Beaver WMA's Cheatgrass Control Project
Project ID: 5751
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2022
Submitted By: 11
Project Manager: Gary Bezzant
PM Agency: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
PM Office: Southern Region
Lead: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
Several of the WMA's in the Beaver Area have been seeing increased cheatgrass invasion and are decreasing in value as it suppresses the shrubs, perennial grasses, and forbs. Recent trials with Rejuvra have demonstrated good control on cheatgrass in areas with intact vegetative communities and a strong release of those species as the cheatgrass suppression is removed. This project will begin to use rejuvra on a larger scale to release the vegetative communities from the cheatgrass suppression.
Location:
Beaver Wildlife Management Areas (Easement and South Creek Units) East and South of Beaver Utah.
Project Need
Need For Project:
This past fall as the annual easement monitoring occurred on the property owned by SFW with an easement maintained by UDWR was conducted the trend toward cheatgrass domination was noted. Upon return to the office the range trend report for the site was consulted and affirmed that trend. This property has received a couple of historic treatments in recent years. First it was harrowed and seeded in 2011 and later received a treatment with Plateau. That report showed cheatgrass held at bay and a positive trend toward increasing perennial vegetation for a couple of years but the cheatgrass ultimately returned and is now overtaking the perennial system again. At the same time as these observations were being made there has been growing support for the use of the new product Rejuvra as a longer lasting cheatgrass control with the possibility of it being long enough to truly deplete the seed bank. The caveat was that the product would also inhibit new seedings and therefore needed to be used in an area with an existing vegetative structure strong enough to release on its own without seeding. Under this logic the easement unit is a prime candidate for using rejuvra. Two other units within the Beaver Wildlife Management Area are also experiencing cheatgrass problems, but we are unsure if the vegetative community is sufficient to release. Product representatives recommend that on areas with unsurety test strips be used to examine the level of release possible prior to treating a larger landscape. So this proposal places these test strips on these 2 units to better inform a future decision about the use of Rejuvra there. The Beaver Wildlife Management Area and its associated management units were purchased to provide high quality winter range for big game animals. On units where cheatgrass suppresses the perennial and shrub vegetation the units ability to provide that value is inhibited.
Objectives:
The primary objective of the project is to remove cheatgrass competition from the vegetation community on the Easement unit of the Beaver Wildlife Management Area and thereby improve the vigor and health of the community as demonstrated by an increase in cover and frequency. This associated anticipated improvement of the vigor and health of the vegetative community by extension will increase the value of the land for wintering big game better accomplishing the purpose of the land ownership. Removing this fine fuel will also reduce the likelihood of a catastrophic wildfire that would destroy the sagebrush that is so critical on this winter range. One secondary objective is to evaluate the potential future use of Rejuvra on other units within the Beaver Wildlife Management Area and inform future management decisions for these properties as well as adjacent BLM properties. We will accomplish this by doing some comparison plots with Imazipic and monitor the differences overtime along with some other locations in the state. Another secondary objective is to use the project area as a demonstration property where others can come and see the results of the use of this new product for better or worse.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
As noted in the attached 2019 range trend report the easement unit is currently transitioning to cheatgrass dominance and action now is imperative to be sure we still have the remaining intact vegetative community to respond to the treatment. It is worried that the transition to cheatgrass dominated systems is possibly already too far gone on the other 2 units but we are excited to test and see if that is the case. The challenge on one of these units (South Creek) is that we have already explored the possibility of mechanical treatment and unfortunately the cultural resources within the unit were too extensive to allow for that type of treatment. The other unit (B-Hill) is a little more intact and we are hopeful the test strips will reveal some potential for chemical treatment and we will hope that we are surprised on the South Creek unit. A quick walkaround this fall in one draw on the unit did reveal more perennial vegetation hiding under the cheatgrass than was evident from just a driveby. It is possible we will end up with a more targeted treatment there in the future utilizing slopes and aspects to help us determine where to treat. The Beaver Deer herd is also currently expressing some suppression and body conditions have been surprisingly low. This increases the importance of providing the best quality winter range we can. At this point, controlling cheatgrass while an intact native community (sagebrush and a few native grasses) would be much more cost effective than doing fire rehabilitation that has increased costs and lower chances of establishing an effective winter range community for deer, elk, and sage grouse. The experimental plots are within the Beaver SGMA and while certainly on the outward edge of where we expect sage grouse to be, these areas are indicative of range conditions across the entire South Beaver Bench and successes we see here can inform future management decisions on areas where SG are known to be actively using and will reduce the threat of invasive vegetative species as well as inappropriate fire cycle as removing the cheatgrass will remove the fine fuels that increase fire cycles.
