Red Canyon Habitat Restoration Project Phase I
Project ID: 4625
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2020
Submitted By: 60
Project Manager: Kendall Bagley
PM Agency: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
PM Office: Southern Region
Lead: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
This project consists of two-way chaining 576 acres of phase III pinyon juniper to remove trees and re-establish the native sagebrush community, a one-way chaining of 470 acres of older bullhog project to stimulate grasses and forbs. A spike treatment will cover 177 acres on BLM. In 2018 the BLM completed 899 acres of lop and scatter, along with installing three (3) cattleguards. The project also includes installing approx 5 miles of 2" HDPE pipeline and two (2) new watering troughs.
Location:
This project is located on the east side of the Pahvant Mtn Range, at the mouth of Red Canyon west of Aurora, Utah. Project will be implemented on BLM and Forest Service Properties. Project is located in T21 South R2 West; Sections 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, and 34.
Project Need
Need For Project:
Over the past fifty years, the east slope of the Pahvant Mountains has seen a gradual shift from sagebrush/bunchgrass communities to thick stands of Utah juniper and two-needle pinyon pine. In the current state, much of the Ezra Flat/Red Canyon area is not effective in providing habitat for many of the wildlife species found there. The dense pinyon-juniper over-story also increases the risk of wildland fire, alters snow accumulation patterns, and increases overland flow and erosion during high runoff events. The project area is classified by UDWR as Crucial winter range for deer and high value winter range for elk. Populations for both species have been consistently below UDWR objectives for the Pahvant Herd Unit (21b) and poor winter range conditions resulting from expansion of pinyon/juniper into sagebrush ecosystems is a key factor. This project will create and improve foraging habitat and directly benefit both wildlife and livestock. .By increasing overall site productivity, this treatment will also increase populations of small mammals and insects, which are important prey species for reptiles such as the Utah Milksnake and Sonoran Mountain Kingsnake, as well as wild turkey and the multiple species of migratory birds that nest in the area. Current conditions are also impacting livestock grazing and dense stands of p/j has reduced and in a few areas all but eliminated native grasses and forbs to the point that the project area has not been able to support cattle grazing for roughly ten years. The Ezra Flat range trend study data shows that perennial grasses and forbs are lacking and may require reseeding to recover in the near future. Addressing the winter range issues and providing additional forage will also benefit local agriculture by providing deer and elk an alternative to cultivated crops in the flats. The project area drains into the Sevier River, which is an important source of water locally and sediment load is always an issue. The lack of an understory and relatively high percentage of bare ground make the area proposed for treatment more prone to erosion and loss of topsoil. Re-establishing a resilient community that includes deep rooted perennial grasses will conserve topsoil and improve watershed functioning. Given the high social and economic importance of hunting and livestock production in the local area the Fillmore Ranger District, Utah Division of Wildlife, BLM and local permittees have combined to focus on improving and restoring winter range on the east slope of the Pahvant Mountains. This project is part of that effort and is designed to improve habitat and range conditions on one of the most productive sites by removing encroaching phase II and phase III pinyon-juniper using a two-way chaining and re-seeding. The two-way chaining will remove >80% of the p/j over-story, releasing the existing under-story from competition while the reseeding will re-establish important herbaceous species in areas where they were reduced or eliminated. Included in the project will be a one way chaining of an existing bullhog treatment to re-establish herbaceous species while retaining most of the black sagebrush canopy. Another part of the project will address the need for additional water on the Cedar Ridge Allotment by installing a new 2" HDPE pipeline and two new troughs. Within the BLM property we will apply a chemical treatment on 177 acres to thin the existing stand of dense sagebrush and increase grasses and forbs in the understory. This is in addition to the 2018 BLM contract that removed approximately 900 acres of young pinyon and juniper whips that had infilled since the previous (2011) treatment. Removal of these young trees was critical to securing the initial investment and extending the project life. Three cattleguards were also installed by the BLM on the Paiute ATV trail system to make travel more convenient and reduce the chance of gates being left open and trespass livestock issues.This project is a great cooperation between State, and Federal Agencies along with Livestock Producers working together to meet a common goal of developing additional habitat for Wildlife and Livestock within Central Utah.
Objectives:
The overall objective is to increase habitat quality and quantity for wintering big game and sagebrush oriented wildlife, and to provide increased livestock forage by removing pinyon-juniper trees and develop a healthy rangeland community with diverse age classes and species composition. Additional objectives include reducing fuels and improving watershed functioning. Specific objectives include reduction on of pinyon-juniper cover to <20% within treatment polygons and five-year post treatment cover values for perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs within 60% of NRCS Ecological Site Description for Upland Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush) sites. Strategically located "leave islands" of pinyon-juniper may be included to provide thermal and hiding cover for big game. The 898 acres of BLM land included in the project will focus more on smaller trees and the understory is fairly robust, but the objectives are similar to the chaining treatment. Increase of grasses and forbs in identified areas will also allow for improved understory of perennial understory, this will be implemented as a herbicide treatment through the use of "Spike" on 177 acres. This project will provide additional water to livestock grazing allotment along with providing year round water source for wildlife species such as mule deer, elk, turkeys, and other small game mammals on the Pahvant Wildlife Management Unit. This project will partner with the UDWR, BLM, SITLA and Fillmore Forest Service to accomplish this task. Objective are to distribute additional water sources within the Forest Service's Cedar Ridge and BLM's Aurora Allotment allowing cattle to utilize the allotments more efficiently. This project will allow water to be piped from the Red Canyon existing pipeline site then follow the existing pipeline to the three existing troughs along this pipeline. This project will allow for additional water at critical times of year for wildlife species to utilize during the year. Water will remain in the troughs after livestock has been moved to different allotments allowing for a water source for wildlife in the area.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
This site faces a host of threats associated with increasing pinyon-juniper cover, including loss of grasses and forbs important to wildlife and cattle, increased risk of wildland fire frequency and severity, risk of invasive plant species such as cheatgrass replacing native and desirable introduced plants, increased risk of soil erosion, and lower quality and quantity of water due to continued decreases in watershed functioning. Nearly all of these are present to some extent and some and in much of the project area have combined to greatly limit many of the uses and benefits this section of land historically provided. All of these threats resulted from pinyon-juniper expansion altering the native sagebrush/bunchgrass community, and this project will address these risks by either restoring the site or at least improving it to a functional state close to the native sagebrush type. Another threat is the loss of the initial investment in the BLM chaining. Removal of the small PJ trees in the lop and scatter area is a cost-effective maintenance project allowing for Phase I trees to be reduced and prolonging the life of this project and the benefits it provides. Delaying treatment until trees are larger and more difficult to handle would greatly increase the expense of treatment and accomplish far less. No action on this project will allow for increased invasive grass species, pinyon-juniper encroachment and increased soil erosion with no productive rangeland conditions. Late Phase II to early Phase III Pinyon-Juniper reduces the native understory of browse, shrubs and herbaceous plants species, reducing PJ will allow for shrub, forbs and grasses species to respond within the treatment site.
