Upland Component Vegetation: Sagebrush habitats throughout the west have declined drastically and continue to decline under many threats that are impacting this habitat type (Bradley 2010, Miller and Eddleman 2000). The greater sage-grouse is one of several species that has been impacted by the loss of sagebrush habitat (Miller and Eddleman 2000). The Miller Creek Watershed Restoration project will target restoring and protecting sage habitat and is one of the BLM's utmost priorities. One of the greatest threats to sage habitat is encroachment of pinyon pine (Pinus edulis) and Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) (Bunting et al.1999). Through fire suppression, historic livestock over-grazing, and changes in climatic conditions, PJ have expanded and encroached into areas once dominated by sagebrush (Tausch 1999). When PJ canopy cover and tree density reaches certain levels, the diversity and density of under-story vegetation (shrubs, grasses, and forbs) decline. This removes an important component of food and shelter for elk, mule deer, sage-grouse, sage sparrows, brewer's sparrow, and small mammals, such as jackrabbits, which are a large component of Golden Eagle diets (Bates and Moretti 1994, Naillon et al. 1999, Vaitkus and Eddleman 1991). In addition to out-competing under-story vegetation, increased PJ tree densities within sage-brush parks have been proven to reduce the use of these habitats by sage-grouse. Sage-grouse avoid these areas because of the increased risk of predation by aerial predators (i.e. raptors) that can use these trees as perches (Commons et al. 1999). Thus, potential habitat for this imperiled bird is lost. This project will help to remove the threat PJ is causing on crucial sagebrush habitat and benefit the species that rely on it for survival. Reducing Catastrophic Fire Potential By reducing ladder fuels and dense PJ stands land managers will help protect infrastructure, waterways, wildlife, livestock, soils, recreationalists, and other public land users. Water Quality: Another negative impact on the watershed from PJ encroachment is soil erosion (Farmer 1995). Removing PJ will allow grasses and forbs to expand and decrease the speed of water-flow and the size of soil particles that can be transported. Also, PJ have been shown to intercept about 10-20 percent of precipitation and have greater precipitation runoff (Farmer 1995, Skau 1964). By removing PJ and establishing grasses and forbs water will more readily infiltrate the soil and remain in the system. Dense tracts of PJ are a big concern for stand replacing wildfire which tends to sterilize and cause hydrophobic soil. Removing sections of trees will help to slow down fire spread and intensity, and help to prevent invasive species like cheatgrass from establishing post-fire. It has been observed that by cutting PJ, the under-story vegetation will grow back in greater amounts than in those areas that are not cut (Bates et al. 2000). Mechanical PJ removal (e.g. Bull hog, or "chainsaw" crew) projects like this project have proven to be a successful method for replacing the function of fire in the ecosystem and help to maintain watershed health. Wildlife: The Miller Creek Watershed Restoration project area has an expansive PJ ecosystem which is encroaching into the domain of sage brush habitats. This plateau system is crucial mule deer and elk winter and summer range and primary sagegrouse habitat. This project will provide several hundred more acres of usable habitat for sage-grouse and ungulates. It is essential that we implement this project as soon as possible to help mitigate the numerous impacts affecting sage habitat. Stream and Riparian Component In the summer of 2012 the Seeley fire burned on the Manti La Sal National Forest, part of it burning the upper end of the Miller Creek Watershed. The slow rehabilitation of native vegetation in Upper Miller Creek and the increase in high flow flood events have resulted in moderate to severe channel incision and sediment movement, and subsequently the destruction and/or disconnection of stream and riparian habitats throughout the watershed. Beaver dam analog (BDA) structures are an inexpensive and highly effective method of reconnecting floodplain and riparian habitats in highly eroded streams. Furthermore, check dam structures such as BDAs have been proven to trap sediment from going downstream, halt stream channel incision, and increase habitat complexity. This is particularly evident when the structures are built with natural materials, and constructed in a way to promote logjams. In other watersheds in Utah where streambed incision is severe following catastrophic fire, introducing large amounts of woody debris in the form dead and burned trees has been successful at aggrading streambeds and increasing stream complexity by trapping eroded sediments and holding them in place. In the summer of 2016, UDWR installed two beaver dam analog complexes on private property downstream of this proposed project area. Within just a few months, the analog complexes filled with sediment from summer flood events. This aggraded the formerly incised streambed as much as four feet. The rapid success of these complexes indicated a higher than expected sediment load from the upstream portions of Miller Creek, and the need for further investigation and possibly more project effort. Upon speaking with landowners further up the drainage, it was apparent that channel incision was more severe in the upper reaches of Miller Creek. In the fall of 2018, 25 additional beaver dam analog complexes and 17 post assisted analog structures were installed on the upper portion of the Middle Fork of Miller Creek to help support the 2016 stream restoration efforts. These previously completed project phases and the work outlined in this proposal will greatly improve sediment balance throughout Miller Creek. The upper end of Miller Creek continues to incise its channel and mobilize dissolved solids, contributing to impaired watershed listing and a TMDL for the Price River. We need to complete this project, in order to reduce and repair ongoing damage to watershed health, riparian and stream habitat values, and water quality in the Miller Creek and Price River watersheds. Lower in the watershed, down cut and lateral scour erosion is occurring on four other private landowners property due to prevalence of tamarisk and Russian olive and hig spring flood and monsoon flows. The monoculture of invasive woody vegetation is not conducive to wildlife and has created a stream channel devoid of useful habitat for fishes such as bluehead sucker and other sensitive species that reside in the Price River below the Miller Creek confluence. Additionally this erosion is worsening water quality in a reach of river that is already listed as impaired by the State of Utah and has an approved TMDL for Total Dissolved Solids. Stone Culvert Component A stretch of the Right Fork of Miller Creek in the Hiawatha mine complex has been routed through a culvert to accommodate a road crossing. This culvert is constructed of large sandstone blocks representative of the Italian and Greek immigrant stonemasonry of the early 20th century found at Carbon County coal mines. The 240-foot culvert features a rare barrel vault top exhibiting fine craftsmanship. High runoff events and debris flows have scoured the lower courses of block for much of the length of the culvert, undermining the walls and destabilizing the structure. Experience with a similar stone culvert carrying Cedar Creek at Mohrland has shown that unsupported blocks in higher courses will fall, resulting in a continuous upward unraveling of the walls that could ultimately result in the structural failure of the culvert and collapse of the overlying fill into the creek channel. At best, this would increase sediment loading in the creek; at worst, the creek could be dammed and risk a catastrophic flood event. The Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program in the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (UDOGM/AMRP) proposes to stabilize the historic culvert by replacing the eroded portions of the stone walls with concrete. Complicating the stabilization process is a large gully headcut in the creek channel immediately downstream of the culvert. This headcut must also be stabilized so that it does not continue to migrate upstream and undermine the culvert. The culvert stabilization is needed to preserve a notable historic structure and maintain road access to the Right Fork. While most of the Miller Creek watershed restoration proposal targets enhancing natural resources (vegetation, wildlife, stream channel), the UDOGM/AMRP culvert stabilization component is an outlier focusing on a cultural resource. However, the culvert proposal dovetails with the natural resource enhancements of the project. Improvements in upper watershed vegetation and instream controls to trap sediments will moderate peak flows and reduce the risk of future damage to the culvert. Stabilization of the culvert will reduce sediment loading and possible catastrophic collapse of fill into the channel. [added 12/23/19 for Project 5220:] UDOGM/AMRP originally planned to stabilize the culvert in the fall of 2019. However, the single bid received for the stabilization work was substantially over budget, so UDOGM/AMRP canceled the solicitation and postponed stabilization for further evaluation. The project may be rebid in the summer of 2020 with the same design and scope of work in expectation that favorable timing may result in more competitive bids. Alternatively, different stabilization design approaches may be considered. One possible approach would be to remove the culvert and the overlying fill, removing the potential source of sediment loading and daylighting the channel so that it could respond geomorphologically in a more natural manner. However, this approach defeats the objective of preserving a historic structure and will require additional time for NEPA and related compliance. While the design options are being re-evaluated, the culvert is temporarily stabilized with timber props installed in June, 2019, to shore up unsupported blocks. This will prevent further loss of material from the culvert. UDOGM/AMRP will monitor the timber props to maintain function.

