The overarching project (including phase I & II, WRI 4402 & 4806) will enhance and/or restore several habitat types such as: lowland sagebrush, mountain sagebrush, mountain shrub, aspen, wet meadow, and spring habitat. This proposal is a continuation of work completed done as part of phase I & II. Future phases of this project are also in the planning stages within the watershed. The project is a continuation of previous sagebrush steppe, mountain brush, springs, wetlands, wet meadow, and aspen restoration accomplished on adjacent public lands, private lands, and state lands that was funded by several partners, including WRI. This project will connect these previous projects and create a more contiguous area restored and enhanced as well as add habitat diversity to the landscape. This project will address priority habitats, species, and threats identified by numerous state agencies, federal agencies, NGO's, and conservation organizations as being important for conservation and restoration. Some of this habitat has been categorized as CRITICAL for priority species such as mule deer, sage grouse, and other sage brush obligate species. Notably, funding sources for previous phases have come from multiple partners: Mule Deer Foundation, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Bureau of Land Management, Safari Club International, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, National Wild Turkey Federation, Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, Utah Division of Wildlife, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, and private landowners. This demonstrates the importance of the project and the scope of the partnership. Taking a watershed approach to this project has allowed us to benefit some extremely important habitat types. We've been able to work on some of Utah's rarest habitat types, such as wet habitats. Habitats near water -- stream sides, wet meadows and wetlands -- support the greatest variety of animal and plant life, and attract wildlife during their daily and seasonal movements. In a water-scarce landscape like Utah, these lush habitats are also where people have naturally settled. A recent study (Donelly et. al. 2014) reveals a strong link between wet sites, which are essential summer habitat for sage grouse to raise their broods, and the distribution of sage grouse breeding areas or leks. The authors found 85% of leks were clustered within 6 miles of these wet summer habitats. Moreover, although wet habitats covers less than 2% of the western landscape, more than 80% are located on private lands. This study makes it clear that successful sage grouse conservation will greatly depend on cooperative ventures with private landowners, ranchers, and farmers to help sustain vital summer habitats. This project area has several springs and wet meadows that are critical summer and brood rearing areas for grouse as well as important big game calving and fawning. These private mesic lands and surrounding private rangelands are critically important to the health of wildlife populations. Research shows that 60--80% of wildlife is dependent on mesic habitats (e.g., wetlands and riparian areas; Thomas et al. 1979, Patten 1998, Belsky et al. 1999, Peck and Lovvorn 2001). This pattern of highly productive privately owned habitat is no different in Utah. If true wildlife conservation is to take place on a sustainable level, public wildlife managers must engage private landowners. This project includes private landowners and public lands cooperatively to address watershed restoration and enhancement. This project area also lies within the Panguitch Sage Grouse Management Area identified in the Conservation Plan for Utah Greater Sage Grouse and is critical habitat for sage grouse brood rearing because of the springs, wet meadows, and adjacent sage brush habitat. It is important that we continue to work in these areas that are critically important to the landscape around them, and because these wet areas are mostly private it is extremely important to work with private landowners restoring these areas whenever possible. The project falls within an identified Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA) with shrub-steppe and wetland habitat listed as priority habitats types for conservation. Sagebrush dependent species such as sage grouse, sage sparrow, and brewer's sparrow are listed as priority birds needing conservation practices implemented. Many of these species identified in the BHCA are not captured in the species portion of this proposal but also need conservation measures implemented. HOORAY FOR SAGEBRUSH SONG BIRDS. The area in and around the project site has been identified as being critically important mule deer habitat and has been identified in the Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan as being a "priority for restoration of crucial mule deer habitat" (Utah Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan, 2014). The project area also provides important hunting opportunities locally and for people traveling from out of state to hunt on the Beaver and Panguitch