Lost Creek Collaborative
Project ID: 5921
Status: Current
Fiscal Year: 2023
Submitted By: 597
Project Manager: Kelly Cornwall
PM Agency: U.S. Forest Service
PM Office: Richfield Ranger District
Lead: U.S. Forest Service
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
The purpose of this phase of the project is to take a collaborative approach to improve wildlife habitat; including big game transition and winter range by seeding and mechanically thinning pinion/juniper from ~10,507 acres of mountain brush and sagebrush/grass/forb areas.
Location:
The Lost Creek Project is located in a series of units ~4 miles east of Sigurd and Glenwood located adjacent to Little Lost Creek and Lost Creek drainages. The project area is comprised of USFS, BLM, SITLA, and Private Land (also part of the Boobe Hole CWMU) located in Sevier County.
Project Need
Need For Project:
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY: This proposal will consist of treating ~10,507 acres. The plan is to treat an estimated ~5,000 - 8,000+ additional acres during future phases of the project. Overall, the total estimated cost/acre is ~$232/acre for this phase of implementation. NEED FOR PROJECT: Continuing project treatments at an increased pace and scale of restoration in the Lost Creek area is needed to not only address the significant sagebrush/grass/forb decline in the area, but also to reduce the risk of fire to the numerous values in the area. The pinion/juniper (PJ) expansion and fading understory in this area is having negative impacts to Lost Creek water quality, Southern leatherside chub, along with numerous wildlife species (primarily Mule deer, which is a Fishlake National Forest Management Indicator Species) which are dependent upon this area and these ecosystems. Approximately 4,500 acres of the PJ are in Phase II transitioning to Phase III. On the ground surveys and site visits in these areas have allowed staffs from the Richfield Ranger District to see the lack of understory plants. Approximately 6,000 acres of the PJ are in Phase I transitioning to Phase II. Forage productivity has diminished greatly over the past century and the PJ expansion continues on a yearly basis into the more productive sage/grass/forb and mountain brush communities. This PJ expansion largely results from reduced occurrences of natural disturbance. As PJ has become dominant on the landscape and as the loss of understory vegetation increases, there will be continued increases in sediment transfer and TDS into Lost Creek and big game and small game animals will continue to experience a loss of foraging habitat. This area has a small Mule deer population which was verified by UDWR 2021 mule deer vehicle route inventory. Mule deer in the area are at historical low numbers. This expansion of more PJ and associated decreasing sage/grass/forb and mountain brush habitat has contributed to and will continue the overall decrease in Mule deer populations and other wildlife species in these areas such as the Greater sage grouse. This expansion factor also contributes to the issue of big game moving closer to higher elevation aspen and local agricultural crops in the valleys to find sustainable forage. Elk depredation issues have been a source of controversy with private landowners for several years. The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Range Trend Studies #25A-4 and #25R-9 are active study sites and are found in the Lost Creek and Durfee Homestead areas. 2018 Range Trend data show that these two trend sights are in "poor-fair" and "poor" condition. Treatments in the immediate and surrounding area will have the opportunity to boost these trend conditions in a positive direction. For this reason, it is imperative that we affect as much transition and winter habitat by treating and seeding (if needed) to produce diversity across a landscape that is losing value for big game as well as a variety of small game and avian populations. Elk, mule deer, are wildlife species that have all been and continue to be studied on the Plateau/Fishlake/Thousand Lakes Elk Unit. The Lost Creek Collaborative project is part of this elk unit and is an important intermediate and winter range area for elk and deer. According to visual observations and telemetry data there is significant interchange of elk and deer between the Monroe Elk and Deer Units and the Plateau/Fishlake/Thousand Lakes Elk and Deer units. These mid 90's telemetry data (See Map in Images/Documents section) have provided much needed information on specific population dynamics that include: home range, seasonal range, migration routes, fawning and calving areas, mortality, body condition, pregnancy rates, birthing success, and other factors. During the years of 1991-1996 the US Forest Service (USFS) and Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) cooperated on an intensive elk telemetry study on the Fishlake Unit. A few hundred elk were collared along with several elk caves. After approximately four to five years of data recording elk use patterns were very well defined. Even today these use patterns by elk on the Plateau/Fishlake/Thousand Lakes elk unit are still very much the same. As large acres continue to be treated with current management practices "elk use" patterns will start to change to some degree. Elk being gregarious by nature and were found to utilize (for cover or forage) a large percentage of available acres on the unit and surrounding units. Collared deer and collared cougar have been documented traveling back and forth to the Monroe Mountain Unit. It is anticipated with added acres of treatment wildlife use patterns across units will become more common. The overall end state of this project is to: 1. Improve vegetative resilience by increasing abundance and diversity of native shrubs and perennial herbs (grasses, forbs and other herbaceous vegetation). 2. Reduce risk and associated negative impacts from uncharacteristic wildfire to the public, firefighters, structures, private property, and other high values at risk. 3. Improve wildlife habitat summer, transition and winter range (i.e., Mule deer). (See attached table in documents showing species listed and benefits associated with this project proposal). 4. Improve and expand wildlife habitat for Greater sage grouse. A reduction of PJ encroachment into sagebrush communities in the Lost Creek area will also help enlarge habitat use opportunities for Greater sage grouse populations established in the area (approximately 2/3's portion of the project is within a PHMA). 5. Reduce sediment transfer and TDS into Lost Creek (TMDL for TDS) to improve water quality and improve and protect Southern leatherside chub habitat (Intermountain Region Sensitive Species). To accomplish this end state, the Richfield Ranger District of the Fishlake National Forest (USFS), Utah Forestry Fire and State Lands (UFFSLs) Color Country BLM, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) have determined there is a need to treat ~10,120 acres of USFS, BLM SITLA and Private lands. Portions of the private land planned to be treated are part of the Boobe Hole CWMU.
