Stateline (Hamlin Valley) Sagebrush Habitat Restoration Project (Year 3)
Project ID: 4087
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2018
Submitted By: 952
Project Manager: Douglass Bayles
PM Agency: Bureau of Land Management
PM Office: Cedar City
Lead: Bureau of Land Management
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
Hamlin Valley - Stateline Sagebrush Restoration (Year 3) would result in the immediate removal of pinyon pine and juniper from the sagebrush community on approximately 1376 acres of BLM managed lands in crucial winter/summer/brood-rearing sage grouse habitat.
Location:
The project is located within Hamlin Valley, which is located north of Modena, Utah. Legal Description: Township 31 South, Range 18 and 19 West, Section(s) Numerous.
Project Need
Need For Project:
The need to protect resources and rehabilitate vegetation communities within the Hamlin Valley Resource Protection and Habitat Improvement Project Area has been recognized for many years. This area continues to be a high priority area for vegetation resource enhancement, resource protection and fuels reduction. The Hamlin Valley Project is located within the Hamlin Valley Sage Grouse Priority Habitat Management Area (PHMA) and also within the Hamlin Valley Priority Area for Conservation (PAC), which is part of the southern Great Basin (Nevada) population. The project area and treatment method has been identified for the Project Area (Year 3) and are identified as follows: 1. Stateline (Bull Hog - BLM - 1,376 acres) Note: Refer to Attached Funding Table (Estimates Costs for the Project) Proposed management prescriptions/strategies for the sagebrush vegetation management area are based on departure from the ecological site, the potential for the community to respond to various treatment methods, as well as the desired future condition of the sagebrush/steppe vegetative community. The excessive juniper and pinyon pine encroachment into areas that were once dominated by perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs according to the Ecological Site Description is of concern throughout the majority of the Project Area. The extensive juniper and pinyon pine encroachment has been detrimental to sage grouse and other wildlife habitat throughout the project area. The implementation of Year 3 for this project would improve 1,376 acres of crucial sage grouse habitat. Year 3 of the project could be separated into multiple projects based on funding. Year 3 of the project would also tie into efforts that have been completed on private lands within the project area over the last 10 years as well as ongoing efforts on private lands. Currently, the NRCS is actively working with livestock permittees through the sage grouse initiative/farm bill to identify projects on SITLA and private lands that could be implemented at the same time as treatment on public lands in Year 3.
Objectives:
The overall objective of this project is to remove pinyon pine and juniper and achieve a vegetation community that more closely resembles the sagebrush ecological site. The majority of the project is within a sagebrush ecological site and the project objectives are as follows: 1. Maintain adequate habitat components to meet needs of greater sage-grouse in nesting, brood-rearing, and winter habitats in accordance with current guidelines and in coordination with UDWR and SWARM while providing for other wildlife values. 2. Manage to maintain/create large, un-fragmented blocks of sagebrush habitat with a variety of seral stages which would meet the seasonal needs of sage-grouse. 3. Improve health, composition, and diversity of shrubs, grasses, and forbs in accordance with Rangeland Health Standards and Guidelines and the Ecological Site Description. 4. Reduce pinyon pine and juniper density by 100% or in accordance with what is described in the Ecological Site Description. 5. The Composition by air-dry weight would be approximately 45-55% grasses, 5-10% forbs, and 40-50% shrubs. 6. Vertical canopy cover for grasses/forbs would be 20-40%, shrubs would be 15-45%, and trees would be 0%.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
The project is focused on eliminating pinyon pine and juniper from the sagebrush ecological site. Improving this community and removing ladder fuels to minimize the potential for a sagebrush stand replacing fire is a high priority. Historically it is expected that sage grouse in the area had a greater distribution and population. There is research by Mordo et. al. (2013) and others that have documented that sage grouse stop utilizing a lek with as little as 4% tree canopy cover. Lack of natural disturbances such as wildfire have favored pinyon and juniper expansion and a subsequent decline in sage grouse populations and sage grouse habitat. It is expected if the project does not occur that juniper and pinyon pine expansion will continue to occur in the project area further limiting sage grouse habitat. Implementation of the project has risks/threats including annual precipitation fluctuations and invasive/noxious weed establishment; however, mitigation measures have been identified that will limit these threats/risks to the project area. The project is located at an elevation of 6,000 feet, which is expected to help counteract the impacts of drought. Typically, rangelands at this elevation receive adequate precipitation to promote vegetative growth and viability in the short-term and long-term. In addition, recent research Roundy, et. al. (2014) has shown that mechanical treatments to remove pinyon and juniper increase time that soil water is available. This research indicates that even four years after treatment, treated areas showed from 8.6 days to 18 days additional