Relation To Management Plan:
The pinyon-juniper and big sagebrush areas lie within the Lowland Sagebrush Steppe Habitat type which is one of the key habitats identified in the Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) The proposed projects will address some of the habitat management strategies outlined in the deer and elk management plans for herd unit 21B (Fillmore Pahvant Unit ) including: *Continue to improve and restore sagebrush steppe habitats critical to deer according to DWRs Habitat Initiative. *Maintain habitat quantity and quality at a level adequate to support the stated population objectives while at the same time not resulting in an overall downward trend in range condition and watershed quality. *Work cooperatively with land management agencies and private landowners to plan and implement improvement projects for the purpose of enhancing wildlife habitat and range resources in general. *The project also helps fulfill the state mule deer management plan section IV Habitat Goal: Conserve and improve mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges. *The proposed projects will address the following goals and objectives of the Division of Wildlife Resources most recent strategic management plan: *Resource Goal: expand wildlife populations and conserve sensitive species by protecting and improving wildlife habitat. *Objective 1: protect existing wildlife habitat and improve 500,000 acres of critical habitats and watersheds throughout the state. *Objective 3: conserve sensitive species to prevent them from becoming listed as threatened or endangered. *Constituency Goal: Achieve broad-based support for Division programs and budgets by demonstrating the value of wildlife to all citizens of Utah. *Objective 2: improve communication with wildlife organizations, public officials, private landowners, and government agencies to obtain support for Division programs. *UDWR SR critical big game winter range are important browse communities that need to be enhanced and improved. The Division will employ a variety of methods to achieve this including prescribed grazing, prescribed burning, reseeding and seedling transplants, also mechanical treatments. Priority areas will include sagebrush-steppe and mountain browse communities. Falls within the rangeland focus area for WRI wildlife species for mule deer and elk. *This plan is consistent with the Fishlake National Forest Plan for wildlife habitat enhancement and fuels management to improve habitat, reduce fuel loading, and protect against catastrophic wildfire. *Other project have been completed by the Forest Service and BLM in past years within the Willow Creek Canyon HUC 12 area. *Project within the are also benefit the management plans objectives of the lower Sevier River Watershed, as this will reduced sediment run off and create a healthy rangeland communities. *Management Plans are also in conjunction with NRCS overall goals of healthy rangelands and communities, improving watersheds and reducing erosion and sediment. The Natural Resources Conservation Service provides leadership in a partnership effort to help people conserve, maintain, and improve our natural resources and environment *FFSL CWPP Process is a local Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is a collaborative plan created by the fire department, state and local forestry, land managers, community leaders, and the public.The planning process maps values at risk, and requires actions to reduce risk, such as prescribed burning, fuel reduction, or other measures that adapt a community to better confront their wildfire threat. Area is also part of the Millard RWPP FFSL Plan which was implemented in 2014, there are Wildfire Codes and Ordinances associated with this plan. Project would also be relevant to NCS Goals and supported through the FS National Cohesive Strategies. CAT FIRE Objectives and Strategies: In 2013, the State of Utah developed the Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy (CAT FIRE) in response to the severe 2012 fire season. Reducing the catastrophic wildfire requires attention to three interdependent goals identified in the National Cohesive Wildfire Management Strategy -- Restore and Maintain Landscapes, Fire Adapted Communities, and Wildfire Response. These goals have been embraced throughout the development of the state's CAT FIRE strategy. Mitigation of hazardous fuels can change fire behavior making it easier to suppress. The effects of the mitigation, however, are not limited to life and property safety but will also affect forest health, water quality, vegetative species abundance, etc. As we continue to implement projects across the landscapes in Utah, the only way to truly be successful is to integrate existing programs, utilize local and federal partners and continue to educate the general public to create the desired shift towards more resilient communities and ecosystems. *Richfield Field Office RMP (2008) pg 76 - Manage for a mix of vegetative types, structural stages, and provide for native plant, fish, and wildlife habitats. -Sustain or reestablish the integrity of the sagebrush biome to provide the amount, continuity, and quality of habitat that is necessary to maintain sustainable populations of Greater sage-grouse and other sagebrush-dependent wildlife species. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS: a. Treat areas determined to need reseeding with a variety of plant species that are desirable for wildlife habitat, livestock, watershed management, and other resource values while maintaining vegetation species diversity. b. implement additional treatments to achieve Standards for Rangeland Health and desired vegetation condition. Vegetation treatments conducted up to 1,472,000 acres over the life of the plan. These acreage figures include all vegetation and fire fuels treatments. Central Utah FMP: - greater use of vegetation management to meet resource management objectives - hazardous fuels treatments will be used to restore ecosystems; protect human, natural and cultural resources; and reduce the threat of wildfire to communities - sagebrush steppe communities will be a high priority for ESR and fuel reduction to avoid catastrophic fires in these areas **I have also included information pertaining to the State of Utah Resource Management Plan, Mule Deer Management Plan for the Fillmore Pahvant, Utah Statewide Turkey Plan and the Sevier County Resource Management Plan located in the Documents Tab of this project.
