Planning. An essential component to success

in all five areas is coordination.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

8

Instructional video and accompanying field forms produced jointly

by the Forest Service’s Northern Region and the Bureau of Land

Management. These educational tools help train staff to inventory,

collect, release, and monitor flea beetles as biocontrol agents.
The FS’s FHP field office in Boise, Idaho, has

teamed up with the Sawtooth and Caribou

National Forests to test control methods

for leafy spurge in mountainous, coniferous environments. On national forests in the Northwest,

leafy spurge is one of the most aggressive and environmentally damaging weed species that land

managers face. While biocontrol agents had been

successful in controlling spurge in prairie environments, it was unknown if they would work in

cooler, high-elevation forested environments. This

technology transfer effort represents an integration

of traditional Research and S&PF responsibilities

with on-the-ground applications in the national

forests.

A leafy spurge infestation on the Fairfield Ranger

District of the Sawtooth National Forest was first

noted in 1968. By the mid-1990’s, the infestation had

grown to more than 22,000 acres. As part of a strategy of IPM, FS staff spray the perimeters of the

infestation with herbicides to limit the increase of

its boundary. Further, in coordination with Forest

Service Research, four species of Aphthona flea beetle have been released as biocontrol agents at about

200 sites. Beetles stress the plants, reducing their

number and vigor.

FHP staff monitor release sites to determine

which biocontrol agents work best under different

site conditions. Monitoring results indicate that a

complex of four different species of the Aphthona

flea beetle has not only survived but also is thriving

in higher elevation environments.

Many of the insects used in the Fairfield Ranger

District came from the Malad Ranger District on the

Caribou National Forest. In 1997, the Malad Ranger

District sponsored a Leafy Spurge Field Session,

where FHP staff showed 70 participants, including

county, State, and Federal personnel, as well as private landowners, how to collect, transport, and

release Aphthona beetles. Because the need is great

and the supply of biocontrol agents is small, field

session participants were also shown how to set up

their own insectaries to grow more biocontrol

agents for redistribution.

CARIBOU AND SAWTOOTH

NATIONAL FORESTS

9

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL...

Forest staff produced the video “Beetles and Billies: Your Buddies

in the Battle Against Leafy Spurge” for public distribution.
I. PREVENTION AND

EDUC ATION

OVERVIEW

Using weed-free forage and road materials and carefully

selecting the species used in restoration and stabilization

projects is helping to minimize the spread of noxious

weeds on national forests. Partnerships with public and

private groups to develop educational materials like trailhead signs, brochures, posters, videos, and displays is

helping to increase public awareness about combating

noxious weeds.

Prevention activities can retard or preclude

the introduction and establishment of noxious weeds in noninfested areas. Education is a

vital part of prevention by informing all levels of

the FS, our partners, and the public of the potential impact and threat of noxious weeds.

There are numerous examples of excellent

local programs that have been developed in

coordination with other agencies and State and

local groups. However, prevention programs

have not been emphasized or implemented in

all appropriate regions. The FS needs a coordinated and consistent prevention and education

effort.

Objective—Implement a program of prevention

measures on all NFS units. Emphasize prevention as an effective and cost-efficient methodology for weed control.

Objective—Develop and implement a program

to increase awareness and understanding of

noxious weed issues at all organizational levels.

Objective—Work with all potential cooperators

on developing educational materials—such as

videos, brochures, advertisements, and classroom materials—to increase public awareness

of noxious weed issues.

Forest Service land managers in coastal areas of

Oregon find that gorse, an aggressive perennial

shrub with extremely stiff, sharp thorns, can

quickly dominate an area, effectively eliminating

any use by humans or wildlife. In addition, gorse

contains flammable oils that pose a serious fire

hazard. The destruction of the Oregon coastal community of Bandon in the 1930’s is attributed to

uncontrollable wildfire spread through gorsedominated vegetation.

Staff on the Mapleton Ranger District of the

Siuslaw National Forest recently completed the environmental analysis for the Western Lane County

Gorse Management Project, an integrated vegetation

management project. The project includes a containment strategy for the most concentrated areas of

gorse on the national forest and an eradication strategy for small isolated occurrences of the weed.

Because gorse is primarily spread through human

use, control treatments are focused on areas like

trails, campgrounds, and picnic areas. Avariety of

treatment methods will be used to prevent gorse

plants from maturing and going to seed. These

include herbicide spraying, biocontrol agents like the

gorse spider mite, crushing and burning, manual

pulling, and mechanical removal. In unique resource

areas, plans call for spot treatment of herbicides

applied to individual plants.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY NOXIOUS WEED PREVENTION AND EDUCATION...

10

SIUSLAW

NATIONAL FOREST

Spider mites cover gorse plant.

Gorse plant.
A number of unique resource areas are affected

by gorse in Western Lane County, including dune

beaches; Highway 101, a scenic highway corridor;

coastal salt spray meadows; and seasonal wetlands.

Gorse treatments are required that are responsive to

the unique characteristics of these areas. The gorse

management strategy must also be responsive to

conditions along salmon streams to protect coho

and steelhead, both candidates for Federal listing as

threatened or endangered species. Along these

streams, gorse will be partially cleared out, and a

variety of conifer species will be planted in an

attempt to shade out the weed.

Prevention and education efforts are a key part

of the gorse management project. Because gorse

seeds are frequently transported in mud clinging to

vehicles, heavy equipment, the feet of stock, big

game, or humans, interpretative signs will be used

throughout the national forest treatment areas

informing the public about the treatment and how

gorse is spread. To help minimize the spread of

gorse along trails, special areas will be designated

at trailheads for horse riders to clean out their

horse’s hooves. Administrative vehicles used in

gorse areas will be steam-cleaned to reduce the

probability of gorse seeds being transported into

new areas. In addition, workshops for Forest

Service employees and the public will heighten

understanding of how gorse is spread and actions

that can help minimize its spread.

