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.
Black Mountain Fire Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation
Region: Southern
ID: 4744
Project Status: Completed
Map This Project
Export Project Data
Project Details
*
Need for Project
The 2018 Black Mountain Fire resulted in a direct loss of valuable shrubs, grasses and forbs on 4,797 acres of occupied greater sage-grouse brood rearing habitat.
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
The overall vegetation objective of the plan is to establish desirable vegetation in order to: * Provide for human life and safety by stabilizing soils within the Black Mountain Fire and eliminate the potential for dust formation and flash flooding along Minersville HWY (SR130) and along the Maple Springs Road. * Stabilize and begin re-establishment of important sage grouse brood rearing habitat, Utah Prairie Dog Habitat, and mule deer crucial winter habitat. * Minimize the production and composition of invasive, non-native species, especially cheatgrass. * Minimize soil erosion. * Prevent the introduction and spread of noxious weeds. * Minimize the potential size and severity of future wildfires. * Repair facilities (fences, water developments, etc.) to pre-fire conditions.
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?)
Some of the risks this project will help to mitigate include: -Safety hazard due to excessive flooding and debris on main roads, (SR 180) -Loss of habitat for Greater Sage-grouse, Mule Deer, Utah Prairie Dog, and other species -Introduction of invasive species and/or noxious weeds -Threat of re-burning if appropriate vegetation is not able to compete with invasives such as cheat grass -Loss of AUMs -Loss of biodiversity
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
The proposed project is subject to the Cedar Beaver Garfield Antimony Resource Management Plan approved October 1st, 1986. The Proposed Action is in conformance with the LUP, even though it is not specifically provided for, because it is clearly consistent with the following LUP decisions (objectives, Terms, and Conditions): * Wildlife RMP objective D.1. states, "manage wildlife habitat to favor a diversity of game and nongame species." * Rangeland Decision B.1. Initiate management prescriptions affecting season of use, grazing systems and grazing use levels through formal grazing agreements, decisions or allotment management plans. Identified allotment objectives include in part: o Balance authorized use with production, o Ensure physiological plant needs are met, o Reduce area in poor condition by improving key species, o Improve habitat by improving quality of key species. * Soil/water/air RMP objective E.1. states in part to "Avoid the deterioration of or improve watershed conditions on all other Federal lands. * USDI BLM. Utah Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire and Fuels Management. (UT-USO-04-01). September 2005. * USDI BLM. Biological Assessment for the Proposed Utah Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire and Fuels Management. March 2005. * Standards and Guidelines for Healthy Rangelands and Grazing Management (BLM-UT-GI-98-007-1020). * USDI BLM WO IM No 2013-043. Greater Sage-grouse Interim Management Policies and Procedures. December 2011. * USDI USFWS. Utah Prairie Dog Final Revised Recovery Plan. March 2012. * Utah Prairie Dog Recovery Implementation Team. Population Structure for Utah Prairie Dog Recovery. Final Draft March 2013. * Iron County. 2013. Iron County Greater Sage-grouse Resource Management Plan. Draft. * USDI BLM. 2015 Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment. DOI_BLM-UT-9100_2013-003-EIS. * Frey, S. N., S. G. Lupis, C. Reid, T. A. Black, T. A. Messmer, and D. Mitchell. 2007. Southwest Desert Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Local Conservation Plan. Utah's Community Based Conservation Program. Unpublished Report. Logan, Utah.
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
Fire history data for the north slopes of the Black Mountains indicates that fires are becoming larger and burning with more intensity. This is primarily due to an increase in the amount of cheatgrass and, in some cases, dead and dying vegetation (increased dry fuels) in the plant community. The seed mixes proposed would generally be sufficient to create vegetation conditions, which would create a low intensity ground fire in the event the fire area reburns in the future. Under normal burning conditions, a fire in such a vegetation community could be fought relatively safely and kept relatively small, using traditional ground forces such as hand and engine crews.
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
Soil retention structures (small earthen dams) would be important to construct on small tributary drainages to control the flow of off-site water. These are easily created with a push of the dozer blade in strategic locations. Retention structures should be installed as early as possible, but no later than during the chaining operation. Further, retention structures should not be constructed in major drainages without proper design as such structures have proven to be ineffective. Additional special measures to reduce wind and water erosion, such as hydro mulching, matting, etc. in conjunction with re-seeding may also be implemented in problem areas. Coordination would be done with cooperators with knowledge of erosion reduction techniques, such as NRCS.
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
In accordance with the Standards for Rangeland Health, rangelands that have been burned, reseeded, or otherwise treated to alter the vegetative composition would be closed to livestock grazing as follows: (1) burned rangelands, whether by wildfire or prescribed burning, will be un-grazed for a minimum of one complete growing season following the burn; and (2) rangelands that have been re-seeded or otherwise chemically or mechanically treated will be un-grazed for a minimum of two complete growing seasons.
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
The entire burned area will be aerially seeded. A selected portion will be seeded with a Utah Prairie Dog seed mix and the rest will be seeded with a general sage grouse mix. Areas that meet criteria for chaining will be chained following the seeding. Erosion control structures will be constructed as needed. Existing fences will be replaced.
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
Establish a monitoring component that looks at sage-grouse habitat parameters in making a determination that habitat restoration objectives are being met. Monitoring and appropriate treatments of invasive noxious weeds would be completed in accordance with approved BLM policy. Noxious weed control would be in accordance with the Noxious Weed Control Environmental Assessment (UT-044-96-15) or other current NEPA, including appropriate mitigation and conservation measures as developed on a case-by-case basis would be followed.
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
The BLM Cedar City Field Office will be working with Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative to complete this project.
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
A mandatory 2 year minimum rest period will be initiated for the portions of the allotments that were burned. Temporary fencing and rest rotation will be used to exclude livestock from the area until appropriate re-vegetation has occurred.
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
Five domestic livestock permittees were impacted by the Black Mountain Fire, with a temporary loss of 3,265 total AUMS on the two affected allotments. In the long term, this project will likely have an overall positive impact on domestic livestock grazing because of added forage value following seeding.
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
Saving...