Project Details

This project is a watershed landscape scale level project. We have collaborated with multiple landowners and agencies to treat the entire watershed. This watershed has many threats to its health and the sage-grouse population declines in particular are a symptom of these threats. 
Large fires, cheatgrass invasion, post fire seed mixes full of crested wheatgrass, pinyon and juniper tree encroachment, creek channel down-cutting, and the loss of wet meadow habitat are all threats that are reducing the health of the North Sheeprocks Watershed. This watershed is crucial for sage-grouse, mule deer, trout sp., amphibians, species of bats, and many other species' survival. Livestock grazing is also an important part of the livelihood of residents of this watershed. These threats reduce the quality of the range for livestock grazing. The town of Vernon is located in this watershed and the benefits from this project will help protect them from wildfire.  We will also work to improve the quantity and quality of water in this watershed. This project is designed to address these threats and benefit the entire watershed through a landscape scale approach.  
The loss of sagebrush habitats from PJ encroachment and fire has been occurring in other areas as well across the west and this important habitat type continues to decline under the many threats that impact it (Bradley 2010, Miller and Eddleman 2000).  One of the greatest threats to this habitat type is the encroachment of pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) and Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) (PJ) trees into these sagebrush habitats (Bunting et al.1999).  Through fire suppression, historic livestock over-grazing, and changes in climatic conditions, PJ have encroached into areas once dominated by sagebrush (Tausch 1999). When PJ canopy cover and tree density reaches certain levels they outcompete other vegetation and the diversity and density of under-story vegetation (shrubs, grasses, and forbs) decline.  This removes an important component of food and shelter for elk, mule deer, sage-grouse, sage sparrows, and small mammals, such as jackrabbits, which are a large component of Golden Eagle diets (Bates and Moretti 1994, Naillon et al. 1999, Vaitkus and Eddleman 1991).  In addition to out-competing understory vegetation, increased tree densities within sagebrush parks have been proven to reduce the use of these habitats by sage-grouse.  Sage-grouse avoid these areas because of the increased risk of predation by aerial predators (i.e. raptors) that can use these trees as perches (Commons et al. 1999). Thus, potential habitat for this imperiled bird is lost. The project area occurs within close proximity to the Little Valley Lek which has not been occupied for several years now and this may be attributed to the increase in PJ encroachment in the area and the subsequent invasion of ravens and raptors. By removing these trees we will hopefully help to restore this lek. 
Another important habitat type for sage-grouse are where the shrubs meet aquatic zones that provide an increase in meadow type habitat. These habitats provide high protein content vegetation and insects that are critical for early chick development and survival. Much of this habitat type has been lost from drought, beaver removal, and creek bed incision.The continued erosion of the creek bed from high flood events has made it so water never reaches outside the banks to increase meadow habitat along the riparian corridor. This project will work to restore the natural floodplain of these creeks and increase wet meadow habitat by building BDAs.
We will be installing additional beaver dam analogue structures (See Attached Documents for More Info on BDAs) in the Vernon, Little Valley, and Bennion Creeks to improve the habitat for wildlife. We will continue to build up about 70 existing BDAs that have already filled with sediment and we will build about 100 new BDAs up stream where needed to continue repairing the stream. Wet meadow habitat is one of the limiting factors in this arid environment. Many of the creek banks have been eroded and historic wet meadow habitat has been lost. This project will repair these eroded banks and raise the stream bank back up. This will increase the vegetation along the creeks banks and increase the wet meadow habitat that is important for brood rearing sage-grouse and other wildlife.  This project will also improve the habitat within the stream channel for fish and other aquatic species. Frog species like northern leopard frogs and potentially Columbia spotted frogs and other amphibian species that are being threatened across the state will benefit from the increase in habitat. By improving the riparian and wet meadow habitat we will also increase the amount of forage available for big game and livestock.
Vernon Creek, Little Valley Creek, Bennion Creek are located within prime brood-rearing habitat.  All of these creeks have been degraded and channelized in spots from human causes, livestock damage, and erosion. This channel incision results in steep and deep banks that are dangerous for livestock and wildlife and make it difficult for animals to drink. It also causes more water to be lost from the system and less vegetation to grow along the banks that could be used by livestock and wildlife.  The creeks in this area  historically likely had beavers that would dam the stream and slow the water so it would not erode as heavily and cut as deep into the ground. These beaver dams would also create meanders, and flooding the stream banks which would water more plants. This flooding would increase soil moisture across a larger area and produce more wet meadow vegetation along the banks.  This natural meanders also helped to reduce channel incision and erosion which results in a loss of habitat. The loss of this habitat has likely attributed to the decline in sage-grouse. Beaver re-introduction in some areas is not always plausible politically or biologically. This area is one such area that may not be a good candidate for re-introduction. Instead we plan to build man made beaver dams called beaver dam analogues or BDAs to replace the lost ecological function that would exist if beavers were in the system and to repair damage that has been caused by other means.  Also, BDAs will help store water longer in the watershed so that water will not just all come at once in a big flow, but will last longer into the summer in a more steady and consistent flow.
The benefits to water quantity and quality from BDAs area many. 
In addition to these benefits BDAs can increase the size of the riparian zone and create a green strip that can be used to slow and stop wildfires. 
From the loss of habitat and other threats the sage-grouse population within this area is at risk of becoming extirpated.  Population numbers are extremely low and have dropped below population viability thresholds.  Sage-grouse have been trans-located to the area to help boost the population, but treating the causes of the population decline  is also essential to maintaining this population.  We must do everything in our power at this time to benefit this Sheeprocks' sage-grouse population to give them a chance of remaining.  If we lose this population it will be devastating to all efforts to keep the bird from becoming listed as an endangered species.  Therefore, all priority needs to be placed on the Sheeprocks area at this time to show that we are managing these species correctly and are not in need of federally listing the bird.  If sage-grouse become federally listed it will have negative impacts on private landowners, ranchers, energy development, and the actual conservation of the bird.  Sage-grouse are not the only species that is in need of this project. 
Other wildlife like mule deer will greatly benefit. If this project doesn't occur and the remaining understory is lost the results will be devastating to the deer herd. It will be more likely that animals will not survive the winter and population numbers will decline. Inversely, by doing this project we will increase the available forage and help to grow the deer herd and improve body condition, which helps to grow big antlers and more bucks.  
There are still remaining many bitterbrush, cliffrose, and sagebrush plants, in the understory that we need to protect. Much of the project area is found within phase I PJ encroachment and every year that goes by without treating increases the cost of treatments in the future and the loss of habitat. 
This project will be a lop and scatter treatments to remove this encroaching pinyon and juniper.  The advantage of this project over others that are located in more phase III PJ encroachment is that because we still have lots of mature understory plants remaining, once the PJ is removed it we will have immediately created suitable habitat for sage-grouse and protected large shrubs for mule deer to eat. Projects areas that have already lost their understory will not be suitable habitat for sage-grouse for many years to come. The sage-grouse population in the sheeprocks cannot wait and all priority needs to be aimed towards projects that will provide an immediate result. In addition to sage-grouse and mule deer there are many other wildlife species that can benefit from doing work to prevent the loss of sagebrush and other understory vegetation. 
In portions of the watershed there have been historic fires that were re-seeded with non native seed mixes. Species like crested wheatgrass have dominated and result in a monoculture of non native grasses. These grasses don't allow for natural succession to take place and shrub species are not able to naturally establish in the system. So as part of this project we have identified one of these areas near the Bennion Lek where the shrub component has been lost and we will plant and seed shrubs to get shrubs back.  This will improve the critical nesting habitat around the lek and increase the nest success that is so important for the population to persist. See photos of the one shrub in a field of grass where a sage-grouse nested. It shows how vulnerable and desperate these grouse are to find suitable nesting sites. 
By doing all of these improvements to this watershed we will have many positive impacts to the ecosystem, to the economy, and the local residents.

