Strawberry Ridge Watershed Restoration Project FY25
Project ID: 6870
Status: Current
Fiscal Year: 2025
Submitted By: N/A
Project Manager: Jeremy Nelson
PM Agency: U.S. Forest Service
PM Office: Kamas/Heber Ranger District
Lead: U.S. Forest Service
WRI Region: Central
Description:
The Forest Service is proposing treatments to improve wildlife habitat and improve forest health for seral aspen, aspen-conifer, and conifer stands in the Strawberry Ridge area. We plan to target 881 acres of lop/scatter and mastication treatments within conifer stands around the Daniel's Summit and Bryant's Fork summer homes. Reconstruct ~0.9 mile of fence to complete a riparian exclosure fence. Noxious weed treatments will be conducted on 101 acres south of Horse Creek.
Location:
Located 20 miles southeast of Heber City, UT, west of Strawberry Reservoir. The vegetation treatments are located near Daniel's Summit and Bryant's Fork summer homes. The fence exclosure is located in the upper reach of the Strawberry River. Noxious weed treatments are near Horse Creek.
Project Need
Need For Project:
In the western and southern drainages of Strawberry Ridge, northern aspect conifer stands have grown extremely dense. This density shades the understory, causing a paucity of grass and forb species that are essential for many wildlife species, especially mule deer and elk, to maintain good body condition and survive the winters. These thick stands of conifers with lots of downed dead trees also make it difficult for animals to travel through the forest and these areas result in a loss of habitat. Collared movement data for mule deer and elk show an avoidance of northern aspect conifer stands on the western drainages of Strawberry Ridge. By thinning the northern aspect conifer stands, these wildlife focused treatments will simultaneously improve mobility and forage. Furthermore, treatments will improve the forest health outlook and reduce probability of high severity fire by reducing stand density and horizontal/vertical connectivity of fuels. In the northern area of Strawberry Ridge, spruce beetle outbreaks from the early 2000s to late 2010s have killed nearly all of the mature overstory spruce in forested areas of the ridge. Additionally, the invasive insect, balsam wooly Adelgid (BWA) has been conclusively identified in the Strawberry area as of 2019. BWA attacks and kills all age classes of subalpine fir and white fir. The combined effect in conifer stands from the insect activity has and will continue to produce stands full of standing dead trees. There is an approximate window of 10-30 years where the large dead trees will stay standing. However, once they fall to the forest floor, the addition of large, 1,000 hour fuels greatly increases the risk of high severity fire. It is expected that BWA will infest and kill weakened or stressed subapline fir in the coming years, further adding to the fuel loading. On the other hand, in seral aspen stands, the conifer component (spruce, fir, and lodgepole pine) has been slowly increasing, reducing aspen health and cover. This conifer encroachment into seral aspen stands has been offset by some logging since European settlement. However, fire constitutes the main check on conifer in aspen, and has been mostly suppressed in the last 150 years. The current conditions outlined above are occurring at the watershed scale. If left unchecked, poor mobility and forage for big game will continue and the potential for high severity fire and pervasive poor forest health conditions will be the common conditions in conifer stands across these watersheds. High severity fire, if it occurs at a large enough scale, would be very detrimental to the Strawberry Basin water supply, fisheries, and local recreation economy. Furthermore, in 2018, the Dollar Ridge, which was on the far east side of Strawberry Reservoir, affected the water quality and fisheries where the Strawberry River exits Strawberry Reservoir to the south. This water supplies many communities in the Uinta Basin and Wasatch Front. Future treatments to improve wildlife habitat, forest health, and the fire and fuels outlook will consist of hand, mechanical, and prescribed fire methods. The right tool for the job would be used, consistent with the forest plan, law, and regulations. In East Daniels Allotment located on Upper Strawberry River, a buck and pull fence was constructed to exclude grazing animals from roughly one mile of riparian habitat. This fence line prevented cattle from entering the Riparian habitat corridor and consuming vegetation that provided canopy shading to Bonneville Cutthroat Trout. Further, the removal of native grasses and shrubs adjacent to strawberry river that protected soils during high seasonal flow events have been impacted. The East Daniel's Riparian Habitat exclosure fence would be constructed to also prevent entry by grazing animals that may cause damage to the area.
