Wetland Enhancement (Mesic Meadow Habitat Development)
Project ID: 4829
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2020
Submitted By: 2988
Project Manager: Jacob Stout
PM Agency: Bureau of Land Management
PM Office: Cedar City
Lead: Bureau of Land Management
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
Mesic meadow habitat development would be prioritized within and adjacent to Greater sage grouse Priority Habitat Management Areas (PHMA) and existing vegetation treatments within the Spanish George area. This habitat would be promoted by constructing structures (i.e. Zuni pools/bowls, media lunas, rock dams, check dams, etc...) to slow the flow and infiltration of water in strategic locations.
Location:
Mesic meadow habitat development would be prioritized within and adjacent to Greater sage grouse Priority Habitat Management Areas (PHMA) and existing vegetation treatments within the Spanish George area.
Project Need
Need For Project:
Mesic meadow habitat would be prioritized within and adjacent to Greater Sage-grouse Priority Habitat Management Areas (PHMA) and existing vegetation treatment areas within the Spanish George area. The project would limit soil erosion that is occurring in existing drainages that are downcut and have limited amounts of vegetation while improving vegetative recovery in these areas due to floodplain development and seeding. In addition, vegetation treatments have been implemented throughout the area within 1 - 1.5 miles of known sage grouse leks and locations (determined by GPS telemetry data). These vegetation treatments are at higher elevation where grasses, forbs and shrubs remain green and as a result are higher in vigor for a longer period of time in the summer due to cooler temperatures and more precipitation that is received at this elevation than the lower lying areas where sage grouse are currently inhabiting. The project would allow for planting forbs, grasses, etc.. that are highly desirable to sage grouse in immediate proximity to the mesic meadow structures. The structures would allow for these areas to remain wetter for a longer period of time and would provide succulent vegetation for sage grouse during the hot and dry portion of the summer. Prior to the vegetation treatments in the higher elevations, the area was dominated by pinyon pine and juniper, which is not conducive to sage grouse; however, following the treatment these areas have been converted to perennial grass, forb and shrubs that are highly desirable to sage grouse. It is expected that sage grouse will utilize the mesic meadow structure areas and begin moving to the higher elevations that have recently been treated, which would provide for an abundance of additional brood rearing habitat. Mesic meadow habitat may be promoted by constructing structures (i.e., Zuni pools/bowls, media lunas, rock dams, and check-dams) to slow the flow and infiltration of water in strategic locations. The majority of these structures may be implemented using hand tools (i.e., shovels, rakes, picks, buckets, etc.), but heavy equipment (skid steer loader or backhoe) may be used to install rock vanes, random rock clusters, large logs, root wads and other woody debris. In addition, this project would focus on planting desirable perennial forbs, grasses, wetland obligates, pollinator, and other vegetation conducive to mesic meadow sites in the Great Basin area. Note: Please refer to the Images/Documents Section for documents including the NRCS - Approved Erosion Control and the NRCS Technical Note for design features (i.e. zuni bowls) and photos of the structures that will be constructed to provide for Mesic Meadow Habitat Development. The project will benefit wildlife species as follows: Sage grouse -- Benefits would be to encourage sage grouse to move to the upper elevations that have been recently converted from Phase 2 and Phase 3 pinyon/juniper encroachment through mesic meadow development. These areas are expected to provide for expansion habitat/opportunity areas within the project area. The mesic meadow areas would be expected to provide for brood rearing habitat due to the perennial forb component that would be planted within the immediate area. Elk, mule deer, pygmy rabbit - Benefits from mesic meadow development are expected to occur overtime as a result of creating wetter areas throughout the project area. The structures would slow water down during runoff events (i.e. snowmelt or monsoonal rain) and provide for floodplain development in drainages within the area. Riparian and mesic wet meadow areas are limited within the project area. It is expected the project will allow for vegetation to stay green longer; especially, during drought conditions, which will provide wildlife species with opportunity areas for high quality forage. The project could be expected to promote fawning habitat for elk and mule deer within the area in the long-term. In addition, because the project would consist of planting highly desirable forbs within the structure development it is expected that a large variety of pollinators would benefit.