water availability at high elevation sites. Additional research by Young, et. al. (2013) also showed a relationship between tree removal and soil climates and wet days on these sites, which while providing more available moisture for desired vegetation could also provide moisture for weeds. Numerous studies have shown that increased infiltration rates and less overland flow improve both water quality and quantity. In addition, extensive pre-monitoring vegetative data collection has occurred within the project area for extensive Sage Grouse Habitat Assessments. Rangeland Health assessments (basal gap, canopy gap, line point intercept, shrub height, Rangeland Health Assessments), nested frequency and utilization data will be collected prior and post treatment. Sage grouse telemetry data has also been collected and will continue to be collected within the Project Area. This information will be utilized to identify future treatments and determine whether sage grouse are utilizing ongoing treatment areas. All of the information that has been collected will serve as a baseline to determine success/failure of the project for sage grouse and other wildlife within the project area on a short-term and long-term basis. Wildlife monitoring data including Breeding Bird Surveys, Raptor Nest Surveys and General Wildlife Use Surveys will be collected throughout the Project Area.
Relation To Management Plan:
Rangeland Health in accordance with the Ecological Site Description. The focus for management within this area is to improve greater sage-grouse brood-rearing habitat while maintaining the dominant aspects of the sagebrush community to ensure adequate cover is available. High quality brood-rearing habitat has been identified as a limiting factor for sage grouse in the Hamlin Valley population area. BLM Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan 2015 A. The project is consistent with the SGARMP (2015) goals, objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Special Status Species section as follows: Special Status Species Goal: Maintain and/or increase GRSG abundance and distribution by conserving, enhancing or restoring the sagebrush ecosystem upon which populations depend in collaboration with other conservation partners. Refer to the following Objectives and Management Actions in the SGRMPA (Objectives: SSS-3, SSS-4, SSS-5) and Management Actions (MA-SSS-4, MA-SSS-6, MA-SSS7). B. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Vegetation section as follows: Refer to the following Objectives and Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-VEG-1, MA-VEG-2, MA-VEG-4, MA-VEG-5, MA-VEG-6, MA-VEG-8, MA-VEG-9, MA-VEG-10, MA-VEG-12 and MA-VEG-14). C. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) Management Actions that were identified in the Fire and Fuels Management section as follows: Refer to the following Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-FIRE-1 and MA-FIRE-3) D. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) Management Actions that were identified in the Livestock Grazing/Range Management section as follows: Refer to the following Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-LG-3, MA-LG-4, MA-LG-5, MA-LG-12, MA-LG-13, MA-LG-16 and MA-LG-17). The Conservation Plan for Greater Sage-grouse in Utah was approved by the Governor in April 2013. The plan established incentive-based conservation programs for conservation of sage-grouse on private, local government, and School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration lands and regulatory programs on other state and federally managed lands. The Conservation Plan also establishes sage-grouse management areas and implements specific management protocols in these areas. The Utah Greater Sage-grouse Management Plan in 2009 identified threats and issues affecting sage-grouse management in Utah as well as goals, objectives, and strategies intended to guide UDWR, local working groups, and land managers efforts to protect, maintain, and improve sage-grouse populations and habitats and balance their management with other resource uses. Southwest Desert Local Working Group Conservation Plan 2009. The local Working Group has developed a Conservation Plan detailing the natural history, threats, and mitigation measures for sage-grouse in each conservation plan area; and conservation guidelines for any activities occurring in the area. In addition, the Project Planning Areas (PPAs) in the Great Basin Fire and Invasive Assessment Tool (FIAT) have identified Hamlin Valley as a high priority for Conifer Focus (Removal). Through this process the top FIAT PPAs, including Hamlin Valley, had the highest priority for sagebrush restoration, protection and conservation within the 5 Great Basin FIAT assessment areas. The highest priority PPAs is those that contain Sagebrush Focal Areas (SFA), high breeding bird densities, conifer threats, wildfire and invasive species threats. The Project Planning Areas (PPA) prioritization will be used to develop an integrated multi-year program of work for all fuels and vegetation management projects and other related activities aimed to protect, conserve and restore sagebrush and sage grouse habitat. The priority PPAs will be used to inform and influence funding decisions by the BLM. The Utah State Wildlife Action Plan 2015-2025 (Final) is a comprehensive management plan designed to conserve native species populations and habitats in Utah, and prevent the need for additional federal listings. Please refer to attached excerpts from the Utah State Wildlife Action Plan 2015-2025 that identify Strategy for Management (Pg. 41 and Pg. 50). Pinyon Management Framework Plan (PMFP) (1983) Although the Project Area was not specifically discussed in the