Objectives:
Objective 1: Vegetation projects involving timber sales, fuels reduction treatments and prescribed fire will be implemented over the next 5-7 years to promote wildlife habitat, increase ecosystem biodiversity and make forest landscapes fire resilient. Public benefits for improved hunting, fishing and other motorized and non-motorized recreational opportunities. Objective 2: Reconstruct East Daniel's Riparian habitat exclusion fence- Remove approximately one mile of old buck/pole fence materials. Install approx. one mile of barbed wire fence to complete updates on the exclusion. Objective 3: Noxious weed control - Spot spray 102 acres within the Strawberry Ridge Aspen Regeneration project to address concerns with noxious weeds.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
Veg treatments are designed to reduce the threat of uncharacteristic fire behavior, not completely remove the threat of fire. The current state of this landscape is due to the absence of fire, due to fire suppression activities and lack of active forest management. This project is a good candidate for restoration work because it is critical to wildlife as a migration corridor and critical summer range (See wildlife tracker documents). Timber Sale activities will improve existing and future timber stands that have been affected by bark beetles and other forest pathogens. Fuels reduction treatments will be targeting areas that have high density of non-commercial timber and fuel to reduce the potential for passive and active crown fire behavior. These treatments will benefits areas identified as values at risk, such as primary and secondary residences, forest infrastructure or watersheds (see Fire Behavior Summary document). In certain locations, prescribed fire will be applied to the landscape to reduce accumulated fuel loads and reduce the risk of uncharacteristic fire behavior (see Fuels Summary document). These prescribed fires will be implemented over the course of 5-10 years. Riparian fence - The exclusion fence that protects essential breeding habitat for Bonneville Cutthroat Trout in the upper reaches of the Strawberry River has deteriorated and is no longer functioning effectively to protect the riparian corridor from adjacent grazing allotments. The riparian corridor is also an essential habitat for Boreal Toad. Preventing entry to this portion of the river by non-preferred animals provides a protective zone where these species can exist without risk of increased mortality by trampling or by increased temperatures as a result of decreased vegetation. Monitoring noxious weeds after project completion is required in the Uinta Forest Plan. Two years after the completion of the Strawberry Ridge Aspen Regeneration project (WRI project #4982), we have some concerns on musk thistle being established in the area. To prevent a monoculture of musk thistle, we need to go back and spot spray these weeds within the aspen stands. Removing this weed will give the aspen community time to establish and become a healthy ecosystem. Besides Bonneville cutthroat trout, all the species listed in the species section will utilize aspen stands in various degrees (ex: food, nesting habitat, travel corridors, etc.).
