Big Summit Fire Zeedyk Structures for Riparian Rehab
Project ID: 5759
Status: Cancelled
Fiscal Year: 2022
Submitted By: N/A
Project Manager: Douglass Bayles
PM Agency: Bureau of Land Management
PM Office: Cedar City
Lead: Bureau of Land Management
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
Riparian recovery of Rice Canyon Creek that was burned in the Big Summit wildfire. Implementation of Zeedyk structures will allow for restoration of hydrologic and ecological function by preventing head-cutting, gully erosion and channel incision. The structures will help to slow and disperse water, dissipate energy, capture sediment, and increase soil moisture thereby promoting mesic and wetland plant species expansion that prevents further degradation and fosters channel recovery.
Location:
The project is located on BLM administered lands approximately 11 miles northwest of Modena, Utah in Iron County in the Stateline area of Hamlin Valley known as Rice Canyon.
Project Need
Need For Project:
The Big Summit fire occurred in the summer of 2020 burning through portions of Rice Canyon Creek. The wildfire made these areas void of vegetation, resulting in the loss of hydrologic and ecological function of the system that increases the risk of head-cutting, gully erosion and channel incision. This proposal would implement multiple zeedyk structures along the burned stretches of the creek to restore the hydrological and ecological function of the creek along with creating possible mesic meadow habitat and restoring riparian areas. These structures would include (i.e. rock dams, check-dams and Zuni pools/bowls) to slow the flow and improve infiltration of water. The majority of these structures may be implemented using heavy equipment to collect and place rock found on site equipment could include (skid steer loader, mini excavator, backhoe). Desirable perennial forbs, wetland obligates, pollinator, and other vegetation conducive to mesic meadow sites and riparian areas in the Great Basin area would be applied as indicated in the specifications attached in the documents section. Elk, mule deer - Benefits from riparian and mesic meadow development are expected to occur overtime as a result of restoring and creating wetter areas throughout the project area. The structures would slow water down during runoff events (i.e. snowmelt or monsoonal rain) and provide for floodplain development along these stretches. It is expected the project will allow for vegetation to stay green longer; especially, during drought conditions, which will provide wildlife species with opportunity areas for high quality forage. The project could be expected to promote fawning habitat for elk and mule deer within the area in the long-term. Deer and elk are known to utilize this area frequently and are dependent upon the proper functioning of this system. Recently in the fall while surveying portions of the creek upstream and designing riparian exclosures (see WRI proposal CCFO Riparian Exclosures) sage-grouse were observed along the creek. In addition, because the project would consist of planting highly desirable forbs within the structure development it is expected that a large variety of pollinators would also benefit.
Objectives:
The project would provide for the following objectives: * Restore the hydrological and ecological function of riparian areas in the burned sections of Rice Canyon Creek * Reduce storm runoff (rain and snowmelt) velocities * Trap sediment * Assist in floodplain development; * Limit soil erosion (i.e. stabilize drainages that exhibit vegetative recovery) * Create desirable wildlife habitats * Provide opportunities to increase possible sage grouse habitat and allow for migration corridors to areas that have been treated through ES&R and vegetation treatment efforts.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
There are minimal, risks to resources during the construction phase of mesic meadow structures since the area has been recently burned. The overall goal of the project is to keep the burned stretches of the creek from crossing a ecological threshold that may be irreversible and lead to failure of the entire system over time. The Big Summit fire burned over the perennial herbaceous and woody vegetation in a short stretch of Rice Canyon creek. Being void of vegetation this portion of the creek has high risk of erosion if high runoff events were to occur in the next few years due to lack of vegetation in the upland areas and inadequate vegetation to dissipate energy within the creek itself. These structures would dissipate the energy until the site has the proper time needed to recover. These structures would be designed with the goal to prevent a high flow runoff event from occurring that could create channelization problems and could end up impacting the system further upstream in the future. These structures are also designed to promote and improve the ecological system by expanding riparian and mesic meadow habitat. Structure failure could occur; however, structures will be monitored. This will be an adaptive management approach using the Zeedyk structures. This could result in future work being completed along the Rice Canyon creek lotic and lentic systems.