Additional Forest Service education and prevention efforts are focused in the biological control

arena. Over the past 10 years, a number of control

methods have been tested by Forest Service

researchers and Oregon Department of Agriculture

staff. Among these, the largest success involved the

use of biocontrol agents, especially gorse spider

mites. The mites form dramatic webbed colonies

over the outer branches of gorse plants, eventually

causing extensive defoliation that results in

reduced plant vigor.

Populations of spider mites are so successful at

some release sites that the Mapleton Ranger District

will sponsor a Gorse Spider Mite Day for the public. Forest Service staff will demonstrate how to collect and transport mature spider mites so they can

be distributed to other gorse areas.

11

Recreationists surrounded by gorse plants.
I. PREVENTION AND

EDUC ATION (CONTINUED)

Short-Term Emphasis Items

D Encourage the implementation of a weed-free

forage program in all wilderness areas by 2002.

D Encourage implementation of a weed-free forage

program for all NFS lands by the year 2005.

D For all ground-disturbing activities, provide a

series of standard mitigation measures such as:

• Clean equipment prior to entering NFS lands;

• Use weed-free materials (that is, gravel and

seeding mixtures);

• Include weed prevention measures in fire

planning and firefighting (for example, weedfree airports and landing sites, weed-free

camp locations, and so forth); and

• Develop Best Management Practices (BMPs)

and contract C-clauses for potential inclusions

in contracts.

D Facilitate the development of restoration/rehabilitation strategies and techniques, including

development of new seed sources, seeding techniques, posttreatment, and management.

D Increase awareness of noxious weeds and their

potential impact at all levels of the agency

through briefings and training sessions. Reward

and recognize successful projects and programs.

D Provide for increased communication for units

and individuals working in noxious weeds.

Where possible, integrate with existing programs

such as the pesticide newsletter, research news,

and Range Writer, the FS range management

newsletter.

D Develop interagency interpretive signs for placement at portals, at trailheads, and along roadsides to alert forest users about the noxious weed

program and their role in prevention and

control.

D Continue technology transfer and technical assistance to State Foresters and private cooperators.

Long-Term Emphasis Items

D Develop national/regional training programs in

policy, plant identification, and integrated pest

management. Where possible and appropriate,

integrate training with local and State agencies

D Identify and classify vulnerable and nonvulnerable ecosystems and vegetation types.

D Develop training materials and programs for

contractors on NFS lands.

D Develop educational materials for inclusion in

wildflower days,

NatureWatch, and

other environmental

education programs.

D Develop advertising

campaigns, leaflets,

and other materials to

educate forest users

on noxious weeds,

how they spread, and

how they can be contained in conjunction

with local, State, and

Federal agencies and

cooperators.

D Develop a consolidated effort including

brochures, school

materials, interpretive

sign content, videos,

internal training and

public outreach to

contractors, private

landowners, elected officials, and the general

public.

D Cooperate with other agencies, States, universities, and organization in developing and funding

noxious weed educational materials for use by

multiple organizations.

D Develop a national advertising campaign in

coordination with States and other agencies.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

12
NEZ PERCE

NATIONAL FOREST

The 1994 creation of the Salmon River

Weed Management Area marked a

turning point in weed management in

central Idaho. After a number of years of

independent work, the county weed supervisor,

neighboring private landowners, and staff of the

Nez Perce National Forest were ready to try a new,

cooperative approach to their noxious weed

problem.

The Salmon River Weed Management Area is a

cooperative venture involving public and private

lands and is focused on identifying common objectives and priorities for noxious weed management.

The 500,000-acre Weed Management Area is dominated by dry grasslands and steep slopes. Roughly

40,000 acres are affected by 17 noxious weed

species, with yellow starthistle the predominate

problem species.

According to Nez Perce range staff, a crucial step

in the Salmon River Weed Management Area

Coordinating Committee’s success to date was the

creation of a weed-status inventory to facilitate a

common understanding of the problem. Along with

the inventory, participants developed an areawide

noxious weed map. Crews from the county, Bureau

of Land Management, and Forest Service mapped

weeds across jurisdictional boundaries, while private landowners brought in reports of weed

sightings.

Committee meetings gave participants the forum

to discuss the results of their control efforts.

Notably, the inventory identified new invasive

species that the committee selected as high priority

for treatment. The committee also used the map to

set objectives and plan annual activities. Initial control efforts focused on yellow starthistle, in part

because the 30,000 acres affected by this species had

a clear geographic boundary and the committee

believed their cooperative efforts could be effective

in preventing its spread beyond that boundary.

The coordinating committee created an annual

operating plan for the upcoming year that describes

each participant’s proposed weed management

activities. The committee also developed a longrange management plan for each weed species.

The Salmon River Weed Management Area effort

is considered a success in a number of respects.

Since its inception, weed-control efforts on both

public and private lands have increased, and,

importantly, cooperative public-private relationships are stronger and more focused on mutual

benefit. Participants know their neighbors are contributing to the cause and believe their personal

efforts will count for more.

As a participant in the Salmon River Weed

Management Area, the Nez Perce National Forest is

working with a number of partners on biological

control of yellow starthistle. Forest Service

Research has helped develop a biocontrol project

and locate a source of successful biocontrol agents.

Forest staff know that for successful biocontrol they

must “manage the insects” by building up insect

populations where they can be most effective. In

support of this approach, the University of Idaho’s

Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomology is

setting up a monitoring program for the insect

release sites.

13

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL...

Yellow starthistle biocontrol

agent collection field trip in

Idaho.

Damage to yellow starthistle

seed head by biocontrol agent.
II. CONTROL

OVERVIEW

The FS’s 20 years of experience with noxious weeds has

shown that IPM, using a full complement of control methods, is the most effective approach. In the IPM strategy, new

and small infestations or those near sensitive areas are given

top priority for treatment.

Programs to control noxious weeds have been

instituted on many ranger districts within the

agency. However, many forests and districts have

not implemented a viable noxious weed program.

Given the number of acres infested and the projected rates of spread, it is clear that there are currently insufficient funds to address even a small

percentage of the areas infested. Funds are insufficient to support program development in new

areas, and it is difficult to retain adequate funding

to support viable existing programs.