Objectives:
The project would provide for the following objectives: * Create mesic meadows (high value perennial forb sage grouse habitat) * Reduce storm runoff (rain and snowmelt) velocities * Trap sediment * Assist in floodplain development; * Limit soil erosion (i.e. stabilize drainages that exhibit vegetative recovery) * Create desirable wildlife habitats * Provide opportunities for sage grouse to migrate to existing upper elevation vegetation treatments
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
There are minimal, risks to resources during the construction phase of mesic meadow structures. Structure failure could occur; however, a plan similar to what was developed in the Birch Creek Bonneville Cutthroat Trout and Improvement Project (3688) would be developed so that monitoring data that is collected would allow for adaptive management strategies to be employed in future phases of the project. The vast majority of the work will be done with hand tools; therefore it is anticipated that only small amounts of dirt will be moved during construction.
Relation To Management Plan:
Riparian Restoration and Wetland Enhancement -- October 2018 The EA/FONSI/DR recognized the importance of the promotion of mesic wet meadows throughout the Cedar City Field Office. Pinyon Management Framework Plan (1983) The resource management plan is a broad framework for managing BLM lands in the jurisdiction of the Cedar City Field Office the project area. Although this project is not specifically addressed in the RMP, the proposed project will comply with and enhance the objectives of this management plan. In addition, improvements to soils was addressed; specifically, involving reduction of erosion and associated improvement/maintenance of soil productivity. Southwest Desert Local Working Group Conservation Plan (SDLWGCP) 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. BLM Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan 2015 A. The project is consistent with the SGARMPA (2015) goals, objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Special Status Species section as follows: There are no specific objectives or management actions identified in the SGARMPA or the SDLWGCP for mesic meadow development. The project is expected to improve brood rearing in localized areas and entice sage grouse to use higher elevation areas where extensive vegetative treatments to convert large areas to sagebrush steppe habitat have occurred between 2015 - 2017. The areas that were converted to sagebrush steppe are expected to serve as long-term opportunity/habitat expansion areas. 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. Southwest Desert Deer Herd Unit Management Plan (SDDHUMP) (2015) 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 Mesic Meadow Development Project are (1) Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities, including hunting and viewing. (2) Maintain the population at a level that is within the long-term capability of the available habitat support. The SDDHUMP identified fawning recruitment as a major concern on the unit and lack of fawning recruitment may be the single greatest factor limiting the population. The project is expected to provide for localized improvement to fawning habitat through the mesic meadow development would create floodplains that would be seeded with highly desirable grasses/forbs component. Southwest Desert Elk Herd Unit Management Plan (SDEHUMP) (2016) Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities including hunting and viewing. Maintain the population at a level that is within the long term support capability of the available habitat. Maintain and enhance forage and cover habitat through vegetative manipulation and other management techniques. Habitat management objectives that are applicable to the project are to (1) develop new and protect/improve existing water sources for wildlife and livestock to improve distribution and minimize overutilization in proximity to water sources (2) enhance riparian systems through continue, prescriptive grazing and mechanical or chemical treatments. The SDEHUMP identified barriers to achieving unit management objectives including drought impacts to rangeland forage condition and abundance. It is expected that the localized improvement through the mesic development project would limit erosion and provide for opportunities for areas to remain greener longer. This would improve vegetative diversity and perennial understory in drainages throughout the project area. Utah Pronghorn Statewide Management Plan (UPSMP) (2009) The management goals are to increase the current population or establish new populations of pronghorn in all suitable habitat within the state and assure sufficient habitat is available to sustain healthy and productive pronghorn populations. The UPSMP identified the lack of succulent forbs and grasses on spring/summer rangers as a critical limiting factor in much of Utah's pronghorn habitat, which is the result of xeric, low annual precipitation conditions. Note: to my knowledge there has not been a project like this done to entice sage grouse to use new areas. In addition, it is acknowledged that benefits to wildlife with the exception of sage grouse would likely be very localized or long-term.
Fire / Fuels:
Mitigation for wildfire would be accomplished by developing mesic meadow habitat and planting a diverse seed mix on a very localized basis, which will lead to improvement in drainages within the project area.
Water Quality/Quantity:
Mesic meadow structures are expected to influence stream hydrology and water quality in a number of important ways primarily by altering the amount, and timing of delivery of water and sediment (Naiman et al., 1988; Gurnell, 1998; Pollock et al., 2003). The mesic meadow structures are expected to provide the following benefits to streams: 1. Slow water velocity encouraging deposition of fine sediment (Butler and Malanson, 1995; Pollock et al., 2007) in the pond itself and during high flows onto the adjacent floodplain. 2. Act as long-term sinks for both suspended and bedload sediment (Green and Westbrook, 2009). The project will use mesic meadow structures will impound water, capture/settle/stabilize stream supplied sediment, increase water levels and corresponding water table, and aid in establishment of riparian vegetation on banks and adjacent floodplain. Water quality benefits of the proposed project would include reduction of suspended sediment, capture of sediment loads, increase DO, decrease overall water temperatures and increase base flows.
