Moab Cheat grass control and seeding
Region: Southeastern
ID: 7359

Project Status: Proposed

Project Details

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.

Cheatgrass continues to invade newly disturbed or treated areas, reducing the potential for vegetative diversity and overall success. If not specifically targeted, cheatgrass may eventually dominate the landscape, creating a seed source that promotes further invasion into native vegetation and adjacent areas. Cheatgrass monocultures are highly flammable, and newly burned areas typically convert from native vegetation to pure cheatgrass monocultures. These monocultures reduce forage for wildlife and restrict vegetative diversity. There is a risk that, once the area is re-burned and seeded, poor moisture conditions could lead to seed crop failure and cheatgrass re-sprouting. The use of the herbicide Plateau will mitigate this risk for several years, but if failure occurs, the area may need to be re-sprayed, re-burned, and/or re-seeded. As areas convert to cheatgrass, the abundance of small rodents decreases, forcing kit foxes to travel longer distances to find prey. Without this project, the habitat for kit foxes would be significantly diminished. Areas treated with Plateau will be adjacent to cisco milkvetch habitat, potentially opening up more areas for this plant to thrive. Mule deer and elk also utilize the sagebrush and grass in the area. Removing cheatgrass from the landscape reduces the likelihood that catastrophic wildfires will negatively affect their 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.

Moab Field Office Resource Management Plan (RMP), approved 2008 (BLM-UT-PL-09-001-1610 UT-060-2007-04) Pg 139 (WL-23): Management of pronghorn habitat will be done in coordination with DWR and may include the following actions: 'Increase forage through vegetation treatment on approximately 4,400 acres.' (Note: this RMP action was developed specifically for the Bitter Creek area fire restoration area of this project).

Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1701 Sec 103 (C)): The BLM is directed to manage public lands in a manner that will best meet present and future needs of the Nation.

Public Rangelands Improvement Act 1978, Title II (43 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.), as amended: Among other management objectives, this act provides for temporary discontinuance of grazing uses for the specific purpose of improving public rangeland conditions and production.

BLM Grazing Management Regulations, 43 CFR Subpart 4120.2: Objectives are to promote healthy sustainable rangeland ecosystems; to accelerate restoration and improvement of public lands to properly functioning condition. This requires development of guidelines to address the restoration, maintenance, and enhancement of habitats to promote the conservation of Federal proposed, Federal candidate, and other special status species.

BLM National Policy Guidance on Wildlife and Fisheries Management (Manual 6500): This manual provides direction "to restore, maintain, and improve wildlife habitat conditions on public lands through the implementation of activity plans."

Cisco Wildlife Habitat Management Plan, 1978: The overall objective of the plan is to improve the 242,560 acres of area to provide habitat capable of supporting adult antelope year-round.

Utah Pronghorn Statewide Management Plan, 2008:
Statewide Management Goals and Objectives:

Goal B. Habitat Management Goal: Assure sufficient habitat is available to sustain healthy and productive pronghorn populations.

Objective 1: Maintain or enhance the quantity and quality of pronghorn habitat to allow populations to increase.

Grand County General Plan:
On page 50 of the county plan update, Grand County points out that throughout the county there are a "number of damaged areas, and the county encourages public land agencies to restore these lands."

Utah Wildlife Action Plan:
Lowland Sagebrush is a Key Habitat in the 2015-2025 Plan. One of the threats identified to lowland sagebrush is invasive plant species/non-native and improper grazing. Current recommendations to improve condition include:

Promoting policies that reduce inappropriate grazing by domestic livestock, feral domesticated animals, and wildlife.

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.

Developing and deploying techniques to diversify species composition in monoculture or near monoculture stands of seeded non-native plants (e.g., crested wheatgrass).

Promoting management that includes seeding a diversity of grasses, forbs, and shrubs that will lead to increased resiliency and resistance in the plant community.

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Statewide Management Plan for Mule Deer 2014-2019:
Section VI Statewide management goals and objectives:

Improve the quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer on a minimum of 500,000 acres of crucial range.