Fire / Fuels:
This project will reduce fuel loading by removing the pinyon-junpier trees with a two-way chaining treatment, as well as with a phase I lop and scatter treatment. Reseeding the site and establishing a resilient and competitive community of perennial grasses and forbs will help prevent the site from being dominated by invasive annuals such as cheatgrass that perpetuate a rapid fire cycle. Treatments like this have been proven to prevent wildfire from spreading following an ignition event, and this particular treatment will create several barriers or buffers between treated and non treated areas that will be critical for controlling or containing wildfires. The FFO Forest Service and the Richfield BLM Fuels have implemented several prior projects that reduced the likelyhood of wildfire in the area and adjacent to this project, these projects consisted of clear cutting, burning and reseeding along with cut and pile projects. This project will help protect valuable infrastructures, from Catastrophic Wildfires, such as homes, summer cabins, outbuildings, hay sheds, livestock corrals and mostly the community of Aurora, Utah which has over 500 residents. This project will also have an effect on the Hwy 50 that is a critical travel corridor, and has been shut down in the past due to the Sawmill Fire, and Gap Fire. The size of the treatment is around 1,950 acres and is within 4-6 miles of several structures including homes, and out buildings, and within 10 miles of Aurora, UT. This treatment will reduce fuel loads and improve critical habitat for mule deer, elk and turkeys in the future, along with providing additional forage for livestock. I have upladed the FFSL Risk Assessment in the documents tab for additional information on the fuel loading, flame length, water resource concerns, and at risk fire potential. We are looking as the project stands today at a Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) Condition Class III with the implementation of this treatment we would expect to drop to a FRCC Class I giving us some good ecological integrity in the treatment with improved understory and shrub components. This would reduce the flame height and fuel loading in the areas and look to prevent Catastrophic Wildfires in the area.
Water Quality/Quantity:
The current condition of much of the project area is Phase III pinyon-juniper stands with little to no understory of grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Prior to treatment, the estimated bare ground cover on the nearby Ezra Flat study site average almost 30%, well above the desired condition and added to the risk of soil erosion. Meeting the project objectives would reduce bare ground (reduced 5% of Ezra Flat), increase vegetative cover, increase infiltration, reduce overland flow, and ultimately increase stream flow and reduce sedimentation and phosphorous loading into the Sevier River and water supplies of the nearby town of Aurora. These benefits have been documented by research done in similar ecosystems (Deboolt et al, 2008). I found a webinar by the NRCS where the presenter mentions through her study that 130 pinyon and juniper trees she sampled within an acre (33% pinyon, 9% juniper and 58% inter-space) over a twelve month period would utilize and estimated 280,000 liters of water per acre per year or approximately 23% of an acre foot. And while the Quality of water will not be overwhelming the first year after treatment it becomes significant over time. This type of treatment will benefit the soil over the long term, due to increasing plants that will utilize the excess water, overland flows of rills will be filled in, chance for overland flooding will be minimized allowing for springs and seep to start appearing and improved rangeland conditions will benefit overall. The proposed pipeline and troughs will allow the collection of water at the spring development and constructed head box and deliver it overland through a pipe line. This will reduce impacts at the source by allowing livestock to be fenced out of the spring area itself, improving water quality and providing better protection of riparian vegetation around the spring. The increased efficiency should also improve water quantity somewhat through increased efficiency and reduced evaporation. The quality of the water will be improved at the destination, as it will be held in water troughs that allow cattle and wildlife to drink clean clear water verse allowing water to be lost or made unavailable in a damaged seep. Water Right is held by the Fillmore Forest Service, approval has been granted to complete this project. Water Right #63-1782, application/claim# D2304, UDWR project manager will consult with Eric Anderson on the this project before implementation can take place and coordinate with the Fillmore Forest Service Office. Information from the Sevier County Resources Plan addressing water Quality and Quantity: DESIRED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 1. Access for municipal water and secondary water development, quality management, or infrastructure construction or maintenance on federal public lands must be granted as soon as possible in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of citizens. 2. Develop improved methods to reduce and remove sediment in storage reservoirs and continue stream bank stabilization efforts. 3. Where water resources on public lands have diminished because grasses have succeeded to pinyon-juniper and other woody vegetation, a vigorous program of mechanical treatments should be applied to promptly remove this woody vegetation and biomass, stimulate the return of the grasses to historic levels, and thereby provide a watershed that maximizes water yield and water quality for livestock, wildlife, and human uses. 4. Sevier County will participate in watershed management on public and private lands to optimize quality and quantity of water. 6. Support projects to increase water quality and quantity in the county. 7. Maintain and improve our fresh water supplies and watersheds, and increase our watershed production capabilities. 8. Conserve and preserve water for agricultural uses in the county. 9. Sevier County shall protect ground, spring, and surface water quality. 19. The county encourages actions by individuals, groups, and local governments that are aimed at improving water quality and supporting the hydrology of the county. Deboodt, T.L., et al., 2008, Monitoring hydrological changes related to western juniper removal: A paired watershed approach: Third Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds, p. 227-232. Also the addressing of the TMDL from the Lower Sevier River Watershed Plan states that through water and overland flows we can have high amounts of phosphors in the system that can drain into the Sevier River watershed. The implementation of this project would seem to help control it as we will be reseeding grasses, forbs and shrubs that would help control the overland flow slow down the sediment discharge in to the Lower Sevier River and reduce sediment, phosphors and other nutrient load by reducing the pinyon-juniper trees and improving the uplands.
