Project Details

The project landscape, a UDWR wildlife priority area  with significant ecological, hydrological, and recreational importance, is currently vulnerable to uncharacteristically large high-severity wildfires allowed by heavy conifer and flashy non-native annual fuels, large outbreaks of mountain pine beetle, and reduced snowpack. This project will provide NEPA-usable information that can inform fire, wildlife, and water management to support the following goals,: 1) reduce ecological departure from reference conditions (a.k.a., natural range of variation) for focal ecological systems chosen by state and USFS partners, 2) improve fire-suppressed forests, woodlands, and shrublands important to focal wildlife species, 3) manage fuels to lower the risk of uncharacteristic high severity fires at the middle and lower elevations of the project area, and 4) maintain runoff and recharge, especially from subalpine forests, which is vital given simulated future severe droughts that could reduce the snowpack's role as a hydrologic reservoir and shorten the naturally long subalpine fire-free intervals.

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.

This project seeks to conduct Landscape Conservation Forecasting in the Ashley National Forest and the Evanston Ranger District of the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest. For fiscal years 2026 to 2028, we propose to implement the full Landscape Conservation Forecasting (LCF) methodology to achieve the following objectives:
1)	Conduct high-resolution remote sensing mapping of ecological systems and their vegetation classes defined in WRI project #6930 (FY2025) by a) ordering Spot 6 satellite imagery in late June-July 2025, b) conducting summer and fall field surveys to match spectral signatures to vegetation types, and c) completing desktop analysis of vegetation maps. 
2)	Build spatial state-and-transition simulation models for all ecological systems in ST-Sim/Syncrosim software using recent simulations databases as a starting point. 
3)	Initiate (FY2026) and continue (FY2027-2028) complex hydrologic modeling with the USGS Basin Characterization Model (BCM) per management scenario and future climate.
4)	Conduct a first onsite (with hybrid option) workshop with expert partners from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) and the United States Forest Service (USFS)  at least 2 months after delivery of vegetation maps. This workshop will review TNC's draft vegetation map of systems and classes and determine guiding objectives, focal systems, annual budgets, alternative simulation scenarios, two climate scenarios, treatments used (including unit cost and success/failure rates of treatments), spatial management constraints, and the vegetation class and ecological departure results of a preliminary do-nothing scenario.
5)	Conduct a second onsite (with hybrid option) expert partner workshop (with UDWR and USFS) >3 months after the first workshop. This workshop will review the ecological departure, vegetation class, and (if completed) hydrologic results of alternative management scenarios. The workshop will also revise treatment implementation rates if needed.
6)	Run final simulations and write final report.

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.

The project will provide crucial management information for an area of significant ecological, hydrologic, and recreational value. The Uinta Mountains comprise an important high-elevation UDWR state wildlife priority area, and they also present a classic western case of historic vegetation management that led to (a) heavy fuel buildup (fire exclusion) in drier forests and aspen-conifer, and (b) altered wildlife habitat often encroached with trees. The recent 2024 Yellow Lake Fire is a reminder of wildfire spreading through altered fuel loads. Given its current condition, this area is a prime target for strategic management to improve forests, lower the risk of high-severity fires, and shift ecological systems closer to a natural range of variation. Additionally, the AOI is the primary water source to the Bear River and a major contributor of water to the Colorado River through the Green River drainage, providing critical water for Utah watersheds at a time when long-term water supplies are scarce. Many eyes are on this landscape for its freshwater importance alone; however, sedimentation after high-severity fires is also a concern as it threatens water quality. This project will empower USFS staff to choose management scenarios with fire and wildlife co-benefits that will also maintain and, hopefully, increase runoff and recharge.

