Hatch Bench Habitat and Watershed Improvement Project
Project ID: 6093
Status: Proposed
Fiscal Year: 2026
Submitted By: N/A
Project Manager: Hal Guymon
PM Agency: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
PM Office: Southern Region
Lead: Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
WRI Region: Southern
Description:
Masticate 567 acres and two way chaining of 517 acres of previously treated project on the Hatch Bench that has become encroached with pinyon and juniper trees. Aerial seeding a total of 1084 ac. Construction of 20 Zeedyk structures to increase mesic habitat.
Location:
5 miles east of Hatch, Utah
Project Need
Need For Project:
Hatch Bench provides winter, brood rearing, summer habitats for greater sage grouse, and summer and transitional habitat for the prized Paunsaugunt mule deer management unit. Elk also use this habitat in the winter and summer providing opportunities for public hunters to harvest elk on public land. Recently the Paunsaugunt elk unit has become an "any bull" unit providing increased amounts of opportunity for the public hunter. Pinyon and juniper have begun to encroach this mountain shrub habitat that had been treated approximately 30 years ago. While the understory is intact and still relatively healthy in the previously treated area, treatment of this area will improve the habitat for sage brush obligates and reduce threat of wildfire that would result in watershed impacts to the Upper Sevier River. Wildlife in this area has a very high value to the state of Utah and local economies. The Paunsaugunt mule deer management unit has long been a "household" name when it comes to trophy quality and hunter satisfaction. Enhancing mule deer range is crucial for the future of this unit. Other highly prized game species includes elk, cougar, and a developing pronghorn herd. Elk depend on this area as transition range and for some early winter range. Increasing the available forage will increase body condition and survival for elk. Increased forage and plant diversity will also benefit other wildlife that use the area, build it and they will come. Species of concern include the greater sage grouse. Two greater sage grouse leks are located within 2 miles of the treatment area. The treatment is designed to increase brood rearing and nesting habitat for these grouse. The removal of pinyon and juniper trees will reduce the perches for sage grouse predators, and it will also increase sagebrush, forbs, and grass which will promote sage grouse use. Removal of woodland species and the creation of sage grouse brood rearing habitat. This Project Has the capability to create and enhance many acres of sage grouse habitat. the seed mix that will be flown on is high in forbs and beneficial grasses. It will also create connective valley bottoms that may encourage growth and movement of Sage Grouse in the surrounding area. Cattle use this area for summer grazing, and the need for a highly productive range is important for the producer's ability to stay in business. Preserving open landscapes and large tracts of sagebrush habitat is important to ranching success and to many sagebrush obligate wildlife species.
Objectives:
1. Increase grass and forbs by 20% in treated areas. 2. Reduce pinyon and juniper by 90% across the treated areas. 3. Diversify the age and cover density of brush to serve wildlife and domestic livestock. 4.Decrease movement of sediment to Sevier river. 5. Create connective Habitat for Sage Grouse.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
Areas to be treated are phase 1-2 pinyon and juniper with intact understory vegetation from the previous treatment. As noted in both UDWR range trend sites within the treatment area, "pinyon and juniper encroachment is continuing". Working in this small to medium densities means the vegetative community hasn't crossed an ecological threshold where high amounts of restoration inputs are necessary. Not doing work in these areas of low densities means the threat of higher costs, inputs, and risk in the future. The site hasn't crossed that financial threshold where cost becomes a prohibitive factor. If we leave it be the entire area may become phase 3 at some point in the future. 470 acres of the proposed treatment has never been treated and is directly adjacent to previous treatments. To protect the treatments and increase sage brush habitats mastication and seed will be need. This will return this area to its ecological site description and complement the work that has been done around this site. Because fire has been removed from most systems, including those listed on this project, fuel loads have increased and could threaten the long-term health of the watershed and species in the area. Although it was determined by the USFWS that listing under the ESA was not warranted for greater sage grouse continuing to do work as identified in the Statewide Sage Grouse Management Plan to conserve sage grouse will support a continued and desired "not warranted" status. As previously mentioned the area has been identified as priority for restoration of crucial summer 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 3 pinyon and juniper encroachment will mean less quality habitat and will threaten our ability to meet mule deer objectives for the management unit. There is also a social threshold to consider with private land as part of this project. Right now, a cattle producer is willing to work with agencies to do the project. Not taking actions to restore habitat when there is local private support for it may account for a lost opportunity in the future. As described above the area is within a Bird Habitat Conservation Area (BHCA) with priority species being sagebrush obligate birds like sage grouse, sage thrasher, and Brewer's sparrow. Not doing the project will lead to an increased density of pinyon and juniper that will decrease the amount of available habitat for these sage dependent bird species in an area designated as important for birds.
