This funding allows for the purchase of herbicide, contract for aerial application, purchase or rental of equipment, maintenance of equipment and purchase of necessary supplies to control Phragmites (common reed) and other invasive weeds on Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) wetland areas and State Sovereign Lands managed by Forestry, Fire and State Lands. Phragmites is the primary target species scheduled for treatment; however other invasive weeds may be controlled during this effort. These include, but are not limited to, Perennial Pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium), Dyers Woad (Isatis tinctoria), Hoary Cress (Cardaria spp.), thistle species (Cirsium spp.), Poison hemlock (Cicuta maculata), Saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), and Cattail, (Typha spp.). Total eradication of invasive and noxious weeds will never happen due to upstream (wind and water) seed sources that carry into these areas. Conversion to a more diverse and beneficial group of wetland species is the desired outcome. Because these are public lands managed by the DWR and FFSL that are adjacent to private agricultural and residential lands, it is imperative to control and contain noxious and invasive weed species. This type of stewardship is not only expected, but also appreciated by neighboring landowners and the user public. Waterfowl hunters and bird watchers have expressed concern that important public wetlands have deteriorated and become limited in value for wetland wildlife due to invasive weeds, primarily Phragmites. These monotypic stands of Phragmites provide little to no value for wildlife. They also prevent viewing of wildlife and provide limited hunting opportunities for the public. The encroachment and continuing spread of this species of invasive weed is further reducing habitat, which was once very productive.

The goal for the project is to protect, enhance and maximize the benefits for the wildlife resources and the public that use these WMA's. The objective is to control noxious weeds on the areas through eradication or containment to acceptable levels, to reduce fire hazards and restore wildlife habitat. The need is to maintain existing suitable habitat and improve marginal habitat that have noxious weed infestations. To reduce the possibility of weed dispersion onto adjacent private and public lands from these Division, and County managed lands. There is a need to continue maintaining the State's premier wetlands for the public's use and enjoyment in a productive, functional and esthetically pleasing condition.

Loss of habitat and public use. Invasive weeds reduce access, food production and cover value for wildlife. Access through Phragmites is limited by dense stands and precludes human use. No action or delayed action allows for continued expansion, loss of additional acreage and increased costs for treatment. No action upstream of DWR WMA's by counties would lead to increased spread of Phragmites and increased seed dispersal downstream. Invasive weeds, especially Phragmites, increases the potential risk of hazardous wildfires. Cooperation and coordination are critical, as well as information dissemination.