Objectives:
PROJECT GOALS: 1) With the numerous acres that have been treated adjacent to this project on both USFS and BLM Lands, the overall goal of this project is to continue to implement a collaborative landscape level ecosystem restoration project with an increased pace and scale of implementation across boundaries. 2) Promote treatment efforts onto private and state lands with a collaborative effort between the USFS, BLM, SITLA, UDWR, UFFSLs, USFWS and Private Landowners. 3) Minimize project costs by promoting cost effective treatments along with increased scale and size of treatments that will reduce overall cost per acre. 4) Manage forest cover types to provide variety in stand sizes shape, crown closure, edge contrast, age structure and interspersion. 5) Implement a landscape level ecosystem restoration project that will reduce risk of catastrophic fire. PROJECT OBJECTIVES: 1) Improve and/or maintain the quality of habitat on big game winter and transition habitat by thinning or removing PJ with prior seeding. Design forage to cover ratios to benefit a variety of wildlife species. 2) Improve and expand habitat for sensitive, threatened and endangered species such as Sage Grouse by increasing acres of grass and forb communities. 3) Improve or maintain quality of habitat for wild turkeys by increasing acres of grass and forb communities. 4) Reduce hazardous fuels while maintaining and improving fire resilient landscapes by improving the fire regime condition class to FRCC 1 and FRCC 2. 5) Increase overall forage production, habitat quality, and species diversity by treating in a mosaic pattern of 60% treated and 40% untreated that will create biodiversity across the landscape. 6) Minimize project costs by promoting cost effective treatments along with increased scale and size of treatments that will reduce overall cost per acre. 7) Enhance habitat on USFS, BLM, SITLA and private lands to promote increased utilization of big game animals and lessen the impact on private agricultural lands. 8) Enhance habitat for southern leatherside chub in riparian areas.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
The greatest risk to this project's success is the possibility of cheat grass invasive species post treatment. This risk is somewhat elevational dependent on this project. The lowest elevations near valley floor pose the greatest risk. As treatments occur further up slope and/ or on northern slopes, the risk decreases. Seeding will occur on the project to promote grasses and forbs in the effort to outcompete the cheat grass. Ungulate browse pressure also poses a risk/threat on project success. Numerous projects have been implemented and more are planned to be implemented in the near future in this area. The combination of all these projects is in effort to increase the pace and scale of implementation to help disperse browse pressure of both wild and domestic ungulates. Ground surveys and site visits have allowed us to see the lack of understory plants in the PJ complex in the Lost Creek area. Forage productivity has diminished greatly over the past century and the PJ encroachment continues on a yearly basis into the more productive sage/grass/forb communities. Some areas within the project have lost a majority of the understory sage/grasses/forbs, but other areas have not completely lost the understory. One of the biggest threats realized in this area is if left untreated these areas with some understory of sagebrush/grasses/forbs left will eventually be gone as well. This will continue to be "poor" habitat and range for ungulate animals. The area serves as transition range and winter range for big game and because it is in poor condition animals fail to remain in this zone for the season of use that should be normal. Just under half (~4,500 acres) of the PJ in the project is in phase II but is about to cross the threshold into phase III dominated PJ and lose the remaining understory. The other half (~5,500 acres) of this project is in phase I with portions about to cross the threshold into phase II. If left untreated these areas with productive sage/grass/forb communities will degrade in productivity and treatment costs in the future will go up dramatically. As PJ has become dominate on the landscape and the loss of understory vegetation increases, big game and small game animals are experiencing a loss of foraging habitat. This entire area is at risk of large catastrophic wildfires that could adversely affect entire watersheds. This project will reduce the ecological risk of: 1) Current sediment transfer and associated increasing TDS and 2) Potential catastrophic impacts of increased sediment transfer and degradation of Southern leatherside chub habitat and population in the event of a wildfire. As Lost Creek and its tributaries are improved and potential catastrophic ecological impacts in the event of a wildfire are reduced, sediment transfer into Lost Creek and subsequent Sevier River will likely be reduced as well. Completed treatments along with planned and future treatments reduce the risk of fire at a landscape level while promoting resilient landscapes. Wildfire suppression costs are extremely high especially when suppressing fires in similar fuel types and loadings as present on this project. When wildfires occur, this could result in increased erosion, greater opportunities for noxious weed establishment, impacts to available short-term forage, stream sedimentation, and possible mud slides/flooding events. Restoring uplands will reduce impacts from future wildfires by reducing risk of future impairment. This project reduces the threat to sensitive riparian ecosystems located in Lost Creek and Little Lost Creek that hold the Southern leatherside chub fish species. Refer to the "Water Quality/Quantity" section for more detail. 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. 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 will increase and maintain the availability of a diverse suite of vegetational communities. A healthy landscape has a diversity of vegetational states within an ecological site. A diverse landscape benefits a larger community of wildlife species and people. A diverse landscape is also more resistance and resilient to disturbance. By allowing this landscape to continue to move further into a dominant PJ woodland it increases the risk of losing the sites ability for resistance to disturbance and its resilience to bounce back and heal after a disturbance.
