Sanpitch Mountains Collaborative Phase I
Region: Central
ID: 5942

Project Status: Completed

Project Details

INTRODUCTION
The Sanpitch mountains lie south of the Nebo unit and between the Manti and Gunnison Valleys.  Quite frankly it's a mountain range that is kind of an afterthought because of it's location and size.  This past year multiple partners and landowners have met, in the field and in the office, to coordinate a larger scale, more collaborative cross-boundary project than the previous iteration of this proposal as suggested last year during the WRI proposal process.  Project partners worked through several treatment prescriptions across thousands of acres to develop a project that meets goals and objectives of several agencies, NGO's, and private landowners.  Conservation practices to be implemented as part of this project are: 1) prescribed fire, 2) lop and scatter of juniper and pinyon in sagebrush, 3) selective herbicide treatment in sagebrush to move ecological state from brush dominant to herbaceous dominant state, 4) in-stream low-tech riparian work, 5) 2 spring developments

BIG GAME
The range is important to many species of wildlife and often is overlooked as big game habitat.  Per discussion in the field with project partners, this project was seen as potentially increasing available habitat to mule deer and elk.  Additionally, the UDWR is having elk depredation issues on farms below and improving elk habitat on the mountain has the potential to mitigate depredation issues.  Looking at the Wildlife tracker (see photos for map), it shows collared deer, elk, and even cougar using our project area as a literal migration corridor between the north and south end of the mountain.  Speaking with unit biologist on site, he supported the project and mentioned the mountain under-produces big game and this project had the potential to help big game.

BIRDS
The Sanpitch lies directly adjacent to an identified Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA).  BHCA's are mapped as important bird areas in the state.  Several raptor species are listed, including Golden Eagle, as species needing habitat conservation practices implemented in this BHCA. Per personal communication with wildlife biologist who does raptor surveys in the area adjacent to the project area, Golden Eagles are known to nest here.  Improving adjacent foraging habitat will benefit these species.

WATERSHED HEALTH.  
Because of the large acreage and multiple habitat treatments, habitats treated, and ecological communities affected, this project has the potential to have a big impact on watershed health.  Proposed treatments will diversify and improve overall health of the vegetational communities, thus improving the watershed resistance and resilience to future disturbance.

OPPORTUNITY
This project was brought to WRI last year and had a lot of comments and it was agreed more planning needed to take place.  Several partners have met in the field and in the office for several days in the attempt of taking the advice from WRI, with the understanding more partners, more planning, and more coordination would result in a more beneficial and comprehensive project.  This proposal is the manifestation of that.  Just saying, this proposal should receive full points for the "Project Manager Engagement Bonus Points" because the project manager showed exceptional effort engaging with reviewers in the comment section last year and greatly improving on the planning and collaboration of this project.

We now have the opportunity to work at a much larger scale, across multiple landownerships, and working with FFSL to replicate some of the awesome Rx fire work they are doing on the Manti unit.  A lot of pieces have fallen into place currently and we have a really good opportunity if we act now.

MAINTENANCE
There are many areas in the Sanpitch range that have received juniper and pinyon treatments over the years and are now in various stages of re-encroachment.  Currently a lop and scatter is recommended, which is cost effective and low impact.  If left untreated, juniper and pinyon will increase and impacts and cost will become greater over time.

SUMMARY ACRES

BLM 
   Lop and Scatter 6296 ac
   Brush 803 ac
   Fire 995 ac

PRIVATE
   Lop and Scatter 805 ac
   Fire 8984 ac
   Riparian 17 ac
   Springs 2

STATE
   Fire 459 ac

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.

1) Hand-cut 99 percent of small invading P/J trees within the treatment polygons.
2) In targeted areas, reduce sagebrush by 30-50%.
3) Within the landscape, maintain a mosaic of treated/untreated areas to serve both as natural fuel breaks and movement/thermal/obscurement corridors for wildlife and livestock.
4) Prolong the  financial and restoration efforts invested by the BLM and WRI during the original treatments.
5) Maintain a mix of plant communities consisting of patches of old and young shrubs, open patches, perennial grasses and forbs and a healthy understory to benefit sagebrush obligates, wildlife, and livestock.
6) Improve riparian health using low-tech structures to reduce erosion, increase channel complexity, reconnect floodplains, and increase adjacent soil moisture while increasing riparian vegetation which will provide more forage production and for a longer period during the year.
7) Using Rx fire, reduce catastrophic wildfire risk while creating a more diverse and resilient ecosystem

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.

