Skyline West Archaeological & Wildlife Surveys
Project ID: 5282
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2021
Submitted By: 2890
Project Manager: Russ Bigelow
PM Agency: U.S. Forest Service
PM Office: Sanpete Ranger District
Lead: U.S. Forest Service
WRI Region: Central
Description:
Skyline West is a landscape scale Aspen restoration project treating approximately 40,000 to 50,000 acres with prescribed fire in a a 94,000 acre project area on the Manti-La Sal National Forest. Thirteen HUC 12 watersheds will directly benefit including 4 that are ranked in the top 20% of the Statewide Stewardship Assessment. This phase of the project is focusing on Archaeological and Wildlife surveys for NEPA analysis.
Location:
The Skyline West project is in Sanpete and a Utah county on the Manti-La Sal National Forest. Project boundaries would include Pole Creek & Coal Hollow (2018) fire perimeters to the north, Skyline drive to the east, Willow Hazardous Fuels project boundary to the south, and US Forest boundary to the west. The project area is east of the communities of Birdseye, Indianola, Milburn, Fairview, Mt Pleasant, Spring City, & Ephraim Utah.
Project Need
Need For Project:
The Skyline West fuels project is a prescribed fire treatment on approximately 40,000 to 50,000 acres within thirteen HUC 12 watersheds east of Birdseye, UT to Ephraim, UT, including four that are ranked in the top 20% of the Utah Shared Stewardship Statewide Assessment. The treatment would be implemented to improve watershed resilience from an uncharacteristic wildfire by reducing hazardous fuels and promoting healthy aspen regeneration. This phase will focus on archaeological and wildlife surveys necessary for NEPA analysis. Two consistent years of wildlife surveys are needed for analysis. Future phases will be implemented to reduce hazardous fuels, improve watershed health, improve wildlife habitat, and areas with declining aspen component will be targeted for prescribed burning to restore healthy aspen.
Objectives:
Survey approximately 15,000 to 20,000 acres for archaeological clearance and survey approximately 40,000 to 50,000 acres for wildlife prior to NEPA analysis. This is designed to be a multi-year project. Additional phases include a second year of wildlife surveys, creating ignition lines using mechanical tree falling on approximately 10,000 to 12,500 acres, and prescribed burning 40,000 to 50,000 acres. Overall objectives for the 94,000 acre project include: * Regenerate declining aspen by introducing a fire disturbance event to cause mortality of encroaching conifers and stimulate root suckering of aspen clones. * Increase the resistance and resilience of watersheds and associated vegetation in the Trail Mountain landscape to climate-related stressors (drought, wildfire, insects, and disease). * Reduce the risk of a severe stand-replacing wildfire on these Forest Service Lands for the entire project boundary, reducing the risk to life (fire fighters, recreationists, and permittees), property, and to natural resource values. * Restore critical elk and deer habitat and browse species by improving forage quality and quantity through introduction of a fire disturbance event. * Restore suitable Goshawk foraging habitat by creating a mosaic of open ground within forested areas. * Restore pollinator habitat by enhancing wildflower-rich foraging habitat through a fire disturbance event.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
Public Health and Safety: There are several private in-holdings cabins, summer homes), and camps immediately adjacent to the Forest Boundary. Ingress and egress is limited to one lane traffic in multiple areas. Vehicles are unable to pass by each other on the road when traveling in opposite directions due to a lack of turnouts and passing lanes. The public and the Forest Service realize that safe ingress and egress could be improved. Vegetation & Fuels: Within the aspen mixed conifer vegetation type there has been no large scale disturbances for several decades meaning conifers are encroaching aspen. Aspen intermixed with conifer result in a denser canopy than just aspen dominated stands. Fire will typically burn much hotter, from canopy density and larger from the continuity of fuel both vertically and horizontally, with conifers present. Existing vegetation conditions such as species composition, canopy closure and pattern, and structure are components of concern for this project. The concern comes from in-holdings adjacent to the project area, developments within the project area, and municipal water developments and the probability that wildfire occurring would result in large scale high intensity wildfire similar to the wildfire as seen in Huntington Canyon in 2012 (Seeley Wildfire) and Spanish Fork Canyon in 2018 (Coal Hollow fire, Pole Creek fire, & Bald fire). Watershed: The project area encompasses 94,000 acres within thirteen 12th order Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) watersheds (Middle Thistle