B08_Attachment_6_Herbicide_PEIS_ROD_070124.pdf

July 2024

Record of Decision for Programmatic Approval

Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides

U.S. Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Cover Photo: Slinkard WSA, Nevada

The Department of the Interior protects and manages the Nation's natural resources and cultural heritage;

provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors its trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska

Natives, and affiliated island communities.

The Bureau of Land Management's mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.

Record of Decision for Programmatic Approval

Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using

Herbicides

July 2024

Prepared by Environmental Management and Planning Solutions, Inc

For more information, contact:

U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

Headquarters Office

1849 C Street NW

Washington, DC 20240

Phone: 202-208-3801

Fax: 970-256-4997 i

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1-1

CHAPTER 2. DECISION .............................................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 Herbicide Active Ingredients Approved for Use .................................................................. 2-1

2.1.1 Aminocyclopyrachlor .................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.2 Clethodim ........................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.1.3 Fluazifop-P-butyl ............................................................................................................. 2-1

2.1.4 Fluminoxazin ................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.5 Imazamox ......................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.6 Indaziflam ......................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.7 Oryzalin ............................................................................................................................ 2-2

2.2 Herbicide Treatment Standard Operating Procedures ....................................................... 2-2

2.3 Monitoring, Coordination, and Education .............................................................................. 2-2

CHAPTER 3. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ............................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Alternative A — Continue Present Herbicide Use (No Action Alternative) ................ 3-1

3.2 Alternative B — Allow For Use of Seven Proposed Active Ingredients on BLM-

Administered Lands (Preferred Alternative) .......................................................................... 3-1

3.3 Environmentally Preferred Alternative .................................................................................... 3-1

CHAPTER 4. MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................ 4-1

4.1 General Herbicide Treatment Considerations ...................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Selection of the Seven Approved Active Ingredients ........................................................... 4-1

4.3 Issues Considered in the Decision Process and Summary of Environmental

Consequences of Decision ......................................................................................................... 4-2

4.3.1 Beneficial Effects to Resources Evaluated in PEIS .................................................. 4-3

4.4 Development of the Decision .................................................................................................... 4-3

4.4.1 Alternative A — Continue Present Herbicide Use (No Action Alternative) . 4-3

4.4.2 Alternative B — Allow for Use of Seven Proposed Active Ingredients on BLM-

Administered Lands (Preferred Alternative) ........................................................... 4-3

4.5 Consultation and Coordination ................................................................................................ 4-4

4.5.1 Endangered Species Act Section Consultation ....................................................... 4-4 CHAPTER 5. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ......................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Development of the Draft Programmatic EIS ........................................................................ 5-1

5.1.1 Public Review and Comment of the Draft Programmatic EIS ............................ 5-1

5.2 Development of the Final Programmatic EIS and Preferred Alternative ........................ 5-1

5.2.1 Public Review of the Final Programmatic EIS .......................................................... 5-1

5.3 Signature Page .............................................................................................................................. 5-2 CHAPTER 6. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................... 6-1

APPENDIX A. - PREVENTION MEASURES AND STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES ............A-1

Table of Contents

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides ii

APPENDIX B. - CONSULTATION DOCUMENTS ......................................................................... B-1

TABLES Page

Table 2-1 Herbicide Active Ingredient Characteristics ...................................................................... 2-2

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides iii

This page intentionally left blank.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides iv

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Full Phrase

BLM United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency NEPA National Environmental Policy Act PEIS programmatic environmental impact statement ROD record of decision SOP standard operating procedure US United States

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides v

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 1-1

Chapter 1. Introduction

1.1 SUMMARY

This Record of Decision (ROD) approves the United States (US) Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) proposed use of the active ingredients aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin to treat vegetation on BLM-administered lands. These seven active ingredients are being added to the BLM’s list of active ingredients available for use on public lands. The underlying environmental analysis for this ROD tiers to the environmental analysis supporting the BLM RODs completed in 2007 and in 2016 (BLM 2007a; BLM 2016a).

1.2 BACKGROUND

Noxious weeds and invasive plants pose an ever-increasing threat to the integrity of our public lands and the many ecological services they provide by outcompeting native vegetation and by acting as hazardous fuels that contribute to the frequency and severity of wildfires. Protection of healthy, intact ecosystems provides the associated native plants and animals a better opportunity to persist and adapt compared with ecosystems that have already been converted to invasive annual grasses. Accordingly, effective management of noxious and invasive plants is essential in maintaining ecological health on the approximately 245 million acres administered by the BLM. An essential tool in that effort is application of herbicides with effective active ingredients..