units for pronghorn, elk, and mule deer. These highly sought after hunting opportunities within the project area provide a financial boost to local economies through food, gas, and other supplies purchases, hiring local guides and outfitters, and hiring local taxidermists and meat processors. Areas that become dominated by by pinyon and juniper out compete understory herbaceous species and leave bare soil prone to erosion. This herbaceous vegetation is important to reducing overland flow and reducing soil loss. Pinyon and juniper dominated sites can intercept 10-20% of precipitation (Horman et al., 1999). By completing this project this will allow more precip to contact the soil and get into the water table. Treating areas of lower densities will prevent a future situation as described above. According to Folliott 2012, research showed that pinyon and juniper expansion into areas historically dominated by higher forbs and grasses impeded stream flow for off-site uses. Because pinyon and juniper is very competitive for water this often reduces grasses and forbs within the area. "The increase in bare soil, particularly in the spaces between trees, typically leads to increased runoff and soil loss as the juniper infestation increases" (Thurow, 1997). Increased runoff and sediment load, decreases water yield and water quality within the watershed. Studies have shown that an evaluation of alternatives using conversion treatments to enhance stream-flow in the pinyon and juniper should be made (Barr, 1956) where possible. As project managers, we understand research related to pinyon and juniper removal varies on how it impacts water resources. In the spirit of complete transparency not all conifer removal projects have the same results as the ones cited above. Because many of our conifer treatments are near springs and wet meadows, we feel there is a high probability of some of the stated benefits to water resources. Mass aspen community decline has been of particular concern across the West during the 21st century with no clear answer to why decline is happening, more aspen communities are dying than regenerating. The concern rises because aspen communities are one of the most biologically rich and diverse eco-types. For example, several studies have shown that aspen forests generally support greater bird species richness and total abundance of birds than do other North American montane habitats (Salt 1957, Winternitz 1976, Reynolds and Finch 1988). This phase of the project will address needs to restore aspen communities. Past phases have addressed aspen conservation on public land (still needing to be implemented due to BLM personnel turnover). Currently we are working with the private landowners and Forestry Fire and State Lands to develop a plan that may include mechanical and prescribed fire in large stands for FY22. We are also proposing for FY21 some light mechanical work with dozers and rippers around small aspen stands on the private. From a watershed health standpoint as it relates to Aspen, in a 2005 and 2006 study published in Ecosystems, measurements of snow water accumulation, snow ablation (melting), soil water content, snowpack sublimation, and evapotranspiration (ET) were measured in adjacent aspen and conifer stands. Peak snow water equivalent (SWE) averaged 34-44% higher in aspen in 2005 (average snow fall) and 2006 (above average snow fall), respectively, whereas snow ablation rates were greater in aspen stands (21 mm day"1) compared to conifer stands (11 mm day"1). When changes in soil water content (due to over-winter snowmelt) were combined with peak snow accumulation in 2006, aspen had greater potential (42-83%) water yield for runoff and groundwater recharge (LaMalfa and Ryle, 2008). A spring development is proposed in the southeastern end of Buckskin Valley, this will provide water for sage grouse, mule deer, elk, livestock and a host of other wildlife species. Using NRCS engineering the spring will be developed, pipeline will be installed, and trough with wildlife escape ramp will be installed. Increase water across the landscape, with good range management practices will disperse grazing pressure, allow wildlife to use other habitats that may be historically under utilize, and create potential habitat for others including greater sage grouse. Because this area has been identified as CRUCIAL mule deer habitat and an important area for increasing sage grouse populations in this Sage Grouse Management Unit we feel this projects importance should be elevated because of the overall impact of the habitat to these species of wildlife. Another qualifier for elevating this project is that the project falls within an identified Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA) as previously discussed. The project will also address several conservation needs for several bird species not captured in the species section of this proposal. And yet another reason we feel this project should be elevated is the multi-year approach on a large watershed scale that this multi-landownership project has and is being implemented.

