Currant Creek Cut-Off Sage Grouse Habitat Improvement
Project ID: 4489
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2018
Submitted By: 1161
Project Manager: Charlie Holtz
PM Agency: Pheasants Forever
PM Office: Vernal, UT
Lead: Pheasants Forever
WRI Region: Northeastern
Description:
Private Landowner, State of Utah DWR, NRCS, USFWS Partners, and Pheasants Forever, through the Sage Grouse Initiative, is working on funding for a 2.1 mile wildlife friendly pipe fence delineating the boundary between private land and Current Creek Wildlife Management Area. Project includes removing existing boundary wire fence between State and private lands, invasive weed abatement along right of way and other areas, and conifer removal using lop and scatter method.
Location:
Northern boundary of Current Creek WMA and adjacent private lands to the north. Project area north of Fruitland, Utah
Project Need
Need For Project:
High utilization area of sage grouse, elk, and mule deer making seasonal movements between Current Creek WMA and private land. Existing fencing has caused sage grouse mortality and deterred migratory movements of elk and mule deer. Trespassing on private land with motorized vehicles, via the existing easement road on private land, has prompted the landowner to install a permanent fence north of the easement road so the public can continue to access Current Creek WMA to the south while reducing the opportunity to drive motorized vehicles on restrictive private lands. The construction of a wildlife friendly pipe fence would nullify the need for existing barb wire fence on Current Creek WMA which would be removed. An internal wire mesh sheep fence would also be renovated to barbed wire and lay down capabilities where fence crosses sage grouse lek areas. Encroaching conifers in area would be removed using a lop and scatter and bullhog mastication methods.
Objectives:
Construct pipe fence on northern boundary of Current Creek WMA. Remove existing barbed wire fence on northern boundary of Current Creek WMA. Renovate internal paddock fence on private land that runs through sage grouse lek with wire and lay down capabilities where high sage grouse mortality has been recorded. Remove encroaching conifers in area by lop and scatter and / or bull hog mastication methods. Treat invasive weeds along fence right of way and other areas.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
Existing fence traverses through / near documented sage grouse leks and also high use migratory movement of elk and mule deer. Sage grouse will begin using lek sites in March of 2018 and existing fence has been deemed detrimental to increasing sage grouse breeding and population numbers. The conifers in the area are early Phase I category with many trees less than six feet tall. Every year that goes by without treatment increases cost to remove encroaching conifers and pushes sage grouse further away due to presence of raptors in area due to tree height and adequate perch sites.
Relation To Management Plan:
The project will help facilitate management plans for the UTDWR Current Creek Wildlife Management Area and adjacent private landowner grazing plan. Upon further review the proposed project is in conjunction with following existing plans: The Utah Wildlife Action Plan identifies sagebrush as key habitat and identifies conifer encroachment a very high threat to that habitat. Reducing conifer encroachment will help restore characteristic upland vegetation and also reduce uncharacteristic fuel types and loadings which is all consistent with language of UDWR WAP in regards to "potential conservation action", "inappropriate fire frequency", and action code 2.3.14, stating, "conduct upland vegetation treatments to restore characteristic upland vegetation, and reduce uncharacteristic fuel types and loadings". The proposed project is also consistent with the Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan and Statewide Elk Management Plan, specifically identifying threats to habitat and needs for restoration in regards and emphasis on encroachment of conifers in sagebrush. In addition project is consistent with Mule Deer and Elk Plan by improving quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer and elk on crucial ranges by engaging broad vegetative treatment projects. This project is also consistent with Statewide Plans in regards to improving quality and quantity of forage and winter habitat by removing conifers and treating invasive weeds. The proposed project is in conjunction with the USFWS Migratory Bird Executive Order 13186 specifically (1) restoring and conserving habitat for migratory birds such as Brewers sparrow, sage sparrow, and sage grouse. The habitat for these species will benefit by removing encroaching conifers and treating invasive weeds to maintain sagebrush ecosystem. Project