Utah Wildlife Action Plan (WAP) 2015: Goal: "To manage native wildlife species and their habitats to help prevent listings under the Endangered Species Act." Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) that have been observed on the areas include : Northern Leopard Frog, American Bittern, Caspian Tern, Snowy Plover, Ferruginous Hawk, Long-billed Curlew, Peregrine Falcon, Bald Eagle, Burrowing Owl, Short-eared Owl, American White Pelican, White-faced Ibis, and Sharp-tailed Grouse (pgs. 14-19). Key aquatic habitats listed in the plan include riverine, emergent, and open water. Priority threats to emergent habitats include: channelization, drought, water allocation policy, Agricultural, municipal, and industrial, water use, and invasive plant species. Threats to open water habitats include: same as above, but also; sediment transport imbalance, roads, improper grazing, diversions, housing and urban areas. Threats to riverine habitats: same as above, but also, presence of dams and inappropriate fire frequencies. .Efforts are in place to secure water rights, protect water sources from exploitation and diversions, and secure appropriate buffers to urban and industrial development. Threats that are directly related to the WAP plan for this project include the control/eradication of invasive plant species. WAP plan objectives and actions. Objective #1 for Invasive Plant Species -- Non-native Locations/habitats that currently do not have non-native plant problems remain free from the introduction and spread of invasive non-native plants. Actions to achieve objective: 2.2.2 Survey, inventory established, and new populations of invasive/problematic species. 2.2.3 Eradicate established populations of invasive/problematic species. 2.2.4 Contain established populations of invasive/problematic species. 2.2.9 Avoid establishment of new invasive/problematic species through education, planning, management, and/or regulation. Develop public information and educational programs aimed at encouraging attitudes and behaviors that are positive for wildlife conservation. Objective #2 for Invasive Plant Species -- Non-native Invasive plant dominance/presence is reduced or eliminated in loca0ons or habitats where such an outcome is realis0c (ecologically and economically). 2.2.2 Survey and inventory established and new populations of invasive/problematic species. 2.2.3 Eradicate established populations of invasive/problematic species. 2.2.5 Conduct mechanical control of invasive/problematic species. 2.2.6 Conduct biological control of invasive/problematic species. 2.2.7 Conduct chemical control of invasive/problematic species. 2.3.15 Conduct riparian vegetation treatments to restore characteristic riparian vegetation, and reduce uncharacteristic fuel types and loadings. 7.2.1 Support Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative. This project has, and will continue to address these SGCN and threats and promote the actions listed above. It also has and will continue to work collaboratively with several other agencies (Federal and State and County), private landowners, NGO's, and research universities (see partners section of proposal). Other management plans 1998 Update for North American Waterfowl Management Plan Goal: Restoring and maintaining waterfowl populations pg. 7. Biological foundation linked to waterfowl abundance. Planning...implementation...evaluation and local scale are measureable and appropriate to the geographic scale. Expanding habitat conservation coordination across landscapes with other initiatives. Vision: Enhance the capability of landscapes to support waterfowl and other wetland associated species-biologically based planning and ongoing evaluation. pg 13Seek landscape solutions that benefit waterfowl pg 14Duck population objective 62 mil with fall flight of 100 mil maintaining current diversity of species pg 17US Shorebird Conservation Plan; Intermountain West Regional Shorebird Plan 2000 Great Salt Lake most important inland shorebird site in North America pg 4. Great Basin Bird Conservation Region, BCR: breeding snowy plover, long-billed curlew, American avocet, black-necked stilt, stop over species: least sandpiper, western sandpiper, marbled godwit, long-billed dowitcher, American avocet, red-necked phalarope, Wilson phalarope Goal: Maintain and enhance diverse landscapes that sustain thriving shorebird populations pg 13. Objective 2; Develop Best Management Practices BPM for the maintenance of shorebird habitats pg 13. Strategy b. work with cooperating agencies and organizations to prepare a prioritized list of habitat maintenance needs annually and provide input into State and federal budget processes. Strategy f. Support the removal the tamarisk, whitetop and other invasive exotic plants from important shorebird sites. Objective 3: Develop a five-year action plan for restoration and enhancement of shorebird habitats in the Intermountain West Region by 2001 pg 14. Strategy b. Integrate restoration and enhancement actions for shorebirds into existing waterfowl and wetland management plans. Strategy c. Conserve and protect the hydrological integrity of ephemeral wetlands through habitat improvements and improved water management techniques. . Division of Wildlife Strategic Plan: Conserve, Protect and Enhance Wildlife and Ecosystems; Enhance Recreational Experience; Maximize Productivity and Satisfaction: Goal A, B, C and F. Objectives A-4, B. FFSL's Great Salt Lake Comprehensive Management Plan calls for control of invasive Phragmites. Table 3.3 Wetlands lists invasive species as a resource issue and targeting and treating invasive Phragmites as an objective for both FFSL and DWR.

Phragmites forms dense monotypic stands. These stands hold very high levels of dead (litter) and living biomass that can produce extremely hot, fast moving, and tall flame lengths if ignition occurs. With many of these wetland areas surrounded by urban and rural structures, the threat of fire and the potential for neighboring structure damage is high. Reducing the cover of Phragmites through this project will greatly reduce the threat and risks of fire damage on the WMAs and adjacent properties.

Due to it's high biomass, Phragmites evapotranspiration is higher than most native plant species. Reducing the amount of Phragmites can help improve water quantity. Phragmites also accretes soil and litter at much higher rates than most native plants. Rapid soil accretion, high amounts of litter, and very high density of stems, alters water distributions reducing downstream flow and in some cases, resulting in loss of wetland habitat further downstream. Slower flows also results in increased evaporation.

For UDWR and FFSL lands: Archaeology, covered by categorical exclusion and SHPO MOU, Dec 3 2014. NEPA, This activity is covered by categorical exclusion, Dec 3 2014 For County managed lands: Counties follow NEPA process and documentation according to the National Discharge of Pesticide Permit.

