Project Details

The Utah prairie dog (Cynomys parvidens; UPD) was listed as an endangered species in 1973 and reclassified as a threatened species in 1984. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits "take" of listed species unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Specifically, section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA allows the USFWS to permit take if such taking is incidental to the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity, and a conservation plan is developed to offset impacts.

Demand for incidental take of Utah prairie dogs from residential and commercial development continues to increase as human populations in UPD range continue to expand. Authorization for incidental take was previously authorized through Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP)(e.g., 1998 Iron County HCP, 2007 Cedar City Golf Course and Paiute Tribal Lands HCP, 2013 Iron County Low Effect HCP, 2014 Garfield County Low Effect HCP) or state management (Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Utah Prairie Dog Management Plan for Non-federal Lands). However, these management options have expired and range-wide incidental take is now governed by the GCP. Without the GCP, individuals proposing projects resulting in take would have to create their own HCP - a costly and time-consuming process. The GCP provides private landowners and developers streamlined options for incidental take authorization for future activities while ensuring conservation of the species.

The minimization and mitigation measures in the GCP contribute to the recovery efforts for the Utah prairie dog. Trapping and translocation reduce take of animals by moving prairie dogs from development sites to suitable habitats on federal lands to establish and augment colonies thereon. Habitat and plague management are implemented at translocation sites to bolster prairie dog survival. Mitigation fees are used to protect and manage habitat in ways (conservation banks, land acquisitions, conservation easements, or on-site mitigation) that will contribute to recovery. UDWR commitments and actions toward recovery are credited as mitigation/minimization to reduce costs to project proponents.

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.

The UDWR's goal is to provide consistent, sound, and professional implementation and administration of all aspects of UPD management in accordance with the GCP. Successful accomplishment of this proposal will allow for the continued growth in Southern Utah while increasing the population of UPDs on federal lands and protecting Utah prairie dogs from demise.

The GCP was developed with the intent to support continued economic viability in the permitting area while compensating for impacts to Utah prairie dogs as a result of commercial and residential development. The minimization and mitigation measures of this GCP include prairie dog translocations, habitat and plague management at translocation sites, and the protection of occupied Utah prairie dog habitats, all of which are consistent with our recovery objectives for this species.

Community Goal:

To facilitate residential and commercial development projects by providing a process to comply with the ESA when incidental take of Utah prairie dogs may occur on private or other non-federal lands.

Objectives:

* Provide a streamlined mechanism for project proponents to receive incidental take authorization for Utah prairie dogs.

* Provide planning certainty for project proponents by reducing time and costs with an umbrella approach (i.e., GCP) for authorizing incidental take of Utah prairie dogs.

* Use mechanisms, such as such as state-funded conservation actions to offset and minimize individual mitigation costs, thereby easing regulatory burdens.

Biological Goals:

Overall, the biological goals of this GCP are intended to assist with the recovery of Utah prairie dogs by implementing minimization and mitigation strategies that are consistent with the biological goals and objectives of the species' recovery plan (USFWS 2012).

Goal 1

Contribute to recovery by establishing or augmenting Utah prairie dog colonies on federal or other protected lands.

Objective:

* Prairie dogs in built-out residential and commercial areas may be unable to sustain long-term population connectivity or viability. Therefore, the objective for this goal is to move prairie dogs away from developed or developing areas (i.e., out of harm's way) to establish new colonies in locations on federal or other protected lands across the species' range where they can contribute toward long-term recovery objectives.

* Use federal and state partnerships that provide funding, staffing, and other resource support for increased habitat and plague management efforts to prepare and manage new and existing translocation sites on federal or other protected lands.

Goal 2

Contribute to recovery by protecting existing prairie dog colonies that occur on private or other non-federal lands where they can contribute to habitat connectivity and metapopulation viability.

Objectives:

* Protect sufficient habitat of appropriate quality to offset impacts from habitat loss through the purchase of conservation bank credits, land acquisitions, or conservation easements from willing landowners. In general, permanent impacts would be offset with permanent protection of prairie dog habitats.