Recognizing the significance of this area and public agencies' need for data to guide restoration and conservation decisions, TNC dedicated staff capacity in both Utah (management) and Nevada (remote sensing and LCF modeling) for a previous LCF project, WRI #6930. This proposed follow-up project is a high divisional priority for TNC. TNC science staff from Nevada created and conducted the LCF methodology (for a good review, see Provencher et al. 2021. Climate 9, 79. https://doi.org/10.3390/ cli9050079) and have applied the United States Geological Survey's Basin Characterization Model (water balance model) in the south Snake Range (Great Basin National Park, Ely BLM, USFS Ely RD, and private lands) and in the upper Truckee River of Nevada and California. The proposed project will build on previous work to complete LCF modeling in the project area, creating customized, high-quality data that will enable agencies to increase the long-term ecological health and resilience of this important landscape.

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.

Through this project, TNC and its partners will develop new documents and high-resolution data that will inform future NEPA assessments as regulated by Forest Plans, as well as any future Forest Plan revisions for the Ashley National Forest and UWC National Forest's Evanston Ranger District.

The project will also inform WRI's management of the high-profile Uinta priority focal area, specifically as it relates to several species (see below for text extracted from single species plan that will contribute to). While the Utah State Wildlife Action Plan (2015-2025) is less specific than the single species management plans shown below, in the Key Habitats sections for aspen-conifer and various shrublands (sagebrush and mountain browse), it does identify the need to improve habitat by (a) reducing conifer dominance and encroachment and (b) recruiting younger vegetation classes through various restoration tools and partnerships with federal agencies and private landowners. 
 
Utah Mule Deer Statewide Management Plan: 
A. Watershed Restoration Initiative 
a. Continue to support and provide leadership for the Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative, which emphasizes improving sagebrush-steppe, aspen, and riparian habitats throughout Utah. 
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. Emphasis should be placed on crucial habitats including sagebrush winter ranges and aspen summer ranges.
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.
e. Encourage land managers to manage portions of pinyon-juniper woodlands and aspen-conifer forests in early successional stages using various methods including timber harvest and managed fire.

Utah Statewide Elk Management Plan
B. Habitat Management Goal: Conserve and improve elk habitat throughout the state.

Habitat Objective 1: Maintain sufficient habitat to support elk herds at population objectives and reduce competition for forage between elk and livestock.

Strategies:
C. Habitat Improvement
a. Utilize Habitat Council, Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative, Wildlife Conservation
Permit funds, and other funding mechanisms to restore or improve crucial elk
habitats.
b. Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk
habitat.
c. 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.
i. Identify habitat projects on summer ranges (aspen communities) to improve
calving habitat and summer forage.
ii. Encourage land managers to manage portions of forests in early succession
stages through the use of controlled burning, logging or other methods.
Controlled burning in areas with invasive weed and/or safety concerns should
be supported only when adequate planning and mitigation measures have been
identified.
iii. Promote Fire Use (let-burn) policies in appropriate areas that will benefit elk,
and conduct reseeding efforts post wildlife.

Utah Moose Statewide Management Plan: 
B. Habitat Management Goal: Assure sufficient habitat is available to sustain healthy and productive moose populations.

Objective: Maintain or enhance the quantity and quality of moose habitat to allow herds to reach population objectives.

Strategies:
e. Initiate prescribed burns, timber harvests, and other vegetative treatment projects to improve moose habitat lost to ecological succession or human impacts. 
f. Under the Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative, design, implement, and monitor the effectiveness of habitat improvement projects to benefit moose and other wildlife.

Utah Conservation Plan For Greater Sage-Grouse
Conservation Goal, Objectives & Strategies
Strategies to Address Pinyon-Juniper (Conifer) Woodland Encroachment
4a. Using the Utah Wildlife Migration Initiative (WMI), identify the highest-priority sage-grouse
habitats and migration corridors within or adjacent to occupied habitats.
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.
4d. Using the WRI, maintain existing sage-grouse habitats by offsetting the impacts identified in
1(f) by creating additional habitat within or adjacent to occupied habitats at an equal rate each
year--or 25,000 acres each year--whichever is greater.
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).
4f. Using the WRI, implement active, passive and natural riparian and mesic restoration projects, including in coordination with those treatments described in 4(d) and 4(e), to increase nesting and brood-rearing 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.