area is also attributed to the Strawberry SGMA, as identified in the Conservation Plan for Greater Sage-grouse in Utah and will fall in line with Plan by removing conifers, removing fences and building wildlife friendly fence, rotational grazing, and treatment of invasive weeds. Other relationships to general management plans are to allow for safe wildlife passage from private to public land upon installation of pipe fence, while also providing more suitable habitat for sage grouse and other wildlife. The proposed pipe fence funding from WRI and other sources such as USFWS Partners Program would allow the landowner more availability to assets to engage NRCS programs on private land. These practices would include conifer removal using the lop and scatter method of encroaching pinyon and juniper pines in sage brush basins. There has been approximately 1,000 acres identified for potential conifer removal and landowner has been receptive engaging this task over subsequent years. The north / south sheep mesh fence has been identified for removal and potential rebuild using a 4 strand wire fence with fence markers with also the possibility for a lay down fence section where fence traverses near a sage grouse lek. Herbicide control for Russian knapweed, and other weeds, would also be proposed throughout private property for subsequent years with the option of seeding over these areas when invasive plants have been reduced. There are many mesic / wet meadow seeps on the property that could be enhanced by installing grade control structures such as rock dams and rundowns and also "Zuni bowls" for head cuts in high gradient areas. The NRCS has programs for these types of projects and the landowner has been receptive to engage these practices. Depending upon numbers of livestock landowner decides to run on property, and if other habitat projects are contracted, there would be a prescribed grazing plan and monitoring system proposed to landowner that will rotate livestock according to resource and wildlife conditions on a yearly basis. Also, dependent upon which projects are contracted through the NRCS, a wildlife monitoring regime practice could be contracted through the NRCS, recording the progress of habitat projects effecting sage grouse.
Fire / Fuels:
Removing trees on private and state land will reduce risk of wildfire by lowering fuel loads. A rotational grazing regime on adjacent private lands of WMA will keep understory vegetation in check and lower fuel load as well.
Water Quality/Quantity:
Water quality will improve because cattle on private land will be forced to use water sources in prescribed pastures thus reducing impact of historic water sources.
Compliance:
Not applicable, but will actions such as fence installation, conifer removal, invasive weed abatement, prescribed grazing will all follow a specification agreement to maintain compliance with NRCS practices.
Methods:
Pipe fence installation will be implemented by contractor of choice by private landowner and installed in the spring of 2018. Equipment used will be determined on funding but would most likely include trucks, trailers, skid steer, and front end loader. Fence removal of existing boundary wire fence on DWR property will be implemented by UTDWR staff or contractor of choice. Activities will be carried out when disturbance to wildlife and habitat will be least. Fence removal of north / south fence and installation of new fence on private property is proposed before sage grouse lek season (March 2018). Landowner will complete work or choose contractor. Conifer removal will be of the lop and scatter method using chain saws and will be completed by landowner or contractor of landowner discretion. Lop and scatter could start summer of 2018 and into subsequent years. Weed abatement on private land will be completed by landowner or discretionary contractor targeting Russian knapweed using Tordon herbicide or similar applied in the fall of the year after flowering. UTV herbicide sprayers or backpack sprayers will be used.
Monitoring:
Monitoring for boundary pipe fence will be implemented by landowner, NRCS staff, and U.S.FWS Partners Biologist. The monitoring will be before, during, and after completion. Monitoring for conifer removal will be completed by NRCS staff before, during, and after project completion. Prescribed grazing will be monitored by landowner using a prescribed grazing plan and data sheet recording pastures used and rested on a yearly basis. Wildlife monitoring will be on a yearly basis implemented by landowner and approved by NRCS staff examining sage grouse fence mortality, water trough drowning, sage grouse sign and sightings, and general vegetation and weather information. Grazing plan and Wildlife Monitoring data sheets can be uploaded to project page on a yearly basis when NRCS staff has approved.
