Henrieville Creek Riparian Invasive Species Restoration
Project ID: 5250
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2021
Submitted By: 917
Project Manager: Stan Gurley
PM Agency: Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands
PM Office: Southwestern Area
Lead: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
Improve 22 acres of riparian habitat through vegetation improvements and water dispersion.
Location:
.5 miles south west of the town of Henrieville, Utah.
Project Need
Need For Project:
The Paria River is a relatively intact, healthy riverine ecosystem with over 90 miles of lush riparian corridor flowing through spectacular redrock canyons that eventually join with the Colorado River near Lees Ferry. The hydrologic regime of the Paria is only minimally regulated in the upper most segments of the basin. One of the greatest threats to this watershed is the spread of woody invasive plant species, principally Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) and tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima). Woody invasive species can alter compositional and functional components of natural systems including food webs, nutrient cycling, fire regimes, and wildlife habitat. The trees constrain the river channel, change flooding dynamics, and alter water temperature and chemistry, while also providing poor quality habitat for most Neotropical birds, and the invasives will degrade and even eliminate native vegetation. More information about the biology of these two principal woody invasive species, Russian olive and tamarisk, can be found in Stannard et al. (2002) and Shafroth et al. (2009). The project area occurs in 3 key aquatic habitats identified in the Utah Wildlife Action Plan 2015 - 2025 (WAP); Riverine, Aquatic -- Scrub/Shrub and Aquatic-Forested. The WAP recognizes that non-native invasive plant species are a priority threat potentially affecting the greatest number of species in these three habitats. This proposal aims to control invasive species on 22 acres, to include initial treatments on private lands, within the three aquatic habitats of the Praria Watershed identified from the WAP. A healthy watershed provides many ecosystem functions including, but not limited to: nutrient cycling, carbon storage, erosion/sedimentation control, increased biodiversity, soil formation, wildlife movement corridors, water storage, water filtration, flood control, food, timber, recreation, and reduced vulnerability to invasive species, the effects of climate change, and other natural disasters. This project will reduce threats and promote processes that secure, restore and enhance currently suitable habitat for federally listed species as well as many other avian, terrestrial and aquatic species in the watershed. Species of greatest conservation concern include Yellow billed Cuckoo and Southwestern Willow Fly catcher. Yellow-billed Cuckoo populations have been and are declining over the pass decades that have been associated to channelization and tamarisk encroachment. The "principal causes of riparian habitat destruction, modification, and degradation in the range have occurred from alteration of hydrology due to dams, water diversions, management of river flow that differs from natural hydrological patterns, channelization, and levees and other forms of bank stabilization that encroach into the floodplain. These losses are further exacerbated by conversion of floodplains for agricultural uses, such as crops and livestock grazing. In combination with altered hydrology, these threats promote the conversion of existing primarily native habitats to monotypic stands of non-native vegetation, reducing the suitability of riparian habitats for the cuckoo". The USFWS goes on to say "Because of the absence or near absence of nesting by Yellow-billed Cuckoos in monotypic stands of tamarisk and other nonnative vegetation, the available literature suggests that conversion of native or mixed (native and non-native) riparian woodlands to nearly monotypic stands of tamarisk and other non-native vegetation, coupled with the inability of native vegetation to regenerate under altered hydrological conditions, is a significant threat to the western Yellow-billed Cuckoo now and in the future". By removing the tamarisk and restoring native vegetation including willows, we are restoring not only prefer habitat of the YBCU, but the health of the flood plain. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (SWFL) "Habitat losses and changes have occurred and continue to occur because of urban, recreational, and agricultural development, water diversion and impoundment, channelization, livestock grazing, and replacement of native habitats by introduced plant species". Like with the YBCU, restoring native vegetation will benefit the habitat needs of the SWFL. Allowing for increase potential habitat and opening the door for future treatments on in the area.
