Project Details

Vegetation: A healthy sagebrush community should consist of a diverse plant community and a variety of wildlife. The sagebrush habitat on the Cedar Mesa is becoming degraded due to encroaching pinyon and juniper. Areas where trees have become dominant, they have out competed understory species for light, moisture, and nutrients. This eventually results in a loss of many understory species. The lack of understory species will deplete the native seed bank, increase soil erosion, and increases non-native weed invasion (cheatgrass). Excessive fuel build up can result in catastrophic wildfires, which further degrades the habitat and increases the likelihood of cheatgrass expansion. Removing some of the pinyon and juniper and seeding with perennial species can improve the degraded sagebrush communities. It will ensure the seed bank maintains desirable species, reduces the chances of catastrophic wildfires, and decrease the risk of weed invasion. There are also several acres of previously used land for annual crops that if left unplanted will serve as a source of weeds for surrounding rangeland. 
Wildlife: The San Juan 14b deer and herds are at <50% of the population objective for the area. These population declines can be attributed in part to habitat quality and quantity on both summer and winter ranges. These stands are in poor condition as a result drought cycles and high utilization by both deer and domestic livestock. Furthermore, existing stands are being outcompeted by Pinyon and Juniper (PJ) trees thus reducing the carrying capacity for mule deer and other wildlife species. Removing trees in a mosaic pattern will improve winter range condition, because pinyon-juniper trees do provide valuable thermal and hiding cover for deer. Removing some pinyon and juniper trees will improve the quantity and quality of sagebrush in the area. This would provide valuable winter range forage for mule deer with hiding and thermal cover in close proximity. This should aid in both deer over winter survival as well as fawn production. 
Watershed Health: Areas dominated by Pinyon-Juniper produce limited understory vegetation and the bare soil interspaces are prone to soil loss by erosion. Herbaceous vegetation is important in impeding overland flow and is effective at reducing soil erosion. Both the potential increase in herbaceous vegetation and the masticated tree material should help stabilize the soils by reducing erosion and protect the water quality throughout the watershed. Pinyon and Juniper intercept 10-20% of precipitation according to Horman et al. 1999. By removing P-J this should allow for more precipitation to contact the soil and increase biomass on the ground. In areas where lop and scatter will be used there should be adequate vegetation to avoid soil erosion but this should increase the amount of water into the system instead of evaporating before it reaches the ground. P-J expansion into areas that historically had greater forbs and grasses present impedes streamflow for off-site (downstream) uses (Folliott 2012). P-J presence alters the amount and distribution of water that reaches the soil. Because P-J is very competitive for water this often reduces grasses and forbs within the area, leading to bare soil. "The increase in bare soil, particularly in the spaces between trees, typically leads to increased runoff and soil loss as the juniper infestation increases" (Thurow 1997). Increased runoff and sediment load, decrease water yield and water quality within the watershed. Studies have shown that an evaluation of alternatives using conversion treatments to enhance stream-flow in the P-J should be made (Barr 1956).

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.

1) Promote a healthy understory of grasses, forbs and shrubs to provide quality habitat for wildlife and range species.
1a. 12-20% preferred browse, 20% or less shrub decadency, 10%+ young shrub population. 1b. 8-15% perennial grasses, 5% perennial forb, less than 5% annual grass cover
2) Reduce the encroachment of pinyon/juniper trees in sagebrush meadows, but leave patches of trees for wildlife corridors.
3) Reduce cheatgrass expansion by promoting perennial grass, forb, and shrub cover.
4) Reduce the density of pinyon/juniper trees as a hazardous fuels treatment to protect habitat at risk from a devastating wildfire event.
5) Reduce overland flows of water from rain/snow events where there is heavy pinyon/juniper stands. Allowing water to be infiltrated into the soils and slowly released back into the system. 6) After mechanical treatments have occurred it has been shown that 2 to 3 years post treatment there is a decrease in bare ground on the site. This increase was from grasses, forbs and litter left on site from mechanical treatment (Miller et al. 2014).
7) Increase available forage for livestock for wildlife.
8) Help bring this plant community back into a more natural state with a variety of age classes of plant communities. 
9) Maintain and improve ecological site description as described in the NRCS Ecological Site Description.

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.

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 National Fire Plan
*Designed to manage the potential impacts of wildland fire to communities and ecosystems and to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildland fire
*The NFP focuses on strategies for improving fire preparedness, restoring and rehabilitating burned areas, reducing hazardous fuels, assisting communities, and identifying research needs
BLM National Policy Guidance on Wildlife and Fisheries Management
*This manual provides direction to restore, maintain and improve wildlife habitat conditions on public lands through the implementation of activity plans

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Statewide Management Plan for Mule Deer 2014-2019
Section VI Statewide management goals and objectives. This plan will address
1: Improve the quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer on a minimum of 500,000 acres of crucial
range.
2. Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or
fire damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges that are being taken over by invasive annual grass species, and
ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats.
3. Encourage land managers to manage portions of pinion-juniper woodlands and aspen/conifer forests in
early successional stages.
4. Work with land management agencies, conservation organizations, private
landowners, and local leaders through the regional Watershed Restoration Initiative working groups to identify
and prioritize mule deer habitats that are in need of enhancement or restoration.
5. Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or
fire damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges that are being taken over by invasive annual grass species, and
ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats.
6. Continue to identify, map, and characterize crucial mule deer habitats throughout the state, and identify
threats and limiting factors to each habitat.
7. Work with land management agencies and private landowners to identify and properly manage crucial mule
deer habitats, especially fawning and wintering areas.