1) Reduce pinyon and juniper to a sagebrush steppe/mountain brush condition as described in the NRCS ecological site descriptions where applicable. * Reduce conifer cover to <5% within in treatment polygons while leaving islands/corridors for cover, bedding, loafing, etc... 2) Maintain and increase available forage as well as habitat diversity * This will be accomplished by preventing Pinyon/Juniper expansion into sagebrush steppe sites and by restoring hydrology in wet meadows, improving aspen health and with targeted brush treatments. 3) Stop and repair head-cutting and raise water table in and around ephemeral drainages and washes * Increase soil moisture and raise water table 1" to 6" 4) Repair and stop a large headcut that is moving up valley through a wet meadow. 5) 4) Improve aspen stands by removing competing conifer and small scale mechanical disturbance with a ripper *Improve health by creating multiple-age classes. * Develop a prescribed fire plan for private lands working with landowners and Forestry Fire and State Lands for future phases.

ECOLOGICAL The majority of the work to be done is phase 1 pinyon and juniper with intact understory vegetation. Working in these light to medium densities mean the vegetative community hasn't crossed an ecological threshold where high amounts of restoration inputs are necessary. The project as it relates to the pinyon/juniper work is a proactive approach to treat areas where sagebrush steppe habitat is still well established. Doing so has several other benefits to preventing soil loss through erosion, maintaining habitat to high interest species previously listed, water-soil infiltration, etc... Not treating pinyon/juniper in the near future will result in negative ecological consequences. Not doing work in these areas of low pinyon/juniper density means the threat of higher costs, inputs, and risk will become greater over time. We will also be doing some pinyon juniper mastication work, mostly in an previously chained area. This work will be done in areas where the trees are large and dense enough they are impacting the existing understory vegetation and crossing an ecological threshold. With that said, a decent understory of sagebrush, bitterbrush, grasses, and forbs still persist in these areas. We also feel doing the mastication now is fiscally responsible because project partners are already spending time and effort to plan and implement other practices in the area. This project will increase and maintain the availability of a diverse suite of vegetational communities. A healthy landscape has a diversity of vegetational states within an ecological site. A diverse landscape benefits a larger community of wildlife species and people. A diverse landscape is also more resistance and resilient to disturbance. By allowing this landscape to continue to move further into a dominant PJ woodland it increases the risk of losing the sites ability for resistance to disturbance and its resilience to bounce back and and heal after a disturbance. The wet meadow erosion control treatments are low risk and impact and offer high rewards. In some of the wet meadow there are small gullies and head-cutting that needs to addressed. Stopping the head-cuts and aggrading small gullies below them can have exponential benefits to soil moisture, water loss, and maintain and increase rare mountain wet meadow habitats that is an extremely limited habitat type. Not implementing this erosion control will certainly lead to head-cuts moving up valley and more rare wet habitat converting to brush. More info on these structures can be found in the project attachments. Also see photos from previous phase. Although occupying just a few acres the aspen units provide valuable wildlife habitat and watershed amenities. Lack of disturbance over the past 100 years has allowed conifer encroachment into what were once aspen stands with few conifer species present. If left untreated a continued decline in aspen is expected. With a decline in aspen, ungulates will continue to be negatively impacted. As conifer continues to increase, and aspen decreases, the amount of usable forage for ungulates will decrease. As conifers continue to increase, the risk for large uncharacteristic/catastrophic wildfires will also continue to increase. SPECIES Although it was determined by the USFWS that listing under the ESA was not warranted for Greater sage grouse there is an impending review to see if further action or protection is needed. Continuing to do work as identified in the Statewide Sage Grouse Management Plan to conserve sage grouse will support a continued "not warranted" status. It has been said by land managers, biologist, and researchers familiar with the project area that this area is very important because sage grouse are space limited here, meaning available habitat seems to be the limiting factor for population growth. As habitat is made available VHF and GPS collar data show immediate use. By doing this project we are addressing an immediate threat to one of the primary limiting factors for this population. As previously mentioned the area has been identified as priority for restoration of CRUCIAL mule deer habitat under the Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan. "Crucial" means the areas habitat is necessary to sustain the areas mule deer herd. Allowing the area to move into phase 2 and 3 pinyon and juniper encroachment will mean less quality habitat to meet mule deer objectives. As described above the area is within a designated Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA) with priority being sagebrush obligate birds like sage grouse, sage thrasher, and Brewer's sparrow. Not doing the project will lead to an increase density of pinyon and juniper that will decrease the amount of available habitat for these sage dependent bird species in an area being designated as important for birds. In 2018 USFWS along with UDWR non-game biologist visited the springs in Phase II of the project area to survey amphibian and mollusks. They found that the springs in and around Phase I of this project had springsnails (Pyrgulopsis sp.) in them. Samples were taken and are going to be sent off for identification but are likely a new population of Toquerville Springsnail (Pyrgulopsis kolobensis). All springsnail species in Utah are managed under a recent conservation agreement signed by UDWR, USFWS, and other partners, and any habitat work that would protect or restore their habitat would show how we're conserving those species. Previously stated, these private mesic lands and surrounding private rangelands are critically important to the health of wildlife populations. Research shows that 60--80% of wildlife is dependent on mesic habitats (e.g., wetlands and riparian areas; Thomas et al. 1979, Patten 1998, Belsky et al. 1999, Peck and Lovvorn 2001). Working in and around mesic areas preserves the diversity and integrity of the local ecology. FINANCIAL Financial thresholds need consideration when funding habitat conservation. The type of pro-active work we are proposing reduces future cost from becoming prohibitive. The partnership dollars currently available also need to be taken into consideration as an ecological and/or other threat. With multiple partners actively funding, planning, and implementing conservation practices in the area costs are being shared. If not done now, future costs may make implementing conservation practices at this scale prohibitive. SOCIO-POLITICAL There is also a social threshold to consider with the private lands as part of this project. Right now we have dozens of individuals part of a grazing associations, other leasees and landowners on the other project site willing to work with agencies to do the project. This has required meetings, presentations, voting, dozens of individuals coming to a consensus, and a lot of signatures and paperwork to get to this point. Not taking advantage of this while everyone is willing may mean a lost opportunity in the future.

