Project Details

The purpose of this project is to improve forest health, forest resiliency through stand composition and structure, watershed resiliency, wilderness character and wildlife habitat at a landscape scale throughout the West Fork Bear River Watershed (36,509 acres) by regenerating aspen in conifer encroached stands, creating landscapes with multiple age classes of trees and reducing hazardous fuel loads that are increasing due to the mountain pine beetle epidemic. Prescribed fire and mechanical and/or hand treatments will be used to move the landscape closer to properly functioning conditions (e.g. a mosaic of patch sizes, species composition, stand structure, and age classes), increasing resilience, and reducing the risk of future large high intensity/severity fires and widespread insect and disease outbreaks. The project area has been significantly impacted by a recent mountain pine beetle epidemic that resulted in up to 90% mortality in the lodgepole pine. The dead trees are beginning to fall over, significantly increasing surface fuel loads and the risk of large high intensity/severity fire. Prescribed fire and mechanical treatments will be used to reduce downed fuel loads, standing alive and dead trees, and create conditions that allow for more fire management options in the event of a future uncharacteristic wildfire.

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.

A no action management alternative would result in a continued decline in aspen in the project area. If the action is delayed, existing mixed aspen-conifer stands in the project area could cross a threshold where conifers could dominate further reducing the overall North Slope aspen population. As conifers become more dominant, canopy closure increases and understory plant species richness and diversity declines creating a loss of forage production. Soil moisture also decreases as conifers increase because conifer needles and branches intercept precipitation before it reaches the forest floor and precipitation evaporates back into the atmosphere. Aspen to conifer succession is a concern for the North Slope. Aspens are clonal and need disturbance such as fire to initiate sprouting. Aspen is more successful over the long term when fire intervals are short enough to regenerate. If fire is not reintroduced, conifers in existing aspen-conifer stands will establish seedlings, shade out aspen, and outcompete them. When a disturbance does occur creating a possible scenario for aspens to sprout, conifers will have a stronghold, which makes it more difficult for aspens to re-establish leading to further loss of aspens. The above threats are associated with Phase II, implementation, of this project.

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.

1. 2003 Wasatch-Cache Forest Plan: - (Subgoal 3d) Restore or maintain fire-adapted ecosystems (consistent with land uses, historic fire regimes, and other Forest Plan direction) through wildland fire use, prescribed fire, timber harvest or mechanical treatments. -(G24) Management activities that negatively affect pollinators (e.g. insecticide, herbicide application and prescribed burns) should not be conducted during the flowering period of any known Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive plant populations in the application area. An exception to this guideline is the application of Bacillus thuringiensis. - (G3.1W-1) Vegetation/fuel treatment, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use are allowed for the purposes of maintaining, improving or restoring watersheds to desired conditions, and to protect property in the wildland urban interface. - (G3.2U-1) Vegetation/fuel treatment, prescribed fire and wildland fire use are allowed for the purposes of maintaining, improving or restoring terrestrial habitat, for hazardous fuel reduction, and to protect property in the wildland urban interface. - (G4.2-1) Vegetation/fuels treatment, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use are allowed to mimic historic conditions and to restore ecosystem functioning. - (G4.3-1) Timber harvest, vegetation/fuels treatment, road construction, prescribed fire and wildland fire use are allowed to mimic historic conditions and to restore ecosystem functioning as compatible with the backcountry recreation opportunity and natural setting desired. - (G4.5-1) Timber harvest, road construction, vegetation/fuel treatment, prescribed fire, new recreation development, and new trail construction are allowed for the purposes of providing public enjoyment, safety, and protection of site investments. - (G5.2-) Prior to use of prescribed fire and wildland fire use, investments made for timber production, such as road systems and silvicultural improvements, and the value of the timber for wood production receive consideration. - (G6.2 -1) Timber harvest, vegetation/fuels treatments, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use are allowed to maintain or improve forage production or for hazardous fuel reduction. -(Objective 3.b.) Stimulate aspen regeneration and reduce other encroaching woody species in aspen by treating (fire use and/or timber harvest) approximately 3,200 acres average annually1 for a 10- year total of 32,000 acres. - Vegetation cover types will form a mosaic of plant communities representing a diverse mix of ages, sizes, and species. Fire use will play a role in reducing fuels, maintaining the historic dynamic of aspen regeneration and ratio of conifer to aspen and mountain brush vegetation patterns and age classes. Mechanical treatment of fuels along with limited use of prescribed fire will emphasize the safety of people and protection of property in the heavily populated and increasingly developed urban wildland interface adjacent to National Forest.