Relation To Management Plan:
Uinta Forest Plan - 2003 Land and Resource Management Plan, Uinta National Forest: https://www.fs.usda.gov/detailfull/uwcnf/landmanagement/planning/?cid=stelprdb5076960&width=full - Plan sites Forest-wide goals and sub-goals on management of wildlife (pgs 2-5 & 2-10), vegetation (pgs 2-5 & 2-6), noxious weeds (pg 2-7 and Objective 2-8), ripirian health (2-11 & 2-12), timber and livestock (pg 2-16) and fuels/fire (pgs 3-14). These projects will address multiple goals, sub-goals, and objectives for the resources listed above to enhance flora and fauna habitat, maintain riparian health, and reduce undesirable fire effects. Utah Mule Deer Statewide Management Plan 2019-2024: The project is designated crucial summer range for Mule Deer. Section IV Statewide management goals and objectives. This project will address Habitat Objective 2: Improve the quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer on a minimum of 500,000 acres of crucial range by 2013 (p11-12). Strategy F. Encourage land managers to manage portions of pinyon-juniper woodlands and aspen/conifer forests in early successional stages. https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/bg/mule_deer_plan_2019.pdf Utah Elk Statewide Management Plan (2010): The project is designated crucial summer range / calving habitat for Elk. It will address Habitat Objective 2: Improve the quality and quantity of forage and cover on 250,000 acres of elk habitat with emphasis on calving habitat and upper elevation elk winter range by the end of this plan. Under this objective, strategies D and F apply. Strategy D. Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve elk habitat with emphasis on calving habitat and winter ranges. Strategy F. Encourage land managers to manage portions of forests in early succession stages through the use of controlled burning and logging. Controlled burning should only be used in areas where there are minimal invasive weed and/or safety concerns. This project area is of minimal weed concern. https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/bg/elk_plan.pdf Wasatch County Resource Management Plan: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Cn80Wzst8eoa0o_BqoTBHOPfPm8M6MIe Pgs: 300, 314, 315, 320 address the County's desire for road access, wildlife, fisheries, Timber and fire prevention. Utah County RMP: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Cn80Wzst8eoa0o_BqoTBHOPfPm8M6MIe Document cites need and County support for: Fire Management (p31) Recreation and Tourism (p72) Threatened, Endangered, & Sensitive Species (p78) https://documents.deq.utah.gov/legacy/programs/water-quality/watersheds/docs/2015/08Aug/StrawberryRiver.pdf Document cites that protection of the headwater areas for the Strawberry watershed is a priority for US Forest Service, Utah Division of Water Quality, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, and the Friends of Strawberry Valley and their partners. (p44) Wasatch County Weed Plan (last update 4/2022): Goal- The Wasatch County Weed Board strives to increase public knowledge about invasive weeds by supporting local programs (Cooperative Weed Management Area), government agencies, and private land owners, to help contain and control the spread of invasive, noxious weeds. The collective, cooperative efforts of all will help conserve and enhance our natural resources in Wasatch County. Musk Thistle is listed as a Class 3 (Containment) on the State List. Weed control efforts may be directed at reducing or eliminating new or expanding weed populations: Wasatch County Weed Department, "Wasatch County Weed Plan" (Last Modified 4/2022), https://wasatch.utah.gov/Portals/0/PublicWorks/Pdfs/Weeds/Weed%20Plan-%20Updated%202022.pdf?ver=2023-01-24-133000-000
Fire / Fuels:
This 881-acre project is the first of many timber and fuel treatments planned for the Strawberry Restoration over the next 5-10 years. The main emphasis on these first projects areas; Daniels Summit, Foreman Hollow, Lodgepole Campground, Bryant's Fork Sumer Homes, and Parker Reservoir identified these as locations with High Values at Risk (VAR). (See Fire Behavior Summary document attached). The design features of this project will reduce the risk of large unwanted fires by decreasing and removing hazardous fuels. Monitoring for invasive species in different forest cover types as fuel treatments are completed will also be conducted to promote landscape resilience. Hand, cut, and pile treatments are designed to reduce conifer in areas of dense conifer forest types or in areas of conifer expansion in aspens stands. Hand cut and pile treatments surrounding Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) areas near Daniels Summit and Bryant's Fork are preferred for reducing fuels and conducting prescribed burning during the spring, fall and winter months. The hand cut and pile, lop and scatter and mechanical piling or mastication projects near Forman Hollow, Lodgepole Campground and Parker Reservoir are fuels reduction treatments designed to protect Forest infrastructure, human health, safety, and scenic values. In areas of lop and scatter, project managers may either elect to burn the material or leave it on the ground to promote coarse woody debris to decompose and provide nutrients to the soils. Mechanical piling or mastication will be conducted where access, slope and terrain are more suitable and effective for equipment. These areas are heavily used during the summer months for a variety of recreational activities and human use, such as camping, hiking, hunting, and snowmobiling. The project area provides for critical wildlife habitat for elk, moose, deer, and wild turkey (see habitat tab for all species). Range management benefits to this project for cattle and sheep allotments as well. This project is in the Duchesne River Watershed which is predominantly in Fire Regime group III (35-200 years low to mixed severity) and IV (35-200 years stand replacement), with an intermixed Condition Class of 2 (moderate departure 34-66%, declining ecological integrity or 3 (high departure 67-100%, poor ecological integrity). *East Daniels Fence Construction will protect riparian habitat corridors. Riparian corridors have been shown to act as natural fire breaks. Riparian habitat is quite resilient following fire events and studies have highlighted their importance/influence in fire/fuel management on the landscape. *Fire and riparian ecosystems in landscapes of the western USA. Kathleen A. Dwire, J. Boone Kauffman,. Forest and Ecology Management 178, 61-77. 2003.
