Project Details

Juniper trees have encroached into the sagebrush, mountain shrub and Aspen communities that provides critical summer and winter ranges for deer, elk and moose and habitat for sage-grouse. There is a robust mahogany component in the area but they have very little to no recruitment. By removing junipers there will be an increase in grasses and forbs along with water and the space left by the junipers will hopefully promote mahogany recruitment.  There are areas where Junipers are very dense in phase II and III.      
Invasive weeds are threatening the Intermountain West with negative impacts on wildlife habitat, native plant communities, soil and watershed resources, recreation, and aesthetic values. A shift from native vegetation to invasive weeds decrease wildlife forage, reduces species diversity, and increases soil erosion. Activities associated with Pinyon and Juniper removal often serve as a source for new noxious weed invasions, and can also spread existing infestations.  An attempt to control the spread of noxious weeds in this area will preserve the value of previous habitat improvements associated with vegetation removal, and prevent spread to other areas.

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.

Not doing the project will result in continued expansion of the junipers resulting in a loss of more under story, aspen communities, water resources and an overall increase in the risk of catastrophic wildfire.  Waiting to implement could result in crossing a threshold wherein future restoration would become much more difficult, cost prohibitive, or even impossible.
Burdock, spotted knapweed, Canada thistle, bull thistle, field bindweed, houndstongue, and dyer's woad have all been documented within the project area. Adverse impacts as a result of noxious weed invasion include a change in the composition of native plant communities, a decrease in biological diversity, undesired shifts in wildlife populations, increased soil disturbance and surface water runoff, decreased water quality, decreased recreational opportunities, and increased economic costs. Many wildlife species are linked to specific native plant communities that are degraded by invasive species. Loss of these communities can lead to higher mortality due to lack of cover and forage. Additionally, the conversion of native perennials to an annual plant mono-culture creates a landscape inhospitable to many pollinator species. Reduction or loss of key pollinators can reduce wildlife forage, and indirectly lead to lower wildlife populations.

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.

Utah's Sage-grouse strategic Management plan:
Goal: Protect, maintain, enhance, and restore greater sage-grouse populations, habitats, and the ecosystems that sustain them. Reestablish, augment, and facilitate sustainable populations of greater sage-grouse in suitable habitats to improve statewide population continuity and distribution.
Objective B-2: Enhance and restore current and potential sage-grouse habitats and the ecosystems that sustain them.
Objective C-2: Identify and secure funding for habitat enhancement, research, monitoring, and maintenance.
A. Vegetation management.
1. Manage seasonal sage-grouse habitats in a manner appropriate to the site conditions, and based on habitat assessment or local expert knowledge and observed ecological condition.
and
4. Manage for late summer brood-rearing habitat that includes a variety of succulent vegetation adjacent to sagebrush escape and loafing cover. Create or enhance riparian/wet meadow habitat in areas where late brood-rearing habitat is lacking. Strive to manage sagebrush habitats with 10-25% canopy cover.
Forest Plan of the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest
Forest wide Goals: 3-Biodiversity & Viability, Goal 3d, Goal 3f., Goal 3g. Goal 3o., 
The project is consistent with the following Forest Plan Ojective:
3.d. Increase grass and forb production and plant species and age class
diversity in sagebrush and pinyon/juniper by treating
approximately 2,000 acres average annually1 for a 10-year total
of 20,000 acres.

Utah Elk Statewide Management Plan:

Statewide goal A, 
Strategy r.Properly manage elk populations to minimize competition with mule deer on crucial mule deer range.
Habitat Management Goal B: 
Habitat Objective 1. Maintain elk habitat throughout the state by identifying and protecting existing crucial elk habitat and mitigating for losses due to human impacts. 
Strategies A. and B. 
Habitat Objective 2:Improve the quality and quantity of forage and cover on 250,000 acres of elk habitat with emphasis on calving habitat and upper elevation elk winter range by the end of this plan. 
Strategies c, d e, h. and j.

Statewide Management Plan for Mule Deer:
Habitat Goal and Habitat Objective 1, Strategies a, and b. 
Habitat Objective 2 and strategies, B, C, D, E, F and H. 
Habitat Objective 1: 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. Minimize impacts and recommend mitigation for losses of crucial habitat due to
human impacts.

k. Where appropriate, work with county, federal and state land management agencies to
adopt seasonal motorized route closures to minimize human disturbance in existing
crucial mule deer habitats.
l. Work with county, state, and federal agencies to limit the negative effects of roads by
reclaiming unused roads, properly planning new roads, and installing fencing and
highway passage structures where roads disrupt normal mule deer migration patterns.
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.
e. Continue to support and provide leadership for the Utah Watershed Restoration
Initiative, which emphasizes improving sagebrush-steppe, aspen, and riparian habitats
throughout Utah.
f. Seek opportunities through the Watershed Restoration Initiative to improve aspen
communities that provide crucial summer habitat for mule deer.

DEER HERD UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN, Deer Herd Unit # 2 (Cache)
Meets habitat goals and objecitives for this plan. * Logan, Green, Providence and Blacksmith Fork Canyons. Projects should be focused on removal of encroaching juniper, and reestablishing understory with winter browse species as well as species of plants that can be used in the spring by wintering deer.

