Original Notice.

     Preproposal statement of inquiry was filed as WSR 12-16-013.

     Title of Rule and Other Identifying Information: Chapter 16-750 WAC, State noxious weed list and schedule of monetary penalties. The board is proposing to amend the state noxious weed list for 2013.

     Hearing Location(s): WSDA, Yakima Building, 21 North First Avenue, Yakima, WA 98902, on November 6, 2012, at 1:00 p.m.

     Date of Intended Adoption: November 7, 2012.

     Submit Written Comments to: Alison Halpern, P.O. Box 42560, Olympia, WA 98504-2560, e-mail ahalpern@agr.wa.gov, fax (360) 902-2094, by November 5, 2012.

     Assistance for Persons with Disabilities: Contact Wendy DesCamp by October 30, 2012, TTY (800) 833-6388 or 711.

     Purpose of the Proposal and Its Anticipated Effects, Including Any Changes in Existing Rules: The Washington state noxious weed list provides the basis for noxious weed control efforts for county and district weed control boards and other entities. It also provides guidelines for the state noxious weed control board. This proposal makes several amendments to WAC 16-750-004 through 16-750-015.

     Reasons Supporting Proposal: The Washington state noxious weed control board (WSNWCB) is charged with updating the state noxious weed list on an annual basis to ensure it accurately reflects the noxious weed control priorities and noxious weed distribution.

     Statutory Authority for Adoption: Chapter 17.10 RCW.

     Statute Being Implemented: Chapter 17.10 RCW.

     Rule is not necessitated by federal law, federal or state court decision.

     Name of Proponent: WSNWCB, governmental.

     Name of Agency Personnel Responsible for Drafting, Implementation and Enforcement: Alison Halpern, 1111 Washington Street S.E., Olympia, WA 98504, (360) 902-2053.

     No small business economic impact statement has been prepared under chapter 19.85 RCW. RCW 19.85.030 (1)(a) requires that an agency prepare a small business economic impact statement (SBEIS) for proposed rules that impose more than a minor cost on businesses in an industry. An analysis of the direct economic effects of the proposed rule amendments indicates that costs to small businesses would be negligible or none at all. A copy of the analysis is shown below, and it can be obtained by contacting Alison Halpern, P.O. Box 42560, Olympia, WA 98504-2560.

     The current proposed changes to the 2013 noxious weed list include:

•	Add French broom, Genista monspessulana, as a Class A noxious weed.
•	Add tall hawkweed, Hieracium piloselloides, as a Class B noxious weed to be designated everywhere except Stevens and Pend Oreille counties.
•	Add common barberry, Berberis vulgaris, as a Class C noxious weed.
•	Add common teasel, Dipsacus fullonum, as a Class C noxious weed.
•	Amend current listing of Japanese eelgrass, Zostera japonica, to make it a Class C everywhere (rather than limiting to commercially managed shellfish beds only, as presently listed).
•	Change eleven Class B noxious weeds to Class C noxious weeds.
•	Amend WAC 16-750-004 Noxious weed region descriptions from the ten current regions to six regions.
•	Amending designations of sixty-one currently listed Class B noxious weeds to match new regions and updated distribution data.

     Purpose of this Analysis: RCW 19.85.030 requires agencies to prepare an SBEIS if the proposed rule will impose more than minor costs on businesses in an industry. The purpose of this analysis is to determine if the proposed changes to the 2013 noxious weed list will impose "more than minor costs" on the businesses directly affected by these proposed changes, which would thereby require WSNWCB to prepare a formal SBEIS.

     Nature of aforementioned noxious weed species in Washington:

     Proposed addition of a Class A noxious weed: French broom, Genista monspessulana, is in the same family and looks a lot like our notoriously invasive noxious weed Scotch broom. Like Scotch broom, it is a tall, shrubby plant with green, ridged stems, small, three-parted leaves covered in fine hairs, and bright yellow, fragrant flowers. Unlike Scotch broom, it is not widespread in western Washington, which is why it has been proposed as a Class A noxious weed. Currently listed as a noxious weed in Oregon, California, and Hawaii, French broom spreads rapidly and displaces native vegetation. One shrub is capable of producing eight thousand seeds, which can survive at least five years. Climate change seems to be expanding its range. Once used as an ornamental plant, it does not appear to be sold through the horticultural industry anymore.

     Proposed addition of a Class B noxious weed: Tall hawkweed, Hieracium piloselloides, has been proposed as a Class B noxious weed. Like our other nonnative hawkweed species, tall hawkweed has lance-shaped basal leaves and clusters of yellow flowers growing atop tall, hairy stems. Nonnative hawkweeds spread rapidly in pastures and rangelands, displacing native forbs and grasses that livestock and wildlife rely on for food. Tall hawkweed is currently a listed noxious weed in Oregon and Montana.

     Proposed additions of Class C noxious weeds: Common teasel, Dipsacus fullonum, has been proposed as a Class C noxious weed. Although teasel is not new to the state - it was first recorded in Washington in 1923 - it appears to be spreading more rapidly in recent years. It thrives in disturbed areas such as roadsides, ditches, moist pasture areas, and vacant lots, but it is becoming increasingly problematic in quality pastureland and farmland, particularly in northwest Washington. Its seeds spread through soil and machinery, especially mowers. Seed crops are especially vulnerable to contamination by teasel seeds. Teasel is typically a biennial that grows up to six feet tall. It has prickly leaves and a very distinctive flowerhead, which is about four inches tall, oval-shaped, and consists of rows of small, purplish flowers. It has distinctive spike-like bracts curling up at the base. Dried teasel flowerheads are sometimes used in floral arrangements.