RMP vegetation treatments were identified throughout the Field Office. Southwest Utah Support Area Fire Management Plan (May, 2006) The SUSAFMP identifies the area as a priority for conversion of encroached pinyon and juniper dominated communities to a sagebrush community with a diverse component of perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs. This would be consistent with the vegetative monitoring data that has been collected within the Project Area to identify the Ecological Site Description. National Fire Plan (2000), BLM National Sage Grouse Habitat Conservation Strategy (2004) The project is also consistent with the NFP. The goals and objectives of the NFP is to manage BLM administered public land to maintain, enhance and restore sagebrush habitats while ensuring multiple use and sustained yield goals of FLPMA. Goals/Strategies identified in the NFP include the following: 1. Provide guidance to ensure integration of sage-grouse habitat conservation measures for actions provided through the management in land use planning process. 2. Issue mandatory guidance on management of sagebrush habitat for sage-grouse conservation. 3. Enhance knowledge of resource conditions and priorities in order to support habitat maintenance and restoration efforts. 4. Complete and maintain eco-regional assessments of sagebrush and sage-grouse habitats across the sagebrush biome. 5. Provide a consistent and scientifically based approach for collection and use of monitoring data for sagebrush habitats, sage-grouse and other components of the sagebrush community. 6. Identify, prioritize and facilitate needed research to develop relevant information for sage-grouse and sagebrush habitat conservation 7. Maintain, develop and expand partnerships to promote cooperation and support for all activities associated with sage-grouse and sagebrush conservation. 8. Effectively communicate throughout BLM and with current and prospective partners on steps BLM will take to conserve sage-grouse and sage-grouse and sagebrush habitats. 9. Facilitate the collection, transfer and sharing of information among all BLM partners and cooperators, as well as BLM program personnel. 10. Develop BLM state-level strategies and/or plans for sage-grouse and sagebrush conservation on BLM administered public lands. Southwest Desert Deer Herd Unit Management Plan (2012) The management goal of the Southwest Desert Deer Herd Unit is to increase the unit deer population. Habitat management objectives that are applicable to the Hamlin Valley Resource Protection and Habitat Improvement Project are (1) Maintain or enhance forage production through direct range improvements on winter and summer deer range throughout the unit to achieve population management objectives. (2) Maintain critical fawning habitat in good condition. Southwest Desert Elk Herd Unit Management Plan (2006) The management goal of the Southwest Desert Elk Herd Management Plan is to achieve a variety of healthy vegetative communities within the herd unit to maintain a diverse elk population in balance with available habitat. Habitat management objectives that are applicable to the Project are TO (1) Maintain or enhance forage production through direct range improvements throughout the unit on winter and summer range to achieve population management objectives. (2) Identify areas suitable for seasonal access management to encourage elk use in areas of low potential conflict. Coordinated Implementation Plan for Bird Conservation in Utah (2005) The priority habitat identified for this area was shrub-steppe, which was identified as a Priority A (High threat, high opportunity, and high value to birds statewide) habitat. Priority birds identified within this area include sage grouse, ferruginous hawk, sage sparrow, and Brewer's sparrow. Sagebrush restoration was identified as an opportunity within this area to address concerns with sagebrush die-off and potential for cheatgrass invasio
Fire / Fuels:
The majority of the area is at moderate to extreme on the fire risk index. There have been several very large fires in the Hamlin Valley area, especially in the last 10 years. There is a large fuel loading build up in Hamlin Valley and an alteration in fuel types. Pinyon and juniper trees have expanded and moved into areas once dominated by shrubs, forbs, and grasses. Without this project, fuel conditions are such that a wildfire may be difficult to contain, leading to an increased risk to firefighter and public safety, suppression effectiveness and natural resource degradation. Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) within the project area is predominately FRCC 3 which is where fire regimes have been extensively altered and risk of losing key ecosystem components from fire is high. Treatments identified within this proposal, including seeding with more fire resistant vegetation, would help reduce hazardous fuel loads, create fuel breaks, and reduce the overall threat of a catastrophic wildfire which could impact outlying residential properties and infrastructure. Treatments in and around the sagebrush areas would break up continuous fuels and reduce the risk of wildfire entering these sensitive areas. Removing pinyon and juniper in a mosaic pattern would also break up continuous fuels and reduce the risk of a high intensity wildfire. Because there is a greater risk of conversion of shrublands to annual grasslands under a high intensity fire, managed, pro-active treatments proposed would reduce the likelihood of cheatgrass invasion and help perennial grasses and forbs persist long-term. One component of this project (Priority 2) is a firebreak that will provide protection to an adjacent community that is at a very high risk should a fire occur.
