Skip to Content
Main Menu
Search
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative
Projects
Maps
About Us
Register
Login
Search
Saving...
Thank you for requesting access to WRI.
An administrator will contact you with further details.
Monitoring Groundwater Response to Pinyon/Juniper Treatments - Year 3
Region: Statewide
ID: 4716
Project Status: Completed
Map This Project
Export Project Data
Project Details
*
Need for Project
This proposal includes generally similar work in three project areas: Tintic Valley, western Juab County (ongoing monitoring leading up to treatment in 2020), Grouse Creek Mountains, western Box Elder County (purchase and installation of two flumes, and ongoing monitoring leading up to treatment in 2019 or 2020), and Montezuma Creek tributaries (Coal Bed Creek and Boulder Creek), southeastern San Juan County (permitting, purchase and installation of monitoring system, ongoing monitoring leading up to treatment in 2020 or 2021). The goal of these projects is to identify and quantify hydrologic and related ecologic changes that may result from large-scale treatment (i.e., cutting) of pinyon-juniper forests along mountain fronts. The treatments are part of a statewide program coordinated and funded by UWRI for restoration of sage-grouse habitat and fire-hazard reduction. Partners/cooperators include the USBLM, U.S. Forest Service, National Resource Conservation Service, UDWR, and private landowners. We have received in the past, and have applied for ongoing, additional funding from the Utah Division of Water Quality. As appropriate to each study area, we will monitor changes in spring flow, stream flow, groundwater levels, soil moisture, surface water-groundwater interactions, water quality, stable-isotope composition, and aquatic, wet meadow, and upland vegetation resulting from the treatments. Monitoring will occur in treatment and control (i.e., untreated) areas that are as hydrogeologically similar as possible. The objective is to establish the monitoring systems at least 2 years before the treatment to characterize baseline response of groundwater to climate variations under current conditions, and monitor at least 3 years after cutting to determine changes in groundwater recharge and availability.
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.
*
Objectives
As appropriate to each study area, we will monitor changes in spring flow, stream flow, groundwater levels, soil moisture, surface water-groundwater interactions, water quality, stable-isotope composition, and aquatic, wet meadow, and upland vegetation resulting from the treatments. Monitoring will occur in treatment and control (i.e., untreated) areas that are as hydrogeologically similar as possible. The objective is to establish the monitoring systems at least 2 years before the treatment to characterize baseline response of groundwater to climate variations under current conditions, and monitor at least 3 years after cutting to determine changes in groundwater recharge and availability.
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.
*
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?)
Studies in central Oregon (Deboodt et al., 2008) and central Nevada (Snyder, 2014) demonstrated increased shallow-groundwater resources (spring flow, shallow groundwater levels, soil moisture) following pinyon/juniper removal, whereas other studies in western states showed no measurable changes (Kuhn and others, 2007). The potential risk, therefore, is that we would not document changes above the resolution of measurement techniques, or that no recharge would occur due to unusually low winter precipitation during the monitoring period. Considering the similarity (climatic, vegetation) of the Oregon and Nevada sites to the proposed study areas, however, we expect positive results. References Deboodt, T.L., et al., 2008, Monitoring hydrological changes related to western juniper removal: A paired watershed approach: Third Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds, p. 227-232. Kuhn, T.J., et al., 2007, Juniper removal may not increase overall Klamath River Basin water yields: California Agriculture 61(4):166-171. DOI: 10.3733/ca.v061n04p166. Snyder, K., 2014, Desatoya Mountains Project and the Porter Canyon Experimental Watershed: Online, <http://www.greatbasinlcc.org/webinar-series>.
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.
*
Relation to Management Plans
Results will (1) aid assessment of the impact of treatments on shallow groundwater systems, (2) demonstrate benefits of the treatment projects beyond changes to plant communities, and (3) help plan future treatment projects by identifying conditions favorable to increasing groundwater recharge.
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.
*
Fire/Fuels
Fuels reduction is a major motivation of the treatments in this region. Monitoring groundwater will not affect fuels.
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.
*
Water Quality/Quantity
We will monitor discharge of springs and streams, and shallow groundwater levels. Water quality will be monitored to identify changes in major solute and stable-isotope composition related to increased recharge from the treatment areas. For surface water, we will monitor flow, temperature, turbidity, and chemical composition in Death Creek; and flow, temperature, and chemical composition including Se in Coal Bed Creek and Boulder Creek (Montezuma Creek tributaries).
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.
*
Compliance
NEPA for monitoring equipment installation on U.S. Bureau of Land Management. MOU with Utah State Institutional Trust Land Administration to install and conduct monitoring. Monitoring well permits from Utah Division of Water Rights for wells greater than 30 feet deep. Installation of monitoring equipment will be in coordination with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and BLM to avoid disturbance of critical habitat. We will follow UDWQ protocol for appropriate water-quality samples.
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.
*
Methods
Spring and stream flow: V-notch weirs or ramp flumes as appropriate, equipped with stilling wells and pressure/temperature loggers. Temperature loggers in stream beds above and below likely areas of groundwater connection, and along reaches of intermittent flow. Shallow groundwater: Piezometers (1.5-inch diameter) screened 2 to 5 feet below the water table, equipped with pressure transducers. Arrange in lines perpendicular to stream to evaluate surface flow-groundwater interaction, and in dry valleys to record seasonal changes in groundwater levels. Chemistry: Periodic sampling of springs, groundwater in piezometers, surface flow, and precipitation; for general chemistry, stable and radiogenic isotopes, and other constituents as appropriate. Soil moisture: Nested TDR probes in boreholes drilled by hand auger or machine auger, in comparable treatment and control areas, In juniper stands and wet meadows as available. Climate: Precipitation, temperature, and snowpack will be measured at a local weather station already established by the BLM.
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.
*
Monitoring
We plan to monitor spring flow, stream base flow, shallow groundwater, major solutes, Oxygen-18 and deuterium isotopes, soil moisture, weather (precipitation, temperature, snowpack), and aquatic, wet meadow, and upland vegetation in watersheds planned for treatment. Monitoring will begin 2 to 3 years before the treatments and continue for 2 to 3 years after. Establish response of groundwater and surface flow to climatic variations under current conditions, and determine changes (if any) following treatment. Coeval monitoring of nearby untreated areas will extend the record of groundwater response to climate variability.
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.
*
Partners
BLM -- James Priest, Cassie Mellon, Thom Gibbons, Shawn Storbo, Ann-Marie Aubry. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources -- Jason Robinson, Alison Whittaker. BLM partners have shared long-term treatment plans and are willing to coordinate treatment schedules to benefit the monitoring projects, e.g., delay treatments of heavily monitored areas to allow accumulation of baseline data.
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.
*
Future Management
If conditions favoring increased groundwater recharge are identified, this could aid planning, management, and promotion of future treatment programs. The study areas is in the Sheeprock Mountains Sage Grouse Management Area, for which extensive pinyon/juniper treatments have been planned. The monitoring process will not affect the sage grouse directly, but will help evaluate possible beneficial changes to habitat.
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.
*
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources
Document possible increased spring flow, surface flow, and groundwater-supported wet meadows for improved grazing.
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.
Title Page
Project Details
Finance
Species
Habitats
Seed
Comments
Images/Documents
Completion Form
Project Summary Report