This project is a landscape-scale watershed improvement project. It addresses threats to the watershed from wildfire, pinyon-juniper encroachment, stream degradation, habitat loss, non-native vegetation, and ecological site degradation. In the upper reaches of the watershed burned by the wildfires, we have lost much of our shrub component that is very important for big game, rabbits, raptors, and many other wildlife species. In some areas, this results in bare ground that is susceptible to erosion and contamination of water quality downstream. As part of this project we will plant native shrub seeds to try and restore this component to the ecosystem. Cheatgrass has established post fire and overgrazing in many other areas of the watershed. Without restoration efforts the cheatgrass will continue to outcompete other native vegetation that is beneficial for ecosystem diversity and health. It also increases fire risk and threatens water quality. We will spray herbicide to try to kill this cheatgrass and stop its spread. On portions of the watershed there is significant Phase 2 and 3 pinyon-juniper encroachment into areas that were formerly shrubland. These sites are crucial winter range for mule deer and the conversion of shrubland to woodland has led to poor winter range condition. We will remove pinyon-juniper to restore shrublands for wildlife. As a result of long-term watershed degradation and the 2018 wildfires, Thistle Creek has experienced significant incision, which leads to increased sediment in the water and loss of habitat. We will use low-tech, process-based restoration to re-connect the stream with its floodplain which will mitigate sedimentation. This will also create more diversity of stream and riparian habitat for the benefit of wildlife and livestock. In particular, bats that are on the WAP species list will benefit from the increase in available drinking water and increase in insects for food.

This project goal is to improve the health of the Thistle Creek watershed and enhance the watershed's resilience to future disturbance. This project objectives are to: 1. Improve and restore shrubland habitat for wildlife such as big game species by increasing cover of shrubland vegetation; and decreasing cover of bare soil, crested wheatgrass, Phase 2 and 3 pinyon-juniper, and cheatgrass. 2. On sites burned by wildfire, use seeds and plantings to establish cover of native and desirable plant species to reduce establishment of noxious and invasive plant species. 3. Use low-tech, process-based methods to increase stream connectivity with the floodplain and reduce stream incision. 4. Increase cover of plant species that are desirable for wildlife and livestock to improve animal health. 5. Reduce stream and soil erosion in order to protect road infrastructure (Highway 89) from being displaced or repaired.

Each year without action, the resilience of the Thistle Creek watershed to wildfire is reduced. Non-native grasses and Phase 2 and 3 pinyon-juniper vegetation continue to increase their abundance which threatens shrublands that wildlife rely on. The changing vegetation community increases the risk of larger, more intense wildfires. Areas burned by intense wildfire further the spread of non-native plants. Without immediate action, the risk of crossing ecological thresholds increases and costs of future treatments increases and the effectiveness of actions is reduced. For example, reviving existing shrub communities before they are completely gone (burned, outcompeted) is more successful and cost effective. The continued loss of shrubland habitat also increases the pressure on remaining plants by herbivores (e.g. deer and elk) thus decreasing the health of remaining plants. The continued delay of not treating this area can ultimately result in poorer food availability for ungulates like mule deer and elk. This can lead to death for these species during severe winters. Rebounding these animal populations will take years and the cost to the UDWR in the reduction of tags will be significant. To prevent complete loss of thermal cover for mule deer and elk and crucial habitat for PJ obligate species we will leave areas for cover and habitat for species like pinyon jays. The threats to the habitat, wildlife, to the community, and the health of the watershed as a whole are much greater if no action is taken to remove PJ trees. If we do not do this project we will continue to lose more of our sagebrush habitats and potentially lose all ecological function of these habitats. By not responding to the erosion concerns post fire we will continue to see flooding and damage to highway 89 and private property. The seeding we did in phase 1 of this project and the continued building of erosion control structures, etc. by our partners will help to slow these flows and mitigate these concerns as well as speed up recovery time. By not repairing the incised stream channels in Thistle Creek with BDAs we may continue to lose fish and amphibian populations due to poor quality habitat. This would be extremely costly to restore later on and would require transplants.