Relation To Management Plan:
The Beaver Wildlife Management Area Plan identifies the importance of both maintaining previous treatments and expanding upon them. This project will accomplish both as it maintains the 2011 Harrow treatment but expands upon that by treating the remainder of the property as well. This project will directly benefit two of the WAP habitats listed Mountain Sagebrush and Mountain Shrub habitats and will also benefit the species that use these habitats. This project will contribute to the overall improvement of a minimum of 15,000 acres of elk range as outlined in the Beaver Elk Unit Management Plan. The project will facilitate improve the Beaver elk herd winter range. The management goal of The Beaver Deer Unit #22 Management Plan is to manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities, including hunting and viewing. The WMA's are listed as critical winter range for mule deer. This project will improve habitat conditions for wintering mule deer. This project also falls in line with the statewide Management Plan for Mule Deer (2014). Specifically dealing with part of their habitat needs this plan calls for the removal of Pinyon and Juniper encroachment and asks for the development of grass/forb/brush rich plant communities to help with their life cycle needs. This project is also in line with the Utah Statewide Management Plan for Elk (2015). In this plan it specifically mentions the needs for creating healthy watersheds and projects have included pinyon-juniper removal, controlled burns, reseeding efforts after wildfires, conifer thinning, etc., which have allowed for increased perennial grasses, forbs, and shrubs to be established for the benefit of elk. This project is allowing our WMA's to come up to the standards set forth in the Fundamentals of Rangeland Health (43 CFR 4180) and Utah's Standards and Guidelines for Rangeland Health which address watersheds, ecological condition, water quality and habitat for special status species. This is directly tied to this project in that it lies in the drainage basin of the beaver river, which is a 303D State Listed Water body for TMDL and Phosphorous loading into this system, and this project will help eliminate erosion leading to this rivers TMDL listing. This project also ties in well with the National Fire Plan (2000). In this plan they state that one of their main objectives is Reducing hazardous fuels (dry brush and trees that have accumulated and increase the likelihood of unusually large fires) in the country's forests and rangelands By tying in with the other project work that has been done in the area this project also ties in well with the Health Forest Restoration Act of 2003 which states protecting forests, woodlands, shrublands, and grasslands from unnaturally intensive and destructive fires is one of its objectives. This project connects a long line of projects that would prove to be effective fuel breaks in the event of a major wildfire event. This project will prove helpful in the Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water QualityTMDL Section(Beaver River Watershed TMDL Management Plan) By reducing the amount of bare ground within this drainage we will in effect reduce the amount of sediment loading in this watershed.
Fire / Fuels:
Cheatgrass is known for its frequent fire cycles, and by slowing the spread of this invasive grass you also lessen the chance of a fire happening in this area. This project would reduce the risk of a wildfire. This project is an FRCC class 2 currently and by treating with the prescribed methods we are hoping that it will move towards a FRCC class 1. This project is also going to protect several values at risk in the area including but not limited to the WUI interface with the Easement unit and the town of Beaver. Another Value at risk in this particular area is the transmission lines and infrastructure that runs around and through these WMA's.
Water Quality/Quantity:
While there are no active streams or known springs on these properties there are gullies and washes that feed into systems that ultimately reach both South Creek and the Beaver River, and ultimately into Minersville Reservoir which has a current TMDL listing for Total Phosphorus loading and low dissolved oxygen (Utah Department of Environmental Quality, 2016). Some of these gullies and washes are experiencing channelization and downcutting. Conversion from cheatgrass to better perennial vegetation will increase water infiltration and decrease overland erosion and flows that could ultimately reach South Creek and the Beaver River and Minersville Reservoir and aid in slowing and reversing the channelization and downcutting in gullies and washes. Improved upland vegetative conditions will also help better distribute ungulate use and assist in decreasing non-point sources which are contributing to the TMDL issues in Minersville Reservoir.
Compliance:
Treatment will be occurring exclusively on private and state owned lands. There is also no ground disturbing activities planned. As such there is no NEPA or Archeology component required prior to implementation. Rejuvra, which initially was marketed as Esplenade, was rebranded as Rejuvra due to a label change allowing for use in grazed areas making it available for a more broad use.
Methods:
UDWR is partnering with Bayer to provide the chemical for the treatment. Bayer will be providing 10 gallons to be utilized on the project free of cost in an effort to expand exposure for the product, and UDWR will purchase the remaining needed chemical to complete the project. UDWR will also contract for aerial application of the chemical utilizing a water carrier in the amount of 5-10 gallons per acre. GBRC will be involved and design some demonstration plots within the treatment area.