Relation To Management Plan:
1 This action responds to the goals and objectives outlined in the Fishlake National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1986) (LRMP). The purpose and need for this project are consistent with Fishlake National Forest goals and objectives found in Chapter IV of the Forest Plan. The proposed treatment units are within the following management areas: * 5A- Big Game Winter Range (majority of proposed acres) and * 4B - Habitat for Management Indicator Species. This proposal is consistent with and it responds to Fishlake Forest Plan direction for wildlife management in areas 5A and 4B. * Reduce hazardous fuels: consistent with forest and MA emphasis and direction (Utah Fire Amendment, pg. A-41) 2) Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Elk Management Plan: This project will help introduce species diversity back into the Lost Creek areas, supporting local elk populations and enhancing elk habitat. NF. 3) The Greater Plateau Elk Complex Elk Management Plan (2016) lists range improvements in the habitat objectives section. This project specifically addresses the components listed under range improvements in that it enhances forage production and habitat quality through direct range improvements on winter range within the unit. The Greater Plateau Elk Complex goes on to mention that "focus will be on high use areas especially where we can entice animals away from agricultural areas." 4) Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Mule Deer Management Plan: This project will help introduce species diversity back into the Lost Creek area. A mosaic design is part of the implementation strategy to create a pattern of treated and un-treated acres that will create an increase of biodiversity. Mule deer population numbers are low in the Lost Creek areas. Habitat improvement from this project will help provide quality habitat to improve the viability of local Mule deer populations. 5) Utah Wild Turkey Management Plan: Newly treated areas through fire or mechanical means will attract use by wild turkey. Insects and new growth will be readily available to support turkey populations. This project will provide more foraging opportunities for wild turkey as grasses and forbs provide insects and seed. 6) UDWR Wildlife Action Plan: This project is geared toward meeting the goals found within this plan for a variety of wildlife species from large too small. a. Threat - Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity: i. Objective #1 for 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 cheat grass, excessive conifer encroachment, or unnaturally large stands of mature Gamble oak. 7) National Cohesive Strategy: This project is in line with the strategy. By means of prescribed fire and mechanical thinning at a landscape scale, the resulting mosaic of early and late successional forests will work toward the goal of restoring and maintaining resilient landscapes. 8) State of Utah Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy: The Lost Creek Collaborative Project aligns with the mission of the State of Utah's Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy. The project reduces the risk of a catastrophic wildfire occurrence negatively affecting property, air quality and water systems. 9) Grazing Allotment Plans: The amount of forage available to livestock within the affected allotments in the Lost Creek area is expected to increase significantly as a result of this project. With the removal of pinion/juniper, the amount of grasses and forbs in the sagebrush is also expected to increase significantly. With increased forage, ungulate distribution is expected to improve. 10) Bald Eagle Management Plan and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) is a United States federal statute that protects two species of eagle. Bald eagles migrate to the area in late October and remain through late March. Treatments will attract wildlife species that are common prey to eagles and other raptors. Wintering Bald Eagles utilize the project area and treatments would improve life cycle opportunities for them. 11) Sevier County Resource Management Plan; This project is congruent with the policies and desired management practices found in Sevier County's Resource Management Plan. Policies (all from pages 6-7) a. Support the removal of conifers and manage land to promote the establishment of aspen cover and attendant grass, brush, and forbs. 12) Central Utah Fire Management Plan (FMP): a. Greater use of vegetation management to meet resource management objectives b. Hazardous fuels treatments will be used to restore ecosystems; protect human, natural and cultural resources; and reduce the threat of wildfire to communities. Sagebrush steppe communities will be a high priority for ESR and fuel reduction to avoid catastrophic fires in these areas. Hand treatments of pinyon and juniper in riparian areas in Lost and Little Lost Creeks supports objectives to enhance habitat for southern leatherside chub as indicated in the Southern Leatherside Conservation Agreement and Strategy (included as attachment). Treatments fulfill the strategy's objective B. to enhance and /or restore habitat conditions in designated areas throughout the historical range of southern leatherside by 2. restoring habitat where possible, creating habitat complexity... for southern leatherside and by 3. implementing habitat enhancements that may include... enhancement of native vegetation.
Fire / Fuels:
Enhancing the habitat in these areas will result in multiple benefits, which include but are not limited to, improving habitat for wildlife dependent upon these various ecosystems, improving native species diversity, reducing hazardous fuel accumulations and breaking up the continuous fuel bed of PJ that currently exist in the Lost Creek area. This treatment will promote a fire resilient environment that reduces the risk for large scale, intense wildland fires, with less risk to public and firefighter safety. Fire risk would be reduced to multiple watersheds and communities located in the Lost Creek and also Gooseberry Creek areas with. The communities of existing wildfire risk index in the project area ranges from moderate-high to very-very low. It compliments completed BLM and USFS treatments located in the area. All these projects combined reduce the risk of fire at a landscape level to the communities and watersheds across the Lost Creek and Gooseberry Creek areas while promoting resilient landscapes. The dominant southwest wind flow in conjunction with associated fire behavior expected from the PJ and mountain shrub fuel types pose significant wildland fire risk to these areas and values. The large, treated areas will create buffers in and around values at risk and will significantly reduce the risk of fire to these values. About half this project is within fire regime III -- 35-100+ year frequency and mixed severity (less than 75% of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced); The Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) is estimated to be both moderate (FRCC 2) and high (FRCC 3) departure from the central tendency of the natural (historical) regime. The central tendency is a composite estimate of vegetation characteristics (species composition, structural stages, stand age, canopy closure, and mosaic pattern); fuel composition; fire frequency, severity, and pattern; and other associated natural disturbances. The other half of this project would be in FRCC 3. This project will improve the fire regime condition class to FRCC 1 and FRCC 2. The District has seen success (Dixie Harrow transects) in treatment areas, both fire and mechanical, on the Forest and BLM that have initially shown cheat-grass response, but after the re-seeding has time to establish, cheat-grass has decreased dramatically thus reducing this potential increased risk of fire.
Water Quality/Quantity:
This project is located in the Lost Creek watershed including Lost Creek and Little Lost Creek which are perennial streams/riparian systems. Lost Creek and its tributaries are listed as impaired with a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Total Dissolved Solids (TDS). This project as it's proposed will improve ground cover and thereby reduce sediment transfer into the lower watershed system. The project proposed will reduce sediment transfer. Restoring uplands will reduce the impacts of future wildfires and reduce the risk of future impairment. Treatments will considerably lessen the risk of catastrophic large scale high severity fires that could result in long-term watershed degradation. By maintaining watershed function, long-term water quality will be maintained or enhanced. By removing PJ it is anticipated that water quantity will be enhanced (seeps, springs, bogs--improved) in the short and long term. Some research indicates that PJ removal in mountain sagebrush can increase soil water availability (Roundy et al. 2014). PJ removal activities should have a net positive effect on increasing water yield/availability as fewer conifer trees use water. Risk of fire will be reduced within multiple watersheds. Since the area suffers from a diminished understory of grass and forbs, the planned aerial seeding will be an important factor to establish future soil stability and reduce the risk of erosion. By maintaining watershed function, long-term water quality will be maintained or enhanced. Both the potential increase in herbaceous vegetation and the masticated or chained tree material should help stabilize the soils by reducing erosion and protect the water quality throughout the watershed. By removing PJ this should allow for more precipitation to contact the soil and increase biomass on the ground. In areas where hand thinning will be used there should be adequate vegetation to avoid soil erosion but this should increase the amount of water into the system instead of evaporating before it reaches the ground. 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. Treatments on this project will be occurring in sagebrush and mountain mixed brush ecological communities. Restoring uplands within all of these ecological communities will reduce impacts from future wildfires along with reducing risks of future impairment to the watersheds. Sevier County: In Sevier County's Water Quality and Hydrology section under Desired Management Practices the statement below supports these types of projects. 3. Where water resources on public lands have diminished because grasses have succeeded to pinyon-juniper and other woody vegetation, a vigorous program of mechanical treatments should be applied to promptly remove this woody vegetation and biomass, stimulate the return of the grasses to historic levels, and thereby provide a watershed that maximizes water yield and water quality for livestock, wildlife, and human uses. (pg. 24).