Below are some of some thresholds/threats/risks we feel impact this project ecologically based on the criteria in the ranking sheet.  We also listed some social and financial thresholds for consideration associated with the project because they too impact our ability to complete the project for ecological benefits.

ECOLOGICAL
Most of the juniper and pinyon removal is phase 1 with intact understory vegetation.  Working in light to medium densities means the vegetative community hasn't crossed an ecological threshold where high amounts of restoration inputs are necessary.  The project as it relates to the pinyon/juniper work is a proactive approach to treat areas where sagebrush steppe habitat is still well established.  Doing so has several other benefits to preventing soil loss through erosion, maintaining habitat to high interest species previously listed, water-soil infiltration, etc... Not treating pinyon/juniper in the near future will result in negative ecological consequences such as reduced understory, erosion, and less soil/water infiltration.  Additionally, not doing work in these areas of low pinyon/juniper density means the threat of higher costs, restoration inputs, and risk will become greater over time.

In some of the higher portions of the Rx fire unit, pockets of aspen still exist in the understory. 
Lack of disturbance over the past 100 years has allowed conifer encroachment into what were once mixed aspen stands.  Rx fire is the most cost effective and ecologically effective way to restore aspen.  If left untreated a continued decline in aspen is expected.  We are at a threshold now where multiple partners are ready to implement a Rx fire treatment.  We may lose the support in the future.  Additionally, because aspen ecosystems are some of the most ecologically diverse areas in the world and because of the rapid decline we need to act when given the opportunity.

This project will increase and maintain the availability of a diverse suite of vegetational communities.  A healthy landscape has a diversity of vegetational states within an ecological site.  A diverse landscape benefits a larger community of wildlife species and people.  A diverse landscape is also more resistant and resilient to disturbance.  By allowing this landscape to continue to move further into a PJ dominated woodland it increases the risk of losing the sites ability for resistance to disturbance and its resilience to bounce back and heal after a disturbance.

We also have the opportunity to reduce the risk of future large scale fire by using Rx fire treatments.  Being proactive with fire will reduce prohibitive costs that would be associated if a much larger fire were to burn.  The Rx burn will also reduce fire intensity if a fire were to burn through here in the future during the hot dry summer months.  Treating now will reduce future costs if we implement the Rx burn now.

Habitats near water -- stream sides, wet meadows and wetlands -- support the greatest variety of animal and plant life, and attract wildlife during their daily and seasonal movements. 
Moreover, although wet habitats covers less than 2% of the western landscape, more than 80% are located on private lands.  The riparian/stream practices are low impact/low risk/high reward practices.  Work on previous phases has been highly successful in catching sediment, connecting/building floodplains habitat, increasing channel complexity, and increasing wetted area and riparian vegetation.  Furthermore, lowland riparian habitat, and perennial lotic (flowing-water) habitat, are among the very rarest and most threatened habitats in the region and the state.

These private mesic lands and surrounding private rangelands are critically important to the health of wildlife populations.  Research shows that 60--80% of wildlife is dependent on mesic habitats (e.g., wetlands and riparian areas; Thomas et al. 1979, Patten 1998, Belsky et al. 1999, Peck and Lovvorn 2001).  If true wildlife conservation is to take place on a sustainable level, public wildlife managers must engage private landowners.  It is important that we continue to work in these areas that are critically important to the landscape around them, and because these wet areas are mostly private it is extremely important to work with private landowners restoring these areas whenever possible.  Wet habitat is the zipper that ties the ecology of the surrounding landscapes together.  Not working in these wet areas puts adjacent habitat and wildlife at risk.