Initiate broad-scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or fire-damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges being taken over by invasive annual grass species, and ranges diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats.

Encourage land managers to manage portions of pinyon-juniper woodlands and aspen/conifer forests in early successional stages.

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.

Continue to identify, map, and characterize crucial mule deer habitats throughout the state, and identify threats and limiting factors to each habitat.

Work with land management agencies and private landowners to identify and properly manage crucial mule deer habitats, especially fawning and wintering areas.

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Statewide Management Plan for Elk 2015-2022:

Maintain sufficient habitat to support elk herds at population objectives and reduce competition for forage between elk and livestock.

Reduce adverse impacts to elk herds and elk habitat.

Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk habitat.

Coordinate with land management agencies, conservation organizations, private landowners, and local leaders through the regional Watershed Restoration Initiative working groups to identify and prioritize elk habitats that are in need of enhancement or restoration.

Identify habitat projects on summer ranges (aspen communities) to improve calving habitat.

Encourage land managers to manage portions of forests in early succession stages.

Deer Herd Unit Management Plan Deer Herd Unit #10 Book Cliffs (March 2012):
A. Maintain and/or enhance forage production through direct range improvements to support and maintain herd population management objectives.
B. Work with private landowners and federal, state, local, and tribal governments to maintain and protect critical and existing ranges from future losses and degradation.
C. Provide improved habitat security and escapement opportunities for deer.

Habitat Management Strategies:
A. Work cooperatively to utilize grazing, prescribed burning, and other recognized vegetative manipulation techniques to enhance deer forage quantity and quality.
B. Protect, maintain, and/or improve deer habitat through direct range improvements to support and maintain herd population management objectives.
C. Work with private landowners and federal, state, and local governments to maintain and protect critical and existing ranges from future losses and degradation through grazing management and OHV and Travel Plan modifications.
D. Work with federal, private, and state partners to improve crucial deer habitats through the WRI process.

Elk Herd Unit Management Plan Elk Herd Unit #10 Book Cliffs:

Improve forage and cover values on elk summer ranges. Practices will include prescribed fire, selective logging, and mechanical treatments that promote a diverse age structure in aspen communities. Over 300 acres per year will be targeted.

Remove pinyon-juniper encroachment into winter range sagebrush parks and summer range mountain brush communities. Over 500 acres per year will be targeted using primarily mechanical treatments.

Promote sustainable livestock grazing practices that minimize negative impacts to plant health and diversity, especially on summer ranges and on SITLA and DWR lands where DWR holds the grazing permit or controls livestock grazing.

Develop new and protect/improve existing water sources for wildlife and livestock to improve distribution and minimize overutilization in proximity to water sources.

Remove coniferous and juniper tree encroachment into winter range, sagebrush parklands, and summer range aspen forest and mountain browse communities. Approximately 1,500 acres per year will be targeted.

Open the closed canopy pinyon-juniper forest lands at mid-elevation zones throughout the Book Cliffs to enhance perennial understory vegetative maintenance. Approximately 1,500 acres per year will be targeted utilizing mechanical and prescribed fire technology.

Enhance riparian system and canyon bottom vegetative communities through continued agricultural practices, prescriptive grazing, and mechanical or chemical treatments. Emphasis on greasewood community improvement will continue.

Manage to minimize wild horse herds and their impacts.

Explore ways to improve Wyoming sagebrush community condition and perennial vegetative health.

Improve existing canyon bottom riparian communities by treating greasewood and over-mature sagebrush through chemical, mechanical, and other methods, and minimize impacts on croplands in these habitats.

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.

In rangeland, the most profound impact of cheatgrass is its influence on fire regimes. Cheatgrass increases the continuity of fine-textured fuel, which promotes larger and more frequent fires. Because the fire return interval is shortened, perennial vegetation is unable to completely recover before the next fire. At the same time, cheatgrass continues to increase, promoting larger and more frequent fires. Perennial vegetation is eventually removed from the system, resulting in a near monoculture of cheatgrass (MT200811AG Revised 6/12).