The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides analyzes the BLM’s use of seven additional active ingredients on all BLM-administered lands. Partnerships with other federal, state, and local agencies, as well as organizations and private landowners, have been instrumental in making progress to manage noxious and invasive plants. These partner agencies and groups use these additional active ingredients on lands not administered by the BLM. The impact of these partnerships across jurisdictional boundaries may be limited if the BLM cannot use the same active ingredients as its partners on BLM-administered lands..

Currently, the BLM uses 21 active ingredients, as authorized by RODs for two different programmatic environmental impact statements (PEISs) from 2007 and 2016. The Record of Decision Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement in 2007 (2007 ROD; BLM 2007a) allowed the BLM to use 18 active ingredients for a full range of treatments on up to 932,000 acres of BLM-administered lands annually. The Record of Decision Vegetation Treatments Using Aminopyralid, Fluroxypyr, and Rimsulfuron on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (2016 ROD; BLM 2016a) allowed the BLM to use three new herbicide active ingredients for a full range of treatments on BLM-administered lands.

The 2007 and 2016 RODs also outlined a protocol for identifying, evaluating, and using new herbicide active ingredients.

The BLM identified aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin as seven herbicide active ingredients that it would like to add to its list of approved active ingredients for use on public lands. These active ingredients were identified based on input from BLM field offices and a preliminary assessment of their effectiveness and suitability for the BLM’s vegetation treatment needs. The seven proposed active ingredients are registered for use by the US Environmental

1. Introduction

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 1-2

Protection Agency (EPA), are deemed effective in controlling vegetation, and have minimal effects on the environment and human health if used according to label instructions. The BLM determined that use of the proposed active ingredients on public lands under established vegetation management programs required further assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

A Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides (BLM 2023) was released to the public on December 29, 2023 (Federal Register, Volume 88, Number 249, Pages 90199-90200). In accordance with NEPA, this PEIS identified impacts on the natural and human environment associated with the use of aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin to treat vegetation on BLM-administered lands. The current PEIS incorporated information from the 2007 and 2016 PEISs by reference, but also provided updated information where available and relevant. The BLM evaluated two program alternatives in the PEIS, including the Preferred Alternative and the No Action Alternative. The alternatives considered in the PEIS address known public concerns and issues, including those raised during the preparation of the 2007 and 2016 PEISs. Comments, documents, and information received concerning the current PEIS were considered in preparing the ROD presented here.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 2-1

Chapter 2. Decision The decision is to approve the BLM’s Proposed Action to add aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop- P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin to its list of approved active ingredients for use on public lands. The BLM selected the Preferred Alternative (Alternative B), which allows the seven active ingredients to be incorporated into vegetation management activities on all BLM-administered lands in the United States. Like all herbicide active ingredients approved for use on public lands, these active ingredients will only be applied for uses, and at application rates, specified on the EPA-registered herbicide label.

The BLM will comply with changes in herbicide label directions and will comply with all state registration requirements. If state registration requirements do not allow the application of a particular herbicide active ingredient approved for use in the PEIS, the BLM will not authorize use of that herbicide active ingredient within the state where its use is prohibited.

The decision to approve the use of the active ingredients is supported by herbicide treatment standard operating procedures (SOPs) and prevention measures to ensure that the natural and human environment are protected during implementation of herbicide treatments.

2.1 HERBICIDE ACTIVE INGREDIENTS APPROVED FOR USE

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the seven active ingredients and their modes of action, target species, and areas where registered use is appropriate.

2. Decision

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 2-2

Table 2-1 Herbicide Active Ingredient Characteristics

Active Ingredient Representative Product Trade

Name

Manufacturer/ Distributer

Concentration of Formulation

EPA

Registration

Number

Herbicide Resistance

– WSSA

Code

Mode and Mechanism of

Action

Pre- or Post-emergence Application

Aminocyclopyrachlor Method 240 SL Bayer Environmental

Science

2.0 pounds a.e./gallon*

432-1565 Group 4 Plant growth regulator – auxin receptor interference

Pre- and post-emergence control of broadleaves and woody species

Clethodim Envoy Plus Valent U.S.A.

Corporation

LLC

0.97 pounds a.i./gallon**

59639-132 Group 1 Lipid biosynthesis inhibition –acetyl- CoA carboxylase

(ACCase) inhibitor

Post-emergence control of annual and perennial grasses

Fluazifop-P-butyl Fusilade DX Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC

2.0 pounds a.i./gallon

100-1070 Group 1 Lipid biosynthesis inhibition –

ACCase inhibitor

Post-emergence control of annual and perennial grasses

Flumioxazin Payload Valent U.S.A.