Climate change has come to the forefront as a global threat to humans and wildlife alike.  Although models vary on future impacts of global climate change one thing stands out is that water may become more scarce in the West.  Preserving and restoring wet areas has been identified as a key way to mitigate impacts like drought, increasing temperatures, and other impacts that a changing climate will have on humans and wildlife.

FINANCIAL
As discussed above, financial thresholds need consideration when funding habitat conservation.  The type of pro-active work we are proposing reduces future cost from becoming prohibitive.

The partnership dollars and in-kind currently available also need to be taken into consideration as an ecological and/or other threat.  With multiple partners actively funding, planning, and implementing conservation practices in the area, costs are being shared across a larger group.  If not done now, future costs may make implementing conservation practices at this scale prohibitive.

Many of our lop and scatter areas are previously treated chainings from 20-30 years ago.  Our goal is to re-treat them while cost effective and not cost prohibitive in the future.

SOCIO-POLITICAL
There is also a social threshold to consider with the private lands as part of this project.  
We have multiple landowners on board and willing to sign agreements.  Also the landowners have the ability to provide a substantial amount of in-kind work, saving the government a lot of money.  This project has momentum with private individuals willing to work with land management agencies and implement a suite of treatment types across a large landscape.  If we miss this opportunity we may not get it again as the landowners have mentioned trying for years to implement a project like this for years and being frustrated.  Not taking advantage of this while everyone is willing may mean a lost opportunity in the future.  We have a very unique opportunity NOW, not later.

MAINTENANCE
This was mentioned above but fits here as well.  Maintenance applies to why we need to do this project now and not later.  There are many areas in the Sanpitch range that have received juniper and pinyon treatments over the years and are now in various stages of re-encroachment.  Currently a lop and scatter is recommended, which is cost effective and low impact.  If left untreated, juniper and pinyon will increase and impacts and cost will become greater.

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.

--Deer Herd Management Unit  #16A(Nebo subunit) and #16C(Manti subunit). They are addressed under the same Herd Unit Management Plan.  Current winter range surveys show that mule deer winter range in this area is poor. The proposed projects will address some of the habitat management strategies outlined in the management plans including:
   OBJECTIVES: 
*Protect, maintain, and/or improve deer habitat through direct range improvements to support and maintain herd population management objectives.
*Work with federal, private, and state partners to improve crucial deer habitats through the WRI process.
   MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES:
* Continue to improve, protect, and restore sagebrush steppe habitats critical to deer. Cooperate with federal land management agencies and private landowners in carrying out habitat improvements such as pinion/juniper removal, reseedings... Habitat improvement projects will occur on both winter ranges as well as summer range.
* Reduce expansion of pinyon-juniper and other woodlands into sagebrush habitats and improve habitats dominated by Pinion-Juniper woodlands by completing habitat restoration projects like lop & scatter, bullhog, and chaining.
* Seek opportunities to increase browse in burned areas of critical winter range.
* Maintain habitat quantity and quality at a level adequate to support the stated population objectives while at the same time not resulting in an overall downward trend in range condition and watershed quality.
   DISCUSSION and RECOMMENDATIONS:
*It is recommended that areas with significant conifer encroachment be treated (e.g. bullhog, chaining, lop and scatter, etc.) where feasible and MAINTENANCE SHOULD CONTINUE on sites that have already been treated.

-- State mule deer management plan section IV Habitat Goal: 
* Conserve and improve mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges.

--The proposed projects will address the following goals and objectives of the Division of Wildlife Resources most recent strategic management plan:
*Objective R2: Maintain existing wildlife habitat and increase the quality of critical habitats and watersheds throughout the state.

--Federal Land Policy and Management Act
*Sec. 102 (a); the public lands be managed in a manner that will protect the quality of... environmental, water resource...; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals

--Utah Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy:
*Shrubsteppe habitats ranked out as the 4th highest habitat priority for the state of Utah. This places the shrubsteppe into a "key" habitat type
*Shrubsteppe habitat should be a target for restoration and conservation.
*Recommends where decadent pinyon juniper has increased into shrubsteppe due to lack of disturbance to disturb the decadent vegetation.