Pesticides remain a key component in an IPM

approach to noxious weed control. The required

NEPA environmental analyses, such as environmental impact statements and environmental

assessments necessary to use pesticides, have not

been completed for many regions and forests.

Objective—Develop an IPM strategy and program

for each NFS unit where noxious weeds occur. 

The IPM strategy should consider and employ all

control treatments, including biological control,

prevention, mechanical, and chemical.

Objective—Participate in the development of local

weed management units to consolidate and coordinate weed control across jurisdictional boundaries.

Objective - Provide leadership in scientific expertise, organization skills, and administrative support

to local weed-control efforts.

Objective - Develop strategies to eradicate, control,

and contain noxious weeds on public lands.

Objective—Rapidly respond to new infestations

with aggressive treatment or eradication.

Short-Term Emphasis Items

D Implement followup inventory treatment on all

ground-disturbing activities.

D Develop a strategy to complete the necessary

environmental analysis to permit the appropriate

use of pesticides in all regions.

D Develop a rapid response strategy on each forest

to respond to new infestations.

D Ensure that control activities do not adversely

affect threatened, endangered, or sensitive

species or site water quality.

Long-Term Emphasis Items

D Develop an IPM strategy for the containment,

control, and potential eradication of weeds on all

FS units where appropriate. Include priority

species and treatment areas.

D Provide sufficient funding to each NFS unit to

implement a locally developed noxious weed

strategy.

D Develop noxious weed management areas in

cooperation with private landowners and local

and State governments (for example, the Greater

Yellowstone Area Weed Management Plan).

D Develop BMP’s for all ground-disturbing activities, which would include appropriate prevention and mitigation.

D Develop multiagency, multiregion strategies for

new and existing weed species.

D Emphasize the use and development of biological control agents.

D Emphasize control and containment of noxious

weeds in special areas such as wilderness and

research natural areas, including the use of

herbicide where appropriate.

D Emphasize use of native vegetation in weed

control activities.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

14
MEDICINE BOW-ROUTT

NATIONAL FOREST

The Jackson County Weed Management

Partnership, initiated by the Forest Service’s

Parks Ranger District in north- central Colorado, is

one of six pilot projects selected by the State of

Colorado to demonstrate the effectiveness of a

coordinated and “boundaryless” approach to weed

management.

In 1993, range staff on the Parks Ranger District

of the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest

approached the Jackson County Commissioners

about forming a multiagency weed management

partnership. Compared with adjacent counties with

similar serious weed infestations, it appeared

Jackson County could be successful in weed-control

efforts if all agencies worked together. A coordinated approach to noxious weed management was

considered critical if Jackson County was to maintain the upper hand with weeds.

The Jackson County partnership in the Upper

North Platte Weed Management Area involves 10

cooperating entities that are responsible for Federal,

State, and private lands within the weed management area, including the town of Walden. The weed

management partners meet each spring to develop

an annual work plan, which includes education,

inventory, and treatment projects. The weed advisory board, composed of local landowners, evaluates and prioritizes treatment areas by looking at

noxious weed occurrences rather than jurisdictional

boundaries. The partners pool staff and equipment

and fund a weed coordinator who is responsible for

coordination and implementation. At the end of the

season, a wrap-up meeting is held to review what

has been accomplished, to discuss problems and

opportunities, and to lay the groundwork for the

next season’s efforts.

While there were a few initial reservations about

embarking on this program, by the second year of

implementation Jackson County Commissioners

enthusiastically endorsed Forest Service range conservationist Tom Smith’s presentation about the

weed partnership at the western regional conference of the National Association of Counties.

The numerous accomplishments of 1997 mark it

as a pivotal year in the integrated weed management program. A county fund was created for the

administration of weed management projects, and

weed infestations were inventoried and mapped on

the county’s computerized Geographic Information

System (GIS). Increased awareness and involvement from other agencies and private landowners

allowed more acres to be treated than ever before.

Through the educational efforts of the county

extension office and the county weed coordinator,

public awareness of the need for proactive weed

management is on the upswing in Jackson County.

NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL...

Range staff on Parks Ranger District, contributors to the Jackson County Weed Management Partnership.
16

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

OVERVIEW

The Forest Service is leading the National Rangeland

Assessment, a report on the condition of all rangelands,

public or private, in the United States. All Forest Service

regions are increasing inventory activities for noxious weeds.

Standardized guidelines for inventoring and monitoring

noxious weeds on all Federal lands will shortly be published,

allowing agencies to share noxious weed information across

jurisdictional boundaries.

The Forest Service lacks a consistent methodology for inventorying and mapping vegetation.

Some regions, forests, and districts have developed

mapping and database standards, but few are

consistent over wide areas. Analysis or displays 

of noxious weeds over broad areas is therefore

difficult. This problem of consistent data standards

is mirrored by other agencies, counties, and States,

which compounds the difficulty of integrating

noxious weed programs across jurisdictional

boundaries. Many of the current inventory efforts

are incompatible with computerized GIS, and

therefore it has been difficult to integrate noxious

weed issues into forest plans and landscape or

other broad-scale analyses.

Objective—Develop consistent inventory, data,

and mapping standards across resource, agency,

and jurisdictional boundaries.

Objective—Map noxious weed infestations on all

NFS lands in a manner compatible with modern

technologies such as GIS and Global Positioning

Systems (GPS).

Objective—Develop consistent, effective, minimalmonitoring standards.

Short-Term Emphasis Items

D Implement minimum mapping standards, like

the Greater Yellowstone Area standards, agreed

upon in 1997.

D Develop sample minimum monitoring standards

for inclusion in revisions of forest plans.

Long-Term Emphasis Items

D Develop interagency, interjurisdictional mapping, inventory, and data standards.

D Develop forest, regional, and national maps for

all noxious weed infestations on NFS lands.

D Implement the use of remote sensing, GIS, GPS

and other technologies.

