SR Mule Deer Winter Range Bitterbrush Enhancement FY20
Project ID: 4961
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2020
Submitted By: 1352
Project Manager: Johnny Neil
PM Agency: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
PM Office: Southern Region
Lead: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
Bitterbrush has been declining in locations throughout Southern Utah. The availability of bitterbrush seed will assist in reversing this trend, as Dedicated Hunters will be planting the seed in critical mule deer wintering areas.
Location:
Various areas in Southern Region (See map). The Iron County and Millard County locations are too small to see without zooming in; here is a description to easily find those areas: In Millard County, zoom in just north of Holden on the east side of I-15. The Iron County sites are near Summit and Enoch on the east side of I-15, and the two sites just south of Highway 20 on the west side of I-15.
Project Need
Need For Project:
To seed disturbed locations throughout the Southern Region to avoid invasive species encroachment and bolster Mule Deer habitat. In recent years, multiple projects have occurred to remove Phase III pinyon-juniper trees in locations where bitterbrush historically existed. Now that competition of the evil trees of darkness has been removed, we seek to reestablish bitterbrush plants in those previously inhabited locations.
Objectives:
By increasing the canopy cover of bitterbrush within the project site within two to five percent, the quantity of bitterbrush plants will be increased to a level that will substantially impact mule deer habitat. This project would support the maintenance or provide an avenue to achieve an increase in deer populations to meet current objectives stated in the mule deer statewide management plan.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
PJ encroachment has contributed to the declining trend in bitterbrush and the survival of bitterbrush plants. To combat this trend, planting bitterbrush in previous project areas where competition with the Trees of Darkness has been alleviated, will increase the efficacy of the planting project.
Relation To Management Plan:
Utah Mule Deer Statewide Management plan (2008) The encroachment of pinyon and juniper threatens to choke out understory grass, forbs, and shrubs. Increasing risk of catastrophic wildfire. In order for mule deer herds to thrive in Utah, it is essential that extensive habitat treatments be completed. To address the decline in mule deer habitat throughout Utah, restoration projects are being implemented to target habitat improvement on crucial mule deer ranges that have shifted in dominance to less desirable types or have degraded and provide little productivity. Panguitch lake Deer Herd Unit Mangement Plan (#28) 2015 The mid elevation upland site supports a pinyon-Utah juniper community and is generally considered to be in very poor condition for deer winter range. This community is prone to infilling from pinyon-juniper trees which can reduce understory shrub and herbaceous cover if not addressed. It is recommended that work to reduce the pinyon-juniper cover (e.g. bullhog, chaining, lop and scatter, etc.) should continue in this community. Parowon Front Wildlifre management plan All of the units on the Parowan Front WMA have pinyon-juniper forests that are encroaching on the sagebrush flats and choking out many of the browse species important to wintering deer. Several thinning (lop and scatter) and chaining projects have been done in the past to remedy this problem. However, due to the extent of the encroachment an aggressive thinning policy needs to be carried out on the Parowan Front WMA to improve habitat for wintering deer. Southern Utah Support Area Fire Mangement Plan 2004 which states: Mechanicallly treat to convert pinyon and juniper invasion (condition class 3) into sagebrush/perennial grass (condition class 1 or 2) vegetation types. . Utah's Standards and Guidelines for Rangeland Health which address watersheds, ecological condition, water quality and habitat for special status species National Fire Plan (2000) Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003 which state protecting forests, woodlands, shrub lands, and grasslands from unnaturally intensive and destructives fires Utah Wildlife conservation Strategy (2005)
Fire / Fuels:
Restoring habitats to a more natural state results in decreases in fire risk. The goal of this project is to aid in efforts to move project area to FRCC 1 from the previous condition of FRCC 2 or 3.
Water Quality/Quantity:
Appropriately vegetated sites assist in retaining runoff and preventing erosion; resulting in higher quality water in adjacent waterways. In addition the previously completed projects have eliminated the trees of darkness from the competition for water resulting in a greater retention of water and aiding in its return to the aquifer as well as decreased runoff.
Compliance:
Projects will be conducted on state, BLM, or private lands that have received prior authorization. DWR will consult within its sections and with other agencies to determine the best locations for reseeding. No NEPA is required for this project.
Methods:
Seed will be distributed to Dedicated Hunters to conduct the planting (via drill seeding) according to the mapped locations.
Monitoring:
Sites will be monitored by wildlife and habitat sections to asses growth of bitterbrush and usage of adult plants. Previous bitterbrush plantings have had 100 foot transects established on sites with planting occuring every foot in order to establish a percent germination and eventually establishment. One or two of these sites will also be established in these project areas. Photos will be taken from point of origin on transect.
Partners:
UDWR partners with USFS, BLM, and sportsmans groups to identify high quality areas to assist in the creation of better mule deer habitat.