2. Wilderness Act 1964: -Section 4(d)(1) Within wilderness areas designated by this Act the use of aircraft or motorboats, where these uses have already become established, may be permitted to continue subject to such restrictions as the Secretary of Agriculture deems desirable. In addition, such measure may be taken as may be necessary in the control of fire, insects, and diseases, subject to such conditions as the Secretary deems desirable. -Section 4(b) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, each agency administering any area designated as wilderness shall be responsible for preserving the wilderness character of the area and shall so administer such area for such other purposes for which it may have been established as also to preserve its wilderness character. Except as otherwise provided in this Act, wilderness areas shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use.

3. 2001 Roadless Rule: -Prohibits cutting, sale, and removal of timber in inventoried roadless areas, except: -For the cutting, sale, or removal of generally small diameter trees which maintains or improves roadless characteristics and: -To improve habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive species, or -To maintain or restore ecosystem composition and structure, such as reducing the risk of uncharacteristic wildfire effects.

4. Utah Mule Deer Statewide Management Plan: -Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat in ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into aspen habitats. -Seek opportunities through WRI to improve aspen communities that provide crucial summer habitat for mule deer. -Encourage land managers to manage portions of aspen/conifer forest in early successional stages using various methods including timber harvest and managed fire. -North Slope is a habitat restoration priority area for mule deer in Utah.

5. Utah Statewide Elk Management Plan -Identify habitat projects on summer range (aspen communities) to improve calving habitat. -Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk habitat -Encourage land managers to manage portions of forests in early successional stages through the use of controlled burning and logging. Controlled burning should only be used in areas with minimal invasive weed and/or safety concerns.

6. Utah Moose Statewide Management Plan: -Initiate prescribed burns and other vegetative treatment projects to improve moose habitat lost to ecological succession or human impacts.

7. Utah Bighorn Sheep Statewide Management Plan: -Encourage land management agencies to use fire as a management tool to improve bighorn sheep habitat. When possible allow fires that can have beneficial effects for bighorn sheep to burn. -Initiate vegetative treatment projects to improve bighorn habitat lost to natural succession or human impacts.

8. Northern Goshawk of Utah: Habitat Assessment and Management Recommendations: -Early and mid-seral species should be increased using both mechanical means and fire. -Polices should be adopted to manage for the production of large early seral species through clearings, thinnings, and weedings, using mechanical means or fire. -Fire or mechanical treatments or both should be used to create conditions favorable to lodgepole pine and quaking aspen.

9. Guidelines for Aspen Regeneration on National Forests in Utah: - Much of the loss of aspen-dominated acreage is attributable to encroachment and overtopping by conifer. It has often been presumed that this encroachment i.e., the natural succession process for seral stands, is the result of fire suppression.

10. Boreal Toad Conservation Plan: -(3.1.1)Protect habitats in forest stands adjacent to and within 2.5 miles of breeding sites. -(3.1.2)Restrict burns to late fall through early spring during which time boreal toads are inactive in known occupied areas. -Burning of downed woody materials approximately 18 to 25 cm DBH is detrimental to boreal toads, because these materials are often selected as beneficial microhabitats. However, fire may eventually result in higher shrub densities in the understory that may provide cover and improved dispersal corridors.

11. Utah Black Bear Management Plan: -Successional replacement of aspen stands by conifers can significantly reduce bear-food production in aspen communities. Both fire and selective logging of conifers can be used to maintain aspen vigor.

12. UDWR Wildlife Action Plan: - While the Aspen-Conifer physical (abiotic) habitat remains largely intact in Utah, coverage of aspen itself within that setting has declined greatly for two main reasons: (1) departure from natural fire regime (reduction in disturbance), resulting in widespread forest succession to conifer dominance; and (2) heavy ungulate browsing on young aspen stems, following disturbance. - The growing problem of catastrophic mega-fires can be solved by a systematic campaign of active restoration via mechanical fuel-reduction treatments and prescribed fire to safely return wildfire as a viable, natural, cost-effective means of maintaining necessary patterns of ecological succession across the landscape. - Increasing disturbance from either prescribed or natural fire. Recent studies have shown that larger scale burns (e.g., 5,000 acres) that burn more intensely have been the most successful in terms of aspen regeneration. Higher-intensity burns stimulate higher numbers of young aspen per unit area, than lower-intensity burns. A larger treatment area distributes ungulate browse pressure, allowing most young aspen stems to reach a safe height. - Applying mechanical disturbance agents such as timber harvest. This can also be used to stimulate aspen regeneration and avoid or reduce resource losses to conifer beetles. As with fire, larger mechanical treatment areas serve to distribute browsing pressure and reduce damage to individual stems, increasing regeneration success.

