Comments

Admin

• Alison Whittaker

  Aug 31, 2023, 2:55:44 PM
  This comment has been deleted by author or admin.

• Alison Whittaker

  Sep 1, 2023, 2:31:54 PM
  This comment has been deleted by author or admin.

• Alison Whittaker

  Sep 1, 2023, 2:33:08 PM
  Jim reminded me that carry over into FY24 was requested and approved. I have moved the project back to current. The completion report for this project will not be due until August 31, 2024. Thanks.

• Alison Whittaker

  Aug 29, 2024, 1:42:38 PM
  This is just a reminder that completion reports are due August 31st. I have entered the expenses in the Through WRI/DWR column on the finance page. Please do not make any changes to numbers in the Through WRI/DWR column. 1. Any "Through Other" or "In-kind" expenses will need to be entered by the PM or contributors. 2. Update your map features so they match what was finally completed and is reflected in the report. 3. Update your report to include any other work that was completed in FY23 and FY24. 4. Don't forget to upload any pictures of the project you have of before, during and after completion. 5. Be sure to click on the finalize button on the completion report when you have your completion report ready to be reviewed by WRI Admin. If you have any questions about this don't hesitate to contact me. Thanks.

• Daniel Eddington

  Sep 11, 2024, 2:16:08 PM
  Thank you for submitting your completion report on time. A few additional items: 1. On the completion Report, please adjust the Project Start and End date to reflect the charges or work that occurred in FY24. The current dates in the Project Start and End date will likely need to be transferred to the final method section for either the 128 acres or the 36 acres of lop/pile. 2. Don't forget to upload pictures from during and after completion. This is now required before a project will be considered completed. 3. The map page has a polygon for Thinning (commercial) for 590 acres, but there is no mention of it in the final methods. Please either remove the polygon if the work wasn't completed or please add information in the final methods section. 4. On the map page, there is a a large Affected Area for 137,448 acres. Affected area is typically only used for surveys such as NEPA, arch, or wildlife that were paid for by this project. If this polygon is none of those practices, then please remove, or add information in the final methods of what survey method was completed. Thanks.

• Shane Woolsey

  Sep 16, 2024, 3:37:26 PM
  The map page shows 137,448 acres because we asked for money to complete Goshawk surveys. This was not completed until this year and is why the dates show such a large range to complete. No WRI money was asked for or used for thinning of the 590 acres, it is a timber sale and I don't recall why it was added to the map. Only one Timber sale was completed (CCC). The other sale (Aquaduct) has been put on hold until the purchaser can figure out what they are doing after the mill burned down. The Lop/pile and lop/scatter were completed Fall of 21

• Alison Whittaker

  Sep 23, 2024, 2:47:26 PM
  It looks like you have addressed most of Daniel's comments. We just need to you to upload some during and after photos to the Images/Documents page. Thanks.

• Alison Whittaker

  Dec 31, 2024, 3:56:16 PM
  Please upload some during and after photos asap. I would like to see this project closed out and photos is the only thing it is still missing. Thanks.

Project

• Keith Day

  Jan 19, 2021, 11:24:31 AM
  Shane, It sounds like this is primarily a request for funding to conduct NEPA for a future large landscape scale proposal. It is hard to assess impacts on our non-game species at this juncture. So, I wonder why you list fringed myotis as a species that will benefit. Also, you do not indicate, unless I scanned over it, where exactly you plan to conduct the 166 acres of lop and scatter pj treatment you desire to accomplish immediately. Keith

• Shane Woolsey

  Jan 20, 2021, 8:51:32 AM
  The Title page describes where the work will be done: "In the municipal watershed excessive fuels in 129 acres will be lopped, piled and burned. In 37 acres of wetland areas, encroaching conifers will be removed by lop and scatter to prepare the area for future RX fires. Future NEPA surveys will be conducted."

• Gary Bezzant

  Jan 20, 2021, 8:56:34 AM
  Additionally, if you go to the map page and click on the vegetation treatment lines it will highlight the smaller treatment areas that sit within the larger NEPA planning area.

• Lisa Young

  Jan 22, 2021, 1:14:20 PM
  Keith, The NEPA that will be completed at the larger scale will continue with the development of projects that will improve riparian areas and follow Forest Plan direction that requires vegetative improvement projects to "encourage conditions that are within the historic range of variation (HRV) as defined by Regional or local properly functioning condition (PFC) assessments." Future phases will move habitat towards PFC and improve riparian areas. This will increase prey species within foraging habitat including riparian areas and maintain watering habitat and the distribution of those sites as riparian habitat is improved and maintained. Fringed myotis have been caught in different locations across the larger Hungry Creek Project Area.

• Michael Golden

  Jan 27, 2021, 6:30:33 AM
  Hey Shane, Nice proposal for a super important project to protect Escalante's municipal water supply and allow you guys to Rx burn 3,000 plus acres. While I see it on the map, the 590 acres of ponderosa pine commercial harvest/thinning that is part of the project appears to be missing in your project description and methods? You may want to add that as it considerably increases the size of the project and I wouldn't want rankers to miss that. Additionally, you may want to have an estimate of the timber volume and timber value from that commercial sale portion of the project in your sustainable uses section. I am not aware of boreal toad in this area although there is an anecdotal observation within the last decade just to the north in the Row Lakes area. Mike

• Shane Woolsey

  Jan 27, 2021, 9:31:55 AM
  Some how the timber sales were missed. I added this to the Methods section: "The CCC timber sale was contracted in fall of 2020 and will begin implementation as soon as winter 2020/21. The CCC timber sale covers 344 acres, contains 2819.14 CCF with a timber value of $36,215. The cost to implement and administer the sale is roughly $50,000. The Aqueduct sale covers 250 acres, contains 2000 CCF with a timber value of $27,000. The cost to implement and administer the sale is roughly $40,000 and is scheduled for implementation Fall of 2021. The timber sale areas lie in the south eastern half of the Hungry Creek Farm Bill area and are south of this project's proposed east side wetland thinning. These timber sales will be concurrent with the treatments implemented in this project.'

• Jonathan Paklaian

  Feb 18, 2021, 10:55:51 AM
  Hi Shane and all- Great to see a proposal here in my backyard benefiting the source water that I use everyday. I'm wondering about what kind of protections the springs and wetlands might receive following the thinning efforts? Having spent some time here, these areas appear to receive fairly high ungulate pressure, especially in dry years. Once these areas are thinned, are there any plans to protect these riparian/wetland ecosystems from what I suspect will be additional pressure?

• Shane Woolsey

  Feb 22, 2021, 10:41:38 AM
  The municipal springs are fenced and are maintained by Escalante City. Key areas within allotments are monitored as part of Annual Operating Plans. Monitoring will be administered by Range and permit holder post treatment to determine if fencing is needed.

• David Dodds

  Feb 19, 2021, 3:52:31 PM
  Garfield County would like to voice its support for this project. Having seen the effects of the recent Brian Head Fire on the Panguitch City springs, we recognize the importance of protecting our water sources. In the long run this relatively small amount of prevention will go a long way towards reducing future issues from any wildfire in the area. The County Resource Management Plan specifically identifies protection of municipal watersheds as a high priority. -- David Dodds, Garfield County Public Works Director.

• Shane Woolsey

  Feb 22, 2021, 10:43:54 AM
  Thank you for your comment.