Compliance:
Cultural Site Clearances will be completed prior to project implementation. NEPA was completed and authorized the project under the Cedar City Field Office - Riparian Restoration and Wetland Enhancement EA/Decision Record in October 2018.
Methods:
The scope of the project includes: 1. Installation of mesic meadow structures 2. Strategic planting of native vegetation The mesic meadow structures will provide an increase in sediment storage on the floodplain and benefits to downstream water quality. Strategic ponding will provide Greater sage grouse with succulent forbs, grasses, etc... throughout the summer. In addition, it is expected that the structures will capture/settle/stabilize drainages within the project area.
Monitoring:
Ocular observations including photo points will occur pre-treatment and on an annual basis post treatment to document changes to drainages and seeding success in the project area. In addition, GPS telemetry data will continue to be collected to determine if sage grouse are utilizing the immediate mesic meadow structure locations.
Partners:
Partners to support the project will include the BLM, Southwest Desert Adaptive Resource Management local working group (SWARM), Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR), Utah State University and Anabranch Solutions. The project will be developed with full participation of these groups.
Future Management:
The Spanish George Allotment has authorized livestock grazing from May 16th - June 30th (Year 1) and August 16th - November 30th (Year 2). A two year livestock grazing management system has eliminated repeated livestock grazing during the critical growing period. In addition, a plan similar to what was developed in the Birch Creek Bonneville Cutthroat Trout and Improvement Project (3688) would be developed so that monitoring data that is collected would allow for adaptive management strategies to be employed in future phases of the project.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
The project is expected to improve and expand mesic habitat within the project area. As discussed, vegetation treatments have been implemented throughout the area within 1 - 1.5 miles of known sage grouse leks and locations (determined by GPS telemetry data). These vegetation treatments are at higher elevation where grasses, forbs and shrubs remain green and as a result are higher in vigor for a longer period of time in the summer due to cooler temperatures and more precipitation that is received at this elevation than the lower lying areas where sage grouse are currently inhabiting. The project would allow for planting forbs, grasses, etc.. that are highly desirable to sage grouse in immediate proximity to the mesic meadow structures. The structures would allow for these areas to remain wetter for a longer period of time and would provide succulent vegetation for sage grouse during the hot and dry portion of the summer. Prior to the vegetation treatments in the higher elevations, the area was dominated by pinyon pine and juniper, which is not conducive to sage grouse; however, following the treatment these areas have been converted to perennial grass, forb and shrubs that are highly desirable to sage grouse. It is expected that sage grouse will utilize the mesic meadow structure areas and begin moving to the higher elevations that have recently been treated, which would provide for an abundance of additional brood rearing habitat.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$14,688.00 $0.00 $14,688.00 $25,000.00 $39,688.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Archaeological Clearance Archaeological Clearance - Mesic Meadow (project sites <1/4 acre each) $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 2020
Personal Services (permanent employee) The majority of mesic meadow structure installation (i.e. Zuni pools/bowls, media lunas, rock dams and check dams), monitoring, etc.. would be completed by internal BLM personnel and volunteers. $0.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 2020
NEPA NEPA completed as part of the Mesic Meadow Enhancement NEPA project. $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 2020
Materials and Supplies Provide skid steer loader, 2 ATVS and 2 ATV trailers, 3 truck trailers for hauling ATVs and skid steer loader for 10 days. $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 2020
Personal Services (seasonal employee) Salary for 4 Field Technicians to aid in project implementation. $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 2020
Materials and Supplies Purchase rock, rebar, delivery to site, etc... to allow for the construction of mesic meadow structures (i.e. Zuni bowls pools/bowls, media lunas, rock dams and check dams). $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Seed (GBRC) High sage grouse value perennial forbs and grasses would be planted at each of the mesic meadow structure sites. $2,188.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Contractual Services Anabranch Solutions LLC provide guidance to development of treatment plan. $2,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$15,000.00 $0.00 $15,000.00 $25,000.00 $40,000.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
BLM (Sage Grouse) A096 Extension ASAP 1698 $7,335.55 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) In-kind funding includes NEPA, cultural clearance, permanent and seasonal employee salaries, monitoring, equipment, etc... $0.00 $0.00 $25,000.00 2020
BLM Wildlife A094 Extension ASAP 1693 $2,806.15 $0.00 $0.00 2025
BLM (Aquatics) A100 Extension ASAP 1811 $4,858.30 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Impacts on Migrating Birds NA
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Persistent Declines in Prey Species NA
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) 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
Droughts Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Temperature Extremes Medium
Pygmy Rabbit N4
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Habitats
Habitat
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Very High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Soil Erosion / Loss Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Very High
Project Comments
Comment 02/08/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
Great project concept, these mesic projects are going to be what stitches all the upland work that has been going on for years together. Great for sagebrush songbirds too. Photos of the proposed project site are always good reference to have in the database.