BLM Grazing Management Regulations:
*Objectives are to promote healthy sustainable rangeland ecosystems; to accelerate restoration and improvement of public lands to properly functioning condition
*Maintenance and enhancement of habitats to promote the conservation of Federal proposed, Federal candidate, and other special status species

Richfield Field Office Resource Management Plan: 
*Hazardous fuels treatments will be used to restore ecosystems; protect human, natural and cultural resources; and reduce the threat of wildfire to communities
*The BLM will work together with partners and other affected groups and individuals to reduce risk to communities and to restore ecosystems
*Maintain vegetation based on desired future condition to provide adequate ground cover to prevent accelerated erosion in wind erodible soils
*Sagebrush/steppe communities will be a high priority for ESR and fuel reduction to avoid catastrophic fires in these areas.

--USFWS Partners for Fish and Wildlife Strategic Plan
     *Project addresses habitat threats for priority species within a PFW priority area (Plateau Focus Area) for restoration work.

--Intermountain West Joint Venture Habitat Conservation Strategy
     *Support existing public-private partnerships to implement sagebrush habitat conservation, at regional, state, and local scales.
     *Remove encroaching conifers to functionally restore sagebrush habitat.

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.

Forest ecologist Frank Kanawha Lake is quoted as saying, "Fire is a form of medicine for the land and its people.  It is necessary to prescribe the right amount of medicine through a process of understanding how to live with fire and adaptation to a changing environment.  But if you don't have adequate medicine on the landscape, the ecosystem and the people are sick."  Whenever we have the opportunity to prescribe the right medicine to avoid a future overdose, we need to act now.

The Rx fire treatment goes without saying, it will greatly reduce fuel loads and potential risk of a much larger fire in the future.  It is also designed to protect important infrastructure on the mountain such as dwellings, fences, roads, and grazing infrastructure. Prescribed fire is one of many fuel reduction treatments used to remove or reduce dense vegetation that is fuel for wildfires. Dense vegetation can create intense fires that burn quickly and endanger nearby communities.

By safely reducing excessive amounts of brush, shrubs, and trees, encouraging the new growth of native vegetation, and maintaining the many plant and animal species whose habitats depend on periodic fire, prescribed burning helps reduce the catastrophic damage of wildfire on our lands and surrounding communities. Wildfires that burn in areas where fuels have been reduced by prescribed fire cause less damage and are much easier to control.

As P/J trees continue to encroach in these areas, live fuel loading and canopy cover increases.  This increase in live fuel loading and a closed canopy will increase the likelihood of an unwanted wildfire and its negative effects.  Reducing the number of smaller diameter trees on the landscape will in turn reduce the live fuel loading and decrease the amount of canopy cover.  This modification in vegetation allows initial attack firefighting crews more options to safely and effectively suppress unwanted wildfires and limit the negative effects.
In addition to modifying fire behavior, treating the vegetation in these areas will result in multiple benefits, which include but are not limited to, improving and protecting current habitat for wildlife dependent upon these various ecosystems, improving native species diversity, reducing hazardous fuel accumulations and breaking up the continuous fuel bed of pinion/juniper that currently exists. This treatment will promote a fire resilient environment that reduces the risk for large scale, intense unwanted wildland fires, with less risk to public and firefighter safety.  Fire risk would be reduced to multiple watersheds.  Existing wildfire risk index in the project areas ranges from moderate-high to very low.  Looking at fire modeling results, an unwanted wildfire in these areas at the 97th percentile weather would quickly spread into high risk areas and threaten multiple watersheds, private lands and numerous other values.