Compliance:
All NEPA (DOI-BLM-UT-CO20-2011-0017-EA) and Culture Resources have been completed and this project is ready to be implemented. The Forest Service and BLM have completed archaeological inventories. UDWR Project Manager will consult with Monson Shaver to make sure all information is correct. Additional information maybe requested from the Federal Agencies. All or the treatment falls within a old existing chaining project that was done in the 1960's.
Methods:
This project would be a composite of several vegetative treatments, including 577 acres that will be two-way chained, 472 acres bull-hogged in 2014 that will be one-way chained, and a lop and scatter of 899 acres of BLM property. The project also includes installing approx 5 miles of 2" HDPE pipeline and two (2) new watering troughs. The BLM will also install three (3) Cattle Guards included in this project. The chaining treatment will consist of using two (2) D-8 cats to pull and Ely anchor chain on the first pass, with the second pass pulling a smooth anchor chain. In between chaining the project will be aerial seeded with a mixture of grasses and forbs. We would also like to use a dribbler attached to each D-8 cat to allow the planting of browse species. Travel corridors will be kept intact allowing for thermal and escape cover for wildlife in the area. Culture Resource issues have been addressed on this project this maybe worked as a joint effort through the UDWR, FS and BLM personnel. The lop and scatter portion of the project will be contracted out through state purchasing, this contract will be awarded based on price per acre and the experience the contractor may have to complete the project in a efficient and professional manner. The pipeline portion of this project will feed two watering troughs both within the Cedar Ridge Allotment located on Forest Service Property and one trough within the Aurora allotment. Pipe will be installed by the use of a D-6 Cat to pre-rip, carry the spools of pipe, and lay the pipe 4 feet below the surface. This pipeline will be installed next to the non-functional existing pipeline and follow the footprint of the existing surveys that have been completed. This project will be installed within the Cedar Ridge and Aurora Allotments, the Forest Service, UDWR and the Wasden Ranch and X-Bar Livestock Grazing Association will work with the BLM to have it installed. Permittees will help install the pipeline and watering troughs along with working along side the BLM and the Forest Service to make sure the project runs smoothly. Fillmore Forest Service and Richfield BLM are excited about this project and in favor of helping out the permittee to address the need of distributing water within the allotments. UDWR is also in favor as to utilize the Cedar Ridge Allotment to benefit wildlife and allow additional winter range to be more fully utilized by both wildlife and livestock.
Monitoring:
The Ezra Flat range trend study (21R-18) is locating within the project area and will be used to measure changes in vegetation over time. Monitoring plans will also include UDWR and USFS bi-annual big game classifications used to monitor production and subsequent survival of area deer and elk herds. Also, the Project Manager will establish a set of vegetation and photo points within a transect to collect pre and post treatment data. UDWR may ask for the GBRC Range Trend Crew to set a permanent vegetation transect for future monitoring of this project that will be read or surveyed for vegetation data every five years depending on their workload, in which this data can be uploaded in the proper forms. We will also be monitoring the chaining aspect of this project out three-seven years and removing all whips that may be left during the treatment, The Fillmore Forest Service will enter into a MOU agreement with the Permittee before the project is implemented. The livestock permittee will look to keep the pipeline and troughs in good working condition within the Cedar Ridge Allotment as it will benefit them and their livestock during the grazing seasons. The BLM Fuels will monitor the Lop and Scatter portion of this project, following up with their fuels crew if necessary to remove encroching pinyon trees that may have been missed by the contractor.
Partners:
Partners for this project consist of the Fillmore Forest Service, Richfield BLM, UDWR, and the Wasdens Ranch and X-Bar Livestock. All partners are supportive of this project and are willing to commit a lot of time and effort towards making this project a Success. This includes resting the treatment from grazing for two growing seasons. In addition the general public and sportsman that enjoy hunting and recreating in this area will also benefit from the Habitat Restoration Work that will be completed, the improvements made will last for several years to come. We have been working along the line of including all Federal and State Partners as well as livestock permittees in this effort, we have completed work on the BLM propoerties in FY19' and are looking to add additional treatments to the BLM in FY 20'. Contact with the private landowners will be addressed as the project moves into additional phases. We are looking at the success of methods that will work on the Federal properties and would like to have a showcase for the private landowners to look at as we move forward in the coming years.