Corporation

LLC

51% active ingredient

59639-120 Group 14 Cell membrane disruptor – protoporphyrinog en oxidase (PPO) inhibitor

Pre- and post-emergence control

Imazamox Clearcast BASF Corporation

1.0 pound a.e./gallon

241-437 Group 2 Amino acid synthesis inhibitor

–acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitor

Post-emergence control

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 2-3

Active Ingredient Representative Product Trade

Name

Manufacturer/ Distributer

Concentration of Formulation

EPA

Registration

Number

Herbicide Resistance

– WSSA

Code

Mode and Mechanism of

Action

Pre- or Post-emergence Application

Indaziflam Rejuvra Bayer Environmental

Science

1.67 pounds a.i./gallon

432-1609 Group 29 Cellulose biosynthesis inhibitor – inhibition of cellulose biosynthesis

Pre-emergence control

Oryzalin Surflan AS Specialty

United Phosphorus Inc.

4.0 pounds a.i./gallon

70506-44 Group 3 Seedling root growth inhibitor – microtubule inhibitor

Pre-emergence control

* a.e./gallon = acid equivalent per gallon ** a.i./gallon = active ingredient per gallon

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 2-5

2.1.1 Aminocyclopyrachlor

Aminocyclopyrachlor is used for pre- and post-emergence control of broadleaf weeds and woody species.

It is registered for both ground and aerial application. Aminocyclopyrachlor is a systemic active ingredient that functions as a plant growth regulator that works by mimicking plant auxins1 and interfering with plant growth. Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) is a rangeland weed that may be targeted with this active ingredient.

As a result, use of picloram, which is a restricted-use pesticide, would be reduced.

2.1.2 Clethodim

Clethodim is used for selective post-emergence control of annual and perennial grasses. It is registered for both ground and aerial application. Clethodim works systemically as a fatty acid biosynthesis inhibitor (“post-grass herbicide”), which inhibits the enzyme ACCase. ACCase is responsible in the catalysis2 of fatty acid synthesis, which contributes to energy storage, cell structure, and other vital physiological functions. Its use by the BLM is likely to be limited.

2.1.3 Fluazifop-P-butyl

Fluazifop-P-butyl works in a similar manner as clethodim. It also would be used for annual and perennial grasses, particularly those that have developed herbicide resistance. Applications would involve either spot or broadcast (ground or aerial) applications.

2.1.4 Fluminoxazin

Flumioxazin is used for pre- and post-emergence control of both terrestrial and aquatic species.

Preemergence applications need moisture to activate the active ingredient. It is registered for both ground and aerial application. Flumioxazin is a systemic active ingredient that functions as a cell membrane disruptor; the active ingredient works by inhibiting PPO, which is an enzyme in the chloroplast that is ultimately responsible for producing other molecules needed for important processes, such as photosynthesis and electron chain transfers. This active ingredient has the potential to provide a replacement for diuron as a bare-ground active ingredient and could assist in managing herbicide-resistant species.

2.1.5 Imazamox

Imazamox is used in a broadcast post-emergence application for both terrestrial and aquatic species. It is registered for both ground and aerial application. Imazamox is a systemic active ingredient that works as an amino acid synthesis inhibitor, which prevents the plant’s ability to produce ALS, which is an enzyme that catalyzes the first step in the synthesis of branched-chain amino acids. Approval of this active ingredient would improve the BLM’s invasive species management program by making available an aquatically approved active ingredient in addition to fluridone, diquat, and specific formulations of 2,4-D, imazapyr, glyphosate, and triclopyr.

2.1.6 Indaziflam

Indaziflam is a broadcast preemergence active ingredient that is registered for both ground and aerial applications to manage invasive annual grasses such as cheat grass and broadleaf species. It is a cellulose biosynthesis inhibitor, which weakens the structure of the cell wall. Because of its long residual activity

1 Auxin is a growth hormone produced by plants.

2 Catalysis is an increase in the rate of a chemical reaction.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 2-5 and selectivity, this active ingredient is a potential tool for maintaining and promoting intact native plant communities threatened by invasive annual grasses and some broadleaf noxious weeds as a spray and release treatment.

2.1.7 Oryzalin

Oryzalin is a preemergence active ingredient that, like flumioxazin, requires moisture to activate. It is registered for ground application. Oryzalin functions as a seedling root growth inhibitor; this mode of action targets cell division at the microtubule, reducing new plant growth and affecting the plant’s ability to grow normally in the soil. This may be used in place of diuron and bromacil for the management of invasive annual grasses and broadleaf species.

