Project Details

The amount of available crucial mule deer winter habitat along the Parowan Front has been greatly reduced by the construction of Interstate Highway 15 (I-15) as well as other human developments. Due to the spatial limitations from anthropogenic influences the shrub populations east of I-15 annually experience heavy browsing pressure from wintering mule deer. This project would complement previous projects nearby. This project specifically addresses mule deer threats to roads/transportation network (high), invasive plant species (high), and drought (med), by increasing the diversity of shrub species within the area. Elk would also benefit from this treatment as antelope bitterbrush is very palatable for elk. This project specifically addresses elk threats to invasive plant species (low) and drought (low).

Additionally, the project aims to address mountain shrub habitat threats such as invasive plant species (med), historic grazing (low), and inappropriate fire frequency (low) by improving plant diversity and abundance. Planting native perennials such as antelope bitterbrush could reduce invasive plants and weeds because plants would compete with invasives and noxious weeds for space, nutrients, and other resources. Mule deer are prevalent within the proposed project area. Antelope bitterbrush is a very palatable, high-quality shrub for big game and livestock. It also provides cover for small animals and birds.

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.

The Antelope Bitterbrush handplanting was authorized under the Shrub and Forb Planting Project Environmental Assessment (DOI-BLM-UT-C010-2021-0023-EA).

Cedar Beaver Garfield Antimony Resource Management Plan Resource Management Plan (1986) as amended. Although the Project Area was not specifically discussed in the RMP vegetation treatments were identified throughout the Field Office.

The project would be consistent with the habitat management strategies identified in the Deer Herd Unit Management Plan for Deer Herd Unit #28 (Panguitch Lake) (UDWR) which pertain to the Project Area are as follows:

1.	Maintain mule deer habitat throughout the unit by protecting and enhancing existing crucial habitats and mitigating for losses due to natural and human impacts. 
2. 	Seek cooperative projects to improve the quality and quantity of deer habitat.
3.	Provide improved habitat security and escapement opportunities for deer.

This project is also specifically supported in the Iron County Deer Winter Range Resource Plan (April 2011).

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.

Web Soil Survey classifies soils in these locations as moderately susceptible to fire damage (396.6 acres or 23.9%) or highly susceptible (1263.8 acres or 76.1%). Moderate and Severe ratings indicate that the area is not resilient to high severity fire and/or where an area has missed one or more fire return intervals. Antelope bitterbrush, however, is considered fire-dependent, given appropriate conditions. Light to moderate fires tend to enhance small stands of bitterbrush and in some cases opening up the canopy and repopulate naturally. Because bitterbrush is also susceptible to heavy browsing by mule deer and livestock, methods used in this project (reintroduction of bitterbrush seedlings, protected by caging) provides an opportunity to resist browsing while also restoring on-site seed sources. Refuges of natural vegetation could be used to re-introduce small prescribed fire, compete with undesired non-native species, such as cheatgrass, which increases long-term resiliency and more natural rangeland restoration Restoration of native vegetation, such as bitterbrush provides natural rangeland resiliency both in fire susceptible and fire-dependent areas.

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.

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.