Water Quality/Quantity:
Water Quantity: Mosaic aspen stands gather more snow in openings and that snow melts more slowly than in full canopy stands. Compared to conifer forests, more snow reaches the ground in aspen stands. Leading to increased snowpack that last longer, providing greater water quantity. "Small openings within these stands were effective snow traps and accumulating one-third more snow than elsewhere in the stand. They found that snow ablated 30% more slowly in these openings, extending the snowmelt runoff or groundwater recharge later into the spring." "Aspen forests (canopy) intercept only minimal amounts of snow, especially compared to coniferous forests, where much of the snow may never reach the ground. In central Utah, Harper found 5% to 70% less water in the snowpack under mixed aspen-conifer stands than under pure aspen. Dunford and Niederhof (1944) found 12% more snow under aspen than in the open. Nearby lodgepole pine contained 12% less snow than the open area, which was approximately 75% of the amount found under aspen. Intercepted snow may evaporate more readily than snow on the ground because of greater surface area exposure to radiation and wind." Additionally, due to warming climatic conditions, increased stress to forests has the potential to cause large-scale die-offs from insect, disease, and fire interactions. Locally we have seen massive forest die-offs due to mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine and spruce beetle in Engelmann spruce in the last 20 years. Large-scale die-offs have potential to negatively effect water quality (Mikkelson et al. 2012). Treatments would help to reduce likelihood of such large scale loss of forest cover and habitat. Treatment types planned are thinning, conifer encroachment removal in aspen, stand structure and age-class treatments, and dry/wet meadow restoration. Excerpts from: https://www.fs.usda.gov/rm/pubs_rm/rm_gtr119.pdf https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7753&context=aspen_bib https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1724 Example of potential contracts specs: https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprd3848918.pdf Water Quality will not decrease as BMP's will be utilized to remove potential impacts during treatment. Wetland Encroachment- Removal of conifers may increase water quantity. Water Quality will not change as BMP's will be utilized to remove potential impacts.
Compliance:
All NEPA requirements will be complete in the spring of 2024 for the vegetation component of this proposal. Archeological clearances were conducted in the fall of 2023 and the project can proceed. No further NEPA is required for the riparian habitat exclosure fence since this action falls under maintenance.
Methods:
Describe the actions, activities, tasks to be implemented as part of the proposed project; how these activities will be carried out, equipment to be used, when, and by whom East Daniel's Riparian Exclosure Fence construction will occur as follows: 1. USFS/UDWR Dedicated hunters will remove and dispose of old fence remnants. 2. USFS/UDWR will purchase fence equipment and tools needed for project using WRI funds. 3. USFS will coordinate with UDWR Central Region Volunteer Program to utilize dedicated hunters to construct fence. 4. USFS employees will be present to coordinate and assist with construction as needed.
Monitoring:
USFS stand exams have provide quantifiable pre implementation forest structure and composition data. Immediately post and then 3-5 years following treatment, stand stocking and composition would be measured. Wildlife and range will also monitor post implementation for weeds and habitat conditions within the vegetation treatments. Also, the wildlife tracker will be used to determine if ungulates are utilizing the treated areas or avoidance is still occurring. The Song Meter minis will be use to collect pre and post implementation data of the present of all species in the area (ex: bat, bird, amphibian, etc.). These recorders will capture any acoustic sounds emitted. Tweaks to future treatments could occur due to the results from the data collected. Range permittees, FS range and wildlife personnel will annually pick up/lay down the enclosure fence to ensure the life of the fence, and fix any minimal repairs needed while checking that livestock are remaining outside the riparian corridor.
