Valley Mountains (South Valley)
Project ID: 5952
Status: Completed
Fiscal Year: 2023
Submitted By: 934
Project Manager: Cody Pollock
PM Agency: Bureau of Land Management
PM Office: Richfield
Lead: Bureau of Land Management
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
The purpose of this project is to take a collaborative approach to improve wildlife habitat; including big game transition and critical winter range by seeding and mechanically thinning 4,142 acres of pinion/juniper from mountain and lowland sagebrush habitat, as well as spike treatment of 477 acres for the removal of sage brush. This project will treat 21 acres of defensible space around 10 structures in the Little Long Valley Community.
Location:
Project is located 8 miles West of Gunnison, Utah and South of the Lone Cedar Road. The project area is comprised of BLM, SITLA, and private land located in Sanpete County.
Project Need
Need For Project:
The Valley Mountain (South valley) project area is Phase 2 of the 30,000-acre landscape level Valley mountains Vegetation Enhancement Project. The purpose of this project is to improve wildlife habitat; including big game transition and winter range, protect structures at risk of wildfire, reduce wildfire risk to the public and firefighters, and ensure escape routes are feasible and easily accessible. The Little Long Valley community has 8 Structure's in need of defensible space located on the valley mountain range on private land. To accomplish this purpose, Color Country BLM, West Desert BLM, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR), School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA), Utah Forestry Fire and State Lands (UFFSLs), Sanpete County and Private Landowners have determined there is a need to seed and mechanically thin pinyon/juniper (PJ) from ~4142 total acres of sagebrush/grass/forb areas surrounding the Little long valley community. Also included is 477 acres of spike treatment to remove sagebrush. The PJ expansion and fading understory in this area is having negative impacts to big game wildlife species (primarily Mule deer and Elk which is a priority species listed on the Richfield Field Office RMP) which are dependent upon this area and these ecosystems. On the ground surveys and site visits have allowed staffs from the BLM, Sitla, FFSL and UDWR to see the lack of understory plants in the PJ complex on the Valley Mountain range. Over half of the PJ in the project is in phase II transitioning to phase III. Some understory brush, grasses, and forbs still exist but is about to cross the threshold into phase III dominated PJ and lose the remaining understory. 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. This PJ expansion largely results from reduced occurrences of natural disturbance. The other half of this project is in phase I with portions transitioning to phase II. Most of these areas have a good understory still present but PJ encroachment continues on a yearly basis into these more productive sage/grass/forb communities 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 expansion of more PJ with reduction of sage/grass/forb habitat has contributed to the overall decrease in Mule deer populations and other wildlife species on the mountain. This expansion factor also contributes to the issue of big game moving closer to local agricultural crops in the valleys to find sustainable forage. The BLM, UFFSLs, UDWR and Sitla anticipates the PJ areas that currently have very little understory will likely need to be reseeded. Improving 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, reducing the risk for large scale, uncharacteristic wildland fires, which in turn creates a fire resilient environment with less risk to public and firefighter safety. These treatments will create a better-balanced ecosystem diversity that will enhance population viability for a variety of big game, small game, migratory birds, upland game, raptors, small mammals, insects and key pollinator species. An interdisciplinary team, composed of BLM, UDWR, FFSL, Sitla, private landowners along with other groups recently visited the area and have identified opportunities within the project area, which include: 1) reducing hazardous fuels and risk to life and property from catastrophic wildfire. 2) restoring and improving the sagebrush ecosystem. 3) increasing plant species and diversity and improving watershed conditions and water quality. 4) improving the health of both woodlands and sagebrush/grasslands by increasing vegetation diversity as well as age class structure. 5) decreasing the amount of pinyon/juniper expansion into areas historically dominated by shrubs, grass, and mountain brush, 6) enhancing important seasonal and year-round habitat for several species of wildlife, in particular wintering mule deer (100% of project area is within wintering mule deer habitat). 7) open phase III canopy for use of hunting and foraging for Golden, Bald Eagles and ferruginous hawk. 8) Reducing hazardous fuels around little long valley community and create a mosaic pattern fuel break continuing from public to private land. Previous phases of the project Lone Cedar Chaining (2188 acres), Little Valley Fuels Reduction (1525 acres) have proven successful in restoring grass, forb, and shrub species to the site, decreasing erosion, improving species diversity and functional plant groups and improving winter mule deer habitat
Objectives:
1) Maintain or improve vegetative diversity and age class structure. 2) Re-establish frequency of grasses to 25%, forbs to 10%, and shrubs to 20%. 3) Restore percent canopy cover of grasses to 15%, forbs to 5% and shrubs to 20%. 4) Reintroduce healthy, viable, perennial grasses, forbs, and shrubs on critical mule deer and Elk winter range. 5) Decrease hazardous fuels by removing 95% of standing pinyon and juniper. 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) Reduce sedimentation through erosion into Sevier River drainage. 8)Implement a landscape level ecosystem restoration project that will reduce risk of catastrophic fire. 9) Create defensible space for 8 landowner/structures in Little long valley community 10) Install 2 wildlife guzzlers.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