Creek, Lake Fork, Upper Thistle Creek, Dry Creek, Oak Creek, Cottonwood Canyon, Birch Creek, Pleasant Creek, Cedar Creek, Upper Oak Creek, Canal Creek, Cottonwood Creek, Pigeon Creek. Four of these 12 HUC watersheds (Middle Thistle Creek, Birch Creek, & Pleasant Creek, & Cedar Creek) are ranked in the top 20% priority watersheds in the state using the Utah Shared Stewardship Statewide Assessment. Based on recent experiences (e.g., Seeley Wildfire, Coal Hollow, Pole Creek, Bald fires), the results of such a fire would likely lead to overland flow, erosion, and debris flows from storm events that would have negative impacts far downstream from the National Forest System lands and municipal watersheds directly affecting communities. Wildlife Habitat: The thirteen Sanpete watersheds contain critical summer range habitat for Mule Deer and Rocky Mountain Elk. It also contains habitat for sensitive species such as the Northern goshawk and Three toed-woodpecker are currently at risk from catastrophic high severity wildfire. Implementation of this project reduces the risk of wildfires impacting these sensitive species. Design criteria are also included to help minimize short-term impacts to these species.
Relation To Management Plan:
This document tiers to the Manti-La Sal National Forest Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement. The proposal has been reviewed to identify conformance with Forest Plan management direction. It complies with the Forest Plan and meets specific direction to: 1. Minimize hazards from wildfire (LRMP III-5). Human life (firefighter and public safety) is the highest priority during a fire. Once firefighters have been assigned to a fire, their safety becomes the highest value to be protected. Property and natural and cultural resources are lower priorities (Utah Fire Amendment). 2. Maintain a healthy forest by applying appropriate silvicultural treatments (LRMP III-3). The desired condition for this landscape and its component stands provides for healthy stands with varied successional stages of trees and stands (LRMP III-2). 3. Reduce hazardous fuels. The full range of fuel reduction methods is authorized, consistent with forest and management area emphasis and direction (III-43). 4. Ecosystems are restored and maintained, consistent with land uses and historic fire regimes, through wildland fire use and prescribed fire (LRMP III-5). 5. Manage stands in a manner that promotes properly functioning conditions and habitat conditions suitable for the northern goshawk (LRMP III-3). 6. Use timber management to meet other management or resource needs (LRMP III-4). Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Elk Management Plan: This project will help introduce species diversity back into the Sanpete Face area. A mosaic design is part of the implementation strategy to create a pattern of treated and un-treated acres that will create an increase of biodiversity. Habitat fragmentation should not be an issue for wildlife as care has been taken to have leave areas, old growth areas, and treatment areas in good juxtaposition across the landscape to promote species diversity. Implementation of this project will benefit those species that favor early serial communities and early serial vegetation (elk). This project will provide increases in habitat effectiveness and benefit species such as ungulates. Mosaic patterns created by the project will distribute ungulate herbivory across the landscape minimizing overuse to current key areas and allow newly treated areas to have favorable responses to treatments. There will be some short-term (3-5 years) temporary impacts to plant and animal uses of these areas during the implementation phase of the project; however, the overall outcome will provide much needed plant species diversity across the landscape that will last well into the future. Increased vegetation through implementation of this project that will be created through primary succession methods will greatly benefit elk. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Mule Deer Management Plan: This project will help introduce species diversity back into the Sanpete Face area. A mosaic design is part of the implementation strategy to create a pattern of treated and un-treated acres that will create an increase of biodiversity. Habitat fragmentation should not be an issue for wildlife as care has been taken to have leave areas, old growth areas, and treatment areas in good juxtaposition across the landscape to promote species diversity. Implementation of this project will benefit those species that favor early serial communities and early serial vegetation (deer). This project will provide increases in habitat effectiveness and benefit species such as ungulates. Mosaic patterns created by the project will distribute ungulate herbivory across the landscape minimizing overuse to current key areas and allow newly treated areas to have favorable responses to treatments. There will be some short-term (3-5 years) temporary