Partners:
The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources is heavily involved and invested in this project. The UDWR worked with the USFS to identify treatment areas and helped provide funding through WRI on the previous phases of this project to help complete the NEPA process. Project implementation/contracting oversite will occur through a joint effort with the MDF, NWTF, and USFS. Grazing associations and USFS will meet annually to discuss potential pasture usage adjustments, future management inputs, and coordination on fence stand up/lay down timing and repairs.
Future Management:
Future management of the project are specified in the 5-7-year Strawberry Ridge Restoration vegetation management plan, Uinta Wasatch Cache Land Resource Management Plan, as well as the Wasatch Wildfire Crisis Strategy Landscape, prioritizing fuels reduction and timber harvesting to meet project goals and objectives to ensure long-term success. Follow-up treatments may include post-commercial thinning and prescribed fire activities. Vegetation Projects (commercial harvest, thinning, habitat improvements, road work) 2023-2030. Prescribed fire implementation would include areas of pile burning, burning lop and scatter treatments to promote aspen regeneration for wildlife habitat, composition, structure and age class diversity. Prescribed fire would be used to reduce/remove 10 hr., 100 hr., and 1000 hr. according to Forest Plan. Forest cover type, minimum of 50 downed logs per 10 acres 6-12" DBH and 8 feet in length. (LRMP p4-42). Follow-up noxious weed spot treatments is expected in the Aspen Regeneration project until the problem is under control. Monitoring for noxious weeds in the Strawberry Ridge Restoration vegetation management plan mentioned above will occur and any infestations will be address accordingly.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
The project area is designated as important big game habitat for mule deer and elk. It is also utilized by recreationists for hiking, big game hunting, fly fishing, and antler collection. Introducing a more frequent disturbance regime will create ease of access to recreationists in the short term and reduce the threat of stand replacing fire to these resources in the long term. Additional effects include local improvements to floodplain features due to the strategic placement of large woody debris that will reinforce stream morphology. Eleven Federal Range Management Units will be directly affected; Bryant's Fork, Mud Creek Cattle, Mud Creek Sheep, Twin Peaks, East Daniels, West Daniels, Little Valley, Streeper Creek North, Streeper Creek South, Squaw Creek and Wallsburg. The amount of forage available to livestock is expected to increase as a result of the project. With the removal of conifers and oak, the amount of usable grasses and forbs is expected to increase. Due to the increased forage provided by the proposed action, livestock distribution and management is expected to improve and become more sustainable. The reduction of conifer dominated overstories and the restoration of aspen stands will improve the resilience of the landscape to future disturbances and create a more sustainable supply of timber products including; sawtimber, biomass and firewood.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$264,244.00 $875,805.00 $1,140,049.00 $247,142.80 $1,387,191.80
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Materials and Supplies Weed Spraying chemicals & supplies $0.00 $45.00 $0.00 2025
Contractual Services Noxious Weeds Contract Crew to spray 101 acres - 4 (crew member) x $144 (cost/person) x 10 (days) Line Item in Agreement $0.00 $5,760.00 $0.00 2025
Other Dedicated Hunter Volunteers - $30hr x 8 hrs x 5 days= $1,200 per volunteer, for 5 volunteers= $6,000 $0.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 2025
Personal Services (seasonal employee) DWR seasonal employee time to monitor contractors and conduct wildlife surveys. Specifically, small mammal surveys and wildlife cameras/acoustic recorders for birds and amphibians. Also doing back-end data processing. $3,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Materials and Supplies Fence construction in East Daniels. $12,000.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 2025
Materials and Supplies 6 Wildlife Acoustics Song Meter Mini Bat 2 Li-ion (acoustic and ultrasonic detectors) to monitor pre- and post-project bird and bat communities. One detector = $849 x 6 =$5,094 $5,094.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Materials and Supplies 6 acoustic microphone stubs for the Wildlife Acoustics Song Meter Mini Bat Li-Lion to record bird acoustics. One microphone = $75 $450.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Personal Services (permanent employee) Prescribe fire implementation-permanent employees, Bryant's Fork, Forman Hollow, Lodgepole and Parker Res units 881 acres @ $100 per acres. $0.00 $0.00 $88,000.00 2026