Future Management:
The Dedicated Hunter program would like to continue to work with the habitat and wildlife sections on future projects. It is anticipated that this will become an annual proposal to help aid habitat projects with sites suitable for bitterbrush re-establishment. Future site selection will be informed as we look at success rates on these sites and identify the best suitable sites for future plantings.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
Many of these seedings will take place in areas with exisitng grazing permits and help contribute to the forage base available for both wildlife and livestock. Recreational uses of both hunting and wildlife viewing is also high on the sites these plantings will occur. Kane County sites exhibit good fawning range, and may keep a few deer out of private lands and make them available for public harvest. The Millard and Iron County sites are good for winter range; Iron County sites will provide habitat for deer, and Millard County sites will contribute to elk and deer habitat.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$7,250.00 $0.00 $7,250.00 $40,373.00 $47,623.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Seed (GBRC) Bitterbrush at 250 pounds $7,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Other Dedicated Hunter Labor $0.00 $0.00 $40,373.00 2020
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$7,250.00 $0.00 $7,250.00 $40,373.00 $47,623.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
Mule Deer Foundation (MDF) S023 $3,625.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) Dedicated Hunter Labor $0.00 $0.00 $40,373.00 2020
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) S027 $3,625.00 $0.00 $0.00 2020
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland High
Habitats
Habitat
Gambel Oak
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Gambel Oak
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Brush Eradication / Vegetation Treatments Medium
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Habitat Shifting and Alteration High
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Habitat Shifting and Alteration Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Very High
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Low
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Project Comments
Comment 02/05/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Johnny, Looks like a great low cost high reward project for mule deer. A few comments/questions. First off I think you should get bonus points for using the phrase " evil trees of darkness." I also want to give you bonus points for not trying to tell me how planting bitterbrush will benefit some snake or raptor species with an N value. Any chance you could load some supplemental maps or provide some steering directions on where the Iron and Millard County sites are. I found the 1300 acres in Kane but am struggling with the smaller acreages. So perhaps you could fill the stupid fish guy in on why these specific sites were chosen over other sites where Phase III PJ has been removed. What are current conditions on the sites like and from a deer or veg perspective why do we need to complete this project right now...is there a threshold that will be crossed making the project more difficult in the next 5 years? Nice use of the herd plans in your relationship to plans section. I am thinking you could sell the hunting value of at least the Kane County sites a bit better in your other sustainable uses section. Any depredation issues the project might help alleviate? How does this tie into all the other projects ongoing in the different watersheds to contribute to watershed health? Any actual deer monitoring? Photo points? Any discussion of work across adjacent land ownership? How will you ensure the success of these seedings? Deferment from grazing? Reseeding if a certain success rate is not met? Can you elaborate on how the project addresses the Invasive species -- Nonnative threat...while PJ are evil trees of darkness, they are most certainly native, just like the coyotes we have a bounty on.
Comment 02/06/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Curtis Roundy
Johnny is out for a bit so to help out I will help you to find the sites, and answer some of the questions that you asked. The Iron County sites are located in two different general areas. The first area is near the Parowan front in areas that have been lop and scattered and/or are planned to be bullhogged. The second location is close to Jackrabbit Spring in the hills north of the Parowan Gap. The Millard County Site is located Northeast of the town of Holden on the East Side of I15. All of the sites were chosen through a collaboration of the District Biologists from UDWR and the Habitat Staff from UDWR. The sites were chosen in areas where projects to remove the "evil trees of darkness" have previously been implemented or are planned to be implemented prior to the planting. This would allow the area to recover a historic veg species that was there and in some instances there are old decadent remnants remaining. If we don't plant these areas in the next five years we expect that they will fill in with grasses and other species some possibly non-desirable, and this would make establishment of bitterbrush much more difficult. This project in all cases is tying into previous WRI projects as a follow up supplemental seeding to try to establish bitterbrush in treatment areas such as a recent bullhog project. Overall as you plant and grow desirable vegetation in these project areas and create the best vegetative community possible you are improving the watershed health as well as creating healthy rangelands that are productive and produce feed and forage for livestock and wildlife. Some of these sites have deer monitoring routes that run through the project area and we count deer in these areas during the winter to help us determine buck to doe ratios and help make management decisions that allow us to follow our management plans. As for how the project addresses the Invasive Species--Nonnative threat, we believe that as we complete these projects (bullhog, chaining etc.) we have a window in which we can establish the desirable species that we would like to see on the landscape (usually 1-3 years). If we fail at establishing the species that we would like to see on the landscape most often what we see instead is takeover by invasive nonnative species, so any attempt to thwart this takeover and invasion of the project areas by seeding desirable species we believe is directly addressing the invasive species -- Nonnnative threat.