Literature Cited
Bates, J.W., M. O. Moretti. 1994. Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) population ecology in eastern Utah. Great Basin Naturalist 54: 248-255.
Bates, J.D., R.F. Miller, T.J. Svejcar. 2000. Understory vegetation in cut and uncut western juniper woodlands. Journal of Range Management 53:119-126
Bradley, B.A. 2010. Assessing ecosystem threats from global and regional change: hierarchical modeling of risk to sagebrush ecosystems from climate change, land use, and invasive species in Nevada, USA. Ecography 33:198--208.
Bunting, S.C., J.L. Kingery, E. Strand. 1999. Effects of succession on species richness of the western juniper woodland/sagebrush steppe mosaic. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS: 76-81
Commons, M.L. 1999. Sage-grouse response to pinyon-junper management. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS:238-239
Farmer, M.E. 1995. The effects of anchor chaining pinyon-juniper woodland on watershed values and big game animals in central Utah. Master Thesis, Brigham Young University. Provo, UT.
Miller, R.F., and L. Eddleman. 2000. Spatial and temporal changes of sage grouse habitat in the sagebrush biome. Technical Bulletin 151, Oregon State University Agri - cultural Experiment Station, Corvallis, OR. 35 pp.
Naillon, D., K. Memmott, S.B. Monsen. 1999. A comparison of understory species at three densities in a pinyon-juniper woodland. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS:72-75 
Skau, C.M. 1964. Interception,throughfall, and stemflow in Utah and alligator juniper cover types of northern Arizona. Forest Science. 10:238-287
Tausch, R. 1999. Historic pinyon and juniper woodland development. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS:12-19
 Vaitkus, M.R., L.E. Eddleman. 1991. Tree size and understory phytomass production in a western juniper woodland. Great Basin Naturalist 51: 236-243