The majority of the areas in this project are within fire regime III -- 35-100+ year frequency and mixed severity (less than 75% of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced); The Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) is estimated to be both moderate (FRCC 2) and high (FRCC 3) departure from the central tendency of the natural (historical) regime. The central tendency is a composite estimate of vegetation characteristics (species composition, structural stages, stand age, canopy closure, and mosaic pattern); fuel composition; fire frequency, severity, and pattern; and other associated natural disturbances. The majority of this project would be in FRCC 3. This project will improve the fire regime condition class to FRCC 1 and FRCC 2.
This project will manipulate the vegetation in a manner that will modify fire behavior such that fire suppression personnel can safely initial attack unwanted wildfires in these areas.  These treatments will provide anchor points, safety zones, and buffer zones for values at risk such as powerlines, communities, range improvements.  Instead of a crown fire that is wind driven with flame lengths of 30+ feet in Pinyon and Juniper requiring aerial resources to initial attack, this treatment will reduce flame lengths to those that are easily managed with engines and hand crews

All of the treatments would help protect infrastructure.  Infrastructure in and around the treatment areas are primarily: cabins, roads, grazing infrastructure (fences, pipelines, troughs).

Our low-tech in-stream structure part of the project will directly impact the landscapes ability to be more resistant and resilient to fire.  It's not complicated, water doesn't burn and wet soils and green vegetation don't burn.  There is a lot of research indicating healthy riparian areas buffer and add resiliency to burning landscapes.  Furthermore, new research shows low-tech restoration methods effectively increased vegetation productivity by 25% and kept plants greener longer during the year.

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.

Aspen forests are considered a benefit to watershed conditions compared to conifer forest, with studies in Utah documenting higher snow water equivalents and greater potential water yield (Burke and Kasahara 2011, LaMalfa and Ryle 2008).

In a 2005 and 2006 study published in 'Ecosystems', measurements of snow water accumulation, snow ablation (melting), soil water content, snowpack sublimation, and evapotranspiration (ET) were measured in adjacent aspen and conifer stands. Peak snow water equivalent (SWE) averaged 34-44% higher in aspen in 2005 (average snow fall) and 2006 (above average snow fall), respectively, whereas snow ablation rates were greater in aspen stands (21 mm day"1) compared to conifer stands (11 mm day"1). When changes in soil water content (due to over-winter snowmelt) were combined with peak snow accumulation in 2006, aspen had greater potential (42-83%) water yield for runoff and groundwater recharge (LaMalfa and Ryle, 2008).  Aspen treatments may have an important and critical role in water quality and quantity changes.  In all transparency, our aspen stands will be pockets here and there but will still impact water characteristics as described above.

Wilkinson et al (2006) documented that fire elevates the concentration of suspended sediment and phosphorus during high flow events.  This data was found when there were high intensity wildfires.  Our Rx burn will prevent large scale fire and mitigate future negative impacts, as stated above, to the several drainages in the area.  Additionally, a low intensity spot Rx fire will benefit both water quality and quantity by creating a more diverse vegetative community across the landscape and increasing early seral plant species.  These herbaceous plant communities reduce overland runoff, increase water soil infiltration, and also filter water as it moves through the vegetation and soil profile.

In a study from 2008, Deboodt, et. al (2008) mentions that juniper trees can use up to 30 gallons of water a day, when adequate moisture is present.  It also states that Vegetative modeling has shown that 9 to 35 trees per acre can utilize all the precipitation delivered to a site in a 13-in annual precipitation zone. In their study researchers monitored two watersheds 12 years prior to treatment (cutting).  After the treatment, analysis indicated that juniper reduction significantly increased late season spring flow by 225%, increased days of recorded groundwater by an average of 41 days, and increased the relative availability of late season soil moisture to soil depths of .76 meters.  It was also noted that managing vegetation for water yield may be obtainable at a much lower precipitation threshold than what was previously understood.  Now understanding our project site is phase I and possibly light phase II juniper removal, we don't expect dramatic changes now but anticipate the benefits stated above will be realized in the long-term as we prevent high levels of conifer encroachment.

Our low-tech stream restoration efforts will have direct impacts on water quantity and quality.  
Practitioners are increasingly turning to cost-effective, low-tech restoration options that restore soil moisture and improve vegetation, which can be more easily implemented at large scales.
New research shows low-tech restoration methods effectively increased vegetation productivity by 25% and kept plants greener longer during the year.
Restoration efforts also showed reduced sensitivity to precipitation over time, resulting in greater resiliency against the impacts of drought and climate variability.
Low-tech stream restoration is like a water bank where you can draw from the stored soil moisture during the hot part of the year.
Low-tech restoration activities increase the ability of a stream to filter sediments and other water contaminants.