Relation To Management Plan:
Following the Paunsuagunt Mule Deer Management (2020): - "Coordinate with federal and state partners in designing projects that will improve fire resiliency and protect areas of crucial habitat." - "Cooperate with federal land management agencies and private landowners in carrying out habitat improvement projects. Protect deer winter ranges from wildfire by reseeding burned areas, creating fuel breaks and reseed areas dominated by cheat grass with desirable perennial vegetation." - "Reduce expansion of Pinion-Juniper woodlands into sagebrush habitats and improve habitats dominated by Pinion-Juniper woodlands by completing habitat restoration projects." Regarding UDWR Elk Management Plan for Paunsuagunt Unit #27: - "Continue to be committed to the statewide goal of supporting habitat projects that increase forage for both big game and livestock." - "Work with private, state and federal agencies to maintain and protect critical and existing range from future losses. Continue projects with USFS, BLM, state and private entities to enhance wildlife habitat." - "Discourage the encroachment of Pinyon and Juniper (PJ) trees into sagebrush and other habitats. Seek opportunities to improve habitat through grazing practices, prescribed burning, and mechanical treatments to improve habitat where PJ encroachment is occurring." Great Sage Grouse Conservation Plan - "5.4.1 Aggressively remove encroaching conifers and other plant species to expand greater sage grouse habitat where possible." Those involved in this project and other Upper Kanab Creek Projects continue to work with the local sage grouse working group (Color Country Adaptive Resource Management Local Working Group) to help fulfill those items identified in the Local Conservation Plan. This plan also ranks a variety of threats to sage grouse populations in the Upper Kanab Creek Area. Fire, vegetation management and invasive species are three aspects ranked as important considerations in this plan. The limiting factors for mule deer on the Paunsagunt are winter range and Highway mortality. This project will likely not help with either of those issues, as it is transition or summer range for mule deer. However, it is a popular area for public hunting, wildlife viewing and supports the overall "Habitat Management Objectives" for this unit by, "maintaining mule deer habitat throughout the unit," and "enhancing existing crucial habitats due to natural and human impacts." Additionally, the Management Plan #27 calls for the continued work to reduce pinyon-juniper encroachment in the Kanab Creek portion of the unit. Mule Deer are seen and harvested frequently throughout this area. Frey, S. N., S. G. Lupis, K. Heaton, T. A. Black, T. A. Messmer, and D. Mitchell. 2006. Color Country Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Local Conservation Plan. Utah's Community Based Conservation Program. Unpublished Report. Logan, Utah. http://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/prog/planning/SG_RMP_rev/ARMPA.html This project falls under the Paunsagunt Elk Management Plan (Unit 27). Habitat management objectives for elk in this area include supporting those projects that improve habitat through treatment of p/j and increased forage for both wildlife and livestock. Utah Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy * "Reduce fire risk by managing and removing invasive species." Intermountain West Joint Venture Habitat Conservation Strategy * "Support existing public-private partnerships to implement sagebrush habitat conservation, at regional, state, and local scales." "Remove encroaching conifers to functionally restore sagebrush habitat." Utah Wildlife Action Plan * "Mountain sagebrush is a key habitat identified in the WAP." * "WAP identifies inappropriate fire frequency as a threat to lowland sagebrush habitat. This project will reduce future fire risk and act as a fire buffer to adjacent higher risk areas." State of Utah Resource Management Plan "Actively remove pinyon-juniper encroachment other ecological sites due to its substantial consumption of water its detrimental effects on sagebrush, other vegetation, and wildlife." "Conserve, improve, and restore 500,000 acres of mule deer habitat throughout the state with emphasis on crucial ranges." "Work with landowners, federal government and private organizations to conserve valuable wildlife habitat and winter range along urban interface." "Develop mechanisms and policies to incentivize private landowners throughout Utah to conserve valuable wildlife habitat throughout Utah." Garfield County Resource Management Plan "However, Garfield County encourages vegetative treatments for maximum yield of forage and rangeland health." "Goals include making sure there is quality forage, water, cover, space and security sufficient to support productive populations. This includes conserving habitat for migratory birds, maintaining vegetation treatments that benefit wildlife, prioritizing treatments to improve habitats and coordinating predator control." Upper Sevier River Watershed Management "Treat 2000 acres of sagebrush grasslands on BLM lands over the next 5 years to improve historic and active sage grouse habitats." " Treat pinyon/juniper and reseed and plant deer browse shrubs on 3,000 acres of BLM/Forest Service land"
