Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement April 2005 

Appendix I-1 

APPENDIX I 

USDA FOREST SERVICE, PACIFIC NORTHWEST REGION 

STRATEGY FOR SUPPORTING INVASIVE PLANT MANAGEMENT ON STATE 

AND PRIVATE FOREST LANDS 

OVERVIEW OF THE STRATEGY 

On September 25, 1998, Chief Mike Dombeck released the USDA Forest Service 

(FS) Strategy for Noxious Weeds and Nonnative Invasive Plant (IP) Management. In 

1999, the Pacific Northwest (PNW) Region produced a IP Strategy for National 

Forest System (NFS) lands that builds upon the FS (National) Strategy and adapts 

goals and priority actions to situations encountered on National Forest lands in 

Washington and Oregon states. 

Since the release of the PNW Region Strategy for NFS lands, the involvement of the 

Forest Health Protection (FHP) staff in IP management has steadily increased. FHP 

supports cooperative efforts that manage IP’s on nonfederal/state and private (S&P) 

forested lands. FHP may provide support through technical and financial assistance 

to state, county, extension, and Cooperative Weed Management Areas (CWMA’s) 

and other agencies/entities responsible for aspects of IP management on S&P lands. 

PNW Region has prepared this strategy to best focus the resources that FHP 

contributes to IP management on S&P lands. The strategy describes our partner 

programs and identifies priority activities where FHP can most effectively support the 

Integrated Weed Management (IWM) of our diverse partners. There are also 

benefits to NFS lands from more effective IP management on S&P forest lands. 

These lands are often intermingled or closely associated, and can be sources of IP 

introduction and spread across ownerships; weeds know no boundaries. 

WHAT IS A NOXIOUS WEED? 

Forest Service policy defines noxious weeds as "those plant species designated as 

noxious weeds by the Secretary of Agriculture or by the responsible State official." 

(FSM 2080) Both Washington and Oregon have designated Noxious Weeds, which 

are the focus of state and county programs, as designation as a Noxious Weed 

invokes state laws and regulations for prevention and control. The FS National and 

PNW Region Strategies use the term "Invasive Plants" to more broadly encompass 

all invasive, aggressive, or harmful non-indigenous plant species, including but not 

limited to Noxious Weeds. FHP support to invasive plant management in 

Washington and Oregon will focus on state and federal-designated noxious weeds 

because of state legal and regulatory requirements. 

PNW REGION NOXIOUS WEED ORGANIZATION 

Three branches of the Forest Service share responsibility for aspects of noxious 
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2005 

Appendix I-2 

weed management: National Forest System, State and Private Forestry, and 

Research. 

National Forest System 

Forest Supervisors and the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Manager 

have the responsibility to prevent, eradicate or control noxious weeds on the National 

Forest lands which they administer. Within the Regional Office, the Natural 

Resources staff administers the Invasive Plant program. The Regional Office and 

each National Forest has designated a Noxious Weed Coordinator. Coordinators are 

resource professionals from various disciplines including forest management, range 

management, botany, hydrology, ecology, and wildlife biology. 

PNW Region will release an EIS in 2004 that amends Forest Plan standards throught 

the Region for more effective invasive plant prevention, treatment, and restoration, in 

cooperation with non-federal neighbors and partners. 

Research 

PNW Station researchers and cooperating university faculty provide support to 

invasive plant management. 

State and Private Forestry 

The Natural Resources staff, Forest Health Protection (FHP) group in the Regional 

Office provides support to IP management in PNW S&P forest lands. FHP provides 

technical support and assistance in IWM, pesticide use, and biocontrol development. 

The PNW Region Invasive Plant Program Manager administers both SPF and NFS 

facets of IP management. FHP provides leadership and technical expertise to the 

new PNW Region EIS in support of NFS invasive plant management. 

This S&P lands invasive plant strategy recognizes that our partners have the lead in 

deciding what and where activities will take place. FHP is a full partner in 

coordinating these activities with NFS priorities and ensuring the accountability of 

partners for appropriate use of federal funds. Thus, this strategy and annual 

proposed activities are programmatic in nature. 

OVERVIEW OF STATE AND SUBREGIONAL NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT 

ORGANIZATIONS 

OREGON 

Oregon Department of Agriculture, Plant Division, Weed Control Program (ODA) 

provides statewide technical assistance in all aspects of Integrated Weed 

Management to essentially all ownerships—state, private, and most federal lands. 

ODA maintains a statewide management staff of four, located in the capital city of 

Salem, and six field specialists located throughout Oregon. The PNW Region FS has 

cooperated with and funded.ODA for IWM work on National Forests for many years 
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2005 

Appendix I-3 

and recently also on S&P lands through FHP funds. ODA prepared a statewide 

Strategic Plan for Noxious Weed Management in 2002 which complements this 

strategic plan. 

