Project Details

The Sheeprock population of greater sage-grouse (GRSG) is as risk. Declining population trends over the past 10 years have left managers with little choice but to augment the population with translocated birds. Part of the process of stabilizing the population will be aggressive predator control and vegetation treatments to improve habitat. Key threats to greater sage-grouse and their habitat include conifer expansion, invasive species, and fire. Since 2004, the BLM has done extensive vegetation treatments throughout the Greater Sheeprocks area to reduce fire threat, remove encroaching juniper, and restore ecosystem resiliency. Over the last couple of years, nearly 16,000 acres of BLM, State, and Private land were treated to remove juniper and expand greater sage-grouse habitat.  This project is designed to build on previous efforts by creating and expanding usable habitat that could used as a corridor between nesting/brood rearing habitat and winter range within the Tintic Valley. To accomplish this, trees will be removed and areas where perennial understory vegetation is lacking will be seeded. A total of approximately 800 acres have been identified for treatment in 2022.

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.

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.

12 management plans/policies are referenced, some with multiple objectives.

1) House Range Resource Area Resource Management Plan (BLM 1987), as amended: a) Wildlife: Manage wildlife habitat to favor a diversity of game and non-game species; Improve habitat in poor and fair condition on crucial and high priority habitat; Improve riparian and fisheries habitat currently in poor or fair condition; and Protect all T&E and sensitive species habitats. b) Fire: The goals and objectives of the program will be to reduce human and ecological losses; complement resource management objectives and sustain productivity of biological systems through fire management.

2) Richfield Fire Management Plan (BLM 2006): a) The Proposed Action (pages 2-1 through 2-5) specifically mentions the action, and is consistent with the objectives identified above to emphasize greater use of vegetation management to meet resource management objectives. b) This project is within the Fire Management Unit C4 Eureka. Within this Unit vegetation management would include a wide variety of management activities including widespread use of prescribed fire activities to attain desired resource and ecological conditions. Fire and non-fire fuel treatments would also be utilized to reduce the hazardous effects of unplanned wildfire.

3) Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (BLM 2015): a) Objective SSS-1: Maintain and/or increase GRSG abundance and distribution by conserving, enhancing or restoring the sagebrush ecosystem upon which populations depend in collaboration with other conservation partners. b) Objective SSS-3: In PHMA, where sagebrush is the current or potential dominant vegetation type or is a primary species within the various states of the ecological site description, maintain or restore vegetation to provide habitat for lekking, nesting, brood rearing, and winter habitats. c) Objective SSS-4: Within PHMA, increase the amount and functionality of seasonal habitats by: i) Maintaining or increasing sagebrush in perennial grasslands, where needed to meet the Habitat Objectives for Greater Sage-Grouse, unless there is a conflict with Utah prairie dog. ii) Reducing conifer (e.g., pinyon/juniper) from areas that are most likely to support GRSG at a rate that is at least equal to the rate of encroachment. iii) Reducing the extent of invasive annual grasslands. iv) Maintaining or improving corridors for migration or movement between seasonal habitats, as well as for long-term genetic connections between populations. v) Maintaining or improving understory (grass, forb) and/or riparian condition within breeding and late brood-rearing habitats. vi) Conducting vegetation treatments based on the following 10-year (decadal) acreage objectives: For the Sheeprocks population area for mechanical treatments the objective is 33,700 acres; for annual grass treatments the objective is 10,000 acres. vii) Outside PHMA (in adjacent opportunity areas) improve and restore historical GRSG habitat to support GRSG populations and to maintain or enhance connectivity. d) Objective SSS-5: Participate in local GRSG conservation efforts (e.g., the appropriate State of Utah agency, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and local working groups) to implement landscape-scale habitat conservation, to implement consistent management to benefit GRSG, and to gather and use local research and monitoring to promote the conservation of GRSG. e) MA-VEG-1: In PHMA, where necessary to meet GRSG habitat objectives, treat areas to maintain and expand healthy GRSG habitat (e.g., conifer encroachment areas and invasive annual grasslands). f) MA-VEG-2: Remove conifers encroaching into sagebrush habitats, in a manner that considers tribal cultural values. g) MA-VEG-4: In PHMA, include GRSG habitat objectives in restoration/treatment projects. Include short-term and long-term habitat conditions in treatment objectives, including specific objectives for the establishment of sagebrush cover and height, as well as cover and heights for understory perennial grasses and forbs necessary for GRSG seasonal habitats (see Objective SSS-3). h) MA-FIRE-3: In PHMA, fuel treatments will be designed through an interdisciplinary process to expand, enhance, maintain, or protect GRSG habitat.

4) Rangeland Health Standards and Guidelines for Healthy Rangelands. BLM Utah State Office (1997). Standard 3: a) Desired species...are maintained at a level appropriate for the site and species involved. As indicated by: frequency, diversity, density, age classes, and productivity of desired native species necessary to ensure reproductive capability and survival.