Fire / Fuels:
This project will decrease the risk of high severity wildfire by reducing fuel loading and promoting the growth of understory vegetation, which are critical to maintaining ecosystem resilience. As demonstrated by the nearby Brianhead fire during the summer of 2017, treatments like these can break up the continuity of fuels and act as fuel breaks. This project will do the same if a fire is ignited nearby where fuel loading is heavy such as in phase 3 pinyon and juniper invaded sites. The current fire regime condition class is moderate (2) and would be reduced to low (1) immediately after treatment. Much of the project area is a mountain sagebrush habitat type which has been identified in the 2015-2025 Utah Wildlife Action Plan as a key habitat. The threats associated with this key habitat are inappropriate fire frequency and intensity. This project will help to reduce fire frequency and intensity by diversifying the understory and removing the large fuels. Reducing the threat of wildfire is also important because of the critical nature of this habitat to mule deer and elk. Completing this project and reducing the risk of fire will help to protect important sagebrush steppe and mountain brush habitat that is critical for priority species including, but not limited to, mule deer and elk. This project will also help to protect the springs and wetlands. If a high severity fire were to move through the area water soil infiltration would decrease, erosion will increase, and the potential for water to get into the aquifer will decrease and spring flows may decrease. The values at risk or VAR are first life and property. This is a signification risk because of the cabin community just to the north of this project. A fire could easily burn to the north and without a reduction of fuels could run on the private and destroy homes, cabins and at the very worse take life. If a fire was to burn in this area thousands of acres of high-quality wildlife forage and habitat would be lost and the Upper Sevier Watershed could become severely impaired.
Water Quality/Quantity:
Reducing the amount of pinyon/juniper will increase and prolong stream flows, while reducing erosion caused by bare soil. The species planted will help stabilize the soil and reduce erosion. Kormas et al. found that drainage's dominated with juniper experience "snow water equivalent peaks higher, snow melts out earlier, and more water is lost to evapotranspiration in catchments when compared to sagebrush steppe vegetation". Kormas et al, Deboodt et al (2008), Baker et al (1984), Roundy et al (2014), Roth et al (2017) and Young et al 2013 have all documented various aspects of water yield and quality benefits from PJ removal projects such as increased and prolonged stream flows, decreased erosion, and delayed snow melt. In this project area there are springs and streams that ultimately make it to the Upper Sevier River which has a 303d listing for phosphorus and sedimentation. there is an old cannel that feeds into two ponds to the west of the project area. In the past the channel has blown out due to the sandy nature of the soils and high water flows at times. we plan to reduce sedimentation into the pond and subsequently into the upper Sevier river. Zeedyk's will be installed in key locations to reduce over all sedimentation. There are also many washes and two unnamed springs to the west of the project area. As explained elsewhere in the project we plan to increase forbs grasses and heathy brush components which will decrease overall sedimentation into Sevier river . Additional research by Young, et. al. (2013) also showed a relationship between tree removal and soil climates and wet days on these sites, which while providing more available moisture for desired vegetation could also provide moisture for weeds. Numerous studies have shown that increased infiltration rates and less overland flow improve both water quality and quantity. As mention the reduction of pinyon and juniper increase water quantity and quality. These benefits may be determined over time by preventing the loss of plant life across the range. overall this project will increase the health of the watershed by decreasing sedimentation into the Sevier river. It will also help create habitat for wildlife and decrease the threat of fire to the nearby communities. It will create more area for livestock grazing and increase food and habitat for the sage grouse.
Compliance:
NRCS will complete its environmental evaluation . All compliance will be completed prior to implementation working through NRCS, and/or WRI. Treatment will be implemented between August 15 to April 15 to ensure that nesting and brood rearing of sage grouse and other birds are not disturbed.