According to USFS Ashley National Forest and Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest staff, the lower and middle elevation plant communities in these areas, such as dry forests, aspen-mixed conifer, and aspen-subalpine conifer, and various shrublands, contain extensive woody (heavy fuels) fuel loadings typical of historically fire-excluded landscapes. Fuel loadings in lower and middle elevations are not in compliance with the natural range of variation, as closed-canopy vegetation classes dominate many areas. USFS staff also indicated high levels of conifer mortality caused by mountain beetle outbreaks in lodgepole pine and Engelmann spruce, which leaves dead standing trees in the forest. While subalpine forests have naturally long (>120 years) fire-free intervals, it is believed that climate warming might be shortening fire-free intervals due to reduced snowpacks and earlier snowmelt than historically observed. These changing snowpack dynamics are causing heavy woody fuels to dry out earlier than expected. This project will provide information to help manage heavy fuel loadings and decrease the risk of high-intensity fires in the project area.

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.

As stated above, the Uinta Mountains are the primary source of water to the Bear River and the Great Salt Lake, representing a large fraction of the Wasatch Front's municipal water supply. Additionally, the Uintas are one of the top contributors of water to the Colorado River system through the Green River drainage. This project will address the following two water-related concerns: 
(1)	We will simulate the effects of alternative vegetation management scenarios on runoff and recharge. These simulations will potentially empower partners to choose management scenarios that provide neutral or even positive contributions to runoff and recharge while still achieving other wildlife and vegetation/fuels goals. Partners may want to choose these alternatives over management scenarios that reduce runoff and recharge, even for a slightly greater cost.
(2)	Compared to a do-nothing management scenario, active management scenarios chosen for this project will need to reduce the future area of high-severity fires, which can cause sedimentation when post-fire mineral soil is exposed to high-intensity precipitation events (e.g., >24-yr summer precipitation events).

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.

