Title: Gypsy Moth Management in the United States, a cooperative approach-Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Author: United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Publication: United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Newtown Square, PA, NA-MR-01-08
Volume I Summary
Volume II Chapters 1-8 and Appendixes A, B, C, D, E
Volume III Appendixes F, G, H, I
Volume IV Appendixes J, K, L, M
This volume I summarizes the draft supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for the gypsy moth. The complete draft SEIS is available on the Web at http://na.fs.fed.us/wv/eis. Print and CD copies are available from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry, 180 Canfield Street, Morgantown, WV 26505-3101, phone 304-285-1523.
Volume II, Volume III, and Volume IV abstract: The USDA Forest Service and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service are proposing an addition to the gypsy moth management program that was described in the 1995 Environmental Impact Statement--Gypsy Moth Management in the United States: a cooperative approach--and chosen in the 1996 Record of Decision. The agencies are proposing these new treatment options: adding the insecticide tebufenozide, or adding the insecticide tebufenozide and other new treatment(s) that may become available in the future to manage gypsy moths, provided that the other treatment(s) poses no greater risk to human health and nontarget organisms than are disclosed in this Draft SEIS for the currently approved treatments and tebufenozide.
Commenting on this Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: Reviewers should provide the Forest Service with their comments during the review period of this draft supplemental environmental impact statement. Timely comments will enable the Forest Service to analyze and respond to all of the comments at one time and to use information acquired in the preparation of the final supplemental environmental impact statement, thus avoiding undue delay in the decision making process. Furthermore, the more specific and substantive the comments, the better for reviewers and the agencies alike. Reviewers have an obligation to structure their participation in the National Environmental Policy Act process so that it is meaningful and alerts the agency to the reviewer's position and contentions (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553, 1978). Environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage may therefore be forfeited, if not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement (Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen, 541 U.S. 752, 764 (2004). Comments on this draft supplemental environmental impact statement should be specific and should address the adequacy of the statement and the merits of the alternatives discussed (40 CFR1503.3).
Online Access: http://na.fs.fed.us/pubs/misc/seis/gm_ineviron_impact_statemnt_draft.pdf
Portable Document Format (.pdf) files need a free reader, available here.
Return to Publications