Stream and Riparian Component In order to address the severe down cutting/channel incision, high sediment load, and the slow rehabilitation of native vegetation in Miller Creek after the Seeley fire, we are proposing the following project objectives: Stream and Riparian Objectives: Objective 1 - Aggrade down cut streambed habitats. Objective 2 - Trap eroded sediments from the Upper Miller Creek Watershed. Objective 3 - Increase channel complexity and reconnect floodplain habitats. Objective 4 - Plant woody riparian species to allow reintroduction of beavers in the future to increase the health of the drainage. Objective 5 - Increase the water table to allow for sufficient water flows for trout to occur all summer with the future goal of restoring Colorado River cutthroat to Miller Creek. Objective 6 - Increase landowner driven conservation work in the Price River Watershed. Objective 7 - Increase awareness and interest in wild turkey populations through improving habitat to support introduced turkey populations. 8 - Reduce invasive woody vegetation. 9- Repair and prevent large eroding banks in agricultural areas that contribute to poor water quality for sensitive fish species. Upland Objectives 1. Mitigate the 3 major threats to sage brush habitat: fire, juniper expansion, and invasive species. A.Removing up to 95% of existing junipers in select areas; protect and preserve sagebrush habitat B. Cutting/Herbicide 95% invasive species (musk, Tamarisk, and Russian Olive). C. Leave pinyon species intact where they do not impact sagebrush communities. Remove pinyon species within potential sage grouse habitat on and near Long Bench. Some removal of lower limbs in some area's to prevent ladder fuels. Lop/scatter of some dead pinyon to aid in insect habitat. 2. Create/expand and improve sagebrush habitat for upland wildlife that could be occupied immediately after treatment. 3. Improve ecosystem resiliency and meet habitat objectives defined by the BLM Utah Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment by increasing perennial grass and forb cover >10% and >5% respectively by 5 years post treatment. 4 Increase pollinator habitat by adding forbs that flower thru different times within the growing season. 5. Reduce Catastrophic Fire potential by reducing some Phase II and Phase III PJ stands back to a Phase I. Stone Culvert Component Objective 1 -- Stabilize the culvert structure to prevent further erosion and loss of original construction materials. Objective 2 -- Stabilize the gully headcut downstream of the culvert to prevent further downcutting of the channel that would undermine the culvert.

Ecological Threats: This project includes not only Phase I and II but Phase III PJ woodlands. The polygons near Long Bench are Phase III and with the decreased understory there is evidence if increased erosion. By seeding and masticating these areas we can slow the erosion process with adding the chipped biomass on to the soil surface while the native seed germinates and assists with long term stabilization. Other areas with phase I and II woodland will benefit as a maintenance action before the vegetative community crosses an ecological threshold where extremely high amounts of restoration inputs (including financial inputs) are necessary. The project as it relates to the pinyon/juniper work is a proactive approach to treat areas where sagebrush steppe habitat is still established. Doing so has several other benefits to preventing soil loss through erosion, maintaining habitat to high interest species, water-soil infiltration, etc... Not treating pinyon/juniper in the near future will result in negative ecological consequences. Not doing work in these areas of lower pinyon/juniper density means the threat of higher costs, inputs, and risk will become greater over time. East of Carbon County Airport is a high traffic use area for recreationalists and the herbicide spot treatment will help reduce noxious and invasive plants to help maintain a diverse native community. Waiting longer to do this will result in increased costs, and more aggressive management tactics. By taking a watershed approach to this project, it has allowed us to benefit some extremely important habitat types. We've been able to work on some of Utah's rarest habitat types, such as wet habitats. Habitats near water -- stream sides, wet meadows and wetlands -- support the greatest variety of animal and plant life, and attract wildlife during their daily and seasonal movements. Moreover, although wet habitats covers less than 2% of the western landscape, more than 80% are located on private lands. The riparian/stream practices are low impact/low risk/high reward practices. Work on previous phases has been highly successful in catching sediment, connecting/building floodplains habitat, increasing channel complexity, and increasing wetted area and riparian vegetation. Furthermore, lowland riparian habitat, and perennial lotic (flowing-water) habitat, are among the very rarest and most threatened habitats in the region and the state. These private mesic lands and surrounding private rangelands are critically important to the health of wildlife populations. Research shows that 60--80% of wildlife is dependent on mesic habitats (e.g., wetlands and riparian areas; Thomas et al. 1979, Patten 1998, Belsky et al. 1999, Peck and Lovvorn 2001). If true wildlife conservation is to take place on a sustainable level, public wildlife managers must engage private landowners. It is important that we continue to work in these areas that are critically important to the landscape around them, and because these wet areas are mostly private it is extremely important to work with private landowners restoring these areas whenever possible. Wet habitat is the zipper that ties the ecology of the surrounding landscapes together. Not working in these wet areas puts adjacent habitat and wildlife at risk. Climate change has come to the forefront as a global threat to humans and wildlife alike. Although models vary on future impacts of global climate change one thing stands out is that water may become more scarce in the West. Preserving and restoring wet areas has been identified as a key way to mitigate impacts like drought, increasing temperatures, and other impacts that a changing climate will have on humans and wildlife. Miller Creek is a tributary to the Price River. The Price River is currently 303(D) listed as an impaired water body with a Total Maximum Daily Load for Total Dissolved Solids that is being exceeded (Utah Division of Water Quality 2016). Riparian/stream conservation practices will directly address TMDL issues in the Price River. Not doing the project exacerbates the problem with water quality and puts rural economies as risk as well as continues to put imperiled fish species at risk. See water quality section for more info. Removal of invasive woody vegetation and the replacement of a more diverse native plant community will promote a more robust fish and wildlife population throughout Miller Creek. The project is a continuation of previous sagebrush steppe restoration accomplished on adjacent public lands, private lands, and state lands that was funded by several partners, including WRI. This project will connect these previous phases and create a more contiguous area restored and enhanced thus having a greater ecological impact. Species Threats: Although it was determined by the USFWS that listing under the ESA was not warranted for Greater sage grouse there is an impending review to see if further action or protection is needed and to see where we collectively are at mitigating threats. Continuing to do work as identified in the Statewide Sage Grouse Management Plan to conserve sage grouse will support a continued "not warranted" status. This project area lies within a Sage Grouse Management Area identified in the Conservation Plan for Utah Greater Sage Grouse. Implementing proposed conservation practices will help alleviate threats identified in the Utah Greater Sage Grouse Plan. By doing this project we are addressing immediate threats and limiting factors for this population. This area has been identified as priority for restoration of CRUCIAL mule deer habitat under the Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan. "Crucial" means the areas habitat is necessary to sustain the areas mule deer herd. Conservation practices previously implemented as part of this watershed project and practices proposed for this current project will meet restoration goals outlined in the State Mule Deer Management Plan as well as the Unit Management Plan. Parts of the project falls within an identified Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA) with shrub-steppe and wetland habitat listed as priority habitats types for conservation. Sagebrush dependent species such as sage grouse, sage sparrow, and brewer's sparrow are listed as priority birds needing conservation practices implemented. Many of these species identified in the BHCA are not captured in the species portion of this proposal but also need conservation measures implemented. Not doing the project will lead to a decrease in the amount of available habitat for these sage dependent bird species in an area being designated as important for these birds. Because this area has been identified as CRUCIAL mule deer habitat and an extremely important area for increasing sage grouse populations in this Sage Grouse Management Unit, we feel that this projects importance should be elevated because of the overall impact of the habitat to these species of wildlife. Another qualifier for elevating this project is the project falls within an identified Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA) as previously discussed. The project will also address several conservation needs for several bird species not available in the species section of this proposal. HOORAY FOR SAGEBRUSH AND RIPARIAN SONGBIRDS! Colorado pikeminnow, roundtail chub, flannelmouth sucker, and bluehead sucker in the Price River need special protection from factors which threaten their existence. Populations of other native, non-sport fish species occurring in the PRD should also be maintained. Maintaining populations of native fish species is biologically important for preserving endangered fish populations in the Green and Colorado rivers (Price River Drainage Management Plan 2010). Financial Threats: The site hasn't crossed a financial threshold where cost becomes a prohibitive factor. If we don't do the project now when pinyon and juniper is low density, the area may become phase 3 at some point in the future and cost will substantially increase. The riparian treatments are also a low cost conservation practice. Continued degradation of the riparian habitat will increase future costs of restoration. Social/Political Threats: There is also a social ecological threshold to consider with the private lands as part of this project. Right now we have willing landowners and private companies working with agencies to do the project. This has required meetings, presentations, and a lot of signatures and paperwork to get to this point. Not taking advantage of this while everyone is willing may mean a lost opportunity in the future. The project area also provides important recreational hunting. Because this is important winter habitat it provides hunting opportunity on the forest above as well. The hunting opportunities provide a financial boost to local economies in several ways. Continuing to do work to maintain the habitat in this area will help to perpetuate the recreational and economic benefits in these struggling rural communities. Stone Culvert Component As outlined in the "Need for Project" section, erosion of the lower courses of stone blocks by high runoff events and debris flows removes the support for the entire culvert walls. If erosion of the walls continues unabated, at some point the walls will collapse and bring the culvert top and overlying fill down with them. Besides losing a remarkable cultural feature and road access to the Left Fork of Miller Creek, structural failure of the culvert would have a significant effect on the creek. Depending on the timing and scale of the failure, large amounts of rock and soil would enter the channel. A severe enough collapse could block the channel with an unengineered earthen dam that would impound water and possibly fail catastrophically.