1. State of Utah Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy: State of Utah's Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy. The project reduces the risk of a catastrophic wildfire occurrence negatively affecting property, air quality and water systems. 2. Utah State Elk Management Plan 1. Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk habitat. 2. Maintain sufficient habitat to support elk herds at population objectives and reduce competition for forage between elk and livestock. 3. Wildlife Action Plan 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 these goals. The removal of trees would create a break in the tree canopy where firefighters could begin to manage the fire. The practice of removing PJ with mechanical methods has been proven to be a successful technique to restore the health of the watershed. 4. State of Utah Forest Action Plan: The 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. . 5. Mule Deer Herd Unit 16 C Plan The proposed projects will address some of the habitat management strategies outlined in the deer management plans for herd unit 16C (Central Mountains, Manti) including: Continue to improve and restore sagebrush steppe habitats critical to deer according to DWRs Habitat Initiative. Maintain habitat quantity and quality at a level adequate to support the stated population objectives while at the same time not resulting in an overall downward trend in range condition and watershed quality. Work cooperatively with land management agencies and private landowners to plan and implement improvement projects for the purpose of enhancing wildlife habitat and range resources in general. 6. Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan The project also helps fulfill the state mule deer management plan section IV Habitat Goal: Conserve and improve mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges. 7. The Division of Wildlife Resources Strategic Management Plan: Resource Goal: expand wildlife populations and conserve sensitive species by protecting and improving wildlife habitat. Objective 1: protect existing wildlife habitat and improve 500,000 acres of critical habitats and watersheds throughout the state. Objective 3: conserve sensitive species to prevent them from becoming listed as threatened or endangered. Constituency Goal: Achieve broad-based support for Division programs and budgets by demonstrating the value of wildlife to all citizens of Utah. 8. The Wildlife Management Area Plans to reach their potential as critical big game winter range, browse communities need to be enhanced and improved. The Division will employ a variety of methods to achieve this including prescribed grazing, prescribed burning, reseeding and seedling transplants, and mechanical treatments. Priority areas will include sagebrush-steppe and mountain browse communities. 9. The Utah Smoke Management Plan (1999, 2006 revision). By using mechanical mastication this plan will accomplish Goal #5, Use of alternative methods to burning for disposing of or reducing the amount of wildland fuels on lands in the State (p3). 10. State of Utah Hazard Mitigation Plan (March 2011) this plan accomplishes statewide goals including 1) Protection of natural resources and the environment, when considering mitigation measures and 2) Minimize the risk of wildfire (p12). 11.UTAH COUNTY -- Resource Management Plan Identify areas of public lands with high scenic, wildlife, or watershed value and protect these areas from further development. Endeavor to protect scenic and wildlife resources without unduly interfering with landowners' ability to utilize their lands. Preserve scenic vistas and wildlife habitat by limiting hillside development. The county supports thoughtful management of floodplains and river terraces as a way to protect human health and safety. The county values floodplains and river terraces as an important part of the local ecosystem.Preventing floods and mitigating natural disasters has always been a priority for landowners in Utah County. The custom and culture of the area is to be responsible about structure and infrastructure placement, and respect the inevitable changes in flowing water. Support projects and land uses on public lands that protect the riparian corridors and stream ecology. Support the use of good science by federal and state agencies to ensure that riparian areas are functioning on public lands.The county values riparian areas for their ecological and aesthetic values. Support projects and policies on public lands that maintain and improve soil conditions and vegetative cover in uplands. Utah County will participate in the management of watersheds on public and private lands to optimize quality and quantity of water Maintain and improve our fresh water supplies and watersheds on public lands, and increase our watershed production capabilities. Maintain water storage capacity of reservoirs on public lands by reducing sediment loading and seeking additional storage. Manage municipal