13. State of Utah Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy: - Rather than just reducing fires, the ultimate goal is to return landscapes to a condition of health and resilience that allows for wildfires to burn without becoming catastrophic to either human or natural systems.

14. Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Colorado River Cutthroat Trout in the State of Utah -Natural climatic events such as flood, fire and drought may threaten specific populations of Colorado River cutthroat trout (CRCT); however, these forces only pose threats as long as CRCT range remains fragmented and populations are small. Small, isolated populations are more susceptible to catastrophic loss and impacts from demographic stochasticity.

15. Bonneville cutthroat trout Rangewide Agreement and Conservation Strategy - State of Utah. 
The Bear River GMU: There are 10 stronghold populations and five metapopulations within the GMU. Conservation strategies of "Protect" (28% of habitat), "Restore Population" (27% of habitat), and "Restore Habitat" (32% of habitat) were identified as primary needs for the GMU using Trout Unlimited's CSI. The following goals have been identified for the GMU.

GMU Goal 1: Maintain all populations within GMU

16. Utah Forest Action Plan 2016
Use all available management tools, including forest industry, to restore and maintain healthy ecosystems. 
Utah's forested resources are used to meet public need while being appropriately managed to provide sustainability for future generations.

17. Utah Forest Stewardship Plan Doodle Run 2015
-Manage forest resources in the best interest of forest health by minimizing losses associated with injurious insects and diseases. 
-Maintain or enhance wildlife use for a variety of big game species. 
-Maintain, improve and utilize range resources for long-term, sustained cattle grazing management, forage production and wildlife habitat. 
Implement management alternatives that reduce hazardous fuels and the likelihood of catastrophic wildfires.

18. Manorlands Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2013
Goal 3 Action 1 Decrease available fuels
 Action 1- Decrease available fuels -  Remove dead and insect infested trees and spray non-infested trees. 
Action 3 - Implement fuel modification projects on private land

19. Uintalands Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2004
Goal A - Decrease fuels to reduce wildfire intensity and impact in and around the community.

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.

The use of prescribed fire on the North Slope has been very limited during the past and most wildfires have been suppressed. The last large scale fire was the East Fork Fire near Bear River, and it burned 14,200 ac in June 2002. According to fire statistics, the number of large fires appears to be increasing since 1980. The majority of the project is within fire regime IV (35-100+ years) and V (> 200 years) with a condition class of 2. One of the objectives of this project is to manage hazardous fuel loading, continuity of hazardous fuels, and to minimize the potential for large, high intensity/high severity wildfires. This project will help the North Slope move to properly functioning conditions (composition, stand structure, age classes, and patch size). It will promote aspen regeneration and recruitment and reduce conifer encroachment. Aspens are more fire-resistant than conifers since they have a higher moisture content, have less chemical content, and provide less fuel during their dormant period. Fuel loads would be reduced and aspen regeneration would occur within the proposed project area, which would protect Manor lands and Monviso subdivisions in the event a catastrophic wildfire was to devastate the area.

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.

Runoff and erosion rates associated with high intensity/severity wildfires are much higher than those associated with prescribed burns. After severe and intense wildfires, soils become hydrophobic increasing runoff and decreasing the soil moisture content in the ecosystem. Runoff introduces large quantities of sediment, ashes, and other chemical contaminants into the river system negatively impacting water quality. Intense/severe wildfires can cause riparian areas to be denuded of vegetation, increase water temperature, decrease dissolved oxygen, and lead to eutrophication and poisoning of aquatic organisms. Forest managers can remedy catastrophic wildfire effects on water quality by using prescribed fire and mechanical tools to reduce hazardous fuel loads. The project area encompasses several ecological communities e.g. lodgepole, aspen, aspen-conifer, spruce-fire, Douglas fir, and the tributaries that flow through these forest communities. By implementing these treatments, Bear River (and its tributaries) would be protected against catastrophic wildfire effects.

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.