Vernal Municipal Watershed Restoration Project Phase 3
Project ID: 7105
Status: Cancelled
Fiscal Year: 2025
Submitted By: N/A
Project Manager: Ryan Mower
PM Agency: U.S. Forest Service
PM Office: Ashley National Forest
Lead: U.S. Forest Service
WRI Region: Northeastern
Description:
The Vernal Municipal Watershed Restoration Project is designed to be a broad ranging project that will protect the water supply for Vernal, Utah and the adjacent communities. The project will also benefit many other resources including fuels, wildlife, fisheries, forest health and range management. The project treatments will include stream restoration, shaded fuel breaks, meadow restoration, and timber stand improvements.
Location:
The project area is within the Vernal Ranger District on the Ashley National Forest. It includes areas primarily within Uintah County along the White Cloud loop west of Highway 191. The project includes the northern areas of the Vernal Municipal Watershed: including Dry Fork drainage on the west and Little Brush Creek on the eastern end.
Project Need
Need For Project:
The Vernal Municipal Watershed Protection Project is a multi-year phased project. All phases are needed to conserve and protect the watershed resources located within and adjacent to the Ashley Karst National Recreation and Geologic Area (NRGA). The Ashley Karst NRGA received special designation by Congress in March of 2019. The purposes of the designation are to, "conserve and protect the watershed, geological, recreational, wildlife, scenic, natural, cultural, and historic resources" that are located within the NRGA. The project area is the sole municipal water supply for the Ashley Valley. Approximately 80% of the Ashley Valley's water supply comes from the Dry Fork/ Ashley Creek Watershed and 20% from the Brush Creek Watershed. The area has been identified by the congress, the Forest Service and partners as an area of high risk to watershed and habitat degradation. The activities and treatments associated with the project have been identified as urgent needs through collaborative efforts. The Ashley National Forest is currently drafting a management plan for part of the area.
Objectives:
The main objective of the project to protect the sole water supply for the Ashley Valley and surrounding areas by completing numerous projects. The activities with also benefit other resource areas such as wildlife, grazing, timber, and recreation -Protect the Ashley Valley water supply from widespread uncharacteristic wildfire in both the near-term and long-term by completing widespread fuel breaks, opening up mountain meadows, and thinning thick lodgepole stands. If nothing is done the current fuel conditions could lead to a fire that could decimate the area's culinary water supply. -Enhance habitat and water quality in a stream that is degraded and continuing on a downward trend. This would reverse that trend. -Enhance meadows and their available forage by eliminating conifer encroachment by removing encroaching conifers from mountain meadows. -Eliminate lodgepole pine overcrowding to provide for future commercial harvest and increase water quantity.
Project Location/Timing Justification (Why Here? Why Now?):
The new fire risk modeling that was completed shows that the risk is as high as possible to experience a widespread uncharacteristic wildfire that could devastate the entire area. The fuel break portion of the project has identified specific roads that would be used as containment lines to prevent uncharacteristic event. The opening up of encroached meadows also provides areas for containment. If fuel reduction and wildfire fuel breaks are not urgently completed in this area then the impacts of wildfire could be much greater than if the projects are completed. The thinning of overgrown stands near roads rearranges fuels that will lead to a longer term reduction in fuels that will also prevent uncharacteristic wildfire. Government Creek was partially restored in 2018 after continued monitoring a new phase of restoration is needed. The meadow if not repaired and protected may be lost as a wetland. This would be resolved with the stream restoration. The open meadows are currently being lost at a rapid rate, to conifer encroachment according to long-term monitoring if no action is taken now the trend will continue and these areas will be lost or become much more expensive to rehabilitate.