Materials and Supplies 64 GB SD cards for acoustic monitors. Lithium-ion batteries for monitors and cameras. 3 cable locks for acoustic monitors. $1,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Materials and Supplies Wildlife cameras for monitoring wildlife use of treatment areas before and after the project. 10 cameras x $200 = $2,000 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Contractual Services Foreman Hollow Hand Cut & Pile/ Mastication 503 Acres $240,000.00 $870,000.00 $0.00 2025
Personal Services (permanent employee) US FS 4 Perm employees @ 35% time GS11(Timber, Fuels, Fisheries, Wildlife) GS09 Fuel Specialist, Fuels Tech NWTF position $0.00 $0.00 $112,142.80 2025
Motor Pool 4 FS vehicles for project monitoring and project inspection $0.00 $0.00 $40,000.00 2025
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$1,140,036.00 $875,805.00 $2,015,841.00 $247,000.00 $2,262,841.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
USFS National Priority Landscape (NPL) - WCS A177 $870,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Internal Conservation Permit S0DE Deer $50,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
USFS National Priority Landscape (NPL) - WCS Foreman Hollow Hand Cut & Pile/ Mastication 503 Acres $0.00 $870,000.00 $0.00 2025
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (UWRI) Weed Contract Crew $0.00 $5,760.00 $0.00 2025
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative (UWRI) Weed spraying chemicals and supplies $0.00 $45.00 $0.00 2025
National Wild Turkey Federation (NWTF) S024 $7,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
United States Forest Service (USFS) Prescribe fire implementation-permanent employees, Bryant's Fork, Forman Hollow, Lodgepole and Parker Res units 881 acres @ $100 per acres. $0.00 $0.00 $88,000.00 2026
Habitat Council Account QHCR $30,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
United States Forest Service (USFS) US FS 4 Perm employees @ 35% time GS11 $0.00 $0.00 $112,000.00 2026
United States Forest Service (USFS) 4 FS vehicles for project monitoring and project inspection $0.00 $0.00 $40,000.00 2025
United States Forest Service (USFS) FS personnel East Daniel's fence reconstruction oversite $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 2025
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) S025 $30,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Utah Archery Association (UAA) S052 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
MDF Admin Expo Fund ($3.50) S113 $50,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
DNR Watershed U004 $97,536.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Volunteers - Dedicated Hunters $30hr x 8 hrs =$240 time 5 days= $1,200 per volunteer for 5 volunteers= $6,000 $0.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 2025
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Black Bear
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Bonneville Cutthroat Trout N4 R1
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) High
Cougar
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Domestic Livestock
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Invasive Plant Species – Non-native Low
Flammulated Owl N4
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management Low
Flammulated Owl N4
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Low
Lewis's Woodpecker N4
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Lewis's Woodpecker N4
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Moose R3
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland High
Ruffed Grouse R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Medium
Snowshoe Hare R4
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Western Toad N4
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) High
Western Toad N4
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Low
Habitats
Habitat
Not Listed
Threat Impact
No Threat NA
Aquatic-Forested
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) Medium
Aquatic-Scrub/Shrub
Threat Impact
Improper Grazing – Livestock (current) High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Camping (Dispersed) Low
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Droughts Medium
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Problematic Insects – Native High
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Problematic Plant Species – Native Upland Very High
Project Comments
Comment 01/12/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Jeremy Nelson
Not Listed Habitat- Migration corridor for games species; Mule Deer, elk and Moose in mixed conifer stands
Comment 01/27/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Jacob Hall
The proposal mentions grazing associations and permittees being involved in some ways, but have you explored options for those groups bringing funds to the project? This is an expensive project, and there are opportunities for permittees to bring funds to projects like this.