     Common barberry, Berberis vulgaris, has been proposed as a Class C noxious weed. This shrubby species with bright yellow flowers was once commonly planted by homesteaders, as its thorny branches made effective hedgerows and fencing for livestock. It spreads by seeds and root sprouts. Common barberry is capable of naturalizing into rocky pastureland and disturbed habitat, but it is its role as an alternative host for stem rust that makes it a serious threat to cereal grain growers. Sexual reproduction of stem rust may occur on common barberry, which could potentially lead to new genetic more virulent and fungicide-resistant strains. Because it is a serious risk to wheat and barley growers, a federal eradication program had been implemented for decades in many northern states until funding ran out in 1981. Current law (WAC 16-472-030) still requires the destruction of common barberry plants in the wheat-producing parts of the state. A Class C listing would help with outreach efforts to educate about the importance of the removal of common barberry.

     Proposed amendment of a currently listed Class C noxious weed: Japanese eelgrass, Zostera japonica, is an annual or perennial herbaceous plant that grows in intertidal marine waters. Shellfish growers have indicated that this nonnative species is invading once-bare mudflats and significantly reducing yield of shellfish, particularly hard-shell clams, and increasing costs to manage and maintain the shellfish beds. It reduces tidal water flow by up to forty percent, thereby potentially changing mudflat use by organisms. However, this species also appears to share similar structure and function to the important and protected native eelgrass, Zostera marina, although it occurs higher in the intertidal zone than the native species. It also appears to be a major food source for migrating shorebirds. Because Japanese eelgrass clearly appears to cause negative economic harm to the shellfish industry but has a complex of positive, negative, neutral, and unknown ecological impacts at this time, the state weed board listed it as a Class C noxious weed on commercially managed shellfish beds only in 2012. The WSNWCB received a proposal to recognize Japanese eelgrass as a Class C noxious weed everywhere instead of just on commercially managed shellfish beds for 2013.

     Proposed change of Class B noxious weeds to Class C noxious weeds: In an effort to reduce the size of county noxious weed lists and give county noxious weed control boards the ability to prioritize noxious weeds of local concern, the WSNWCB is proposing to change eleven Class B noxious weeds to Class C noxious weeds. This would mean that these species would not be designated for required control by the WSNWCB; rather county noxious weed control boards would have the option of selecting them for control. The proposed species to be changed are:

Austrian fieldcress	Rorippa austriaca
Blackgrass	Alopecurus myosuroides
Common catsear	Hypochaeris radicata
Polar hawkweed	Hieracium atratum
Lawnweed	Soliva sessilis
Lepyrodiclis	Lepyrodiclis holosteoides
Longspine sandbur	Cenchrus longispinus
Oxeye daisy	Leucanthemum vulgare
Perennial sowthistle	Sonchus arvensis ssp. arvensis
Swainsonpea	Sphaerophysa salsula
Wild carrot (except where commercially grown)	Daucus carota

     Proposed amendment of noxious weed regions: WAC 16-750-004 divides the state into ten noxious weed regions based on eco-types. Class B noxious weeds are generally designated at this regional level. In accordance with RCW 34.05.220(5), which instructs that rules "be clearly and simply stated, so that it can be understood by those required to comply" and by Executive Order 05-03, which requires all agencies to adopt plain talk principles, the WSNWCB is proposing to reduce the number of weed regions from ten to six, using county boundaries rather than ecological regions to make the noxious weed regions and corresponding Class B designations simpler and easier to understand.

     Proposed amendments of current Class B designations: Based on the new proposed noxious weed regions described in WAC 16-750-004 and using current distribution data and input from county noxious weed control boards, the WSNWCB is proposing to update designations of the remaining sixty-one Class B noxious weeds.

     Affected Groups and the Cost of Compliance:

     Proposed addition of a Class A noxious weed: A Class A noxious weed listing would require the eradication of French broom by all landowners; however, distribution of this nonnative invasive species is extremely limited at this time. The largest known infestation of French broom is on University of Washington property, and eradication efforts are already underway.

     Proposed addition of a Class B noxious weed: A Class B noxious weed listing means that the WSNWCB would designate the species for control in areas where it is limited in distribution or altogether absent, and/or where its control is a priority. In designated areas, landowners would be required to control and prevent the spread of the Class B noxious weed. County noxious weed control boards would also have the option of selecting a Class B noxious weed for control where the state has not designated it. Tall hawkweed would be designated everywhere except for Stevens and Pend Oreille counties, which have many widespread and similar-looking hawkweed species whose control is not required.

     Proposed additions of Class C noxious weeds: A Class C listing of a species means that the WSNWCB recognizes that the species meets the criteria of a noxious weed. Control of Class C noxious weeds is not mandated by the state, although county noxious weed control boards have the option of selecting Class C noxious weeds for mandatory control at the local level. Destruction of common barberry is already required under WAC 16-472-030 even if county noxious weed control boards do not select it for control. County weed boards could select common teasel for required control if it poses a threat to local agriculture or natural resources.