Relation To Management Plan:
Uintah County Management Plan This project would meet two objectives of the Uintah County Management Plan 7.4.1 Use active and adaptive forest management to improve forest health and support multiple use and sustained yield with emphasis on employment, forest product production, open space, wildlife habitat, forage, recreation, and other social and economic benefits. 7.4.2 Encourage management of forest resources to reduce the risk of catastrophic fires, which cause unacceptable harm to resources and assets valued by society, including ecosystem and community health and resilience. Utah Statewide Elk Management Plan 1. The proposed plan addresses concerns discussed in Habitat Section III. 2. Population Objective 2: Identify future habitat restoration projects with stakeholders. 3. Watershed Restoration Initiative Goals a) Increase forage production by annually treating a minimum of 40,000 acres of elk habitat. b) Coordinate with land management agencies, conservation organizations, private landowners, and local leaders through the regional Watershed Restoration Initiative working groups to identify and prioritize elk habitats that are in need of enhancement or restoration. i) Identify habitat projects on summer ranges (aspen communities) to improve calving habitat. ii) Encourage land managers to manage portions of forests in early succession stages through the use controlled burning and logging. Controlled burning should only be used in areas with minimal invasive weed and/or safety concerns. Utah Mule Deer Statewide Management Plan 1. The proposed project falls with in crucial mule deer habitat restoration priority areas. 2. Habitat Objective 2: Improve the quality and quantity of vegetation for mule deer on a minimum of 500,000 acres of crucial range by 2019. 3. Work with land management agencies, conservation organizations, private landowners, and local leaders through the regional Watershed Restoration Initiative working groups to identify and prioritize mule deer habitats that are in need of enhancement or restoration (Figure 6). Forest Plan- The proposed action has been reviewed and is conformance with the Forest Land Management Plan FLMP (1986) for the Ashley National Forest. The FLMP identifies the need and gives specific direction and objectives for management and maintenance of critical habitat by means of treating conifer encroachment. Additional FLMP objectives which are included in the Allotment Management Plans for each allotment include: 1. Manage the habitat of all T&E or sensitive plant and animal species to maintain or enhance status (Objective 3, IV-30). 2. Maintain or improve soil stability, site productivity, and repair or stabilize damaged watersheds (Objective 2, IV-39). 3. Maintain or improve riparian areas and riparian dependent resource values including wildlife, fish, vegetation, watershed, and recreation in a stable or upward trend. Manage for species diversity (Objective 1, IV-45). 4. Manage vegetation to enhance the riparian ecosystem (Objective 2, IV-46). 5. Maintain natural complexity and high relative productivity of riparian areas (IV-45). 6. Riparian areas will be given a high priority for rehabilitation in range improvement, fish and wildlife improvement, watershed restoration, road maintenance, and KV programs (IV-46). 7. Manage vegetation in riparian areas to be in good or excellent ecological condition, with a stable or upward trend (IV-46). Agreement for Shared Stewardship between the State of Utah and the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. *Using all available tools for active management. The States and the Forest Service will use every available authority and tool to do more work on the ground, including timber sales, mechanical treatments, prescribed fire, hazardous fuels reduction, long-term stewardship contracts, innovative wood-product utilization, carefully managing fire, and working with partners. State Resource Management Plan Increase communication and cooperation among programs within the Department of Natural Resources and other State and Federal agencies.
Fire / Fuels:
Recent fire risk modeling determined that the entire municipal watershed is at a high risk of a devastating uncharacteristic wildfire. Three out of the five projects will have direct benefits to the fire risk by removing fuels or rearranging fuels where risk will decrease over time and allow firefighters areas to contain the burns. Fuels projects were allowed in the Congressional Act that designated the majority of this area. The fuel breaks will not only protect the watershed, but some will be completed near the Oaks Park Cabin Community, private property near Massey Meadow, recreational routes. Minimizing spread of any uncharacteristic wildfire will also has tremendous benefit for wildlife, recreation, and grazing.
Water Quality/Quantity:
The largest indirect benefit to water quality will occur after the completion of the fuel breaks under the new CE category by assisting firefighters to gain the upper hand on an otherwise widespread uncharacteristic wildfire and preventing the entire area from burning. All of the other projects will benefit water quality and quantity. The pre-commercial thinning portion of the project will allow precipitation to land on the forest floor and enter the groundwater/surface water cycle increasing available water. It will also provide a rearrangement of fuels that in the long term should decrease fire severity. The meadow enhancement portion of the project will eliminate trees in mountain meadows. This will decrease evapotranspirative desiccation allowing more water in the system which should increase both wetted area and stream flow and increase distance between live water and timber burn areas in the event of a wildfire.. The stream restoration will involve placement of grade control structures and planting which would decrease sediment loads and catch sediment preventing the sediment from flowing downstream benefiting local water quality and increasing wet areas for late season water. Some areas around the stream have lost all wetland vegetative species, this project should restore the water table leading to an expansion of hydric vegetation. The guzzlers would decrease pressure on existing water sources benefitting local water quality. Several of these sub-watersheds are listed on the 303(d) impaired waters list. The above treatments will benefit these impairments. The stream restoration will reduce sediment input reducing contaminants, the meadow restoration will provide a wider buffer zone for material to drop out prior to entering the stream, and the guzzlers will move livestock and wildlife away from perennial sources reducing ungulate disturbance.