Comment 02/19/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Dan Fletcher
Clint - Thanks for the comment. I think it is an exciting concept. If we can create some more wet areas in Hamlin Valley it will not hurt anything. In addition, I think with proper placement we can "encourage" sage grouse and other sagebrush obligates to transition from the lower portions of the valley to the higher elevations where we have completed treatments to convert from pinyon/juniper encroachment back to a sagebrush steppe community. I should have some pictures to attach.
Comment 02/11/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Dan, You do not provide any detail concerning number of structure/meadows created or locations for the same. I presume, since you mention SAGR, they will be placed in grassland and/or shrub steppe habitats. Benefits to pygmy rabbit could accrue over time, but placement of structures must also avoid any occupied habitat. FEHA and GOEA could gain some improved foraging, but that would be totally dependent on habitat response and may be a long-term vision. Keith
Comment 02/20/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Dan Fletcher
Keith - Thanks for the comments. You are correct the structures would be placed in shrub steppe areas and locations of sage grouse. We would complete wildlife surveys (including pygmy rabbit) prior to construction. It will be interesting to see if we can determine a response from wildlife in the area. I thought focusing on sage grouse was a good start because we have some GPS collars in the area. In addition, the map has been updated to provide locations for structure development. There are a pretty large amount of structures that have been identified; however, this is intended to be a multi-year project.
Comment 02/13/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Vicki Tyler
In looking at this project, I too have a hard time telling what will occur where, and to what extent it will benefit sage grouse. Are the sites in locations that sage grouse are known to frequent or near where they have brood and nesting habitat (1-1.5 miles is broad). What makes these sites (also broad on your map, suitable for this treatment). Need more specifics here, and a finer-detailed map. Please explain for the lay reader what these water structures are - I am not sure that everyone is familiar with he the different types of Zedyke structures. You list a lot of species and habitats that will benefit, but no where in the proposal do you tie the threats and risks to those species/habitats to how this project addresses those. Lastly, what is to ensure that livestock grazing will not impact these structures once completed?
Comment 02/20/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Dan Fletcher
Vicki - Thanks for the comments. 1. Location refinement? The map has been updated to provide locations for structure development. There are a pretty large amount of structures that have been identified; however, this is intended to be a multi-year project. The map should have the current locations of sage grouse within the area. A bottom (lower elevation) to top (higher elevation) approach would be utilized for structure placement. This would allow structures to be placed as close to sage grouse GPS points as possible in an effort to encourage expansion into the upper elevations. 2. Explain what water structures are? Refer to Images/Documents for further information (text and pictures). Rather than place all of this narrative into the text I was just hoping to refer everyone to these documents. I will refer everyone to these documents in the Need for the Project Section so that they are aware of the design features (i.e. zuni bowls) and photos of the structures. 3. Species/habitat benefits The following will be added to the Need for Project Section: Sage grouse -- Benefits would be to encourage sage grouse to move to the upper elevations that have been recently converted from Phase 2 and Phase 3 pinyon/juniper encroachment through mesic meadow development. These areas are expected to provide for expansion habitat/opportunity areas within the project area. The mesic meadow areas would be expected to provide for brood rearing habitat due to the perennial forb component that would be planted within the immediate area. Elk, mule deer, pygmy rabbit - Benefits from mesic meadow development are expected to occur overtime as a result of creating wetter areas throughout the project area. The structures would slow water down during runoff events (i.e. snowmelt or monsoonal rain) and provide for floodplain development in drainages within the area. Riparian and mesic wet meadow areas are limited within the project area. It is expected the project will allow for vegetation to stay green longer; especially, during drought conditions, which will provide wildlife species with opportunity areas for high quality forage. The project could be expected to promote fawning habitat for elk and mule deer within the area in the long-term. 4. Livestock Grazing I really do not think that the structures are going to be negatively impacted by livestock since they will be made out of rock and restricted to drainages. Objectives of the project include reducing storm runoff velocities, which will trap sediment and assist in floodplain development. It is expected that the structures will covered with soil and vegetation in the long-term as the floodplains are developed. There are no plans to fence off the structures because of the very small size of the area to be impacted.