watersheds on public lands for multiple uses with mitigation measures to protect the water supply for intended purposes. Allow projects when the proposed mitigation measures provide adequate protection. The county supports finding local solutions to water quality and hydrological concerns on public lands including future dams. 12. Livestock grazing on public land should be managed and regulated by county, state, and federal agencies so as to maintain and enhance desired plant communities for the benefit of watershed, wildlife, water quality, recreation, and livestock grazing as required by the applicable land use plans. Such management should be developed specifically and individually for each public land grazing allotment in order to achieve the desired result throughout the county. Encourage livestock use on public lands to be compatible with recreation use. Locate structural and design non-structural improvements to meet visual quality objectives. 13. NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE -- Conservation Programs Manual Locally led conservation is based on the principle that community stakeholders are best suited to identify and resolve local natural resource problems. Thus, community stakeholders are keys to successfully managing and protecting their natural resources. It challenges neighbors, both urban and rural, to work together and take responsibility for addressing local resource needs. The word "local" can mean a county, a portion of a county, a watershed, a multicounty region, or whatever geographic area is best suited to address the resource conservation needs identified. Local may also include specific sectors of a county, watershed, region, or community with common resource concerns. This may include but is not limited to groups based on operational type (organic, specialty crop, etc.), groups based on operator type (limited-resource, family-owned farms, retirees, etc.), or groups based on other mutual resource concerns. (1) It is important to keep in mind that locally led conservation must be driven by natural resource conservation needs rather than by programs. Its primary focus should be to identify natural resource concerns, along with related economic and social concerns. Once the natural resource concerns are identified, appropriate Federal, State, local, and nongovernmental program tools can be used, both individually and in combination, to address these resource concerns and attempt to meet the established goals of the community stakeholders. 14. FARM SERVICE AGENCY -- Emergency Conservation Program The Emergency Conservation Program (ECP), administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency (FSA), provides emergency funding and technical assistance to farmers and ranchers to rehabilitate farmland damaged by natural disasters and to implement emergency water conservation measures in periods of severe drought. 15. Statewide Turkey Managment Plan III. ISSUES AND CONCERNS High Priority: Urgent and Important Issue H2. Insufficient Winter Habitat Concern A. Starvation during severe weather. Concern B. Winter overutilization of urban and agricultural areas Objective 1.Stabilize populations that are declining outside of natural population fluctuations; especially through catastrophic events (i.e. following fires, severe winters, etc.). Strategy c: Conduct habitat projects to address limiting factors. Objective 2.Increase wild turkey habitat, quality and quantity, by 40,000 acres statewide by 2020.Strategy d:Conduct habitat improvement projects in limiting habitat(s). Objective 1.Decrease the number of chronic material damage complaints per turkeys by 25% by 2020. Strategy Improve habitat to draw wild turkey populations away from conflict. 16. Utah Beaver Management Plan This project will address the following objective of the Utah Beaver Management Plan a. Facilitate and promote beaver assisted restoration activities and expansion of existing beaver populations in areas that beaver are already present, habitat exists to already support them and human beaver conflict is low and or easily mitigated. 17. Utah Wildlife Action Plan. 2015. Southern Leatherside Chub are listed as a Species of Greatest Conservation Need under the WAP. Threats to its persistence include: 1) drought (very high), and 2) dam and water management (high). Both of these are factors affecting the leatherside population in the project area. Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Southern Leatherside Chub. 2010. Goal is to ensure long-term persistence of Southern Leatherside within its historic range and support development of statewide conservation efforts. Objectives include: 1) maintain and monitor currently known and newly discovered populations and their habitat, and 2) identify, prioritize, and implement actions to reduce threats to leatherside populations and habitat and evaluate the effectiveness of these actions. The Strategy's goal and both of these objectives are applicable to the proposed project.