D Complete a literature summary on the uses of

remote sensing in weed inventories.

III. INVENTORY, MAPPING, 

AND MONITORING

Global Positioning Systems (GPS) use satellites to produce 

precise maps of noxious weed infestation locations.
NOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY, MAPPING, AND MONITORING...

MIDEWIN NATIONAL

TALLGRASS PRAIRIE

The 15,000-acre former munition-production

facility, the Joliet Arsenal, is located about 40

miles southwest of Chicago, within a midwest

urban population area of some 8 million. The

arsenal provides a unique setting for a unit of the

FS, which, since 1997, jointly manages the site 

with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.

Ecosystem restoration of the Arsenal’s tallgrass

prairie was a primary objective identified for the

Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie by the Joliet

Arsenal Citizens’ Commission and the Illinois Land

Conservation Act of 1995.

Forest Service and Illinois Department of

Natural Resources staff participate in laying a

scientific foundation for the development of a

management plan for Midewin. At the local, or

“micro-site” level, Tallgrass Prairie staff have begun

inventorying and mapping the current condition of

vegetation. Of the 60 invasive species inventoried,

22 species were identified as presenting the most

immediate management problem and were

prioritized for treatment.

The inventory and mapping effort includes

identifying which invasive plants pose the most

significant threat to native species, how severe

infestations of each invasive species are, and the

potential for spread each species poses. A specific

IPM manual has been prepared for each of the priority invasive species on the Midewin. The IPM

manual includes a series of recommendations for

potential control methods, including mechanical,

chemical, biological, and prescribed burning.

Inventory and mapping work on a larger scale is

part of the Prairie Parklands “macro-site “ effort,

which involves an approximately 40,000-acre area

of public and private lands in Northeastern Illinois,

including Midewin. In an effort to trim inventory

costs, one feature of the macro-site effort incorporates remote sensing. Through a grant from the

National Aeronautics and Space Administration,

Prairie Parklands staff ground-check the findings of

high-altitude satellite photographs on the Midewin

site. The ground-check tests the accuracy and feasibility of remote sensing for invasive species

inventories.

Long-term plans call for the establishment of

about 40 miles of seedbeds to be used in restoration

planting. They will include specialized seedbeds to

raise prairie, savanna, and wetland plant species.

Staff horticulturists at Midewin have developed the

beds because commercial nurseries currently are

unable to keep up with the enormous demand for

seed that restoration will require. The beds will 

also allow the project to proceed cost effectively.

Volunteers at the Tallgrass Prairie helped create 

and maintain the first seedbeds, and they remain

involved in the ongoing expansion of the seed

production areas.

17

Garlic mustard, an invasive species in the Midewin National

Tallgrass Prairie.
18

Noxious weeds adversely impact more than the

traditionally affected forests and rangelands in

California. Areas of historic, prehistoric, and scenic

significance—including Highway 1, the designated

“All American Highway” along the California

coast, and the Jordan Creek/Bower Cave Special

Interest Area, are currently the focus of some

innovative noxious weed efforts.

The Monterey Ranger District noted an increase

in noxious weeds threatening wildland values and

creating an increased fire hazard on public lands.

While many weeds apparently start along the coast,

they move rapidly inland and pose a threat to

riparian areas, designated wilderness areas, and

designated botanical areas. Noxious weeds threaten

endangered species’ habitat as well. One such

example is Smith’s blue butterfly.

In response, the Big Sur Weed Management Area

was formed by the Big Sur Multi-Agency Advisory

Council. Participants include the Monterey Ranger

District of the Los Padres National Forest;

California Department of State Parks; CALTRANS,

the California Highway Department; the Monterey

County Planning and Building Inspection

Department, and private property owners. Through a grant from the California Exotic Pest/

Plant Council, the Big Sur Weed Management 

Area Committee developed a joint invasive plant

inventory for the transfer of hand-drawn maps to a

computerized GIS. Based on the inventory, priority

areas and target species for treatment were identified. Potential for partnerships or shared efforts

among committee members is a criterion in

selecting priority sites for treatment.

In addition, the committee developed and

distributed a brochure that includes photo identification of the most common invasive plants in the

area and describes what the public can do to 

ensure that they do not contribute to the invasive

plant problem. The Weed Management Area

Subcommittee facilitates a unified effort on both

public and private land for effectively managing

common problems with weeds.

NOXIOUS WEED INVENTORY, MAPPING, AND MONITORING...

LOS PADRES AND STANISLAUS

NATIONAL FORESTS

Pampas grass.

Typical pampas grass site along coast of California.
The 1,600-acre Jordan Creek/Bower Cave Special

Interest Area on the Groveland Ranger District,

Stanislaus National Forest, includes a historic ranch

and way station and the Bower Cave. The cave is

both a significant cultural site to the local Me-Wuk

Indians and a 100-year old tourist attraction.

By 1994, an estimated 500 acres at this site were

infested with yellow starthistle. The inventory

indicated approximately 125 starthistle plants per

square foot, which translates to roughly 5 million

noxious thistle plants per acre. To help return

native vegetation, a multiyear project of prescribed

burning and native species planting was started in

1997. The first burn was a success, with most of the

starthistle consumed. In the fall of 1997 annual

grasses were seeded to act as fuel to help carry

future prescribed burns. As control of starthistle 

is gained, native plants and grasses will be 

planted at the site.

New partnerships make important contributions

to the starthistle control project. Firefighters from

the Forest Service and California Conservation

Corps staffed the first prescribed burn at their 

own cost, using the fire as a training opportunity.

Their contribution helped stretch scarce noxious

weed treatment funds on the ranger district. An

Annenberg Rural Challenge Grant to the local

county school district will fund an outdoor course

in monitoring and research at the site. Students 

will conduct before-treatment and after-treatment

starthistle plant counts as part of their course work.

Right: Mariposa County Fire Department volunteer lighting 

a strip of yellow starthistle. Photo by Lisa Linde.

Below: Firefighters walking through waist-high starthistle.