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.

SAGEBRUSH TREATMENT
Some of the past treatment areas are in a stage where the herbaceous component of the understory is still present but beginning to decline (at the study site nearest the field tour discussion stop, Western WG went from 44% foliar cover in 2017 to 20% in 2022, Sandberg bluegrass from 16 down to 8), in part, due to competition from sagebrush that is now 25+ years old.  Thinning the sagebrush prior to loss of herbaceous understory will allow the understory species to persist into the future without requiring additional ground disturbance and seed.  Possibly a more important benefit of thinning the sagebrush is the creation of sagebrush age class diversity.  This increases the resiliency of the system when threats/disturbances such as drought, insects, fire occur, there will be multiple age classes already on site.  Although the older plants are often susceptible to these types of disturbances, the younger plants will be more tolerant and likely to survive, thus maintaining sagebrush on the site.

The tebuthiuron label states that "0.2 to 0.3 lb a.i./ac are recommended to provide a thinning effect of 50 to 75% canopy reduction in big sagebrush growing on coarse to medium textured soils with less than 4% organic matter.  Higher rates may be required to achieve the desired level of canopy cover reduction on sites with the following characteristics:  Soils with greater than 4% organic matter content, soils with greater than 30% clay or on sites with very dense sagebrush (40% or greater canopy cover)."  The label goes on with "NOTE: On high elevation areas (7800 ft or higher), or on sites with high organic matter (5% or greater), higher rates (0.5 to 0.7 lb a.i./ac) may be required."

The NRCS soil pit used to classify the area's soils was dug 0.3 miles west of where the field tour discussed the sagebrush treatment and within the tebuthiuron treatment polygon.  The soil survey lists the soil having 31% clay in the A1 and A2 horizons (0-11 inches) and 5% organic matter.

Last year the BLM was targeting a 50-75% thinning of sagebrush since only 1,200 acres of the surrounding 30,000 acres of BLM land would have any sagebrush treated.  However, a field tour discussion occurred which included multiple BLM employees, multiple DWR employees, 1 USFWL service employee, 1 FF&SL employee, 1 NRCS employee, and the permittee.  Out of that discussion came the agreement that the thinning would target a 30-50% reduction instead of a 50-75% reduction on 819 acres of sagebrush.

Given the label information and the site characteristics of 5% organic matter and 31% clay, sagebrush will be treated with an aerial application of Tebuthiuron at .3 lb. a.i./ac to thin the sagebrush by 30-50%.  This will free up resources for the herbaceous understory allowing it to persist while still maintaining most of the younger, healthier sagebrush plants and a seed source into the future.  The chemically treated acres will also be lop and scattered since the rate used to thin sage brush will not be high enough to kill P/J.

LOP AND SCATTER TREATMENT
Lop and scatter will be completed in identified polygons using hand crews.  Within polygons, 99% of the re-encroachment/re-growth will be cut.  Any trees that were untreated in corridors and islands will again remain untreated.  Contract will be administered through DNR avenues.

RX FIRE
The San Pitch prescribed fire will be completed mostly on private lands. There are some scattered inholdings of State Trust Lands and Color Country BLM Lands and the appropriate land managers for those lands have been contacted and are part of the project.

Spring burning is desired due to longer more achievable burn windows and Higher soil moisture content which will less likely damage non-targeted vegetation. A 40 -- 75 percent mosaic burn is the goal of the prescribed fire. Starting mid to late March and burning to as late as mid-June. Starting as soon as we can get into the area with tracked UTV's and the snow melts off South slopes we will begin burning and work through the window till green up shuts us down. Progressing next to West and East facing slopes in the same fashion. Vegetation will dictate desired outcome. If it needs to burn it will. Sage Brush will not be targeted unless burning is needed to facilitate holding. Oak and Maple will be targeted for regrowth and to eliminate understory to facilitate regrowth of forbs, forage, and grasses and to open and rejuvenate decadent stands. More mortality will be expected in the oak and less in the maple. Pinyon Juniper will be targeted and the maximum mortality in these stands will be pursued. Areas with high dead to live ratio and dead and down will also be targeted to facilitate holding for the rest of the prescribed fire. South and West slopes will be out the following day. East slopes may linger a few days with more likely heavier fuel loading than South and West. South West and East slopes desired black acres will be less than North slope acres. Closer to the 40 % or even less is desired and considered a successful target.