Methods:
Aerial seeding will be done with a diversified mix of grasses and forbs before mastication in the fall. Due to the nature of the terrain the option to use fixed wing or helicopter will be determined by the contractor. Seed will be obtained from the Great Basin Research Center (GBRC). Seed mix used on past phases has proven to be successful and a similar mix will be used. ). Mastication will be done a contractor through state purchasing. The contractor will be required to meet these speciation's: * All pinyon and juniper trees within the designated treatment area are to be removed; this includes all live and dead trees by chipping, shredding, or mulched, unless designated as a leave tree. * No live or dead limbs shall be left on the stump of removed trees. Stump height shall not exceed 6 inches measured on the uphill side. * Any tree or sapling that cannot be removed by mastication machinery must be removed by hand utilizing chainsaws or loppers. * All surplus vegetation and slash shall be mulched or cut into lengths not to exceed 3 feet in length. * Mulch depth shall not exceed six (6) inches. If mulch exceeds six inches in depth, the Contractor shall spread the mulch either mechanically or by hand to reduce depths to six (6) inches or less. Chaining: an anchor chain dragged between two bulldozers will be used to remove juniper and prepare the soil for seeding. Following the initial chaining grass and forb seed will be flown on with a fixed wing aircraft. The area will then be back-chained to cover seed and insure good removal of juniper Zeedyk's will be installed according to NRCS guidelines.
Monitoring:
UDWR/NRCS: photo point monitoring in treatment areas. Sage grouse Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Guide to be done pre-treatment to assess habitat conditions. Range assessment done pre-treatment The UDWR through the migration initiative will provide data show mule deer use with the collared deer in the area. Since May 2020, 0 collared mule been on the property. But when the compare to the Sevy Bench WRI 4958 there were 17 deer with 13,576 points. This illustrates the use that this area receives from wildlife. We could expect similar results once the treatment complete. Continual use of this resource help us understand mule deer and other wildlife movements and use of this property. Dr. Nicki Frey has said that sage grouse use the riparian area consistently, and with improvements we could expect that grouse will move in to these areas.
Partners:
Permittees are willing to do these improvements to their private ground to improve habitat, and livestock production. They have applied for NRCS assistance through the EQIP IRA program. TLA is a main land owner in this project NRCS encourages work in this area to support birds and their habitat. Also increasing production of viable livestock production is an important issue for the NRCS in supporting conservation on the ground. UDWR is supportive of improving greater sage grouse habitat and providing improved mule deer habitat. The CCARM sage grouse local working group has ranked this project as a priority and has provided its support for the project. USFWS will be providing funding/planning/implementation support and as the project falls within their programs focus habitat and species.
Future Management:
The private landowner will also be entering into a NRCS contract and be obligated to implement practices and allow monitoring and meet future obligations of that contract. Landowner will sign an agreement stating minimum 2-year rest in the seeded areas. UDWR continue to monitor big game through aerial surveys and GPS data as part of the Migration Initiative. We feel with these management activities, the stated objectives have a high likelihood of being met for this project.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
This project will have a big benefit to the grazing operation. The Bullhog and Chaining will provide a significant increase in available forage once seeding is established and help with cattle distribution in the future. Zeedyk's will increase mesic habitat and decrease erosion. This property is part of a the only premium mule deer management unit in the state of Utah. It has gain name of producing trophy quality deer. As mention deer use this property throughout the summer and fall months. Enhancing the quality and quantity of forage will theoretically improve body condition when these deer leave for the toughest months of their live cycle, winter.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$588,815.00 $0.00 $588,815.00 $2,500.00 $591,315.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Contractual Services Fence materials and construction 4115 ft* $7/ft $28,805.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Archaeological Clearance Archaeological Clearance on the mastication 1084 ac*$70 /ac $73,360.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Contractual Services Chaining of 517ac*$160/ac $82,720.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Contractual Services Seed Flight 897 ac*$15/ac $13,455.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Contractual Services Mastication of 567 Ac at $425/ac $240,975.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Seed (GBRC) Seed $160/ acre 897 acres $143,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Personal Services (permanent employee) DWR/NRCS Partner Biologist to plan and contract planned items $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 2026
Contractual Services Zeedyk installation 20 structures at $300 per structure $6,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$588,815.00 $0.00 $588,815.00 $2,500.00 $591,315.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
NRCS-Sage Grouse Initiative (SGI) Pending NRCS funding Producer 2 $325,900.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Funded NRCS contract Producer 1 $197,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (UWRI) funding requested through WRI $65,715.00 $0.00 $0.00 2026
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) DWR/NRCS Partner Biologist to plan and contract labor $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 2026
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Droughts Low
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
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
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Pronghorn R3
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Pronghorn R3
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Monarch butterfly N3
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Habitats
Habitat
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Droughts High
Mountain Sagebrush
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Project Comments
Comment 01/10/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
Nice matching dollars being brought to the project.