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.

Untreated PJ will continue to grow and increase costs of treatment in the future and the loss of understory vegetation. This means if we don't do this project now we will need to pay for bullhog and aerial seeding in the future to restore the habitat. In addition, it will take many years to have sagebrush grow back. 
These P1 lop and scatter efforts are in areas we didn't masticate, or was an outlier area not dense enough to justify the added expense or was not as successful over the long term. These areas are critical to connect these previous mastication efforts to create transitional areas and or protect the wintering/ brood areas. 
By not trying to restore the shrub component now near the Bennion Lek we may lose this lek in the near future and the entire sage-grouse population. This would be devastating ecologically and to our economy. 
We have already invested in building BDAs throughout the project for several years. If we do not continue to fund this effort to build upon the work we have done in previous years we will lose momentum from the improvements we have already gained and continue to see degradation of the stream habitat.

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. Vernon Ecosystem Management Plan
The desired condition for pinyon/juniper in the Vernon Ecosystem Management Plan for Vegetation (USDA 1996) is to maintain greater than 85 percent of potential ground cover on pinyon-juniper sites and to remove pinyon-juniper on sites with less than 30 percent slope.  This desired condition for pinyon-juniper was developed to mimic conditions created by past fire regimes and is within the range of natural variability for the Vernon Ecosystem. 
2. Wildlife Action Plan 
Project area occurs within the sagebrush steppe type, one of the key habitats identified in the WAP. This area supports mule deer (Tier III) and Greater sage grouse (Tier II) and numerous other species of concern (Tier III) including neotropical birds and raptors.

3. Treatments lie within Central Region UWRI focus areas.

4. WDARM sage-grouse conservation plan
Treatments address strategies outlined in the WDARM sage grouse conservation plan; reduce pinyon/juniper stands from sage-grouse use areas.  Increase brood-rearing habitat quality in the Resource Area.
a)	Reduce pinyon/juniper stands from sage-grouse use areas.
b)	Remove pinyon/juniper trees from priority areas where action is warranted.
c)	Revisit and retreat pinyon/juniper removal sites, as needed.
d)	Maintain or increase distribution and quality of mesic sites available to sage-grouse during summer months.
e)	Maintain or improve breeding habitat quality in the Resource Area.
f)	Minimize weed concerns

This plan addresses the removal of PJ which will welcome the SG to utilize the forage and open water that crosses portions of this property.  Reseeding disturbed areas will mitigate weedy species concerns, and expand habitat for this population.
http://utahcbcp.org/files/uploads/westdesert/WDARMSAGRPlanFinal.pdf

5. Mule Deer Unit 19b Mgt Plan
Objectives/Strategies: 
a)	Reduce expansion of Pinyon-Juniper woodlands into sagebrush habitats and improve habitats dominated by Pinyon-Juniper woodlands by completing habitat restoration projects like lop & scatter, bullhog and chaining.
b)	Condition of winter ranges is a long-term problem.
c)	Fire and encroachment by pinyon and juniper trees results in the loss of forage production, diversity and quality.
d)	Cooperate with federal land management agencies and private landowners in carrying out habitat improvement projects.
e)	The primary concern on the studies within the subunit is the abundance of weedy annual grass species (cheatgrass), particularly on the lower elevation sites.

This plan addresses the condition of winter range in the project area by dealing with PJ expansion, condition of winter range by planting browse species, reducing fuel loads, coordinating with Federal land management agencies, and mitigating weedy annual grass species.
http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/plans/deer_19.pdf

6. The Vernon Management Area as defined by the 2003 Land and Resource Management Plan for the Uinta NF has the following sub-goals of the Forest Plan:

Sub-goal 2-8: Ecosystem resilience is maintained by providing for a full range of seral stages and age classes (by cover type) that achieve a mosaic of habitat conditions.