     The horticultural industry: The group most likely to be impacted by the proposed Class A listing of French broom is the horticultural industry. However, it is unlikely that this listing will cause these businesses to lose sales or revenue. The noxious weed list is separate from the WSDA quarantine lists (WAC 16-752-300, 16-752-400, 16-752-500, 16-752-600), which prohibit the sale and transport of particular species, so the proposed noxious weed listing of French broom would not directly prohibit the sale of this plant. Nurseries selling French broom could potentially experience a decrease in sales of this particular species by consumers who voluntarily choose not to purchase ornamental species that are listed noxious weeds. To help assess the magnitude of this indirect economic impact, the state weed board developed a survey through SurveyMonkey (https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/6PKZL9L). A summary of the proposed French broom listing and link to the survey was e-mailed to the Washington Nursery and Landscape Association (WSNLA) on August 29, 2012, for inclusion in their upcoming newsletter. Hard-copies of the survey, handouts comparing different broom species, and self-addressed stamped envelopes were mailed to about forty licensed (by WSDA) nurseries on September 5, 2012. The sampling strategy employed was a systematic, random design so that at least one nursery per county was included in the survey. We did not receive any on-line survey responses, but eighteen hard-copy surveys were returned by mail between September 10 and October 3, 2012. One hundred percent of the respondents indicated that French broom was not stocked as part of their inventory. Therefore the proposed listing, if adopted, would not result in decreased revenue caused by reduced sales of French broom.

     The WSNWCB has worked over the years to improve its relationship with the nursery industry. A member of the WSNLA has been appointed to the state weed board's noxious weed committee for over six years to represent the horticultural industry, and the state weed board has had a representative on the WSNLA's invasive plant task force since 2004. The cooperative efforts culminated in the creation of the publication GardenWise: Non-invasive Plants for Your Garden. This collaboration between the horticultural industry, state and county government, NGOs, and an institution of higher learning resulted in a publication that educates the consumer about invasive plants and promotes the sales of noninvasive alternatives, and it has been applauded by gardeners, nurseries, and noxious weed control programs alike. Overall, ten respondents (55.6 percent) indicated that efforts by the WSNWCB to promote noninvasive alternatives to invasive ornamental species were helpful to their businesses. Three respondents (16.6 percent) were not sure if these efforts were helpful to the nursery business, and another four respondents (22.2 percent) left this survey question blank. Only one (5.6 percent) respondent indicated that the WSNWCB efforts were not helpful.

     The craft and floral industries: The groups most likely to be impacted by the proposed Class C listing of common teasel are the craft/hobby and floral industries, since dried flowerheads of common teasel are sometimes sold for and used in floral arrangements. However, it is unlikely that this listing will cause these businesses to lose sales or revenue. The noxious weed list is separate from the WSDA quarantine lists (WAC 16-752-300 through 16-752-600), which prohibit the sale and transport of particular species, so the proposed noxious weed listing of common teasel would not directly prohibit the sale of this plant. Craft stores and florists could potentially experience a decrease in sales of common teasel flowerheads by consumers who voluntarily choose not to purchase ornamental species that are listed noxious weeds. To help assess the magnitude of this indirect economic impact, the WSNWCB developed a survey and mailed hard-copies, along with cover letter, handout about common teasel, and a self-addressed stamped envelope. It was mailed on September 5, 2012, to a combination of forty small-business craft/hobby stores registered with the Washington department of revenue under NCIS Code 451120 (craft supply stores) and florist shops licensed through WSDA. The sampling strategy employed was a systematic, random design so that at least one craft store or florist per county was included in the survey. Seventeen surveys were returned between September 13 and September 28, 2012. Fifteen (88.2 percent) respondents indicated that they did not carry common teasel as part of their inventory and that the listing of this plant would not cause lost sales or revenue. One of these respondents took the time to elaborate: "I have been in the retail florist business for over 40 years. Back in my early years in the industry, teasel was quite popular to use in dry arrangements but it has drastically changed over the years. Teasel is considered an undesirable weed that is seldom ever used in dry type arrangements. There are so many nicer choices now. People are tired of that look of teasel. It will not have any effect on customers or the industry whatsoever." Two (11.8 percent) respondents indicated that they carried common teasel routinely. One small business provided an estimate of annual list sales or revenue of $50-$1,000; however, contact information was not provided and we were unable to request more information. The other small business that carries common teasel noted that they "only use seasonal, would not impact business." Therefore the proposed listing of common teasel as a Class C will not impose "more than minor costs" to the majority of small businesses that rely on this plant as part of their revenue.