Water Quality/Quantity:
The Project Area is located at 6,000 feet above sea level; therefore, it is expected that the opportunity to restore native species to the composition and frequency appropriate to the area is high. As discussed, this area is dominated by pinyon pine and juniper (Phase 2 and Phase 3). There is noticeable soil erosion throughout the area due to the absence of perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs. The project is expected to improve herbaceous understory, which will reduce water runoff and decrease soil erosion while increasing infiltration. Improvements to the Standards and Guidelines for Healthy Rangelands (Standard 1 and Standard 3) are expected through project implementation. It is expected that Standard 1 (Soils) will improve by allowing soils to exhibit permeability and infiltration rates that will sustain/improve site productivity throughout the area. This will be accomplished by making improvements to the Biotic Integrity of the community by converting areas that are dominated by pinyon pine and juniper to a diverse component of perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs that is consistent with Ecological Site Description. Indicators will include sufficient cover and litter to protect the soil surface from excessive water and wind erosion, limiting surface flow and limiting soil moisture loss through evaporation, which will promote proper infiltration. As discussed, extensive Rangeland Health monitoring data will be collected throughout the project area prior to treatment. This monitoring data will be utilized as baseline data to determine the success of the treatment while providing for a scientific measurement of the indicators identified above. In addition, recent research Roundy, et. al. (2014) has shown that mechanical treatments to remove pinyon and juniper increase time that soil water is available. Even four years after treatment, treated areas showed from 8.6 days to 18 days additional water availability at high elevation sites. Additional research by Young, et. al. (2013) also showed a relationship between tree removal and soil climates and wet days on these sites, which while providing more available moisture for desired vegetation could also provide moisture for weeds. Numerous studies have shown that increased infiltration rates and less overland flow improve both water quality and quantity.
Compliance:
The NEPA/Final Decision documents were completed for the project area in June 2014. The treatment would be rested from livestock grazing for a minimum of two years following project implementation to ensure adequate rest and seedling establishment. The project area boundaries will need to be flagged and cultural clearances will be completed prior to project work. Extensive monitoring data (upland and wildlife) will be collected to provide baseline data to determine the success of the treatments.