Ecological Threats: This project focuses on juniper removal as a means to mitigate threats to critical Mule deer summer/winter range, elk winter range. Sagebrush habitat is at risk of being lost due to excessive pinyon and juniper, wildfire, and high potential for invasive vegetation. High severity wildfire could lead to an Increase in cheatgrass and loss of perennial native species. This project will decrease the risk of high severity wildfire by reducing fuel loading and promoting the growth of perennial understory species which are critical to maintaining ecosystem resilience. This project will increase the availability of a diverse suite of vegetational communities. As stated earlier the dominant vegetational state is pinyon and juniper woodland. A healthy landscape has a diversity of vegetational states. A diverse landscape benefits a larger community of wildlife 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 its resistance to disturbance and its resilience to bounce back and heal after a disturbance. Numerous projects have been implemented in the area with more planned to be implemented in the near future. The combination of all these projects is in effort to increase the pace and scale of implementation to help disperse browse pressure for both wild and domestic ungulates. Ground surveys and site visits have allowed us to see the lack of understory plants in both the mountain sagebrush and lowland sagebrush. 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. One of the greatest threats to the area is no action. This would facilitate the continued loss of understory from those areas that have some sagebrush/grasses/forbs understory left and the immediate conversion of sagebrush to cheatgrass following the next wildfire. This will continue to be "poor" habitat and range for ungulate animals as well as Livestock. Species Threats: This area has been identified as priority for restoration of CRUCIAL mule deer habitat under the Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan. "Crucial" means the areas habitat is necessary to sustain the areas mule deer herd. Allowing the area to move into phase 2 and 3 pinyon and juniper encroachment will mean less quality habitat to meet mule deer objectives. Elk and Mule Deer: The Lone Cedar area of the Valley Mountain range is very important for mule deer and elk. From higher to lower elevations elk and deer depend on the habitat with it's available forage and cover to complete their life cycle requirements. This project will greatly improve available forage for elk and deer populations. Treatments patterns will play an important role within the treatment implementation. One of the primary objectives of this project is to improve habitat for elk and deer. Winter range improvements from this project will benefit elk and deer populations for decades to come. Future monitoring and maintenance of the project will be essential to prolong the integrity of the treatment and health of big game populations. It has been said by land managers, biologist, and researchers familiar with the project area that this area is very important because Mule Deer are space limited here, meaning available habitat and water seem to be the limiting factor for population growth. As habitat is made available by doing this project, we are addressing an immediate threat to one of the primary limiting factors for this population. Ferruginous Hawk: Decreasing populations are commonly attributed to loss of habitat, and lack of secondary prey species. Ferruginous hawk is closely associated with open landscapes offering good visibility and prey resources In Utah, these conditions are often provided by lowland sagebrush, mountain sagebrush, and desert grassland habitats (UDWR 2015). Drought conditions over the past two decades have contributed to sagebrush die-offs, increased fire intensity and frequency, and increased invasive plants. These in turn lead to habitat fragmentation, decreased plant community vitality and decreased prey populations. This project will offer good visibility for foraging and nesting with a mosaic pattern and limit the risk of high intensity wildfire with increased invasive plants. The project will open foraging opportunities for prey such as lagomorphs, ground squirrels, birds and reptiles. Breeding success and population status have been tied to prey abundance and cycling. Wild Turkey: 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. Domestic Livestock: As treated areas are allowed to establish from seeding and sufficient rest from livestock these sites will produce additional AUMs for the allotments. Allowing livestock to enter the treatment areas before new seed establishment will greatly minimize the integrity of the treatment. Annual operating plans will be in place to reflect the timeline for resting the treatment areas from livestock. Social/Political Threats: The project area also provides important recreational hunting for the local population and people travel from all over the state (and from other states) to hunt on the nebo unit for elk, and mule deer. The highly sought-after hunting opportunities within the project areas provide a financial boost to local economies in several ways. Continuing to do work to maintain the habitat in this area will help to perpetuate the recreational and economic benefits. Financial: Financial thresholds need consideration when funding habitat conservation. The type of pro-active work we are proposing reduces future cost from becoming prohibitive. The partnership dollars currently available also need to be taken into consideration as an ecological and/or other threat. With multiple partners actively funding, planning, and implementing conservation practices in the area costs are being shared. If not done now, future costs may make implementing conservation practices at this scale prohibitive.