Relation To Management Plan:
Riparian Restoration and Wetland Enhancement - October 2018 The EA/FONSI/DR recognized the importance of the promotion of mesic wet meadows throughout the Cedar City Field Office. Pinyon Management Framework Plan (1983) The resource management plan is a broad framework for managing BLM lands in the jurisdiction of the Cedar City Field Office the project area. Although this project is not specifically addressed in the RMP, the proposed project will comply with and enhance the objectives of this management plan. In addition, improvements to soils was addressed; specifically, involving reduction of erosion and associated improvement/maintenance of soil productivity. Southwest Desert Local Working Group Conservation Plan (SDLWGCP) 2009. The local Working Group has developed a Conservation Plan detailing the natural history, threats, and mitigation measures for sage-grouse in each conservation plan area; and conservation guidelines for any activities occurring in the area. BLM Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan 2015 A. The project is consistent with the SGARMPA (2015) goals, objectives and Management Actions that were identified in the Special Status Species section as follows: There are no specific objectives or management actions identified in the SGARMPA or the SDLWGCP for mesic meadow development. The project is expected to improve brood rearing in localized areas and entice sage grouse to use higher elevation areas where extensive vegetative treatments to convert large areas to sagebrush steppe habitat have occurred between 2015 - 2017. The areas that were converted to sagebrush steppe are expected to serve as long-term opportunity/habitat expansion areas. The Utah State Wildlife Action Plan 2015-2025 (Final) is a comprehensive management plan designed to conserve native species populations and habitats in Utah, and prevent the need for additional federal listings. Southwest Desert Deer Herd Unit Management Plan (SDDHUMP) (2015) The management goal of the Southwest Desert Deer Herd Unit is to increase the unit deer population. Habitat management objectives that are applicable to the Mesic Meadow Development Project are (1) Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities, including hunting and viewing. (2) Maintain the population at a level that is within the long-term capability of the available habitat support. The SDDHUMP identified fawning recruitment as a major concern on the unit and lack of fawning recruitment may be the single greatest factor limiting the population. The project is expected to provide for localized improvement to fawning habitat through the mesic meadow development would create floodplains that would be seeded with highly desirable grasses/forbs component. Southwest Desert Elk Herd Unit Management Plan (SDEHUMP) (2016) Manage for a population of healthy animals capable of providing a broad range of recreational opportunities including hunting and viewing. Maintain the population at a level that is within the long term support capability of the available habitat. Maintain and enhance forage and cover habitat through vegetative manipulation and other management techniques. Habitat management objectives that are applicable to the project are to (1) develop new and protect/improve existing water sources for wildlife and livestock to improve distribution and minimize overutilization in proximity to water sources (2) enhance riparian systems through continue, prescriptive grazing and mechanical or chemical treatments. The SDEHUMP identified barriers to achieving unit management objectives including drought impacts to rangeland forage condition and abundance. It is expected that the localized improvement through the mesic development project would limit erosion and provide for opportunities for areas to remain greener longer. This would improve vegetative diversity and perennial understory in drainages throughout the project area. Utah Pronghorn Statewide Management Plan (UPSMP) (2009) The management goals are to increase the current population or establish new populations of pronghorn in all suitable habitat within the state and assure sufficient habitat is available to sustain healthy and productive pronghorn populations. The UPSMP identified the lack of succulent forbs and grasses on spring/summer rangers as a critical limiting factor in much of Utah's pronghorn habitat, which is the result of xeric, low annual precipitation conditions.
Fire / Fuels:
The project would promote the growth and expansion of riparian areas and mesic meadows of a previously burned area. This area has had multiple wildfires occur within the last decade. This project would create healthy riparian areas that would be more resilient to wildfires that could act as fuel breaks.
Water Quality/Quantity:
The mesic meadow structures are expected to provide the following benefits to streams: 1. Slow water velocity encouraging deposition of fine sediment (Butler and Malanson, 1995; Pollock et al., 2007) in the pond itself and during high flows onto the adjacent floodplain. 2. Act as long-term sinks for both suspended and bedload sediment (Green and Westbrook, 2009). The project will use mesic meadow structures will impound water, capture/settle/stabilize stream supplied sediment, increase water levels and corresponding water table, and aid in establishment of riparian vegetation on banks and adjacent floodplain. Water quality benefits of the proposed project would include reduction of suspended sediment, capture of sediment loads, increase DO, decrease overall water temperatures and increase base flows.
Compliance:
Cultural Site Clearances will be completed prior to project implementation. NEPA was completed and authorized the project under the Cedar City Field Office - Riparian Restoration and Wetland Enhancement EA/Decision Record in October 2018.
Methods:
The scope of the project includes: 1. Installation of 90 Zeedyk structures along burned stretches 2. Strategic planting of native vegetation with each structure The structures will be built to the specifications found in the documents section. The area has plenty of rock material on site that can be used to build the structures. Heavy equipment will be used to collect rock material from nearby and move the material to the structure site. Then heavy equipment will be used for digging and placing heavy rock. Hand crews will be able to construct the rest of the structures by hand. The structures will provide an increase in sediment storage on the floodplain and benefits to downstream water quality. Strategic ponding will provide wildlife habitat with succulent forbs, grasses, etc... throughout the year. In addition, it is expected that the structures will prevent erosion from excessive run off events and work to restore and improve the hydrologic and ecological function of the rice canyon creek system.