ELK HERD UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN Elk Herd Unit # 2 Cache:
Habitat objective: Maintain and/or enhance forage production through direct range improvements throughout the unit on winter range to achieve population management objectives. Pay special attention to WMA's and areas were holding elk could alleviate pressure on private landowners experiencing damage by wintering elk.Work with private and federal agencies to maintain and protect critical and existing winter range from future losses.
UTAH MOOSE STATEWIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN
C. Habitat - The primary limiting factor for moose in Utah and across their range is the availability of suitable habitat. - Moose have done well in drier habitats in northern Utah which are dominated by mountain mahogany, Gambel oak, serviceberry, quaking aspen, and burned over coniferous forests
A. Habitat Degradation or Loss. - The single biggest influence on moose populations in Utah is the quantity and quality of available habitat. Habitat can be degraded, fragmented, or lost to a variety of causes including human development and plant succession
B. Habitat Management Goal: Assure sufficient habitat is available to sustain healthy and productive moose populations. Strategies -- A,D,E
Logan Ranger District Travel Management Plan implementation;

3m.  Provide for connectivity of continuous large patches of forested habitat for interior forest-dependent and wide-ranging species (such as lynx, wolverine and migratory birds).
3o.	Provide adequate habitat components for sustainable big game populations coordinated with State wildlife management agencies, private lands and other resource needs and priorities. 
3s.	Greatly reduce known infestations of noxious weeds and rigorously prevent their introduction and/or spread.

Guidelines for Biodiversity and Viability:  
(G26)	Protect key big game calving, fawning and lambing habitat and provide security in summer concentration areas.

State of Utah's new Greater Sage-Grouse Management Plan (2009) --M2 Maintain/protect large contiguous intact sagebrush communities that contain seasonal habitat needs of sage-grouse populations within the state.

Wasatch-Cache Forest Plan;
Forestwide Goal 3-Biodiversity & Viability
Provide for sustained diversity of species at the genetic, populations, community and ecosystem levels.  Maintain communities within their historic range of variation that sustains habitats for viable populations of species.  Restore or maintain hydrologic functions. Reduce potential for uncharacteristic high-intensity wildfires, and insect epidemics.
2a. Identify areas not in properly functioning condition. Improve plant species composition, ground cover and age class diversity in these areas. 2j. Maintain and/or restore habitat to sustain populations of well distributed native and desired non-native plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate populations that contribute to viability of riparian dependent communities.
3m.  Provide for connectivity of continuous large patches of forested habitat for interior forest-dependent and wide-ranging species (such as lynx, wolverine and migratory birds).
3o.	Provide adequate habitat components for sustainable big game populations coordinated with State wildlife management agencies, private lands and other resource needs and priorities. 
3s.	Greatly reduce known infestations of noxious weeds and rigorously prevent their introduction and/or spread. 
Guidelines for Biodiversity and Viability:
(G25) Integrated weed management should be used to maintain or restore habitats for threatened, endangered, proposed and sensitive plants and other native species of concern where they are threatened by noxious weeds or nonnative plants. When treating noxious weeds comply with policy in Intermountain Region's Forest Service Manual 2080, Supplement #R4 2000-2001-1 (Appendix III).
(G26)	Protect key big game calving, fawning and lambing habitat and provide security in summer concentration areas.

Greater Sage-grouse ROD, Greater sage-grouse Utah Plan Amendment (FS 2015).  
GRSG-GRSGH-GL-032-(UT) In priority and general habitat management areas, sagebrush focal areas, and Anthro Mountain, native plant species should be used when possible to maintain, restore, or enhance desired conditions (Table GRSG-GEN-DC3) in Utah. (Amendment #13, September 2015)
State of Utah's new Greater Sage-Grouse Management Plan (2009) --M2 Maintain/protect large contiguous intact sagebrush communities that contain seasonal habitat needs of sage-grouse populations within the state.

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

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.

Hire contractor to aerially seed the area.  Hire a contractor to masticate junipers.  Dedicated hunters and volunteers will lop and scatter junipers.  Crews will be instructed not to cut mahogany.  The project area will not be grazed the year after seeding to maximize the seeding success.      
The FS will perform quality control to ensure the objectives are met.
Noxious Weed Control; A contractor will be used to survey and treat noxious weeds within the project area. Previously mapped noxious weed populations will be verified, and new populations will be recorded as treatment occurs. Accurate identification, mapping, and data entry is essential to ensuring previously known infestations are treated annually, and in determining efficacy of treatments. Chemical control will be the primary treatment method, but manual control may be utilized as appropriate. Herbicides will be applied by qualified applicators. Treatment will begin summer of 2022, with a follow up application planned for the following summer. The contractor will use their own equipment, personal protection equipment, and herbicide to treat weeds.

Describe the actions, activities, tasks to be implemented as part of the proposed project; how these activities will be carried out, equipment to be used, when, and by whom.

Describe plans to monitor for project success and achievement of stated objectives. Include details on type of monitoring (vegetation, wildlife, etc.), schedule, assignments and how the results of these monitoring efforts will be reported and/or uploaded to this project page. If needed, upload detailed plans in the "attachments" section.

List any and all partners (agencies, organizations, NGO's, private landowners) that support the proposal and/or have been contacted and included in the planning and design of the proposed project. Describe efforts to gather input and include these agencies, landowners, permitees, sportsman groups, researchers, etc. that may be interested/affected by the proposed project. Partners do not have to provide funding or in-kind services to a project to be listed.

Detail future methods or techniques (including administrative actions) that will be implemented to help in accomplishing the stated objectives and to insure the long term success/stability of the proposed project. This may include: post-treatment grazing rest and/or management plans/changes, wildlife herd/species management plan changes, ranch plans, conservation easements or other permanent protection plans, resource management plans, forest plans, etc.

Potential for the proposed action to improve quality or quantity of sustainable uses such as grazing, timber harvest, biomass utilization, recreation, etc. Grazing improvements may include actions to improve forage availability and/or distribution of livestock.