2.2 HERBICIDE TREATMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

Under either alternative, the BLM would follow prevention measures and SOPs designed to minimize risks to human health and the environment from herbicide treatment actions. SOPs are management controls and performance standards that are required of all herbicide treatments. They are intended to protect and enhance natural resources that could be affected by herbicide treatments. The BLM reviewed and refined the prevention measures (BLM 2007b, pp. 2-24 to 2-25) and SOPs (BLM 2007b, pp. 2-30 to 2-35) from the 2007 PEIS for this effort to reduce redundancy and improve clarity. The list of prevention measures and SOPs is presented in Appendix A.

2.3 MONITORING, COORDINATION, AND EDUCATION

Monitoring of vegetation treatments is used to identify whether treatments are implemented appropriately and to determine their effectiveness. Under either alternative, the BLM would continue to use the BLM Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring Strategy as a monitoring framework; this is described further in the 2016 PEIS (BLM 2016b, p. 2-9). The 2007 PEIS (BLM 2007b, pp. 2-35 to 2-39) provides an additional discussion of monitoring of vegetation treatments, including BLM guidance, procedures for implementation, monitoring methods, and dissemination of results.

The 2007 PEIS (BLM 2007b, p. 2-39) summarizes the ways in which the public can participate in this process, as well as other applicable coordination efforts between the BLM and the public.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 3-1

Chapter 3. Alternatives Considered Two program alternatives were evaluated in the PEIS. Alternatives were developed that: 1) allow the BLM to continue its current use of 21 herbicide active ingredients on BLM-administered land in the United States, or 2) allow for the use of aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin, in addition to the 21 herbicide active ingredients currently used by the BLM. The BLM also considered alternatives that were considered during the development on the 2007 and 2016 Programmatic EISs. These were incorporated by reference in this Final EIS (BLM, 2023).

3.1 ALTERNATIVE A — CONTINUE PRESENT HERBICIDE USE (NO ACTION

ALTERNATIVE)

This alternative described an integrated vegetation management program for resource management and habitat enhancement using the 21 active ingredients approved in the decision records for the 2007 and 2016 PEISs to manage competing and unwanted vegetation. This alternative corresponds to Alternative B of the 2016 PEIS, which estimated that approximately 932,000 acres in the western US would be treated annually using active ingredients.

On lands within the BLM’s eastern states jurisdiction, an environmental assessment was completed to adopt the 21 active ingredients approved for the western US.

3.2 ALTERNATIVE B — ALLOW FOR USE OF SEVEN PROPOSED ACTIVE INGREDIENTS

ON BLM-ADMINISTERED LANDS (PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE)

Under the preferred alternative, the BLM would add the proposed active ingredients to its suite of tools it may consider for vegetation management. The proposed active ingredients would be integrated into the BLM’s vegetation treatment activities. They could be used throughout BLM-administered lands, subject to applicable restrictions on their usage, such as those identified on the individual pesticide label and restrictions by each state’s pesticide regulatory agency. Appropriate site-specific NEPA analyses would be conducted prior to on-the-ground use of the active ingredients.

3.3 ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Alternative B, The Preferred Alternative, is the environmentally preferable alternative in this ROD. The BLM determined that risks associated with the use of proposed herbicide active ingredients will be minor, and the benefits of herbicide use under Alternative B will be greater than under the other alternative.

Additionally, the proposed active ingredients are of lower toxicity than some of the active ingredients currently approved for use by the BLM. In some instances, one or more of the new herbicides may be used instead of more toxic active ingredients. The Preferred Alternative allows the BLM to use all seven of the new active ingredients under the widest range of treatment scenarios. The ability to use these will afford the BLM more options to consider when designing vegetation treatment projects, responding to the negative effects of invasive plant infestations, and increasing efficacy of treatments and associated benefits to resources on public lands.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 4-1

Chapter 4. Management Considerations This section provides the rationale for the BLM’s decision to approve the use of aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin in its vegetation management programs.

4.1 GENERAL HERBICIDE TREATMENT CONSIDERATIONS

The 2007 and 2016 RODs include a lengthy discussion of the considerations that went into the decision to approve the use of 21 herbicide active ingredients to manage vegetation on public lands. Many of these considerations are pertinent to vegetation or herbicide treatments in general. As the seven approved active ingredients are being incorporated into existing vegetation management programs, these more general considerations are pertinent to the current decision. They are summarized below:

• The BLM is guided by federal laws, regulations, and policies that require actions to reduce wildfire risk, to manage noxious weeds and other invasive vegetation, and to manage, maintain, and improve the condition of rangelands.