Compliance:
USFS: The Fishlake National Forest Pinyon and Juniper Project Decision Notice was signed on December 5th, 2019 which covers the USFS portion of this project. The Fishlake National Forest has begun consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office. Archaeological surveys will occur prior to implementation. BLM: Cedar Mountain Fuels Reduction and Habitat Improvement EA completed and signed January, 2018. Arc clearance will been completed on all BLM managed lands inside the proposed project boundary prior to implementation. The remaining FS managed areas have cultural surveys under contract to be completed by June 2022. All other necessary clearances will be completed prior to the 2023 fiscal year. Culture Resource Inventory surveys will be completed by June of 2022 on the Private Bullhog portion of the Boobee Hole. This will be conducted through State of Utah Purchasing and UDWR. USFS lands would be rested from any livestock use for a period of two growing seasons to help establish seeded-treated areas.
Methods:
In this phase of the project, planned treatment will include ~10,200 total acres ( USFS ~7,058ac, BLM ~ 2,384ac, Private ~779ac, SITLA ~310ac) Treatment methods will include the following: USFS 1) aerial seeding followed by a chaining contract for approx. 3,481 acres. (Fall 2022/Spring 2023). USFS 2) USFS IDIQ hand thinning contract for approx. 3,093 acres (Currently under contract to be completed Spring 2022). USFS 3) Lop and scatter contract for approx. 489 acres. BLM 1) aerial seeding followed by a mastication contract for approx. 870 acres (Fall 2022). BLM 2) Lop and scatter contract for approx. 1,515 acres (Fall 2022). UFFSLs 1) aerial seeding followed by a mastication contract for approx. 131 acres of private (Fall 2022). UFFSLs 2) Lop and scatter contract for approx. 26 acres (Fall 2022). SITLA 1) aerial seeding followed by a mastication contract for approx. 225 acres (Fall 2022). 2) Lop and scatter contract for approx. 85 acres (Fall 2022). UDWR/USFWS 1) aerial seeding followed by Bullhog Mastication of approximately 622 acres on the Boobe Hole CWMU. The USFS has cultural surveys for the USFS portion under contract will be completed June 2022. 1,226 acres are remaining that need archaeology surveys on BLM State and Private lands. Funding is being requested to complete these surveys. Slopes over 40% and/or areas classified as phase I PJ expansion will be hand thinned utilizing chainsaws, and/or lopped/scattered. Slopes under 40% or classified phase II or III PJ expansion will be thinned utilizing mastication and chaining methods by machine. A mosaic treatment pattern combined with travel corridors will be designed into the project to allow some hiding, thermal and migration cover for big game. This diversity will help create a mix of life cycle benefits for a variety of wildlife and insect species. Curl-leaf mahogany and other key brush species will be designed away from fire opportunities to maintain browse integrity. The USFS, UDWR, UFFSLs and BLM will seed with a mix of brush, grass and forbs.
Monitoring:
USFS: Throughout implementation of this project elk, deer, and other Management Indicator Species along with range conditions will continue to be monitored annually, following USFS Wildlife and Range Protocols (vegetation monitoring cages and vegetation transects). Areas as needed would be temporarily rested from domestic ungulate use, for 2-3 growing seasons, to allow vegetation time to establish. Post season deer counts in 2021 show historical low numbers of deer in the area. We will continue to conduct this route as well as the in conjunction with UDWR route to monitor deer and elk use within the treatment areas. If noxious and/or invasive weeds are detected, the District will take the appropriate actions to control spread and eliminate the noxious and/or invasive weeds from the treatment areas. The District has seen success (Dixie Harrow transects) in treatment areas, both fire and mechanical, on the Forest and BLM that have initially shown cheat-grass response, but after the re-seeding has time to establish, cheat-grass has decreased dramatically. Since the area suffers from a diminished understory of grass and forbs seeding will be an important factor to establish future soil stability and forage opportunities. Seed and mechanical treatment on Mormon Peak (Monroe Unit across to the West) proved to be very successful and preventative against domination of cheat grass. See data set in documents. Fuels treatment monitoring will take place involving multiple repeatable photo points. Plots will be visited post 1 year, 3 year, and 5 year, monitoring vegetation response and ground cover. This will be accomplished by the Forest Service SCA Monitoring Crew. Wildlife and aquatics monitoring data collected from this phase of treatment will be included in the documents section of the WRI database. BLM: Vegetation and ground cover data will be collected using the line-point intercept method and nested frequency. Photos will be taken and a qualitative site condition assessment completed. This area is also a designated mule deer route for BLM wildlife biologist and is monitored yearly. This year, each BLM Field office will have entire team devoted to the Assessment, Inventory and Monitoring program (AIM), and although the sample points are random, it is likely that some of these points will fall within the project area. This monitoring program uses standard core indicators and methods to provide a statistically valid sampling design across the landscape. Private Lands: When the original hand thinning project was done pre and post-treatment range assessment and woodland surveys were conducted by NRCS staff. Photo point will be established in the 66 acres of new treatment on private lands. USFWS As part of the USFWS landowner agreement USFWS biologist will visit the site at minimum once per year to assess needs, success, failures, and need for any follow-up treatments/maintenance for the duration of the 10 year Landowner Agreement. UDWR Annual aerial and ground mule deer and Elk counts and classifications.
Partners:
One of the main goals for this project is to promote treatment efforts at a landscape level with a collaborative effort between the USFS, BLM, SITLA, USFWS, UFFSL's, UDWR and private landowners. Coordination meetings are taking place to collaboratively determine future treatments that will mutually benefit all agencies and private landowners along with promote landscape-level restoration. This multi-agency collaborative project is located in Sevier County and includes USFS, BLM, SITLA, and private lands part that are also part of the Boobe Hole CWMU. Some USFS/BLM/Private across boundary work has already been completed adjacent to this project. These treatments will compliment previously accomplished treatments and wildlife benefits from the numerous treatments that the USFS and BLM have already completed in the Lost Creek area. The USFS, BLM, SITLA, USFWS, UDWR, and UFFSLs, are not only collaborating on this project but are also consulting about future treatments in the area. Multiple meetings with private landowners have been held and future meetings with them are planned to discuss further details of this project. During project planning the local UDWR biologists offered suggestions that were incorporated and offered support for the project. The Sevier County Commission are supportive of this project. Local ranchers are also supportive of this project. During project scoping, no opposition from the public was shared. The Grand Canyon Trust NGO is also in support of this project and voiced their support. Those in attendance during planning and the decision signing of the "Fishlake National Forest Pinyon and Juniper Project" expressed their support for active management.