Monitoring:
Ocular observations including photo points will occur pre-treatment and on an annual basis post treatment to document changes to the system and seeding success in the project area.
Partners:
Partners to support the project will include the BLM, Southwest Desert Adaptive Resource Management local working group (SWARM), Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR), Utah State University and Anabranch Solutions. The project will be developed with full participation of these groups.
Future Management:
The Stateline Allotment has authorized livestock grazing from July 1st - September 30th. The area is planned to be rested from livestock grazing to allow rest of the recent ES&R seeding and chaining that took place fall of 2020. This would proper time for the forb seeding to establish through this project. Other work is being planned to improve the Rice Canyon creek system including 4 riparian exclosures around the spring source and sections of lentic and lotic areas that have been assessed as Functioning at risk. Re-construction of the UT/NV fence is being proposed which will help to limit negative affects from wild horses to the system from over grazing and trampling. Recent wild horse gathers have taken place in the area with more planned in January - February 2021.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
The project is expected to restore and improve existing riparian & mesic habitat within the project area. As mentioned, vegetation treatments & ES&R treatments have been implemented throughout the area. Sage grouse were observed utilizing the area this fall. This could be a potentially important area for sage grouse that has not been known that falls on the west side of the valley, especially with the vegetation treatments and ES&R treatments that have been completed within close proximity the Rice Canyon Creek and other surrounding spring sources. These vegetation treatments are at higher elevation where grasses, forbs and shrubs remain green and as a result are higher in vigor for a longer period of time in the summer due to cooler temperatures and more precipitation that is received at this elevation than the lower lying areas where sage grouse are currently inhabiting. The project would allow for planting forbs, grasses, etc.. that are highly desirable to sage grouse in immediate proximity to the Zeedyk structures. The structures would allow for these areas to remain wetter for a longer period of time and would provide succulent vegetation for sage grouse and big game species during the hot and dry portion of the summer.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$115,200.00 $0.00 $115,200.00 $7,500.00 $122,700.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Contractual Services Re-construction of the UT/NV fence $70,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
NEPA NEPA completed as part of the Mesic Meadow Enhancement NEPA project. $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 2021
Contractual Services Estimated the project would require 2 excavators @ $180 per/hour x 120 project hours $43,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Archaeological Clearance 1.5 miles of clearance work will need to be completed before project implementation. $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 2021
Seed (GBRC) Seed mix that will be used at each structure site. $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2021
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$115,200.00 $0.00 $115,200.00 $7,500.00 $122,700.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
DNR Fire Rehab Funding through WRI would consist of contractual services to implement stream structures. $115,200.00 $0.00 $7,500.00 2021
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Impacts on Migrating Birds NA
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Persistent Declines in Prey Species NA
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) Medium
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Temperature Extremes Medium
Habitats
Habitat
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Channelization / Bank Alteration (direct, intentional) High
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Sediment Transport Imbalance Medium
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Low
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Very High
Lowland Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Soil Erosion / Loss Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/15/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Douglas, Stablizing and restoring this riparian zone will likely have only limited benefit to ferruginous hawks and golden eagles. However, it should be very beneficial to passerine birds. 80-90% of this group in Utah depend on riparian habitats at some stage of there annual cycle. The project should also be beneficial to the 6-8 speicies of bats that are likely found in that area. Keith
Comment 01/20/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Keith, thanks for the information. I will pass this along to our biologists to make note of this. It would be interesting to monitor if the project moves forward.
Comment 01/30/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Jimi Gragg
The project title and details suggest some riparian rehab. Your habitats list only mentions lowland sagebrush. What gives? Is there a stream and riparian zone there? I would add those habitats, as appropriate.
Comment 02/01/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Yes, that was an oversight on my part. Sections of the creek are intermittent, but the stretch of creek proposed within the project consists of riparian. I have updated the habitats section. Thanks.
Comment 01/30/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Jimi Gragg
Also, when do you mean to implement this project? Ideally, from a snakes and lizards perspective, you wouldn't be harvesting local rock in May or June. That's when they're up near the surface, often hiding under rocks or in rock slides and outcrops. Not a huge thing, there's nothing "mission critical" there. But I'm pretty sure you do have mountain kingsnakes there, as they are known from the Wilson Range in NV & Antelope Range in UT, in exactly this kind of habitat (among others) and this site is right between those localities. Also, this project would benefit their population (even if you squash or sever a few), if they are indeed present. Ask your guys to have a phone camera handy and snap photos of any snakes they see? Good luck!