Future Management:
The USFS will work with Wasden Ranch and X-Bar Livestock Grazing to implement a rest rotational grazing system on the chaining consistent with the Fishlake National Forest management plan. Grazing will also be suspended for two growing seasons post treatment to allow the grass and forb species to establish. This will be written into the Annual Operating Instructions signed by the permitees each spring prior to grazing on the Forest. UDWR, Forest Service and the BLM are strongly committed to improving habitat through restoration efforts to meet overall regional goals and objectives for wildlife and livestock grazing in this area. Success will be determined by the Management Plans of the Forest Service, BLM and UDWR along with the grazing permittees through proper grazing systems that allow for healthy rangeland communities. The BLM grazing permit states that the allotment will be managed to: a) provide for livestock grazing while maintaining rangeland in properly functioning condition. b) maintain healthy, sustainable rangeland ecosystems and restore degraded rangelands to meet Utah's Standards for Rangeland Health and to provide a wide range of public values... c) integrate livestock use and associated management practices with other multiple use needs and objectives to maintain, protect, and improve rangeland health. d) monitor and evaluate grazing allotments to maintain or improve rangeland productivity. This particular Forest Allotment has been deferred from grazing for at least the last 10 years, because it simply didn't produce enough grass to make grazing feasible. The permitees are very motivated and committed to management that will insure productivity and maximize the useful life of this project. Management of the pipeline project will be to ensure that the project is installed correctly, pipeline and watering troughs are set correct and all fittings are secure. The need to fix or repair items associated with this project will be left up to the permittees in the future, they along with the Fillmore Forest Service and UDWR will be working together to improve this allotment and improve the distribution of cattle during the grazing period for both agencies. Additional phases of this project are in the works as water is limited in this area and the need for additional watering sites is critical to the distribution of livestock as well as wildlife in this area.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
This project will increase the understory of the treatment area dramatically, allowing for increased feed for grazing livestock on the Forest Service Cedar Ridge Allotment and BLM Properties. Pinyon Juniper trees are very dense and little to no understory is present. This project will increase grasses, forbs and shrubs species for livestock due to native and non-native seeded species included in the mix. The chaining aspect will open up areas to sunlight, reducing overall pinyon-juniper stands and allow of the establishment of seeded species to occur. Domestic livestock will be grazed on a rotation type system after two to three growing seasons, improved distribution can a will occur due to improved understory, the addition of the new pipeline and three new watering troughs will allow for improved dispersion of livestock and better grazing management practices. The lop and scatter portion of the project will consist of working within the BLM land use plan to address rotational grazing within the lop and scatter treatment as livestock grazing will not have to be deferred. The chaining in 2011 improved herbaceous understory species dramatically. Some of the grass has started to decline near the only watering location within the treatment. The proposed additional water source will allow livestock to utilize a larger portion of the treatment and draw some of the use away from the initial water source. The cattleguards to be installed will greatly reduce the amount of livestock trespass on both the BLM and Forest Service Allotments. Other sustainable uses towards this project will be the use of additional firewood that will be available, cutting of cedar post, access to additional hunting opportunities for big game such as mule deer and elk. Additional opportunities will be opened up for turkey hunting and upland game hunting as well. With the Sevier County ATV Jamboree each year, riders from across the country enjoy riding trails in this area and enjoy camping and recreating.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$267,011.00 $0.00 $267,011.00 $120,495.00 $387,506.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Other In-kind materials as water trough, head box, HDPE pipe, install labor and fittings coming from Fillmore Forest Service. $0.00 $0.00 $12,700.00 2020
Contractual Services Contract Service to hire a contractor to single chain 472 acres @ $35.00/Ac. $16,520.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Contractual Services Contract Services to hire a contractor to double chain 577 acres @ $140.00/Ac. $80,780.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Contractual Services Aerial Seeding this chaining portion of the project estimated price for both early and late flight. $20.00/Ac $21,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Materials and Supplies Estimated expenses for the HDPE 2" Pipe SDR 11 at $1.50/FT for 26,400' $39,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Personal Services (permanent employee) Labor for 2 BLM employees to install pipeline, troughs, and cattleguards. 5-6 weeks. $0.00 $0.00 $21,600.00 2020
Materials and Supplies Estimated expenses for the two (2) water troughs (4' x 12'), includes valves and fittings. $4,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Materials and Supplies Misc supplies and flagging for this project, also hire hire to flag the chaining areas before treatment. $750.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Personal Services (permanent employee) In-kind Services from UDWR Employee working with the FS, BLM and contractors on this project $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 2020
Personal Services (permanent employee) In-kind Services from FS pertaining to his project, providing equipment, install the trough and help with the pipeline line. $0.00 $0.00 $4,000.00 2020
Contractual Services Contract Services that will include hiring a lop and scatter crew to complete that portion of the project. Est. 900 acres at $64.00/Ac $0.00 $0.00 $57,600.00 2019
Seed (GBRC) Estimated seed expenses from GBRC for the chaining aspect of this project. $92,856.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Equipment Rental/Use BLM Equip Rates: Backhoe-64hrs@ 45.26/hr=$2897 Dozer-60hrs@102.47/hr=$6148 service truck = $350 $0.00 $0.00 $9,395.00 2020
Materials and Supplies 3, 16' cattleguards @ $3800ea=$11,400 6 concrete cattleguard bases @ $300ea=$1,800 $0.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 2019
Contractual Services Expenses to apply "Spike Treatment on BLM Property. Estimated at $65/Ac for flight and chemical for 177 acres. $11,505.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$300,470.21 $0.00 $300,470.21 $121,279.51 $421,749.72
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
DNR Watershed N3622 $43,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 2019
BLM HLI (Range 1020) In-kind cost estimates from the Richfield BLM Office $0.00 $0.00 $101,795.00 2019
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) In-kind from UDWR Employee towards this project. $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 2020
United States Forest Service (USFS) In-kind from the Fillmore Forest Service towards the project $0.00 $0.00 $16,700.00 2020
Get Hushin C073 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
UWRI-Pre-Suppression Fund U006 $23,329.18 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) S027 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Utah Archery Association S052 $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
MDF Expo Permit ($1.50) S053 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
DWR-WRI Project Admin In-Kind $0.00 $0.00 $784.51 2021
UWRI-Water Development Fund U015 $36,954.30 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Federal Aid (PR) P651 $146,836.34 $0.00 $0.00 2020
National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) S024 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Habitat Council Account QHCR $1,360.09 $0.00 $0.00 2020
UWRI-Water Development Fund U015 $2,645.70 $0.00 $0.00 2021
UWRI-Pre-Suppression Fund U006 $1,670.82 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Federal Aid (PR) P651 $10,516.66 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Habitat Council Account QHCR $97.91 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Internal Conservation Permit C010 $8,459.21 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Domestic Livestock
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Low
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Droughts 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
Sonoran Mountain Kingsnake N4
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Low
Sonoran Mountain Kingsnake N4
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Low
Utah Milksnake N4
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Low
Utah Milksnake N4
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Low
Habitats
Habitat
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Very High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Soil Erosion / Loss Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/19/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Vicki Tyler
Wow! Nice inclusive project with ALL partners! NEPA from USFS?