Future Management:
FUTURE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT: By continually promoting a collaborative effort between USFS, BLM, SITLA, UDWR, UFFSLs, USFWS, and Private Landowners, it is anticipated that a long term level of success will be obtained on all the current and future treatments. Future maintenance of projects to protect investments made by USFS, UWRI, BLM, SITLA, and Private landowner have been addressed and allowed through the project planning document (NEPA). Adaptive management has been allowed for in the NEPA documents. Many tools have been analyzed in the NEPA planning process to allow other methods in the future. USFS: Treatment areas will be monitored post-implementation. If noxious and/or invasive weeds are detected, the District will take the appropriate actions to control spread and eliminate the noxious and/or invasive weeds from the treatment areas. Implementation of this project will reduce the risk of catastrophic high severity wildland fire; thus reducing the risk to the public and firefighters. Health and public safety is improved. With this reduced risk, future management of naturally caused fires on USFS lands may be possible to allow fire to play greatest feasible natural role in the environment, thus potentially further reducing risk to public and firefighters. As habitat is improved for ungulates (deer, elk, cattle, sheep) and additional forage becomes available, the USFS expects the flexibility and management of ungulates will improve; hopefully with less controversy. Maintaining healthy populations of wildlife while also responding to the needs of livestock permittees is expected to become easier. As future PJ expansion occurs, maintenance/re-treatment of this project via hand thinning of new PJ growth/whips is expected to be implemented to maintain the integrity of this project and the anticipated continued PJ expansion. Increased pace and scale of restoration type projects in this area is currently underway. Multiple projects have been, and are currently being implemented and more are being planned in this area. With numerous projects and thousands of acres treated in the surrounding area, this project compliments this completed restoration work at a large landscape scale and will hopefully promote future restoration projects to landowners on more of the surrounding private property. Also this project is in a continued effort to disperse browse pressure of both wild and domestic ungulates and improve watershed health. FUTURE RANGE MANAGMENT: USFS: Forest lands would be rested from any livestock use for a period of two growing seasons to help establish seeded treated and treated areas. The District will ensure a temporary resting of treatment areas (2 to 3 years) which will be incorporated into Annual Operating Instructions. These actions will help ensure that permittees are in the communication loop and will give them enough time to plan for the resources they need to continue their operations. Impacts to permittees will be minimized by the use of herding and temporary electric fences so that treatment areas can be temporarily rested while non-treatment areas can continue to be grazed. BLM: This project area is within two grazing allotment. All areas seeded will be rested for a minimum of two complete growing seasons or until the seedlings become established and set seed. Once seeding establishment has been confirmed, BLM may authorize grazing according the Utah's Fundamentals of Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Management (2007). Vegetation will continue to be monitored for utilization, cover and trend. Following the rest period, the current management plan will govern. If needed, grazing adjustments would be made in Grazing Allotment Plans and through the grazing permit renewal process. USFWS/Private: The private landowners will enter into a contract with USFWS if funded. 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. Permitee/Landowner: The landowner/permitee signed agreement that Lost Creek project will be rested for a minimum of two complete growing seasons if deemed necessary. USFWS and UDWR along with the Boobe Hole CWMU Private Landowner's have agreements signed and in place moving forward that grazing will be deferred for up to two growing seasons.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
PUBLIC and ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY: The project areas are very popular for camping, hiking, sight-seeing, wildlife viewing, fishing, hunting, snowmobiling, and ATV trail riding. Miles of hiking and prominent ATV trails exists. Treatments will promote a renewed resilient beautiful sustainable forest that will be enjoyed by future generations. Multiple contracts are planned during this phase of treatment along with future planned phases. This project benefits the local communities by providing private companies work and associated economic benefits. Efforts are being made to promote commercial sale of Juniper fence posts from project areas. This project promotes sustaining hunting of big game such as elk and deer along with small game such as wild turkey. Treatments like this have potential to increase wildlife numbers and potential hunting opportunities to future generations. A main goal of these treatments is to enhance habitat at a landscape scale rather than at a jurisdictional level to promote increased utilization of big game animals and lessen the impact on private agricultural lands. Other sustainable uses towards this project will be the use of additional firewood that will be available, cutting of cedar post, access to additional hunting opportunities for big game such as mule deer and elk. Additional opportunities will be opened up for turkey hunting and upland game hunting as well. With the Sevier County ATV Jamboree each year, riders from across the country enjoy riding trails in this area and enjoy camping and recreating. FORAGE PRODUCTION or IMPROVED DISTRIBUTION: Forage productivity has diminished greatly over the past century and the PJ expansion continues on a yearly basis into the more productive sage/grass/forb communities. As PJ is thinned, understory vegetation increases, wild and domestic ungulates will experience an increase in foraging habitat. Through the mechanical thinning, PJ expansion is addressed, and sagebrush, grasses, and forbs are promoted. This in return moves the sage/grass/forb ecosystems in the Lost Creek area on a trajectory toward improved forage conditions thus improving ecosystems for both wildlife and livestock. Portions of the project are currently not being grazed due to the lack of understory and PJ expansion. This project has the potential to improve distribution of domestic livestock into new areas. The amount of forage available to livestock and wildlife is expected to increase significantly as a result of this project. With the removal of PJ, the amount of usable grasses and forbs in the and sagebrush is expected to increase significantly. With increased forage, ungulate distribution is expected to improve. Many areas that are currently unproductive due to overgrowth will soon become desirable for future uses by ungulates.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$1,881,559.72 $170,000.00 $2,051,559.72 $211,165.00 $2,262,724.72
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Contractual Services Mastication Contract for approx. 1,383 acres Lost Creek 835@ $508 acre $424,180 BLM 622 acres ($315,976.). Private 36 acres ($18,288). SITLA 177 acres ($89,916). Boobe Hole Mastication: 548 Acres ($198,968) $623,148.00 $150,000.00 $0.00 2023