Methods:
The BLM has identified an ID Team and invited cooperating agencies (UDWR, NRCS, SWARM, etc.) to assess the current condition and formulate a vegetation management prescription that achieves the Desired Future Conditions, management intent, and management goals and objectives within the project area. BLM will provide overall project oversight. BLM will also refine flagging of the treatment area (i.e. leave islands (cultural and wildlife) in cooperation with UDWR and SWARM. All areas within Year 3 of the Project Area will be aerially seeded to meet wildlife habitat objectives in accordance with the Ecological Site Description. Seed will be requested through GBRC. Juniper and Pinyon Pine Encroachment (Phase 2 and Phase 3 P/J Encroachment) Objective is present in the Treatment Area: 1. Stateline - BLM (Bull Hog Treatment Method -1,376 acres) The majority of the Project Area is currently in Phase 2 and Phase 3 condition. Although sagebrush and perennial grasses are present in portions of the Project Area that are currently in Phase 2 condition the species vigor, composition and production are well below what should be expected for the site as revealed by the Ecological Site Description. The Bull Hog Treatment Method would be utilized to eliminate juniper and pinyon pine from the existing sagebrush and perennial grass community. Application of a diverse seed mix including perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs would be required throughout the project area. In addition, the Project Planning Areas (PPAs) in the Great Basin Fire and Invasive Assessment Tool (FIAT) have identified Hamlin Valley (which is within the project area) as a high priority for Conifer Focus (Removal). Through this process the top FIAT PPAs, including Hamlin Valley, had the highest priority for sagebrush restoration, protection and conservation within the 5 Great Basin FIAT assessment areas. The highest priority PPAs are those that contain Sagebrush Focal Areas (SFA), high breeding bird densities, conifer threats, wildfire and invasive species threats. The Project Planning Areas (PPA) prioritization will be used to develop an integrated multi-year program of work for all fuels and vegetation management projects and other related activities aimed to protect, conserve and restore sagebrush and sage grouse habitat. The priority PPAs will be used to inform and influence funding decisions by the BLM. The project area is dominated by Juniper and Pinyon Pine; however, this is not consistent with what should be expected according to the ESD, which states that the site should be dominated by Wyoming big sagebrush and a diverse composition of perennial grasses and forbs. The project areas will be flagged and BLM will provide overall project oversight in coordination with NRCS, DWR, SWARM, etc... In addition, archaeology clearances will be completed by DWR contract with project oversite provided by the BLM Fuels Archaeologist.
Monitoring:
Pre-monitoring within the Project Area has been ongoing since 2014. Monitoring will continue to be completed by BLM, which may include some support from UDWR or other cooperators. Standard surveys have included: Wildlife Use Pattern Surveys (i.e. Pellet Counts), Wildlife Population Surveys, Key Forage Utilization, Nested Frequency (Trend), Line Intercept (Shrub Cover and Age Class), Standards and Guidelines for Rangeland Health Assessment, Photo Points, OHV Monitoring (to determine if new roads are being created), Breeding Bird Surveys, Raptor Nest Surveys, General Wildlife Use Surveys and Noxious weed inventory / monitoring. Pre and Post vegetation and wildlife monitoring data will be collected throughout the project area. This monitoring data will be compiled into an overall monitoring report that will help determine the level of success for the project in the short-term and long-term. This data will be utilized to support an Adaptive Management Strategy to determine if changes in treatment methods, seeding, etc... need to occur in order to meet measurable objectives. There currently is inconclusive data to suggest that the sage grouse population size would increase if the treatments were completed in Hamlin Valley. Vegetation treatments were completed in Fall 2015 within the Chokecherry and Spanish George areas. These vegetation treatments consisted of lop and scatter (1,623 acres) and bull hog (1,423 acres). Vegetation treatments were completed in the Fall 2016 within the Atchison Creek, Jackson Wash and Spanish George areas. These vegetation treatments consisted of chaining (1,900 acres) and bull hog (1,622 acres). Treatments have also occurred on private and SITLA lands in the last 5-10 years. Sage Grouse telemetry data has been collected since 2010 throughout Hamlin Valley. It is expected that this baseline data and future data will allow for correlation of whether sage grouse are utilizing treatment areas. Furthermore, it is expected that by improving Rangeland Land Health conditions and creating expansion sage grouse habitat through the elimination of pinyon and juniper in areas that should be dominated by perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs in accordance with the Ecological Site Description will lead to sage grouse habitat improvements and population increases. This will be verified through further data collection (telemetry, lek counts, RLH data, trend, utilization data, etc...). Similar treatments in others areas within the Color Country District Office indicate that sage grouse are utilizing the treatments almost immediately following the removal of pinyon and juniper, which is expected to also occur in Hamlin Valley. A joint sage grouse telemetry project is occurring between BLM administered lands in Cedar City Field Office and the Shell Field Office (Ely, Nevada). In addition, CCFO is coordinating with SFO (Ely, NV) on their future vegetative treatment projects immediately adjacent to Hamlin Valley. This coordination is expected to continue to provide for habitat connectivity across jurisdictional boundaries.