     The shellfish industry: The large majority of small businesses with Japanese eelgrass on their property are commercial shellfish growers. A small business economic impact survey of the shellfish growers was conducted last year, when Japanese eelgrass was proposed as a Class C noxious weed on commercially managed shellfish beds only. It was concluded that the listing would not cause these businesses to directly lose sales or revenue, nor will the listing itself directly result in the accrual of more than minor costs to the businesses, since control would not be mandated by the WSNWCB. It should be noted that the nominations to add Japanese eelgrass as a Class C noxious weed for 2012 came from several commercial shellfish growers. The original proposals were to add this species as a Class C noxious weed; the WSNWCB modified the proposed Class C listing to limit it to commercially managed shellfish beds only, based on all the information available. Many shellfish growers have expressed concern about this species and will likely control the intertidal plant voluntarily. A few shellfish growers have expressed concern about the public perception of having a listed noxious weed on their shellfish beds and the possible use of chemicals to control it. It should be noted that the WSNWCB supports integrated plant management (IPM) and does not mandate the use of specific control options. To summarize the survey results described in the 2011 document entitled "WSNWCB SBEIS analysis 2012":

•	Fifty percent of respondents (eleven of twenty-two) currently have Japanese eelgrass on their shellfish beds; forty-one percent of respondents (nine of twenty-two) do not have Japanese eelgrass on their shellfish beds, and about nine percent of respondents (two of twenty-two) were not sure if they have Japanese eelgrass on their shellfish beds.
•	About seventy-three percent of respondents (sixteen of twenty-two) indicated that the potential Class C listing of Japanese eelgrass on commercially managed shellfish beds would not cause their business to lose sales or revenue. Eighteen percent of respondents (four of twenty-two) were not sure if the listing would cause their business to lose sales or revenue. Nine percent (two respondents) indicated that the listing would likely cause them to lose sales or revenue.
•	Twenty-seven percent of respondents (six of twenty-two) indicated they anticipated controlling Japanese eelgrass, whether or not it is listed as a noxious weed, about thirty-two percent of respondents (seven of twenty-two) indicated they would not control Japanese eelgrass, and about forty-one percent of respondents (nine of twenty-two) were not sure at this time.
•	About fifty-five percent of respondents (twelve of twenty-two) anticipated some benefits to listing Japanese eelgrass as a Class C noxious weed on commercially managed shellfish beds, about fourteen percent of participants (three of twenty-two) do not anticipate benefits to the listing, and the remaining thirty-one percent of respondents (seven of twenty-two) are not sure if there are benefits to the proposed listing.

     There are likely a few small businesses outside of the commercial shellfish industry that have Japanese eelgrass on their property, such as marinas. There is at least one hotel that might have this species on its property, but it was included in last year's survey since it also commercially raises shellfish on the property. However, control of Japanese eelgrass would not be required by the WSNWCB if the current listing is expanded, and so far no county noxious weed control board has selected this species for mandatory control.

     The WSNWCB held a meeting in February 2012, with stakeholders - including representatives from the shellfish industry, state agencies, NGOs, and concerned citizens - to further discuss issues about Japanese eelgrass, after it had been listed as a Class C noxious weed on commercially managed shellfish beds only for the 2012 weed list. The state weed board will likely continue to be a part of the discussion about Japanese eelgrass, since it has generated such interest.

     Nonspecific groups:

     Proposed addition of a Class B noxious weed: The proposed addition of tall hawkweed as a Class B noxious weed would not result in more than minor costs to small businesses. It appears to be limited in distribution, and the primary known infestations occur on public lands (WSDOT: Hwy. 2 and Hwy. 203).

     Proposed addition of a Class C noxious weed: The proposed addition of common barberry as a Class C noxious weed would not incur any additional costs to small business or cause them to lose sales or revenue because destruction of this species in wheat-producing areas of the state is already mandatory under WAC 16-472-030. It is already quarantined under WAC 16-472-020 and thus cannot be sold, traded, or shipped.

     Proposed changes of eleven Class B noxious weeds to Class C noxious weeds: Changing these eleven Class B noxious weeds to Class C noxious weeds actually removes landowner responsibility to control these species where they are designated by the WSNWCB. County noxious weed control boards may choose to select some of these species for local control in order to protect agriculture and natural resources if these noxious weeds pose a threat. Control requirements of a Class B designate and a Class B nondesignate or Class C selected for control by a county noxious weed control board are identical, except on timberland.

     Proposed amendment to noxious weed regions: The proposed amendment of the existing noxious weed regions serves to simplify the regions used to designate Class B noxious weeds and would not have any costs to small businesses.

     Proposed changes in Class B designations: The designations of the sixty-one currently listed Class B noxious weeds have been amended to match the proposed new six-regions map, and updated to better match existing distribution data. The goal is to make the Class B control requirements simpler to understand. For many counties, control requirements have not changed. In general, the WSNWCB designated Class B species for control where they were either absent from or very limited in a given county. If a particular species was more abundant, the WSNWCB did not designate it unless it was at the bequest of the county noxious weed control board, and in most of these cases, control was already required by the state or by the county weed board.

     Alternatives to the Proposed Assessment:

     Proposed addition of a Class A noxious weed: The alternative to the proposed listing would be that French broom is not added as a Class A noxious weed, resulting in a status quo of the current situation, whereby individual landowners or land managers have the option of voluntarily eradicating the limited populations of this species. County noxious weed boards would not be able to require eradication of this species while it is still limited in distribution, which would likely allow French broom to spread further in Washington state.

     Proposed addition of one Class B noxious weed: The alternative to the proposed listing would be to not add tall hawkweed as a Class B noxious weed, resulting in a status quo of the current situation, whereby individual landowners or land managers have the option of voluntarily controlling this species. County noxious weed control boards could educate about tall hawkweed if it is a local concern, but control could not be mandated.