Monitoring:
WRI Range trend site 22-R-17 is already in place within the treatment area and has been read every 3-5 years since 2008 and was most recently evaluated in 2019. This site will continue as we desire to follow the treatment and the report can be uploaded to the database. In addition GBRC plans to design and implement some demonstration plots within the treatment area to test some variables and show the results. It is anticipated these demonstration areas will be utilized in the future to share visually with others expected results in similar project areas. As part of the range trend site pellet data is gathered and used to calculate how many days use by the different species on the property. This data gathering will be accelerated to annually for the next 5 years to fill the gap between range trend readings and seek to understand how an anticipated trend toward a better condition vegetative community influences use.
Partners:
Conservation Easement monitoring was shared with SFW and they are supportive of efforts to improve vegetative conditions on their property. In addition a tour of the proposed treatment area was conducted bringing in experts from the Great Basin Research Center and they are supportive of the project and have committed to help in its design and planning, including some associated research and monitoring through a demonstration portion of the project. Preliminary discussions have also been held with adjacent landowners BLM and SITLA. BLM is not currently authorized for use of this new chemical but hopes to be in the future and is excited to see how it works out here as it could potentially inform their own use on adjacent properties and projects. SITLA will be involved in the final design and may see some treatment on all or at least part of its property.
Future Management:
As mentioned above this project is a first attempt to use Rejuvra on a larger scale than test plots. Even so there will be efforts to also carefully monitor the results and use the information gained to inform future decisions. Test strips will be used on 2 of the WMA managment units and will inform a decision for future treatments on these units if it is determined there is a strong enough vegetative response. In addition as mentioned above the BLM which has similar issues on adjacent properties will be closely following the results and have a desire to conduct similar treatments if the results are positive. All 3 of these management units do not have permitted grazing, they are however available as grassbanks which UDWR uses to assist others when conducting habitat treatments on other properties. In an effort to ensure success of the project the units will not be available as grassbanks for at least 2 growing seasons. Afterward they would return to availability and may be utilized occasionally but not regularly as needed.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
It is anticipated that the project will improve the vigor and production of the perennial vegetation which is important on these properties as they provide valuable winter range for mule deer and elk. In addition, turkeys and quail often inhabit the far northwestern corner of the easement property where it dives of to the river bottoms below. These properties also provide public access for sportsmen during the annual deer, elk, turkey, and upland game hunts. The easement unit is also utilized annually by SFW and UDWR to host a youth pheasant hunt where pheasants are planted on the property and youth receive a highly valuable mentored hunting experience. All 3 of these properties also receive a good amount of recreational use by ATV enthusiasts as they tie into multiple trail systems utilized in the South Beaver and South Creek area. UDWR has placed special emphasis on an access management plan for these properties to allow for this use in a carefully planned way that also protects the value for which the properties were purchased, wintering big game species. All of these units also have Pinyon and Juniper cover to varying extents and post cutting and firewood cutting permits are available to be utilized on the properties.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$37,268.00 $0.00 $37,268.00 $10,944.00 $48,212.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Materials and Supplies 10 Gallons of Rejuvra comped by Bayer, and 20 gallons to be purchased. $21,888.00 $0.00 $10,944.00 2022
Contractual Services Aerial Application contract for 769 acres @ $20/acre. $15,380.00 $0.00 $0.00 2022
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$37,268.00 $0.00 $37,268.00 $11,688.38 $48,956.38
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
Mule Deer Foundation (MDF) S023 $15,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2022
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) S027 $22,268.00 $0.00 $0.00 2022
Other In kind value of 10 gallons of Rejuvra that Bayer is providing complimentarily to assist with the project. $0.00 $0.00 $10,944.00 2022
DWR-WRI Project Admin In-Kind $0.00 $0.00 $744.38 2022
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Low
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Cheatgrass Impacts NA
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native High
Habitats
Habitat
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Very High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Soil Erosion / Loss Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/13/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Jimi Gragg
This is an exciting project, though I'm a little bit curious why it needs to go through the competitive process at all. My perception is that the agent (formerly Esplanade but relabeled & renamed for grazing-OK usage) has been trialed a decent amount (with very encouraging results) but not really deployed at scale yet in Utah. So this is (is this?) really a proof-of-concept project to try and get this new product out of the "valley of death" and into more widespread adoption. Bayer won't keep making it if it doesn't sell. If they only sell a little the price won't come down. You really aren't asking for much money. Is there no way for DWR, SFW, and/or WRI to just ensure this gets done?
Comment 01/13/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Danny Summers
We view this and a companion project (5772) as a way to show the use of this product at a larger scale and use it as a demonstration, at a large scale not just a the plot scale. We want to learn and show what the right prescription is to use the product. If there are still desirables on site then it might be a great tool. If the site is totally denuded of desirable species it probably isn't the right tool. These projects hope to demonstrate the usefulness of this product here in Utah. It might not rank at the top, but it's probably good to expose the greater WRI community that it is a new tool and how it can be used. We're confident we can find a way to fund it.
Comment 02/19/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
Danny covered it - excited to use the tool and let others see if it works, part of letting others see it is running it through the process even if we fund it another way.