impacts to plant and animal uses of these areas during the implementation phase of the project; however, the overall outcome will provide much needed plant species diversity across the landscape that will last well into the future. Increased vegetation through implementation of this project that will be created through primary succession methods will greatly benefit mule deer. The Northern goshawk in Utah: habitat assessment and management recommendations: In Forest Plan direction for the Northern goshawk, forest vegetation structural stage classes are discussed and how they relate to preference by goshawk for nesting, post fledgling family areas, or rearing and teaching of young and foraging. Careful consideration has been given to Northern goshawk territories found within the project boundaries. Territories will be part of the mosaic pattern designed as "leave" areas for prescribed burn and mechanical treatments. Creating age class diversity through the implementation of this project will ensure future habitat as well as habitat for prey used by goshawk is maintained. National Cohesive Strategy: By means of prescribed fire and mechanical thinning at a landscape scale, the resulting mosaic of early and late successional forests will work toward the goal of restoring and maintaining resilient landscapes, one of the three goals described in the National Cohesive Strategy. State of Utah Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy: The Skyline West Project aligns with the mission of the State of Utah's Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy. The project has developed a comprehensive and systematic approach toward reducing the size, intensity and frequency of catastrophic wildland fires on the Sanpete Face through a collaborative process. The project reduces the risk of a catastrophic wildfire occurrence negatively affecting property, air quality and water systems. State of Utah Forest Action Plan: The Skyline West Project addresses all three of the key goals laid out in the Forest Action Plan: conserve and manage working forest landscapes for multiple values and uses, protect forests from threats and enhance public benefits from trees and forests. All actions called for in the Skyline West Project work together to reduce wildfire and forest health threats to the surrounding forests and reduce the potential for long-term degradation of forested watersheds on the Sanpete Face. Sanpete County Resource Management Plan: Objective A. Healthy forests are managed for multiple uses, most importantly water quality and watershed protection. Additional support and direction listed throughout this document defining county objectives, policies and desired management practices. Sanpete County Community Fire Plan: Goal B: Community will work with county, state and federal fire officials to decrease fuels on adjacent public lands to reduce wildfire intensity and impact in and around the community. This project works to achieve Goal B of the Sanpete County CWPP by reducing fuel loading and lowering the potential of wildland fire spread across the Sanpete Face.
Fire / Fuels:
The Skyline West Project treatments would be implemented to effectively restore resilient, fire-adapted aspen ecosystems on a landscape-scale and across boundary 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 Sanpete Front landscape; thus mitigating the risks and damage associated with a high intensity, high severity, uncharacteristic/catastrophic wildfire and where appropriate, expand opportunities to manage fire for resource benefits and meet Manti-La Sal Land and Resource Management Plan objectives. The stands associated with this project are in a Fire Regime II Condition Class 3 (High). A Fire Regime II is a 0- 35 year or greater fire frequency and high (stand-replacement) severity (greater than 75% of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced). Condition Class 3 is high departure from this regime and is considered outside the natural (historic) range of variability. Consequently, fire suppression actions necessary to protect private lands associated structures would be difficult given the nature of the fuels in the area. Within the Skyline West Area a lack of disturbance including wildfire suppression have changed stands from early seral species (aspen) to late seral climax species (spruce and fir) resulting in dense canopy and continuous vertical crown structure. A Forest wide spruce beetle epidemic has affected a portion of the project resulting in the mortality of more than 90 percent of Engelmann spruce greater than 8 inches diameter. Because of prolonged drought, dense canopy, and the accumulation of the dead spruce it is highly probable the project area will undergo a uncharacteristic high intensity stand replacing fire. Additionally, in the vicinity of the Skyline West Project are several private in-holdings (cabins, recreational developments), power lines, municipal water developments, which would be a great risk in the event of such a fire.