This project will to address threats, work within focus areas and with focus species, help meet objectives and goals of the below listed plans. Under those plans are specific language from the plan describing threats, goals, strategies, and objectives this project will help meet. 1) USFWS Partners for Fish and Wildlife Strategic Plan *Project addresses habitat threats for a priority species (sage grouse an UPD) within a PFW priority area (Plateau Focus Area) for restoration work. 2) Utah Greater Sage Grouse Conservation Plan *Protect 10,000 acres of habitat on private and School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) lands *Increase habitat by 50,000 acres per year, and improve an average of 25,000 acres of habitat each year. 3) Utah Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan *Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or fire damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges that have been taken over by invasive annual grass species, and ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats, ensuring that seed mixes contain sufficient forbs and browse species. *Work with local, state and federal land management agencies via land management plans and with private landowners to identify and properly manage crucial mule deer habitats, especially fawning, wintering and migration areas. 4) Beaver Mountains Deer Herd Unit #22 Management Plan *Cooperate with federal land management agencies and private landowners in carrying out habitat improvement projects. Protect deer winter ranges from wildfire by reseeding burned areas, creating fuel breaks and reseed areas dominated by cheatgrass with desirable perennial vegetation. *Reduce expansion of Pinion-Juniper woodlands into sagebrush habitats and improve habitats dominated by Pinion-Juniper woodlands by completing habitat restoration projects. *Work with federal and state partners in fire rehabilitation and prevention on crucial deer habitat through the WRI process. 5) Utah Wildlife Action Plan *Lowland sagebrush is a key habitat identified in the WAP *WAP identifies inappropriate fire frequency as a threat to lowland sagebrush habitat. This project will reduce future fire risk and act as a fire buffer to adjacent higher risk areas. 6) Intermountain West Joint Venture Habitat Conservation Strategy *Support existing public-private partnerships to implement sagebrush habitat conservation, at regional, state, and local scales. *Remove encroaching conifers to functionally restore sagebrush habitat. 7) Sage Grouse Initiative 2.0 Investment Strategy * Restore 25,773 acres in Utah representing 58 percent of non-federally encroached priority areas. * Restore and enhance degraded mesic areas to help increase populations. 8) Utah Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy *Reduce fire risk by managing and removing invasive species 9) USDA Forest Service: Using Resistance and Resilience Concepts to Reduce Impacts of Invasive Annual Grasses and Altered Fire Regimes on the Sagebrush Ecosystem and Greater Sage-Grouse *Use mechanical treatments like cut and leave or mastication to remove trees, decrease woody fuels, and release native grasses and forbs in warm and moist big sagebrush ecosystems with relatively low resistance to annual invasive grasses that are in the early to mid-phase of pinyon and/or juniper expansion. *Prioritize areas where restoration of sagebrush and/or perennial grasses is needed to create large patches of landscape cover of sagebrush or connect existing patches of sagebrush habitat. 10) Utah Partners in Flight Avian Conservation Strategy Version 2.0 *Create, enhance and protect small ephemeral "wet areas" within nesting and brood-rearing habitats for sage grouse. *Manage large blocks of land for contiguous Shrubsteppe habitat and avoid activities that cause fragmentation. 11) UTAH ACTION PLAN For Implementation of Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362. 2018. * This project is SPECIFICALLY mentioned as being a priority in this plan for restoration work 12) BLM Western States Programmatic Environmental Report The project enhances UPD habitat and is in keeping with BLM recommendations. BLM's Final Programmatic Environmental Report: Vegetation Treatments on BLM Lands in 17 Western States Programmatic Environmental Report, June 2007. 13) All springsnail species in Utah are managed under a recent conservation agreement signed by UDWR, US FWS, and other partners, and any habitat work that would protect or restore their habitat would show how we're conserving those species. This is within Sage Grouse Management Zone III (Southern Great Basin) and is part of the Panguitch/Bald Hills sage grouse population. The 2013 conservation Objectives Final Report (COT) identified this area as the highest potential for increase in Utah due to habitat treatments to remove pinyon and juniper. Key threats identified in the COT report include increased predator populations, vegetation management (conflicting uses or lack of), energy development, and residential/commercial development. BLM Utah also recently completed an, "approved resource management plan amendment for sage grouse, which tied sage grouse treatment objectives and thresholds for disturbance to existing land use plans. Primary to this document is a section that integrates the State of Utah's strategy of improving greater Sage Grouse habitat through vegetation treatments by setting treatment objectives to increase areas available for sage grouse habitat and to reduce the threats of wildfire to sage grouse habitat (pp 1-13) (Appendix C). This project will both reduce threats of wildfire while also increasing available connectivity and habitat. BLM Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan 2015 A. The project is consistent with the SGARMP (2015) goals, objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Special Status Species section as follows: Special Status Species Goal: Maintain and/or increase GRSG abundance and distribution by conserving, enhancing or restoring the sagebrush ecosystem upon which populations depend in collaboration with other conservation partners. Refer to the following Objectives and Management Actions in the SGRMPA (Objectives: SSS-3, SSS-4, SSS-5) and Management Actions (MA-SSS-4, MA-SSS-6, MA-SSS7). B. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Vegetation section as follows: Refer to the following Objectives and Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-VEG-1, MA-VEG-2, MA-VEG-4, MA-VEG-5, MA-VEG-6, MA-VEG-8, MA-VEG-9, MA-VEG-10, MA-VEG-12 and MA-VEG-14). C. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) Management Actions that were identified in the Fire and Fuels Management section as follows: Refer to the following Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-FIRE-1 and MA-FIRE-3) D. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) Management Actions that were identified in the Livestock Grazing/Range Management section as follows: Refer to the following Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-LG-3, MA-LG-4, MA-LG-5, MA-LG-12, MALG- 13, MA-LG-16 and MA-LG-17) The Conservation Plan for Greater Sage-grouse in Utah was approved by the Governor in April 2013. The plan establishes incentive-based conservation programs for conservation of sage-grouse on private, local government, and School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration lands and regulatory programs on other state- and federally managed lands. The Conservation Plan also establishes sage-grouse management areas and implements specific management protocols in these areas. The Utah Greater Sage-grouse Management Plan in 2009 identified threats and issues affecting sage-grouse management in Utah as well as goals, objectives, and strategies intended to guide UDWR, local working groups, and land managers efforts to protect, maintain, and improve sage-grouse populations and habitats and balance their management with other resource uses.