Relation To Management Plan:
The project falls within the Central Mountains, Nebo unit management plan. Current winter range surveys show that mule deer winter range in this area is poor. This unit identifies habitat as a limiting factor and states that "P/J encroachment on traditional winter rangelands is decreasing diversity and vigor of browse plants." and then identifies as a habitat management objective: *Winter range restoration efforts must be completed for this deer herd to reach its population objectives. Pinyon and juniper reduction treatments and sagebrush restoration are necessary to stabilize winter range conditions and allow this herd to withstand heavy winters. *Continue to be committed to the statewide goal of supporting habitat projects that increase forage for both big game and livestock. Discourage the encroachment of Pinyon and Juniper (PJ) trees into sagebrush and other habitats. Seek opportunities to improve habitat through grazing practices and mechanical treatments to improve habitat where PJ encroachment is occurring. The plan also identifies barriers to acheiving unit management objectives: *Degradation of rangelands by woody vegetation. The proposed treatments will address some of the habitat management strategies outlined in the deer and elk management plans for herd unit by removing PJ and improving habitat for deer and elk. The project also helps fulfill the state mule deer management plan section IV Habitat Goal: * Conserve and improve mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges. The proposed projects will address the following goals and objectives of the Division of Wildlife Resources most recent strategic management plan: *Resource Goal: expand wildlife populations and conserve sensitive species by protecting and improving wildlife habitat. *Objective 1: protect existing wildlife habitat and improve 500,000 acres of critical habitats and watersheds throughout the state. CENTRAL UTAH FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN (FMP): *Greater use of vegetation management to meet resource management objectives *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 Federal Land Policy and Management Act *Sec. 102 (a); the public lands be managed in a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archeological values; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals *Sec. 103 (c); The BLM is directed to manage public lands in a manner that will best meet present and future needs of the nation. Richfield Field Office RMP *Manage for a mix of vegetative types, structural stages, and provide for native plant, fish, and wildlife habitats. * Sustain or reestablish the integrity of the sagebrush continuity, and quality of habitat that is necessary to maintain sustainable populations of sagebrush-dependent wildlife species. BLM Grazing Management Regulations: *Objectives are to promote healthy sustainable rangeland ecosystems; to accelerate restoration and improvement of public lands to properly functioning condition *Maintenance and enhancement of habitats to promote the conservation of Federal proposed, Federal candidate, and other special status spec. Wildlife Action Plan Improving Conditions Lowland Sagebrush: *Promoting and funding restoration that reduces the uncharacteristic class, including cutting/mulching/chaining of invading pinyon and juniper trees, herbicide or mechanical treatment of non-native invasive species such as cheatgrass and secondary perennial weed species, and rehabilitation of burned areas following wildfire. *Continuing the development of new plant materials and restoration techniques suited to this habitat. *Developing and deploying techniques to diversify the understory species composition and age classes of decadent even-aged sagebrush stands. *Developing and deploying techniques to diversify species composition in monoculture or near monoculture stands of seeded non-native plants (e.g., crested wheatgrass). *Promoting management that includes seeding a diversity of grasses, forbs and shrubs that will lead to increased resiliency and resistance in the plant community. Mountain Sagebrush: Improving Condition *Promoting policies and management that allow fire to return to a more natural regime. *Promoting policies that reduce inappropriate grazing by domestic livestock and wildlife. *Promoting and funding restoration that reduces the Uncharacteristic and surpluses of older age class, including Dixie/chain harrow, brush mowing or other treatments that reduce the older age class and stimulate the younger/mid age classes; herbicide or mechanical treatment of non-native invasive species such smooth brome; single tree mulching/cutting of invading conifer. *Continuing the development of new plant materials, especially native forbs. *Promoting zoning/policies/laws that lead to responsible human/energy intrusion and development. *Promoting management that includes seeding a diversity of grasses, forbs and shrubs that will lead to increased resiliency and resistance in the plant community. Gamble Oak: 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 unnaturally large stands of mature Gamble oak. Gambel oak resprouts after fire, so other types of vegetation generally do not replace it following burning. Gambel oak stands are susceptible to cheatgrass invasion, especially on drier sites. Changes in fire regime may not replace the dominant oaks but are likely to have effects on other important members of the plant community that defines this key habitat. 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. Utah Statewide Mule Deer Management Plan *Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or fire damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges that have been taken over by invasive annual grass species, and ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats, ensuring that seed mixes contain sufficient forbs and browse species. *Work with local, state and federal land management agencies via land management plans and with private landowners to identify and properly manage crucial mule deer habitats, especially fawning, wintering and migration areas. *SITLA Management Plans: Correspond with the Utah Code Title 53C Chapter Five Section 101, 102 and 103 in accordance with Management of Rangeland Resources Utah Administrative Code R850-50-1100 Range Improvement Projects within the SITLA Property. Sanpete County RMP *Support the removal of conifers and manage land to promote the establishment of attendant grass, brush, and forbs. *Sanpete county encourages federal and state agencies to adopt and maintain scientifically sound forest management policies based on high quality, recently acquired data, and to pursue multiple use of public forest resources to provide sustainable and continuous yield of timber, forage, firewood,wildlife, fisheries, recreation, and water. *Support managing forest cover types to perpetuate tree cover and provide healthy stands, high water quality, and wildlife and fish habitat. *Support agencies in providing for harvest of forest products when the activity would improve water production and does not adversely affect water quality. *Support the management of forests and woodlands for healthy conditions that contribute to healthy habitat for animal and plant species, proper watershed functioning conditions, and riparian restoration and enhancement. *Support agencies in prioritizing fuel reduction treatment in high value/high-risk areas. Implementation of fuels management actions should be prioritized using the following criteria: *Wildland-urban interface (WUI) areas. *Areas with fuel loading that could potentially result in the loss of ecosystem components following wildland fire. *Support the prioritization of using native seeds for fuels management treatment based on availability, adaptation (site potential), and probability of success. Where probability of success for native seed is low, desirable non-native seeds may be used to trend toward restoring the fire regime. When reseeding, use fire-resistant native and desirable non-native species, as appropriate, to provide for fire breaks. *Hazardous fuels reduction treatments should be used to restore ecosystems, protect human, natural, and cultural resources, and reduce the threat of wildfire to communities. *Support the reduction of fuel loading conditions in forests and woodlands. Six County pre-disaster mitigation plan *Mechanically treat hazardous fuels around little long valley community *Work with landowners to create defensible spaces around structures located in little long valley community. *Coordinate with BLM to reduce fuel loads along south valley and lone cedar road for accesses and egress to little long valley community.