Partners:
NRCS: agency will implement Conservation Plan for private landowner including cost incentives and technical assistance for fence installation, fence removal, fence renovation, rotational grazing, conifer removal, invasive weed abatement, additional water troughs and pipe, and wildlife monitoring annual reviews and protocol. U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Partner Program: agency will propose funding for fence and other practices on private land up to $25,000. This funding will be used for boundary pipe fence between Current Creek WMA and private landowner, fence removal and wildlife friendly fence installation of north / south existing fence. Funding could also assist other projects including conifer removal and weed abatement. Pheasants Forever: conservation group is willing to commit lop and scatter efforts on Current Creek WMA up to 25 acres of treatment or equal to $1,000 of In-Kind
Future Management:
The proposed pipe fence funding from WRI and other sources such as USFWS Partners Program would allow the landowner more availability to assets to engage NRCS programs on private land. These practices would include conifer removal using the lop and scatter method of encroaching pinyon and juniper pines in sage brush basins. There has been approximately 1,000 acres identified for potential conifer removal and landowner has been receptive engaging this task over subsequent years. The north / south sheep mesh fence has been identified for removal and potential rebuild using a 4 strand wire fence with fence markers with also the possibility for a lay down fence section where fence traverses near a sage grouse lek. Herbicide control for Russian knapweed, and other weeds, would also be proposed throughout private property for subsequent years with the option of seeding over these areas when invasive plants have been reduced. There are many mesic / wet meadow seeps on the property that could be enhanced by installing grade control structures such as rock dams and rundowns and also "Zuni bowls" for head cuts in high gradient areas. The NRCS has programs for these types of projects and the landowner has been receptive to engage these practices. Depending upon numbers of livestock landowner decides to run on property, and if other habitat projects are contracted, there would be a prescribed grazing plan and monitoring system proposed to landowner that will rotate livestock according to resource and wildlife conditions on a yearly basis. Also, dependent upon which projects are contracted through the NRCS, a wildlife monitoring regime practice could be contracted through the NRCS, recording the progress of habitat projects effecting sage grouse. The following is a cost analysis of what these future management practices would cost based off of the "NRCS FY2018 Cost Scenarios Document": NRCS UTAH COST SCENARIOS 2018 PJ Lop and Scatter: 1,000ac = $134,960 Fence(sheep mesh) removal: 13,401ft = $12,194.91 Fence replace/build: 11,860ft=$24,906 Weed treatments: 10ac = $374.70 Monitoring: 1000ac = $5,630 Rx Grazing: 5,856ac = $20,613.12 Total: $198,678.73
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
Private landowner wants to improve distribution of cattle and fence will allow utilization of pastures while keeping livestock out of Current Creek WMA.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$50,000.00 $25,000.00 $75,000.00 $1,000.00 $76,000.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Contractual Services Conifer removal $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 2019
Contractual Services Pipe fence labor and materials $50,000.00 $25,000.00 $0.00 2019
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$50,000.00 $25,000.00 $75,000.00 $1,000.00 $76,000.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
DNR Watershed N3622 $40,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Habitat Council Account HCRF $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2018
Private Private landowner was awarded a grant of $25,000 for pipe fence construction costs. $0.00 $25,000.00 $0.00 2018
Pheasants Forever Pheasants Forever willing to donate labor to lop and scatter up to 25 acres or not to exceed $1,000 of expenses to do project on Current Creek WMA at a $50 per acre rate for lop and scatter services. Project was completed at 20 some acres of treatment. $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 2018
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Cabin Communities / Development Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Housing and Urban Areas Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
OHV Motorized Recreation Medium
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Brush Eradication / Vegetation Treatments High
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Cheatgrass Impacts NA
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Housing and Urban Areas Medium
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
OHV Motorized Recreation Low
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland High
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Seeding Non-native Plants Medium
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Unintentional Spread of Non-native Species Medium
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Water Developments for Wildlife Low
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Cabin Communities / Development Low
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Housing and Urban Areas Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
OHV Motorized Recreation Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland High
Habitats
Habitat
Mountain Meadow
Threat Impact
Soil Erosion / Loss High
Mountain Meadow
Threat Impact
Plant Material Development NA
Mountain Meadow
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Brush Eradication / Vegetation Treatments Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Habitat Shifting and Alteration Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
OHV Motorized Recreation Low
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Very High
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Seeding Non-native Plants Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/09/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Tory Mathis
I think several of the threats you listed to both species and habitats aren't really applicable as I don't see anything in your proposal that relates to these items. Those I think should probably be removed include: Cabin Communites/Development, Improper Forest Management, Brush Eradication/Vegetation Treatments, Data Gaps -- Cheatgrass Impacts, Seeding Non-native Plants, Water Developments for Wildlife, and Plant Material Development. Alternately, if you believe these threats really do apply, please describe what this project is doing to address these threats. You can see the definitions of all of the threats at https://watershed.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/List-of-Threats-for-Utah-WAP_WRI-with-definitions.pdf
Comment 01/11/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Will do, thanks. So I can update and revise project now? Until what date?