This is a multiyear plan and will require a long-term commitment for dollars and manpower to be effective and successful. Phragmites and any noxious weed control effort take multiple years to eradicate or to achieve an acceptable level of containment. The vast acreage of Phragmites requires a long term commitment in order to effectively treat each years designated acreage for the additional two years of follow up treatment required. Each treated acre of Phragmites will require a three-year commitment; initial and two follow up treatments. Phragmites treatment with glyphosate (aquatic approve Roundup) will be applied aerially on most areas for the first treatment period. If possible, Phragmites treatment areas will be burned or mowed to remove residual following the initial aerial treatment in the fall or spring. This will encourage growth from competitive desirable species and allow for easier access for follow up treatment of any surviving Phragmites stems/plants with ground application equipment. If burning cannot be accomplished then mowing will be the second choice, for residual removal. If mowing cannot be accomplished then rolling/trampling can be used if affordable or considered effective. Livestock grazing can be used on two year delayed burn treatments to help open up the area for chemical treatment (enough green Phragmites will be available at that time to hold livestock in the area).Once monotypic stands of Phragmites have been thinned it becomes a plant-by-plant herbicide treatment in order to reduce damage to desirable species such as Saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), Olney Threesquare (Scirpus olneyi) and Alkali Bulrush (Scirpus paludosus). Some sources indicate a delayed application of herbicide after desirable plants have started into dormancy may reduce mortality on desirable plants. Phragmites being a warm season grass goes into dormancy after a period of frost and typically after some native plants such as Alkali Bulrush. This may allow for a second year aerial spot-treatment in areas where living Phragmites stems are in excess of 15% of the original stand. Residual removal is considered necessary for follow-up treatment in year two. This allows for access into the area by ground equipment. It also allows the pilot to find surviving Phragmites stands for aerial treatment if that method of application is selected or required. No additional burn for the initial treatment site is anticipated after the initial burn unless cattail or Phragmites stands remain too thick to penetrate effectively or are blocking light penetration to allow for germination of more desirable plants. It is not recommended aerial application be applied on the third year treatment unless stands are dense enough and large enough to justify the use of the helicopter for aerial application. Ground treatment should be the only option for the third year during follow-up treatment to be as selective as possible and reduce damage to desirable plants. Aerial application will be used for the initial application in most cases for Phragmites control efforts and on occasion as a second year treatment if survival within the stands so dictates. Follow up application of herbicide for Phragmites control will be accomplished with backpack sprayers, tractor mounted sprayer, track machine mounted sprayer, airboat mounted sprayer and by ATV mounted sprayer. Helicopter application for more sensitivity and selectivity will be requested as the method for aerial application. Summer drawdowns and drought stressing remaining Phragmites stands has shown to be an important tool for wetland managers. DWR and FFSL managers will select areas that have already been treated for 3-4 years and where Phragmites stands have been reduced significantly. Drought stressing has shown to reduce Phragmites seed production, overall growth, and expansion. However, in order to implement this strategy, some areas are in need of water control structures in order to divert water. New water control structures will be placed on the Doug Miller and Turpin Units at Farmington Bay WMA. These structures will help both DWR and FFSL managers manipulate water levels, both inside and outside the impounded wetlands, in a manner that is more conducive for successful Phragmites treatments.

UDWR, within the scope of this project has worked and will continue to work with USU in studying treatment effectiveness and returning native plant communities. Research from USU has identified strategies that prove treatment efficiency and effectiveness (for both large and small patches), strategies to improve native seed germination, and strategies to help improve Phragmites grazing program. Monitoring will include germination rates, abiotic factors that affect seed germination and seedling survival, and look at what type of litter removal works best (mowing, trampling, or complete removal of litter). USU will continue to monitor seeding treatments with the UDWR and adjacent FFSL lands. In particular they will be monitoring different seeding densities, species composition, and developing a predictive model where seeding is likely to be most successful. Starting in 2020, USU will be initiating a large re-vegetation trial with funding through an EPA Grant. This project will implement seeding and planting techniques and monitor the results. DWR compiles data on vegetation transects and photo-points of some treated areas for at least three years. DWR also monitors bird populations on all of the WMA's during monthly waterfowl and quarterly non-game bird counts. FFSL conducts annual monitoring photopoints and line-intercept transect data on Phragmites treatments. FFSL and DWR have partnered with the UDAF ISM monitoring specialist. She has and will conduct in depth annual monitoring on Phragmites treatment areas. In depth annual reports have and will be written to track successes and failures. FFSL and DWR have initiated a UAS remote sensing program to monitor Phragmites cover in the treatment areas. This program is still under development, however, last year a complete procedure was developed and remote sensing maps were successfully produced. This year another round of remote sensing is planned for Howard Slough WMA. Expanding to additional areas is planned for subsequent years.