Comment 01/24/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Thanks Vicki, The NEPA has been completed for all the work that will be done on the Forest Service and the BLM. I meet last week to follow-up with the Forest Service and they assured me that it was done.
Comment 02/01/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Hey Kendall, Echo Vicki's sentiment on great cross boundary work. Comments and questions. 1) Can you explain why we need to go in and treat the FS acres that were just treated in 2014 under project 2623? How will this project ensure better success for objectives than that one or are objectives different this time? What Phase of PJ succession are the previously treated acres in? 2) Any reason project was not expanded onto SITLA parcel too? 3) Improper Forest Management is probably not the right threat to mule deer in the Lowland Sagebrush habitat type. Assuming Invasive Plant Species -- Non-native refers to a cheat grass threat? If so you probably want to include that in your threats and risks and fire and fuels section. If you were referencing the PJ the threat you wanted was Problematic Plant Species -- Native Upland. 5) Any information available on FRCC or fuels loading departures from range of variability? 6) Does this project address any specific water quality issues or TMDLs in the Sevier River? Would repeat Vicki's request on a reference for "Estimated that 1 acre of pinyon-juniper will utilize during the year 23% of the water within a 1 acre foot." 7) What does the Ezra Flat Big Game Range trend site tell you about current conditions and will it be used for future monitoring? 8) Could you be more specific on how the FS and BLM GMPs/AMPs for the allotments in question will help to assure future management?
Comment 02/05/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Brant Hallows
Mike, I have added in the 'future management' section a few statements that were pulled right out of the BLM grazing permit that will help guide future management and decisions. It's not talking specifically about this project but more to maintaining overall health of the allotment. At the time it was written this project was not in the works yet.
Comment 02/06/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Thanks Mike again for the great comments and involvement with this project. The FS wanted to retreat the bullhog acres that where treated in 2014 due to the fact that the seeding aspect didn't respond as expected due to the possible amount of litter left on the sites. The though was to seed during the chaining portion of the project then one way chain the bullhog portion and scatter the seed along with the litter. I have attached some pictures of this area in the database. The succession of the proposed chaining areas is in a phase three type juniper stand, no understory, and little shrub to no shrub present. I have been in talk with SITLA, to see if they are wanting to treat their property, I will have a follow-up conversation with Slate this week or next. This project does not specifically address any TMDL into the Sevier River, although through the rangeland improvement we are hopeful to reduce the sediment run off through the chaining treatment allowing for improved understory of grasses, forbs and shrubs that will be seeded. As for the question about the amount of water taken in by the juniper and pinyon trees this was a study that was present to the NRCS through a webinar, I received it from Burke Davenport, study stated that in the study 130 trees identified in a one acre area (33% pinyon, 9% juniper, 58% inter-space over a twelve month period would consume 280,000 liters of water per acre of trees per yr or about 23% of an acre foot) As I made mention in another project in the comments I hope I am interpreting it as the presenter explain it. As far as the Ezra Flat Trend sit it explained as follows: This site was established in 2013 and was dominated by black sagebrush (Artemisia nova) with Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) and twoneedle pinyon (Pinus edulis) scattered throughout and was considered to be transitioning from Phase I to Phase II of woodland succession. The 2013 bullhog treatment removed most of the tree cover, and black sagebrush was the sole dominant site component in the 2016 sample year although a variety of other browse species were observed in height crown measurements. The herbaceous understory was sparse in both sample years. Although 2016 cover and density of pinyon-juniper were low, their presence indicates that this site has the potential to be infilled in the future. This particular site was treated in fall of 2013, as far as the chaining portion of the project for this years treatment it will help with inter-seeding the grasses, forbs and shrubs. The proposed two-way chaining area is phase three succession and will greatly benefit from being chained and seeded. Thanks Mike as always for taking the time to help me out with my projects.
Comment 02/02/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Kendall, Water troughs should have escape ramps for smammals and birds. Any nesting raptors? Keith
Comment 02/02/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Thanks Keith for the comment, I will have to defer to Sean Kelly on the nesting raptors in the treatment area, but I can assure you that I will have escape ramps installed in the watering troughs, I can follow up with the BLM and FS on this as well. Thanks. Sean can you comment on the raptor portion that Keith is requesting??
Comment 02/05/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: N/A
Keith, we don't have any raptor nests in the area proposed for chaining. When we did the bullhog work a few years back I did find a red-tailed hawk nest and several raven nests outside the project area, and the RT nest was just inside the spatial buffer. Since implementation occurred in the winter it wasn't an issue. Implementation of this project is also planned for late-fall or winter, so disturbance during the nesting season won't be an issue.
Comment 02/16/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Danny Summers
If the range trend site we have here is any indication it doesn't appear the site has been heavily invaded by cheatgrass. I beleive we have some good native varieties of grasses that could work well at this site. I think we could remove the crested, intermediate, newhy, and tall WG. Sub-in: Snake river, thickspike and increase rates of bluebunch.
Comment 02/19/2018 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Danny, I have made the adjustments to the seed mix and talked to the Fillmore Forest Service Range Conservationist Lannce Sudweeks on this. Thanks Kendall
Comment 03/06/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Kevin Gunnell
The RT site within the polygon is listed as black sagebrush. Is this isolated to the RT site or should there be black sage in the mix instead of Wyoming?