Starthistle burning in background. Photo by Lisa Linde.
IV. RESEARCH

OVERVIEW

Forest Service scientists are focusing biological control

research on high-elevation and natural area noxious

weeds. Research efforts are also examining new integrated pest management strategies combining a number

of treatment methods. Much of the agency’s weed

research is being conducted in coordination with universities and other research institutions across the globe.

More research on biological control of weeds

is needed to meet the challenge of new noxious weed introductions into the country. The FS

and ARS biocontrol programs should continue to

cooperate in co-located laboratories, related

research, and other collaborative situations.

In addition to biological control, research is

needed on the ecological processes of weed invasion and establishment, especially in native

ecosystems. Additional information is needed on

the vulnerability of individual vegetation types

and habitats; reductions in site diversity and productivity following invasion of noxious weeds;

loss of wildlife habitat; changes in visual quality;

alternative treatments such as burning, mowing,

and grazing; and the economic cost.

Objective—Expand cooperation with ARS and

the Natural Resources Conservation Service in

biological control, weed ecology research, and

the use of native species in revegetation. Also

provide to USDA Cooperative State Research,

Education and Extension Service (CSREES) weed

research needs so these priorities can be identified in the National Research Initiative and

Special Grants Program.

Objective—Strengthen coordination with

APHIS to receive early alerts in a timely manner

on accidentally imported weed species that

might become a problem on NFS lands.

Objective—Strengthen research efforts in noxious weeds, including all aspects of weed ecology, plant community dynamics, and alternative

control methods.

BIOLOGIC AL CONTROL

Forest Service researcher Dr. George Markin’s

work on biocontrol of noxious weeds is built

upon a number of international cooperative efforts.

Markin conducts biocontrol research on a variety of

noxious weeds, including Rush skeletonweed,

Scotch-broom, gorse, kudzu, and tansy ragwort.

Because these noxious weeds are not native to

North America, Markin’s research takes on a foreign focus. Markin notes, “Because the need is so

great and the number of scientists in the field is

small, there is no reason to compete; instead, I

know I can rely on any of the 200-plus biocontrol

scientists across the globe to readily share information with me about their findings and help me

locate potential biocontrol agents. “ Markin also

works closely with the ARS facilities and staff

located throughout the world.

Markin works with cooperators in Uzbekistan

and the Republic of Georgia on a search both for

potential pathogens and insect biological control

agents for Rush skeletonweed, a major problem in

southern Idaho. Studies are also underway in

Greece and Turkey to determine the suitability for

release in North America of two root-boring caterpillars as control agents for Rush skeletonweed. A

colony of these caterpillars has been established

under Markin’s supervision at the Montana State

University quarantine laboratory in Bozeman and

is supplemented regularly by new shipments from

Greece.

The Oregon Department of Agriculture’s program for control of Scotch-broom and gorse in

western North America has joined an international

effort by Australia, New Zealand, and Chile in the

search for natural enemies of these weeds. Markin’s

project has introduced selected agents into quarantine in Montana for final host-testing. Also in

Bozeman, he is studying a mite- and foliagefeeding caterpillar, as well as a seed-feeding beetle,

supplied to him by cooperators in England, France,

and Portugal.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY NOXIOUS WEED RESEARCH...

20
In 1997, in cooperation with the FS Southern

Forest Experiment Station and the Department of

Interior’s Great Smokey Mountains National Park,

Markin undertook an effort to determine the feasibility of using biological control for kudzu, a devastating weed species covering millions of acres of

forests and agricultural lands in the Southeastern

United States. Kudzu, a native of Japan and China,

is a major problem in southern pine forests because

of its tenacity and ability to climb, overtop, and

subsequently smother, mature trees. No biological

control agents are currently available in the United

States for kudzu control.

Dr. Markin visited China in 1997 to learn about

the protocols, regulations, and requirements for

working in that country. Then, based on observations, published reports, a review of herbarium

specimens, and a computerized climatic match, the

southeastern province of Anhui was chosen as the

most likely area to search for the natural enemies of

kudzu. After observing numerous natural enemies

attacking kudzu in Anhui, Markin initiated an

agreement with entomologists in the Agriculture

Department of the Anhui University to conduct a 2-

year study to identify those that might have potential for controlling kudzu.

Most recently, Markin is at work on tansy ragwort, a large infestation of which was recently

found in northwestern Montana on the Flathead

and Kootenai National Forests. Tansy ragwort was

at one time a major problem on the West Coast, but

an earlier biological control program there almost

completely controlled it west of the Cascade

Mountains. Unfortunately, the same biocontrol

agent released on infestations east of the Cascades

has failed to become established. In an effort to find

cold-hardy strains of approved biocontrol agents,

Markin has begun a study of the natural enemies of

tansy ragwort found in the Alps of Switzerland.

21

Dr. George Markin in China working with Chinese entomologists

and students, reviewing herbarium specimens.
IV. RESEARCH (CONTINUED)

Objective—Increase cooperation with all members

of the research community, including FS Research,

the Wilderness Research Institute, the Inventory

and Monitoring Institute, other agencies, universities, and extension services.

Short-Term Emphasis Items

D Clearly identify and prioritize research needs in

noxious weeds, optimizing limited research

funds.

D Evaluate current research projects for potential

application to noxious weed ecology.

D Coordinate research efforts with other agencies,

such as ARS, NRCS and CSREES.

D Develop a strategy for FS research efforts.

Coordinate research strategies and priorities

with concurrent research efforts in other agencies, universities, and extension services.

Long-Term Emphasis Items

D Encourage basic research in weed ecology,

including competitiveness, habitat requirements

and limitation of individual weed species, pesticide effectiveness, and pesticide residue in wildland settings.

D Expand research on biological control agents,

including insects, pathogens, and livestock.

Expand research coordination with local universities and extension services.

D Expand research in the use of remote sensing

technology to identify and track invasive and

noxious weeds in the field.