     Proposed addition of two Class C noxious weeds: The alternative to the proposed listings would be to not add common teasel or common barberry as Class C noxious weeds, resulting in a status quo of the current situation, whereby individual landowners or land managers have the option of voluntarily controlling common teasel, and destruction of common barberry would still be required under WAC 16-742-030. County noxious weed control boards could educate about both species if they are a local concern, but control could not be mandated through chapter 17.10 RCW of either species.

     Proposed amendment to Class C noxious weed listing: The alternative to the proposed amendment to the current Japanese eelgrass listing is that it would remain a recognized Class C noxious weed on commercially managed shellfish beds only, resulting in a status quo of the current situation. Individual landowners or land managers would have the option of voluntarily controlling this species but county noxious weed control boards could only require control on commercially managed shellfish beds if control were to be mandatory.

     Proposed changes of eleven Class B noxious weeds to Class C noxious weeds: The alternative to the proposed changes of eleven Class B to Class C noxious weeds would be to leave these species as Class B noxious weeds with their current designations intact.

     Proposed amendment to noxious weed regions: The alternative to the proposed amendment to the noxious weed regions would be to leave the existing ten regions the way they are currently described.

     Proposed amendments of current Class B designations: The alternative to the proposed amendments of current Class B designations would be to leave them the way they are written, using the ten noxious weed regions.

     Conclusions: Few, if any, small businesses will be directly impacted by these proposed changes to the 2013 noxious weed list. Based on feedback from the horticultural industry, French broom does not appear to be widely carried in the nursery trade, so it is unlikely that these businesses will experience direct or even indirect negative impacts to sales or revenue. It is also unlikely that craft supply stores and florists will experience direct or even indirect negative impacts to sales or revenue due to the Class C listing of common teasel. Since common barberry is already quarantined (WAC 16-742-020) and destruction of these shrubs is already required under WAC 16-472-030 in wheat-producing areas, there will be no changes to small businesses if it is added as a Class C noxious weed. Tall hawkweed is limited in distribution and known infestations occur on public lands, so few if any small businesses will be affected if this species is added as a Class B noxious weed. The majority of small businesses with Japanese eelgrass on their property are commercial shellfish growers. An SBEIS analysis conducted last year, when Japanese eelgrass was proposed as a Class C noxious weed on commercially managed shellfish beds only indicated that any foreseen negative impacts to sales or revenue would be the direct result of the nonnative plant Japanese eelgrass on their shellfish beds and not due to the actual noxious weed listing. The WSNWCB would not require control of this species and does not mandate control methods. Since shellfish growers and other property owners, including other small businesses, can control Japanese eelgrass whether or not it is listed as a noxious weed, these potential indirect impacts on businesses would not be the direct result of the noxious weed listing.

     The proposed changes of eleven Class B noxious weeds to Class C noxious weeds would actually ease control requirements by the state. Amending the Class B designation regions from ten to six would not have direct impacts on small businesses, although it would make the designation regions easier to understand. Amending the designations of current Class B noxious weeds to correspond to the new regions would not have any impact to small businesses, and the net impact of updating Class B designations to fit current distribution would likely be negligible or neutral.

     Based upon the above analysis, the WSNWCB concludes that minor costs - if any - imposed would affect less than ten percent of small businesses and would not exceed $100 in lost sales or revenue as a direct result of the proposed rule-making changes. The WSNWCB concludes that small businesses will not be disproportionately impacted, nor would the proposed rule changes impose more than a minor cost on businesses in an industry. Therefore, we conclude that a formal SBEIS is not required.

     A cost-benefit analysis is not required under RCW 34.05.328. The WSNWCB is not one of the agencies listed in this section.

October 3, 2012

Alison Halpern

Executive Secretary

OTS-5054.1

AMENDATORY SECTION(Amending WSR 99-24-029, filed 11/23/99, effective 1/3/00)

WAC 16-750-004   Noxious weed region descriptions.   The state of Washington is divided into ((ten)) six regions for the purpose of designating Class B noxious weeds.

     (1) Region 1 description. A region ((consisting of all lands lying within the boundaries of Clallam and Jefferson counties.

     (2) Region 2 description. A region consisting of all lands lying within the boundaries of Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, San Juan, and Island counties.

     (3) Region 3 description. A region consisting of:

     (a) All lands lying within the boundaries of Okanogan County.

     (b) All lands lying within the boundaries of Chelan and Douglas counties and north of Highway 2.

     (4) Region 4 description. A region consisting of:

     (a) All lands lying within the boundaries of Ferry, Stevens, and Pend Oreille counties.

     (b) All lands lying within the boundaries of Spokane County and north of the Spokane River.

     (5) Region 5 description. A region consisting of all lands lying within the boundaries of Grays Harbor, Mason, Kitsap, Thurston, Pierce, and King counties.

     (6) Region 6 description. A region consisting of:

     (a) All lands lying within the boundaries of Kittitas and Grant counties.

     (b) All lands lying within the boundaries of Chelan and Douglas counties and south of Highway 2.