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.

Utah Prairie dogs are listed as a threatened species and are subject to the provision of ESA. The Utah Prairie Dog Final Revised Recovery Plan (USFWS 2012) directs management of the species and outlines management actions to assist in reaching the recovery goals.

Urban expansion and plague are considered high-level threats to the Utah prairie dog in the species' recovery plan, (USFWS 2012). Therefore, the overall conservation strategy for recovery of the Utah prairie dog focuses on the need to address habitat loss and fragmentation, and disease through a program that encompasses threats abatement, population management, research, and monitoring.

The goal of the recovery plan for the Utah prairie dog is to recover the species so it no longer needs the protections of the ESA. In addition to numerical criteria of protecting at least 2,000 adult animals (i.e., 1,000 adult prairie dogs spring count) on at least 5,000 acres of protected habitat in each recovery unit, the recovery objectives for the Utah prairie dog in the Recovery Plan include:

1) Protection of suitable habitat that is of sufficient size to support a viable Utah prairie dog population that is spatially distributed to provide connectivity in each recovery unit, and

2) Establishment and maintenance of viable Utah prairie dog populations in each recovery unit.

Because of the high percentage of Utah prairie dogs on non-federal lands and potential habitat loss from development, the species' recovery plan (USFWS 2012) recommends a two-tier approach for recovery--1) protection of some of the existing Utah prairie dog colonies on non-Federal lands through land acquisitions, conservation easements, and conservation banks, and 2) continued translocations, habitat restoration, and management of prairie dogs on Federal lands. The minimization and mitigation strategies for this GCP were developed to be consistent with the species' recovery needs to ensure their biological relevance.

Utah prairie dog is a SGCN in the Utah Wildlife Action Plan. Threats identified therein include: housing and urban expansion, ecosystem modification, invasive organisms (i. e. plague), drought, and recreational activities. The GCP is designed specifically to address the first two of these threats and the others ancillary to those.

Federal land management agencies, Dixie National Forest and BLM field offices, manage Utah prairie dogs under their existing resource management plans. GCP actions, specifically trapping and translocation, are coordinated and accomplished under the authority of those plans.

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.

Take of listed species is prohibited under the ESA, unless otherwise permitted by USFWS. Specifically, section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA allows the USFWS to permit take if such taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity, and a conservation plan is developed to offset impacts.

Conservation plans under section 10(a)(1)(B) are referred to as habitat conservation plans (HCP). HCPs are required as part of an application for an incidental take permit for species listed under the ESA.

The GCP fulfills the section 10(a)(1)(B) conservation obligations under the ESA. As we fulfill our responsibilities and obligations under the ESA and applicable laws and regulations, we will ensure that the action will result in sustainable conservation of the covered species. Therefore, this GCP would provide private landowners and developers streamlined options for incidental take authorization for future activities while ensuring conservation of the species.

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.

All tasks that will be implemented to properly administer the GCP can be categorized into Administrative Effort and Field Effort.

Administrative Effort:

1) Create and maintain a database of: survey requests; survey results; minimization and mitigation measures; habitat quality assessment results; number of animals translocated for development and sites animals were moved to and the number, location and amount of acres UPDs were trapped from for translocations independent of development.
2) Assess survey needs
3) Coordinate with project proponents to implement minimization and mitigation measures
4) Assist, advise, inform and educate the public on the provisions of the GCP
5) Conduct annual UPD education and training seminars in coordination with Southern Utah counties.
6) Coordinate with the various local building permitting offices to assist them in proper adherence of the GCP

Field Effort:

7) Perform Utah prairie dog occupancy surveys for proposed development projects
8) Trap and translocate for development projects when feasible
9) Identify translocation sites with our federal partners and Recovery Team
10) Monitor Translocation sites for predators and supplemental food and water needs

In addition, permanent and seasonal employees may spend up to 10 percent of their time assisting other wildlife programs.

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.