Contractual Services USFS Chaining Contract for approx. 1,375 acres @ ~$185/acre $254,375.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Contractual Services Lop and Scatter Hand Thinning Contract for ~2,324 acres USFS 102 acres ($15958.92). USFS Riparian 387 acres ($40,213.17) BLM 1,725 acre ($231,443.25). Private 25 acres ($1627.08). SITLA 85 acres ($5319.30). $294,561.72 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Archaeological Clearance Cultural clearance of 1,226 acres @ $34/acre. BLM 870 acres ($29,580). Private 131 acres ($4,454). SITLA 225 acres ($7,650). Private Boobe Hole Project (Need $17,000) $58,684.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Seed (GBRC) Seed for aerial application. USFS 3,481 acres @ $92.47/acre ($321,899) BLM 629 acres @ $117.66/acre ($101,894) SITLA 181 acres @ $117.66/acre ($26,474) Private 36 acres @ $117.66/acre ($15,414) Boobe Hole Private 622 acres @ $103.12/acre ($64,162) $529,843.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Contractual Services Aerial Seeding Contract Services 5,329 acres @ $12.00/Acre. USFS 3,481 acres ($41,772). BLM 870 acres ($10,440). SITLA 225 acres ($2,700). Private 753 acres ($9,036). $63,948.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Other USFS SCA Fuels Monitoring Crew $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 2023
Personal Services (permanent employee) USFS Contract Administration, site prep, boundary marking, etc... $0.00 $0.00 $25,000.00 2023
Contractual Services USFS IDIQ Hand Thinning Contract for 2,719 acres at $34/acre. $0.00 $0.00 $92,640.00 2023
Personal Services (permanent employee) UDWR In-kind cost associated with the project. $0.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 2023
Materials and Supplies Materials and supplies to be used for flagging polygons, horse hire days and other restoration equipment. $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Archaeological Clearance USFS Cultural Surveys for 3,481 acres @ $25.00/acre. This area is the USFS chaining treatments. Under Contract to be completed early summer 2022 (In kind contributions). $0.00 $0.00 $87,025.00 2023
Personal Services (permanent employee) BLM Project layout, contract preparation, and contract administration for mechanical mulching, aerial seeding, Lop and scatter, and Cadastral survey. $0.00 $20,000.00 $0.00 2023
Personal Services (seasonal employee) USFS wildlife/botany crew and supplies to complete required surveys and seasonal crew and supplies to monitor/treat weeds. ($20,000 Weeds, $10,000 Wildlife, $10,000 Botany) $40,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Materials and Supplies Funding for Boss Tank Guzzler and Apron Material this was funded from NWTF $16,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$2,272,446.87 $170,000.00 $2,442,446.87 $219,070.32 $2,661,517.19
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
United States Forest Service (USFS) USFS In-Kind Contribution towards the project $0.00 $0.00 $207,665.00 2023
BLM Fuels (Color Country) A088 Mod 8 $565,000.00 $20,000.00 $0.00 2023
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Private lands only $0.00 $50,000.00 $0.00 2023
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Private lands only $0.00 $100,000.00 $7,000.00 2023
DWR-WRI Project Admin In-Kind $0.00 $0.00 $4,405.32 2023
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) A142 $50,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
DNR Watershed U004 $56,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2024
Habitat Council Account QHCR $50,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
DNR Watershed U004 $534,990.53 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Federal Aid (PR) P651 $500,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
BLM (Sage Grouse) A096 -RF $184,026.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Utah Wild Sheep Foundation (WSF) S022 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Mule Deer Foundation (MDF) S023 $35,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) S024 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Safari Club International (SCI) S026 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) S027 $25,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Utah Archery Association (UAA) S052 $2,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
RMEF banquet funds S055 $20,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) S024 Funding from NWTF towards a guzzler and apron materials associated with the Lost Creek Project. $16,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
BLM Fuels A099 Mod 10 EBLM1788 - $35k - CRI $35,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
DNR Watershed U004 Fast Track amount for FY22 $70,968.47 $0.00 $0.00 2022
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) A153 $100,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
DNR Watershed U004 $7,461.87 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Bald Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Bobcat
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Cougar
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Domestic Livestock
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Persistent Declines in Prey Species NA
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Greater Sage-grouse N3 R1
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland High
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mountain Cottontail R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Ruffed Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Ruffed Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) High
Southern Leatherside Chub N2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Southern Leatherside Chub N2
Threat Impact
Sediment Transport Imbalance Low
Dusky Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Dusky Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Habitats
Habitat
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Channel Downcutting (indirect, unintentional) High
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Channelization / Bank Alteration (direct, intentional) High
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Fire and Fire Suppression Medium
Gambel Oak
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Gambel Oak
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Very High
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (historic) Low
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Low
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
Mountain Shrub
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Low
Riverine
Threat Impact
Sediment Transport Imbalance Medium
Riverine
Threat Impact
Storms and Flooding Low
Riverine
Threat Impact
Fire and Fire Suppression Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/27/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Kelly, Ferruginous hawks benefit from improved foraging areas, but specifically if you leave good perch trees. A straight line division between pj and sage/grassland is not as effective for them. Additionally, leaving trees suitable of supporting nesting scattered across the landscape is of more value to them. I was out in this area with Kendall last spring looking for pinyon jays. We did not find any on the private parcel we visited, but it is still worth while making certain nesting colonies are not destroyed. Keith
Comment 02/07/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Kreig Rasmussen
In several of our last PJ projects I have insisted that the mastication pattern have a mosaic type pattern built into the treatment. That mosaic pattern may be islands, leave trees of 4-5 per acre, leave trees of different age classes, etc. Contractors have done an okay job at doing this type of leave pattern, but not always. A Savannah type pattern is kind of what I am after in certain treatment areas. As we have visited these areas that have been treated this way I am seeing groups of Pinion-Jays in and around those treatment areas. It appears to me that that type of treatment seems to be conducive to several bird species. We will continue to masticate according to desired condition combined with wildlife habitat needs.