     (c) All lands lying within the boundaries of Yakima County and north of Highway 12 from the Yakima -- Lewis County line to Yakima and north of Highway 82 from Yakima to the Yakima -- Kittitas County line.

     (d) All lands lying within the boundaries of Ranges 28E, 29E, and 30E of Adams County.

     (7) Region 7 description. A region consisting of:

     (a) All lands lying within the boundaries of Lincoln and Whitman counties.

     (b) All lands lying within the boundaries of Spokane County and south of the Spokane River.

     (c) All lands lying within the boundaries of Ranges 31E, 32E, 33E, 34E, 35E, 36E, 37E, and 38E of Adams County.

     (8) Region 8 description. A region consisting of all lands lying within the boundaries of Pacific, Lewis, Wahkiakum, Cowlitz, Skamania, and Clark counties.

     (9) Region 9 description. A region consisting of:

     (a) All lands lying within the boundaries of Benton and Klickitat counties.

     (b) All lands lying within the boundaries of Yakima County and south of Highway 12 from the Yakima -- Lewis County line to Yakima and south of Highway 82 from Yakima to the Yakima -- Kittitas County line.

     (c) All lands lying within the boundaries of Franklin County and west of Highway 395.

     (10) Region 10 description. A region consisting of:

     (a) All lands lying within the boundaries of Asotin, Garfield, Columbia, and Walla Walla counties.

     (b) All lands lying within the boundaries of Franklin County and east of Highway 395.)) containing all lands lying within the boundaries of Clallam, Jefferson, Grays Harbor, Mason, and Pacific counties.

     (2) Region 2 description. A region containing all lands lying within the boundaries of San Juan, Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, Island, King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Thurston counties.

     (3) Region 3 description. A region containing all lands lying within the boundaries of Lewis, Cowlitz, Wahkiakum, Clark, and Skamania counties.

     (4) Region 4 description. A region containing all lands lying within the boundaries of Chelan, Douglas, Okanogan, Ferry, Stevens, and Pend Oreille counties.

     (5) Region 5 description. A region containing all lands lying within the boundaries of Klickitat, Yakima, Kittitas, Grant, Adams, Lincoln, Spokane, and Whitman counties.

     (6) Region 6 description. A region containing all lands lying within the boundaries of Benton, Franklin, Walla Walla, Columbia, Garfield, and Asotin counties.

[Statutory Authority: Chapter 17.10 RCW. 99-24-029, § 16-750-004, filed 11/23/99, effective 1/3/00; 91-24-072, § 16-750-004, filed 12/2/91, effective 1/2/92; 88-18-001 (Order 24, Resolution No. 24), § 16-750-004, filed 8/25/88.]

Common Name	Scientific Name
((bean-caper, Syrian	Zygophyllum fabago
blueweed, Texas	Helianthus ciliaris
brome, false	Brachypodium sylvaticum
broom, Spanish	Spartium junceum
buffalobur	Solanum rostratum
bulrush, ricefield	Schoenoplectus mucronatus
clary, meadow	Salvia pratensis
clematis, oriental	Clematis orientalis
cordgrass, common	Spartina anglica
cordgrass, dense flower	Spartina densiflora
cordgrass, salt meadow	Spartina patens
cordgrass, smooth	Spartina alterniflora
crupina, common	Crupina vulgaris
flax, spurge	Thymelaea passerina
four o'clock, wild	Mirabilis nyctaginea
geranium, shiny	Geranium lucidum
goatsrue	Galega officinalis
hawkweed, European	Hieracium sabaudum
hawkweed, yellow devil	Hieracium floribundum
hogweed, giant	Heracleum mantegazzianum
hydrilla	Hydrilla verticillata
johnsongrass	Sorghum halepense
knapweed, bighead	Centaurea macrocephala
knapweed, Vochin	Centaurea nigrescens
kudzu	Pueraria montana var. lobata
milfoil, variable-leaf	Myriophyllum heterophyllum
mustard, garlic	Alliaria petiolata
nightshade, silverleaf	Solanum elaeagnifolium
primrose-willow, floating	Ludwigia peploides
rush, flowering	Butomus umbellatus
sage, clary	Salvia sclarea
sage, Mediterranean	Salvia aethiopis
spurge, eggleaf	Euphorbia oblongata
starthistle, purple	Centaurea calcitrapa
sweetgrass, reed	Glyceria maxima
thistle, Italian	Carduus pycnocephalus
thistle, milk	Silybum marianum
thistle, slenderflower	Carduus tenuiflorus
velvetleaf	Abutilon theophrasti
woad, dyers	Isatis tinctoria))