Management Plans State and County Management Plans 1) State of Utah Resource Management Plan Wildlife *Conserve, improve, and restore 500,000 acres of mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges. *Protect existing wildlife habitat and improve 500,000 acres of critical habitats and watersheds throughout the state by 2025. *Produce and maintain the desired vegetation for wildlife and domestic livestock forage on public and private lands. Livestock and Grazing *Improve vegetative health on public and private lands through range improvements, prescribed fire, vegetation treatments, and active management of invasive plants and noxious weeds. *Actively remove pinyon-juniper encroachment in other ecological sites due to its substantial consumption of water and its detrimental effect on sagebrush, other vegetation, and wildlife *The state supports the active removal of pinyon juniper encroachment on other ecosystem, such as sagebrush, due to its consumption of water, detrimental effects on vegetation and available forage, and its negative effects on wildlife habitat. Noxious Weeds *Establish immediate revegetation or rehabilitation after treatment. The state of Utah supports prevention as one of the best methods of managing noxious weeds. T&E Species *Work with stakeholders and partners to continue to implement recommendations from the Utah Wildlife Action Plan 2015--2025 to conserve sensitive species and their habitat. *Restore 75,000 acres of critical habitat for sensitive species each year through the Watershed Restoration Initiative and by partnering with other government and nongovernmental entities. Water Quality and Hydrology *Cooperate in the protection, restoration, enhancement and management of water resources in the State of Utah to the extent of each agency's authority, expertise, and resources. 2) Carbon County Resource Management Plan Land Use *Encourage public land management agencies to restore damaged areas. *Encourage coordination between federal agencies and local governments, public land managers, and private landowners. Support responsible development and the long -term health of the land. Fire Management *Fuel reduction techniques such as conifer reduction, grazing, prescribed fire, and chemical, biological, and mechanical treatments may be acceptable, given site-specific variables. *Work with the private landowner(s), federal, or state agency, in cooperation with Utah Forestry Fire & State Lands to remove fuel load buildup by prescriptive grazing, silviculture prescriptions or mechanical means. Wildlife *Forest and range health are managed to provide more forage for both livestock and wildlife. *Cooperation between livestock owners and wildlife agencies occurs to manage the lands to the benefit of all species. *Funding increases for the increased quality of habitat for all species. *Promote hunting and wildlife photography in the area. T&E Species *The county supports finding local solutions to protect sensitive species in an effort to prevent federal listing. *Support efforts to help ensure that the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) remains under the management of UDWR and does not become listed as threatened or endangered. Water Quality and Hydrology *Carbon County participates in the management of watersheds on public and private lands to optimize quality and quantity of water. *Preserve our watershed and ensure that reclamation occurs on areas destroyed by fire. *Support projects and policies that maintain and improve soil ecology and vegetative cover in uplands. *Carbon County will participate in the management of watersheds on public and private lands watersheds to optimize quality and quantity of water. *Where water resources on public lands have diminished because grasses have succeeded to woody vegetation, a vigorous program of mechanical treatment should be applied to promptly remove the woody vegetation and stimulate the return of grasses. These efforts would be intended to provide a watershed that maximizes water yield and water quality for livestock, wildlife, and human uses. *To identify and control noxious weeds and invasive plant species, beginning at the head of each natural drainage area of the watershed. Noxious Weeds *Remove noxious and invasive vegetation along rivers and streams, followed by revegetation. *Control noxious weeds and poisonous plants in cooperation with public land users and state and local agencies. *Continue to encourage, coordinate with, and participate in public land management agency projects to implement an aggressive noxious weed and invasive species control operation on all of the lands they manage. Livestock and Grazing *Encourage rangeland health, forage, and grazing stability on public lands. Promote the use of good science to establish data used in rangeland decision-making. *Encourage the implementation of rangeland improvement projects including brush control, seeding projects, pinion and juniper removal, noxious and invasive weed control, and livestock water developments. *Where once-available grazing forage has succeeded to pinion juniper and other woody vegetation, or where rangeland health has suffered for any other reason, a vigorous program of mechanical treatments such as chaining, logging, seeding, lopping, thinning, burning, and other vegetative treatments should be applied to remove woody vegetation and stimulate the return of the grazing forage for the mutual benefit of livestock, wildlife, and other agricultural industries. 3) Price River Watershed Coordinated Resource Management Plan (2016) Applicable strategies listed for reducing TDS on the Price River and its tributaries and meeting the 3000 mg/l TMDL from the confluence of Soldier Creek to the Carbon Canal Diversion. *Create vegetated buffer strips along streams and ditches to reduce erosion *Revegetate stream banks with soil holding species, use rock barbs to divert flow from banks, and re-slope steep streambanks to allow for vegetation establishment *Maintain plant cover with proper grazing strategies *Identify areas where, due to erodible soils, grazing may not be sustainable *Improve riparian condition through grazing management and establishment of wetland species State Wildlife Plans 1) Utah Conservation Plan for Greater Sage-Grouse (2019) *Protect, maintain and increase sage-grouse habitats within SGMAs at or above 2013 baseline disturbance levels. *Prioritize fuels mitigation to protect habitats within and near SGMAs *Using Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (WRI), remove conifer as appropriate in areas protected in 4(b) to ensure that existing functional habitats remain intact. *Using the WRI, maintain existing sage-grouse habitats by offsetting the impacts identified in 1(f) by creating additional habitat within or adjacent to occupied habitats at an equal rate each year--or 25,000 acres each year--whichever is greater. *Increase sage-grouse habitats by using the WRI--and other state, federal and private partnerships--to restore or create 50,000 acres of habitat within or adjacent to occupied habitats each year 2) Utah Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan (2019) *Habitat Goal: Conserve, improve, and restore mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges * Habitat Objective 1: Maintain mule deer habitat throughout the state by protecting and enhancing existing crucial habitats and mitigating for losses due to natural and human impacts *Work with local, state and federal land management agencies via land management plans and with private landowners to identify and properly manage crucial mule deer habitats, especially fawning, wintering, and migration areas *Work with local, state and federal land management agencies and ranchers to properly manage livestock to enhance crucial mule deer ranges *Habitat Objective 2: Improve the quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer on a minimum of 700,000 acres of crucial range by 2026 *Work with land management agencies, conservation organizations, private landowners, and local leaders through the regional Watershed Restoration Initiative working groups to identify and prioritize mule deer habitats that are in need of enhancement or restoration (Figure 6). Emphasis should be placed on crucial habitats including sagebrush winter ranges and aspen summer ranges *Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or fire damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges that have been taken over by invasive annual grass species, and ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats, ensuring that seed mixes contain sufficient forbs and browse species *Encourage land managers to manage portions of pinyon-juniper woodlands and aspen conifer forests in early successional stages using various methods including timber harvest and managed fire 3) Deer Herd Unit Management Plan- Deer Herd Unit # 16- Central Mountains (October 2015) Unit Management Goals *Maintain a healthy mule deer population within the long term carrying capacity of the available habitat Habitat Management Objectives * Protect, Maintain, and/or improve deer habitat through direct range improvements to support and maintain herd population management objectives * Work with private landowners and federal, state, and local and tribal governments to maintain and protect critical and existing ranges from future losses and degradation *Work with federal, private, and state partners to improve crucial deer habitats through the WRI process. Habitat Management Strategy *Continue to improve, protect, and restore sagebrush steppe habitats critical to deer. Cooperate with federal land management agencies and private landowners in carrying out habitat improvements such as pinion-juniper removal, reseedings, controlled burns, grazing management, water developments, etc. on public and private lands. Habitat improvement projects will occur on both winter ranges as well as summer range *Reduce expansion of pinion-juniper and other woodlands into sagebrush habitats and improve habitats dominated by pinion-juniper woodlands by completing habitat restoration projects like lop & scatter, bullhog, and chaining. 4) Utah Elk Statewide Management Plan (2015) Habitat Objective 1: Maintain sufficient habitat to support elk herds at population objectives and reduce competition for forage between elk and livestock. *Coordinate with land management agencies and private landowners to properly manage and improve elk habitat, especially calving and wintering areas. *Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk habitat *Coordinate with land management agencies, conservation organizations, private landowners, and local leaders through the regional Watershed Restoration Initiative working group Recreation Management Goal: Enhance recreational opportunities for hunting and viewing elk throughout the state. *Maintain a diversity of elk hunting opportunities. *Increase opportunities for viewing elk while educating the public concerning the needs of elk management and the importance of habitat 5) Elk Unit Management Plan Elk Herd Unit #16 Central Mountains (2016) Unit Management Goals *Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities including hunting and viewing. Maintain an elk population consistent with available range resources that are in balance with other range uses such as livestock grazing and watershed protection *Maintain and enhance existing elk habitat through vegetative manipulation, sound domestic grazing practices, and other management techniques that will meet habitat objectives. Habitat Objectives: *Enhance elk habitat on a minimum of 20,000 acres during the next 5 years through direct range improvements *Remove pinion-juniper encroachment into winter range sagebrush parks and summer and transitional range mountain brush communities. Approximately 2,000 acres per year will be targeted using primarily mechanical treatments. *Cooperate with livestock operators and federal agencies to improve range management practices in such a way to optimize both livestock and elk forage production and thus minimize conflicts. Strategies for removing barriers and reaching unit management objectives *Continue to improve forage production on winter and other shrublands by aggressive pinion-juniper removal. 6) Utah Wild Turkey Management Plan (2014) Goal A. Maintain and improve wild turkey populations to habitat or social carrying capacity Objective1.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). 7) Utah Wildlife Action Plan 2015-2025 This project proposes to increase the amount and/or improve the condition of three of the thirteen key habitat types in the state: lowland sagebrush, aquatic scrub/shrub ("riparian"), and riverine ("lotic" or flowing water). This project will also address threats to the following wildlife: Black Rosy Finch, Golden Eagle, Greater Sage-Grouse, Colorado River Cutthroat Trout, Bluehead Sucker, Northern Leaopard Frog, Little Brown Myotis. Threats addressed and strategies to improve condition are include below. Lowland sagebrush *Alterations from reference conditions that have occurred ... include widespread encroachment by juniper and pinyon pine, and understory depletion. *Deficits of some young and mid age classes, and surplus of older and especially the uncharacteristic class Threat- Inappropriate fire frequency and intensity (VH) Improving Condition *Promoting and funding restoration that reduces the Uncharacteristic class, including cutting/mulching/chaining of invading pinyon and juniper trees *Developing and deploying techniques to diversify the understory species composition and age classes of decadent even-aged sagebrush stands. Aquatic-Shrub/Scrub Threat-sediment transport imbalance (M), improper grazing (H) Improving Condition *Promoting policies that maintain or restore natural water and sediment flow regimes. *Promoting policies that reduce inappropriate grazing by domestic livestock and wildlife. *Continuing the use of appropriate methods for reducing the spread and dominance of invasive weeds, including "early detection -- rapid response" programs. *Continuing the use of appropriate methods for reducing the spread and dominance of invasive weeds, including "early detection -- rapid response" programs Aquatic-Riverine Threats- sediment transport imbalance (M), improper grazing (H), inappropriate fire frequency/intensity (M), invasive plant species non-native (M) Improving condition *Promoting policies that maintain or restore natural water and sediment flow regimes. *Promoting policies that reduce inappropriate grazing by domestic livestock and wildlife. Black Rosy Finch Threat- inadequate understanding of distribution or range (NA) * An altitudinal