Comment 02/03/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Hey Kelly, As always it looks like you have put together a great partnership project. A good chunk of this overlaps with current project 5405. Did you guys just not get enough funding to do those overlapping units in 5405? Also, I haven't ever been on the ground in Lost Creek, but the aerial makes it look like there is conifer encroachment into the riparian, any reason this is not being treated? Any benefit to dropping some trees in the stream? SLSC have a Conservation Agreement and Strategy that I am sure you are addressing objectives of. Finally, $1.8 million? Why you gotta be a hater? ;-)
Comment 02/08/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Kelly Cornwall
Hey Michael, Thanks for the comments. I can address part of your question. Project 5405 is the WRI project that we are completing the cultural surveys from for the forest portions. The cultural surveys are under contract for areas on the forest. This has helped us considerably to expedite project implementation by getting survey funds and cultural surveys completed the year or two prior to asking for implementation funding. I will get Jens Swenson to address the riparian portion of your question. As far as the $1.8m...the partnership group of agencies we have formed up here in central Utah consisting of USFS, BLM, UDWR, SITLA, and USFWS believe that one larger landscape level project working together across agency boundaries is better than 3-4 smaller proposals agency by agency. Larger contracts seem to bring price/acre down as well overall and have been more cost effective.
Comment 02/11/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Jens Swensen
Hi Mike, there is indeed conifer encroachment in the riparian areas of both Little Lost and Lost Creeks. I sent Kelly C. some polygons that include hand treatments within the riparian areas of both streams. He is going to add these to the project as treatment areas. The hand thinning treatments in riparian will include PJ that will be dropped into the stream to improve fish habitat, especially for southern leatherside chub. The treatment areas will be visited by me before a contract gets put together to identified leave trees (or areas of leave trees) and drop trees. We want to give riparian woody species (willow, cottonwood, birch, alder, aspen, etc.) the best chance to regenrate post-treatment. Hopefully slash from lopped and scatterd PJ will protect streambanks from ungulate browse and those woodies will regenerate. Thanks for mentioning the CAS for S. Leathersides. I'll take a look and incorporate parts of the plan that this project aligns with as far as objectives for the species go.
Comment 02/11/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Kelly Cornwall
Hey Michael so Jens and I have been chatting back and forth and we have added 387 acres of hand thinning to the project all located in riparian. Thanks for the insight and your comments.
Comment 02/06/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
1. What are the ESDs for this area? Please provide the ESDs and the soil survey (if one has been completed) in the documents section. What native plant species should be present based on the ESDs, and the grass/forb/shrub ratio/component? The objectives/desired outcomes should be tied to the ESDs. 2. According to the Project Goals: "With the numerous acres that have been treated adjacent to this project on both USFS and BLM Lands, the overall goal of this project is to continue to implement a collaborative landscape level ecosystem restoration project with an increased pace and scale of implementation across boundaries." What are the cumulative impacts of so many past, present and proposed veg management projects, particularly chaining and other ground disturbing activities, as well as seedings w/a significant amount of non-native species? 3. As to non-native seeds, your mix includes orchardgrass. according to NRCS, "this plant may become weedy or invasive in some regions or habitats and may displace desirable vegetation. Also, "Seeds can collect on animal coats and be transported long distances. Livestock watering and bedding areas are typical sites where orchardgrass may colonize. It may spread into adjoining degraded plant communities via seed under ideal conditions." The seed mix should be focused on native grasses and forms as identified in the ESDs, and not include introduced species that do not comport with the ESDs, such as crested wheatgrass and orchardgrass, sanfoin, burnet, forage kochia, alfalfa.... 4. Have the grazing allotments been analyzed to determine compliance with the Utah Standards for Rangeland Health? If so, what did those analyses show? How has livestock grazing contributed to the current degraded conditions of this landscape? In the project details you say: "Once seeding establishment has been confirmed, BLM may authorize grazing according to the Utah's Fundamentals of Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Grazing Management (2007)... Following the rest period, the current management plan will govern. If needed, grazing adjustments would be made in Grazing Allotment Plans and through the grazing permit renewal process." Does the current grazing management plan comply with the FRH? If not, then the agencies must modify grazing to make significant progress towards meeting rangeland health standards.The agencies should be addressing livestock grazing impacts concurrently with these types of vegetation projects to address grazing as at least one of the causes (if not the main cause) of the degraded ecological conditions necessitating these treatments, particularly in the face of drought and climate change
Comment 02/10/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
Judi thanks for your comments. I will comment on the BLM acres that are in this collaborative project along with the questions that are associated with the BLM acres. (1) The ESD for the project area is primarily located is Semidesert Loam (Wyoming Big Sagebrush). The dominant aspect of this plant community is Wyoming big sagebrush and bluebunch wheatgrass. The composition by air-dry weight is approximately 55 percent perennial grasses, 5 percent forbs, and 40 percent shrubs. Some of the Native plants that should be in this area are: Bluebunch Wheatgrass, Indian Ricegrass, Bottlebrush Squirreltail, Sanberg bluegrass, Needle and Thread, Western Wheatgrass, Nevada Bluegrass, Scarlet Globe Mallow, Pacific aster, Cushion buckwheat and Wyoming big sagebrush. (4) The BLM Allotment is meeting rangeland health standards. There is also trend and utilization monitoring that has and is currently being collected for these allotments. Utilization levels have been and are at appropriate levels. As always with these types of projects, the Permittees will take non-use in seeded area while the seeding is getting established. This project is addressing pinyon and juniper encroachment issues not livestock grazing issues. Thanks again for your comments and looking into this project.
Comment 02/10/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Kendall Bagley
Judi, Here is information pertaining to question #3 associated with this project. This question is regarding concerns of using non-native seed in the seed mix, this mix may be applied, only on private lands associated with the bullhog mastication project. We have opportunities to reduce or augment the seed mix moving forward, this mix is not set in stone and due to the reduction of seed inventory and collection, some seed species may not be available or may need to be reduce. We understand that any seed species, even noxious weed species can be spread to other areas from birds, livestock, wildlife, wind and rain or snow events as well as UTV/ATV, motorized vehicles and even foot traffic. Having the opportunity to reseed phase III pinyon-juniper through a mechanical treatment will help sustain and promote the seeded species of grasses, forbs and shrubs by leaving litter on the ground to promote seed germination and establishment. There is currently little to no herbaceous understory in the areas targeted for bullhog work and thus little to no grazing or wildlife use is taking place. The opportunity to re-seed before a bullhog treatment is found, to be very beneficial to the overall landscape and improvement of rangeland health, reduction of soil movement from rain and snow events, improvement of soil conditions from organic matter/litter and improved vegetation forage for livestock and wildlife in the future.
Comment 02/07/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
One more question: What cultural surveys and tribal consultation are being/have been conducted for this project?