Partners include: Forestry Fire and State Lands (FFSL), Utah State University (USU), Utah Department of Agriculture (UDAF), Utah Geologic Survey (UGS), University of Utah Digit Lab (U of U), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge), Box Elder, Weber, and Cache County, private duck clubs, Utah Waterfowl Association, Delta Waterfowl, Wasatch Wigeons. FFSL has committed funding to match with federal funds in order to continue work on DWR and FFSL lands around the GSL. USU continues to provide valuable monitoring data and scholarly reports pertaining to Phragmites control and re-vegetation along the GSL. UDAF will continue annual vegetation monitoring of Phragmites treatments. UGS will pilot drones for multispectral imagery collection. U of U will process multispectral imagery in wetland plant species classification maps. USFWS will continue to contribute funds for aerial treatments on their property. The counties continue with implementing treatments upstream of WMA's. Central Davis Sewer District is contributing funds for aerial treatment of Phragmites along their treatment facility outflow which extends onto state sovereign lands managed by FFSL. Although not all of these partners are contributing direct funds for this project, these agencies and groups are contributing to the treatment and reduction of Phragmites on their respective properties. Also, many of these partners contribute volunteer hours during treatment implementation. Multi-agency and adjacent and upstream treatment is imperative due to Phragmites wind and water dispersal. All of these agencies support this proposed project. Collaboration with these partners pertaining to treatment effectiveness, treatment locations, and strategies has been very beneficial.

This is a multi-year project that will only be successful with continued efforts. The initial 2006 project proposal was for an aggressive continued effort for 15 years, until 2021. Afterwards activities would shift to a more routine weed maintenance effort on the WMAs. Starting in the fall of 2021 (FY22), most Phragmites treatment activities within the diked (impounded) units of the WMA's will be considered weed maintenance efforts. These efforts will span small to fairly large areas throughout most of the units at each WMA. Collaboration with researchers will continue in order to stay current with Phragmites management and strategies that will improve our wetlands. During the course of this project there has been an effort to educate other agencies, local cities, organizations and private landowners on how to treat Phragmites and the need to do so within the entire drainage area of the Great Salt Lake. These efforts and partnerships need to, and will continue in order to enhance and preserve wetland habitats around the GSL.

UDWR and FFSL are currently using cattle to help control and contain dense stands of Phragmites. Grazing is mostly being utilized in areas that become drought stressed in the fall and are unsuitable for chemical application. Some cattle are also being used in areas that have gone through the 3 year chemical treatment cycle in order to maintain remaining stands of Phragmites.

07/01/2021

06/30/2022

2022

Aerial application of glyphosate was completed by Hammond Helicopter. Aerial application included maintenance spot spraying at Farmington Bay, Howard Slough, Ogden Bay, Harold Crane waterfowl management areas (WMA's) and the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge. Treatments consisted of >90% Phragmites and <10% cattail. Follow up applications (2nd & 3rd year applications), and maintenance applications (4th year or beyond) of herbicide for Phragmites control was accomplished using track machine mounted sprayers, airboat mounted sprayers, and by ATV mounted sprayers. All ground applications were implemented by DWR Northern Region waterfowl staff, other DWR staff, and volunteers. FFSL aerial spraying, ground spraying, and mowing and trampling was contracted out. FFSL seeding was completed using DWR Marsh Masters. To help remove and accelerate decomposition of dead Phragmites biomass UDWR personnel mowed various locations at Farmington Bay, Howard Slough, and Ogden Bay in March and April of 2022. These vegetation manipulations will encourage growth from competitive desirable species and allow for easier access for follow up treatment of any surviving Phragmites stems/plants with ground application equipment the following year. Contracted mowing on the Willard Spur WMA was completed by PMG Vegetation Control in September of 2021. Three different prescribed burns also took place in the spring of 2022. One at Salt Creek WMA and two at Ogden Bay WMA. Fire is used when possible as it is a much less expensive way to remove standing dead Phragmites and increase native vegetation. Grazing was also implemented on Farmington Bay, Howard Slough, Ogden Bay, and Harold Crane WMA's. Over 5,000 acres was grazed. Cattle are used in areas that typically dry out before herbicide application can be implemented in August. Since spraying drought stressed plants does not work, cattle are great tools to remove this years growth, open areas up for bird use and hunter access, and to help reduce Phragmites seed production. Cattle are also used in areas that have completed the 3 year treatment cycle in order to maintain current vegetation conditions. Cache and Box Elder Counties used a combination of aerial and ground herbicide applications to complete treatments in their respective counties.