Additionally, several subregional Cooperative Weed Management Areas have been 

established which are independent, locally-based organizations with wide 

stakeholder participation that includes representatives of FS and ODA. 

WASHINGTON 

In contrast to Oregon, Washington’s noxious weed management organization is 

decentralized. The Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board manages 

processes for designation of noxious weeds, and coordinates county activities; 

however, no statewide organization exists for delivery of weed management services 

excluding biological control expertise provided by Washington State University 

Extension. Okanogan County has been the most active county weed control agency 

in cooperative weed management, involving FS partnerships; a few other 

countieshave also been active, primarily in northeast Washington and the Columbia 

Gorge. 

Cooperative Weed Mangement Areas have been organized, most notably in Puget 

Sound area where they focus on noxious riparian weeds including Japanese 

knotweed. A large-scale partnership has developed in northeast Washington to 

provide biological control expertise and services to all land owners, including, state, 

private, tribal, and FS. The PNW Region FS has contributed both NFS and FHP 

funds for startup and expansion of this program, which is broadly recognized and 

supported by partners; it is now expanding to provide statewide service. 
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2005 

Appendix I-4 

COMPONENTS OF AN INTEGRATED INVASIVE PLANT MANAGEMENT 

STRATEGY 

Experience has shown that Integrated Weed Management (IWM) is most effective. 

IWM combines coordinated prevention practices; early detection and rapid response 

to new invaders; sustained eradication or control of established weeds; and 

restoration and monitoring. By the time an invasive plant is perceived as a "problem" 

in a particular area, the opportunity for prevention is lost, eradication is difficult, 

control is costly, and impacts on wildland ecosystems and uses are severe. 

1. PREVENTION AND EDUCATION 

Current Situation 

Education and information exchange (I&E) are continuing and important components 

of prevention strategies. Public outreach and education will make forest users aware 

of how noxious weeds are introduced and spread, and what are the associated 

environmental impacts and costs. Once educated, many forest users will adopt 

prevention practices to reduce the likelihood of weed introduction and spread from 

their activities. Furthermore, prevention programs are more broadly effective when 

all forest users are involved and everyone is perceived to be part of the effort. I&E 

also supports Early detection and Rapid Response programs. 

However, most actions outlined in the FS guide to Weed Prevention Practices are 

purely voluntary on non-NFS lands. Development of demonstration projects may be 

possible in the future to encourage their voluntary adoption. One notable opportunity 

in both Washington and Oregon where a state role exists is the development of 

weed-free feed, straw and mulch programs. Neither state has any statewide weedfree certification program in place. Both WSDA and ODA staffs have proposed weedfree certification programs in the past, but the proposals have not been accepted due 

to costs and grower group concerns. In Oregon, a few local grass-roots programs 

have generated increasing interest. 

ACTIONS 

1A Develop, support, and distribute weed awareness, identification and 

prevention information at regional and local information centers in Washington 

and Oregon 

1B Participate in noxious weed awareness and education opportunities with user 

groups, civic groups, legislators, interested citizens, and agency employees in 

Washington and Oregon. 

1C Compile listing of weed awareness and education resources available to 

agency personnel and the public and include in weed prevention electronic 

media. 
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2005 

Appendix I-5 

1D Develop in concert, and in consultation with state Departments of Agriculture 

implementation plans for weed-free straw, mulch and feed certification and for 

closures on public lands. Foster support for trial weed-free forage programs 

and for use of weed-free products by private land owners/managers. 

2. EARLY DETECTION AND RAPID RESPONSE (EDRR) 

Current Situation 

State and Private capacity for early detection and rapid response depends on several 

factors: 

• Number and distribution of people (staffs, cooperators, and educated publics) 

able to recognize potential new invaders 

• Regulatory noxious weed designations for new invaders of limited distribution 

and for plants known to be highly invasive in comparable environments but not 

yet reported to exist in the state. Both OR and WA have such designations in 

their noxious weed regulations. 

• Regulatory and control capacity to respond quickly and effectively to new 

discoveries. 

ODA is a leader in early detection and rapid response efforts, with up to 20 ongoing 

or proposed EDRR programs at a state or regional level. WSDA does not currently 

have organzational capability for statewide EDRR, however some counties and 

CWMA’s have EDRR efforts 

In addition to statewide EDRR, the same tactics should be implemented within each 

state on a subregional geographic basis for noxious weeds of limited distribution. For 

example, ODA control policy for tansy ragwort in western Oregon (where it is widely 

distributed) is containment, primarily with biological control. In contrast, eradication is 

the objective in northeastern Oregon where isolated, limited populations exist and 

biocontrol agents do not appear to be effective. 

