Malheur National Forest, Oregon; Malheur National Forest Invasive Plants Treatment, 16281-16282 [06-3124]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
• Forest Service

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16281-16282]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-3124]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Malheur National Forest, Oregon; Malheur National Forest Invasive 
Plants Treatment

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

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

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

SUMMARY: The Malheur National Forest proposes to treat approximately 
3,800 acres of invasive plants located across the 1.7 million acre 
National Forest. It is anticipated that approximately 800 acres of both 
existing and newly discovered sites would be treated in any year. The 
proposed treatment methods includes: manual pulling or use of hand 
tools, use of mechanical hand tools, herbicide, cultural methods such 
as grazing or mulching, and biological controls. The method used would 
depend on resource protection concerns for a given site.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by May 1, 2006. The draft environmental impact statement is expected in 
March, 2007 and the final environmental impact statement is expected in 
September, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments about this project to Stan Benes, 
Forest Supervisor, Malheur National Forest, P.O. Box 909, John Day OR 
97845. Electronic comments can be mailed to: comments-pacificnorthwest-
malheur@fs.fed.us.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carole Holly, Project Leader, Phone: 
541-575-3026 or e-mail: cholly@fs.fed.us.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The Purpose of this action is to provide a rapid and more 
comprehensive, up to date approach to the treatment of invasive plants 
that occur on the National Forest. The purpose of treating weed 
infestations is to maintain or improve the diversity, function, and 
sustainability of desired native plant communities and other natural 
resources that can be adversely impacted by invasive plant species. 
Specifically, there is an underlying need on the Forest to: (1) 
implement treatment actions to contain and reduce the extent of 
invasive plants at existing inventoried sites, and (2) rapidly respond 
to new or expanded invasive plant sites as they may occur in the 
future.

Proposed Action

    A detailed project description can be found on the Malheur National 
Forest Web page at https://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mai/projects.
    Various types of treatments would be used to treat invasive plants 
including the use of herbicides, physical, and biological methods. 
Treatments are proposed for existing or new infestations including new 
plant species that currently are not found on the Forest. Potential 
treatments based on existing mapped sites include: Biological methods 
on approximately 1 acre; Chemical/non riparian methods on approximately 
904 acres; Chemical/riparian methods on approximately 553 acres; and 
Physical methods on 2,404 acres.
    Herbicide Treatments: Any use of Chemicals would be done in 
accordance with USDA Forest Service policies, regulations and Forest 
Plan Standards as well as product label requirements. Chemicals 
approved for use, within or outside riparian areas, are listed in the 
Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing 
Invasive Plants FEIS (Regional Invasive Plant EIS), April 2005 and ROD 
and includes: Chlorosulfuron, clopyralid, glyphosate, imazapic, 
imazapyr, metsulfuron methyl, picloram, sethroxydim, sulfometuron 
methyl, and triclopyr. The application rates depend on the presence of 
the target species, condition of non-target vegetation, soil type, 
depth to the water table, the distance to open water sources, riparian 
areas, special status plants, and requirements of the herbicide label. 
Monitoring of treated sites would determine what follow-up treatments 
would be needed.
    Ground based application methods would be used based on 
accessibility, topography, and the size of treatment area. The 
following are examples of the proposed methods of application:
     Spot spraying--This method targets individual plants and 
is usually applied with a backpack sprayer. Spot Spraying can also be 
applied using a hose off a truck-mounted or ATV-mounted tank.
     Wicking--This hand method involves wiping a sponge or 
cloth that is saturated with chemical over the plant. This is used in 
sensitive areas, such as near water, to avoid getting any chemical on 
the soil or in contact with non-target vegetation.
     Stem injection--A new hand application technique currently 
being used on Japanese knotweed in western OR.
     Hand broadcast--Herbicide would be applied by hand using a 
backpack or hand spreader to cover in area of ground rather than 
individual plants.
     Boom broadcast--This involves using a hose and nozzle from 
a tank mounted on a truck or ATV. Herbicide is applied to cover an area 
of ground rather than individual plants. This method is used when the 
weed is dense enough that it is difficult to discern individual plants 
and the area to be treated makes spot spraying impractical. This would 
be the method used for aerial applications.
    When needed to facilitate recovery, native seed would be used to 
recover the site and increase competition.
    Use of Physical Treatments: Physical methods include manual 
control, hand mechanical and cultural methods.
    Manual Control Methods: These methods include non-mechanized 
approaches, such as hand pulling or using hand tools (e.g., grubbing), 
to remove plants or cut off seed heads. Where sites are small or there 
are few individual target species, handsaws, axes, shovel, rakes, 
machetes, grubbing hoes, mattocks, brush hooks, and hand clippers may 
all be used to remove invasive plant species. To meet control 
objectives or reduce the risk of activities spreading invasive plants, 
seed heads and flowers would be removed and disposed of using proper 
disposal methods. Developed flowers or seed heads are generally bagged 
and burned.
    Hand Mechanical Control Methods: This method uses hand power tools 
and includes such actions as mowing, weed whipping, road brushing, root 
tilling methods, or foaming, steaming, infrared, and other techniques 
using heat to reduce plant cover and root vigor. Mowing and cutting 
would be used to reduce or remove above ground biomass. Seed heads and 
cut fragments of species capable of re-sprouting from stem or root 
segments would be collected and properly disposed of to prevent them 
from spreading into uninfested areas.
    Cultural Control Methods: Approved methods include any cultural 
practice known to be useful for treating invasive plants such as 
mulching with a variety of materials, grazing animals, using 
fertilizer/soil amendments, competitive planting, or other local 
remedies that may be determined to be effective (e.g., spraying water/
salt/sugar mixtures). Competitive planting would consist of a