Comment 01/11/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Tory Mathis
You should be okay to make revisions until just before the ranking committee meets. A firm deadline will probably be established at the proposal meeting in February.
Comment 01/11/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Thanks
Comment 01/11/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Based off the Threats List from the link I believe the following risks would still apply: Cabin Communities / Development: Landowner historically has been absentee and now wanting to try out ranching "full time". I feel there is potential landowner could / has thought about subdividing property or selling as one big chunk. Goals are to try and assist landowner with technical and financial assistance to maintain the land in a "working landscape" as grazing the only, but managed, disturbance. Brush Eradication / Vegetation Treatments: Years ago on the private land a Spike herbicide treatment was used to eradicate sagebrush. A very high kill rate ensued, although there are sagebrush reestablishing in varying age classes. Also, crested wheatgrass was planted and has an excellent hold on landscape although native grasses due persist on a moderate level. Grazing management would try and focus on crested wheatgrass areas at opportune times to knock back persistence and remove cattle when native grasses are growing and allowed to set seed. Cheatgrass Impacts: A threat of cheatgrass dispersal is valid with proposed project disturbance including ground disturbance and vehicles coming and going from sites. Also the use of UTV along, and off, access road right of way is an ongoing potential of weed seed spread Seeding Non-native Plants: This threat would more adequately cover the crested wheatgrass seeding project and persistence documented in "Brush Treatment" threat description The following Threats would be removed or changed to fit, such as Water Developments for Wildlife will be change to "...for Livestock": Improper Forest Management Water Developments for Wildlife Plant Material Development
Comment 01/10/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Miles Hanberg
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 01/22/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Brian Maxfield
Thanks for all the work on this project and meeting with the landowner. I would suggest the work on the fences not go on during the month of March or April. Grouse winter in this area and then will start strutting soon after the snow is gone.
Comment 02/09/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Landowner is aware of March and April sage grouse high use months and would possibly be willing to start after
Comment 02/14/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Tory Mathis
Your "Relation to Management Plans" section seems incomplete. It looks like you intended to have more in there but something is missing.
Comment 02/14/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Will look into it. Thank you
Comment 02/14/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Updated "Relation to Management Plans". Thx
Comment 02/16/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Natasha Hadden
It might be beneficial to put the additional NRCS practices that you are implementing on the private lands in the in-kind portion of the financial page. Also, you may want to talk to Miles Hanberg to see if the fence would be better suited for Habitat Council funding.
Comment 02/20/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Excellent suggestion. Will let you know when updated. Thx
Comment 02/20/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
NRCS UTAH COST SCENARIOS 2018--(cost data was collected from NRCS Utah FY2018 Scenarios Document) ****Practices have been identified as most likely engaged and contracted with landowner through NRCS Sage Grouse Initiative Application for 2018 and completed within 3 years. Other practices such as wet meadows / mesic area enhancements (Practice 643 Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities) have been identified, and have great potential to be contracted in the future, but not for a 2018 contract. Pinyon / Juniper Lop and Scatter (Practice 314 - Brush Management): 1,000 acres over multiple years = $134,960 Fence removal "north / south sheep mesh fence" (Practice 500 Obstruction Removal) : 13,401 feet = $12,194.91 Multi-strand barbed/smooth wire fence install (Practice 382 Fence): 11,860 feet = $24,906 Chemical herb treatments (Practice 315 Herbaceous Weed Treatment): 10 acres = $374.70 Wildlife monitoring (Practice 645 Upland Wildlife Habitat Management): 1,000 acres = $5,630 Rotational Grazing Plan (Practice 528 Prescribed Grazing): 5,856 acres = $20,613.12
Comment 02/20/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Total NRCS FY2018 Cost Scenario = $198,678.73
Comment 02/20/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Updated these numbers in "Finance" section under "In-Kind" contributions
Comment 02/21/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Is this portion of the project a true part of this project or is this portion of the project contingent on whether or not the fence portion happens? The way I understood your presentation last week was that the way you were getting your foot in the door was construction of the fence with hopes to build trust for future projects. I am just trying to determine if the NRCS in-kind amount is truly a valid funding source for this project. Should the NRCS amount be put into a FY2020 proposal for next year as a second phase of a project instead?