The transition to North slopes is where the game changes, South slope burning takes far less resources maybe only a few burners with snow doing the holding. North slopes will require engines and people for holding and best results will come from aerial burning with a Helicopter and a Heli torch. Expected fire behavior is stand replacing 200' flame lengths in the mixed conifer. A bit less in sparser and pinyon juniper filled areas. North slopes 75% mosaic will be desired. And likely to get that or more. Some of the North slopes have some scattered pockets of aspen that hopefully will regenerate into new aspen stands. Burning the mixed con will produce new, young ecosystems of grass, forbs and brush for wildlife, cattle and birds.

All forms of firing will be utilized including hand carried drip torches, UTV mounted Terra Torches (Flame Throwers) Helicopter and UAS (drone) PSD (plastic sphere dispenser) and Helicopter and Heli-torch.

Reseeding will work best right after, even planting it in the cooling ash. All stages of the prescribed fire will be completed from mid-May to mid-June depending on climate and moisture.

AERIAL SEEDING
Seed mix is included in the proposal and will be flown on by the landowner as in-kind.

DEFENSIBLE SPACE
A landowner and the county will be doing a lop and scatter and mastication treatment as part of the Rx fire for defensible space.  This can be seen on the east side of the fire polygon in the map as long thin lines if you zoom in and is captured under in-kind as part of the fire on the finance page.  
 
FENCING
The landowners are building fence that will give them the ability to keep livestock off the Rx fire and re-seeding area for at least 2 growing seasons to allow seeding and natural re-growth establishment.

LOW-TECH STREAM RESTORATION
The low-tech stream restoration part of the project will take place in Chris Creek.  50-100 structures will be built using NRCS Tech note and Joe Wheaton et. al. specs.  We will use native materials and untreated posts when posts are used.  See photos for example one nearby.

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.

The field office has an Assessment, Inventory and Monitoring program (AIM) crew for monitoring, and although the sample points are random, it is likely that some of these points will fall within the project area.  This monitoring program uses standard core indicators and methods to provide a statistically valid sampling design across the landscape.

Range personnel will collect vegetation and ground cover data using the line-point intercept method and nested frequency.  Photos will be taken and a qualitative site condition assessment completed. Studies will be read yearly for 2 years.  Data will be summarized each year and placed in project files.  Studies will then be read once every 3-5 years by the Richfield Field Office.  
  
Currently a rain gauge and 5 BLM range trend plots with photos are located in or near the project area.  The trend plots started in 1966 and have been photographed periodically since then.  Rain gauge data will be read quarterly each year and BLM range trend studies will continue.

There is also 2 DWR range trend plots that were read in 2019 and will continue based on their schedule.

Before and after pics will be taken on all treatment and landowner types.

Landowners will sign a USFWS Agreement and will be in place for 10 years.  During those 10 years USFWS will do annual site visits and work with the landowners to assess project outcomes and future adaptive management.

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.

BLM
BLM brought this project to the region last year and is the project lead.  As project lead they are coordinating, planning, field work, implementation oversight, and everything needed to see this project from idea to implementation.  They are also providing a substantial amount of funding through a coop agreement with WRI.

UDWR
UDWR participated in site visits twice in 2022.  Habitat managers, habitat restoration biologist, wildlife biologist, and NRCS/UDWR partners biologist all attended these site visits and brainstormed ideas and provided input.

NRCS 
The NRCS/UDWR Farmbill Habitat Biologist attended site visits and provided input.  One landowner has an application with NRCS for the low-tech stream restoration and future projects may include other NRCS contracts with landowners.