[[Page 16282]]

combination of methods used with planting native vegetation in small 
areas of disturbance, less than 100 square feet.
    Biological Control: Biological weed control activities typically 
include the release of parasitic and ``host specific'' insects. 
Presently, insects are the primary biological control agent in use. 
Mites, nematodes, and pathogens are used occasionally. Treatments do 
not eradicate the target species but rather reduce target plant 
densities and competition with desired plant species for space, water 
and nutrients. The treated areas would continue to be inventoried and 
monitored to determine the success of the treatments and when the 
released bio-control agents have reached equilibrium with the target 
species.

Responsible Official

    The Forest Supervisor, Stan Benes, will be the responsible official 
for making the decision and providing direction for the analysis. He 
can be contacted at the address listed above.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The responsible official will decide what type of methods and how 
they will be used to control invasive plants on the Malheur National 
Forest.

Scoping Process

    The public is asked to provide the responsible official with 
written comments describing their concerns about this project. At this 
time, no public meetings are being planned.

Comment Requested

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement. When reviewing 
the proposed action, bear in mind that the Forest has been operating 
under direction found in the 1988 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 
and 1988 & 1992 Records of Decision (ROD) for Competing and Unwanted 
Vegetation and the associated 1989 Mediated Agreement. Treatments under 
this agreement have previously been by manual control methods. 
Monitoring has indicated that this approach is not successful. In 2005 
the Forest Service's Pacific Northwest Region completed and implemented 
the Pacific Northwest Region Invasive plant Program FEIS providing new 
direction and updating the herbicides that would be permitted for use 
in the Region. The new herbicides offer many advantages over the more 
limited set allowed previously, including greater selectively, less 
harm to desired vegetation, reduced application rates, and lower 
toxicity to animals and people. The proposed treatments will be guided 
by this FEIS. The most useful comments to developing or refining the 
proposed action would be site specific concerns and those that can help 
us develop treatments that would be responsive to our goal to control, 
contain, or eradicate invasive plants as well as being cost effective. 
Prevention measures have already been built into the Regional Invasive 
Plant EIS and will be implemented with all actions occuring on the 
Forest. The purpose of this proposed action is to begin treatments on 
known invasive plant sites and provide a mechanism to respond rapidly 
when new infestations are discovered.

Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review

    A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for 
comment. 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 proposed so that it is 
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and 
contents. 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 impact 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 comment period so that substantive comments and 
objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it 
can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in the final 
environmental impact statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft 
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is 
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the 
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft 
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives 
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer 
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing 
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
    Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who 
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal 
and will be available for public inspection.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 
1909.15, Section 21)

    Dated: March 27, 2006.
Roger W. Williams,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 06-3124 Filed 3-30-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M