Comment 02/10/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
If funded the required Cultural and tribal consultation will be completed before implementation for all involved agencies/partners. WRI takes pride in being in compliance with state and federal cultural resource laws. The need for cultural surveys is defined by the treatment type and by the applicability of Programmatic Agreements or Protocols between the relevant state or federal agency and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). For treatments identified as an undertaking under Utah Code 9-8-404 or the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and involve ground disturbing activities (e.g. bullhog; chaining), the WRI funds and completes intensive cultural resource inventories and consults with SHPO on findings prior to implementation. Tribal consultation takes place as part of the NHPA compliance process and is completed by the relevant federal agency before implementation occurs. Unless consultation with SHPO and relevant tribes agree to otherwise, projects that involve ground breaking treatments do not begin until the SHPO and tribal consultation processes are complete. Thank you for all your comments and lookin into this project.
Comment 02/15/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Danny Summers
Sheep fescue is really not very palatable (see: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_PLANTMATERIALS/publications/wapmcpg12477.pdf). Idaho fescue could be a more palatable alternative.
Comment 08/31/2023 Type: 2 Commenter: Daniel Eddington
Thank you for submitting your completion report on time. A couple follow items: 1. Please enter any missing expenses, highlighted in rust, on the Finance Page. 2. The Map feature and the reported acres in the Completion Report are slight off on a few of the treatment practices (total acres, hand thinning, riparian, and bullhog acres of 835 (report) vs 827 acres (map feature). On the bullhog, the landownership acres don't quite line up. When you have completed that please go back to the Completion Form and finalize your report again so I know that it has been completed. Thanks.
Comment 09/13/2023 Type: 2 Commenter: Kelly Cornwall
Should be fixed. Sorry about that!
Comment 09/14/2023 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Thanks for making those additions. I have moved this project to completed.
Comment 10/10/2024 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
This project was turned back to current for FY25 due to late billing from the USFS.
Completion
Start Date:
07/01/2022
End Date:
04/01/2024
FY Implemented:
2024
Final Methods:
In total 7,802 acres were treated during this phase of the project on USFS, BLM, SITLA and Private lands. Treatments included: 1) ~2,719 acres USFS IDIQ hand thinning contract. Completed Fall 2022 2) ~1,836 acres UDWR hand thinning contract on BLM (~1,725), Private (~25), and SITLA lands (~85). Completed Fall 2022 3) ~489 acre riparian hand thinning treatments on USFS within little lost creek. Completed Fall 2022 4) ~1,375 acres UDWR chaining contract on USFS only. Chaining treatments utilized a 2-way Ely chain between two dozers. (area was seeded via fixed wing aerial contract through the UDWR prior to implementation) Completed Winter 2023. 5) ~827 acre Bull hog Mastication contract on BLM (~616), Private (~36), and State (~176) the area was cultural surveyed, and seed was applied via fixed wing aerial contract through the UDWR prior to implementation. Completed Fall 2022 6) ~549 acre Bull hog Mastication and seeding on Private Lands associated with the Boobe Hole CWMU consisted of UDWR/USFWS Partnership Funding. Area was cultural surveyed, and seed was applied via helicopter aerially contract through the UDWR prior to implementation. Completed Fall 2022.
Project Narrative:
During this phase of the project mechanical thinning (chaining, mastication and hand thinning occurred on USFS, BLM, State, and private land in and around the Lost Creek area. Seeding also occurred in the chained and mastication treatment areas prior to treatment. This was in an effort to allow increase under story recovery in areas that show depleted grasses and forbs due to the pinion and juniper encroachment. This treatment also reduced the risk of wildfire to the private property and other values in the area. Heavy live fuel loading in the Pinion and Juniper was present in the area and has been significantly reduced. Some of the hand thin areas were maintaining previously treated chaining's that occurred in the late 70s. The other portions of the hand thinning were focused on phase 1 PJ encroachment in the Lost Creek area. The remaining USFS chaining contract was cancelled due to contactor issues. The unfinished chaining areas were seeded as well. We are planning to include the unfinished seeded areas in Phase 3 Lost Creek Collaboration proposal for FY25. A settlement with the contractor finally came about on April 1, 2024 and the final payment to the contractor was made. Within the Boobe Hole Private Lands portion of this project the ending treatment acres was 548 acres of critical mule deer and elk winter range being treated through the methods of a Bullhog Mastication Rx. In June of 2022 Alpine Archeological Consultants completed the Culture Resource surveys on this project. In October a diverse mix of grass, forb and shrub seed was flown on the treatment site with the use of a helicopter (Hammond Helicopters), a total of 12,608 lbs of seed was applied prior to the Bullhog treatment. The contractor for the Bullhog Treatment was Mountainscape Forestry along with a Contract Sub from Razr Bak Restoration. This project worked out great and the contractors did a awesome job, the hard work and great winter/spring moisture will pay lasting dividends for wildlife and livestock in the future.
Future Management:
Resting from grazing in the chained/masticated and seeded areas is being incorporated into the annual operating plan for associated allotments. Planning future treatments on both private, BLM and USFS land in Phase 2 and 3 of this project. Future planned treatments will include seeding and mastication along with more hand thinning as well in Phase 1 PJ areas. Also have been having conversations with land owners about the possibility of prescribed fire treatments in the higher elevation areas along with the Boobe Hole area. Will be working toward future burn planning with UFFSLs, USFWS, USFS and private land owners during out year phases of the Lost Creek WRI Project. Overall future management in this areas is to increase overall fooprint of treatments at a more landscape level with the use of prescribed fire in conjunction with needed mechanical treatments in the lower elevations around values at risk. The landowner is also committed to resting the seeded area on private for at least 2 growing seasons. Kendall Bagley will ride his horse and chase cows out if needed. The private landowners have a history of working with conservation partners and future projects are being discussed and planned as mentioned above. The private landowners have a 10-year agreement with USFWS Partners Program to leave restored habitat in place. During this time USFWS will periodically check on the project and communicate with the landowner on future needs.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
12899 Terrestrial Treatment Area Vegetation removal / hand crew Lop and scatter
12900 Terrestrial Treatment Area Bullhog Full size
12900 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
12978 Aquatic/Riparian Treatment Area Vegetation Improvements Manual removal / hand crew
12981 Terrestrial Treatment Area Anchor chain Ely (2-way)
12981 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
12985 Terrestrial Treatment Area Vegetation removal / hand crew Lop (no scatter)
12998 Terrestrial Treatment Area Bullhog Full size
12998 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-helicopter)
Project Map
Project Map