The Utah Geological Survey's Groundwater and Wetlands Program is conducting long-term hydrologic monitoring and research at select locations statewide to analyze the hydrologic effects of large-scale landscape restoration projects including Pinyon-Juniper woodlands treatments (PJT), Beaver Dam Analog (BDA) installations in streams, and Managed Grazing (MG) along streams. This proposal requests support for ongoing monitoring in six project areas: Northwest Tintic Valley PJT, Vernon Creek BDA, Grouse Creek Mountains PJT, Montezuma Creek tributaries PJT, and Three Creeks MG; and for ongoing GIS, imagery analyses, and reporting. The common theme of these restoration projects is to improve habitat and ecosystem health following years of drought, wildfire and overuse. Degradation of habitat and water supply threatens state Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN; Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2021) including Greater Sage-grouse, Western Toad and Bonneville Cutthroat Trout and, for water bodies, can contribute to an assessment of "impaired" by the Division of Water Quality (2022). In addition to restoring vegetation to more native, better functioning assemblages, improved water supply and quality are key restoration goals. Near-surface groundwater is essential to sustaining water supply and quality because it is the primary source of spring flow, late-season base flow in streams, and groundwater-dependent ecosystems (GDEs) such as wetlands, wet meadows and spring pools. Encroachment and infilling of P-J woodlands from mountains to mountain fronts and valleys has reduced shrub-steppe rangelands, the primary habitat for greater sage grouse; and increased wildfire severity (Monaco and Gunnell, 2020; Jones, 2019). Extensive PJT projects conducted by federal, state, and private cooperators aim to restore shrub-steppe rangelands for sage grouse and reduce wildfire severity. Monitoring associated with these projects typically focuses on plant assemblages, sage grouse populations, and fuels reduction. Increased water availability is commonly listed as an additional benefit of the treatments, however, relatively few studies are available to assess this hypothesis (Jones 2019; Carroll et al., 2017; DeBoodt et al., 2008; Kuhn et al., 2007). Studies in central Oregon (Deboodt et al., 2008) and central Nevada (Snyder, 2014; Carroll and others, 2017) demonstrated increased shallow-groundwater resources (spring flow, shallow groundwater levels, stream base flow) following P-J removal, whereas other studies in western states showed no measurable changes in stream flow (Kuhn and others, 2007). Considering the similarity (climatic, vegetation) of the Oregon and Nevada sites to our study areas, we expect positive results. In the central Oregon study, spring flow in the treatment area showed statistically significant increase immediately after the treatment (DeBoodt et al., 2008). That study was designed specifically to test the hypothesis that PJT will lead to increased groundwater resources. In our project areas, treatments are designed mainly for sage grouse habitat enhancement and wildfire hazard reduction and typically are planned only a few years in advance. Observable hydrologic changes may manifest in different ways depending on the hydrogeologic system and short-term climatic variations. Measurable changes may be obvious as in the central Oregon study, or occur during late season only, during dry years only, one to three years after treatment, or may be expressed as long-term resilience to climatic fluctuations. The main objectives of BDA projects are to restore vegetation and ecological functions, including connection between stream and adjacent groundwater below the floodplain, and reduce or reverse downcutting and sediment load (Edgel, 2018; Wheaton and others, 2019). BDA projects are widespread throughout Utah, and some studies that focus on hydrologic changes exist. UGS work has focused on collecting pre-installation data and monitoring changes after, while monitoring a similar reach which is not altered. We are testing the hypothesis that increased streambank aquifer recharge will support late-season flows. Results from the Fish Creek (tributary to South Fork Chalk Creek) BDA project (Bosworth et al., 2025) support this hypothesis. The Three Creeks managed grazing project aims to restore streambank and riparian corridor ecosystem health by enacting an innovative grazing rotation system that minimizes physical and water-quality impacts of grazing and, at the same time, improves forage (Working Lands Conservation, LLC, 2022). The UGS role is to characterize stream-aquifer dynamics within existing exclosure fences, which represent idealized targets for the restoration, and compare those results to observations in grazed areas to test the hypothesis that reduced grazing will allow healing and reconnection of streams and their adjacent aquifers. References Bosworth, L., Smith, R.M., Culbertson, A., Jamison, L.R., Burnett, P., and Brooks, P.D., 2025, Streamflow and groundwater response to stream restoration using beaver dam analogues in a sem-arid perennial steam: Journal of the American Water Resources Association v. 61, p. 