Project Details

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.

If the project does not go forward, the state of the stream and river corridor will remain in poor condition.  Water quality will not improve because elevated loads of total phosphorous and fine sediment will continue.  Fish and wildlife populations will not reach desirable and/or historic levels because the absence of suitable habitat will persist.  Additionally, habitat conditions downstream of the proposed project where stream improvement work has already been completed could be negatively impacted if the project does not go forward (e.g., not addressing high width to depth ratios and continued lack of riparian vegetation are two important factors driving elevated stream temperatures downstream and bank erosion contributes to an elevated level of fine sediment downstream).

If the project is delayed, there is a risk of losing the good financial, political, and social support that currently exists with multiple partners to implement the project.

If the project does go forward, there are few notable threats/risks.  Similar stream improvement work has been completed along much of the upper Sevier River near this project area without negative impacts and many positive impacts (e.g., increases in game and non-game fish abundance and biomass).

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.

The project would address General Conservation Actions listed in the Utah Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy:
1. "Restore Degraded Habitats" - the project would promote natural, healthy stream sinuosity and channel profiles, plant desirable vegetation, improve aquatic habitat for a variety of fish species, etc. 
2."Control and Monitor Contaminants" - establishing a healthy riparian community would help to buffer nonpoint source contaminants from overland flow and reduce contaminant inputs from bank erosion (e.g., phosphorous).
3. "Increase/Secure In-stream Flow & Conservation Pools" - riparian plantings and bank sloping/shaping that reconnects the stream with the floodplain would have a positive impact on instream flow by promoting less variable, more natural stream flows and ground water recharge.
4. "Habitat Monitoring and Research" - the project would occur in an area that is being monitored and add to the knowledge base about the effects of habitat restoration on different species.

The project would help to meet goals and objectives listed in the Upper Sevier Watershed Management Plan:
1. "Maintain or improve water quality and quantity for local needs while providing for the needs of recreation, fish and wildlife" - the project would help to establish woody riparian vegetation where needed, decrease sediment flow into the river, etc.
2. "Provide suitable habitat for a diversity of wildlife species" - the project would provide and protect quality fish habitat and recreational angling opportunities.
3. "Maintain and restore desired vegetation that is resilient and sustainable" - the project would move vegetation communities closer to desired conditions.
4. "Maintain ranching and agricultural as sustainable economic, cultural and lifestyle components of the Upper Sevier Watershed" - the project would be done on private land in a manner that helps to "address potential and real conflicts between wildlife management goals and private land use".

The project would implement conservation elements called for in the Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Southern Leatherside (Lepidomeda aliciae) in the State of Utah:
1. "Habitat Enhancement" - the project would help to restore habitat conditions within the historical range of southern leatherside.
2. "Restore Hydrologic Conditions" - the project would help to restore natural hydrologic characteristics and water quality (e.g., riparian buffer of nonpoint source pollutants).

The project would help to meet habitat-related objectives in the Conservation Plan for Greater Sage-grouse in Utah:
1. The project would promote a healthy, functioning riparian habitat along the upper Sevier River and benefit late brood-rearing habitat for greater sage-grouse.

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.

The project has the potential to significantly improve water quality.  The project would likely help reduce phosphorous and sediment loads in the upper Sevier River, as well as address habitat alteration issues, all of which were listed concerns in the upper Sevier River TMDL.  The project would reestablish a dense and diverse corridor of riparian vegetation, helping to reduce phosphorous and sediment inputs from streambank erosion and creating an important buffer zone for filtration of nonpoint source pollutants from overland flow.  Furthermore, the livestock grazing strategy (rest for at least 5 years, followed by limited spring grazing) proposed by the project would help to increase litter cover and water infiltration.  The project would also improve habitat for a multiple species by increasing habitat heterogeneity at multiple scales.

There are limited pathways by which a project like this can impact water quantity.  However, the project does promote reconnecting the stream with the floodplain and increasing water infiltration, both leading to ground water recharge and more consistent flows later into the season.

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.

The strategies for achieving project goals are centered on improving function and health of the stream channel and stream corridor.  The major restoration techniques that would be used on the project include:

(1)  Large woody debris and rock structure installation - Private contractors would haul large tree and rock material to the project area and operate the necessary heavy equipment (e.g., excavator and front-end loader) to install large woody debris and rock structures in the stream and along banks.  The structures would be intended to add cover for fish, help address problems associated with elevated rates of streambank erosion (e.g., recruitment of fine sediment or high total phosphorous loads), and protect cattle crossing structures to manage livestock grazing.

(2)  Streambank shaping and sloping - All bare, vertical, eroding banks would be shaped and sloped back to at least a 2:1 slope in a manner intended to promote reconnection of the river with the floodplain and help address streambank erosion problems.  The stream channel slope, pattern, and location would not be changed.  Work would only occur on existing stream banks.  The stream would be narrowed and deepened in some locations, but cross-sectional area of the channel would be maintained.

(3)  Riparian seeding and planting - All disturbed ground and areas lacking adequate riparian vegetation would be seeded with a native grass mixture and the Utah Conservation Corps (UCC) would be hired to plant willow cuttings and bare root riparian trees and shrubs (e.g., water birch, cottonwood, red-osier dogwood, chokecherry, elderberry and golden current) to add cover and address streambank erosion problems.

(4)  Livestock management - The stream corridor encompassing the project area would be fenced as necessary to manage livestock grazing, which should also help to protect large woody debris structures, riparian vegetation, and streambanks over the long-term.  Livestock grazing would not occur within riparian areas for five years.  Thereafter, livestock grazing within riparian areas would occur at an intensity, duration, timing, and season such that woody riparian vegetation is not degraded or lost due to grazing by livestock (e.g., short duration, high intensity during spring).

Project implementation would likely occur in the fall of 2016.

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.

The study design for assessing effectiveness of the project to improve water quality and increase the abundance and diversity of fish and wildlife would be through before-after (BA), control-impact (CI), and before-after-control-impact (BACI) comparisons; where "before" refers to monitoring sites prior to completion of any stream improvement work, "after" refers to a monitoring sites following completion of any stream improvement work, "control" refers to monitoring sites in which no stream improvement work has been or will be completed, and "impact" refers to monitoring sites in which stream improvement work has already been completed.  These types of analyses are required to control for fluctuations in response variables (e.g., total phosphorus levels) that could be influenced by factors with natural spatial and temporal variation (e.g., annual precipitation).

Study sites would be selected based on factors that could help to facilitate effectiveness of the study design, such as overlapping with already established study sites/reaches of other agencies or investigators and being geomorphically representative of the greater stream section.

The data collection and analysis for monitoring of different chemical, physical, and biological parameters will primarily occur by the following schedule, agency or agencies, and methods:

Chemical - total phosphorous, total suspended solids, and dissolved oxygen would be monitored before/after active stream improvement work is completed and ongoing on an annual basis by UDWQ (with support from UDWR personnel when needed).

Physical - temperature, channel geomorphology, habitat suitability, and particle size distribution would be monitored before/after active stream improvement work is completed, annually for five years, and then ongoing every five years by the UDWR and UDWQ.
			
Biological	- riparian vegetation, macroinvertebrates, and fisheries	would be monitored before/after active stream improvement work is completed, annually for five years, and then ongoing every five years by the UDWR and UDWQ.

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.