Comment 01/12/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Thanks Clint. Interesting that the next comment question the partnerships.....
Comment 01/12/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Carrie Howard
With the new rubric, partner inclusion points are more defined. Can you expand on if consideration was given to expand the project to a broader landscape? Thanks
Comment 01/12/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
We always work to bring as many partners to the table as possible. In this case is no different. I counted 5 listed and I failed to list SITLA as a partner, so that would make 6 partners. The private landowner on the north and south has a NRCS contract and has been treating rabbit brush for the past 2 years. He was not interested in doing a WRI proposal at the time and has been completing his project on schedule. To the south is a SITLA block that we hope to work on in the near future too with the permittee. That will tied the Sevy Bench Project to this project. To the north is are several BLM projects that have been completed. Sandwich in-between multiple small landowners that we will attempt to work with in the coming year also.
Comment 01/13/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Carrie Howard
Stan and Clint, thanks for the reply and awesome partnership inclusion. This helps clarify the second part of the partnership section for the new rubric.
Comment 01/12/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
Good question, what Stan said, I have no more to add. Thanks for reading the project Carrie.
Comment 01/12/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
Actually I do have something to add about partnerships now ha. Although not in the ranking criteria specifically but worthy of elevating partnership points I feel is when project managers and partners bring matching funds. Just a thought.
Comment 01/20/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Keith Day
Stan, You call this "an area designated as important for birds," but only offer benefits to sagebrush species. There will be loss for p/j species. Do you plan to survye for nesting pinyon jays? Keith
Comment 01/21/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Thanks for your comment Keith. We will follow all NRCS and USFWS environmental standards during the implementation of this project. Implementation will take place August 15-April 1 to avoid any disturbance to breeding and nesting birds. Healthy mosaic of sagebrush and pinyon juniper habitats promote ecological sustainability.
Comment 02/08/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Tyler Thompson
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 02/08/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Tyler Thompson
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 02/08/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Tyler Thompson
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 02/08/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Tyler Thompson
This comment has been deleted by author or admin.
Comment 01/31/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Nicki Frey
Stan, While my telemetry hasn't documented birds actually in the study area much, it should not be interpreted that sage-grouse don't use the area. They do use the riparian areas heavily. Increasing suitable habitat adjacent to the riparian areas could go a long way to providing necessary summer lands.
Comment 01/31/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Thanks for the information. I am hoping by creating more connectivity that essentially the birds will find their way up there. I will load you collar data.
Comment 02/04/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: David Dodds
Hey Stan, Thanks for reaching out to Garfield County to talk about this project. Removing encroaching pinyon and juniper from our rangelands and increasing forage is a major goal of the County and fits the goals of our County Resource Management Plan. I appreciate that the project is looking to treat the PJ at an earlier stage of encroachment to reduce costs. I also appreciate that you have brought additional funds through NRCS SGI. Overall, I think it's a good project on many levels and you have our full support. Thanks again for taking the time to bring this to our attention. David Dodds Garfield County Public Works Director
Comment 02/07/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Dave Thanks for the comment of support. Stan
Comment 02/07/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Judi Brawer
What cultural surveys and tribal consultation are being/have been conducted for the SITLA portion of this project?
Comment 02/10/2022 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
The 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. Treatments that have been identified by SHPO and a state or federal agency as not having the potential to affect cultural resources (e.g. aerial seeding) generally do not receive a cultural resource survey. 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.
Comment 01/20/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Nicki Frey
The Color Country sage grouse working group thinks that this project will be great for thinning out woodland canopy cover near an active sage-grouse lek. The area would benefit from some grass/forb cover.