Sub-goal-2-23 Areas identified as being of special concern for habitat such as big game winter range, big game natal areas,.... and greater sage grouse breeding areas in the Vernon Management Areas are maintained and, where potential exists, improved or expanded.

Sub-goal-2-25(G-2-25)Maintain stable and upward conditions in big game winter range and improve downward trend sites

7. Utah Greater Sage grouse Management Plan, 2009 Publication 09-17, State of Utah, DNR, DWR, - Specifically the plan addresses goals outlined in part B-1.3 Public land habitat objectives; A Veg. Mgt, D Fire Mgt, and E Conifer Encroachment - 1. Reduce conifers that are encroaching on sagebrush habitats using appropriate methods, which may include: masticators, chains, chain saws, prescribed fire, etc (pp45-48). In addition it addresses goals in section B-2.3 Public land habitat restoration objectives (p 49-50).

8. Utah Conservation Strategy (Utah Wildlife Action Plan), 2005 Publication Number 05-19, State of Utah, DNR, DWR, Effective 2015-2025 - The threat of Greater Sage-grouse  habitat loss due to Pinyon -Juniper succession in sagebrush habitats should be addressed by the conservation actions of enhancing fragmented and degraded  habitats [Juniper removal] (11.1). Habitat problems and conservation actions (7.1 & 7.3) by addressing fire cycle alteration with methods to disturb decadent [Pinion-Juniper] vegetation.
This plan addresses invading PJ, mitigation of non-native invasive species, new restoration techniques, and diversification of understory species composition in mountain and lowland sagebrush steppe.
https://wildlife.utah.gov/learn-more/wap2015.html

8. NRCS SGI 2.0
Objectives/Strategies:

a)	Reduce threats...by grazing sustainably ...re-vegetating disturbed areas and combatting noxious weeds. Avoid further loss of sagebrush grazing lands to wildfire by reducing annual grass threat.
b)	Accelerate removal of conifer trees.
c)	Avoid further loss of riparian edges, wet meadows, restore and enhance degraded mesic areas to help increase (Sage grouse) populations."
d)	Reduce sage grouse fence collisions.
This plan will support this initiative by removing conifers (PJ) revegetating disturbed areas and enhancing degraded mesic areas.

9. Utah DWR Statewide Management Plan for Mule Deer
Objectives/Strategies:

a)	Programs that provide incentives to private landowners to manage their properties for mule deer and other wildlife are critical to the success of the state's deer management program.
b)	Conserve, improve, and restore mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges.
c)	Maintain mule deer habitat throughout the state by protecting and enhancing existing crucial habitats and mitigating for losses due to natural and human impacts.
d)	Work with local, state and federal land management agencies via land management plans and with private landowners to identify and properly manage crucial mule deer habitats, especially fawning, wintering and migration areas.
e)	Improve the quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer on a minimum of 500,000 acres of crucial range by 2019. 
f)	Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or fire damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges that have been taken over by invasive annual grass species, and ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats, ensuring that seed mixes contain sufficient forbs and browse species.
g)	Continue to support and provide leadership for the Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative, which emphasizes improving sagebrush-steppe, aspen, and riparian habitats throughout Utah.
This plan addresses improving and restoring Mule deer habitat, by working in cooperation with partners, mitigating invasive annual species, ensuring that seed mixes contain sufficient forbs, and browse species, and improving sagebrush-steppe.

https://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/biggame/pdf/mule_deer_plan.pdf

10. BLM Pony Express Resource Management Plan (1988)
Wildlife Goals and Objectives 
1.	Manage wildlife habitat to favor a diversity of game and non-game species.
Project Relevance: We will be removing PJ which will protect a larger diversity of plant species upon the landscape. 
2.	Continue to provide forage for current big game numbers or long-term management goal numbers,.

11. Utah Partners in Flight Avian Conservation Strategy

Habitat Objectives:

Sage-grouse- 7. Eliminate or modify habitat components that facilitate predation on Sage-grouse.(pg. 77)
-	This project will help to eliminate trees that predators such as raptors may use as perches to prey on sage-grouse. This will allow for sage-grouse to also feel more comfortable inhabiting these sage-brush parks that used to be filled with pj.