V. ADMINISTRATION

AND PLANNING

OVERVIEW

Forest Plans are one tool for ensuring that noxious weeds

are given appropriate priority within an ecosystem management approach. The NEPA process allows the FS to evaluate

the degree of threat from noxious weeds as well as evaluate

the treatment options available. Development of cooperative

weed management areas, or “WMA’s,” with neighbors

through programs such as the “Pulling Together” partnerships, helps to pool resources and expertise to accomplish

more in prevention, treatment, and control than any one

party could achieve alone.

While widely recognized as a potential threat to

ecosystem viability, noxious weeds are often

not fully considered in landscape and other

ecosystem-based analyses.

Some analyses fail to consider the potential effect

of the proposed action on noxious weeds. Some forest plans are silent on noxious weeds, or direction is

weak. There remains inconsistent manual direction

for noxious weeds in the various resource areas.

Objective - Encourage coordination and collaboration between the FS, other Federal agencies, State,

local, and tribal governments, and the university/

research community to promote increased efficiencies and effectiveness of noxious weed management programs.

Objective—Integrate consideration of noxious

weed issues into forest planning and analysis.

Objective—Provide consistent direction and support for management of noxious weeds to all

resource areas and within all levels of the

organization.

Short-Term Emphasis Items

D Ensure that the noxious weed program is an

emphasis item of the Chief.

D Pursue a multifunded line item budget for noxious weeds and provide adequate funding.

D Include noxious weed issues in the Resources

Planning Act assessment.

D Develop prototype of minimum forest plan

goals, objectives, standards and guidelines for

inclusion in forest plan revisions.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

22
OC ALA

NATIONAL FOREST

I

n northern and central Florida, invasive nonnative species are an emerging problem in the

national forests. Coordinated control efforts on

invasive species can be hampered if adequate legislative recognition and authority is not available.

Therefore, in response to recommendations from

the Task Force on Invasive Upland Exotic Plants,

the Florida legislature recently amended State

statutes to include the control of invasive upland

exotic plants, such as cogon grass, on public lands.

Cogon grass was imported to Florida in the

1940’s to help control soil erosion and to provide

forage. Cogon grass can quickly become a monoculture, aggressively crowding out native plants.

There are no known biological control agents for

the species in Florida; and, if allowed to grow tall,

its razor sharp leaves make consumption by

wildlife impossible. In addition, because it burns

hot and fires move quickly through it, cogon grass

also poses a severe fire threat to the urban interface

where homes are scattered among forest lands.

The Task Force recommendation and amended

State statute helped set the stage for expanded

cooperative control efforts in Marion County.

Planning is underway to eradicate this species from

three distinct areas that involve the Ocala National

Forest and private and State lands.

The earlier success of Ocala National Forest to

control cogon grass infestations led the Lake

George Ranger District to expand the scope and

partners involved in upcoming eradication efforts.

The new cogon grass eradication plan is a cooperative venture between the Forest Service, Florida

Departments of Environmental Protection and State

Parks, county parks, water management districts,

and private corporations and landowners.

The plan calls for surveys delineating the boundaries of infested areas, treatment with pesticides,

monitoring, followup re-treatment until eradication

is complete, and revegetation where necessary.

Since forest staff have found that a significant

source of cogon grass infestation is yard clippings

dumped in the forest, an educational campaign

includes informational kiosks at dump sites within

the national forest.

NOXIOUS WEED ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING...

Botonist Lorraine Miller inspects cogon grass on the Ocala National Forest. Photo by Bruce Ackerman, Ocala Star Banner.
Short-Term Emphasis Items

D Ensure that there is consistent manual direction

for noxious weed management in all resource

areas. As part of the ongoing manual review,

ensure that all outdated and conflicting clauses

are eliminated.

D Develop a glossary of common terms and

definitions.

D Clarify legal definitions of a “noxious weed.”

D Clarify and/or develop protocols for the listing

of noxious weeds at both the Federal and State

levels to ensure that noxious weeds may be

treated as they appear in new areas or States.

Long-Term Emphasis Items

D Ensure that members of Congress and their staffs

have firsthand knowledge and awareness of onthe-ground noxious weed conditions, impacts

and trends, and the cost of implementing IPM to

prevent, control, and eradicate noxious weeds.

D Ensure that noxious weeds and their potential

effects on native plant communities, threatened,

endangered and sensitive species, and dependent wildlife species are considered in environmental analyses for project activities and

landscape assessments.

D Ensure that the “no action/no noxious weed

control” alternative is analyzed, fully reviewing

the environmental and economic consequences

of no treatment. Establish clear policy direction

for the use of multiresource (multistaff area)

funding for noxious weed management efforts.

D Encourage the coordination of weed management programs with adjacent and intermingled

landownership.

D Encourage FS participation in local weed boards,

organizations, and rural development planning.

D Cooperate with Federal, State, and local road

and highway departments to integrate cooperative control efforts across all ownership.

V. ADMINISTRATION AND

PLANNING (CONTINUED)

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

24

Cogon Grass. Photo by Jeff Lotz, Division of Plant Industry, FL.
LINCOLN

NATIONAL FOREST

I

n a few counties in New Mexico, county officials

and public land managers have jointly initiated

an effective administrative tool to respond to

increasing noxious weed infestations that adversely

affect Federal, State, county, and private land

ecosystems.

Through a Memorandum of Understanding

(MOU) created in Otero County in 1997, a coalition

of public, State, county, and private entities seeks to

coordinate, encourage, and formalize the cooperative relationships necessary for effective management of alien noxious weeds. Otero County’s MOU

includes the implementation of integrated weed

management action plans and treatment projects, as

well as prevention and education programs.

The Lincoln National Forest is a signatory to the

Otero County MOU, which includes the county

commissioners, the Otero County Soil and Water

Conservation District, the Natural Resources

Conservation Service, the Bureau of Land

Management, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the

Mescalero Apache Indian Tribe, the FS, the New

Mexico State Highway and Transportation

Department, and the Cooperative Extension

Service. In addition, the Farm Bureau also has been

actively involved in control efforts.