migrant, moving to sagebrush or shrubland in lower elevation valleys, benches, and foothills during winter. Golden Eagle Threats- fire and fire suppression (M), * Found in open country with sufficient mammalian, avian, and reptilian prey, or carrion in winter. * Apparent breeding declines associated with fire, shrub loss and jackrabbit declines in the Great Basin area (Slater et al. 2013, Keller 2014)129130. Little data on nesting in southeastern Utah exists. Greater Sage-Grouse Threats-fire and fire suppression (VH), other ecosystem modifications (H) * A sagebrush obligate species dependent on sagebrush ecosystems for breeding, brood rearing and winter survival. * The species is found throughout Utah in suitable sagebrush habitat, however distribution in Utah now covers only 41% of historic habitat in several disjunct populations. Colorado River Cutthroat Trout Threats-habitat shifting and alteration (H), other ecosystem modifications (H) * Need cool, well-oxygenated water. * Occur in streams and high lakes in the Colorado River Basin. * Populations have become isolated and fragmented. Bluehead Sucker Threats-habitat shifting and alteration (M), fire and fire suppression (H) * Occurs in mainstem and tributary locations. *Found in the Colorado, Snake, and Bonneville River Basins. *Habitat and populations have been lost from water diversions and barriers to movement. Northern Leopard Frog Threats-other ecosystem modifications (M) * Highly aquatic frog found in streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, and meadows for breeding and overwintering * Found in pinyon-juniper, sagebrush, and desert grassland habitat Little Brown Myotis Threats-habitat shifting and alteration (M), * Little brown bats are currently common and abundant in Utah. 8) Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Colorado River Cutthroat in the States of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming (2006) Goals - To assure the long-term viability of CRCT throughout their historic range. Areas that currently support CRCT will be maintained, while other areas will be managed for increased abundance. New populations will be established where ecologically and economically feasible, while the genetic diversity of the species is maintained. The cooperators envision a future where threats to wild CRCT are either eliminated or reduced to the greatest extent possible. * Objective 3 - Increase the number of populations by restoring CRCT within their native range. Local restoration goals and approaches will be developed to meet this objective. *Objective 4 - Strive to improve watershed conditions for CRCT, including development of protocols for monitoring. Strategy 3: Restore or enhance CRCT populations * Secure reintroduction sites-Ecosystems selected for restoration of CRCT will be secured from watershed habitat degradation. Strategy 7: Improve habitat conditions for CRCT * Manage the entire watershed Impacts outside the riparian zone should be considered as part of CRCT management. Land management agencies should work to mitigate adverse impacts of watershed activities on water quality, instream habitat, channel morphology, riparian areas, and population stability. * Improve lake and stream habitat -Habitat improvement techniques will be used where appropriate to provide missing habitat components or improve existing ones. Examples of these techniques include building instream structures to improve pool to riffle ratios, stream bank stabilization, riparian management, instream cover, pool or spawning gravel enhancement, and provision of fish passageways. Department of Interior Plans 1) Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program Mountain-Prairie Region Strategic Plan (2017-2021) Goal 1-Conserve Habitat * Maintain intact landscapes to benefit suites of Federal Trust Species * Restore or enhance habitat for threatened, endangered, and candidate species * Restore and enhance habitat for Native species of trout * *Restore and enhance habitat for migratory birds of conservation concern, as identified in the Service's migratory bird conservation plans *Regional habitat 5 year target- Upland Restoration/Enhancement: 457,070 acres, River/Stream/Riparian Restoration/Enhancement: 325.1 miles This project addresses habitat threats for a priority species (sage grouse an UPD) within a PFW priority area (Plateau Focus Area) for restoration work. Rangeland Health in accordance with the Ecological Site Description. The focus for management within this area is to improve greater sage-grouse brood-rearing habitat while maintaining the dominant aspects of the sagebrush community to ensure adequate cover is available. High quality brood-rearing habitat has been identified as a limiting factor for sage grouse in the Carbon County population area. 2) DOI Secretarial Order 3336 sets forth enhanced policies and strategies for preventing and suppressing rangeland fire and for restoring sagebrush landscapes impacted by fire across the West. These actions are essential for conserving habitat for the greater sage-grouse as well as other wildlife species and economic activity, such as ranching and recreation, associated with the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem in the Great Basin region. This effort will build upon the experience and success of addressing rangeland fire, and broader wildland fire prevention, suppression and restoration efforts to date, including the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, and ensure improved coordination with local, state, tribal, and regional efforts to address the threat of rangeland fire at a landscape-level. Sec. 4 Policy. Protecting, conserving, and restoring the health of the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem and, in particular, greater sage-grouse habitat, while maintaining safe and efficient operations, is a critical fire management priority for the Department. Allocation of fire management resources and assets before, during, and after wildland fire incidents will reflect this priority, as will investments related to restoration activities. We are meeting the objectives set for in Sec. 5 Developing an Enhanced Fire Prevention, Suppression, and Restoration Strategy of Secretarial Order 3336 by: a.) Work cooperatively and collaboratively with other Federal agencies, states, tribes, local stakeholders, and non-governmental organizations on fire management and habitat restoration activities, including: (i) Enhancing the capability and capacity of state, tribal, and local government, as well as non-governmental, fire management organizations, including rangeland fire protection associations and volunteer fire departments, through improved and expanded education and training; and (ii) Improving coordination among all partners involved in rangeland fire management to further improve safety and effectiveness. b.) Utilize risk-based, landscape-scale approaches to identify and facilitate investments in fuels treatments, fire suppression capabilities, and post-fire stabilization, rehabilitation, and restoration in the Great Basin. c.) Seek to reduce the likelihood, size, and severity of rangeland fires by addressing the spread of cheatgrass and other invasive, non-native species. d.) Advance the development and utilization of technologies for identifying areas of high ecological and habitat value in sagebrush-steppe ecosystems to enhance fire prevention and sage-grouse habitat protection efforts. e.) Apply science and research to improve the identification and protection of resistant and resilient sagebrush-steppe landscapes and the development of biocontrols and other tools for cheatgrass control to improve capability for long-term restoration of sagebrush-steppe ecosystems. f.) To the extent practicable, utilize locally-adapted seeds and native plant materials appropriate to the location, conditions, and management objectives for vegetation management and restoration activities, including strategic sourcing for acquiring, storing, and utilizing genetically appropriate seeds and other plant materials native to the sagebrush-steppe ecosystem. g.) Encourage efforts to expedite processes, streamline procedures, and promote innovations that can improve overall rangeland fire prevention, suppression and restoration efficiency and effectiveness. h.) Explore opportunities to pilot new strategies to reduce the threat of invasive, nonnative plant species and rangeland fire to sagebrush-steppe ecosystems and greater sage-grouse conservation, including enhanced use of veteran fire crews and youth conservation teams, and efforts to further public-private partnerships to expand capacity for improved fire management. i.) Establish protocols for monitoring the effectiveness of fuels management, post-fire, and long-term restoration treatments and a strategy for adaptive management to modify management practices or improve land treatments when necessary. 3) BLM Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan 2015 A. The project is consistent with the SGARMP (2015) goals, objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Special Status Species section as follows: Special Status Species Goal: Maintain and/or increase GRSG abundance and distribution by conserving, enhancing or restoring the sagebrush ecosystem upon which populations depend in collaboration with other conservation partners. Refer to the following Objectives and Management Actions in the SGRMPA (Objectives: SSS-3, SSS-4, SSS-5) and Management Actions (MA-SSS-4, MA-SSS-6, MA-SSS7). B. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Vegetation section as follows: Refer to the following Objectives and Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-VEG-1, MA-VEG-2, MA-VEG-4, MA-VEG-5, MA-VEG-6, MA-VEG-8, MA-VEG-9, MA-VEG-10, MA-VEG-12 and MA-VEG-14). C. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) Management Actions that were identified in the Fire and Fuels Management section as follows: Refer to the following Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-FIRE-1 and MA-FIRE-3) D. The project is also consistent with the SGARMP (2015) Management Actions that were identified in the Livestock Grazing/Range Management section as follows: Refer to the following Management Actions in the SGRMPA (MA-LG-3, MA-LG-4, MA-LG-5, MA-LG-12, MALG- 13, MA-LG-16 and MA-LG-17). 4) Price Field Office RMP: (VEG-1) -- Allow vegetation manipulation with restrictions to achieve the desired vegetation condition. Etc. (pg. 69) (VEG-2) -- Design sagebrush treatment projects (including fire and fuels vegetation projects) conducted in greater sage-grouse occupied or historic habitat. (pg.70) This project will meet the goal of protecting the sagebrush community by removing Pinyon-Juniper that is encroaching into sagebrush habitat (current/historical). (VEG-3) -- (2) enlarge the size of sage brush patches with emphasis on areas occupied by greater sage-grouse and/or other sage dependent This project will meet the goal of protecting the sagebrush community by removing PJ that is encroaching into sagebrush habitat (current/historical). Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity - "1) Fire is excluded from habitats in which potential burns now would be frequent, large, and destructive to soils and native vegetation; the habitats are being actively managed (treated) to reduce components or factors that promote risk of catastrophic fire, such as cheatgrass, excessive conifer encroachment, or unnaturally large stands of mature Gambel oak. 2) Fire is returned to habitats from which it had been unnaturally excluded; the fire regime (frequency and intensity) in these habitats generally approximates a natural, pre-settlement regime." Invasive Plant Species - Non-native - "1) Locations/habitats that currently do not have non-native plant problems remain free from the introduction and spread of invasive non-native plants. 2) Invasive plant dominance/presence is reduced or eliminated in locations or habitats where such an outcome is realistic (ecologically and economically)." Problematic Plant Species - Native Upland - (due to the statewide, all-habitats-and-species way in which priority threats were identified and then chosen for detailed write-ups, this threat was not considered a statewide, plan-wide priority. However, for certain specific species and habitats, it is a priority threat. This is the case for lowland sagebrush.) Droughts - "1) Terrestrial SGCNs and key habitats persist on the landscape, despite increasing drought conditions. 2) Aquatic SGCNs and key habitats persist on the landscape, despite increasing drought conditions." Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) - "Scope and severity of channel downcutting are declining for impacted species and habitats." 5) Secretarial Order 3372: (2)(b) Coordinate and Collaborate with Land-Managing Partners and Stakeholders. Managing wildfire is not unique to the Department. The Department shares this responsibility with other Federal land-managing Agencies, States, Territories, Tribes, localities and stakeholder groups. (c) Utilize active Land, Vegetation, and Wildfire Management Techniques that are supported by Best Practices and Best Available Science. 6) Executive Order 13855 of December 21, 2018, specifically: Section 1. Policy, (b) Coordinating Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Assets. Wildfire prevention and suppression and post-wildfire restoration require a variety of assets and skills across landscapes. Federal, State, tribal, and local governments should coordinate the deployment of appropriate assets and skills to restore our landscapes and communities after damage caused by fires and to help reduce hazardous fuels through active forest management in order to protect communities, critical infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources. (c) Removing Hazardous Fuels, Increasing Active Management, and Supporting Rural Economies. Post-fire assessments show that reducing vegetation through hazardous fuel management and strategic forest health treatments is effective in reducing wildfire severity and loss. Actions must be taken across landscapes to prioritize treatments in order to enhance fuel reduction and forest-restoration projects that protect life and property, and to benefit rural economies through encouraging utilization of the by-products of forest restoration. Sec. 6. Collaborative Partnerships. To reduce fuel loads, restore watersheds, and improve forest, rangeland, and other Federal land conditions, and to utilize available expertise and efficiently deploy resources, the Secretaries shall expand collaboration with States, tribes, communities, non-profit organizations, and the private sector.