12. Beaver Management Plan
Watershed Restoration
1. Support restoration of beaver and adequate protection where establishing
2. Consider using beaver as a stream restoration tool
3. Beaver are a good tool that could be used to restore degraded riparian
communities that could benefit many other wildlife species 
4.Need to consider the site characteristics of the locations where beaver will be
relocated/re-introduced enough vegetation to support a beaver population
5. Potential benefits of aspen/cottonwood restoration in improving beaver habitat 
Outreach and Education
Objective 1:
Increase awareness of and appreciation for the role of beaver in Utah's ecosystems in
10% of stakeholders (landowners, educators, recreationalists, sportsmen, water rights
holders) by 2020. We will be working with private landowners and citizen scientists to educate them about importance of beavers in ecosystem.
4. Establish at least one showcase beaver management area in each
UDWR Region. 
Objective 2:
Improve the understanding of all UDWR and other governmental agency employees
involved in beaver management and assure consistent transmission of information and
application of management actions through 2020. 
Watershed Restoration
Objective 1:
Work to improve riparian habitats, associated streams and wetlands in a minimum of 10
tributaries through translocating beaver into unoccupied suitable habitat on public and/or
private land by 2020. This project will not be translocating beavers at this time to this area, but through the use of BDAs we will be re-introducing the functionality of beavers in the system. Also we will be improving the habitat and preparing an area so that in the future beavers can be re-introduced.

13. Statewide Elk Management Plan
1. Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk
habitat.
2. Maintain sufficient habitat to support elk herds at population objectives
and reduce competition for forage between elk and livestock.

14. Statewide Turkey Management Pan
Objective 
Increase wild turkey habitat, quality and quantity, by 40,000 acres statewide by 2020.

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.

Fuels have been accumulating over the years due to human cultural practices and changing climatic conditions. The 2007 Northern Utah Regional Wildfire Protection Plan designates this area as a Moderate-High Risk area for wildfire (Utah Division of Fire, Forestry and State Lands 2007).  Hazardous fuels reduction treatments would help minimize the risks to private land, structures, and natural resources, from potential wildland fires.The nearby communities of Vernon and Lofgren are listed as two of Utah's Communities at Risk (Utah Division of Fire, Forestry and State Lands 2013).  The implementation of this project would help minimize the risks to private land, structures, and natural resources, from potential wildland fires by: 1) altering fire behavior from a crown fire to a surface fire, 2) increasing native plant populations and their resiliency, 3) reducing the risk of weed expansion, and 4) protecting critical mule deer habitat from unwanted fire effects. The current fuel load and arrangement is likely to support a relatively severe crown fire due to continuous, dense canopies of juniper and oakbrush. The proposed treatment would alter fire behavior from a crown fire to a more controllable surface fire by breaking up the continuity of aerial fuels. This alteration in fire behavior not only enhances firefighter and Forest visitor safety, but increases the ability of the plant community to recover post-fire by reducing the fire severity. 
 This project will increase the sinuosity of the stream, raise the water table, slow water movement through the system and reconnect the channel with its historic floodplain. This will increase the amount of riparian vegetation which will create a larger fuel break to stop fires from spreading and destroying more critical wildlife habitat. It will also create a location where firefighters can more easily combat the fire. 
By having younger shrubs that are not as decadent and dry as older dying shrubs it will reduce the risk and severity of fire. Hopefully it will serve as green strip areas where fires will slow or stop. By maintaining healthy stand of shrubs and native plants it will prevent annual grasses from establishing that can increase the fuel load and dryness of plants that increase fire risk

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.

Beaver Dam Analog benefits to water quality and quantity:
Currently in areas where the stream-bank has been stripped of vegetation due to erosion, resulting in more downcutting, this leads to further erosion and diminished water quality. This project will help to raise the water levels and allow for more vegetation to be growing near the water to stabilize the banks. This will help increase the water quality and quantity in the system.  This project will also slow the flow of water which will decrease the amount of erosion that will occur in big flood events. Slowing the water will also increase the quantity of water that is able to seep into the soil and benefit the system. This will also hold water longer upstream and increase the length of time that the reservoir downstream can hold water, thus increasing its capacity and  water quantity.
PJ removal benefits to water quality and quantity:
PJ removal will help to establish vegetation that will stabilize the soil and help to reduce the amount of sediment that will enter streams and washes. This will help to improve the water quality of the watershed. Also, currently moisture will move across the soil more quickly and water quantity will be lost. This project will help establish vegetation that will hold more moisture in the system and allow for it to soak into the soil and enter under ground water storage.  Another negative impact on the watershed from PJ encroachment is soil erosion (Farmer 1995).  By removing PJ  it will allow for the current grasses and forbs to return and stabalize the soil and decrease the speed of water-flow and the size of soil particles that can be moved downstream and therefore reduce erosion.  This project will help to protect this from happening in the future and save the ecosystem from irreversible losses to soil.   Cut trees will also be placed in washes to slow the flow of water and promote pooling and reduce them eroding as quicklyl.  In water-limited systems, an added benefit to PJ removal can be the potential to increase water-savings.  PJ have been shown to intercept about 10-20 percent of precipitation (Skau 1964).  Also, where PJ encroachment has resulted in large bare ground areas it has been shown that these systems can have greater precipitation runoff (Farmer 1995).  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 stream flow. 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. By removing PJ on this project we will be preventing the increased loss of water from occurring. This project is very large and has the potential to make a large impact on the watershed;1.12 miles of streams are within the planned project area polygons.