broom, French	Genista monspessulana
broom, Spanish	Spartium junceum
buffalobur	Solanum rostratum
common crupina	Crupina vulgaris
cordgrass, common	Spartina anglica
cordgrass, dense flower	Spartina densiflora
cordgrass, salt meadow	Spartina patens
cordgrass, smooth	Spartina alterniflora
dyers woad	Isatis tinctoria
eggleaf spurge	Euphorbia oblongata
false brome	Brachypodium sylvaticum
floating primrose-willow	Ludwigia peploides
flowering rush	Butomus umbellatus
garlic mustard	Alliaria petiolata
giant hogweed	Heracleum mantegazzianum
goatsrue	Galega officinalis
hawkweed, European	Hieracium sabaudum
hawkweed, yellow devil	Hieracium floribundum
hydrilla	Hydrilla verticillata
johnsongrass	Sorghum halepense
knapweed, bighead	Centaurea macrocephala
knapweed, Vochin	Centaurea nigrescens
kudzu	Pueraria montana var. lobata
meadow clary	Salvia pratensis
oriental clematis	Clematis orientalis
purple starthistle	Centaurea calcitrapa
reed sweetgrass	Glyceria maxima
ricefield bulrush	Schoenoplectus mucronatus
sage, clary	Salvia sclarea
sage, Mediterranean	Salvia aethiopis
shiny geranium	Geranium lucidum
silverleaf nightshade	Solanum elaeagnifolium
spurge flax	Thymelaea passerina
Syrian bean-caper	Zygophyllum fabago
Texas blueweed	Helianthus ciliaris
thistle, Italian	Carduus pycnocephalus
thistle, milk	Silybum marianum
thistle, slenderflower	Carduus tenuiflorus
variable-leaf milfoil	Myriophyllum heterophyllum
velvetleaf	Abutilon theophrasti
wild four o'clock	Mirabilis nyctaginea

[Statutory Authority: Chapters 17.10 and 34.05 RCW. 12-01-050, § 16-750-005, filed 12/15/11, effective 1/15/12; 09-01-071, § 16-750-005, filed 12/15/08, effective 1/16/09; 07-24-023, § 16-750-005, filed 11/28/07, effective 1/1/08; 05-24-026, § 16-750-005, filed 11/30/05, effective 12/31/05; 03-04-001, § 16-750-005, filed 1/22/03, effective 2/22/03. Statutory Authority: Chapter 17.10 RCW. 99-24-029, § 16-750-005, filed 11/23/99, effective 1/3/00; 98-24-026, § 16-750-005, filed 11/23/98, effective 1/2/99; 97-24-051, § 16-750-005, filed 11/26/97, effective 1/2/98. Statutory Authority: RCW 17.10.080. 96-06-030, § 16-750-005, filed 2/29/96, effective 3/31/96. Statutory Authority: Chapter 17.10 RCW. 93-01-004, § 16-750-005, filed 12/2/92, effective 1/2/93; 91-24-072, § 16-750-005, filed 12/2/91, effective 1/2/92; 91-01-016, § 16-750-005, filed 12/7/90, effective 1/7/91; 90-01-004, § 16-750-005, filed 12/7/89, effective 1/7/90; 88-24-002 (Order 26, Resolution No. 26), § 16-750-005, filed 11/29/88. Statutory Authority: RCW 17.10.080. 88-07-016 (Order 22, Resolution No. 22), § 16-750-005, filed 3/7/88.]

[Statutory Authority: Chapters 17.10 and 34.05 RCW. 12-01-050, § 16-750-011, filed 12/15/11, effective 1/15/12; 10-24-037, § 16-750-011, filed 11/22/10, effective 12/23/10; 09-01-071, § 16-750-011, filed 12/15/08, effective 1/16/09; 07-24-023, § 16-750-011, filed 11/28/07, effective 1/1/08; 06-24-056, § 16-750-011, filed 12/4/06, effective 1/4/07; 05-24-026, § 16-750-011, filed 11/30/05, effective 12/31/05; 05-01-012, § 16-750-011, filed 12/2/04, effective 1/2/05. Statutory Authority: Chapter 17.10 RCW. 04-13-014, § 16-750-011, filed 6/4/04, effective 7/5/04. Statutory Authority: Chapters 17.10 and 34.05 RCW. 03-24-012, § 16-750-011, filed 11/20/03, effective 12/21/03; 03-04-001, § 16-750-011, filed 1/22/03, effective 2/22/03. Statutory Authority: Chapter 17.10 RCW. 01-24-035, § 16-750-011, filed 11/28/01, effective 12/29/01; 00-24-017, § 16-750-011, filed 11/28/00, effective 1/2/01; 99-24-029, § 16-750-011, filed 11/23/99, effective 1/3/00; 98-24-026, § 16-750-011, filed 11/23/98, effective 1/2/99; 97-24-051, § 16-750-011, filed 11/26/97, effective 1/2/98; 97-06-108, § 16-750-011, filed 3/5/97, effective 4/5/97. Statutory Authority: RCW 17.10.080. 96-06-030, § 16-750-011, filed 2/29/96, effective 3/31/96. Statutory Authority: Chapter 17.10 RCW. 95-06-002, § 16-750-011, filed 2/16/95, effective 3/19/95; 94-01-076, § 16-750-011, filed 12/10/93, effective 1/10/94; 93-01-004, § 16-750-011, filed 12/2/92, effective 1/2/93; 91-24-072, § 16-750-011, filed 12/2/91, effective 1/2/92; 91-01-016, § 16-750-011, filed 12/7/90, effective 1/7/91; 90-01-004, § 16-750-011, filed 12/7/89, effective 1/7/90; 88-24-002 (Order 26, Resolution No. 26), § 16-750-011, filed 11/29/88; 88-18-001 (Order 24, Resolution No. 24), § 16-750-011, filed 8/25/88. Statutory Authority: RCW 17.10.080. 88-07-016 (Order 22, Resolution No. 22), § 16-750-011, filed 3/7/88.]