The loss of sagebrush and other native vegetation, combined with the invasion of cheatgrass into the area, has altered the ecosystem's integrity and productivity. The project intends to reduce unnatural increases in wildfire frequency in project areas and in adjacent sagebrush communities. Additionally, by treating the area with Imazapic (Plateau) herbicide prior to seeding, this project should reduce the amount of flammable cheatgrass in the area. Without treatment, the area is considered to be at a very high risk of more frequent and intense wildland fires.

Reducing the fire risk in the treatment area would also reduce fire risk in adjacent sagebrush areas. These areas offer crucial antelope habitat, potential pronghorn fawning grounds, critical winter habitat for mule deer, and habitat for elk. The area also supports habitats for ferruginous hawks, prairie dogs, and kit foxes, as well as foraging areas for eagles and various other raptor and migratory bird species.

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.

Crescent Junction Seeding: 
A Class III Cultural Resource Survey (U24MQ0367) was conducted for the mechanical/drill seeding treatment units of this undertaking totaling 1,109 acres. The cultural survey identified 18 cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effect (APE), five of which are eligible for listing on the NRHP. Project will result in No Adverse Effect as long as site-specific protection measures are followed including. Eligible sites will be treated by hand vegetation treatments only, such as hand seeding, within the site boundary plus a buffer around site boundaries and/or contributing features. SHPO concurrence was received on 09/30/2024 (Case No. 24-2321). Section 106 tribal consultation was initiated via letters on 10/4/2024. No responses have been received to date.

Aerial Cheatgrass Project:
A literature review identified 94 sites within the Area of Potential Effect, 35 of which are eligible or unevaluated for listing on the NRHP. The nature of the proposed project is such that historic properties will not be adversely affected. No ground disturbance is expected during this undertaking is expected as the application of herbicide and seed will be executed aerially. Known rock art sites were purposefully excluded from the APE, and project boundaries were modified to provide at least a 300-foot buffer between rock art and the APE preventing chemical drift from effecting the resource. Under the State Protocol Agreement between the BLM and the Utah SHPO under appendix H. D. 3. the project is exempt from SHPO consultation. Section 106 tribal consultation was initiated via letters sent out on 5/4/2023. One response was received by the Southern Ute Tribe on 10/29/2024 agreeing with the BLM's determination of no adverse effect.

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.

Crescent Junction Seeding:

A Class III Cultural Resource Survey (U24MQ0367) was conducted for the mechanical/drill seeding treatment units of this undertaking, totaling 1,109 acres. The cultural survey identified 18 cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effect (APE), five of which are eligible for listing on the NRHP. The project will result in No Adverse Effect as long as site-specific protection measures are followed. Eligible sites will be treated using hand vegetation treatments only, such as hand seeding, within the site boundaries plus a buffer around site boundaries and/or contributing features. SHPO concurrence was received on 09/30/2024 (Case No. 24-2321). Section 106 tribal consultation was initiated via letters on 10/4/2024. No responses have been received to date.

Aerial Cheatgrass Project:

A literature review identified 94 sites within the Area of Potential Effect, 35 of which are eligible or unevaluated for listing on the NRHP. The nature of the proposed project is such that historic properties will not be adversely affected. No ground disturbance is expected during this undertaking, as the application of herbicide and seed will be executed aerially. Known rock art sites were purposefully excluded from the APE, and project boundaries were modified to provide at least a 300-foot buffer between rock art and the APE, preventing chemical drift from affecting the resource. Under the State Protocol Agreement between the BLM and the Utah SHPO under Appendix H.D.3, the project is exempt from SHPO consultation. Section 106 tribal consultation was initiated via letters sent out on 5/4/2023. One response was received from the Southern Ute Tribe on 10/29/2024, agreeing with the BLM's determination of no adverse effect.

Aerial Herbicide and Seeding Project:

Aerial spray will be conducted at all locations designated for herbicide application using Plateau herbicide during late winter or early spring before cheatgrass germination begins. Seeding will be carried out using a mix of aerial applications and drill seeding. All aerial applications will be contracted through the Utah DWR, while drill seeding will utilize equipment from the Great Basin Seed Warehouse.

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.