To ensure that the goals and objectives of the

MOU are achieved, the coalition has designated

representatives to an interagency work group that

meets whenever necessary to coordinate plant control efforts, funding, public awareness and involvement programs, and management objectives.

Through agreements in the MOU, members of

the coalition plan and appropriate funds to attack

jointly the Otero County noxious weed problem. In

the absence of mandatory statewide noxious weed

legislation, regional and forest employees find that

these types of agreements are a positive approach

toward the containment and control of noxious and

invasive weed species.

Efforts of the coalition have already produced

results that benefit the Lincoln National Forest in

southern New Mexico. The public has been made

aware of the extent of the noxious weed problem

and supports the program. Treatment of highway

corridors reduces the threat of weeds spreading

along State and county highways and roads.

Private landowners voluntarily treat infestations

within and adjacent to national forest boundaries.

In all, this program is a win-win situation for

everyone and demonstrates what can be done

cooperatively, without mandatory State legislation.

25

NOXIOUS WEED ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING...

Musk thistle. Teasel.
INTERDEPARTMENTAL

USDA ACTIVITIES

D Cooperate on issue development on a policy

level.

D Develop research cooperatives with sister

agencies.

D Cooperate on developing educational materials

and programs.

D Develop cost-share agreements for research and

demonstration projects.

D Act as reviewer for sister agencies’ programs or

research development.

D Define research needs and focus programs and

funding across agencies.

COOPERATION

WITH OTHER

FEDERAL AGENCIES

D Combine efforts with other Federal agencies to

ensure that data are compatible and accessible

within the FS and to outside users.

D Cooperate on control and prevention activities

on adjacent lands and with other land management agencies.

D Cooperate in research for developing new

technologies.

D Cooperate in inventory, monitoring, and

mapping, use of remote sensing information 

and database management for compatible data

systems with other land management and

research agencies.

D Cooperate in development of educational

programs.

D Pool funding with sister agencies for more

efficient use of funds on projects of common 

interest.

D Work with other Federal agencies to justify a line

item in the Federal budget for a multiagency

invasive and noxious weed budget, modeled

after Fire or IPM.

D Continue to support and participate in the

Federal Interagency Committee for Management

of Noxious and Exotic Weeds.

NOXIOUS WEED STRATEGY

26

Leech Lake Reservation, Division of Resources Management,

cooperative purple loosestrife control project with Chippewa

National Forest. Photo by Steve Mortensen.
NON-FEDERAL

PARTNERS AND

COOPERATORS

D Cooperate on control and prevention activities

with adjacent public and private landowners.

D Pool funding with public and private landowners for the most efficient use of funds in noxious

weed management.

D Cooperate in educational projects.

D Continue to educate and build a constituency to

support Federal action and funding support of a

multiagency budget line item.

D Encourage active participation of FS professionals in scientific weed societies, county weed

boards, and weed coalitions.

D Seek cooperation and challenge cost-share funding from private sources including cooperate

foundations, grants and organizations.

D Interact with international partners in developing international cooperation on noxious weed

issues and programs.

27

Tahoe National Forest volunteers

working on musk thistle removal.

Photo by Kathy Van Zuuk.

Leafy spurge control tour on

Sheyenne National Grassland,

involving researchers, grazing

association members, and 

cooperators.
National Contacts

Deborah C. Hayes, Ph.D. 

National Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

P.O. Box 96090 AB-3S

Washington, DC 20090-6090

PH: 202-205-0847

FAX: 202-205-1096

EMAIL: dhayes/wo@fs.fed.us

Rita Beard 

Washington Office Detached Office

USDA Forest Service 

3825 E. Mulberry

Fort Collins, CO 80524

PH: 970-498-1715

FAX: 970-498-1660

EMAIL: rbeard/wo,ftcol@fs.fed.us

Dave Thomas 

Forest Health Protection Noxious Weed Coordinator 

USDA Forest Service 

FHP AB-2S 

P.O. Box 96090 

Washington, DC 20090-6090 

PH: 202-205-0889 

FAX: 202-205-1139

EMAIL: dthomas/wo@fs.fed.us 

Northern Region: 

MT, ID, ND, Northwestern SD

Jim Olivarez

R-1 Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service 

Fed. Bldg., P.O. Box 7669

Missoula, MT 59807 

PH: 406-329-3621

FAX: 406-329-3132

EMAIL: jolivarez/r1@fs.fed.us

David Atkins

R-1 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator 

USDA Forest Service 

Fed. Bldg., P.O. Box 7669

Missoula, MT 59807 

PH: 406-329-3134

FAX: 406-329-3132

EMAIL: datkins/r1@fs.fed.us

Rocky Mountain Region: 

CO, KS, SD, and Eastern WY

R-2 Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

740 Simms St.

Golden, CO 80401

PH: 303-275-5005

FAX: 303-275-5075

EMAIL: /r2@fs.fed.us

Susan Johnson

R-2 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

P.O. Box 25127

Denver, CO 80225

PH: 303-275-5065

FAX: 303-275-5075

EMAIL: sjohnson/r2@fs.fed.us

Southwestern Region: 

AZ and NM

John Conner

R-3 Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service 

517 Gold Avenue SW

Albuquerque, NM 87102

PH: 505-434-7200 or 505-842-3227

FAX: 505-842-3807 or 505-434-7218

EMAIL: jconner/r3@fs.fed.us

Doug Parker

R-3 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator 

USDA Forest Service 

Fed. Bldg., 517 Gold Avenue, SW

Albuquerque, NM 87102

PH: 505-842-3280

FAX: 505-842-3800

EMAIL: dparker/r3@fs.fed.us

Intermountain Region: 

Southern ID, NV, UT, and Western WY

Curt Johnson

R-4 Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

Fed. Bldg., 324 25th St.

Ogden, UT 84401

PH: 801-625-5600

FAX: 801-625-5483

EMAIL: cjohnson/r4@fs.fed.us

28

FOREST SERVICE NOXIOUS

WEED COORDINATORS
29

Dave Baumgartner

R-4 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

Fed. Bldg., 324 25th St.