Compliance:
NEPA is complete for the meadow enhancement project and the precommercial thinning. The Stream Restoration NEPA should be completed by April. The fuel break mastication is ongoing.
Methods:
The Ashley National Forest has identified several projects that will benefit the proper function of the watershed now and provide potential benefits in the event of a wildfire. -Mountain meadows that are experiencing a significant amount of conifer encroachment will have lop and scatter treatments which would reestablish former boundaries and maintain and enhance these areas. -Pre-commercial thinning would occur in some lodgepole pine stands that would allow establishment of larger trees and eliminate the brushy thick trees. -Stream and wet meadow restoration utilizing bio-char and zeedyk structures.
Monitoring:
The Ashley has a long term monitoring program that will be utilized to determine long term trends. More specific monitoring will occur on a local basis. For example: the stream restoration will be monitored every 2-4 years to determine needs for reentry and to observe the stream's progress. Pre-Commercial Thinning areas will be monitored for growth to determine when commercial harvest will occur. The meadow enhancement project will be monitored to determine when reentry will be needed and to seed if increasing the meadow's resiliency will measurably add to available forage. The fuel breaks will be actively monitored to ensure the ability of firefighters to utilize the areas to combat wildfire. . Trail cameras may also be utilized to determine both wildlife and livestock use of the Guzzlers. Utah wildlife tracker shows that Mountain Goats and Mule Deer use the area near the guzzlers frequently. The Utah Wildlife Tracker will continue to be used to see if any of the projects lead to increased use. A completion report will be added to the database and updated.
Partners:
The U.S. Congress is coordination with Uintah County established the Ashley Karst National Recreation and Geologic Area. They identified the importance of this area to local communities water supply. The Forest Service and the Central Utah Water Conservancy (CUWCD) have worked together to enhance the protection of water quality in the event of a wildfire. CUWCD is also contributing funding for a portion of this project. The Forest Service in collaboration with Utah Forestry Fire and State lands have ranked several landscapes on the Ashley National Forest and this area was rated in the upper tier. The USFS and NRCS have filed an application for a Joint Chiefs Grant. This grant allows for the other phases of the project to continue on other jurisdictions. The projects currently proposed for implementation are completely within the Ashley National Forest and do not occur close enough to other jurisdictions to completer work outside of NFS ground. The USFS has worked closely with the Mule Deer Foundation to identify priorities for Mule Deer. The MDF, utilizing the wildife tracker and migration corridor information have ranked priorities for implementation that would benefit Mule Deer.
Future Management:
This project will have a large influence in how the future of this area will be utilized. The fuel breaks have been identified to provide firefighters the best opportunity to prevent a widespread uncharacteristic fire that would change grazing practices, timber harvests and watershed function. The meadow restoration will also enhance vegetation for continued grazing. The Ashley is also beginning a Prescribed Fire Analysis for this area the fuel breaks, meadow enhancement and thinning will allow for this activity to proceed at a quicker pace. As the prescribed fire and fire break analyses move forward entities that share boundaries with the USFS will be contacted to determine if they would like to also perform fuel treatments. All of the projects will be monitored to determine need for reentry and maintenance. All project are expected to require long term maintenance. Joint Chiefs Landscape Restoration Program Grant funding work on both public and private property. The timber thinning will be monitored to determine when thinned stands will be ready for sustainable harvest.
Sustainable Uses of Natural Resources:
The lop and scatter project and the pre-commercial thinning projects will open up the canopies and enhance meadows which allow for an increase in forage for grazing and wildlife and allow for better access for hunters. The thinning will also allow for trees to grow and be sustainably harvested in the future. The future fuel breaks will enhance the ability to combat wildfires to minimize acres lost. This benefits all sustainable uses. Some of the timber removed for fuel breaks will be sold to the public.