Objectives:
This proposal seeks to restore 22 acres of riparian corridor on private lands through the removal of invasive woody species. The overall goal of this project is to: "Reduce Russian olive and tamarisk in the watershed to minimal levels through various control methods, thereby allowing native plants and animals to thrive and natural (historical) riparian process to function, such that riparian areas become more naturally functioning, sustainable and resilient to change." Through the initial and secondary treatment of invasive species of lowland riparian habitat on a watershed scale, this project will: * Increase native tree species recruitment through the removal of Russian olive and tamarisk and, where necessary, by replanting of native cottonwood, willow and shrub species; * Increase the prevalence of native grass and forb species through reseeding treatment areas with a seed mixture of native species or through natural recruitment; * Reduce invasive plant seed source both locally and regionally; * Increase the frequency of riparian area inundation and recharge of groundwater; * Improve water quality and quantity in the Praria River by reducing the adverse effects of run off from adjacent agricultural operations and storm water through the restoration of riparian forest buffers on private lands; * Increase actual and perceived value and accessibility of private riparian corridors through removal of impenetrable Russian olive stands; * Improve habitat for a diversity of wildlife and fish species, specifically through biomass management techniques of inputting woody debris into the system to enhance aquatic complexity, promote development of riffles and pools while decreasing channelization and stream narrowing; * Increase southwestern willow flycatcher (SWWFL) habitat connectivity by creating additional suitable habitat and linking to currently restored habitat * Protect the investment of seeding, planting and woody invasive removal made by the landowner, UWRI, NRCS and USFWS partners. Through the application of grazing deferment, this project component will: * Allow for desirable herbaceous and woody species establishment.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
This proposal encompasses three aquatic habitats: Aquatic-Forested, Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub and Riverine. The light establishment of Russian olive in these three habitats along the Henrieville Creek River is leading to increased deposition of sediment and the formation of levees leading to extreme narrowing, simplification and confinement of the river channel. As for now the flood plain is active, but a shift in the function is noticeable in some areas of this proposed treatment. Such confinement of the channel could restrict channel movement and alter the floodplain dynamics leading to down-cutting of the channel during floods. Channel down-cutting is a significant threat to both habitat and wildlife. The effects of channel down-cutting include severing floodplains from the water table, draining adjacent meadows or wetlands, reducing the area of riparian vegetation, reducing or eliminating complex aquatic habitat, and altering water flow and sediment transport regimes. Removal of Russian olive from the riparian forests of the Paria Watershed is expected to result in more natural (pre-exotic establishment) flood regimes which allow for the lateral, overbank movement of floodwaters to inundate and re-charge the associated floodplain (restoration of floodplain connectivity) and the restoration of characteristic native riparian vegetation. In addition, removing Russian olive promotes healthy riparian forests and increases accessibility to the river for humans and animals. This proposal creates an opportunity to reduce any adverse impacts of current or historic livestock grazing by working with private landowners engaged in restoration efforts in managing the scope, intensity and duration of livestock grazing. Improper current and historic grazing has resulted in the spread and proliferation of undesirable plant species such as Russian olive and tamarisk, reduced the abundance and richness of native forbs and grasses, degraded the function and condition of soil and water, and has been economically detrimental to landowners and ranchers. Through this proposal, conservation actions will be employed to address threats associated with improper livestock grazing, past and present, by promoting partnerships between landowners, NRCS and/or USFWS Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program to utilize cost-share and technical assistance programs. The goal is to help landowners adjust grazing, control exotic plants, and establish native riparian vegetation to improve or create functioning and resilient riparian forest buffers for the benefit of habitat, water and wildlife. Currently this area is not grazed and the landowner has no intention of grazing as of now. To ensure wildlife habitat is minimally affected and seasonal conflicts are negated on public lands, any new (initial) treatments that would remove large stands of Russian olive through the use of chainsaws are not conducted during the migratory bird seasons (March 1 through August 14) on federal lands within the watershed. Additionally, frill cut and cut stump methods are used in tandem as treatment techniques throughout the watershed. Frill cut allows for trees to be left standing so as to reduce the management of biomass at the time of treatment while also minimizing impacts to migratory birds. This project seeks to decrease the threat of extreme fire intensity created by the dense understory of by early treatment of the invasive before the we completely before a forest canopy state is reached as seen on the Escalante River and neighboring Aley Wash. Removal of Russian olive is expected to reduce the risk of catastrophic fire as both Russian olive and tamarisk produce large quantities of volatile fuels.