Wildfire Threat is a measure of the likelihood of a fire starting and spreading to a location. Collectively, areas with Moderate Wildfire Threat. This area has Moderate to High Wildfire Threat which is approximately six times greater than Low Wildfire Threat. Flame length is directly related to Fire Intensity and is commonly used as a direct visual indication of Fire Intensity. The Fire Intensity displayed is the average of non-zero Fire Intensity values for the area inside of the circle shown which has a radius of 787 feet (eight 30-meter cells). This Fire Intensity Level has flame lengths ranging from 12 to 20 feet long. Trees with low branches can be expected to torch with fire extending into the canopy of stands. Expect short-range spotting to be very common with medium to long range spotting possible up to one mile. Direct attack by firefighters, engines, aircraft, and dozers is generally ineffective but indirect attack may be effective. It will be difficult for firefighters to work near structures unless adequate defensible space has been created. Areas with Very high intensity have flame lengths up to ten times more than very low intensity areas. Wildfire is one of the greatest threats to sage grouse habitat. This project will help protect and preserve sagebrush habitat by decreasing both fuel loading and fire potential. Pinyon and juniper trees have expanded and moved into areas once dominated by shrubs, forbs, and grasses. Dense PJ fuel conditions are to the point that if a wildfire occurred it would be difficult to contain, leading to an increased risk to firefighter and public safety, suppression effectiveness and natural resource degradation. Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) within the project area is predominately FRCC 3 which is where fire regimes have been extensively altered and risk of losing key ecosystem components from wildfire is high. Treatments identified within this proposal, will help reduce hazardous fuel loads, create fuel breaks, and reduce the overall threat of a destructive wildfire which could impact outlying properties and oil & gas infrastructure. Functional riparian areas create a fuel break since they have green vegetation most of the time. By repairing and creating a healthy riparian area in the Miller creek drainage it will provide a robust fuel break in the Miller creek watershed. Finally the fire threat in this area threatens not only native vegetation but oil and gas infrastructure, transmission lines, scattered homes, public and firefighter safety, soil structure, and wildlife. See Documents for the full UWRAP Assessment.