• The decision to allow use of active ingredients at the programmatic level still requires NEPA analysis and agency consultation at the regional and/or local level, which includes an implementation-level analysis of potential effects to environmental and socioeconomic resources.

• The BLM coordinates with national, tribal, state, county, and local agencies, as well as non-governmental organizations and cooperative weed management areas that have various responsibilities and objectives pertaining to invasive species control and prevention, natural resource improvement, and wildland fire management and prevention.

• Herbicides are one component of a larger vegetation management program that follows an integrated pest management approach to managing and treating vegetation. Vegetation treatments include the use of fire, mechanical and manual methods, biological control, and herbicides. When developing vegetation treatment projects, all of these management options are considered, as appropriate, allowing the BLM to select the method or combination of methods that optimizes control of vegetation with respect to environmental concerns, effectiveness, and cost of control.

All of these factors will be considered, regardless of what active ingredients are allowed at any given time.

• The BLM considers a variety of factors (such as statutory mandates, goals, and treatment priorities) when selecting sites for treatments.

• The BLM considers a variety of site-specific factors when determining which treatment method(s) to utilize in a given location, such as site conditions, land uses, characteristics of the target plant species, and proximity to communities.

4.2 SELECTION OF THE SEVEN APPROVED ACTIVE INGREDIENTS

The ROD for the 2007 PEIS included a protocol for identifying, evaluating, and approving new herbicide active ingredients for use in BLM vegetation management programs. This protocol was followed in the

4. Management Considerations

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 4-2 selection of aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin for future use in BLM vegetation management programs. These active ingredients were selected based on the following:

1) Input from BLM field offices on the types of vegetation needing control.

2) Studies indicating that these active ingredients would be more effective in managing noxious weeds and other unwanted vegetation than active ingredients currently used by the BLM.

3) EPA approval for use on rangelands, forestlands, and/or aquatic environments.

4) Input from herbicide manufacturers regarding active ingredients not currently approved for use on public lands that may be appropriate to manage vegetation.

5) The effectiveness of the active ingredients on a variety of target species on BLM-administered lands.

6) The level of risk of the herbicidal formulations to human health and the environment.

7) The availability of existing human health and ecological risk assessments for the proposed active ingredients, and the need to reduce herbicide resistance risk resulting from exclusive use of particular active ingredients.

The BLM would use these active ingredients to help reduce the spread of noxious weeds and other invasive plants to reduce the buildup of hazardous fuels, reduce the loss of wildlife habitat, help stabilize and rehabilitate sites impacted by fire, and restore native and desirable plant communities. BLM would require post-treatment monitoring and evaluation to record and identify treatment effectiveness and non-target effects.

4.3 ISSUES CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION PROCESS AND SUMMARY OF

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF DECISION

The BLM conducted internal scoping by gathering an interdisciplinary team of specialists to review the 2007 and 2016 PEISs. This team then identified new issues for analysis associated with this effort and issues that may need updating from the previous PEISs. Then, after public scoping, the BLM reviewed all public comments and identified substantive ones—those that provide relevant and new information with sufficient detail. The substantive comments informed the development of issues for the analysis. Non-substantive comments were not discussed because the commenters did not provide information pertinent to the project or because they contained opinions or vague questions. As a result of the internal and public scoping efforts, the following issues were identified for analysis in this PEIS:

1. How would the application and use of proposed active ingredients affect nontarget plant species, including special status plants?

2. How would the application and use of proposed active ingredients affect the potential for herbicide resistance?

3. How would the application and use of proposed active ingredients affect soil microbiology?

4. How would the application and use of proposed active ingredients affect water quality?

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 4-3

5. How would the application and use of proposed active ingredients affect pollinator habitat?

6. How would the application and use of proposed active ingredients affect fire risk across the landscape?

4.3.1 Beneficial Effects to Resources Evaluated in PEIS

Short-term losses in resource functions that might occur from herbicide treatments would generally be compensated for by long-term gains in ecosystem health.

Treatments with aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin could improve the effectiveness of certain treatments and reduce the likelihood of herbicide resistance with the availability of the additional active ingredients. Improved treatment effectiveness could allow the BLM to better meet its goals of managing undesirable vegetation, reducing fire risk, and restoring natural fire regimes. This would indirectly benefit vegetation communities, non-timber special forest product availability, and rare plants and their habitat, including critical habitat.

Successful herbicide treatments, which would often be combined with other types of treatments, would benefit soils, water quality, and vegetation by helping to move fire regimes closer to historical levels, slowing the spread of weeds, and allowing for a wider range of options to reduce the potential for impacts on natural resources. Treatments that remove or facilitate removal of hazardous fuels from public lands should also reduce the number of fire starts.