Relation To Management Plan:
Objective: Accomplish invasive species control through a watershed wide, multi-jurisdictional approach with multiple stakeholders and financial and technical partners: 1. Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument Management Plan (2000) a. Work in conjunction with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in managing fish, wildlife, and other animals to achieve and maintain natural populations, population dynamics, and population distributions in a way that protects and enhances Monument resources i. FW-1 To meet the above objectives, the BLM will manage habitats for the recovery or reestablishment of native populations through collaborative planning with local, State and Federal agencies, user groups, and interested organizations. ii. FW-4 The BLM will place a priority on protecting riparian and water resources as they relate to fish and wildlife, and will work cooperatively with the U.S. Forest Service to coordinate maintenance of fisheries and flows. 2. Garfield County Resource Assessment (2013) conservation strategies are implemented by: a. Working with landowners and conservation partners to plan, develop funding and implement Russian olive and tamarisk removal along river and stream channels; b. Increase funding opportunities for noxious weeds and invasive species; c. Identify and develop watershed projects on the Paria River to mitigate Russian olive and tamarisk in the riparian buffer zones; 4. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Utah Wildlife Action Plan 2015 -- 2025 supports this project by guiding "partnership-driven, landscape-scale conservation work to help maintain the full array of Utah's wildlife, and also improve habitat health." 5. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan (2002) supports joint ventures that move toward flycatcher conservation by a. Coordination of exotic management efforts among multiple landowners drainage-wide; b. Working with private landowners, state agencies, municipalities and NGOs to conserve and enhance habitat on non-federal lands. 7. Garfield County General Management Plan, Resource Management Section (2017), Section 2.6 Vegetation and 2.6.2 Invasive Species states that desired future conditions are achieved when land mangers significantly increase efforts to eradicate noxious weeds and replace invasive species with desirable historic plant communities. Objective: Increase the health and diversity of riparian ecosystems through the removal of woody invasive species as woody invasive species are recognized as a threat to healthy riparian forests. Improve suitable habitat and habitat connectivity for a diversity of species including the Southwestern willow flycatcher, an endangered species. 1. Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument Management Plan (2000) a. The overall objective with respect to riparian resources within the Monument is to manage riparian areas so as to maintain or restore them to properly functioning conditions and to ensure that stream channel morphology and functions are appropriate to the local soil type, climate, and landform. i. RIPA-6 The noxious weed control program will target invasive species such as tamarisk and Russian olive, which will improve riparian functioning condition. b. Work in conjunction with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in managing fish, wildlife, and other animals to achieve and maintain natural populations, population dynamics, and population distributions in a way that protects and enhances Monument resources. i. SSA-6 There will be an active noxious weed control program in the Monument. This program will focus on areas where habitat, including special status species habitat, is being lost due to changes in the water table and changes in vegetation structure and composition caused by noxious weeds. 2. Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of the BLM, by reducing woody invasive species to minimum levels this project promotes FLPMA's goals of management, protection, development, and enhancement of the public lands. 3. Utah Noxious Weed Act (Nov 2015) lists tamarisk as a Class C noxious weed where the focus to this threat is on stopping expansion and Russian olive as a Class D Prohibited weed. 4. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Utah Wildlife Action Plan 2015 -- 2025 supports this project by recognizing that invasive, non-native plant species: a. Which dominate vegetation communities can alter the natural or desired composition, structure and functioning of habitats. Specifically, non-native plant dominance can severely degrade native biological diversity, soil stability, and hydrologic function of habitats; b. Negatively impact many species in 3 key aquatic habitats (Aquatic-Forested, Aquatic- Scrub/Shrub, Riverine); c. Have ranked as a statewide priority level 3 threat to species of greatest conservation need and to key habitats where level 3 is the level towards which conservation actions can most readily be envisioned and directed. Essential conservation actions to address this threat include: i. Eradicate or control established populations; ii. Restore floodplain connectivity; iii. Conduct chemical, mechanical and biological control; iv. Conduct riparian vegetation treatments to restore characteristic riparian vegetation; 5. Forestry, Fire and State Lands (FFSL), Utah Forest Action Plan 2016 recognizes the Escalante Watershed as a priority area and a. Invasive species along rivers, lakes and streams reduce available water resources; b. Invasive species are displacing native species and disrupting the normal function of ecosystems; c. FFSL will provide leadership and implement strategies that will reduce invasive species in riparian corridors. 6. Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Quality, Escalante River Watershed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) calls for the control of exotic plants including tamarisk and Russian olive and the restoration of cottonwood trees to improve temperature regimes. 7. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan, 2002, supports this proposal through removal of exotic plants in potentially suitable habitats if: a. There is evidence that the exotic species removed will be replaced by vegetation of higher functional value; b. The action is part of an overall restoration plan. c. Mexican Spotted Owl Recovery Plan First Revision December 2012. The Escalante Canyon is considered riparian forest recovery habitat. Recovery habitat, outside of protected activity centers and key habitat for owl recovery, "could frequently be used by owls for foraging, roosting, daily movements, dispersal and potentially for nesting." Some specific recommendations for recovery are: i. Vegetation manipulation including removal of non-native vegetation; ii. "Manage for a diversity of age and size classes of native riparian trees and shrubs along with a diverse understory of native riparian herbaceous species to provide potential roost/nest sites for owls and cover for owl prey species." 8. Escalante River Watershed Partnership Woody Invasive Control Guidelines, v.2 (2015), advances the goal of a healthy riparian ecosystem by: a. Recognizing that the reduction of Russian olive to minimal levels of infestation in the Escalante River watershed is critical to maintaining naturally-functioning riparian ecosystems; b. Increasing the number of sustainable, healthy riparian and floodplain communities in the watershed. 9. Natural Resource Conservation Service, Working Lands for Wildlife Program (May 2012) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service's programmatic biological opinion (2012) of the implementation of the SWWFL NRCS project goals: a. Protect, maintain and restore riparian habitat; b. Increase and improve occupied, suitable and potential SWWFL breeding habitat; c. Improve weed and invasive species management; d. Increase connectivity of existing and potential SWWFL habitat. This project calls for invasive species removal, habitat restoration and connectivity of suitable habitat of a focus species, the Southwestern willow flycatcher. e. NRCS conservation practices that remove non-native vegetation and replace with native species will help return the natural riparian ecosystem and thus reduce catastrophic wildfire risk. 10. Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife Resources, Utah Wild Turkey Management Plan (2014) recognizes that continued loss of riparian habitats throughout Utah could impact turkey habitat and that cottonwood riparian habitats are important for the Rio Grande subspecies of wild turkeys. Strategies that increase wild turkey habitat may help to stabilize populations, decrease human material damage and nuisance complaints. 11. Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife Resources, Mule Deer Statewide Management Plan's (2014) overarching habitat goal of conserving, improving and restoring mule deer habitat is supported by this watershed wide proposal focusing on improving scarce riparian habitat. 12. Objective: Apply adaptive management practices and implement a monitoring regime to achieve long-term efficacy of restoration. a. 1. Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument Management Plan (2000) states, "...the Monument will be managed to achieve a natural range of native plant associations." a. a. NW-8 For major removal projects, monitoring plots will be established in key areas to determine effectiveness of methods and presence of noxious weed species. All projects will contain restoration and/or revegetation protocols to minimize re-colonization of treated areas by noxious weed species. Monitoring in these areas will be part of the adaptive management framework described in Chapter 3. 2. Escalante River Watershed Partnership Woody Invasive Control Guidelines, v.2 (2015), this plan advances this project objective by: a. Conducting follow-up treatment and rapid monitoring in 100% of treated basins; b. Established a long-term monitoring program in selected high-priority basins that have been treated for RO; c. Preparation and use of a GIS database and improve the planning, prioritization, implementation and tracking of the control efforts and increases the success of the woody invasive control plan; d. Control efforts would be planned and conducted to minimize harm to wildlife, especially migratory birds and species of management concern; e. Woody invasives can be controlled using a variety of weed management techniques, including chemical, mechanical, cultural and biological techniques and will be selected based on local conditions.