Comment 02/14/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
Hey Dan - I am excited about the concept here. As written it is gonna be tough to score well. Need more ties to mgmt plans, support for the benefits to species and habitats. Partners section sounds like it is headed in the right direction but reading between the lines it sounds like you intend to have that coordination but it hasn't happened yet, at least doesn't sound like anyone here at UDWR has been coordinated with yet. If it doesn't get funded don't drop the idea, lets connect the dots for next year.
Comment 02/21/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Dan Fletcher
Gary -- Thanks for the comments. 1. Management Plans? The following will be added to relationships to plans: Riparian Restoration and Wetland Enhancement -- October 2018 The EA/FONSI/DR recognized the importance of the promotion of mesic wet meadows throughout the Cedar City Field Office. Pinyon Management Framework Plan (1983) The resource management plan is a broad framework for managing BLM lands in the jurisdiction of the Cedar City Field Office the project area. Although this project is not specifically addressed in the RMP, the proposed project will comply with and enhance the objectives of this management plan. In addition, improvements to soils was addressed; specifically, involving reduction of erosion and associated improvement/maintenance of soil productivity. Southwest Desert Local Working Group Conservation Plan (SDLWGCP) 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. BLM Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan 2015 A. The project is consistent with the SGARMPA (2015) goals, objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Special Status Species section as follows: There are no specific objectives or management actions identified in the SGARMPA or the SDLWGCP for mesic meadow development. The project is expected to improve brood rearing in localized areas and entice sage grouse to use higher elevation areas where extensive vegetative treatments to convert large areas to sagebrush steppe habitat have occurred between 2015 - 2017. The areas that were converted to sagebrush steppe are expected to serve as long-term opportunity/habitat expansion areas. 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. Southwest Desert Deer Herd Unit Management Plan (SDDHUMP) (2015) 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 Mesic Meadow Development Project are (1) Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities, including hunting and viewing. (2) Maintain the population at a level that is within the long-term capability of the available habitat support. The SDDHUMP identified fawning recruitment as a major concern on the unit and lack of fawning recruitment may be the single greatest factor limiting the population. The project is expected to provide for localized improvement to fawning habitat through the mesic meadow development would create floodplains that would be seeded with highly desirable grasses/forbs component. Southwest Desert Elk Herd Unit Management Plan (SDEHUMP) (2016) Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities including hunting and viewing. Maintain the population at a level that is within the long term support capability of the available habitat. Maintain and enhance forage and cover habitat through vegetative manipulation and other management techniques. Habitat management objectives that are applicable to the project are to (1) develop new and protect/improve existing water sources for wildlife and livestock to improve distribution and minimize overutilization in proximity to water sources (2) enhance riparian systems through continue, prescriptive grazing and mechanical or chemical treatments. The SDEHUMP identified barriers to achieving unit management objectives including drought impacts to rangeland forage condition and abundance. It is expected that the localized improvement through the mesic development project would limit erosion and provide for opportunities for areas to remain greener longer. This would improve vegetative diversity and perennial understory in drainages throughout the project area. Utah Pronghorn Statewide Management Plan (UPSMP) (2009) The management goals are to increase the current population or establish new populations of pronghorn in all suitable habitat within the state and assure sufficient habitat is available to sustain healthy and productive pronghorn populations. The UPSMP identified the lack of succulent forbs and grasses on spring/summer rangers as a critical limiting factor in much of Utah's pronghorn habitat, which is the result of xeric, low annual precipitation conditions. Note: to my knowledge there has not been a project like this done to entice sage grouse to use new areas. In addition, it is acknowledged that benefits to wildlife with the exception of sage grouse would likely be very localized or long-term. 2. Partners The project was proposed to the local SWARM group in December 2018. Project ranked pretty high in comparison to the all of the projects that were presented. I honestly do not remember if anyone from the DWR was at the meeting. We have been considering this project for quite a while to determine if we could utilize GPS sage grouse data to entice sage grouse to use upper elevation areas that have been treated between 2015 -- 2017. I have not been able to find any other projects like this and we would be incorporating techniques/strategies in the following references: Let the Water Do the Work (Bill Zeedyk and Van Clothier), Restoration of Rare or Declining Natural Communities: Zeedyk Sructures for Riparian Aras and Wet Meadows and Range Technical Note: Hand-built Structures for Restoring Degraded Meadows in Sagebrush Rangelands. I think this is a pretty exciting concept that has potential to allow for the expansion of sage grouse use into the new treatments and also try to get sage grouse to areas with a diverse and succulent mix of perennial grasses and forbs. I would be happy to coordinate more and get out on the ground and show everyone the locations of structures.