Comment 01/15/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Gary, Our breeding bird surveys have shown this site is regularly occupied by several sagebrush/grassland dependent birds. Reducing cheatgrass and releasing native vegetation will benefit this group. Keith
Comment 02/02/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
Thanks Keith - We are excited about this project not just for the immediate site, but if it proves as successful as we hope also for its application on other larger adjacent areas and really making a difference for all the birds and small mammals,
Comment 02/02/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Honorable Mr. Bezzant, I hate to say it, but I now agree with Jimi on like 4 comments this year. What the heck is going on? This looks like needed information and a great opportunity. Regardless of scoring I think we need to have the discussion on how to elevate this at the rankers meeting. And also take me out there before and after and learn the fish guy on grasses. Science is cool. There has to be some SGCN benefitting from this. Ask Jimi about some rare insect or something. Mike
Comment 02/02/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
Yes Mr. Golden this is one exciting project to give a try. I will have to make you come help us measure grass, forbs, and shrubs pre and post just like I help you measure willows on the East Fork. Our hope and belief is that funding will be identified regardless of how it ranks but we really want the group to be exposed to it so we are running it through the process. As for SGCN I have asked all my favorite bird nerds, including Jimi and Keith, and while they like the project they have yet to recommend a species from the magic list.
Comment 02/02/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Your experimental strips are in a sage grouse PHMA and the larger WMA treatment is as close or closer than other projects claiming stupid chicken benefits. I know it is not removing several one foot tall junipers per acre, but I think addressing cheat grass is pretty beneficial for sagebrush ecosystems and their obligates. Then again I am just a dumb fish guy.
Comment 02/02/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
If the dumb fish guy says it benefits SG then who am I to argue, I will add it. It makes sense on several levels. 1st a small direct benefit associated with improved shrub conditions on the experimental areas and likely future treatments. And a strong secondary benefit in that it informs future land management decisions on the ground that the grouse will really use in the future. Thanks for the thoughts!
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Chamberlain
What is the rate of active ingredient that is being applying to the main area?
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Gary Bezzant
Planning for 5 ounces per acre. Will likely apply at 2.5 ounce rate 2X with the 2nd pass being halfway between the first pass lines in an effort to avoid missed strips.
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Kevin Gunnell
If I did my math right 5 oz/acre of the formulation translates to 1 oz A.I./acre.
Comment 08/29/2022 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Thank you for submitting your completion form on time. It looks great. Thanks for uploading pictures!
Completion
Start Date:
07/12/2021
End Date:
09/02/2021
FY Implemented:
2022
Final Methods:
UDWR issued an aerial herbicide contract to Hammond Helicopter to complete the "Utah Cheatgrass Control" project. This included projects in Washington County, Beaver, and Fountain Green. The portion of that contract that was conmpleted under this proposal was in Beaver. We completed aerial treatment of a total of 770 acres. 732 acres were in the main block with test strips of 21.6 acres and 16.4 acres treated on additional Beaver WMA units further south with an eye toward informing future treatments on those units. The vast majority of the treatment was done using rejuvra, with a small corner of the 732 acre polygon also involving some experimental strips utilizing plateau and no treatment control units to be used as demonstration sites for comparison purposes over the next few years.
Project Narrative:
UDWR purchased and supplied the chemical for this project utilizing a combination of state heribcide contracts and donated rejuvra from Bayer Chemical Company wanting to promote its future use. Hammond helicopter completed the application utilizing a helicopter and on ground crew to mix chemical and fill tank. Rejuvra herbicide was applied at 5 oz/acre in 7 gallons of water per acre on both the Rejuvra polygons and the experimental Rejuvra strips. Plateau herbicide was applied at 6 oz/acre in 7 gallons of water/acre + 1 quart MSO surfactant per 100 gallons of spray mix on the experimental strips. Treatment took place on Aug 31 and Sept 1, 2021.
Future Management:
Early monitoring indicates very good control of cheatgrass on the site after year 1. Monitoring will continue and re-treatment will be considered if cheatgrass re-invades the property at a future time. Strips on the southern units will also be evaluated for response to determine if the entire units would benefit from and exhibit sufficient perennial vegetation to establish on the site. If deemed appropriate broad scale treatments will be planned for those units. Tours of the property will also be planned to share results of treatments with adjacent landowners to determine if there would be an interest to expand on the treatments. It is acknowledged that BLM currently is not authorized for Rejuvra use but this project could help with encouragement to get to where they can.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
10231 Terrestrial Treatment Area Herbicide application Aerial (fixed-wing)
10232 Terrestrial Treatment Area Herbicide application Aerial (fixed-wing)
10395 Terrestrial Treatment Area Herbicide application Aerial (fixed-wing)
Project Map
Project Map