The Nature Conservancy proposes to complete the following steps:
1.	May 2025 (prior to award but an essential step): Remote sensing contractor orders Spot 6 satellite imagery from Airbus Defence and Space for capture during the second half of June and early July depending on snow cover.
2.	July 2025: Remote sensing contractor conducts an unsupervised classification of satellite imagery and plans 4WD, hiking, and helicopter field survey routes to match spectral signatures to system using the class vegetation combinations described in WRI #6930. 
3.	July-August 2025: Remote sensing contractor and TNC staff conduct first field survey for at least 15 days where passable roads will be driven, some trails will be hiked, and 5 days (7 hours per day) of helicopter will be used for remote and rugged areas. At each selected spectral signature, the ecological system, vegetation class and local biophysical observations will be noted (as per the WRI #6930 vegetation description) and at least one ground photograph and one landscape photograph will be taken before moving on to the next site.  
4.	October 2025: Remote sensing contractor prepares a draft and incomplete map to identify areas requiring more field observations. Contractor and TNC staff will only conduct a second field survey at those sites requiring additional ground verification. The same field methodology will be deployed for the second field survey, but no helicopter will be used. 
5.	November 2025 -- September 2026: Remote sensing contractor conducts desktop remote sensing analysis of satellite imagery with observations. Delivery of ecological system by vegetation class raster map (tiff format to TNC) in September 2026.
6.	December 2025 -- November 2026: TNC staff use existing spatial simulation databases from recent projects (Boulder Mountain UT, South Snake Range NV, IL Ranch of northern NV) to build a draft spatial simulation database for the Uinta Mountains. Several complex tasks (below) are required to build this database:
Task a.	Before the delivery of vegetation rasters, download climate time series (precipitation, minimum temperature, and maximum temperature) obtained from each of two Localized Climate Analogs (LOCA; bias corrected and statically downscaled Global Circulation Models). Each climate series group (precipitation and temperatures) will be replicated with a stochastic weather generator and each replicate will be converted to the Standard Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) as explained in Provencher et al. (2021). Different months and lags of SPEI will be uploaded into the ST-Sim software as external variables to modify the variability of the different fixed parameter values of each ecological process. These same climate series will also be incorporated in the estimation of runoff and recharge with BCM. 
Task b.	Download USGS Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and upload raster as percent slope into the database to define fire spread up and down slopes given the user-defined frequency of annual wind direction. Also, use DEM to create rasters with slopes <15%, >14% to <30%, and >29% that will be applied to mechanical treatment equipment. 
Task c.	Obtain wildfire size distribution from historic data at MTBS and other federal websites to build table of fire size distribution, which will be uploaded in ST-Sim's Spatial Size Distribution menu.
Task d.	Obtain lightning strike point data for the Uinta Mountains from the Western Regional Climate Center in Reno, NV. As described in Provencher et al. (2021), convert lighting strike point data to pixel-based frequency (0 to 1) using a 12.5 km2 moving window to create a non-random fire initiation raster. A frequency of zero signals no fire initiation probability at that pixel, while a frequency of 1 signals the highest fire initiation probability. A second raster of human-caused ignitions will be modeled using Morrison's (2007) equation of ignition likelihood as a function of distances from roads, also standardized between 0 and 1:  H(i) = 1.0171 x  exp[-0.004 x Dist(i)], where H(i) = probability of human ignition at pixel i and Dist(i) = distance from pixel i to the nearest road with frequent use (the first pixel distance was calculated from ÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ½ pixel length). The maximum value between the two layers (lightning strike or distance from roads) for each pixel will be retained to create the final map of ignition likelihood. After fires are ignited in these locations, different menus will dictate fire spread based on underlying vegetation characteristics, prevailing wind directions, and slopes  (Provencher et al. 2021). 
Task e.	Spatially define the livestock grazing systems by allotments and pastures. Obtain USFS grazing permits from USFS and, if possible, maps of water sources to establish distance to water grazing intensity. Create distinct probability use rasters for cattle and domestic sheep by late-spring season of use (boot stage; May 15th to June 30th), summer (July 1st to September 30th), and the rest of the year. Upload rasters into ST-Sim Spatial Constraints menu and lock each seasonal grazing transition to each seasonal grazing raster.  
Task f.	After delivery of vegetation map layers from remote sensing contractor, crosswalk to class names and codes to TNC's vegetation class names and codes found in Uinta Mountains vegetation description (WRI #6930). Perform quality control. Upload distinct ecological system and vegetation class tiff rasters into ST-Sim's Initial Conditions menu. Upload ownership raster into ST-Sim's Initial Conditions menu. 
Task g.	Non-spatially run natural variation scenario imitating pre-European settlement conditions for 1,000 years to determine the equilibrium proportions of reference vegetation classes for each ecological system. Upload proportions into ST-Sim's Ecological Departure menu. 
7.	September 2026 -- April 2027: BCM contractor (Flint Hydroscience; Alan and Lorrie Flint created BCM at USGS) establishes BCM with a current vegetation raster. This raster will group ecological systems and vegetation classes of the new remote sensing map layer into vegetation categories created by TNC that match actual evapotranspiration resolutions (e.g., late successional open canopy ponderosa pine and mixed conifer become montane conifer-open canopy). 
8.	September -- November 2026. Run the draft custodial (do-nothing) management scenario for 40 years and estimate unified ecological departure by system (Provencher et al. 2021). 
9.	November -- December 2026. Conduct first hybrid management workshop in to-be-determined city either in the Evanston Range District or Ashley National Forest. Partners will (a) review new vegetation map and current unified ecological departure (b) determine guiding objectives, focal systems, annual restoration budgets, duration of simulations, alternative management scenarios, treatments used (including their unit cost and success/failure rates), and spatial treatment constraints, and (c) review custodial scenario simulation results.  
10.	January -- March 2027: Run active management scenarios after iteratively adjusting treatment implementation rates to not exceed annual budgets. 
11.	April 2027: Conduct second hybrid management workshop to review results of active and custodial management scenarios and revise treatment implementation scenarios. 
12.	April -- June 2027: Conduct final simulations. 
13.	April -- August 2027: Using one replicate of the downloaded future climate per scenario to keep computational memory requirements feasible, BCM contractor estimates annual runoff and recharge per management by climate scenario. BCM will use the exact same climate as in the state-and-transition simulations models (STSM) and output of any year will become the input of the next year. 
14.	January -- December 2027: Write final report and deliver spatial data layers to WRI and USFS.