Comment 04/03/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Kevin Gunnell
What are thoughts for seed bed prep and planting? Where this is all forbs it may be worth investigating some different strategies. Glad to discuss what GBRC can do if funded.
Comment 04/04/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Dan Fletcher
Kevin - Thanks for the comment. Yes, I think it is really important to prepare a seedbed. As discussed in the proposal, the project will be implemented in very small localized areas and are expected to be less than 0.1 acres each. I think there are some options for seedbed preparation ranging to handwork to a rototiller on a tractor. If the project ever gets funding I would definitely like to have further discussion with you. We may implement a few structures in house this summer/fall to get the ball rolling so I will be in touch.
Comment 02/21/2019 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
With adding the points of where the structures will be built I don't think you need the large aquatic/riparian treatment. That doesn't really help with displaying the project.
Comment 02/22/2019 Type: 2 Commenter: Jason Stewart
The structure points were added in response to a previous comment. We would like to leave the polygon in place as we are planning other improvements in the area as well.
Comment 02/25/2019 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Ok. If you feel like the action and treatment you guys have selected is a good representation of what you will be doing that works. This is a little different project than a lot of projects in the past so knowing how to best display it is kind of tricky. Thanks.
Comment 04/28/2025 Type: 2 Commenter: Daniel Eddington
The BLM funding on this project expired on 3/31/2025 and will need a completion report submitted by June 30, 2025 for reporting to the BLM. Please updated the following: 1. Update the Funding section, but only the "Through Other" or "In-kind." WRI Admin team will update all expenses in the "Through DWR/WRI" column. 2. Update your map features (if applicable) and 3. fill out the completion form. 4. Don't forget to upload any pictures of the project you have of before, during and after completion. 5. 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. If you have any questions about this don't hesitate to contact me. Thanks.
Comment 09/04/2025 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Completion reports were due August 31st. Please enter any missing expenses on the Finance page, update final features, if applicable, and fill out the Completion Form ASAP. If you have any questions about this don't hesitate to contact me. Also, don't forget to upload before, during and after photos of the project. Thanks.
Comment 11/26/2025 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Thank you for submitting your completion report. It looks like everything has been updated. Thanks for uploading before and after photos. This project has been moved to completed.
Completion
Start Date:
07/01/2024
End Date:
06/30/2025
FY Implemented:
2025
Final Methods:
The BLM, along with UCC and ACE crews completed 65+ wood and rock structures to stabilize multiple headcuts and incised channels in August and October 2023, and November 2024. Rock was purchased from a quarry in Milford and delivered to the site. Crews reshaped headcuts using shovels and picks and constructed structures by hand.
Project Narrative:
The original project was to take place in Hamblin Valley at over 40 potential sites, however, a similar site in Pine Valley where sage grouse have been observed was identified as more "at-risk" as there were several active headcuts working through an extensive wet meadow, Cottonwood Meadow. BLM, UCC, and ACE crews met in August and October 2023 and November 2024 to construct over 65 wood and rock structures that led to the stabilization of over 35 acres of wet meadow.
Future Management:
Structures will be monitored annually for effectiveness and modified with rock that remains on site on an as-needed basis. Any additional erosion features identified will be stabilized using rock that remains on site. The BLM will continue to monitor, identify, and address additional sites that are at risk due to excessive erosion and headcutting throughout Hamblin Valley and Pine Valley.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
15255 Aquatic/Riparian Treatment Area Stream Corridor/Channel Improvements Check dam(s) (low stage)
Project Map
Project Map