Ogden, UT 84401

PH: 801-625-5258

FAX: 801-625-5716

EMAIL: dbaumgartner/r4@fs.fed.us

Pacific Southwest Region: 

CA, HI, Guam, and Trust Territories

Cheri Rohrer

R-5 Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

630 Sansome St.

San Francisco, CA 94111

PH: 415-705-2545

FAX: 415-705-1166

EMAIL: crohrer/r5@fs.fed.us

R-5 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service 

630 Sansome St.

San Francisco, CA 94111

PH: 415-705-2660

FAX: 415-705-1140

Duane Nelson

Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry

USDA Forest Service

1643 Kilauea Ave.

Hilo, HI 96720

PH: 808-935-6292

FAX: 808-935-9801

EMAIL: dnelson/r5@fs.fed.us 

Pacific Northwest Region: 

OR and WA

Gary Smith

R-6 and FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

333 SW 1st Ave., P.O. Box 3623

Portland, OR 97208

PH: 503-808-2914

FAX: 503-808-2469

EMAIL: gsmith/r6pnw@fs.fed.us

Southern Region: AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, NC, OK,

SC, TN, TX, VA, PR, and Virgin Islands 

Levester Pendergrass

USDA Forest Service

R-8 Noxious Weed Coordinator

1720 Peachtree Rd., NW

Atlanta, GA 30367

PH: 404-347-3908

FAX: 404-347-4448

EMAIL: lpendergrass/r8@fs.fed.us

Paul Mistretta

R-8 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator 

USDA Forest Service 

1720 Peachtree Road, NW, Room 925N

Atlanta, GA 30367

PH: 404-347-2229

FAX: 404-347-1800

EMAIL: pmistretta/r8@fs.fed.us

Eastern Region: 

CT, DE, FL, IA, IN, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MO, 

NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, VT, WV, and WI

Eunice Padley

USDA Forest Service

R-9 Noxious Weed Coordinator

310 W. Wisconsin Ave., Room 500

Milwaukee, WI 53203

PH: 414-297-1977

FAX: 608-262-2500

EMAIL: epadley/r9@fs.fed.us

Russ McKinney

R-9 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

100 Matsonford Road

5 Radnor Corp Ctr. Suite 200

Radnor, PA 19087-4585

PH: 610-975-4124

FAX: 610-975-4200

EMAIL: rmckinney/na@fs.fed.us

Alaska Region: AK

Mary Stensvold

R-10 Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

204 Siginaka Way

Sitka, AK 99835

PH: 907-747-4210

FAX: 907-747-4331

EMAIL: mstensvold/r10_chatham@fs.fed.us

Ed Holsten

R-10 FHP Noxious Weed Coordinator

USDA Forest Service

3301 “C” St., Suite 522

Anchorage, AK 99503-3956

PH: 907-271-2573

FAX: 907-271-2897

EMAIL: eholsten/r10_chugach@fs.fed.us
FOREST SERVICE

RESEARCH CONTACTS

National Headquarters

Sheila M. Andrus, Ph.D.

USDA Forest Service

Vegetation Mgmt. and Protection Research Staff

14th and Independence Ave., SW

P.O. Box 96090

Washington, DC 20090-6090

PH: 202-205-1561

FAX: 202-205-2497

Research Station Headquarters

North Central Forest Experiment Station 

USDA Forest Service

1992 Folwell Avenue

St. Paul, MN 55108

PH: 612-649-5000 

FAX: 612-649-5285 

Northeastern Forest Experiment Station

USDA Forest Service

5 Radnor Corporate Ctr., Suite 200

Radnor, PA 19087

PH: 610-975-4223

FAX : 610-975-4200

Pacific Northwest Research Station 

USDA Forest Service 

333 S.W. 1st Avenue 

P.O. Box 3890 

Portland, OR 97208 

PH: 503-326-3592 

FAX: 503-808-2130

Rocky Mountain Research Station

USDA Forest Service

240 West Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526-2098

PH: 303-498-1100

FAX : 303-498-1010

Pacific Southwest Forest and 

Range Experiment Station

USDA Forest Service

800 Buchanan Street, West Bldg

Albany, CA 94710-0011 

PH: 510-559-6300

FAX: 510-559-6440 

Southern Research Station

USDA Forest Service

200 Weaver Blvd

P.O. Box 2680

Asheville, NC 28802

PH: 704-257-4300

FAX: 704-257-4840

Forest Products Laboratory

USDA Forest Service

One Gifford Pinchot Drive

Madison, WI 53705-2398

PH: 608-231-9200

FAX: 608-231-9592

International Institute of Tropical Forestry

USDA Forest Service

Call Box 25000

UPR Experimental Station

Rio Piedras, PR 00926-5000

PH: 787-766-5335

FAX: 787-766-6302

30
31

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The following people supplied information,

ideas, or photographs for the noxious weed

stories. Thanks to all who generously contributed

their time for this publication.

Noxious Weed Strategy

Deborah Hayes and Rita Beard

Forest Service Noxious Weed Stories

Jan Lerum

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender,

religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or

family status. (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 USDA, Director, Office of Civil

Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue,

SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD).

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Guy Anglin

Tom Barbouletos

Bob Bridges

Bob Brittain

H. Dan Brown

Julie Concannon

John Conner

Bev Corbett

Rose Davis

Jim Federicks

Jennie Haas

Kirk Johnson

Jeff Kwasny

Andy Kratz

Leonard Lake

Eric Lane

Jim Lile

George Markin

Lorraine Miller

Paul Mistretta

Duane Nelson

Jim Olivarez

Eunice Padley

Dick Reardon

R. D. Richard

Cheri Rohrer

Larry Samson

Steve Schumacher

Dan Segotta

Beth Shimp

Jody Shimp

Gary Smith

Tom Smith

Mary Stensvold

Larry Stritch

Chuck Sundt

John Taylor

Dave Thomas

Eric Ulaszek

Kathy Van Zuuk