Fire / Fuels:
This proposal seeks to abate the threat of fire intensity on the treatment area through the removal of invasive woody plant species. The proliferation of Russian olive and the fire-adapted tamarisk have created a dense understory of growth below native cottonwood riparian forests. Removal efforts are expected to reduce the risk of catastrophic fire as both Russian olive and tamarisk produce large quantities of volatile fuels that allow fire to reach native canopy cover creating destructive crown fires and to move horizontally through ignition of continuous fuels. Disturbance regimes such as frequency of floodplain inundation have been reduced due to the channelizing effect produced by Russian olive armoring riverbanks. Removal of Russian olive is expected to produce more lateral movement of the river and subsequent overbank flood events. Flooding is crucial to the movement and redistribution of live and dead vegetation that can accumulate as a continuous fuel load. Floods have a tendency to redistribute vegetation in noncontiguous, patchwork piles.
Water Quality/Quantity:
The conversion of highly diverse cotton wood and riprian communities has had significant effects on flooding regimes, water quality and supply, siltation, channel morphology and adverse effects on native plant and fish populations. Many streams have contributing areas that are prone to high severity fire which can promote fire-tolerant species and can lead to poor water quality. Portions of the Paria River have 303(d) listings for temperature, and TDS. Please see attachment for the most current 303(d) listing information from the Utah Department of Water Quality. Overtime, the trapping of sand by near-channel Russian olive during overbank flooding will likely contributed to the creation of channel levees and further narrowing and simplification of the channel within the Paria Watershed. In a neighboring drainage the removal of dense stands (greater than 90% density) of tamarisk and Russian olive on private lands have increased stream flows locally in the Alvey Wash, an intermittent stream. This project area (approximately 159 acres in 3 parcels) is in varying stages of project implementation.
Compliance:
This project is on private lands. All cultural clearance requirements for the State of Utah and Natural Resources Conservation Service will be met before the commencement of the project. Chemical with be mixed and applied by a licensed chemical applicator through the contractor.
Methods:
Cutting techniques are very specific; cut stump and frill cut methods are utilized and an herbicide is then applied. On public lands, conservation corps crews use chainsaws and/or handsaws to cut stump Russian olive trees and a one-quart hand sprayer is used to apply the herbicide to the stump. Another method is called frill cut, a non-mechanized treatment method, where crew members insert hacks or frills in various locations throughout the trunk using hatchets and a one-quart hand sprayer is used to apply herbicide to the frill. Specific protocol has been developed to guide treatment work on public lands, which is determined by tree location and size. Herbicides to be used include: Glyphosate, Imazapyr, and Triclopyr. Herbicides will be selected depending on project location and are on the BLM approved list.
Monitoring:
NRCS practices will be required to insure that success is achieved. NRCS will work with the producer to ensure concerns are met and practices are implemented according to NRCS standards and specifications. Using the work on the Escalante River and private lands, after the primary treatment 3 years of follow spot treatments will take and will be found in future phases.