Water Quality/Quantity:
Project treatments will result in short to moderate term impacts to water quality, but project design features will prevent long-term degradation. Project treatments will considerably lessen the risk of uncharacteristic large scale high severity fires that could result in long-term watershed degradation. By maintaining watershed function, long-term water quality will be maintained or enhanced. By removing conifer it is anticipated that water quantity will be enhanced (seeps, springs, bogs--improved). Fire behavior over the last 2 decades have illustrated the potential for large uncontrollable fires across the Manit-La Sal with current fuel loadings and conifer stand densities. A large wildlife would likely lead to large flood events. Water quantity could increase but most increase would be associated with storm events or early snow melt. This would likely lead to channel instability and down-cutting. Ash, erosion from the fire, and erosion from channel adjustments would decrease water quality by increasing water turbidity and sediment loads. These effects could lead to extirpation of fish populations if the area burned was large enough. Water quantity (and quality) would return to near baseline levels as vegetation recovered over time, but channel adjustments such as down-cutting post-fire would likely have long-term consequences such as reduced areas of riparian habitat and wet meadows.
Compliance:
The Skyline West project is in pre-NEPA development, therefore all required laws and compliance will be prescribed to when fully developed. This phase of the project will meet analysis of Cultural Resource Surveys in order to consult with appropriate native american tribes and the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) as well as to develop the Wildlife specialist reports.
Methods:
Archaeological surveys contracted through the State of Utah contractual services. Wildlife surveys conducted using US Forest Service seasonal personnel.
Monitoring:
The State of Utah will provide COR support to oversee the development of Statement of Work and project implementation. The US Forest Service will provide a Project Inspector to develop the Statement of Work and project implementation.
Partners:
US Forest Service - Manti-La Sal National Forest. Utah Department of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. Sanpete County.
Future Management:
2021 - 2nd year Wildlife Surveys 2023 - NEPA Environmental Assessment Completed 2024 through 2034 - Implementation through mechanical ignition lines and prescribed burning.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
The project area is designated as important big game habitat for mule deer and elk. The amount of forage available to livestock is expected to increase significantly as a result of this project. With the removal of conifers and oak the amount of usable grasses and forbs in the aspen under-story is also expected to increase significantly. With increased forage livestock distribution and management is expected to improve. Many areas that are currently unproductive due to overgrowth will soon become desirable for future uses by livestock.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$202,100.00 $150,000.00 $352,100.00 $0.00 $352,100.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Archaeological Clearance State Contract archaeological clearance $21/acre x 15,000 acres = $315,000 $165,000.00 $150,000.00 $0.00 2021
Personal Services (seasonal employee) (2) GS 4 seasonal wildlife employees $250/day x 70 days = $17,500 (2) GS 5 seasonal wildlife employees $280/hour x 70 days = $19,600 $37,100.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$253,977.00 $0.00 $253,977.00 $46,036.64 $300,013.64
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
United States Forest Service (USFS) surveys work by USFS employees $0.00 $0.00 $45,000.00 2021
USFS - Shared Stewardship A118 $46,308.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
USFS - Shared Stewardship A118 N6970 $207,669.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
DWR-WRI Project Admin In-Kind $0.00 $0.00 $317.14 2022
DWR-WRI Project Admin In-Kind $0.00 $0.00 $719.50 2023
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Black Bear
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Bonneville Cutthroat Trout N4 R1
Threat Impact
Agricultural / Municipal / Industrial Water Usage High
Bonneville Cutthroat Trout N4 R1
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Bonneville Cutthroat Trout N4 R1
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management Low
Bonneville Cutthroat Trout N4 R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Housing and Urban Areas Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (historic) Medium
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Housing and Urban Areas Low
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Cabin Communities / Development Low
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Housing and Urban Areas Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Ruffed Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Cabin Communities / Development Low
Ruffed Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Ruffed Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Ruffed Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Dusky Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Cabin Communities / Development Low
Dusky Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Dusky Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Dusky Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Habitats
Habitat
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Cabin Communities / Development Medium
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Habitat Shifting and Alteration Medium
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (historic) Very High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Problematic Insects – Native High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Utility and Service Lines Low
Mountain Meadow
Threat Impact
Soil Erosion / Loss High
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (historic) Low
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Low
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/13/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Terri Pope
I would suggest removing Greater Sage-grouse from your species list. I am not sure how a forest project like this benefits sage-grouse directly. Bald Eagle for the specific threat listed is also a bit of a stretch.