Partners:
Utah State University Extension, NRCS, The Nature Conservancy, DWR, SWARM, Intergovernmental Internship Cooperative - Southern Utah University, Schell Field Office (Ely, Nevada), livestock permittees, private landowners (homeowners)
Future Management:
Livestock grazing within the Stateline Allotment has been assessed through the permit renewal process. The Stateline Allotment has authorized livestock grazing from July 1st - September 30th on an annual basis. The Stateline Allotment is deferred until after the completion of the critical growing period. In addition, utilization has been collected on a continual basis within the allotments. Livestock use has been within established utilization parameters on a consistent basis. It is expected that the vegetative treatment will result in forage production increases that are consistent or greater to what has been identified in the Ecological Site Description. All areas seeded would be rested for a minimum of two complete growing seasons or until the seedlings become established and set seed. Once seeding establishment has been confirmed, BLM may authorize grazing according the Utah Fundamentals of Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Management. Vegetation treatments would continue to be monitored for utilization, cover and trend. Following the two year rest period, the grazing management system identified during the grazing permit renewal process would be resumed. Key Management Areas are typically established in grazing allotments to monitor trend where there is livestock use. Trend sites will be established in the Project Area which will provide for baseline monitoring data so that short-term and long-term treatment success can be monitored. Once trend within the treatment area has been collected as baseline data, trend will be determined in subsequent years as data is collected. Trend will be collected at these sites for 3 years following treatment and then these sites will be incorporated into the overall range vegetative monitoring schedule and be collected every 3-5 years. Trend sites have bben established near the project area. The current trend at these Key Management Areas would be expected to be static to downward based on pinyon and juniper expansion within the area, similar to the Project Area. Following treatment it is expected that this will be reversed and an upward trend will occur. Future maintenance projects to protect investments made by UWRI/NRCS/BLM have been addressed and allowed through the project planning document (NEPA). Adaptive management has been allowed for in the NEPA/Decision document. A large variety of treatment methods have been identified and authorized for use within the Project Area.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
As discussed, the majority of the project area is in Phase 2 and Phase 3 condition. The project is expected to improve health, composition, and diversity of shrubs, grasses, and forbs in accordance with Rangeland Health Standards and Guidelines and the Ecological Site Description, which will be beneficial to livestock grazing. Furthermore, the project will be proactive in Improving vegetative communities and removing ladder fuels within areas that are dominated by pinyon and juniper, which will minimize the potential for a catastrophic wildfire throughout the area, which would be detrimental to livestock grazing. It is expected that the vegetative treatments will result in increased forage production that are consistent or greater to what has been identified in the Ecological Site Description. BUDGET WRI/DWR Other Budget Total
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$744,392.43 $0.00 $744,392.43 $145,995.00 $890,387.43
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Personal Services (permanent employee) Cedar City Field Office will provide one permanent employee who will coordinate project design, layout, and oversee monitoring and inventory completed by seasonal employees and project inspection. $0.00 $0.00 $25,000.00 2018
Contractual Services Stateline Allotment Bullhog Costs - Mechanical equipment contract (i.e. Bull Hog) 1,377acres @ $425.00/acre. - NRCS funding $278.41/acre up to $373,205.82 for 1,340.49 acres. $585,225.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Archaeological Clearance Archaeological Clearance Contract Administration $0.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 2018
Seed (GBRC) Seed Mix 1 (1,377 acres x 75.35 per acre) Seed Mix 2 (1,377 acres x 10.24 per acre) NRCS funding - $48.99/acres up to $67,361.25 for (1,375 acres). WRI to cover the rest. This includes application. $117,857.43 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Personal Services (permanent employee) Cedar City Field Office will provide a seasonal wildlife biologist to assist with monitoring and inventory for federally listed and BLM/State Sensitive Species prior to implementation. One seasonal employee for 2 months @ $4,100/month $0.00 $0.00 $8,200.00 2018
NEPA The Cedar City Field Office completed the NEPA/FONSI/Final Decision Record in June 2014. $0.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 2018