Partners:
The NRCS working with the private landowner will be a major finical and technical partner in this project. The USFWS was also be partnering with funds and with technical support to see that the project is completed.
Future Management:
The land owner is not using this area for production. The landowner will be required to ensure that the treatment is not grazed for two growing season, even though we are not applying a seed mix the whole treatment. Spot seeding will be done to improve diversity.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
Restoration along this portion of the headwaters of the Paria River is aimed at removing invasives, promoting native plant and animal species, and restoring natural flooding and biological processes to the system. A healthy watershed provides many ecosystem functions including, but not limited to: nutrient cycling, carbon storage, erosion/sedimentation control, increased biodiversity, soil formation, wildlife movement corridors, water storage, water filtration, flood control, food, timber, recreation, and reduced vulnerability to invasive species, the effects of climate change, and other natural disasters. A healthy watershed also creates more opportunities for tourism tied to recreation and travel as well as economic development in local communities. Though grazing is not planned in the future for the landowner NRCS will provide technical assistance in ways to manage grazing if the need arises.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$52,285.00 $0.00 $52,285.00 $6,770.00 $59,055.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Archaeological Clearance Clearance of 22 acres @ $35/ac DNR Archaeologist will clear it. $0.00 $0.00 $770.00 2021
Contractual Services Contraction for tree removal, chipping and spraying $45,768.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Seed (GBRC) Seed for spot seeding 15ac $6,517.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Personal Services (permanent employee) Contracting and Supervision $0.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 2021
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$66,461.90 $0.00 $66,461.90 $7,662.61 $74,124.51
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) T165 $15,560.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Habitat Council Account QHCR $43,813.45 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) $0.00 $0.00 $6,770.00 2021
DWR-WRI Project Admin In-Kind $0.00 $0.00 $892.61 2021
DNR Watershed U004 $7,088.45 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Invasive Wildlife Species – Non-native Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher N1
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo N3
Threat Impact
Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) High
Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo N3
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo N3
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Wetland High
Habitats
Habitat
Aquatic-Forested
Threat Impact
Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) High
Aquatic-Forested
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) High
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Riverine
Threat Impact
Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) High
Riverine
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/17/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Stan, You mention that cottonwood, willow, other native shrubs will be replanted "where necessary". In order for YBCU to potentially benefit (uncertain result), you will need a multi-layer vegetative community with gallery cottonwood. This will only be attained quickly if you plant. Willow plantings will also provide more potential SWFL habitat more rapidly. Keith
Comment 02/03/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Thanks Keith. This project unlike a lot of the projects that have been done on the Escalante River have multiple age class vegetation that will provide the vegetative community needed for YBCU. The "where necessary" is simple stating that we will target areas that need willow an cotton wood planting.
Comment 02/07/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
Hey Stan - Looks like the beginnings of a great project. Just a couple suggestions. First, on the map feature it looks like this is a postage stamp in the middle of a lot of untreated lands. Can you elaborate on condition of adjacent lands and any future plans to expand upon this treatment. 2nd, We could use some elaboration on wildlife benefits for some of the species on your list as they are never mentioned in the project details.
Comment 02/10/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Gary thanks for the comment. This project is small but could be the beginnings of great things to come in a historically neglected area. The NRCS has done some erosion control work, but that is about it. The neighboring lands are in similar condition to this piece; mid invasion of Russian olive and tamarisk, with a healthy riparian system on the verge of being choked out. I have made contact with one of neighbors and they want to see how this goes before they dive in. We feel that like on the Escalante, once the ball starts to roll, then it will take off. We were working on this with EWRP, but it was out of their focus area so, Clint and I are taking it on. I have added some information about the benefits to wildlife in the Need for the Project section.