Comment 01/14/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Russ Bigelow
Thanks for the input Terri. I have no problem removing Greater Sage-grouse and even the Bald Eagle if its your professional opinion. With the recent large scale fires we have seen in the area (Trail, Coal Hollow, Pole, & Bald 2018) these proposed fuel treatments may not directly affect their habitat but the secondary effects (soil sterilization, erosion, etc.) from large scale fires could impact them. The prescribed burning we are recommending for this project will be beneficial in reducing the potential for large scale catastrophic fire along the Sanpete Front. We did use the DNR website (https://utahdnr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f2a182a16a4b45698d9d96b962852302) to identify all the potential species within the Project Area. Thanks, Russ
Comment 01/30/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Terri Pope
Yes, I think it is best to only include species that the threats are specifically addressed by this particular project. Secondary results are nice, but shouldn't be considered when assessing points for a project. Thanks.
Comment 01/28/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Jimi Gragg
Thanks for the proposal, my recollection from an analysis done several years ago (and summarized in the WAP terrestrial habitat accounts) is that the Fire Regime Condition for aspen-conifer in those watersheds was highly departed from reference condition. Your project would help alleviate that departure, truly at landscape scale. One question - what wildlife species will be specifically targeted for surveys? Would - for example - Columbia spotted frog be detectable in these surveys? And where will the results of surveys (raw effort, and detections) be housed? Will UDWR get those wildlife data? Thanks again, and best luck!
Comment 02/06/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Russ Bigelow
Jimi, thanks for the comment. Yes the Fire Return Interval is approximately 200 years out of whack thus the need for the project. After consulting with Kevin Albrecht more about wildlife species and benefit, we removed Sage Grouse, Bald Eagle, Columbia Spotted Frog, Cougar, Colorado River Cutthroat, Moose, Western Toad, Flammulated Owl, and Lewis Woodpecker. Although, each of the species would benefit from secondary results and reducing the threat of intense wildfires (Pole Creek, Coal Hollow, etc.), they would not be the focus of project. Kevin indicated that Northern Goshawk and Three-toed woodpecker would be the target species for the surveys and results from the surveys would be available. Thanks again for the comment and support. - Russ
Comment 01/31/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Chris Crockett
I'd like more information on how Columbia spotted frog and BCT will be directly benefited from this work and if (and how) those benefits will be monitored.
Comment 02/06/2020 Type: 1 Commenter: Russ Bigelow
Chris thanks for the comment. After further consolation with our wildlife biologist, Kevin Albrecht, we decided to revise the species list and only include those that would have direct effect from the benefits for the project and not the secondary effects of preventing future wildfires. Again, thanks for the comment. - Russ
Comment 03/17/2020 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Russ - Can you clarify the arch line item in your budget on the Finance page for me? It is a little confusing. Is the full area going to be cleared through the state contract? I am wondering if that $150k should be in the through WRI/DWR column instead of in-kind. Has the $150k from the region been confirmed or is this potentially shared stewardship? Thank.
Comment 08/16/2023 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
This is just a reminder that completion reports are due August 31st. Expenses have been entered 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 09/13/2023 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Please fill out the Completion Form ASAP. Completion reports were due August 31st.