USFWS
Clint Wirick with USFWS Partners Program is working closely with the landowners and will act as project lead on private lands.  He is also providing project planning, oversight, attended field visits.  He will have landowners sign an agreement with USFWS.

FFSL
FFSL, Matt Christensen, was brought in for the prescribed fire part of the project.  He is playing a major role as project lead pertaining to the Rx fire.

LANDOWNERS
Several landowners are part of this project and have been present for site visits and meetings.  Landowners will also be providing a huge chunk of in-kind running equipment and flying on seed.

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 of this project will be to continue to monitor the encroachment of the smaller trees into the treatment areas and look to involve permittees to work on improvements as needed within the allotments (water pipelines, troughs for better distribution of livestock, fence maintenance to control livestock, etc).  The need to follow-up with pinyon-juniper whips that may have been missed, or installation of guzzlers, or planting additional browse species can be accomplished through dedicated hunter projects or working with local Sportsman Groups.

As part of the private lands work, the landowner will enter into a signed agreement with the USFWS.  The agreement will last for 10-years and allow for collaboration and monitoring during those 10 years where USFWS and the landowner will assess future needs, adjustments in management, and success of the project.  It will also allow annual site visit for monitoring.  In the USFWS, if grazing rest is deemed needed, it will be specified, agreed to, and signed.

Currently the area is managed as a general season mule deer unit (Nebo #1534).  Talking with the unit biologist, he supported doing anything to increase opportunity on the southern end of the unit as we are doing.

The landowners we are currently working with are heavily wildlife minded.  The private properties are also part of a grazing rotation.  The landowners are willing to rest burned areas and will be building fence too keep livestock out.  One landowner has also told us when they know the funding and implementation status they are willing to sell some livestock to reduce herd size temporarily.

Axhandle, Horse Ridge, Maple Canyon, and Timber Canyon are all sheep allotments with season of use being June and October generally.  These allotments are not receiving any spike treatment, only lop and scatter.  The Fayette Cattle allotment is the largest allotment where the largest acreages of treatment will occur and is receiving both spike and lop and scatter treatment.  It is a cattle allotment with the season of use being June 1 - Sept 30.  Permittees are the cooperative type who adhere to their permit numbers and dates and have always been willing to reduce numbers when asked, and many times when not asked, just because they think the range won't handle full numbers.  They remain active in maintaining the fences and pipelines on the allotment.  They are on the waiting list to purchase e-collars for their livestock as soon as there are more available so he can be even more pro-active in managing his livestock on the allotment.  They have also been very proactive on their neighboring private lands implementing vegetation enhancement projects while waiting years for government program help that has never materialized.

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.

The private and public lands are all part of grazing rotations.  This project will have a benefit to the private grazing operations.  Working across landownerships will have a greater ecological and economic impact for livestock producers. With the removal of PJ we will maintain available forage.  The Rx fire will substantially increase herbaceous and browsing species for wildlife and livestock.  Brush treatments are also expected to increase herbaceous vegetation.  With increased forage, ungulate distribution is expected to improve. Many areas that are currently becoming less productive due to overgrowth will soon become desirable for future use by ungulates. Implementation of this project would eventually improve overall livestock performance (e.g. increased cow weights, increased calf crops, increased weaning weights, etc) and improve the economic stability of the permittees due to an increase in the quantity and quality of grasses and other herbaceous forage which are important to livestock grazing.

Hunting, OHV riding, wildlife viewing, and camping are the primary uses of these areas.  Improving/maintaining quality habitat allows winter survival of big game and provides for spring/summer/fall habitat of upland game for hunters to pursue.

Other opportunities allow the public to benefit from harvesting fire wood, fence stays and cedar posts prior to the project being implemented.  Increased recreational opportunities such as camping, and hiking will also be enjoyed in these areas.

This area is a very high use area for non- consumptive (by the way we are all consumptive, I hate that phrase) recreational users (campers, hikers, photographers, birders, wildlife viewing etc...).  Managing for a diversity of vegetational states protects and enhances the viewscape.

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.