Dense stands of pinyon-juniper are a concern for greater fire severity and promoting crown fires that can be more destructive. Removing sections of trees will help to slow down potential crown fires spread and heat, and help to prevent invasive species like cheat-grass from establishing post fire. This project will decrease the risk of high severity wildfire by reducing fuel loading, reduce soil erosion, and promoting the growth of understory vegetation, which are critical to maintaining ecosystem resilience. Fuels in the current state pose a hazard to fire personnel, the private citizens, structures and infrastructure. 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 these goals. The removal of trees would create a break in the tree canopy where firefighters could begin to manage the fire. The practice of removing PJ with mechanical methods has been proven to be a successful technique to restore the health of the watershed. It has been observed that by cutting down PJ, that the understory vegetation will grow back in greater amounts than in those areas that are not cut (Bates et al. 2000). Therefore, in areas where natural processes such as fire are not possible or no longer effective, it is essential for current management and restoration projects to utilize other methods to remove PJ and allow for understory to return, such as a bullhog. By reseeding areas that burned in the Pole Creek fire we will curb the spread of cheatgrass which will increase the future fire danger if we don't seed. By building BDAs and expanding the green riparian area along thistle creek we will provide a greater fire break to reduce the spread of future fires.

This is a very valuable watershed that provides water for many people in Utah County. Post Wildfire Restoration Because the 2018 fires removed so much vegetation and exposed soil high in watershed there have been several large water events that have caused severe flooding and erosion. These flood events have caused surface damage to watershed below often destroying existing flood plains, riparian areas and habitats, and aquatic life in perennial waters. This project will help to establish vegetation that will stabilize the soil and help to reduce the amount of sediment that will enter streams and washes post fire.This will help to improve the water quality of the watershed. Also, currently moisture will move across the soil more quickly and water quantity will be lost. This project will help establish vegetation that will hold more moisture higher up in the watershed and allow for it to soak into the soil and enter under ground water storage. PJ removal treatments: Another negative impact on the watershed from PJ encroachment is soil erosion (Farmer 1995). By removing PJ it will allow for the current grasses and forbs to return and stabalize the soil and decrease the speed of water-flow and the size of soil particles that can be moved downstream and therefore reduce erosion. This project will help to protect this from happening in the future and save the ecosystem from irreversible losses to soil. This will be important for improving water quality. In water-limited systems, an added benefit to PJ removal can be the potential to increase water-savings. PJ have been shown to intercept about 10-20 percent of precipitation (Skau 1964). Also, where PJ encroachment has resulted in large bare ground areas it has been shown that these systems can have greater precipitation runoff (Farmer 1995). Results of the Great Basin Landscape Conservation Cooperative study in Nevada (Desatoya Mt.) found that by removing (lop and scatter) P/J (130 trees/acre) there is the potential to increase water recharge yields 4% on wet years. On wet years this will increase recharge and hopefully allow for more water to be available for fish, livestock, wildlife, and human consumption. Wet meadows and upland plants benefit by utilizing the increase soil moisture, providing for better resiliency during drought years. This provides for an increase in water quantity for herbaceous plants on sites where p/j is removed. Beaver Dam Analogs Where the stream-bank has been stripped of vegetation due to erosion, resulting in more downcutting, this leads to further erosion and diminished water quality. This project will help to raise the water levels and allow for more vegetation to be growing near the water to stabilize the banks. This will help improve the water quality and quantity in the system. This project will also slow the flow of water which will decrease the amount of erosion that will occur in big flood events. Slowing the water will also increase the quantity of water that is able to seep into the soil and benefit the system. This will also hold water longer upstream and increase the length of time that the reservoir downstream can hold water, thus increasing its capacity and water quantity.

Cultural resource surveys will be completed before project work begins. NEPA has already been completed for bullhog areas on USFS lands. An NRCS CPA 52 will be completed for all private land. Joint Utah Division of Water Rights/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Stream Alteration Permits will be obtained before stream restoration activities are implemented. All project activities, particularity vegetation treatments, will adhere to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and avoid take of breeding birds.

Juniper Removal We will first have a contractor survey the treatment area for cultural resources. All identified sites will be avoided. Following this we will fly seed onto some of the treatment areas aerially. This will be done prior to commencement of the bullhogging. Bullhogging will be done in the fall of 2021. Pinyon trees will be retained and some juniper trees may be retained along drainage bottoms and where cover is needed. Post Fire Rehabilitation NRCS projects in the watershed will chain and strategically pile burned trees where private landowners have requested this. This WRI proposal will help fund post fire burn scars that have been slow to recover by aerially seeding areas that have not responded with desirable vegetation The NRCS and WRI will fund efforts to spray or broadcast plateau in order to control cheatgrass. We are going to utlilize rangleand G which is a granular form of Plateau. Stream Restoration. We will construct low-tech structures (i.e., beaver dam analogues and post-assisted log-structures) using the methods described in Low-tech, Process-based Restoration of Riverscapes (Wheaton et al. 2019). We will use untreated wooden fence posts approximately 3-4" in diameter. Posts will be driven into the stream bed with a gas or hydralic post pounder. The posts will extend about 1 m above the channel bed and spaced approximately 0.5 - 0.8 m apart, and driven to a depth of approximately 1 m into the streambed. We will weave native vegetation, rocks, and mud between the posts to create a structure that will look like a beaver dam. The structure will slow the water but allow fish to pass through. We will place low-tech structures 10-30 m apart within the stream reaches. After a year we will assess the health of the stream and evaluate future actions. We may plant willows or other native plants at the restoration sites to improve establishment of riparian vegetation. Shrub Restoration. We will use a dozer to scalp away non-desirable grass competition. We will plant bitterbrush, four-wing saltbush, and sagebrush seed. We will then also hand broadcast forb and shrub seed.