4.4 DEVELOPMENT OF THE DECISION

4.4.1 Alternative A — Continue Present Herbicide Use (No Action Alternative) The BLM did not select this alternative for the decision and did not consider this alternative to be the environmentally preferred alternative because it does not afford the BLM any additional herbicide options for designing on-the-ground treatments. Additionally, this alternative does not address the BLM’s identified need for new active ingredients that benefit weed control capability by increasing herbicide treatment options to better target problematic weeds, reduce impacts on nontarget species, and help prevent weed-developed herbicide resistance that can result from repeated use of the same active ingredients.

4.4.2 Alternative B — Allow for Use of Seven Proposed Active Ingredients on BLM- Administered Lands (Preferred Alternative)

This alternative best meets the purpose and need for the proposed action. The BLM’s purpose is to improve the effectiveness of its invasive plant treatment efforts by allowing the use of EPA-registered active ingredients not currently authorized for use on BLM-administered lands. This action would increase the BLM’s treatment options for the public lands it administers. The overall goals are to control noxious weeds and invasive plants to restore degraded habitat and reduce the risk of further ecological damage across BLM-administered lands.

While the current suite of active ingredients used by the BLM are effective at treating many invasive plant species, the BLM has identified some areas where the efficacy of treatments could be improved with the new active ingredients or where use of active ingredients with a higher risk to humans, fish, wildlife, or other natural or cultural resources could be reduced. Indaziflam, for instance, can be used to manage sites that are becoming invaded by invasive annual grasses, such as cheatgrass, but treated areas can still retain a desired native component.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 4-4

For these reasons, the BLM selected Alternative B for the decision. The BLM determined that the risks associated with the use of active ingredients under this alternative will be similar to, or slightly lower than, those under Alternative A, but the benefits have the potential to be greater than under Alternative A. The BLM also identified this alternative as the environmentally preferred alternative.

4.5 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Specific coordination and consultation will also occur as necessary as local BLM offices undertake implementation-level analyses and authorizations.

4.5.1 Endangered Species Act Section Consultation

The BLM completed ESA Section 7 consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) prior to completion of this Record of Decision. On December 18, 2023, the BLM submitted a Biological Assessment determining that this action is Not Likely to Adversely Affect threatened or endangered species. An Essential Fish Habitat Assessment, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, was included. The US Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with the BLM’s finding in a letter dated April 10, 2024. The BLM, when completing implementation level authorizations, is required to consult with the US Fish and Wildlife Service when conducting actions that may affect threatened or endangered species under that agency’s jurisdiction.

On June 4, 2024, NMFS completed a Biological Opinion finding that vegetation treatments using herbicides are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed or proposed species under NMFS’s jurisdiction. This Programmatic Biological Opinion covers all noxious and invasive plant management activities outside of pesticide use limitation areas as described by NMFS and the EPA.

Section 16 of the Biological Opinion includes the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Response, which incorporates necessary conservation measures when working in Essential Fish Habitat. These measures are carried forward from the Prevention Measures and Standard Operating Procedures presented in Appendix A.

A copy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service Letter of Concurrence and the Executive Summary of the NMFS Biological Opinion are provided in Appendix B. A full copy of the Biological Opinion is available online with this record.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 5-1

Chapter 5. Public Involvement The public, state, local, tribal and federal government agencies, and non-governmental organizations provided valuable input into the decision processes used to develop the PEIS and ROD.

5.1 DEVELOPMENT OF THE DRAFT PROGRAMMATIC EIS

The BLM published a Federal Register Notice of Intent (Notice) on April 4, 2022 (Federal Register, Volume 87, Number 64, Pages 19525-19526). The Notice asked the public to provide comments and help the BLM identify issues relevant to the proposal to use aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, oryzalin, and trifluralin on public lands. The BLM later dropped the active ingredient trifluralin from consideration for analysis. The Notice indicated that the public comment period for the scoping process was 30 days. The BLM removed trifluralin from consideration as the EPA has not registered it for uses necessary to BLM-managed public lands.

5.1.1 Public Review and Comment of the Draft Programmatic EIS The Notice of Availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides was published in the Federal Register on April 21, 2023, which initiated a 45-day public review and comment period. The Draft PEIS and supporting documentation were posted to the BLM website (https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2017138/510) where the public was able to download copies of these documents. Copies of the documents were also available upon request.