Comment 02/14/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Hey Kendall, Nice proposal. Thanks for facilitating cross boundary work onto the Forest up there. A few suggestions. It looks like that wash along highway 50 that drains your area would flow into the Sevier River at the top of the Middle Sevier River from Salina Creek downstream to Yuba Reservoir segment that has an approved TMDL for total P, sediment and TDS that your project might help address. I would put objectives from the TMDL into your plans. Snake monitoring? If any of that $57,600 to hire a lop and scatter crew is cash money it probably belongs in the Other section or through WRI if it is going to the State and then in the dame place under funding with the identified funding source. Man I feel like I made that sound way more complicated than it is. Nice job addressing Quality, benefit and need for species. I gave you an extra point because you tried to make a tie to your milk snake, even if I am skeptical;-). Now I am afraid Jimi is going to yell at me again.
Comment 02/14/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Thanks Mike for the comment, I will follow up with making the suggestions to the plans as it pertains to the TMDL and the Lower Sevier River Watershed. As far as snake monitoring, I am not a herpetologist, but any monitoring I can do will be of value if the project is completed this fall, better to see the sneeky snakes then miss them. Over all I think they will benefit due to increased forage from grasses forbs and other vegetation that rodents, mice and other small mammals will feed on. As for the lop and scatter aspect the BLM completed it in fall of 2018, we just showed the in-kind match toward the project from the BLM. Thanks Kendall
Comment 02/19/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
I know Kendall and he is too afraid of snakes to go looking and monitor for them ;)
Comment 02/19/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Clint, you are exactly right, no need to have the snow melt the nightmares of seeing the serpents make my skin crawl, long sleepless nights, fear of walking in the woods alone, seeing a camouflaged reptile just laying in waiting makes me cringe. I will conquer my fears and move on to do good things for wildlife and even a snake or two. Thanks Clint.
Comment 02/14/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Chamberlain
Kendall did speak to me (SITLA) about the project and we declined due to a timing issue. The permittees that would be impacted have other portions of their grazing lands currently being rested/treated. In a couple of years I hope he expands this work to the north so we can include the trust lands.
Comment 02/14/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Thanks Scott for the comment, if funding and implementation happens this fall we can seriously look at moving to the north and improving some of the SITLA portions. Thanks, Kendall
Comment 02/19/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
Here come a couple snake questions for ya, sorry. I like to see projects get points for these obscure species other than deer, elk, and sage grouse so just trying to help. You referenced how those two snake species might benefit so that's great. For someone like me and other rankers who don't know the first thing about these species can you provide any distribution maps or at least what kind of value of habitat it is without rankers having to do their own research. I know UDWR has some distribution maps and ranks the value of habitat. Maybe get one of the non-game biologists to reply here. Again I think it's great to think about these obscure species. In the WAP it doesn't list the Sonoran Mountain Kingsnake but rather the Pyro Mountain Kingsnake. Diffferent or the same species? Great project in an area that could use some death to pinyon and juniper. When you get rollin on the private lands remember me.
Comment 02/19/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Jimi Gragg
Hi Clint, I can speak to some of your questions. On the identity one, we had a species split - the Sonoran Mtn King was "cut" at about the Mogollon Rim, and everything north was named Pyro Mtn King. Everything south retained the old name. On the maps - we have positive-occurrence data only for these species. We have a distribution-modeling project that'll start in the fall, but we will begin with higher priorities. It will be a few years until we get around to those 2 (although they are pretty ideal candidates - from a technical standpoint - to model, I think). As far as value of habitat - I've tried to address that before. Basically, *all* snakes are predators. These 2 feed exclusively on vertebrates - lizards primarily, and small mammals to a lesser extent. That prey base depends on a landscape that isn't excessively dominated by woody plants, and which also isn't depleted of its herbaceous component. Basically, there needs to be enough seeds and bugs - same story as for so much small wildlife. The location, objectives, and methods of this proposal are well aligned to benefit these 2 snake species. Hope this is helpful. Thanks all. (Mike I'm not yelling!!!! ha ha ha)
Comment 02/22/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
So when we kill trees of darkness everybody wins...except the Pinion jay....where are you on that one Jimi?;-)
Comment 02/25/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Jimi Gragg
Where am I on pinyon jays? Alert and engaged, but also pretty aware of the state of knowledge of causal factors. I would love for us to get to the state of knowing what to do, and what not to do, for them. Definite "what not to do" is - as I understand things - currently limited to "just don't cut down colonies". Which is not as easy as it sounds, unfortunately. It certainly *does not* extend to "require jay surveys for any PJ removal projects". Practically speaking, for this proposal, I don't see that we're operating in onsite PJ, it appears we're operating in late-seral sagebrush (on both a first entry and second entry basis - chaining and lop & scatter, respectively). I honestly don't ever see operating in sagebrush sites (even late-seral, phase 3 PJ ones) being a serious threat to pinyon jays. For all we know, maybe we should be doing more infill reduction in actual, on-site PJ sites - maybe we should have silviculturalists prescribing more ICO in true PJ. Anyway, the jay issue is like almost anything - the closer you look, the more interesting and nuanced and complicated it is. I look forward to doing what I can to help figure out where to go on jays, and helping us go there. What we don't need is people using pinyon jay as a dog whistle to sow doubt on our enterprise. Anybody tells you they truly *know* what's going on with jays - you're hearing a falsehood. That's where I'm at on that one. And I'm still not yelling, at anyone.
Comment 02/24/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Thanks Jimi for your comment about the pinyon jays. I appreciate your response back to Mike. Kendall
Comment 02/24/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Thanks Mike for your comments and concerns on the Pinyon Jays, I hope Jimi answered your question. After chaining several hundred acres of pinyon and juniper trees, I find myself sitting and pondering the good we have done and the additional forage we have made for wildlife species, but most of all I enjoy seeing pinyon jays picking up the pinyon nuts across the landscape collecting a cash for winter. Thanks Mike.