Fire / Fuels:
The majority of the area is at moderate to extreme on the fire risk index. Pinyon and juniper trees have expanded and moved into areas once dominated by shrubs, forbs, and grasses. Without this project, fuel conditions are such that a wildfire may be difficult to contain, leading to an increased risk to firefighter and public safety, suppression effectiveness and natural resource degradation. Fire Regime Condition Class within the project areas is predominately FRCC 3 which is where fire regimes have been extensiviely altered and risk of losing key ecosystem components from fire is high. Treatments identified within this proposal, including seeding with more fire-resistant vegetation, would help reduce hazardous fuel loads, create fuel breaks, and reduce the overall threat of a catastrophic wildfire which could impact the communities of Scipio, Gunnison, Fayette and Little Long Valley. Treatments in and around the sagebrush areas would break up continuous fuels and reduce the risk of wildfire entering these sensitive areas. Removing pinyon and juniper in a mosaic pattern would also break up continuous fuels and reduce the risk of a high intensity wildfire. Because there is a greater risk of conversion of shrublands to annual grasslands under a high intensity fire, managed, pro-active treatments proposed would reduce the likelihood of cheat grass invasion and help perennial grasses and forbs persist long-term to create a more resilient landscape. The National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy currently guides fire and fuels management for Utah BLM. The strategy encourages collaboration among all stakeholders and across all landscapes, using best science, to make meaningful progress towards the three goals of: 1) resilient landscapes; 2) Fire adapted communities; and 3) Safe and effective wildfire response. This project will address all three of these goals. Sanpete County, FFSL along with Six County pre-disaster mitigation plan identified the little long valley community at a high risk for wildfire and had the following recommendations. *Mechanically treat hazardous fuels around little long valley community *Work with landowners to create defensible spaces around structures located in little long valley community. *Coordinate with BLM to reduce fuel loads along south valley and lone cedar road for accesses and egress to little long valley community.
Water Quality/Quantity:
The project is located within the Sevier River 19 Water Quality Assessment Unit which includes west side Sevier River tributaries from Sevier Bridge Dam to Salina Creek Confluence. The condition of the assessment unit has not been determined because insufficient water quality data are available. The assessment unit drains into the Sevier River - 17 assessment unit which is listed as an impaired water due to violations for Total Phosphorus, Sedimentation, and Total Dissolved Solids. The Project would stabilize soils and reduce runoff and therefore would benefit the adjacent assessment unit. Completion of this project would reduce flooding and runoff from heavy rainstorms by depositing woody debris in the gullies to slow and hold back the water. Currently with the pinyon and Juniper on site there is a lot of bare ground available for erosion. By planting this treatment with a variety of grasses, forbs and shrubs the ground cover will be greatly increased, which will decrease the potential for erosion. Areas that become dominated by pinyon and juniper out compete understory herbaceous species and leave bare soil prone to erosion. This herbaceous vegetation is important to reducing overland flow and reducing soil loss. A recent publication by Roundy et al. 2014 (Pinyon-juniper reduction increases soil water availability of the resource growth pool. Range Ecology and Management 67:495-505) showed that phase 3 juniper removal can increase available moisture for more than 3 weeks in the spring. And removing juniper from phase 1 and 2 stands can increase water from 6-20 days respectively. Because juniper is prolific water users, they readily outcompete understory species which eventually die off. Removing juniper is critical for restoring sagebrush habitat and ecosystem resilience because of the water available to other species once they're gone. Most recent research (Kormas, et. al.) found that when shrub-steppe communities and grasslands convert to pinyon and juniper woodlands, the water cycle and local weather pattern is significantly altered. Snow deposition and the timing and magnitude of melt can alter delivery of water to the soil, which can then impact plant growth. This study found that more water is lost to evapotranspiration and snow melts earlier in pinyon and juniper than in sagebrush-steppe areas. The study concludes that sagebrush vegetation can effectively capture, store and deliver water and better sustain vegetation diversity necessary for ecological processes than pinyon and juniper dominated areas As stated earlier, areas that become dominated by by pinyon and juniper out compete understory herbaceous species and leave bare soil prone to erosion. This herbaceous vegetation is important to reducing overland flow and reducing soil loss. Pinyon and juniper dominated sites can intercept 10-20% of precipitation (Horman et al., 1999). By completing this project this will allow more precip to contact the soil and get into the water table. Treating areas of lower densities will prevent a future situation as described above. According to Folliott 2012, research showed that pinyon and juniper expansion into areas historically dominated by higher forbs and grasses impeded stream flow for off-site uses. Because pinyon and juniper are very competitive for water this often reduces grasses and forbs within the area. "The increase in bare soil, particularly in the spaces between trees, typically leads to increased runoff and soil loss as the juniper infestation increases" (Thurow, 1997). Increased runoff and sediment load, decreases water yield and water quality within the watershed. Studies have shown that an evaluation of alternatives using conversion treatments to enhance streamflow in the pinyon and juniper should be made (Barr, 1956) where possible.