Personal Services (seasonal employee) The Cedar City Field Office will provide seasonal employees to carry out all monitoring (pre and post treatment) identified in the monitoring section. $0.00 $0.00 $24,600.00 2018
Archaeological Clearance Archaeology clearance funding provided by BLM for 1,377 acres @ 35.00 within the project area. $0.00 $0.00 $48,195.00 2018
Contractual Services Aerial seeding 1,377 acres @ $30/acre $41,310.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$606,583.49 $0.00 $606,583.49 $145,995.00 $752,578.49
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
DWR - General Fund HORS $63,781.73 $0.00 $0.00 2018
BLM RL N6462 $250,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Utah Wild Sheep Foundation NS6522 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Includes Personal services, Archaeological clearance, Cadastral, Survey and Design, etc... $0.00 $0.00 $145,995.00 2018
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) N6770 Funding for bullhog, seed, aerial seeding, fence marking and a water facility. $257,801.76 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Mule Deer Foundation (MDF) NS6523 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) NS6527 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
MDF Admin Expo Fund ($3.50) NS6713 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Domestic Livestock
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Medium
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Future Effects of Greater Temperature Variability under Climate Change NA
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Pygmy Rabbit N4
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Pygmy Rabbit N4
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Low
Habitats
Habitat
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Habitat Shifting and Alteration High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/19/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Douglas, Increasing sagebrush habitat available in Hamlin Valley will likely improve foraging opportunities for both GOEA and FEHA. However, FEHA nests are often associated with the juniper/sagebrush intergrade zone. Removal of all juniper trees will not benefit nesting FEHA. I suggest that a few older, larger juniper trees be left in the sagebrush to provide hunting perches and potential nest structures for FEHA. Also, raptor nest surveys should be conducted, if not yet, so no nest trees are lost. Pygmy rabbits can benefit from this project, but that will be many years out and only if old-growth sagebrush is maintained. They can sometimes be found in sagebrush near juniper, so a presence-absence survey may be in order.
Comment 01/19/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Vicki Tyler
Hi Keith, Intensive wildlife surveys will be completed in this area in the spring and all nests will be gps'd and buffered. However, barring a nest, and just for the sake of perches, I would not recommend leaving single, large juniper trees in the sagebrush at this site. This particular project falls 2.2-3 miles from an active sage grouse lek. Mordo et. al. (2013) have shown that sage grouse use of leks decreases as tree cover increases and recommend that in priority areas (<2.6 miles from leks) or opportunity areas (<4 miles from leks) where feasible, canopy cover of trees be reduced or eliminated. This project is surrounded by private land - some of which has experienced sagebrush management and some of which has not. The project was also designed with mosaic and as such, there are deliberate wildlife corridors and lots of edge for other wildlife use. Thanks for the comment and concern, Keith. (Reference: Baruch-Mordo, et. al. 2013. Saving Sage Grouse from the trees: A proactive solution to reducing a key threat to a candidate species. Biological Conservation 167 (2013) 233-241.)
Comment 01/23/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Keith - Thanks for the comments. Comment responses are as follows: 1. Once again, though, I'd hate to lose any FEHA nesting territories or opportunities. Please refer to the monitoring protocols located in the Images/Documents Section that are identified in the Hamlin Valley (Stateline) Wildlife Monitoring Plan and Protocols. These protocols have been utilized on all of the WRI projects that have been completed in the CCFO. Intensive pre-field assessments and baseline inventories will continue to be completed on all of the projects. This level of monitoring has been responsible for the location of a variety of raptor nests including Ferruginous Hawk in the past and this is expected to continue. The monitoring data is utilized to provide for buffers and islands within the project areas so that impacts to raptors are limited. 2. Also, any plans to survey for PYRA and BUOW before putting this in play? Please refer to the monitoring protocols located in the Images/Documents Section that are identified in the Hamlin Valley Wildlife Monitoring Plan and Protocols. We could always use help from DWR on completion of PYRA surveys; however, we will complete this during our surveys. Please refer to the monitoring protocols located in the Images/Documents Section that are identified in the Hamlin Valley (Stateline) Wildlife Monitoring Plan and Protocols.