This project will decrease the risk of high severity wildfire by reducing fuel loading and promoting the growth of understory vegetation, which are critical to maintaining ecosystem resilience. As demonstrated by the nearby Brianhead fire during the summer of 2017, treatments like these can break up the continuity of fuels and act as fuel breaks. This project along with already completed adjacent projects will can be expected to act similar if a fire were to ignite nearby. The current fire regime condition class is moderate (2), and would be reduced to low (1) immediately after treatment. The habitat type has been identified in the 2015-2025 Utah Wildlife Action Plan that lowland sagebrush is a key habitat and the threats associated with this key habitat are inappropriate fire frequency and intensity. This project will help to achieve this goal. Reducing the threat of wildfire is important because of the critical nature of this habitat to mule deer and sage grouse. Completing this project and reducing the risk of fire will help to protect important sagebrush steppe and mountain brush habitat that is critical for priority species including, but not limited to, Greater sage grouse and mule deer. This project will also help to protect the springs and wetlands. If a high severity fire were to move through the area water soil infiltration would decrease, erosion will increase, and the potential for water to get into the aquifer will decrease and spring flows may decrease. This project treatments would be implemented to effectively restore resilient, fire-adapted aspen ecosystems on a landscape-scale by moving the stands toward properly functioning condition in terms of composition (species diversity) and density (crown spacing and fuel loading). In addition the treatments would improve structural diversity, promote aspen regeneration and recruitment, reduce the hazardous fuel loading, and reduce the continuity of fuels across the landscape.

Areas that become dominated by by pinyon and juniper out-compete understory herbaceous species and leave bare soil prone to erosion. This herbaceous vegetation is important to reducing overland flow and reducing soil loss. Pinyon and juniper dominated sites can intercept 10-20% of precipitation (Horman et al., 1999). Treating areas of lower densities pinyon and juniper will prevent a future situation as described above. According to Folliott (2012), research showed that pinyon and juniper expansion into areas historically dominated by higher forbs and grasses impeded streamflow for off-site uses. Because pinyon and juniper is water competitive this often reduces grasses and forbs in an area. "The increase in bare soil, particularly in the spaces between trees, typically leads to increased runoff and soil loss as the juniper infestation increases" (Thurow 1997). Increased runoff and sediment load decreases water yield and water quality within the watershed. Studies have shown that an evaluation of alternatives using conversion treatments to enhance stream-flow in the pinyon and juniper should be made (Barr 1956). Because the project is large scale, over multiple years, and near springs and meadows the impact to potential water and erosion savings is greater than just this fiscal years project area. As project managers, we understand research related to pinyon and juniper removal varies on how it impacts water resources. In the spirit of complete transparency not all conifer removal projects have the same results as the ones cited above. Because many of our conifer treatments are near springs and wet meadows, we feel that a high probability of some of the stated benefits to water are likely. Also, the overarching project area has several springs and wet meadows that are critical to deer fawning, elk calving, sage grouse brood rearing, and several other species of birds. The project will have direct impacts to improving these wet areas by decreasing runoff and increasing infiltration in the uplands that can come through the soil to these areas. Wet meadow conservation practices have the potential to absorb water and hold moisture on site, make it into the aquifer, and potentially move slowly towards springs later in the year (or years later) rather than just flowing off site during runoff events. Phase I included funding for fencing off the springs. We will directly benefit these water sources from overuse, trampling, and mitigate water quality issues. The wet meadow erosion control treatments are low impact/low risk/high reward type practices. In some of the wet meadows small gullies and head-cutting need to be addressed. Stopping the head-cuts and aggrading small gullies below can have exponential benefits to soil moisture, water loss, and maintain and increase rare mountain meadow habitats that is an extremely limited habitat type. In a 2005 and 2006 study published in 'Ecosystems', measurements of snow water accumulation, snow ablation (melting), soil water content, snowpack sublimation, and evapotranspiration (ET) were measured in adjacent aspen and conifer stands. Peak snow water equivalent (SWE) averaged 34-44% higher in aspen in 2005 (average snow fall) and 2006 (above average snow fall), respectively, whereas snow ablation rates were greater in aspen stands (21 mm day"1) compared to conifer stands (11 mm day"1). When changes in soil water content (due to over-winter snowmelt) were combined with peak snow accumulation in 2006, aspen had greater potential (42-83%) water yield for runoff and groundwater recharge (LaMalfa and Ryle, 2008). Aspen treatments may have an important and critical role in water quality and quantity changes.