In 2012, the Seeley Fire burned the upper end of the Miller Creek Watershed leaving the watershed devoid of vegetation, this resulted in extreme surface runoff, channel incision, and degradation of riparian habitat. The result of downcutting erosion is large pulses of sediment being transported downstream. As a tributary to the Price River, sediment flows during flooding are carried through to the main river channel. The Price River is currently 303(D) listed as an impaired waterbody with a Total Maximum Daily Load for Total Dissolved Solids that is being exceeded (Utah Division of Water Quality 2016). Reduction in erosion and trapping sediment to agrade the streambed and reestablish a flood plain in Miller Creek will effectively reduce the amount of both suspended and dissolved solids that reach the Price River. Adding complexity to a stream through Beaver Dam Analogs and introduction of large woody debris has been shown to trap sediment and promote healthy sediment transport. Aggrading the streambed through these activities will reduce the salt loading and Total Dissolved solids in the Price River. Upland Component The Miller Creek upland project area elevation is over 5,800 feet above sea level; therefore, it is expected that the opportunity to restore native species to the composition and frequency appropriate to the area is high. The area is dominated by pinyon pine and juniper (Phase 2 and Phase 3). There is noticeable soil erosion throughout the area due to the absence of perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs. The project is expected to improve herbaceous understory, which will reduce water runoff and decrease soil erosion while increasing infiltration. A recent publication by Roundy et al. 2014 (Pinyonjuniper Reduction Increases Soil Water Availability of the Resource Growth Pool. Range Ecology and Management 67:495505) showed that phase 3 juniper removal can increase available moisture for more than 3 weeks in the spring. And removing juniper from phase 1 and 2 stands can increase water from 6-20 days respectively. Because juniper are prolific water users they readily out compete understory species which eventually die off. 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, but does not increase stream flow. 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 PJ is removed. Improvements to the Standards and Guidelines for Healthy Rangelands (Standard 1 and Standard 3) are expected through project implementation. It is expected that Standard 1 (Soils) will improve by allowing soils to exhibit permeability and infiltration rates that will sustain/improve site productivity throughout the area. This will be accomplished by making improvements to the Biotic Integrity of the community by converting areas that are dominated by PJ to a diverse component of perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs that is consistent with Ecological Site Description. Indicators will include sufficient cover and litter to protect the soil surface from excessive water and wind erosion, limiting surface flow and limiting soil moisture loss through evaporation, which will promote proper infiltration. Stone Culvert Component The high runoff and debris flows resulting from the Seeley fire have contributed to the destabilizing erosion of the culvert. Where the sandstone blocks have been washed out from the culvert walls, the unconsolidated earth fill behind the walls is exposed and subject to erosion, contributing to sediment loading in the creek (and further destabilizing the culvert). Although chronic minor erosion is a concern, the primary concern is the long term risk of structural failure of the culvert from prolonged erosion and the collapse of fill into the channel.