Comment 02/01/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Ideally, we would like to implement early this spring to have the structures in place before any major runoff events that may occur. I will pass this information along to the office biologists and make sure anyone working on the project is aware. Thanks for the comment.
Comment 02/01/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Jimi Gragg
Cool, thanks. The iNaturalist phone app is a great way to make natural history observations. I do snakes and lizards etc - but also flowers, trees, butterflies, bumblebees etc. There's AI plus curation so even if you don't know what you're looking at, you can just generalize to e.g. "snakes" or "butterflies". Somebody will come along and make the ID, and you will get an email from iNat about it. It's pretty fun, and in my case, I'm actually learning some butterflies. "Impossible!" Ha ha, the proof shows otherwise. "Hello, juniper hairstreak." DWR is already using herp data on iNat that was entered by diverse outdoors users. Anyway - thanks again, and good luck!
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Douglass, Looks like a cool project. Not familiar with this site or how hot it burned so take my next design comments in that context. Not sure if you had any help with design from hydrologists, but we have had issues with pretty large rock structures failing in fine grained substrates even in the absence of wildfire. I see you have an excavator in the budget for some of the structures, which should help, but I would also recommend using erosion control fabric behind each structure and making sure that they are well keyed into the bank. It also helps to model the projected potential flood flows when picking your rock sizes. If you want an extra set of eyes on the project I am sure we could find one between UDWR folks with this kind of experience and folks on the Forest. Also did you consider planting woody riparian vegetation to help with bank stability along the whole stretch instead of just around the structures? Any reason why this project wasn't combined with project 5708? In terms of threats, you are only addressing a "Data Gap" threat for a species if you are doing some kind of research to fill that gap. You are also benefitting riverine habitat. Could you elaborate on how the project addresses the Invasive Plant Species -- Non-native threat for Lowland sagebrush? No need to continue structures downstream onto the private? Mike
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Mike, Thanks for your comments. I appreciate the advice; we do not have a hydrologist stationed out of the Cedar City Office so it would be very beneficial to speak with you or anyone else who has experience working on these structures, especially from a hydrologist's perspective. It would be worth making a trip out to the site to make sure the design was solid before implementing. Most of the stretch that burned was heavily wooded with willows, just a month or so after the fire the willows seemed to respond well to the burn and willow sprouts have already started and seem to be numerous so at this time, I do not think a planting would be necessary. This project was not combined with 5708 because for now we are focusing on the burned area and 5708 had other excloures not in the burn and in other parts of the field office. As for invasive species in lowland sagebrush habitat the project would buildup up sediment, slow down flows and retain water that will promote the native and seeded vegetation to help in preventing invasive species from spreading. This habitat category was added because portions of the creek have been incised in spots that has resulting in little buffer between the riparian and lowland sage habitat. If this phase of the project were successful there could be potential for more structures upstream in the un-burned area. The structures extend down to the end of the system into a pond so no structures would be needed on the private.
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Chamberlain
Could you expand on the risks if you don't do the project? I think there is an opportunity to get more points.
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
Yes, The Big Summit fire burned over the perennial herbaceous and woody vegetation in a short stretch of Rice Canyon creek. Being void of vegetation this portion of the creek has high risk of erosion if high runoff events were to occur in the next few years due to lack of vegetation in the upland areas and inadequate vegetation to dissipate energy within the creek itself. These structures would dissipate the energy until the site has the proper time needed to recover. These structures would be designed with the goal to prevent high flow runoff events from occurring that could create channelization problems and could end up impacting the system further upstream in the future. These structures are also designed to promote and improve the ecological system by expanding riparian and mesic meadow habitat to benefit wildlife. Thanks for the comment.
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Chamberlain
I noted that your seed mix does not have any grasses. Is there a reason for that? Grasses are excellent in slowing surface runoff from the disturbed sites. Something like Thickspike or Streambank wheatgrass may work well. If not, I'm sure GBRC could make a suggestion or two.
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Douglass Bayles
The burned area was just seeded through ESR efforts that included a diverse grass mix. So I only included a mix that would be applied with construction of the structures to further promote wildlife and pollinators.
Comment 02/04/2021 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Chamberlain
Because of the type of disturbance done during the installation of the structures it is very likely the seed flown on as part of the ESR will be either removed, buried too deep, and or damaged. Just thought it would work well for those site. Just a suggestion.
Completion
Start Date:
End Date:
FY Implemented:
Final Methods:
Project Narrative:
Future Management:
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
2324 Water development point feature Construction Water Control Structure
10409 Aquatic/Riparian Treatment Area Stream Corridor/Channel Improvements Check dam(s) (low stage)
Project Map
Project Map