Comment 02/23/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Great question. The NRCS funding effort, tasks, and cost analysis has been put in the "Future Management" section of proposal as these practices are not definitively contingent on whether or not the pipe boundary fence is built or not.
Comment 02/20/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Jim Spencer
Hey Charlie, piggybacking on Tory's question about Relation to Management Plans, I suggest you reference specific plans such as the State Mule Deer Plan, State Elk Plan, Wildlife Action Plan, or the SVARM Sage Grouse Plan are a few that come to mind that might apply to your project and cite specific objectives your proposal would address. Good job on your first proposal!
Comment 02/20/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Charlie Holtz
Thanks for the suggestion to search and find existing plans to tie in for project. I have located a few and highlighted how overall project falls in conjunction with existing plans in the "Relation to Management Plans" section of proposal
Comment 08/26/2019 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 08/26/2019 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 08/26/2019 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Charlie - Will you update your final map features to match what was actually completed in this project. According to your completion report and the expenses you have a lot more lop and scatter acres mapped out than indicated. Also, what is the affected acres that you have listed? Did anything happen on those acres? If so please include that in your completion report. Thanks.
Completion
Start Date:
05/01/2018
End Date:
11/11/2018
FY Implemented:
2019
Final Methods:
Pipe fence separating Current Creek Wildlife Management Area and Steven Ellis property has been supported by UTDWR and NRCS. Built to specifications for ease of movement for wildlife species such as elk and sage grouse. Will keep recreationists off private property and facilitate vehicle traffic along access road. WRI funded pipe fence has been built to allow grazing practices on private land as a tool for conservation and economic sustainability. This project stimulated the DWR wire sheep fence removal on north boundary of Current Creek WMA. Lop and scatter of juniper trees was completed November 11, 2018 on Current Creek Wildlife Management Area for 20 some acres which fulfills obligation agreement of $1,000 IN KIND contribution. (Estimated cost for 20 acres, based off of an $50 per acre rate).
Project Narrative:
Pipe fence started construction May 2018. Fence finished last week of August. Dollar Ridge Fires contributed to late August completion. Lop and Scatter portion of Current Creek Wildlife Management Area was started on October 10th and completed November 11, 2018. This WRI project helped stimulate an NRCS SGI contract with private landowner. Herbicide treatments to invasive plant species because of fence disturbance is scheduled through NRCS Sage Grouse Initiative Contract for 2018 and 2019. Future monitoring and management will continue for subsequent years. Additional conservation practices are contracted with private landowner and NRCS adjacent to Current Creek Wildlife Management Area through 2022 including sheep mesh fence removal, pinyon juniper eradication (623 acres), herbaceous weed control (65 acres), and wildlife and project monitoring. See uploaded map for project site locations on private land titled "Private Land NRCS SGI Project Map" in Documents section .
Future Management:
Monitor for invasive weeds along roadway and fence corridors and treat with herbicide. Monitor for wildlife passage and cattle enclosure along with recreationists and trespassing violations. Maintain communication, completion schedule, and compliance with NRCS Sage Grouse Initiative contracted practices that include sheep mesh fence removal, invasive species herbicide treatments, pinyon and juniper pine lop and scatter, and upland wildlife habitat monitoring. Future projects that could be contracted through the NRCS include rotational grazing system, erosional gully remediation through beaver dam analogues, additional pinyon and juniper eradication, and seeding efforts where perennial weeds such as Russian knapweed have been reduced through herbicide treatments. See uploaded map of private land projects titled "Private Land NRCS SGI Project Map" in Documents section.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
674 Fence Construction Pole top
675 Fence Removal Barbed wire
7497 Terrestrial Treatment Area Vegetation removal / hand crew Lop and scatter
Project Map
Project Map