Comment 01/31/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Anthony Gray
We will talk with our range conservationist and ask her about those funding options that the permittees can explore. The permittees may have already applied for those funds when they repaired their responsible portion of the fence, so they could know the details for applying. Thanks for bringing up that the permittees do have other avenues they can go down for funds.
Comment 02/07/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Sandy Wingert
Anthony - Years ago we used GIP and NPS funds to help with this project. If interested, we can talk about more about the NPS funds as DWQ manages it.
Comment 01/30/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Clint Wirick
Curious, why barbed wire for the riparian fence? I'm just curious because my unskillful observation is you get a lot of traffic around riparian areas from animals and people. A lot of things want to go over/under/through to get to water, again including people. I've try to lean towards some other sort of wildlife and people friendly fence that is easier to get through like a buck-and-pole, post-wire with pole top rail, or whatever those wood A looking fences are called.
Comment 02/01/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Anthony Gray
The reasons we decided to go with a 4 strand barb wire fence are: 1. outside of the permittee grazing season (mid June to end of Sept.), the fence will be laid down. This secondarily reduces damage from over the snow vehicles during winter months. 2. matching aesthetics to the conjoining fence lines. 3. the fence will be built to wildlife friendly fencing standards so one of the wires will be barbless. This will reduce fence crossing associated mortalities. 4. the deferred maintenance cost is lower over time compared to previous buck and pole design. We do appreciate the point for access. We can integrate the construction of multiple stepladder stiles at convenient locations adjacent to parking areas to provide recreational access to riparian areas.
Comment 02/05/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Todd Black
paucity--really is that a word you learned in 1st grade:) Nice! way to increase my vocabulary and hope i can use it without thinking in a normal every day conversation.
Comment 02/07/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Robert Edgel
This is a great project that we at DWR have been partners on for several years now. We are very excited to finally be through the NEPA process and to begin work on the ground. A big thank you to the USFS for working with DWR in the planning of this project and we feel that this is one of the most beneficial projects for benefiting big game species such as mule deer, elk, and moose in our region. I also applaud the efforts to combine the riparian work with the upland work that we have planned. Moving forward let's continue to collaborate for future phases of this project. There are other opportunities that we can add to future phases to possibly benefit boreal toads. THanks!
Comment 02/07/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Evan DeHamer
I'll echo Edgel's comments... think this is the right work, right locations and right scale to truly benefit the Strawberry Ridge area from many angles, for this phase and the multiple phases to come in subsequent years. MDF appreciates all the partners involved in getting it put together and actionable NEPA clearances finished, particularly the UWC staff. Looking forward to how that summer range responds!
Comment 02/13/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Aaron Sisson
I believe this project will help Big game species in the area. This project would be high priority if left to me.
Comment 03/27/2024 Type: 3 Commenter: Alison Whittaker
You have quite a few things in the funding section listed with UWRI as the funding source but the amount is in the Through Other column. Any funds that start or end up with DWR needs to be in the Through WRI/DWR column. It doesn't matter what color the funds are. What determines whether or not it goes in the Through WRI/DWR column is if at any time the money goes through DWR accounts. Please update your budget so that your total request for funding from WRI is clear. One other thing about your funding section you don't have to change but may make it easier in the future is you don't have to itemize each funding amount. You have already done that above in the budget section. You can lump the funding requests by source and if you want to make a short note of what it's for you can.
Completion
Start Date:
End Date:
FY Implemented:
Final Methods:
Project Narrative:
Future Management:
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
1203 Fence Reconstruction Barbed wire
13310 Terrestrial Treatment Area Herbicide application Spot treatment
13311 Terrestrial Treatment Area Forestry practices Thinning (non-commercial)
Project Map
Project Map