5.2 DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINAL PROGRAMMATIC EIS AND PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Following closure of the public comment period, the BLM reviewed the comments received and finalized its selection of Alternative B as the Preferred Alternative. No alternative proposals were received from the public.

A total of 46 comment letters or emails on the Draft PEIS were received. A total of 175 substantive comments were identified and responded to during preparation of the Final PEIS. The few changes made to the PEIS primarily consisted of clarifying BLM’s efforts to coordinate with Tribes and incorporate additional literature into the impacts analysis. However, no changes to the alternatives or the effects analysis were warranted.

5.2.1 Public Review of the Final Programmatic EIS

The Notice of Availability of the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides was published in the Federal Register on December 29, 2023.

The Final PEIS and associated documents were posted to the BLM website (https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2017138/510) where the public was able to download copies of these documents. Copies of the documents were also available upon request. The BLM received one written comment letter regarding the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides. A review of the comment letter identified no substantive or significant new circumstances or information not previously addressed in the Draft or Final PEIS or Biological Assessment. No new information was identified that indicated that the BLM should modify the final Preferred Alternative or alter the decision to select the Preferred Alternative in this ROD.

5. Public Involvement

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 5-2

5.3 SIGNATURE PAGE

Program Information U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Directorate for Resources and Planning Division of Forestry, Range, and Vegetation Resources Weeds and Invasive Species Management Program https://www.blm.gov/programs/weeds-and-invasives

I approve selection of the Preferred Alternative described in the attached Record of Decision and analyzed in the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides (Final PEIS) (U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, December 2023).

This decision approves the inclusion of herbicide active ingredients aminocyclopyrachlor, clethodim, fluazifop-P-butyl, flumioxazin, imazamox, indaziflam, and oryzalin to vegetation management activities on BLM-administered lands.

Signature and Date

Sharif Branham Assistant Director, Resources and Planning Bureau of Land Management U.S. Department of the Interior

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides 6-1

Chapter 6. References BLM (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management). 2007a. Record of Decision for

Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States. Washington Office, Washington DC.

BLM (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management). 2007b. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States. Washington Office, Washington DC.

BLM (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management). 2016a. Record of Decision for Vegetation Treatments Using Aminopyralid, Fluroxypyr, and Rimsulfuron on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States. Washington Office, Washington DC.

BLM (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management). 2016b. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Vegetation Treatments Using Aminopyralid, Fluroxypyr, and Rimsulfuron on Bureau of Land Management Lands in 17 Western States. Washington Office, Washington DC.

BLM (US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management). 2023. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Approval of Herbicide Active Ingredients for Use on Public Lands. Bureau of Land Management Headquarters, Washington DC.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides A-1

Appendix A. Prevention Measures and Standard Operating Procedures

The following appendix describes measures to prevent the introduction and spread of noxious and invasive weeds (Table A-1) and standard operating procedures (SOPs) for applying herbicides (Table A-2). The 2007 PEIS describes further the importance, priorities, and processes associated with prevention, early detection, and rapid response (BLM 2007b, p. 2-23 to 2-25).

As described in the 2007 PEIS (BLM 2007b, p. 2-22 to 2-23), SOPs would be followed by the BLM under all alternatives to ensure that risks to human health and the environment from herbicide treatment actions would be kept to a minimum. Standard operating procedures are the management controls and performance standards required for vegetation management treatments. These practices are intended to protect and enhance natural resources that could be affected by future vegetation treatments. For instance, following specifications on an herbicide’s label may require spray at a certain droplet size that is intended to prevent offsite spread. Drift prevention may also be accomplished by the use of adjuvants or tank mixes.

A. Prevention Measures and Standard Operating Procedures

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides A-2

Table A-1 Prevention Measures

• BLM

Activity • Prevention Measure

Project Planning • Incorporate prevention measures into project layout and design, alternative evaluation, and project decisions to prevent the introduction or spread of weeds.

• Determine prevention and maintenance needs, including the use of herbicides, at the onset of project planning.

• Use modeling tools (e.g., EPA’s Pesticide Use Limitation Areas), as appropriate and available, during project planning to avoid impacts on resources.

• Before ground-disturbing activities begin, inventory weed infestations and prioritize areas for treatment in project operating areas and along access routes.

• Remove sources of weed seed and propagules to prevent the spread of existing weeds and new weed infestations.

• Pre-treat high-risk sites for weed establishment and spread before implementing projects.

• Post weed awareness messages and prevention practices at strategic locations such as trailheads, roads, boat launches, and public land kiosks.

• Inform the public about weed free hay, straw, and gravel requirements in applicable states.