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Statewide Management Plan for Elk 2015-2022
1) Maintain sufficient habitat to support elk herds at population objectives and reduce competition for forage
between elk and livestock.
2) Reduce adverse impacts to elk herds and elk habitat.
3) Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk
habitat.
4) Coordinate with land management agencies, conservation organizations, private
landowners, and local leaders through the regional Watershed Restoration Initiative
working groups to identify and prioritize elk habitats that are in need of enhancement
or restoration.

Elk herd unit #14 management plan 
Winter Range - Maintain and improve winter foraging areas through browse regeneration and pinyon-juniper removal projects.

Deer Herd Unit #14 management plan-habitat objectives
-Protect, maintain, and/or improve deer habitat through direct range improvements to support and maintain herd population management objectives. 
 -Work with private landowners and federal, state, and local governments to maintain and protect critical and existing ranges from future losses and degradation through grazing management and OHV and Travel Plan modifications. 
 -Work with federal, private, and state partners to improve crucial deer habitats through the WRI process. 
 -Work with federal and state partners in fire rehabilitation on crucial deer habitat through the WRI process 
 -Maintain and protect critical winter range from future losses.  Acquire critical winter range when the opportunity arises. 
 
San Juan County Master Plan
Fuels Management
*Objectives
a. Impacts of wildfire on the health, safety and property of County residents as well as valuable natural and cultural resources are prevented or minimized.
b. Natural fuel load conditions benefit or improve watersheds and forage conditions and are appropriately maintained by natural and prescribed fire.
2. Support the use of prescribed and natural fire to avoid catastrophic fire, encourage aspen regeneration, remove dead standing trees, manage bark beetle impacts, and increase vegetation and diversity in plant communities. Prescribed fires should be coordinated
with the State Smoke Coordinator prior to ignition and follow the requirements of the State's Enhanced Smoke Management Plan.
3. Use fuel reduction techniques such as conifer reduction, grazing, prescribed fire, chemical, biological, and mechanical treatments appropriate for site characteristics.
Livestock Objectives
a. The livestock industry is a viable and sustainable component of the County's economy, heritage, and culture.
3. Support the implementation of rangeland improvement
projects including brush control, seeding projects,
pinion and juniper removal, noxious and invasive weed
control, and livestock water developments.
4. Support continued properly managed livestock grazing on grazing allotments rather than conversion to conservation, wildlife or other uses even when a permitted may propose relinquishment or retirement of grazing AUMs for other purposes.

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.

This project will decrease the risk of high severity wildfire by reducing fuel loading, reduce soil erosion, and promoting the growth of understory vegetation, which are critical to maintaining ecosystem resilience. Fuels in the current state pose a hazard to fire personnel, the private citizens, structures and infrastructure. The current fire regime condition class is moderate (2), and would be reduced to low (1) immediately after treatment. The habitat type has been identified in the 2015-2025 Utah Wildlife Action Plan that lowland sagebrush is a key habitat and the threats associated with this key habitat are inappropriate fire frequency and intensity. This project will help bring to achieve this goals. The removal of trees would create a break in the tree canopy where firefighter could begin to manage the fire. According to the Utah DNR Wildfire Risk Portal (Cat. Fire Map or UWRAP) the area has a risk score of low/moderate and a threat score of low/moderate. The area is remote and does have the potential to grow to large acre before being noticed. Treatment in this area could reduce the potential for fires by creating a gap in the tree canopy allowing for potential place to begin fire management.

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.

Watershed Health: Areas with limited understory vegetation and the bare soil interspaces are prone to soil loss by erosion. Herbaceous vegetation is important in impeding overland flow and is effective at reducing soil erosion. Both the potential increase in herbaceous vegetation and the masticated tree material should help stabilize the soils by reducing erosion and protect the water quality throughout the watershed. Pinyon and Juniper intercept 10-20% of precipitation according to Horman et al. 1999. By removing p/j this should allow for more precipitation to contact the soil and increase biomass on the ground. In areas where lop and scatter will be used there should be adequate vegetation to avoid soil erosion but this should increase the amount of water into the system instead of evaporating before it reaches the ground. Results of the Great Basin Landscape Conservation Cooperative study in Nevada (Desatoya Mt.) found that by removing (lop and scatter) P/J (130 trees/acre) there is the potential to increase water recharge yields 4% on wet years. On wet years this will increase recharge, but does not increase streamflow. Wet meadows and upland plants benefit by utilizing the increase soil moisture, providing for better resiliency during drought years. This provides for an increase in water quantity for herbaceous plants on sites where p/j is removed. A recent publication by Roundy et al. 2014 showed that phase 3 juniper removal can increase available moisture for more than 3 weeks in the spring. And removing juniper from phase 1 and 2 stands can increase water from 6-20 days respectively. Because juniper are prolific water users they readily out compete understory species which eventually die off.

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.

The project area falls within an active grazing allotment. In areas where seeding will occur the BLM will work with the permittees to rest seeded areas for 2 growing seasons. Fencing will not be constructed as part of this project. The project will be evaluated after treatment to determine if any follow treatments will need to occur, particularly if additional herbicide applications are needed. The project area is on BLM lands and will continue to be managed for multiple use, including grazing, hunting, wildlife watching and many other recreational activities. The area is within the The Deer Herd Management Plan for the San Juan Unit 14b dated October of 2015. The herd objective is 7,000 deer with a 3 year average of 25 to 35 buck per 100 does post season. The area will continue to managed for these numbers. The area is under objective and this project would help work toward achieving this goal. The San Juan Elk Herd unit 14 Management Plan states that population objective is 1,300 elk the current population estimate is slightly under objective. The area will continues to be managed for increased elk numbers. The area will also be monitored for cheat grass and if it is needed treatments will take place to control the cheat grass while perineal grasses and forbs establish.

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.