Comment 08/11/2021 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
This is just a reminder that completion reports are due August 31st. I have entered the expenses in the Through WRI/DWR column on the finance page. Please do not make any changes to numbers in the Through WRI/DWR column. Any "Through Other" or "In-kind" expenses will need to be entered by the PM or contributors. Update your map features and fill out the completion form. Be sure to click on the finalize button on the completion report when you have your completion report ready to be reviewed by WRI Admin. Don't forget to upload any pictures of the project you have of before, during and after completion. If you have any questions about this don't hesitate to contact me. Thanks.
Comment 08/30/2021 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Kendall - A few questions came up as I was reading your report. First of all how many troughs were installed? Both 4 and 5 are referenced in the report. The other big question I had was what was the difference between the one-way and two-way chained areas to make you do the different treatments? Thanks.
Comment 09/02/2021 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Thanks for making those corrections. I have moved this project to completed.
Completion
Start Date:
10/01/2019
End Date:
06/03/2021
FY Implemented:
2021
Final Methods:
Red Canyon Project consisted of the collaboration between the Fillmore Forest Service, Richfield BLM, UDWR and Grazing Permittees. This project was identified to reseed over 1,043 acres of pinyon and juniper communities, along with two-way chaining approximately 575 acres and one-way chaining approximately 468 acres. The one-way chaining portion of this project was a previous bullhog project that was not seeded when the project was completed by the FS. The purpose of the one-way chaining was to incorporate the seed into the soil. The chaining aspect of the project was completed by Mike Kesler Construction. With support from Thirstycows.com, the BLM and USFS installed over 26,705 feet of 2" HDPE fusible pipeline. Also installed where five (5) rubber tire troughs that will help livestock and wildlife in the area with an added water supply. In additional to the chaining, pipeline and trough installation the BLM also treated approximately 177 acres with a "spike" herbicide within the Ezra Flat area of this project. This was completed by Hammond Helicopters through the use of a fixed wing aircraft.
Project Narrative:
The overall goals and objectives of the Red Canyon Project both with the BLM and the USFS were met through this cooperative effort between the two Federal Agencies along with the Livestock Permittee and UDWR. The main focus of this project was to reduce encroaching pinyon-juniper trees within an existing treatment, improve grass, forb and shrub understory and improve water supply for livestock and wildlife. Through the partnership of the BLM working with the USFS, UDWR and livestock permittees we where able to install over 18,305 feet of 2" HDPE pipeline and set 4 water troughs. This was done through in-kind services provided by the BLM, who donated labor, a D-8 dozer with pipe ripper and fuel to complete this portion of the project. The new pipeline was installed under ground and set next to the old non-functioning line. It was completed in summer of 2019. In addition another pipeline was installed in spring of 2021 by Thristycows.com. This pipeline was over 8,400' and included one water trough, UDWR was able to contract this portion of the project out withThirstycows.com. In the fall of 2019, UDWR and the USFS agreed to contract the aerial seeding application of 1,043 acres that was associated with the chaining aspect of the project. Hammond Helicopters where the low bidder for this seeding application, a diverse mix of grasses and forbs where applied at 15.80 lbs per acre this was done through a fixed wing plane. UDWR then contracted with Mike Kesler Enterprises to help complete the 1,043 ac of chaining. This project was completed by the use of two (2) tracked John Deere D-8 Dozers pulling an "Ely" anchor chain weighing around 28,000 lbs. Mike did a great job on the project. He was willing to make adjustments if needed and work within the schedule we had lined out. In the fall of 2019, UDWR again contracted with Hammond Helicopters to apply a shrub mix over the newly chained areas. This shrub mix contained forage kochia and alfalfa and was applied at 1.0 lb per acre. This was also completed using a fixed wing plane. In the spring of 2021, UDWR contracted with Hammond Helicopters to work in partnership with the BLM to apply "Spike" Herbicide on 177 acres of BLM property in the Ezra Flat area. This contract called for the application of .5 active ingredient per acre. This application was completed with a fixed wing airplane. Over all this project was a great success. We had lots of great contractors help us out, as well as the in-kind labor from the BLM, USFS, UDWR and livestock permittees. This project looks great and we are seeing increased forage for wildlife and livestock. The troughs are working great and even in a drought type year we still have enough water. Special thanks to all the partnerships, sportsman groups, federal and state agencies for making this project a success.
Future Management:
The Red Canyon Project will be overseen by the BLM and the USFS, both agencies will play a critical role in managing for seasonal livestock grazing associated with the project. With continued success the BLM will complete any maintenance associated with the pipeline and trough that is located on BLM property. In addition the BLM will also monitor the herbicide treatment on Ezra Flat, they will be looking at the rate of kill on the sagebrush and the amount of understory that was released through the treatment. The USFS will be deferring livestock grazing for up to two (2) growing seasons, this will occur on the 1,043 acres of chaining that took place. In addition, the USFS and the Grazing Permittee will be maintaining the pipeline and water troughs as they will need to be monitored for lose fittings, plugs, or breaks in the system. This project was a great cooperative effort with the BLM, USFS and the Grazing Permittee, through all the hard work this project was a great success.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
1000 Pipeline Construction Below surface
2383 Water development point feature Construction Trough
2384 Water development point feature Construction Trough
2385 Water development point feature Construction Trough
2386 Water development point feature Construction Trough
2389 Water development point feature Construction Trough
6764 Terrestrial Treatment Area Anchor chain Ely (1-way)
6764 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
6764 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (secondary/shrub) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
6765 Terrestrial Treatment Area Anchor chain Ely (2-way)
6765 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
6765 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (secondary/shrub) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
7763 Terrestrial Treatment Area Herbicide application Aerial (fixed-wing)
Project Map
Project Map