```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4719-4720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2306]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Sandpoint Ranger District Noxious Weed Control Project, Idaho 
Panhandle National Forests, Bonner County, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) to disclose the potential environmental effects of 
noxious weed treatment of the Sandpoint Ranger District. Treatment 
sites would be at various locations across the district and are within 
the Pend Oreille Ecosystem, Sandpoint Ranger District, Idaho Panhandle 
National Forests, Bonner County, Idaho. Most treatment sites are 
located near or along forest roads, trails, powerline corridors, 
recreation sites and wildlife forage habits (i.e. dry sites).

    The proposed action to control populations of noxious and 
undesirable weeds on certain travel corridors and areas is designed to 
prevent the spread of these weeds and promote the retention and health 
of native and/or desirable plants within this ecosystem. The proposed 
action would use an integrated pest management approach to control 
weeds. This approach includes mechanical, biological, cultural, and 
chemical control.
    At least 16 species of noxious or undesirable weed will be 
considered for control. The major species considered for control 
include spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), orange hawkweed 
(Hieracium aurantiacum), meadow hawkweed (Hieracium pratense), 
dalmation toadflax (Linaria dalmatica), Canada thistle (Cirsium 
arvense), common St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum), hound's tongue 
(Cynoglossum officinale) and common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare). Other 
species may include diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa), purple 
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), ox-eye daisy (Chrysanthemum 
leucanthemum), rush skeltonweed (Chondrilla juncea), sulphur cinquefoil 
(Potentilla recta), yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), musk 
thistle (Carduus nutans), and bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare).
    This project level EIS will tier to the Idaho Panhandle National 
Forests Weed Pest Management EIS, October 1989; the Idaho Panhandle 
National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), 
September 1987; the Final EIS Noxious Weed Management Project, Bonners 
Ferry Ranger District, September 1995, and the Priest Lake Noxious Weed 
Control Final EIS.

DATES: Written comments and suggestions should be received no later 
than March 3, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions on the proposed 
management activities or requests to be placed on the project mailing 
list to Betsy Hammet, Project Leader, Sandpoint Ranger District, 1500 
Hwy 2, Suite 110, Sandpoint, ID 83864.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betsy Hammet, EIS Team Leader, 
Sandpoint Ranger District, phone number (208 263-5111.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Weed control is proposed on 46 sites that 
have been identified on the Sandpoint Ranger District. These sites 
range in size from single plants to approximately 300 acres and total 
approximately 1,270 gross acres. These sites represent less than 1% of 
the 315,420 acres in the Sandpoint Ranger District.
    The primary purposes for weed control are as follows:
    (1) Protect the natural condition and biodiversity of the Pend 
Oreille

[[Page 4720]]

Ecosystem by preventing or limiting the spread of aggressive, non-
native plant species that displace native vegetation.
    (2) Eliminate new invaders before they become established.
    (3) Prevent or limit the spread of established weeds into areas 
containing little or no infestation.
    (4) Reduce weed seed sources on trail heads and dispersed 
campsites, along main roads and trails, within powerline corridors, and 
in wildlife forage habitat (i.e. dry sites).
    (5) Protect sensitive and unique habitats including research 
natural areas, wetlands, and sensitive plant populations.
    The treatment sites are in scattered locations across the district. 
Small infestations that are discovered in addition to the 46 sites 
would be treated within the scope of the Final EIS and Record of 
Decision. The Idaho Panhandle National Forests Land and Resource 
Management Plan provides guidance for management activities within the 
potentially affected area through its goals, objectives, standards and 
guidelines, and management area direction. The Forest Plan directs that 
forest pests be managed by an integrated pest management approach.
    The decision to be made is what actions, if any, should be taken to 
control weeds in the Pend Oreille Ecosystem, where treatment should be 
applied, and what types of treatment should be used.
    The Forest Service will consider a range of alternatives. One of 
these will be the ``no action'' alternative in which none of the 
proposed treatment activities would be implemented. Additional 
alternatives will represent the range of control methods currently 
available for treatment of weeds, including non-chemical methods.
    Public participation is an important part of the analysis and will 
play an important role in developing the alternatives. The initial 
scoping process (40 CFR 1501.7) will occur during February, March, and 
April, 1997. The mailing list for public scoping will be developed from 
responses to this NOI, and to a Scoping Notice sent out to interested 
individuals, organizations and agencies. In addition, the public is 
encouraged to visit with Forest Service officials during the analysis 
and prior to the decision. The Forest Service will also be seeking 
information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local 
agencies and other individuals or organizations who may be interested 
in or affected by the proposed actions.
    Comments from the public and other agencies will be used in 
preparation of the Draft EIS. The scoping process will be used to:
    1. Identify potential issues.
    2. Identify major issues to be analyzed in depth.
    3. Eliminate minor issues or those which have been covered by a 
relevant previous environmental analysis.
    4. Identify alternatives to the proposed action.
    5. Identify potential environmental effects of the proposed action 
and alternatives (i.e., cumulative effects).
    Some public concerns have already been identified from initial 
interdisciplinary review of the weed control proposal. The following 
significant issues have been identified so far:
    1. Current and potential impacts of the spread of noxious weeds on 
the physical, biological, and ecological environment within the 
Sandpoint Ranger District.
    2. Potential effectiveness, economics and impacts on natural 
resources of various weed control methods.
    3. Potential effects on human health from the application of 
herbicides.
    This list will be verified, expanded, or modified based on public 
scoping and interdisciplinary review of this proposal.
    The draft environmental impact statement is expected to be filed 
with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and available for public 
review in June, 1997. At that time, the EPA will publish a Notice of 
Availability of the draft environmental impact statement in the Federal 
Register. The comment period on the draft environmental impact 
statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection 
Agency publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
    The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important 
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of 
draft environmental impact statements must structure their 
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is 
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and 
contentions (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 
553 (1978)). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the 
draft environmental statement stage but that are not raised until after 
completion of the final environmental statement may be waived or 
dismissed by the courts (City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 
(9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 
1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980)). Because of these court rulings, it is 
very important that those interested in this proposed action 
participate by the close of the 45-day scoping comment period so that 
substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest 
Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to 
them in the final environmental impact statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns regarding the proposed action, comments on the draft 
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is 
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the 
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft 
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives 
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer 
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing 
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
    I am the responsible official for this environmental impact 
statement. My address is Sandpoint Ranger District, 1500 Hwy 2, Suite 
110, Sandpoint, ID 83864.

    Dated: January 21, 1997.
David S. Dillard,
District Ranger.
[FR Doc. 97-2306 Filed 1-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
```