This funding allowed for the purchase of herbicide, contract for aerial application and vegetation removal, maintenance of all equipment, monitoring of revegetation techniques (through Utah State University), and purchase of necessary supplies to control Phragmites australis and other invasive weeds on Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR), Division of Forestry, Fire, and State Lands (FFSL), the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge (BRMBR), Box Elder County, and Cache County, wetland areas. Phragmites was the primary target species scheduled for treatment; however other invasive weeds were controlled during this effort. These include, but are not limited to, Perennial Pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium), Dyers Woad (Isatis tinctoria), Hoary Cress (Cardaria spp.), thistle species (Cirsium spp.), Waterhemlock (Cicuta maculata), Saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), and Cattail, (Typha spp.). Cattail and phragmites was treated in the period between August 1 and September 30, and the other noxious weed species were treated from mid-April to June 10. Aerial application consisted of 1,720 acres of Phragmites treatment on DWR WMA's, and 1,920 acres on the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge. Ground herbicide applications by DWR personnel consisted of 3,661 acres of Phragmites treatment across all WMA's. Box Elder and Cache Counties treated approximately 300 acres combined. In order to remove standing dead Phragmites, three burns were completed at Salt Creek (600 acres) and Ogden Bay WMA's (542 acres) in coordination with FFSL. Mowing of dead Phragmites was completed by DWR personnel (220 acres) and contractors (435 acres). FFSL contracted 3,532 acres of aerial spraying, 1,895 acres of mowing, 117 acres of trampling, and 112 acres of ground spraying. FFSL spent $125,610 on herbicide and $217,233.80 on mowing and trampling. Invoices for these matching funds are attached on the documents tab. USU Research Narrative: "Our objective was to evaluate different native seed mix densities and microtopography to maximize native plant community cover and limit Phragmites reinvasion. We found that sowing native seeds, particularly at five times the common seeding rate managers historically have used, resulted in a substantially greater cover of native plants and reduced Phragmites cover compared with unseeded areas. Saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), a native grass, performed particularly well in the seed mixes and shows great promise for future seeding efforts. Regardless of seeding, Phragmites still returned in many areas underscoring the need for follow-up control. In another experiment looking specifically at microtopography, we found that discing to create artificial microtopography initially benefitted alkali bulrush germination but the effect was short-lived, likely due to the extreme drought experienced in all wetlands in 2021. We will continue to explore the benefits of discing for microtopography in future years." Seeding projects and monitoring took place outside of Teal Lake and Turpin at Farmington Bay WMA. Three large water control structures, including 60' of HDPE pipe was purchased using these funds. The structures have not been put in place, but the Waterfowl Maintenance Crew will be putting these in this fall. The structures will allow for better water control within the Turpin and Doug Miller Units, which is imperative for successful Phragmites control. These will also allow for better water control outside of these units where FFSL will be treating in the next year or two.

With the exception of the Willard Spur WMA (treatments started by FFSL a couple years ago), and a few other small units at each WMA (treatments failed due to loss of water control), we are now in more of a maintenance mode, treating patches of Phragmites throughout the whole WMA. Other management techniques such as grazing, and summer drawdowns (drought stressing Phragmites) will be used following the third or fourth year of treatment to aid in control efforts. Grazing will also continue to be used in areas where water control is inconsistent and is therefore the better option over herbicide treatments. As the Great Salt Lake continues to recede, barren mudflats increases the likelihood of Phragmites germination and expansion. Efforts are underway to coordinate treatments and funding with FFSL and other potential partners such as the Sewer Districts. Coordination with Universities and researchers will continue to insure best management practices are implemented. We are currently working with USU on hydroseeding and re-vegetation techniques in order to establish more desirable wetland species following Phragmites control efforts. Coordination and dissemination of information about Phragmites control continues to be an integral part of this project. Information pertaining to best management practices for NGO's, private landowners, and other government agencies will continue to be presented.