Any NEPA and archeological survey requirements will be completed by project partners as needed per requirements for federal funding and federal land management oversight before implementation. NEPA for all BLM portions of the project is complete. Fremont Habitat Improvement Project-Sept 13, 2016. Funding may be requested from WRI for arch surveys. The cultural survey for the Sage Flat mastication area was funded during phase II of the project.

JUNIPER AND PINYON REMOVAL: Most of the units will be accomplished using a saw crew to lop and scatter trees as close as possible to 100% in polygons. Mastication will take place in a smaller portion of the project where pinyon juniper density is thicker. Most of these acres are in an area that was chained for wildlife habitat improvement in 1967. Additionally, a few small units will be included adjacent to past lop and scatter areas which all have existing shrubs and grasses in them but are about to have the understory lost due to competition from pinyon and juniper. SEEDING: Aerial seeding will be done on only the masticated pinyon juniper treatment area prior to trees being treated. The seed mix consists of 3 native grasses and several forbs to try and diversify the existing understory vegetation. All the sites have existing sagebrush and bitterbrush so we did not feel we needed to include shrubs in the mix. HEAD-CUTTING: Head-cutting is happening in small ephemeral drainages and washes. We propose to use simple rock structures that are being use across the West in several other states to stop and repair head-cuts. * See additional attachment for more information on these structures and pictures from past structures built during the last phase of the project. A large head-cut is moving up a meadow where larger rock and woody debris structures are needed. This will be done using a contractor and mini excavator building natural looking drop structures out of rock and wood. BRUSH: Some patches of rabbitbrush on private and BLM will be mowed and treated with the appropriate herbicide in the fall. Targeted spike herbicide treatments will be accomplished using aircraft on private land. Spike treatments will take into account recommended edge habitat criteria and sites will be selected where high density of forbs and grasses would be expected such as silver sage sites and valley bottom meadow sites. POND LINING: 2-3 ponds will be cleaned and clay lined depending on funding and access. Ponds will help distribute livestock. ASPEN: For smaller aspen stands on private land, it is proposed to disturb aspen and promote re-growth using a small dozer and ripper. We will continue to work with the private landowners to develop a burn plan and budget for prescribed fire in larger aspen stands where conifer has taken over. Once this is done we hope to implement prescribed fire treatments during FY 2022 utilizing hand ignition techniques targeting spruce/fir, mixed conifer, and seral aspen with mosaic burn patterns and mixed burn severity as a objective. Burning would take place during the late summer/fall/winter to take advantage of soil moisture, precipitation and vegetation green-up, which would reduce fire impacts to existing perennial vegetation, and to allow for adequate fuel moisture characteristics to facilitate a burn. Site preparation including identification and implementation of fuel breaks would be implemented prior to the Prescribed Fire Treatment as necessary. It is expected that adhering to design features and completion of Prescribed Fire Burn Plan would minimize direct impacts as a result of the treatment. FENCE: Construct and maintain an eight foot fence around 78 acres to protect aspen regeneration. Detailed: A wildlife proof fence will be constructed around areas burned in the mixed conifer/aspen types on the Fremont prescribed burn project. The fence will consist of two 39 inch net wire laid one on top of the other. A strand of barbed wire will be placed on top of that. The resulting fence will be approximately eight feet tall. It needs to be capable of keeping elk and other wildlife species from browsing the aspen spouts. It must be maintained for five to seven years. SPRING DEVELOPMENT: With an NRCS engineer a spring box will be built and some of the water piped to an off-site trough.

NRCS: Pre and post photopoint monitoring in treatment areas. Sage grouse Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Guide to be done pre-treatment to assess habitat conditions. UT-2 Range vegetation assessment done pre-treatment and post treatment. NRCS Pinyon and juniper woodland survey will be conducted pre and post treatment Sage grouse monitoring via GPS loggers is going on in the Panguitch SGMA as well as adjacent SGMA's. These are showing connectivity between populations and will show if grouse are using newly treated areas. This could be put together in a map form and uploaded as part of the completion report. USFWS Will work with partners to complete some of the monitoring described as well as doing their own photo point monitoring. Also as part of the USFWS landowner agreement USFWS biologist will visit the site at minimum once per year to assess needs, success, failures, and need for any follow-up treatments/maintenance for the duration of the 10 year Landowner Agreement. UDWR Annual aerial and ground mule deer counts and classifications. Area sage grouse lek counts each spring. BLM In response to aspen overbrowsing, aspen in the project area will be monitored. Short-term temporary adjustments in livestock/wildlife management may be needed to ensure new aspen regeneration successfully recruits. Pre and post monitoring photos, Frequency trend studies - 2 existing and up to 2 additional studies to be added. Wildlife Monitoring Plans: This year, each BLM Field office will have entire team devoted to the Assessment, Inventory and Monitoring program (AIM), and although the sample points are random, it is likely that some of these points will fall within the project area. This monitoring program uses standard core indicators and methods to provide a statistically valid sampling design across the landscape. Additionally, this project falls within potential sage grouse habitat. Habitat Assessment Framework monitoring is a multiscale, sage-grouse habitat assessment tool that will be integrated with the AIM. This monitoring is done from a broad-to-fine scale. The dataset at the site scale (which includes this project) describes habitat indicators, such as sagebrush cover, sagebrush height, grass and forb cover, riparian stability, and/or proximity of detrimental land uses and structures. These data will ensure appropriate project implementation, as well as guide future actions in sage grouse habitat. Currently, there are no AIM, HAF (sage grouse) monitoring points in this treatment area; however, these areas will be prioritized for data collection during 2019. There are also no UDWR trend studies in this area; however, UDWR will read Southern Region projects during 2019 and a data site could be requested at that time. A raptor survey will be conducted before the project begins. The majority of the raptors in this area, nest along the canyon edges, and those trees are left. Additionally, if nest trees are found during surveys, they are buffered and left as islands to serve as refuges for all wildlife Additionally, archaeological resources that are found within the area are buffered and worked into the overall project design. These islands would also be left for perching raptors.