Compliance:
BLM: Valley Mountains EA DOI-BLM-UT-C0202012-0011-EA Signed November 12,2013. Arc and wildlife survey's will be completed before implementation. SITLA: Any NEPA and archeological and wildlife survey requirements will be completed by project partners as needed per requirements for federal funding and federal land management oversight before implementation. Private Lands: Wildlife and archeological clearances will be completed on private land before implementation.
Methods:
Pinyon and juniper, which currently occupy and are encroaching upon the site will be removed through mechanical mulching (approx. 2655 acres), lop and scatter (approx.1487 acres) and spike (approx. 477 acres) of sagebrush to rejuvenate grass and forb understory. Islands and corridors of pinyon and juniper would remain untreated throughout the unit. Before mechanical implementation, treated areas would be broadcast seeded with a mix of native and non-native shrubs, grasses and forbs important for improving winter mule deer range, other wildlife habitat, and stabilization of soils. The goal of this project is to create a mosaic fuel break that will flow across boundary lines and not have hard edges. This will aid in wildfire suppression efforts. 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. BLM 1) aerial seeding followed by a mastication contract for approx. 2242 acres. (Fall of 2023) 2) Hand thinning contract for approx. 1452 acres. (Fall of 2023) 3) Aerially apply spike treatment 94 acres (Fall of 2023) UFFSLs 1) Defensible space clearing contract for 10 structures. (Fall 2023) 2) FFSL will use their own crew with chipper to clear 2-3 acres around all structures 21 acres of defensible space will be completed with in-house fuels crew and equipment. SITLA 1) aerial seeding followed by a mastication contract for approx. 165 acres. (Fall of 2023) 2) Hand thinning contract for 13 acres (Fall of 2023) 3) Spike treatment of 81 acres (Fall of 2023) PRIVATE 1) aerial seeding followed by a mastication contract for approx. 248 acres. (Fall of 2023) 2) hand thinning contract for approx. 21 acres. (Fall of 2023) 3) Aerially apply spike treatment 302 acres (Fall of 2023) FFSL will use their own seasonal crew and equipment to treat 21 acres of defensible space around all structures in the Little Long Valley community. The USFS, UDWR, UFFSLs and BLM will seed with a mix of grass and forbs. Areas needing to be seeded would be temporarily rested from domestic ungulate use if needed, for 2-3 growing seasons, to allow new vegetation time to establish. Instructions regarding temporary rest would be incorporated into the Annual Operating Instructions (AOIs) for the livestock permit holders. Both Guzzlers (if funded) will be installed with the help of UDWR, BLM, NWTF and other sportsman's group. One of the landowner's have agreed to having the 500-gallon guzzler installed on his private property. The other 1800-gallon guzzler will be installed on Sitla.
Monitoring:
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. UDWR Annual aerial and ground mule deer counts and classifications.
Partners:
BLM: Will be providing funding/planning/implementation support and is one of the project managers working closely with Scott Chamberlin on SITLA lands. UDWR: Kendall Bagley of UDWR is working as contributors and providing planning/implementation support, project design. SITLA: Scott Chamberlin has been involved from beginning of project and has assisted in planning, seed mix and design of project. Sitla has offered to have an 1800-gallon wildlife guzzler installed on Sitla land inside project boundary. Permitee's: will be working with permitee's to ensure planning and implementation will be done to meet their objectives as well as agency objectives, also have agreed to resting for two complete growing seasons. FFSL: will be working alongside all landowners and coordinating the defensible space along with helping with overall project design and layout. Private Landowners: will be working with BLM and FFSL on project layout and design to ensure project success. One private landowner has also agreed to have a 500 Gallon wildlife guzzler installed on his property. NWTF provided a guzzler in the previous Lone cedar chaining phase will working to secure funding to provide 1 to 2 guzzlers for South Valley phase.