Portions of the project are located on the Lasson Draw and Spencer Fork WMAs so there will be continued monitoring of success of the project on these areas into the future. As well as areas on USFS and private lands. NRCS will monitor the success of their projects and ensure that if further work is needed that it will be done. The UDWR will conduct fish electro shocking surveys before and after the project to document changes in fish populations. The UDWR will also conduct bat and amphibian surveys pre and post project. The UDWR and partners will conduct riparian rapid stream assessments to determine health of the stream prior to and post BDA work. UDWR will utilize motion sensor cameras to document use of BDAs by beavers and other wildlife. Photo points will be established and point line intercept transects to monitor improvements in vegetation.

The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources is working with Nels Rasmussen and Russ Bigelow of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Janice Gardner from Wild Utah Project to complete this project. We are working across landownership boundaries. In phse 1 of this project we did bullhog work on the USFS lands and this year we will continue to do more bullhog work on USFS. We will also do BDAs on USFS lands. This work will be done in partnership with Wild Utah Project that will help to build BDAs. A lot of work will also be done on the UDWR Lasson and Spencer Fork WMAs. We also have the NRCS and Farm Service doing work in the same watershed to improve it but they are not asking for money through WRI at this time.

We will not graze the areas that we treat during sensitive times of the vegetation growth process. We will work with UDWR wildlife biologist to recommend doe hunts if we need to reduce the herbivory pressure. Much of the project is being done on UDWR wildlife management areas who have dedicated staff to monitor the projects and ensure that if further work is needed to achieve desired objectives that that work is done. Likewise, the USFS has full time staff able to monitor and adaptive react to land management needs in the future. The NRCS will work with the private landowners to also monitor success of achieving desired objectives and make appropriate management recommendations as needed.

Domestic livestock will greatly benefit from this project by having an increase in the amount of available forage. Stream restoration activities are expected to increase the amount of surface water available for livestock. Fish and wildlife will greatly benefit from this project so there will be an increase in hunting and fishing opportunity. It will also help improve the beauty and quality of the forest to be appreciated by recreational users of the forest like campers, hikers, and wildlife watchers.

10/15/2021

05/20/2022

2022

We first flew seed with a fixed-wing aircraft over the area that would be masticated. This was done so that the seed will be on the ground and can be pushed into the soil by the tracks of the bullhog masticator. We flew the seed on in October of 2021. Once this was complete, we began mastication shortly thereafter in early November of 2021. We masticated 730 acres of pinyon and juniper trees. In September of 2021, we used the mad max dozer and planted antelope bitterbrush and four-wing saltbush at the 2-inch depth with the planters. We also broadcasted seed over the tracks into the scalped rows, see the seed mix for what species were planted. We also built 50 BDAs in Thistle Creek.

This project is a landscape-scale watershed improvement project of the Thistle Creek drainage. From near Indianola to Birdseye. It addresses threats to the watershed from wildfire, pinyon-juniper encroachment, stream degradation, habitat loss, non-native vegetation, and ecological site degradation.

We will not graze the areas that we treat during sensitive times of the vegetation growth process. We will work with UDWR wildlife biologists to recommend doe hunts if we need to reduce the herbivory pressure. Much of the project was done on UDWR wildlife management areas, which have dedicated staff to monitor the projects and ensure that if further work is needed to achieve desired objectives that work is done.