USFWS: Will be providing funding/planning/implementation support and is one of the project managers working closely with Stan Gurley from NRCS/UDWR on work directly tied to private land. UDWR: Stan Gurly of UDWR/NRCS is working as a project manager and providing funding/planning/implementation support. We will also be working with habitat and wildlife biologist to address any needs they see. NRCS: Stan Gurly of UDWR/NRCS is working as a project manager and providing funding/planning/implementation support. The NRCS State Biologist has also visited the project area and provided input and support for the project. BLM: We have contacted the field office and received input on the project. They support connecting the private to the BLM treated acres. This project includes project work on BLM managed lands working with the Color Country Field Office. Local Grazing Association made up of several landowners: The project will be working with 1 grazing association across 2 private landownerships where planning and implementation will be done to meet their objectives as well as agency objectives. Adjacent Landowners have also participated in the project and conservation practices have been implemented. Private citizens who have the BLM grazing leases and private grazing leases have all been part of the planning of this multi-year project. Color Country and Southwest Desert Local Working groups: The project was discussed at both of these local working group meetings and has support from the members of the groups. These groups are made up of agencies, private landowner representatives, and county government. SITLA: The project was discussed has been discussed with SITLA. Approximately 200 acres of State land will be seeded and masticated in this proposal. Sportsmen Groups: Several sportsmen groups have provided funding for this project including: National Wild Turkey Federation, Safari Club International, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, National Turkey Federation, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife. The project will also be featured in the Mule Deer Foundations' Western Hunting and Conservation Expo Edition of their magazine this January.

The private landowners will enter into a contract with NRCS and USFWS. As part of the landowner agreement with USFWS the landowner agrees to leave the habitat restored in place for a 10 year period and during that time will work with the USFWS biologist to monitor and access needs, success, and any needed adaptive management. Landowners will be contracted with the NRCS to manage grazing to maintain a 12" stubble height on in contracted areas for 2 years. Grazing will be allowed, because this lop and scatter practice does not require seeding and understory in great condition. This project will also help the landowners better distribute and graze not only his private property but also his adjacent public allotments. This means the potential for improved range management and range conditions moving forward. There is no grazing rest prescribed for this phase III project as current management is adequate to meet project goals and objectives, with the exception of the masticated portion. All areas seeded and masticated would be rested for a minimum of two complete growing seasons or until the seedings become established. The area is part of the Panguitch and Beaver unit big game management areas and is managed according to the mule deer and elk management plan cited in the management plan sections. These units are managed for big bull trophy elk through a draw process with permitted OTC spike hunting. The mule deer hunting is managed through the general season draw process. No sage grouse hunting is permitted at this time. The area is also carefully managed as core sage grouse habitat. Any actions undertaken by agencies consider both Federal and State management plans. By generally sequencing the treatment of aspen in this project, browse pressure may be more directed away from newly treated areas; this is expected to increase the probability of regenerating aspen to reach 6 feet tall after treatment. Aspen browse thresholds and adaptive management response options have been developed and will be implemented to help ensure new regenerating aspen successfully recruit (become 6 feet or taller). To assist this effort, aspen monitoring and protection fences will be put in place. Areas that are seeded will be rested for a minimum of two years. The project is located in the Fremont Allotment, which has been assessed through the permit renewal process. Grazing management systems that identified livestock numbers, season of use and AUMs were identified through this process. The Fremont Allotment has authorized livestock grazing from May 1st - October 31st for cattle. The project area is located in the Native Pasture, which can be utilized by livestock from June 15th - October 31st. Following the 2 year rest period (seeded areas) the majority of livestock grazing will occur following the critical growing period, which is expected to ensure long-term sustainability of the project. Vegetative monitoring data including utilization and nested frequency will continue to be collected within the allotment.