Comment 02/07/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Hi Stan, Related to GBs comment, as rankers we are asked to award 5 points based on the following: "If applicable, does the project cross jurisdictional boundaries? If the proposed project area borders other ownerships, was consideration given to expand the project to a broader landscape? If no opportunity existed, award full points. If an opportunity existed and minimal or no outreach occurred, score accordingly." You may want to address this in your partners section. I super appreciate the fact that you guys have a landowner willing to help try to restore the riparian on their property but what about the surrounding property owners and the big, bad BLM upstream?
Comment 02/10/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Working across boarders is my middle name, but a lot of people don't know that. Regarding the working on neighboring lands, my answer is yes and no. I talked to a neighbor, but not to the BLM mainly because of the distance to the BLM. Would I like to work with the BLM, of course I would, and I will be in contact with someone now, but it most likely won't be this year.
Comment 08/16/2021 Type: 2 Commenter: Daniel Eddington
This is just a reminder that completion reports are due August 31st. I have entered the expenses in the Through WRI/DWR column on the finance page. Please do not make any changes to numbers in the Through WRI/DWR column. Any "Through Other" or "In-kind" expenses will need to be entered by the PM or contributors. Update your map features and fill out the completion form. Be sure to click on the finalize button on the completion report when you have your completion report ready to be reviewed by WRI Admin. Don't forget to upload any pictures of the project you have of before, during and after completion. If you have any questions about this don't hesitate to contact me. Thanks.
Comment 09/01/2021 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Thank you for submitting your completion form on time. I have moved this project to completed.
Comment 02/06/2020 Type: 3 Commenter: Arie Leeflang
Hey Stan - I'm the new DWR archaeologist and I've been looking through proposals in prep for next week's UPCD presentations. If you're not doing any ground disturbing activities I don't think we'll need a class III archaeological inventory budget. If you are going to be doing something ground disturbing I can come down and walk the area. And then we can move the budget line-item for the archaeological survey from 'WRI' to 'in-kind'. Looks like a good project though. Cheers!
Comment 02/06/2020 Type: 3 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Yes there will be ground disturbance, so it will need to be cleared. If this is funded by the NRCS we will either need to coordinate the clearance or do it together, our Archaeologist has done both in the pass. I will be in contact if we get to that point.
Comment 02/06/2020 Type: 3 Commenter: Arie Leeflang
Ahhh - yes. I should have seen the NRCS funding. No doubt Shelley will take care of it! Thanks.
Comment 02/07/2020 Type: 3 Commenter: Stan Gurley
With the back log in the NRCS that is why we are asking for the funds to have it done and then submit the report to NRCS. Tara will be who we are working with .
Completion
Start Date:
03/16/2021
End Date:
04/28/2021
FY Implemented:
2021
Final Methods:
Using skidsters with cutting and chemical applicator attachments all russian olive and tamarisk was cut, chemically treated, and piled. Once all the trees had been piled a masticator was brought in to masticate and spread the material. Due the untimely death of the landowner the NRCS contract was canceled and the seed was not applied.
Project Narrative:
After completion of cultural resources survey and report, the russian olive and tamarisk removal began by Eco life. Ecolife started March 16, 2021 and finished April 28, 2021. Due the difficulty finding equipment in 2021, Ecolife needed an extension of 18 days. Once they were able to get the equipment they completed the removal. The seeding did not happen because of the late completion of the removal the UDWR Farm Bill Biologist advised to wait till fall of 2021 to apply the seed. In July the NRCS contract holder passed away, unexpectedly and the NRCS contract was canceled.
Future Management:
This area was never used for livestock grazing and was not planned to be used for livestock use in the future. With the cancelation of the NRCS contract and new control over the land, UDWR Farm Bill Biologist will work with new landowner to help address concerns they might have.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
9336 Terrestrial Treatment Area Herbicide application Spot treatment
9336 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Ground (mechanical application)
9336 Terrestrial Treatment Area Vegetation removal / hand crew Lop and chip
Project Map
Project Map