• Coordinate project activities with nearby herbicide applications to maximize the cost-effectiveness of weed treatments.

• Consider adjustments in the existing grazing permit, needed to maintain desirable vegetation on the treatment site.

• Identify and implement any temporary domestic livestock grazing and/or supplemental feeding restrictions needed to enhance desirable vegetation recovery following treatment.

• Provide educational materials at trailheads and other wilderness entry points to educate the public on the need to prevent the spread of weeds.

• Encourage backcountry pack and saddle stock users to feed their livestock only certified weed-free feed for several days before entering a wilderness area.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides A-3

• BLM

Activity • Prevention Measure

Project Development

• Minimize soil disturbance to the extent practical, consistent with project objectives.

• To prevent weed germination and establishment, retain native vegetation in and around project activity areas and keep soil disturbance to a minimum, consistent with project objectives.

• Locate and use weed-free project staging areas. Avoid or minimize all types of travel through weed-infested areas, or restrict travel to periods when the spread of seeds or propagules is least likely.

• Prevent the introduction and spread of weeds caused by moving weed-infested sand, gravel, borrow, and fill material.

• Inspect material sources on site, and ensure that they are weed-free before use and transport. Treat weed-infested sources to eradicate weed seed and plant parts, and strip and stockpile contaminated material before any use of pit material.

• Survey the area where material from treated weed-infested sources is used for at least 3 years after project completion to ensure that any weeds transported to the site are promptly detected and controlled.

• Prevent weed establishment by not driving through weed-infested areas.

• Inspect and document weed establishment at access roads, cleaning sites, and all disturbed areas; control infestations to prevent spread within the project area.

• For operations in waterbodies, when moving equipment or personnel through waterbodies on the way to the project site or before transporting watercraft and aquatic gear (i.e., hip boots, waders, and bait containers) to the authorized use area, permittee shall:

• Remove any aquatic plants, animals, and mud attached to watercraft and equipment,

• Drain water from boat, motor, bilge, live wells, and bait containers, and

• Spray all watercraft and equipment with high pressure water or dry for at least 5 days Project Development (cont.)

• Avoid acquiring water for dust abatement where access to the water is through weed-infested sites.

• Identify sites where equipment can be cleaned. Clean equipment before entering public lands.

• Clean all equipment before leaving the project site if operating in areas infested with weeds.

• Inspect and treat weeds that establish at equipment cleaning sites.

• Ensure that rental equipment is free of weed seed.

• Inspect, remove, and properly dispose of weed seed and plant parts found on workers’ clothing and equipment. Proper disposal entails bagging the seeds and plant parts and incinerating them.

• Use certified weed-free feed for horses and pack animals.

• Develop monitoring and evaluation plans to record and identify treatment effectiveness and non-target effects

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides A-4

• BLM

Activity • Prevention Measure

Revegetation • Include weed prevention measures, including project inspection and documentation, in operation and reclamation plans.

• Retain bonds until reclamation requirements, including weed treatments, are completed, based on inspection and documentation.

• To prevent conditions favoring weed establishment, re-establish vegetation on bare ground caused by project disturbance as soon as possible using either natural recovery or artificial techniques. Revegetate disturbed sites with native species if there is no reasonable expectation of natural regeneration.

• Maintain stockpiled, uninfested material in a weed-free condition.

• Revegetate disturbed soil (except travel ways on surfaced projects) in a manner that optimizes plant establishment for each specific project site. For each project, define what constitutes disturbed soil and objectives for plant cover revegetation. Revegetation may include topsoil replacement, planting, seeding, fertilization, liming, and weed-free mulching, as necessary.

• Where practical, stockpile weed-seed-free topsoil and replace it on disturbed areas (e.g., road embankments or landings).

• Inspect seed and straw mulch to be used for site rehabilitation (for wattles, straw bales, dams, etc.) and certify that they are free of weed seed and propagules.

• Inspect and document all limited term ground-disturbing operations in noxious weed infested areas for at least 3 growing seasons following completion of the project.

• Use native material where appropriate and feasible. Use certified weed-free or weed-seed-free hay or straw where certified materials are required and/or are reasonably available.

• Provide briefings that identify operational practices to reduce weed spread (for example, avoiding known weed infestation areas when locating fire lines).

• Evaluate options, including closure, to regulate the flow of traffic on sites where desired vegetation needs to be established. Sites could include road and trail ROW, and other areas of disturbed soils.

Record of Decision Addressing Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides A-5

Table A-2 Standard Operating Procedures for Applying Herbicides

• Resource Element • Standard Operating Procedure

Guidance Documents • BLM Handbook H-9011-1…