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.

While remote sensing field work will occur once to match spectral signatures to vegetation in the field, no true field monitoring (e.g., of wildlife or vegetation) will be conducted; however, repeated change detection remote sensing at 5-year intervals after this initial project could begin a future monitoring program. Project progress will be measured by the delivery of the 1) raster-based vegetation maps (ecological system and vegetation class), 2) map and table of unified ecological departure for 2025, 2050, and 2075, 3) completion of first workshop, 4) completion of the second workshop, 5) estimation of runoff and recharge after final management scenario simulations are run, and 6) delivery of final report and geodata. Some products will not be completed until the end of the project (vegetation layers, maps and tables of unified ecological departure, simulated vegetation class results, BCM results, final report, and geodata); therefore, programmatic monitoring will take the form of short periodic progress reports every 6 months, and the delivery of the final report will close project monitoring.

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.

Partner organizations for this project include the Ashley National Forest, the Evanston Ranger District of the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest, and Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. On October 19th, 2023, TNC staff Ann Neville (Utah) and Louis Provencher (Nevada) traveled to Vernal to present the Landscape Conservation Forecasting methodology and products to Dustin Bambough, Tory Mathis, John Hak and Allen Huber from the Ashley National Forest. Brian Trick from the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest attended the meeting for the Ashley National Forest and suggested a follow-up presentation with the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest leadership. Daniel Eddington from WRI also attended the presentation. TNC staff gave a follow-up online presentation to the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest (Supervisor Dave Whittekiend and other staff) on October 27, 2023. Tyler Thompson and Daniel Eddington from WRI attended this presentation, with Thompson providing introductory remarks. Thompson has proposed to work collaboratively on this vast landscape to achieve multiple goals. As a result of these partner interactions, The Nature Conservancy submitted a proposal for year 1 to WRI and was awarded funding (WRI #6930) to write the vegetation description for the Uinta Mountains' ecological systems and vegetation classes in the State of Utah's FY2025. The vegetation descriptions, partly based on mapped vegetation by USFS (both National Forests, peer-reviewed literature, and LANDFIRE) and one partner workshop, will be used in remote sensing and state-and-transition simulation models. Since WRI #6930 was awarded, TNC's Ann Neville, Kelley Hart, and Louis Provencher have presented the project to the Ashley National Forest and Evanston Range District to secure dates and recruit experts to attend the workshop. Ann Neville and Kelley Hart (TNC) made an in-person presentation about this project to Kristy Groves, Ashley National Forest Supervisor, on October 16, 2024. The Evanston Range District has shared its vegetation map and plot data with TNC, whereas the Ashley NF delivered their vegetation, but plot data is still being entered into a geodatabase not yet available.

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.

This multi-year project will facilitate the sustainable use of natural resources, increasing land managers' ability to achieve the following goals:
1)	Reduce conifer dominance of vegetation classes in systems where conifers should only exist as a small proportion of a system's area, such as aspen-conifer, shrublands, and grasslands, while increasing availability of younger or more palatable forage to herbivores.
2)	Reduce the risk of extensive high-severity fires burning heavy conifer fuels, which can threaten system integrity, substantially increase early snowmelt and snow sublimation (reduced runoff and recharge), and make sedimentation more likely to degrade water quality.
3)	Reduce the area of closed-canopy conifer classes in naturally open-canopy conifer forests, thus decreasing ecological departure from reference conditions and reducing sublimation of snow stalled on conifer canopies that never reaches the forest floors.
4)	Identify management scenarios that will jointly improve wildlife habitat and increase runoff and recharge.

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.