The private, SITLA, and adjacent BLM administered lands are all part of grazing rotations. This project will have a big benefit to the private grazing operations. Working across landownerships will have a greater ecological and economic impact for livestock producers. The lop and scatter treatment may slightly increase available forage but more importantly prevent future loss of forage. Wet meadow restoration will increase herbaceous vegetation. The project area also provides important recreational hunting for the local population and people travel from all over the state (and from other states) to hunt on the Beaver and Panguitch units for pronghorn, elk, and mule deer. The highly sought after hunting opportunities within the project areas provide a financial boost to local economies in several ways. Continuing to do work to maintain the habitat in this area will help to perpetuate the recreational and economic benefits. Aspen communities are some of the most productive vegetative communities on the planet. Working to restore these communities will provide a substantial increase of available forage for all grazing animals, native and domestic. Aspen communities are also very important habitat for pollinators with a high percentage of forb species in the understory. ATV and UTV use in these areas is one of the dominant recreational uses on this landscape. Each summer people from all over the country travel in and around these project areas to ride the thousands of miles of improved atv trails. Improving and creating fire resistant habitat adds value to atv rider experience. This area is a highly visited area of Utah for tourism. This project is visible from 2 major highways frequented by tourists.

08/01/2021

06/01/2023

2023

JUNIPER AND PINYON REMOVAL: Chainsaw crews with work being completed fall 2022. Masitication was completed using machinery fall/winter 2022. SEEDING: Aeriel seeded using fixed-wing in masticated acres. GBRC supplied seed. Seed flown on prior to mastication. HEAD-CUTTING: A contractor was hire (by USFWS and paid for directly through the landowner) and spent a few days in the norther part of the project area adding additional hand-built rock 'zeedyk' type structures. This was in addition to already completed zeekyk work from the previous year. The contractor added structures and also did some maintenance as needed. Additionally a large head-cut has been moving through a meadow for several years on another private property where partners have been doing conservation work. A log step-down type structure was built in an effort to stop the head-cut. BRUSH: Some patches of rabbitbrush on private and BLM were mowed and treated with herbicide. Targeted spike herbicide treatments were accomplished using aircraft on private land. Spike treatments took into account recommended edge habitat criteria and sites selected where high density of forbs and grasses would be expected such as silver sage sites and valley bottom meadow sites. Rates used were to thin cover and not kill sagebrush plants completely. POND LINING: Ponds were cleaned and clay lined. Ponds will help distribute livestock. ASPEN: Mechanical and Rx fire in aspen stands were NOT completed. Logistics and turnover with fire staff prevented aspen work from being completed. FENCE: Pasture fence was constructed to manage livestock grazing and protect Sage Flat Mastication. Post and wire fence to cattle and wildlife grazing specs. No fencing was done around aspen treatments because no aspen was treated. SPRING DEVELOPMENT: With an NRCS engineer a spring box was built and some of the water piped to an off-site trough. All work was contracted through WRI and state contracting except some of the wet meadow work as specified above.

This is an area many partners have prioritized in the last few years to complete enhancement and restoration work on uplands, wetlands, springs, and meadow habitat across all landownership types. Agencies, sportsmen groups, private landowners, and other partners all feel this area is ecologically important for rural economic reasons as well as for wildlife habitat. The area is mapped critical mule deer habitat. The meadows are important sage grouse brood rearing habitat. The uplands are important nesting habitat for many sagebrush songbirds such as pinyon jays, sage sparrow, and sage thrashers. The springs are important habitat for endemic springsnails, tiger salamanders, pollinators, and bats. The area is important for rural economies through tourism, hunting, and livestock production. Project work in this area have and will continue to cross boundary regardless of ownership. The project falls within an identified Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA) with shrub-steppe and wetland habitat listed as priority habitats types for conservation. Sagebrush dependent species such as sage grouse, sage sparrow, and brewer's sparrow are listed as priority birds needing conservation practices implemented. Many of these species identified in the BHCA are not captured in the species portion of this proposal but also need conservation measures implemented. HOORAY FOR SAGEBRUSH SONG BIRDS. The area in and around the project site has been identified as being critically important mule deer habitat and has been identified in the Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan as being a "priority for restoration of crucial mule deer habitat" (Utah Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan, 2014). The project area also provides important hunting opportunities locally and for people traveling from out of state to hunt on the Beaver and Panguitch units for pronghorn, elk, and mule deer. These highly sought after hunting opportunities within the project area provide a financial boost to local economies through food, gas, and other supplies purchases, hiring local guides and outfitters, and hiring local taxidermists and meat processors.

Masticated and seeded acres will be rested from livestock for 2 growing seasons. Permittees on BLM will continue to adhere to grazing plan. Fence on BLM will help with grazing rotation and rest. No changes in management recommended on lop and scatter acres. Meadow erosion will be monitored but no management changes recommended. No management change recommendations for brush treatments. Landowners have contracts and agreements in place with NRCS and USFWS that require periodic communication and monitoring. Both landowners have a long history of working with partners and will continue to work with partners in the area.