Another factor to assist with subregional EDRR is a statewide reporting and spatiallybased mapping system to track infestations across the state. Oregon State 

Univeristy has developed such a system, named “Weedmapper”, and ODA and 

federal agencies are discussing how best to implement it statewide. 

ACTIONS 

2A Provide resources to ongoing and new EDRR efforts determined by state, 

county and CWMA weed managers. 

2B Support statewide reporting and mapping capabilities to identify new 
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2005 

Appendix I-6 

introductions, determine their extent and design rapid response programs to 

control new invaders. 

2C Develop a Memorandum of Agreement with WSNCB and WSDA to build 

capacity for early detection and rapid response under state regulations in 

cooperation with active county weed boards and CWMA’s. 

3. INTEGRATED CONTROL STRATEGIES 

Effective control of noxious weeds statewide has both technical and jurisdictional 

aspects to be addressed. 

County and CWMA organizations emphasize effective control of existing noxious 

weed infestations. Herbicide use is generally preferred, except in some 

environmentally or socially sensitive situations where manual or mechanical control is 

preferred. General training and treatment information are somewhat available 

through state and professional organizations, but more focused training on Integrated 

Weed Management would help private land managers. 

Interest in biological control techniques is high, and recent FS support has expanded 

capacity and service in both Washington and Oregon. Biocontrol efforts need to 

continue and increase because biocontrol technology continually expands for new 

pest plants, new control agents and agent complexes, and new environmental 

situations. 

To be effective on a large scale, noxious weed control has to be integrated in 

techniques, and applied across all affected ownerships. State, county, federal, and 

private organizations must all have capacity and be appropriately involved in noxious 

weed control. CWMA’s have a unique role in coordinating cross-jursidictional control 

efforts, distinct from, but complementary to federal, state, and county programs. 

Programs to map distributions of weed infestations across landscapes support 

effective planning for coordinated control strategies. Remote sensing is not used 

significantly in weed inventory due to limited technology development. Studies 

indicate that reliable weed infestation identification is highly seasonal, and varies 

among weeds, and among elevational/climatic gradients for a weed species. 

ACTIONS 

3A Support and expand integrated control programs and training available to 

private land managers through state and county agencies and CWMA’s in WA 

and OR. 

3B Support additional biocontrol technology development and transfer by 

specialized, qualified organizations: ODA and WSU Extension Weed 

Biocontrol program. 
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2005 

Appendix I-7 

3C Support statewide and subregional reporting and mapping capabilities to 

identify noxious weed distributions, determine state and regional priorities, and 

design response programs to control priority established noxious weeds. 

3D Work with FS technology development centers and cooperators to develop 

and refine techniques for remote sensing of weed infestations. 

3E Develop a Memorandum of Agreement with WSNCB and WSDA to build 

capacity for integrated control programs in cooperation with active county 

weed boards and CWMA’s. 

4. RESTORATION 

Plant ecologists recognize the importance of reestablishing desired plant 

communities to restore ecological function, to resist reinfestation, and to avoid the 

costs associated with retreatment. However, the scientific basis for developing 

restoration methodologies is meager. Much more needs to be learned about 

effective restoration techniques for areas with varied disturbance regimes and longterm management objectives. Where management objectives necessitate repeated 

disturbance, such as rangelands and rights-of-way, restoration techniques are very 

different from natural areas where future disturbance is minimal. Also, desired plant 

materials, especially native plants, are limited in availability and very costly. 

The laws and regulations requiring control of noxious weeds do not require 

restoration; demonstrations and incentives are possible methods of persuasion for 

state and local organizations to gain landowner support for restoration programs 

(perhaps in cooperation with Extension Services and Resource Conservation 

Districts). 

ACTIONS 

4a Provide technical assistance and cooperate with state, county, and CWMA’s to 

develop monitoring programs to more systematically assess effectiveness of 

weed control and restoration over time at appropriate scales. 

4B Provide technical and financial support to agencies, cooperating research 

institutions, and CWMA’s for development of locally-effective restoration 

practices and demonstration areas for technology transfer. 

4C Support development of nursery production techniques for appropriate plant 

species/cultivars for commercial growers, to provide seed/stock for largescale, economically feasible restoration practices. 
Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement March 2005 

Appendix I-8 

PREPARED BY: 

Gary K. Smith, Regional Invasive Plants Program Manager 

January 29, 2004 

APPROVED BY: 

Doug Daoust, Asst. Director for Natural Resources, Forest Health Protection 

February 2, 2004