Shrub restoration benefits to water quality and quantity:
By having a healthy diversity of age class shrubs it will prevent a mono-culture of old decadent plants which can die off and result in invasion of weedy plants such as cheatgrass. Cheatgrass will absorb all of the available water and decrease the plant diversity. By doing this project there will be more available water for native understory plants to increase diversity.

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.

PJ Removal:
To remove PJ we will contract chainsaw hand crews to lop and scatter. We will not need to seed because there is still an understory.
 Remove smaller Junipers and Pinyon pines <10" in diameter measured at each stem or stems where they meet the bole or bole's nearest the root collar / stump of the tree in shrub-steppe and grassland areas that have less than 20% canopy cover. Remaining stumps will be no higher than 6 inches, Trees will be cut into approximate 3 foot lengths and branches scattered across the site. Scattered material should not exceed a height/depth of  24 inches. Chainsaws and /or loppers would be used in the project areas. All travel between sites will be on foot or on existing roads and trails. 
BDA Construction:
We will construct the BDAs with sharpened lodgepole fence posts, approximately 3-4" diameter. They will be driven into the stream bed with a gas post pounder or hydraulic post pounder.  The posts will extend about 1 m above the channel bed. The  posts will be spaced approximately 0.5 - 0.8 m apart, and driven to a depth of approximately 1 m into the streambed.  We will then weave willow branches or other tree branches that are available onsite between the posts to create a  structure that will look like a beaver dam.  The willows will help to slow the water but will also allow fish to pass through. We will then reinforce the posts with stream bed material at the base of the posts. The idea is that the dams will last until sediment is piled up at the dam and vegetation begins to grow and the stream channel rises and floods. We will place dams about  30 m apart, depending on where they need to go. After a year we will assess the health of the stream again and determine what progress has been made and where future BDAs need to be placed. Once sediment has built up behind the dam we will plant the wetland sod mats to speed up recovery and have the roots hold that built up sediment in place.
Shrub Restoration:
We will also use a dozer to scalp 2' wide rows into the thick crested wheatgrass areas. The bare soil will reduce competition from grasses and allow for naturally seeding to occur. We will also broadcast seed and use dribblers to augment the amount of seed and diversity of species. We will also be planting two year old shrubs with vexar mesh protectors to help increase survival.

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.

BDA monitoring
We have already conducted a pre-restoration Rapid Stream-Riparian Assessment (RSRA) monitoring survey (See Attached) on Vernon and Little Valley Creek. We will do another RSRA survey this year to see how the system has changed several years post BDAs.

In 2018, we began monitoring of bats and we are asking for additional funds to continue this monitoring this year to monitor whether BDAs improve the area for bats, including Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifigus), a SCGN in the 2015-2025 Wildlife Action Plan.  We plan to monitor for bats by following the protocol for the North American Bat Monitoring Program (NABat), which uses stationary acoustic devices, driving surveys, and possibly mist-netting to detect bat activity.  We plan to set acoustic monitoring equipment at sites were BDAs were installed in 2017 as well as sites where new BDAs are planned for installation, to try to determine if bat activity differs between sites.  Data collected from the grid encompassing the Vernon BDA project area will also be included in the nationwide NABat program.

PJ Treatments
We will take photo points before and after at a few select locations. We will monitor the project for greater than 1% of Phase 1 pinyon/juniper re-establishment in year 3 and 5 post treatment. If re treatment becomes necessary we will pursue retreatment options.

Shrub Restoration:
We will take photo points before and after the project. We can go back in several years and retake them to show how effective the project has been. We will also keep track of the survival of shrub plantings to determine how successful they were.

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.