This project falls within the exiting scope of the BLM Price Field Office RMP and DOI Secretarial Order 3336. Parts of the treatment area will be rested from livestock grazing for a minimum of two years following project implementation to ensure adequate rejuvenation and seedling establishment. The NEPA for the pinyon/juniper removal is completed and signed (DOI-BLM-UT-G020-2014-0046-EA). Archaeological Clearance for pinyon/juniper will be completed before the project activities begin. Stream work is on private lands and DWR lands, a stream alteration permit will be obtained prior to instream work. Working with DWR archaeologist to complete stream archaeological clearance A SITLA RIP application will be submitted for upland work. Culvert Component UDOGM/AMRP is federally funded through the U.S. Office of Surface Mining's Abandoned Mine Land Fund. As such, it is required to comply with applicable federal laws, including NEPA, ESA Section 7, and NHPA Section 106. Environmental compliance for all planned Hiawatha reclamation work was completed when the Office of Surface Mining issued a Categorical Exclusion and Authorization to Proceed on August 28, 2018.

Upland Upland sites this year will be treated with one or more of the following: aerial seeding, hand crews (lop and scatter), mastication, herbicide spot treatment, and some hand planted forb islands. The areas with the highest density will receive aerial seed then mastication. Other areas will receive a lop and scatter treatment and one area east of the Carbon County Airport will receive the herbicide spot treatment. These previously chained areas will receive grass, forb, and shrub seed along with hand planting of forb islands similar to previous phases. Invasive species (Russian Olive, Tamarisk, and Musk Thistle) will be cut and treated with herbicide. Russian Olives will be girdled and sprayed while the remaining species will be cut within six inches of the ground and stumps sprayed. Small mammal and herpetofaunal (herp) monitoring will occur at several sites in or around the project area. Additionally, we will assess bat use of several ponds that were maintained in the project area in 2019 (Project 4207). See the Monitoring section for specific methods on small mammals, herps, and bats. In Channel Methods The lower sections of Miller Creek support pinyon/juniper woodlands while the upper reaches transition to sub alpine fir, Douglas fir, Engelmann spruce, and aspen. Our FY20 Miller Creek Project focused on the mainstem of Miller Creek below the confluence of the three forks on more than a mile of stream through Leo Hardy's privately held property. Moderate to extreme downcutting had occurred due to the Seeley Fire (2012) in the upper end of the watershed. In this FY21 proposal our focus will be on monitoring our restoration sites in Middle Fork while applying our refined methods to the North Fork to further "scale up" the watershed benefits. We will continue to work downstream from the FY20 project with low-tech, process-based stream restoration (Wheaton et al. 2019) using instream structures until we arrive at the Conoco-Phillips diversion. A combination of traditional restoration structures built with heavy machinery (log rollers, step pools, cross vanes) as well as Beaver Dam Analogs (BDA's) will be used to stabilize the stream channel, preventing further down cutting. Rock structures will likely be needed to stabilize the Conoco Phillips diversion. Willow waddles, addition of topsoil, and coir fabric will be used around rock structures to ensure vegetation establishment and long term stability. Within the moderate slope sections, gravel and other finer substrate is still present in the bed material. Within these sections log structures, including log rollers and log step pools maybe installed. The log roller structure was designed to emulate natural features of stable streams with high slopes and low sinuosity typically found in low order streams that drain steep hillsides. In the American west, these stream types are often adjacent to conifer forests such as lodgepole and limber pine that grows in Utah from 7,000 to 10,000 feet, or douglas fir forests found in Utah at elevations ranging from 6,000 to 9,000 feet. When these trees die and fall or wash into the channel they significantly contribute to the hydraulics and function of the stream. The in channel trees redirect flow, creating sinuosity or scouring pools, over time, the trees can become embedded in the channel with gravel and sand, and acting like a dam they back up water and stabilize the bed elevation. Using the natural process as a guide, machinery is used to precisely arrange and bury logs in the channel to maximize benefits to the stream. These structures provide grade control, add flow resistance to dissipate energy, and decreases near bank stress by directing flow to the center of the channel. Based on our experience on the Middle Fork, we plan to construct as many as 10 large wood or rock structures as needed with heavy equipment. The focus, however, will be on building low tech structures such as BDAs in clusters that work together to capture sediment. In FY 20 we built nearly 90 per mile and will continue to work in a similar concentration as we work downstream to the Conoco Phillips diversion and explore their feasibility upstream in the North Fork of Miller Creek. All structures will be installed in October and November to avoid fall rainstorms that frequently occur in southeastern Utah. Based on previous experience on Miller Creek the structures will quickly work as intended, facilitating aggradation of sediment or scouring pools as needed. In the spring, likely after rain events have interacted with the structures we will evaluate each structure making modifications as needed as well as develop a plan for re-vegetation that will focus on transplanting willows and other woody plants during the dormant season. In the lower agricultural area of Miller Creek we will install 100 low tech instream structures over one mile to trap sediment and aggrade the streambed over one mile. Where Miller Creek is eroding banks into adjacent fields we will install toe wood or other appropriate structures using heavy equipment to place rocks and logs to redirect erosive flows. A hand crew will be hired to clear a 50 foot corridor along Miller Creek to reestablish native perennial plants and begin the process of removing invasive tamarisk and Russian Olive. Slash form the removal will be piled and burned and a plan will be developed to treat the re-sprouts. . Stone Culvert Component Culvert stabilization will be accomplished by replacing the areas of missing blocks with reinforced concrete. Stabilization of the downstream gully headcut will likely be done using traditional hard engineering techniques (riprap drop structure) incorporating modifications for fish passage.

Effectiveness of stream restoration (e.g., BDAs) will be monitored with the Rapid Stream-Riparian Assessment (RSRA) survey (see attached). The RSRA generates a score for water quality, hydrogeomorphology, fish and aquatic habitat, riparian vegetation, and terrestrial wildlife habitat. This method was selected because it is a time and cost efficient means to monitor restoration projects. Wild Utah Project biologists and their volunteers will conduct the RSRA surveys before and after restoration. Representative channel cross sections will be taken at each distinct location where BDA's will be constructed. Benchmarks will be installed to allow accurate re-survey of the channel post construction and after the first major flooding event. Cross sections will allow us to monitor changes is channel profile and flood plain formation, and quantify the effectiveness of our objectives such as facilitating channel aggradation. Upland Component Monitoring will consist of randomly located vegetation transects with the purpose of measuring both overstory and understory vegetation change. Measurements will include line-point intercept cover, tree density, species richness, and seeded species frequency using BLM's Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) protocols. Repeat photographs will also be taken. Monitoring data will be maintained by Canyon Country Fire Fuels program. DWR will also place photo monitoring plots that will be revisited pre-treatment and 3 years post treatment. Line point vegetation monitoring will be completed along with the repeat photography. Herpetofauna and small mammals will be monitored using pitfall and funnel trap arrays based on a modified design presented in Fisher 2008 (see attached diagram). Arrays were constructed and placed in four sites (one array per site) around the Miller Creek drainage in August 2019: one untreated control site, one bull hog and aerial seeding site (2018), one PJ push site that was seeded with dribblers on tracks (2005), and one roller-chopper aerial seeding site (2008). Traps will be run during the warmer months (likely April - June), as time allows, and all non-shrew captures will be identified and released at the point of capture. Because of the difficulty in field identification, shrews will be collected and preserved for later identification. In addition to pitfalls and funnel traps, small mammal live traps will be deployed at the same treatment sites and run several times throughout the grant period. Upland Monitoring Several BLM trend studies are located within the project areas and will continue to be read every 3-5 years. Established photopoints will also be re-taken pre and post treatment and will be uploaded to the database when completed BLM has recently initiated a new Assessment, Inventory and Monitoring program (AIM) to improve the effectiveness of monitoring on BLM lands. This monitoring program uses standard core indicators and methods to provide a statistically valid sampling design across the landscape. The BLM office will have a team devoted to AIM monitoring, the sample points are randomly generated by software. Additionally, this project falls partially within sage grouse habitat. Habitat Assessment Framework monitoring is a multiscale, sage-grouse habitat assessment tool that can be integrated with the AIM. This monitoring is done from a broad-to-fine scale. The dataset at the site scale (which includes this project) describes habitat indicators, such as sagebrush cover, sagebrush height, grass and forb cover, riparian stability, and/or proximity of detrimental land uses and structures. These data will ensure appropriate project implementation, as well as guide future actions in sage grouse habitat. Soil pits will not be dug unless the Ecological Site Description is not well represented on the site. The Monitoring Manual for Grassland, Shrubland, and Savanna Ecosystems (Second Edition) will be the document guiding methods for monitoring . Stone Culvert Component UDOGM/AMRP has no set monitoring program, but does revisit past projects on an "as available" basis to check on conditions. Funding for maintenance repairs is available if needed.

USFWS: Will be providing funding/planning/implementation support and is one of the project managers working closely Utah Division of Wildlife and Trout Unlimited. Wild Utah Project: Wild Utah Project will recruit and manage volunteers to support with restoration activities such as willow plantings and installation of beaver dam analogues. Wild Utah Project staff will conduct stream monitoring and manage data. NWTF: UDWR recently released wild turkeys in this area. NWTF has an interest in improving the riparian area and the adjacent uplands within this project area to help support these birds and improve habitat conditions for additional future releases. DWR: The Utah DWR will provide contract administration associated with both upland and riparian work. The DWR will also provide monitoring in the stream channel and on the uplands. Additional monitoring will be conducted on small mammals and reptiles by DWR staff. Archaeological clearance will be a combinatation of in-house surveys and contracts through DWR. BLM: The BLM will help with contract administration on the BLM portions of the project. BLM NEPA has already been completed. Fire crews will also assist with some of the lop and scatter west of Price. Forest Service: The Forest Service will begin the NEPA process for drainages to be worked on in future phases. Private Landowners: There are multiple private landowners involved in this project. There has been coordination wit these landowners to maintain the project and manage property accordingly to help achieve project success. NRCS: Will help with planning and funding through work with private landowners. UDOGM The Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program in the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (UDOGM/AMRP) is tasked with mitigating public safety hazards and environmental disturbance created by past mining practices. UDOGM/AMRP is funded from the Abandoned Mine Land Fund administered by the U.S. Office of Surface Mining under the authority of the 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA, PL 95-87). ConocoPhillips has been involved with this project from the early stages. They have provided materials and manpower for each of the phases and will continue to support this project as it moves forward. SITLA has been involved with past phases of the project. They have collaborated with the permittees and have allowed for range improvements through vegetation treatments to fencing to pond maintenance. We will work with SITLA on future treatment that will allow for wildlife monitoring before treatment and then will provide an area to do post treatment wildlife observations. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation: As part of Secretarial Order 3362 this project has received funding for big game winter range and migration corridors in past phases. Trout Unlimited will act as project manager for all stream and riparian work and will obtain necessary permits to install structures. Additionally, TU will act as liaison with land owners where necessary.