Future Management:
BLM: This project area is within three grazing allotments (Lone Cedar, Hayes Canyon, Swedes Canyon). 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 to 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. Future maintenance of projects to protect investments made by UWRI, BLM, SITLA, 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. Permitee/ Private Landowner: The permitees/ Private Landowners have signed agreements that South Valley project will be rested for a minimum of two complete growing seasons.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
The treatment will provide a variety of resource benefits, including a grazing management benefit. The South Valley project area is within Livestock grazing allotments used in the fall/winter grazing season. The acres of the allotments within the project area are in mid to late seral stages with a static to downward trend due to even-aged, decadent sagebrush and encroachment and infilling by pinyon and juniper. Pinyon and juniper are out competing the shrub and herbaceous components thus reducing available forage for livestock and wildlife. The SITLA, and BLM administered lands are all part of grazing rotations. This project will have a big benefit to permittees. Working across landownerships will have a greater ecological and economic impact for livestock producers. Rangeland conditions are expected to improve following implementation of the proposed vegetation project. The health, vigor, recruitment and production of perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs would improve which would provide a more palatable and nutritional source of forage for both livestock and wildlife. This will aid in improved rangeland conditions throughout the allotment. Implementation of this project would eventually improve overall livestock performance (e.g., increased cow weights, increased calf crops, increased weaning weights, etc) and improve the economic stability of the permittees due to an increase in the quantity and quality of grasses and other herbaceous forage which are important to livestock grazing. The project area is used for big game and upland game species. This area is critical for general season mule deer, limited entry elk. The area is popular for dispersed camping, sightseeing, driving for pleasure, wildlife viewing and an overall heavy recreational use. Creating a more fire resistant and resilient landscape will add to an overall positive experience.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$1,585,311.45 $66,200.00 $1,651,511.45 $0.00 $1,651,511.45
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Materials and Supplies Spike for BLM 94 acres, Sitla 81 acres and private 302 acres (477 acres @ $75/ac) $35,775.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Archaeological Clearance Archaeological Clearance Contract for 2655 acres (BLM 2242 , SITLA 165, Private 248 ) 2655acre @$40 acre. $106,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Materials and Supplies Install 2 Guzzlers (1) 500 gallon guzzler, (1) 1,800 gallon boss tank guzzler $16,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Other BLM Project layout, contract preparation, and contract administration for mechanical mulching, aerial seeding, Lop and scatter, spike treatments and Cadastral survey. $0.00 $20,000.00 $0.00 2023
Contractual Services Aerial seeding contract 2655 acres ( BLM 2242, SITLA,165 Private 248) acres @ 12.00 acre. $31,860.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Contractual Services Mechanical Mulching Contract 2,655 acres ( BLM 2,242, SITLA 165, Private 248) @ $375Acre (BLM - $840,750, SITLA - $61,875, Private - $68,200) $995,625.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Seed (GBRC) Seed mix for South valley project. 2655 acres( BLM 2242, SITLA 165, Private 2048) at $93.59@acre $248,481.45 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Contractual Services Apply spike chemical with fixed wing or helicopter Spike 477 acres @10 acre $4,770.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Contractual Services Lop and scatter contract for 1467 acres (BLM 1452, Private 22, Sitla13) 1467 acres at @$100 acre $146,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Personal Services (seasonal employee) FFSL In-house crew for defensible space. all structure's This money will be used as In-kind towards the private. 21 acres of defensible space @$2200 per acre. $0.00 $46,200.00 $0.00 2023
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$1,504,379.52 $66,200.00 $1,570,579.52 $537.28 $1,571,116.80
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
BLM Fuels (West Desert) A087 future mod $45,638.02 $0.00 $0.00 2023
National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) S024 $1,450.00 $0.00 $0.00 2022
BLM Fuels (Color Country) A088 Mod 8 $204,949 Mod 9 $277,051 RF - $211,157 $458,468.32 $20,000.00 $0.00 2023
Utah Division of Forestry, Fire & State Lands (FFSL) FFSL along with Sanpete county fuels crew will do defensible space work. $0.00 $46,200.00 $0.00 2023
Utah Wild Sheep Foundation S022 $1,450.00 $0.00 $0.00 2022
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) S025 $1,450.00 $0.00 $0.00 2022
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) S027 $1,450.00 $0.00 $0.00 2022
DWR-WRI Project Admin In-Kind $0.00 $0.00 $537.28 2022
Utah Wild Sheep Foundation (WSF) S022 $1,686.63 $0.00 $0.00 2023
National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) S024 $1,686.62 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) S025 $1,686.62 $0.00 $0.00 2023
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) S027 $1,686.62 $0.00 $0.00 2023
BLM Fuels A099 Mod 10 EBLM1784 - $430k - Chaining/Mastication EBLM1785 - $100k - Seeding EBLM1786 - $117,120 - CRI $647,120.00 $0.00 $0.00 2023
BLM Fuels (West Desert) A087 RF FUnds $23,361.98 $0.00 $0.00 2024
BLM Fuels (Color Country) A088 Mod 9 - $23,531.68 Mod 13 - $79,102.52 - Mx and L&S RF - $211,157 $313,791.20 $0.00 $0.00 2024
Utah Wild Sheep Foundation (WSF) S022 $863.37 $0.00 $0.00 2024
National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) S024 $863.38 $0.00 $0.00 2024
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) S025 $863.38 $0.00 $0.00 2024
Sportsman for Fish & Wildlife (SFW) S027 $863.38 $0.00 $0.00 2024
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Bald Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Not Listed NA
Domestic Livestock
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Ferruginous Hawk N4
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Golden Eagle N5
Threat Impact
Data Gaps - Persistent Declines in Prey Species NA
Wild Turkey R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland High
Habitats
Habitat
Gambel Oak
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Gambel Oak
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Medium
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
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Very High
Project Comments
Comment 01/14/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
Very readable proposal, well written Cody. One question you might get is expound on Ferruginous hawk benefits. Also if I had anything else to say I might suggest this with seed. All the grasses are cool season. Throw in a warm season grass or two for some seasonal diversity. Sand dropseed, galleta, blue grama are some common to the area. We saw the importance of warm season grasses this last summer with the monsoon rains. Also just my opinion, I like to add a little bit of an annual forbs like sunflower or beeplant. I treat these species kinda like a cover crop. They pop up quick that first growing season and are abundant and gives permittees and land managers a sense of success while we wait for the perennials. Secondly, awesome for pollinators. Thirdly, they tend to decrease over time as perennials establish. And fourthly, they add organic matter and cover to the soil as they die each growing season. Just some thoughts.