Comment 02/06/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Heather Talley
Hey Mike - thanks for the comments! I coordinated with some of the wildlife and habitat biologists to answer the remaining questions in Johnny's absence. Thank you, Curtis, for the awesome responses to these comments! I've just itemized each question with a bullet point beneath it to depict the response for each individual question: Directions to Millard and Iron County sites now listed in the "Short Description of Project" comment box. a. Parowan Front have been lop-and-scattered and/or plan to be bullhogged. 2) Why are these specific sites chosen over other sites where Phase III PJ have been removed? 2a) What are current conditions on the sites like, and from a deer or veg perspective, why do we need to complete this project right now....is there a threshold that will be crossed, making the project more difficult in the next 5 years? a. The sites were chosen in areas where projects to remove the "evil trees of darkness" have previously been implemented or are planned to be implemented prior to the planting. This would allow the area to recover a historic veg species that was there, and in some instances, there are old decadent remnants remaining. If we don't plant these areas in the next five years, we expect that they will fill in with grasses and other species some possibly non-desirable, and this would make establishment of bitterbrush much more difficult. 3) Need to sell hunting value more in the sustainable uses section a. Kane County -- good fawning range, and may keep a few deer out of private lands and make them available for the public. Millard and Iron County sites are good for winter range; Iron County sites will provide habitat for deer, and Millard County sites will contribute to elk and deer habitat. 4) Any depredation issues the project might help alleviate? a. Each of these areas may help to keep some big game from moving into the surrounding cultivated areas. 5) How does this tie into all other projects ongoing in the different watersheds to contribute to watershed health? a. This project in all cases is tying into previous WRI projects as a follow up supplemental seeding to try to establish bitterbrush in treatment areas such as a recent bullhog project. Overall as you plant and grow desirable vegetation in these project areas and create the best vegetative community possible you are improving the watershed health as well as creating healthy rangelands that are productive and produce feed and forage for livestock and wildlife. 6) Any actual deer monitoring? a. Some of these sites have deer monitoring routes that run through the project area and we count deer in these areas during the winter to help us determine buck to doe ratios and help make management decisions that allow us to follow our management plans. 7) Photo points? a. Sites will be monitored by wildlife and habitat sections to assess growth of bitterbrush and usage of adult plants. Previous bitterbrush plantings have had 100 foot transects established on sites with planting occurring every foot in order to establish a percent germination and eventually establishment. One or two of these sites will also be established in these project areas. Photos will be taken from point of origin on transect. 8) Any discussion of work across adjacent landownership? a. Project sites are identified on DWR, BLM and other state lands. 9) How will you ensure the success of these seedings? Deferment from grazing? Reseeding if a certain success rate is not met? a. It is anticipated that this will become an annual proposal to help aid habitat projects with sites suitable for bitterbrush re-establishment. Future site selection will be informed as we look at success rates on these sites and identify the best suitable sites for future plantings. 10) Can you elaborate on how the project addresses the invasive species -- nonnative threat a. As for how the project addresses the Invasive Species--Nonnative threat, we believe that as we complete these projects (bullhog, chaining etc.) we have a window in which we can establish the desirable species that we would like to see on the landscape (usually 1-3 years). If we fail at establishing the species that we would like to see on the landscape, most often what results is a takeover by invasive nonnative species, so any attempt to thwart this takeover and invasion of the project areas by seeding desirable species we believe is directly addressing the invasive species -- nonnnative threat.
Comment 02/13/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
While most of us have a pretty good idea on how the seed will be planted it'd be good to bolster up the methods section for those who might not know.
Comment 02/13/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Johnny Neil
I have added that the seed will be planted via drill seeding. Thanks for the tip.
Comment 02/13/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Johnny Neil
A document will be added to explain how the seed will be planted
Comment 02/13/2019 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
While dedicated hunters have come to call the Bitterbrush seed planter a drill seeder, it is not a traditional seed drill that is pulled behind a tractor but is actually a hand tool (Gopher Mole Bait Applicator) modified specifically for the planting of bitterbrush seed. I have attached a history of the tool to the documents tab.
Comment 08/26/2020 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. 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. Thanks.
Comment 10/22/2021 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
I am assuming this project is completed? Please submit a completion report, update map features and enter missing expenses. Thanks!
Completion
Start Date:
07/01/2019
End Date:
10/27/2021
FY Implemented:
2022
Final Methods:
Seed was distributed to Dedicated Hunters to conduct the planting (via drill seeding) in the mapped locations
Project Narrative:
Dedicated hunters planted 250 pounds of bitterbrush seed in the mapped areas over the last couple of years. This planted seed will increase the abundance of bitterbrush on the landscape within these areas. This increase in bitterbrush will provided better habitat for mule deer.
Future Management:
The Dedicated Hunter program would like to continue to work with the habitat and wildlife sections on future projects. It is anticipated that this will become an annual proposal to help aid habitat projects with sites suitable for bitterbrush re-establishment. Future site selection will be informed as we look at success rates on these sites and identify the best suitable sites for future plantings.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
7742 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (secondary/shrub) Hand seeding
7758 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (secondary/shrub) Hand seeding
7759 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (secondary/shrub) Hand seeding
7760 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (secondary/shrub) Hand seeding
7803 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (secondary/shrub) Hand seeding
Project Map
Project Map