The private landowners will enter into a Landowner Agreement with USFWS. As part of the landowner agreement with USFWS the landowner agrees to leave the habitat restored in place for a 10 year period and during that time will work with the USFWS biologist to monitor and access needs, success, and any needed adaptive management. Previous work with private landowners have also signed Landowner Agreements with USFWS. Forest Service Future Management: The Forest Service has visited the treatment areas within the Miller Creek area and is interested and focused on future restoration in a collaborative effort that reaches across jurisdictional boundaries and connects the headwaters with these treatments on a landscape scale. The Forest Service is eager to participate in this shared stewardship and has the support to begin project planning for these future efforts. These efforts may include an array of restoration tools, including; BDA's, in-stream structures, plantings, culvert replacement and fish passage, upland fuels reduction, e.g... Upland Component The site will be monitored and if maintenance needs to be done in the future the NEPA is already in place and will allow managers to respond swiftly to maintain the health of the range. Adjacent treatments have occurred on the Gordon Creek tributaries which includes summer range habitat for sage grouse, and winter habitat for mule deer, and elk, with benefits to grass, sage, and forb rejuvenation. This project will be the missing link for connectivity between other adjacent projects for seasonal transitional wildlife range. The increase in forage for livestock will offer grazing relief from other areas within the allotments. Instream Component The site will be monitored and maintained as needed to continue to meet the restoration potential of Miller Creek in the riparian area and in the channel. The project will be expanded both upstream and downstream and into the adjacent forks of Upper Miller Creek with the success of this project. The project will also spread across the west side of the Price River Valley with work planned in Gordon Creek. This area has been chosen as a focal area for the DWR Wildlife Action Plan Implementation Team. A group of partners determined that the Miller Creek watershed would be an important place to do upland and riparian improvement for watershed health as well as wildlife. Since this area has been chosen by the WAP IT partner group upland and stream projects will continue in this area until the stream health can support fish, the uplands are balanced and can provide habitat for multiple wildlife species such as wild turkey, quail and big game to name just a few. The areas on public lands will continue to managed for multiple use including grazing, recreation, wildlife viewing, hunting and all aspects of multiple use.

This project has the ability to increase quantity and quality of forage for domestic livestock and multiple wildlife species (esp. big game). The removal of Pinyon Juniper (PJ) will open up the canopy and release soil moisture which will allow other vegetation to take advantage of the light and moisture that was previously being taken up by the PJ. The aerial seeded sites on BLM administered lands will not be fenced due to the steep terrain surrounding most of the site, the small area being seeded, the currant lack of edible plants on site, and the lack of cattle that normally transition through the area. The BLM Range staff with instruct permitee's to actively remove cattle from seeded areas weekly and use salt, water, and other livestock management tools to reduce livestock herbivory within the aerial seeded sites. The other seeded areas of this project will be left ungrazed for at least two growing seasons allowing the seeding to become established prior to being included in the grazing rotation. In the current state there is very limited grazing potential for livestock or wildlife; therefore, long term this project will increase the amount and quality of forage that will be available, improving the overall grazing management and wildlife benefits. Hunting opportunities could be enhanced by this project as well. Improvements to wildife habitat and increased forage opportunities will benefit multiple game species and will provide not only a benefit within this project area but will also expand to neighboring public lands. Within the upper reach of the Miller Creek watershed the private property land manager has been working with the NRCS to develop several pastures through livestock water development and pasture fencing. The land manager has agreed to rest the riparian area to allow for establishment of riparian species. Once some riparian species are established and the stream aggrades the area will be able to be grazed however it will take close monitoring to ensure that the grazing does not put the stream restoration work in jeopardy. This past year, there have been issues with trespass cattle accessing previously treated areas. The partners on this project will continue to work with the private landowner to prevent any additional damage. The riparian portion of this project was heavily impacted by the 2012 Seeley fire which devastated the upper Miller Creek watershed. This resulted in a drastic reduction of vegetation, severe down cutting of the stream and increased sediment loads being transported downstream. This project will continue to decrease sediment loads in downstream ponds and irrigation ditches which will benefit downstream agriculture. As a tributary to the Price River, sediment flows during flooding are carried from the Miller Creek watershed through to the main river channel. The Price River is currently 303(D) listed as an impaired waterbody with a Total Maximum Daily Load for Total Dissolved Solids that is being exceeded (Utah Division of Water Quality 2016). This project will result in a reduction in erosion and will help trap sediment to agrade the streambed and re-establish a flood plain in Miller Creek which will effectively reduce the amount of both suspended and dissolved solids that reach the Price River. Adding complexity to a stream through Beaver Dam Analogs and introduction of large woody debris has been shown to trap sediment and promote healthy sediment transport. Aggrading the streambed through these activities will reduce the salt loading and Total Dissolved solids in the Price River. Other Sustainable Uses: The project area also provides important recreational hunting. Because this is important winter habitat too, the area sustains populations of big game hunted on the forest above as well. These hunting opportunities provide a financial boost to local economies in several ways. Continuing to do work to maintain the habitat in this area will help to perpetuate the recreational and economic benefits in these struggling rural communities. Wildlife watching and shed antler gathering are another popular recreational activity in some of these areas. Improving habitat here will benefit this sustainable use of the landscape.

11/09/2021

12/16/2021

2022

Lop and Scatter work began November 9, 2021. Work progressed well and was completed December 16, 2022. Lower Miller Creek Stream Restoration: Tamarisk and Russian olive were removed using chainsaws to cut the trees and then immediately spraying them with Triclopyr 3A. We used youth corps crews to do the work. An ACE crew worked from 4/3/22 - 4/16/22 and treated one acre. A UCC crew worked from 6/27/22 - 6/30/22 and treated another 2 acres. We constructed 100 BDAs in a one mile stretch of lower Miller Creek. The posts for the BDAs were put in by Good Fellers from 6/25/22 - 6/28/22. The BDAs were repaired, filled, and finished by TRP Ridgeline Pros from 4/10/23 - 5/8/23.

Lop and Scatter work began November 9, 2021. Work progressed well and was completed December 16, 2022. Work started on the West side of Highway 6 then moved northward and eastward across the highway. Lower Miller Creek Stream Restoration: This portion of the project was done in coordination with the NRCS. The work being done is on private land and the landowners had a contract with the NRCS to help pay for the work. The initial plan was to remove tamarisk and Russian olive within 25 feet of the creek on both banks (about 6 acres) to allow for easier access when constructing the BDAs. Once treatment of these invasive species had been finished we planned on planting with native plants. The first youth corps hired was only able to complete one acre of tamarisk treatment, the second only completed two acres. We decided this route was cost prohibitive and decided to construct the BDAs without the rest of the planned tamarisk removal. We hope to treat the remaining tamarisk at some point in the future. Due to permitting issues we were unable to fully construct the BDAs in 2022. As carryover funding is not guaranteed, we wanted to put in what we could in 2022 which was only the posts for the BDAs. We received carryover funding and finished the BDAs in 2023. There were plans for stream bank stabilization, but in working with the NRCS there were some differences in opinion for the engineering. That work won't be done as part of this project, but may be done in the future.

Mastication was not sent out for bid due to this project having the only polygon in the area for mastication and mobilization costs would have been too high.