Comment 01/20/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
Clint, thanks for the recommendations. I will get some info added in on the Ferruginous hawk. I agree with you on the seed and will get with our range/wildlife specialists for input on what seed species to add. Thanks for your time and input into this project.
Comment 01/20/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
Cody, in the documents section, could you please provide the EA on which this project is based? I tried to find it in ePlanning and could not locate it. It would also be really helpful see some before and after photos and monitoring information related to the other phases of this project.
Comment 01/24/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
Judi, thanks for looking at the project. I cannot get the EA document to load but have added the EA number to the compliance section. I will look and try to get some monitoring data and pics added. Thanks.
Comment 01/24/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
Cody, thank you for adding the EA info. Once I look at it I may have additional comments. I do have a few comments/questions about this project. 1. What are the ESDs for this area? What native plant species should be present? What do the ESDs say should be the grass to forb to shrub ratio/component and the % canopy? 2. Have the three 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). If needed, grazing adjustments would be made in Grazing Allotment Plans and through the grazing permit renewal process." What grazing adjustments is the BLM planning concurrently with this project? If grazing continues as it has been, then conditions will deteriorate again, resulting in the same problems you are trying to address with this project.
Comment 02/09/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
Judi thanks for your comments. (1) The ESD for the project area is primarily located in Semidesert Gravelly Loam (Wyoming Big Sagebrush). The ESD states: The dominant aspect of this plant community is Wyoming big sagebrush. The composition by air-dry weight is approximately 45 percent perennial grasses, 10 percent forbs, and 45 percent shrubs. Some of the Native plants that should be in this area are: Bluebunch Wheatgrass, Indian Ricegrass, Bottlebrush Squirreltail, Sandberg bluegrass, Needle and Thread, Western Wheatgrass, Nevada Bluegrass, Scarlet Globe Mallow, Pacific aster, Cushion buckwheat and Wyoming big sagebrush. (2) These three Allotments are 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 areas while the seeding is getting established. This project is addressing pinyon and juniper encroachment issues not livestock grazing issues.
Comment 01/24/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
Additional Comments/questions: 3. Have you considered less impactive/non-mechanical treatments in place of the proposed mastication treatments? 4. The Richfield RMP says:Richfield Field Office RMP *Manage for a mix of vegetative types, structural stages, and provide for native plant, fish, and wildlife habitats. * Sustain or reestablish the integrity of the sagebrush continuity, and quality of habitat that is necessary to maintain sustainable populations of sagebrush-dependent wildlife species. But, the BLM is proposing a seed mix containing a number of non-native species. This does not comply with the need to manage for native plant and wildlife habitat. The non-natives are being used to improve forage for livestock grazing. We'd like to see only native seeds used here, particularly those that comport with the ESDs.
Comment 02/09/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
(3) Yes! Where pinyon and juniper encroachment are in Phase 1 with a good understory of grasses, forbs and shrubs, a less impactful treatment method would be used. That is why 1467 acres will be Lop and Scattered. In the Phase 2 juniper, a less impactful method would not be appropriate for these sites. Lop and scatter vs mastication would severally increase fire hazard due to the amount of heavy slash that would be left at greater heights and more whole. The understory of grasses, forbs and shrubs would not benefit as much because the seed would not be covered by mulch or worked into the soil. (4) We will prioritize the use of native seeds for restoration based on availability, adaptation (ecological site potential), and probability of success. Where probability of success or adapted seed availability is low, desirable non-native seeds may be used if they support habitat objectives. Re-establishment of appropriate sagebrush species/subspecies and important understory plants, relative to site potential, is the principal objective for rehabilitation efforts. These seed mixes are not final and are dependent on seed availability and GBRC staff guidance based on the site, precipitation and soil type.
Comment 01/24/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
Additional Comments: 3. Why are the water guzzlers needed? What has happened to the existing water sources? Where will the water for the guzzlers come from? 4. How will this project improve water quality? You mention that it will, but I don't see a specific explanation as to how. 5. You state that "Previous phases of the project Lone Cedar Chaining (2188 acres), Little Valley Fuels Reduction (1525 acres) have proven successful in restoring grass, forb, and shrub species to the site, decreasing erosion, improving species diversity and functional plant groups and improving winter mule deer habitat. Wasn't the Lone Cedar chaining just completed? What monitoring has been done to show success? There are several Little Valley projects in the WRI database -- which one(s) are you referring to?
Comment 02/09/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
(3) The Guzzlers are for wildlife use only and currently the only water in the project area is seasonal ponds that catch runoff. There are currently no developed water sources on site. Seasonal rain and snow events will provide the water for the guzzlers. The lack of consistent precipitation creates a need to improve on water quality and quantity in this area. Guzzlers will benefit all wildlife species, especially in the summer months, as water is critical yet lacking. If guzzlers become dry from lack of seasonal rain or snow events UDWR opportunities, designated hunters, and sportsman groups have been willing to haul water to wildlife guzzlers located in other areas and that willingness is also anticipated here. (4) Please refer to the project details: Water quality/quantity section for details. (5) Little valley fuels reduction and Hayes Canyon bullhog are previous treatments. The Lone Cedar phase was just completed fall of 2021 and wasn't suppose to be listed. That's a mistake on my end.