Comment 01/25/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Thanks Nicki
Comment 02/06/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Barbara Sugarman
I do not think there will likely be any impact, but there is a Utah prairie dog colony approximately 0.5 of a mile north of the project area. I just wanted to get it on your radar just in case you might not have known. Thanks!
Comment 02/07/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Thanks Barbara. Is this colony occupied? Keith and I talked about it because I was claiming them as a species that would benefit from a similar project and if I remember correctly he said it was vacant. I could be wrong and usually I am when I get out of wheel house. Shoot me a email if you would like.
Comment 02/08/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Barbara Sugarman
Hi Stan, the colony is occupied and had a count of 20 UPDs in 2022. The colony is on private land and likely will not be impacted by this project. That being said, UPD colonies are known to shift, so I wanted to be sure to keep it on your radar just in case. I agree with Keith's assessment that UPDs will likely not benefit from this project, but I do not think it will negatively impact them either. I am happy to talk further too if you want any more details. Thanks Stan!
Comment 02/08/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Copy that.
Comment 02/21/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Stubbs
The Utah PLC supports this project. It is very important that we maintain prior projects so that the rain stays in a healthy state. This helps our watershed, our grazing and our wildlife. Thank you
Comment 02/21/2023 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Thanks Scott
Comment 01/27/2025 Type: 1 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Hal Great project!!! Great job on the partners that pay! Being on the other side of the table now, here are a couple things I thought of as I ranked the project for you to consider. Talk about "Watershed" benefits. Wildlife are great indicators of watershed health, but sometimes we focus on indicators and miss the whole picture. The other thing I was going to mention is added some more information about how this project will benefit Sage grouse, I see the paragraph, about them, but this really could be one of those projects that would be expanding/restoring sage grouse habitat. Also with the seed mix, I would encourage you to consider a pollinator or two as benefiters from the project. Good work!!!
Comment 01/28/2025 Type: 1 Commenter: Hal Guymon
Thank you Stan, The project Had a great back bone to start off of ;) I will go in and talk more about how this benefits the watershed. I will also beef up my sage grouse section. Your right this project has the potential to help out lots of sage grouse I will emphasize this. I will Also add a pollinator as a benefiter the seed mix is flower and forb heavy. Thank you for your suggestions Stan.
Comment 02/05/2025 Type: 1 Commenter: Kevin Gunnell
Overall I think the project looks really good. I just wanted your thoughts on the efficacy of the chain in the old treatment. Looking at pictures and aerial imagery it looks like there are a lot of smaller trees. Is there concern for whips and a need for a quick follow up lop and scatter? Is there a place to maybe expand the bullhog and do some lop and scatter in the areas with less encroachment? Also, the sagebrush seed rate seems a little low, but there also appears to be a pretty good residual understory so it may not be necessary.
Comment 02/06/2025 Type: 1 Commenter: Scott Chamberlain
I really appreciate how you've left wildlife corridors. Especially corridors that are long the top of ridges and or slopes. Leaving trees in the bottom of a steep drainage does very little for them. I have personally walked this area and found that the deer and elk use the ridge top or just off the ridge when going back and forth for their nightly travels. Thanks for leaving them some cover.
Comment 02/01/2023 Type: 3 Commenter: Arie Leeflang
Hey Stan - looks like a great project. Looking at the archaeology budget, I would humbly suggest bumping up the per-acre rate a bit. Say ~$55/acre. I'm going to cross my fingers and hope rates come in lower this year, but let's be safe and bump it up. Thanks in advance for considering this.
Comment 02/01/2023 Type: 3 Commenter: Stan Gurley
Done! Thank you All Knowing Archeologist! Humbly of course.
Completion
Start Date:
End Date:
FY Implemented:
Final Methods:
Project Narrative:
Future Management:
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
1317 Fence Construction Barbed wire
3172 Water development point feature Construction Water Control Structure
14710 Terrestrial Treatment Area Anchor chain Ely (2-way)
14710 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
14716 Terrestrial Treatment Area Bullhog Full size
14716 Terrestrial Treatment Area Seeding (primary) Broadcast (aerial-fixed wing)
14717 Terrestrial Treatment Area Bullhog Full size
Project Map
Project Map