[Federal Register: May 3, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 86)]
[Notices]
[Page 22389-22390]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03my02-15]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Cibola National Forest Invasive Plant Management Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare An Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture, Forest Service will prepare an
environmental impact statement for a proposal to manage invasive plant
species on the Cibola National Forest and the Kiowa, Rita Blanca, Black
Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands. Counties included in
the analysis area are Socorro, Sierra, Catron, Lincoln, Torrance,
Bernalillo, Valencia, Cibola, Sandoval, McKinley, Colfax, Union, Mora
and Harding in New Mexico; Dallam, Gray and Hemphill Counties in Texas;
and Cimarron and Roger Mills Counties in Oklahoma.
DATES: Comments must be received, in writing, on or before May 31,
2002.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Range and Wildlife Staff, Forest
Supervisor's Office, Cibola National Forest, 2113 Osuna Rd., NE, Suite
A, Albuquerque, NM 87113-1001, Attn: Range, Wildlife and Watershed
Staff. For further information, mail correspondence to: Range and
Wildlife Staff, Cibola National Forest Supervisor's Office, 2113 Osuna
Rd., NE, Suite A, Albuquerque, NM 87113-1001, phone (505) 346-3900.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose and need for the Proposed Action of managing invasive
plant infestations on the Cibola National Forest and Kiowa, Rita
Blanca, Black Kettle and McClellan Creek National Grasslands is to:
Protect forests, rangelands, grasslands, wildlands and
adjacent private, industrial and other agency lands by eradicating
invasive plant species where possible and by limiting the spread of
well established invasive plant species when eradication is not
realistically possible given time and funding constraints;
Comply with federal, state and county noxious week laws
regarding the management of noxious weed species.
Proposed Action
The project proposes to take an integrated pest management (IPM)
approach to management of invasive plant species. This approach will
combine biological, cultural, mechanical and chemical methods as well
as incorporating prevention and education measures. These methods are
further defined below:
Biological control methods involve the release of insects
or plant pathogens that impact invasive plant species through reduction
of seed production, reduction of plant vigor, or other avenue that
reduces the ability of invasive plants to dominate native plant
communities. Biological control agents typically come from the area of
origin of the pest plant host, which is usually overseas. These agents
have been proven to be benign to native plants and crop species. They
are generally not effective in elimination of invasive plants, and
usually require large infestations to become established.
Cultural control methods include planting, fertilizing or
generally encouraging desired vegetation to limit sites available for
encroachment by invasive species.
Mechanical control methods involve hand pulling or digging
individual plants, picking off and destroying flower and seed heads
Chemical control methods involve the use of herbicides to
kill invasive species while maintaining as much desirable vegetation as
possible.
Possible Alternatives
Possible alternatives to the proposed action include taking no
action against invasive plant species and using only non-chemical
control methods.
Responsible Official
The responsible official is Liz Agpaoa, the Cibola National Forest
Supervisor. The address is Cibola National Forest Supervisor's Office,
2113 Osuna Rd., NE, Suite A, Albuquerque, NM 87113-1001.
Nature of Decisions To Be Made
The decisions to be made are: (1) Whether to manage invasive plant
species and if so, whether to use one or a combination of several
methods of control, including mechanical, chemical, biological or
cultural treatments and if so, where and how much? (2) A range of
alternatives will be considered. These include taking no action against
invasive plant species, using only non-chemical control methods, and
using a combination of control methods in an integrated pest management
strategy.
Scoping Process
Public participation will be important at several times during the
analysis. The first time is during the scoping period [Reviewer may
wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environment
Policy Act (CFR) at 40 CFR 1501.7]. The Agency will be seeking written
issues with the Proposed Action from Federal, State, and local
agencies, any affected Indian tribes, and other individuals who may be
interested in or affected by the Proposed Action. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, will be invited to
participate as a cooperating agency to evaluate potential impacts to
threatened and endangered species habitat if any such species are found
to exist in the potential treatment areas. This input will be used to
develop additional alternatives. The scoping process includes:
Identifying potential issues;
Selecting significant issues with the Proposed Action,
needing in-depth analysis;
Eliminating insignificant issues; issues that have been
analyzed and documented in a previous EIS, issues that controvert the
need for the Proposed Action, or issues that are outside the authority
of the Responsible Official to decide;
Exploration of additional alternatives based on the issues
identified during the scoping process; and
Identification of potential environmental effects of the
proposed action and alternatives (i.e., direct, indirect, and
cumulative effects and connected actions).
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
[[Page 22390]]
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 impact 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.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook
1909.15, Section 21)
Dated: April 29, 2002.
Liz Agpaoa,
Forest Supervisor, Cibola National Forest.
[FR Doc. 02-10981 Filed 5-2-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2002/05/03 EST