Common Name	Scientific Name
babysbreath	Gypsophila paniculata
((beard, old man's	Clematis vitalba
bindweed, field	Convolvulus arvensis
blackberry, evergreen	Rubus laciniatus
blackberry, Himalayan	Rubus armeniacus
canarygrass, reed	Phalaris arundinacea
cockle, white	Silene latifolia ssp. alba
cocklebur, spiny	Xanthium spinosum
cress, hoary	Cardaria draba
dodder, smoothseed alfalfa	Cuscuta approximata
eelgrass, Japanese (on commercially managed shellfish beds only)	Zostera japonica
goatgrass, jointed	Aegilops cylindrica
groundsel, common	Senecio vulgaris
hawkweed, common	Hieracium lachenalii
hawkweed, other nonnative species	Hieracium sp., except species designated in the note in the left-hand column
Note:
This listing includes all species of Hieracium, except the following:
• Species designated as Class A noxious weeds in WAC 16-750-005;
• Species designated as Class B noxious weeds in WAC 16-750-011;
• Native species designated below:
– Canada hawkweed (H. canadense)
– houndstongue hawkweed (H. cynoglossoides)
– long-beaked hawkweed (H. longiberbe)
– narrow-leaved hawkweed (H. umbellatum)
– slender hawkweed (H. gracile)
– western hawkweed (H. albertinum)
– white-flowered hawkweed (H. albiflorum)
– woolley-weed (H. scouleri)
henbane, black	Hyoscyamus niger
iris, yellow flag	Iris pseudacorus
ivy, English, 4 cultivars only:	Hedera hibernica 'Hibernicia'
	Hedera helix 'Baltica'
	Hedera helix 'Pittsburgh'
	Hedera helix 'Star'
mayweed, scentless	Matricaria perforata
pondweed, curly-leaf	Potamogeton crispus
rye, cereal	Secale cereale
spikeweed	Hemizonia pungens
St. Johnswort, common	Hypericum perforatum
tansy, common	Tanacetum vulgare
thistle, bull	Cirsium vulgare
thistle, Canada	Cirsium arvense
toadflax, yellow	Linaria vulgaris
tree-of-heaven	Ailanthus altissima
water lily, fragrant	Nymphaea odorata
whitetop, hairy	Cardaria pubescens
wormwood, absinth	Artemisia absinthium))

absinth wormwood	Artemisia absinthium
Austrian fieldcress	Rorippa austriaca
black henbane	Hyoscyamus niger
blackberry, evergreen	Rubus laciniatus
blackberry, Himalayan	Rubus armeniacus
blackgrass	Alopecurus myosuroides
cereal rye	Secale cereale
common barberry	Berberis vulgaris
common catsear	Hypochaeris radicata
common groundsel	Senecio vulgaris
common St. Johnswort	Hypericum perforatum
common tansy	Tanacetum vulgare
common teasel	Dipsacus fullonum
curly-leaf pondweed	Potamogeton crispus
English ivy 4 cultivars only:	Hedera hibernica 'Hibernica'
	Hedera helix 'Baltica'
	Hedera helix 'Pittsburgh'
	Hedera helix 'Star'
field bindweed	Convolvulus arvensis
fragrant water lily	Nymphaea odorata
hairy whitetop	Cardaria pubescens
hawkweed, common	Hieracium lachenalii
hawkweed, polar	Hieracium atratum
hawkweed, other nonnative species	Hieracium spp., except species designated in the note in the left-hand column
Note:
This listing includes all species of Hieracium, except the following:
• Species designated as Class A noxious weeds in WAC 16-750-005;
• Species designated as Class B noxious weeds in WAC 16-750-011;
• Native species designated below:
– Canada hawkweed (H. canadense)
– houndstongue hawkweed (H. cynoglossoides)
– long-beaked hawkweed (H. longiberbe)
– narrow-leaved hawkweed (H. umbellatum)
– slender hawkweed (H. gracile)
– western hawkweed (H. albertinum)
– white-flowered hawkweed (H. albiflorum)
– woolley-weed (H. scouleri)
hoary cress	Cardaria draba
Japanese eelgrass (on commercially managed shellfish beds only)	Zostera japonica
jointed goatgrass	Aegilops cylindrica
lawnweed	Soliva sessilis
lepyrodiclis	Lepyrodiclis holosteoides
longspine sandbur	Cenchrus longispinus
old man's beard	Clematis vitalba
oxeye daisy	Leucanthemum vulgare
perennial sowthistle	Sonchus arvensis ssp. arvensis
reed canarygrass	Phalaris arundinacea
scentless mayweed	Matricaria perforata
smoothseed alfalfa dodder	Cuscuta approximata
spikeweed	Hemizonia pungens
spiny cocklebur	Xanthium spinosum
Swainsonpea	Sphaerophysa salsula
thistle, bull	Cirsium vulgare
thistle, Canada	Cirsium arvense
tree-of-heaven	Ailanthus altissima
white cockle	Silene latifolia ssp. alba
wild carrot (except where commercially grown)	Daucus carota
yellow flag iris	Iris pseudacorus
yellow toadflax	Linaria vulgaris