Comment 01/25/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
Doug - I like this project! Question on the NRCS funding - is it all for bullhog work or is it actually tied to a more diverse suite of actions (I'm assuming it is becasue it usually is)? If so it would be good to see in the comment on that funding line item something like (Funding for bullhog, aerial seeding, etc...) That'll keep the accountant types a bit more open to paying bills for aerial seeding with those funds because it is specifically called out. Also - please continue to coordinate with Jason Nicholes and Curtis Roundy on project design, if they have desires for some cover patches for deer in certain areas I would love to see that included in final contracts on the ground.
Comment 01/26/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Gary- Thanks for the comment. I went ahead and made the update to the funding line item comments for ease of accounting. We will coordinate with Jason and Curtis on final project design before project implementation.
Comment 02/13/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Gary, as you may have seen we added Jason Nicholes as a contributor.
Comment 02/04/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Slate Stewart
Again on the finance/budget, could you use the NRCS budget so that a single line item for each practice could reflect the dollar amounts from each contributor on that line? This would clarify who is spending what amount on what practices? Also, dumb question but I assume that all bull hog projects within the area will be lumped as much as possible to cut cost?
Comment 02/06/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Slate, I will work with Jason Bradshaw from NRCS and we should be able to break down the NRCS money by practices for this project. We would try to lump the Hamlin Valley projects under one contract. Which we've done in the past.
Comment 02/06/2017 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Douglas, I got nothing. Well written proposal. Thanks!
Comment 08/28/2018 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 08/28/2018 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Thank you for giving more detail in your report. That info is very helpful in the future. As for the shapefile I need to have you do something different with that. I am not sure why it let you do what you did. It shouldn't have. You are magical. Anyway, I need to have you delete the aerial seeding feature off of the database and upload a new one. The new one that I need is only the area that was only seeded. You will need to clip the area that was masticated out of seeding file. Basically it will be just the little islands, not the entire area. The larger area is already counting the seeding. If you need help with this get a hold of Rhett with the DWR in Cedar or check with Brandon or Jason. They both know what is needed. If you can't get with any of them let me know and I can walk you through it.
Completion
Start Date:
12/26/2017
End Date:
02/08/2018
FY Implemented:
2018
Final Methods:
842 acres were mechanically treated within the Stateline Project Area. The contractor started December 26th and completed the project February 28th. The project area is within the Hamlin Valley Sage Grouse Priority Habitat Management Area (PHMA). Excessive juniper and pinyon had encroached into areas once dominated by perennial grass, forbs and shrubs becoming detrimental to to Sage Grouse and other wildlife throughout the project area. Through Aerial seeding and mechanical mulching the site will achieve a vegetation community that more closely resembles the sagebrush ecological site. The Stateline proposal was initially wrote to include 1,136 acres that would be mechanically masticated with a Bullhog. But through NEPA process clearances project acres changed to 860 acres, which was aerially seeded with a perennial grass and forb seed mix in November. Post seeding several small leave islands were included into the project. With the islands being small and scattered it was decided to seed the same 860 acre polygon which included the islands with the second shrub seed mix which was flown on in January.
Project Narrative:
The Project Area encompasses a diverse landscape that provides important forage values to livestock, wildlife and wild horses. It also provides for multiple-use by diverse groups of resource users. This area is important today for a variety of reasons. The BLM, along with various partners and cooperators, has recognized the need to maintain and protect resources and communities while providing for fire fighter safety, build off of treatments previously completed on private property and improve habitat in a variety of vegetation communities. The BLM's overarching goal for vegetation management is as follows: Through an interdisciplinary collaborative process, plan and implement a set of actions that improve biological diversity and ecosystem function and which promote and maintain native plant communities that are resilient to disturbance and invasive species. The purpose and need of the Proposed Action is to protect resources and improve various components of the vegetation communities within the Hamlin Valley Resource Protection and Habitat Improvement Project Area. This area is identified as a high priority area for vegetation resource enhancement, resource protection and fuels reduction.
Future Management:
The areas that were treated will be rested from livestock grazing for a minimum of two years or until objectives are achieved. Once treatment has been determined to be successful livestock grazing will recommence. The season of use within the allotments where the treatments were completed begins after the end of the critical growing period. In addition, there are grazing management systems that have been identified. This is expected to provide for the long-term maintenance of the project. Currently, utilization objectives are well within acceptable parameters.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
7176 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
7177 Terrestrial Treatment Area Bullhog Full size
7177 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
Project Map
Project Map