Completion
Start Date:
07/01/2020
End Date:
10/07/2022
FY Implemented:
2023
Final Methods:
From August 31 to October 24, 2020, and June 26 to August 23, 2022, EcoPlan Field Directors John Curry, Katherine Cera, and Tucker Deady, Crew Chiefs Joseph Hall, Tyler Reinholt, and Lydia Rennalls, and crew members Connor Christiansen, Alana Clements, Daniel Miller, Paul Randall, Robert Shinkle, and Emily Wicke, conducted an archaeological survey of the project area to locate and record cultural resources. Archaeological sites were fully recorded on Utah Archaeology Site Forms (USAFs), and documented with digital photographs of site locations, features, and diagnostic artifacts. Isolated occurrences (IOs) were assigned individual numbers, briefly described, and photographed if diagnostic. Historic linear alignments that maintained their historical fabric were recorded within the project area and outward for a distance of 400 m, if possible, as suggested in the Utah Professional Archaeological Council (UPAC) Linear Sites guidelines (UPAC 2008; see below). A handheld Trimble Geo7X GPS receiver was used to record spatial data for cultural resources and other project elements. The Skyline Project wildlife surveys has been a multi-year undertaking resulting in thousands of acres surveyed. In the year 2021 we were able to survey utilizing Forest Service crews throughout the summer, surveying 676 call stations and 42,000 acres north of the Fairview canyon road.
Project Narrative:
For the archaeological survey, the proposed vegetation project requires a focus on both the treatment units themselves, and on access roads to or near the parcels that might be used and possibly need some level of work or improvement to accommodate logging trucks. The treatment units are spread across and within the various canyons that head at the top of the Wasatch Plateau and run generally down to the west into Sanpete Valley. Because most of the treatment units are in canyons, and these canyons tend to be very deep, the majority of the units are on very steep slopes. Compounding this problem is the fact that most tree stands are very thick with both live trees and deadfall; these, and the typically dense ground vegetation within the tree stands, make it unlikely that survey in these contexts would be effective or efficient, as well as increasing the chance of injury to the field crews. These variables, then, made it necessary to restrict the surveys to areas of higher potential for finding archaeological sites, while at the same time making sure that the units as a group were adequately sampled. To address these problems, the USFS determined to survey areas within the treatment units where the terrain was slopes of less than 30 percent ("low slope"). From the low slope areas within treatment units, surveys focused on areas with lower vegetation density, either due to a lack of vegetation or through aspen stands, which are generally less dense and ground covered that the coniferous areas within the treatment units. This survey strategy would cover areas with the highest potential for finding cultural resources. Because these survey areas were analyzed through GIS without ground truthing, discretion was given to the contractor to exclude further survey polygons from survey if the slope in reality was over 30 percent or the vegetation too dense. This resulted in the 2,828 acres of survey being dropped from the contract, which are reflected on the survey maps as "unsurveyed parcels." A total of 9,437 acres were intensively surveyed. All areas likely to contain identifiable cultural resources within the treatment areas or access roads for the Sanpete Face Project were adequately surveyed. In the year 2021 we were able to survey utilizing Forest Service crews throughout the summer, surveying 676 call stations and 42,000 acres north of the Fairview canyon road. In 2022 with the reduction of seasonal forest employees we decided to put the remaining surveys out for contract using the remaining WRI money allocated in 2021. However, due to access concerns, scale of survey acreage, and amount of call stations we were unable to secure a contractor to perform the work.
Future Management:
EcoPlan conducted an intensive pedestrian survey of 9,437 acres in the Manti-La Sal National Forest in advance of proposed ecosystem restoration activities. Those areas were intensively surveyed with transects spaced no more than 15 m apart. Four previously recorded sites and 77 new sites were documented. Two sites that were previously recorded within the survey area were not relocated. Of the 81 documented sites, nine are recommended as eligible for listing in the NRHP. Seventy-two sites and all 184 IOs are recommended as not eligible for the NRHP under any criterion. EcoPlan could not make eligibility recommendations for the two non-relocated sites. The eligible sites should be avoided or hand treated in a way to avoid potential adverse effect. In 2023 using funds from another project we rebid the second round of wildlife surveys. This time did award the contract however, due to the inability of contracting crews to access the project(snow drifts) until the first part of August we were unable to get the contract completed. The contract is still on-going and waiting for the nesting/fledgling period June 1st-August 15th. Once surveys and NEPA are complete the USFS will begin implementation of mechanical thinning and prescribed burning within the project area.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
9002 Affected Area
Project Map
Project Map