Comment 01/26/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Michael Golden
Hey Cody! Great looking partnership across multiple land ownerships. Any chance you can add some stuff to qualify for "ENHANCED PROJECT LOCATION/DESIGN BONUS POINTS" in the new scoresheet?
Comment 02/02/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
Thanks Mike for the comment. I have checked with DWR and looked at wildlife tracker. I wish there was something on there but right now they do not have any data/collared animals in this area. Hopefully in the future we can coordinate to make this happen.
Comment 01/27/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Cody, Is there currently ferruginous hawk use in the area? If so, do you know if there are nesting territories? Raptor nest surveys would be a good idea to prevent destroying any extant nest trees. ALso, it would be nice to avoid cutting down any pinyon jay nesting colonies. Any plans to survye for this speceis? Keith
Comment 02/02/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Karolina Kukulka
Keith, prior to implementation, we conduct wildlife clearance surveys which include raptor nest documentation. Any raptor nests found that are in the treatment polygon, or near, are buffered to avoid destruction. We have observed ferruginous hawk in this area but have not found nests. PIJA surveys are also being pursued. If nesting colonies are found, I will work with the fuels team to preserve it. Thanks!
Comment 02/01/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Chamberlain
Cody, Thanks for proposing this. Can you add Hard Fescue to the seed mix? Thanks Scott
Comment 02/02/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
Thanks Scott, we can defiantly add that into the seed mix.. This seed mix is not set in stone.
Comment 02/02/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Clare Poulsen
Like the project. My only comment is on the seed mix. I would remove the prickly lettuce. I agree with both Clint's and Scott's suggestions for additions.
Comment 02/02/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Cody Pollock
Thanks for the comment. I will get with our partners and specialist's to discuss this and make those recommended changes/additions.
Comment 02/07/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
One final question: What cultural surveys and tribal consultation are being conducted for this project?
Comment 02/09/2022 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 02/10/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
Cody, thank you for your detailed responses and explanations. Greatly appreciate it. I hope you're able to move the seed mix to focus more on native seeds.
Comment 08/29/2024 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
I am confused. Did you only do 72 acres of mastication or did you do 1883. The completion report is hard to read. Please go back through it and edit as needed so that it is clear. Please also add some details about the "why" of the project. Your map features show a spike treatment but it is not described in the completion report. Please make sure that your map and report match, including a point for the guzzler. The last thing that the completion report needs is during/after pictures. 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 and ready for review. Thanks.
Comment 09/19/2024 Type: 2 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
Thanks for making those changes/additions. I have moved the project to completed.
Completion
Start Date:
06/13/2022
End Date:
06/09/2023
FY Implemented:
2023
Final Methods:
An archaeology contract was started June 13,2022 and 2610 acres were completed. These acres were split between 2 BLM districts;1814 acres completed on Color Country and 796 acres completed on West Desert. The majority of the CRI completed on the West Desert (724 acres) was in preparation for a future phase (Three Knolls). November 15, 2022: Aerial seeding of 1883 acres of grasses, forbs, and shrubs was completed by Mountain West Helicopters. Mulching began December 28, 2022. There were 1864 acres mulched (1798 acres Color Country BLM, 66 acres West Desert BLM) Mulching Contract was awarded to Giles Construction. Giles did most of the mulching other than a 350-acre unit they sub-contracted to Skyline. Giles had a total of 7 machines working throughout the project. Mulching was completed on June 09, 2023. One guzzler was also installed on SITLA land. We had employees and volunteers help with installation from BLM, SITLA, DWR and dedicated hunters.
Project Narrative:
Started seeding on December 17, 2022 by aerially seeding grasses, forbs, and shrubs with a fixed wing aircraft. Contractor completed seeding within 3 days due to snow storms in the afternoons. Seed was consistent throughout the project and contractor took good care in completing contract within specifications. Mulching contract began December 28, 2022. Giles Construction was awarded the contract. Giles construction started with 3 machines and finished with 7 on project. The contract did go over the deadline by 45 days due to above average snowfall, with up to 6 feet of snow on project. Contractor did an exceptional job in complying with the contract stipulations and working with tough conditions. 1883 acres were mulched after arc sites and wildlife islands were added. Lop and scatter will not be completed in this phase and hopefully funds will become available in the future. There was no defensible space work done on private land because of no funding and also, we were not able to get funding for the defensible space work. The spike portion of project was cancelled and will be implemented with future phase of projects planned in the area. 1--1800-gallon guzzler was also installed on SITLA Land. The purpose of this project is to improve wildlife habitat, including big game transition and winter range and to help distribute the use of animals by installing a wildlife guzzler. This area has very little water so by installing guzzlers we are hoping to see an increase in wildlife.
Future Management:
Project area will be monitored for vegetative trend, cover and wildlife use for the next 3 years. The project area will be rested from livestock for a minimum of 2 complete growing seasons in order to allow the seedlings to become established and set seed. The rest period may be extended if monitoring shows the seeding has not sufficiently established. Maintenance of the project will be completed in the future.
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
12073 Terrestrial Treatment Area Bullhog Full size
12073 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
14036 Affected Area
Project Map
Project Map