Budget WRI/DWR Other Budget Total In-Kind Grand Total
$1,250,000.00 $0.00 $1,250,000.00 $15,000.00 $1,265,000.00
Item Description WRI Other In-Kind Year
Personal Services (permanent employee) Stream Restoration will be completed by the USFS. $0.00 $0.00 $15,000.00 2025
Contractual Services Treatments Contract $1,250,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 2025
Funding WRI/DWR Other Funding Total In-Kind Grand Total
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00
Source Phase Description Amount Other In-Kind Year
United States Forest Service (USFS) 1.1 Million will be from a Joint Chiefs Grant if awarded. $0.00 $0.00 $15,000.00 2025
Species
Species "N" Rank HIG/F Rank
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Elk R2
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Improper Forest Management High
Mule Deer R1
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity High
Habitats
Habitat
Aspen-Conifer
Threat Impact
Inappropriate Fire Frequency and Intensity Very High
Mountain Meadow
Threat Impact
Soil Erosion / Loss High
Project Comments
Comment 01/17/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Tory Mathis
The map features don't match what is in the project details. The only polygon on the map is for lop and scatter, but you have mastication and timber stand improvement on the project. Can you add the map features for the other portions of the project?
Comment 01/31/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Ryan Mower
Sorry. We have changed to a new ArcGIS program and I was having difficulty creating shapefiles. Features are now loaded on the map.
Comment 01/19/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Tory Mathis
Your monitoring section mentions guzzlers and mountain goats, but I don't see anything else in the proposal, including the finances and species lists, that suggest guzzlers in areas where mountain goats live are a part of this proposal.
Comment 01/31/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Ryan Mower
Sorry that was an error on my part
Comment 01/19/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Tory Mathis
There are several places in your proposal where you mention stream restoration, but there isn't anything in the budget or on the map features about stream restoration. Can you please add that?
Comment 02/23/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Jim Spencer
Hey Ryan, a few comments. I do support the need for this project, but I think you need to put a little more work into the proposal. I agree with all three of Tory's original comments posted here. The Finance section needs to be more detailed. What will the stream restoration cost? What is the cost/acre for the lop and scatter? the firebreaks? Not to mention the guzzlers are still in the Project Details section in a couple of places including monitoring. It's almost like you are asking for a blank check with no accountability? I realize this is Phase 3, but I think there should be a bit more effort into the creation of the proposal than cut and paste. I know you have the numbers, you have done this before. Just plug them in. Sorry if I sound rude, I don't mean to. It would just be a whole lot easier to rank if we could see the background information. Also, it would be nice to see a bit more stream restoration/wet meadow work, or at least more proportional to the tree cutting effort. I realize that lop and scatter projects don't rank as well anymore and the addition of the streamwork gives your project a ranking bump, but maybe make it more proportional.
Comment 02/26/2024 Type: 1 Commenter: Evan DeHamer
As stated in the Partners section, MDF has been coordinating with the Ashley NF staff on project prioritization and build-out within this area. Much of the data informing that process is courtesy of UTDWR and their office-to-state level efforts and management priorities. Very supportive of work being done here to protect the municipal watershed, big game summer range/migration corridors and the array of ecological and social benefits the area provides. MDF will be providing financial and technical support here in the coming years, including this phase. With the ranker hat on, I'd agree with Jim that there are some helpful elements missing that there may be time still to amend. SGCN's would top that list for me. Seems like fish, bats and some bugs would benefit. It's hard to fully rank the anticipated benefits without a little more to go on. Understood that credit for mitigating damage from a fire that hasn't happened yet is a difficult thing to quantify textually. Having to wait on existing funding and timing details to get settled before putting this together I'm sure didn't help ANF. Just need a few more hours in every day, right?
Completion
Start Date:
End Date:
FY Implemented:
Final Methods:
Project Narrative:
Future Management:
Map Features
ID Feature Category Action Treatement/Type
13771 Aquatic/Riparian Treatment Area Stream Corridor/Channel Improvements Check dam(s) (low stage)
13789 Terrestrial Treatment Area Vegetation removal / hand crew Lop and scatter
13790 Terrestrial Treatment Area Vegetation removal / hand crew Lop and scatter
13791 Terrestrial Treatment Area Bullhog Full size
Project Map
Project Map