5) Utah Conservation Plan for Greater Sage-Grouse (UDWR 2019): a) Conservation goal: Protect, maintain and increase sage-grouse populations within the established SGMAs throughout Utah. b) Habitat Objective: Protect, maintain and increase sage-grouse habitats within SGMAs at or above 2013 baseline disturbance levels. c) Conservation Strategy 2: Implement the actions outlined in EO/002/2015 and related MOUs, along with the Governor's Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy, relevant sections of State code, and the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, to reduce the size, severity and frequency of wildfires in and adjacent to SGMAs: i) 2A. Coordinate across relevant state agencies to ensure maximum conservation and risk reduction benefit to sage-grouse populations on all land management projects, prescribed fires, and fire suppression actions in and adjacent to SGMAs. d) Conservation Strategy 4b: Work with federal, state and private landowners to protect an average of at least 5,000 acres annually of the highest-priority habitats identified in 4(a) through voluntary conservation covenants, leases, easements, transfers, acquisitions or other legal or regulatory tools. e) Conservation Strategy 4c: Using Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (WRI), remove conifer as appropriate in areas protected in 4(b) to ensure that existing functional habitats remain intact. Conservation Strategy 4e: Increase sage-grouse habitats by using the WRI--and other state, federal and private partnerships--to restore or create 50,000 acres of habitat within or adjacent to occupied habitats each year, in addition to those acres identified in 4(d).

6) Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Conservation Objectives: Final Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, CO. February 2013: a) General Conservation Objectives: 1. Stop population declines and habitat loss. 2. Implement targeted habitat management and restoration. b) Specific Conservation Objectives: 1. Retain sage-grouse habitats within PAC's. 3. Restore and rehabilitate degraded sage-grouse habitats in PAC's. c) Conservation Objective: Maintain and restore healthy native sagebrush plant communities within the range of sage-grouse d) Conservation Objective: Remove pinyon/juniper from areas of sagebrush that are most likely to support sage-grouse (post-removal) at a rate that is at least equal to the rate of pinyon/juniper incursion. i) Prioritize the use of mechanical treatments. ii) Reduce juniper cover in sage-grouse habitats to less than 5% but preferably eliminate entirely. iii) Employ all necessary management actions to maintain the benefit of juniper removal for sage-grouse habitats.

7) Utah Wildlife Action Plan. DWR Publication Number 15-14, State of Utah, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife Resources, Effective 2015-2025: a) The proposed action supports mitigating threats to Lowland Sagebrush including: i) Promoting policies and management that allow fire to return to a more natural regime. ii) Promoting policies that reduce inappropriate grazing by domestic livestock, feral domesticated animals, and wildlife. iii) Promoting and funding restoration that reduces the Uncharacteristic class, including cutting/mulching/chaining of invading pinyon and juniper trees, herbicide or mechanical treatment of non-native invasive species such as cheatgrass and secondary perennial weed species, and rehabilitation of burned areas following wildfire. iv) Promoting management that includes seeding a diversity of grasses, forbs and shrubs that will lead to increased resiliency and resistance in the plant community.

8) Utah Mule Deer Statewide Management Plan. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources: a) Section IV Statewide Management Goals and Objectives. This proposal will address Habitat Objective 2: Improve the quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer on a minimum of 500,000 acres of crucial range by 2019 (see pages 19 and 20). i) Strategy B: 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. ii) Strategy D: 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. iii) Strategy F: Encourage land managers to manage portions of pinion-juniper woodlands and aspen/conifer forests in early successional stages.

9) The Utah Smoke Management Plan (1999, 2006 revision): a) By using mechanical mastication this plan will accomplish Goal #5, Use of alternative methods to burning for disposing of or reducing the amount of wildland fuels on lands in the State (p3).

10) State of Utah Hazard Mitigation Plan (March 2011): a) This plan accomplishes statewide goals including, 1) Protection of natural resources and the environment, when considering mitigation measures and 2) Minimize the risk of wildfire (p12).

11) A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the Environment 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan (U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service 2002): a) 1) Improve fire prevention and suppression; 2) Reduce hazardous fuels; and 3) Maintain and restore fire adapted ecosystems.

12) Secretarial Order 3336 -- Implementation Plan: Rangeland, Fire Prevention, Management and Restoration. a) Section 7b(iii) -- Expand the focus on fuels reduction opportunities and implementation b) Section 7b(iv) -- Fully integrate the emerging science of ecological resiliency into design of habitat management, fuels management, and restoration projects.

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.

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.

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.

Partners are the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, local BLM grazing permittees, and the Utah Geological Survey.

Recent conversations with grazing permittees has required changes to the initially proposed project area. After discussion, reducing the proposed acres to the north will allow for better grazing rotation while also allowing for a rested pasture on the proposed seeded acres to the south. This will also eliminate the need for temporary fences that were initially proposed.

Coordination with the DWR (Robby Edgel and Jason Robinson) has begun over the last few weeks on how this project will impact big game in the area. Further coordination is planned this spring to identify polygons that would be beneficial to keep for big game.

Coordination with Utah Geological Survey to keep the integrity of the current soil moisture study being conducted in the area.

There were planned treatment acres east of the proposed project area; however, recent legislation has put this land in exchange with SITLA. With this land in the middle of exchange, we have removed the proposed treatment on these parcels and as of now SITLA will plan on implementing projects once the exchange has been completed.

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.