Project Details

This project is directly adjacent to the South Alton, completed in 2012 (Project ID 1738), and the Alton/Skutumpah Project completed in 2009. These project areas are mapped as brood rearing habitat, and since tree removal, have been successful in recruiting grouse into the treatment areas. This years' project will expand those brood rearing areas into opportunity areas by removing Stage II and Stage III p/j, and re-establishing understory grasses and forbs. Two BLM livestock permittes are involved in implementing the project, on private and BLM lands.

The need to rehabilitate vegetation communities within the Upper Kanab Creek Watershed Vegetation Management Area has been recognized for many years. Numerous management plans, including the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Statewide Management Plan for Mule deer (2008), the Paunsagunt Mule Deer Management Plan (2000), Color Country Adaptive Resource Management Plan (CCARM) (2008) for sage grouse and the southwest Utah support Area Fire Management Plan have all addressed resource and vegetation management needs within this area.

Of particular concern within this watershed is the infilling of pinyon/juniper into areas once dominated by shrubs and other herbaceous vegetation and the subsequent impact on greater sage grouse. An increase in pinyon/juniper is also affecting soil resources, water and nutrient cycles, fire regimes, plant community structure and composition, forage production and wildlife habitat.

Numerous partner project have been completed on private lands in the vicinity in an effort to benefit sage grouse, as well as by the BLM in areas adjacent to this. Approximately 2300acres of  mechanical thinning, 1000 acres chaining, and 4000 acres hand thinning have been completed over the past three years, providing connectivity to sage grouse migration corridors and restoring large sagebrush flats. This project will help open up travel corridors near two historic sage grouse leks near Ford Pasture and Skutumpah Ranch areas.
 
Overall, the project will provide benefits to the southernmost population of sage grouse in the western United States, as well as provide habitat for mule deer. sagebrush steppe obligates and will improve overall rangeland health.

These objectives would be in compliance with objectives currently recommended through the BLM interim protective measures identified for sage grouse (2011), to emphasize management and protection that incorporates preliminary priority habitat (PPH) for: 1) protection
of unfragmented habitat; 2) minimize habitat loss and fragmentation; and 3) manage habitats to maintain; and enhance or restore conditions that meet greater sage-grouse life history needs. Additionally, it provides off-site mitigation for areas near the Alton Coal Mine, just north of the project area.

Provide evidence about the nature of the problem and the need to address it. Identify the significance of the problem using a variety of data sources. For example, if a habitat restoration project is being proposed to benefit greater sage-grouse, describe the existing plant community characteristics that limit habitat value for greater sage-grouse and identify the changes needed for habitat improvement.

Provide an overall goal for the project and then provide clear, specific and measurable objectives (outcomes) to be accomplished by the proposed actions. If possible, tie to one or more of the public benefits UWRI is providing.

Historically sage grouse within this areal likely had a greater distribution than they currently do. Although difficult to understand all of the reasons for their decline, Mordo et. al. (2013), as well as others have documented that sage grouse stop using an area with as little as 4% tree canopy cover. Lack of natural disturbances such as wildfire and grazing practices that favor shrub growth have favored pinyon juniper expansion and a subsequent decline in sage grouse/sage grouse habitat.

By not doing this project, these processes will continue, putting greater sage grouse at increased risk, and/or moving them further toward an endangered species listing. This action would have dire consequences to public and private land uses in the area.

Completing the project also has risks. There is always the risk of disturbance to desired wildlife species; however, mitigation measures in
place should reduce or eliminate this risk. There is also a risk of weed invasion following treatment and of seeding failure, given yearly moisture regimes. These risks are inherent to any vegetation project. BLM has an aggressive noxious weed early/detection rapid response program that should help mitigate the risk of noxious weeds. Should the seeding fail, efforts would be made to secure additional funds to provide the inputs needed to make the project successful.

Private landowners in this area have been pro-active in treating private lands, to provide additional connectivity, and to help ensure that sage grouse are not listed.

LOCATION: Justify the proposed location of this project over other areas, include publicly scrutinized planning/recovery documents that list this area as a priority, remote sensing modeling that show this area is a good candidate for restoration, wildlife migration information and other data that help justify this project's location.

TIMING: Justify why this project should be implemented at this time. For example, Is the project area at risk of crossing an ecological or other threshold wherein future restoration would become more difficult, cost prohibitive, or even impossible.

List management plans where this project will address an objective or strategy in the plan. Describe how the project area overlaps the objective or strategy in the plan and the relevance of the project to the successful implementation of those plans. It is best to provide this information in a list format with the description immediately following the plan objective or strategy.

If applicable, detail how the proposed project will significantly reduce the risk of fuel loading and/or continuity of hazardous fuels including the use of fire-wise species in re-seeding operations. Describe the value of any features being protected by reducing the risk of fire. Values may include; communities at risk, permanent infrastructure, municipal watersheds, campgrounds, critical wildlife habitat, etc. Include the size of the area where fuels are being reduced and the distance from the feature(s) at risk.

Describe how the project has the potential to improve water quality and/or increase water quantity, both over the short and long term. Address run-off, erosion, soil infiltration, and flooding, if applicable.

Description of efforts, both completed and planned, to bring the proposed action into compliance with any and all cultural resource, NEPA, ESA, etc. requirements. If compliance is not required enter "not applicable" and explain why not it is not required.

Describe the actions, activities, tasks to be implemented as part of the proposed project; how these activities will be carried out, equipment to be used, when, and by whom.

Describe plans to monitor for project success and achievement of stated objectives. Include details on type of monitoring (vegetation, wildlife, etc.), schedule, assignments and how the results of these monitoring efforts will be reported and/or uploaded to this project page. If needed, upload detailed plans in the "attachments" section.

List any and all partners (agencies, organizations, NGO's, private landowners) that support the proposal and/or have been contacted and included in the planning and design of the proposed project. Describe efforts to gather input and include these agencies, landowners, permitees, sportsman groups, researchers, etc. that may be interested/affected by the proposed project. Partners do not have to provide funding or in-kind services to a project to be listed.

Detail future methods or techniques (including administrative actions) that will be implemented to help in accomplishing the stated objectives and to insure the long term success/stability of the proposed project. This may include: post-treatment grazing rest and/or management plans/changes, wildlife herd/species management plan changes, ranch plans, conservation easements or other permanent protection plans, resource management plans, forest plans, etc.

Potential for the proposed action to improve quality or quantity of sustainable uses such as grazing, timber harvest, biomass utilization, recreation, etc. Grazing improvements may include actions to improve forage availability and/or distribution of livestock.