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.13254. Carroll, R.W.H., Huntington, J.L., Snyder, K.A., Niswonger, R.G., Morton, C., and Stringham, T.K., 2017, Evaluating mountain meadow groundwater response to Pinyon-Juniper and temperature in a great basin watershed: Ecohydrology, v. 10, DOI 10.1002/eco.1792. Deboodt, T.L., et al., 2008, Monitoring hydrological changes related to western juniper removal: A paired watershed approach: Third Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds, p. 227-232. Edgel, R. 2018, BDA descriptions: Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative WRI project 4046 (https://wri.utah.gov/wri/project/title.html?id=4046). Jones, A., 2019, Do mechanical vegetation treatments of pinyon-juniper and sagebrush communities work?: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331414368 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12538.13760 Kuhn, T.J., et al., 2007, Juniper removal may not increase overall Klamath River Basin water yields: California Agriculture 61(4):166-171. DOI: 10.3733/ca.v061n04p166. Utah Division of Water Quality, 2022: Assessed Waters 2022: Online, https://enviro.deq.utah.gov/, accessed 2/14/24 Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2021, Utah's Species of Greatest Conservation Need: Online, https://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/WAP/2021-10-sgcn-list.pdf. Wheaton J.M., Bennett S.N., Bouwes, N., Maestas J.D. and Shahverdian S.M. (Editors). 2019. Low-Tech Process-Based Restoration of Riverscapes: Design Manual. Version 1.0. Utah State University Restoration Consortium. Logan, UT, http://lowtechpbr.restoration.usu.edu/manual Working Lands Conservation LLC, 2022, Improving ecosystem services at a watershed scale using an innovative grazing system -- 2022 report. https://www.workinglandsconservation.org/range-monitoring

Objectives of the UGS work are to measure changes in springs, streams, shallow groundwater, soil moisture, upland vegetation, and wet-meadow vegetation resulting from these restoration efforts, as appropriate to each project area. To do so, we need to characterize the hydrology of the untreated systems and identify possible changes following restoration, meanwhile measuring the hydrology in nearby systems that are not treated (i.e., "Paired Basin" approach). Following treatment, hydrologic changes measured in the untreated ("Control") area can be attributed to climate fluctuations and other issues such as changes in grazing, whereas hydrologic changes in the treated areas represent the cumulative effects of changes measured on the Control areas plus changes due to the treatments. The validity of this approach is supported by analyzing pre-treatment data in both basins to demonstrate that their responses to climate fluctuations are similar. The greatest challenges are distinguishing the effects of climate fluctuations from those due to the treatments, maintaining continuous data collection, and lack of control over changes in land use and treatment schedule. Results will (1) aid assessment of the impact of environmental restoration projects on shallow groundwater systems, (2) demonstrate ecologic benefits of the projects beyond changes to plant communities, (3) help plan future projects by identifying conditions favorable to increasing groundwater recharge, and (4) help plan future BDA projects by providing data on how stream hydrology may change, aiding project timing, setting expectations for local water users, and addressing water rights issues.

UGS UWRI Project Narratives Tintic Valley (PJT). The Tintic Valley project is in northwestern Tintic Valley, within and adjacent to the Sheeprock Mountains Sage Grouse Management Area (SGMA) and was our first effort at monitoring PJTs. This project includes three subareas: Mud Springs, Death Creek and Railroad-McIntyre Springs. In FY 26 we plan to continue data collection at a few sites in the Mud Springs subarea. Meanwhile we will analyze our data, present our data at the statewide UWRI conference, and work toward completing a draft report. Mud Springs. The Mud Springs subarea includes Mud Spring 1 (Control) and Mud Spring 2 (Treatment). We are conducting continuous flow monitoring and periodic sampling at Mud Spring 1 and Mud Spring 2. We installed groundwater monitoring wells north and south of Mud Spring 2 in 2018 and continue monitoring groundwater levels and periodic sampling at those sites. The northern well is closer to the treatment area than Mud Spring 2 and the southern well is adjacent to a large wet meadow in Chambers Wash that we informally and optimistically refer to as Chambers Spring. Soil moisture monitoring sites are at wet meadows above and below Mud Spring 2, and in the P-J northeast of the spring. We interpret both wet meadow sites groundwater-supported so they potentially stand to benefit from the treatment. Treatment above Mud Spring 2 occurred during winter 2021-22. The following winter had greater than 300% average precipitation which we suspect would mask any changes due to the treatment. Subsequent winters have had close to the long-term mean precipitation which is why we chose to continue limited monitoring. We concluded vegetation monitoring at both wet meadow sites and in P-J within the treatment area in late 2024. Death Creek. We established continuous flow-measurement stations (flumes equipped with pressure transducers) in 2017 at a site close to Death Creek Springs, where perennial flow begins, and at the southeastern end of the planned Death Creek PJT area. These sites were designed to quantify potential changes in flow from Death Creek Springs and cumulative changes due to possible increased flow from lateral seepage along Death Creek in the treatment area. We measured flow monthly at the flumes and at four additional sites along Death Creek. Soil-moisture monitoring is ongoing in upland (P-J cover) areas as a control for the Mud Springs treatment. Death Creek subarea treatment has been postponed indefinitely due to failure of the Emery County land exchange agreement. Extremely high stream flows in Spring 2023 destroyed our continuous flow monitoring sites and we chose to not rebuild them, and have abandoned monitoring in this subarea. Railroad Springs. We established monitoring of spring flow, shallow groundwater levels, groundwater conductivity, and stable isotope composition at six springs in the Railroad Spring complex (treatment area) and five springs in the informally named McIntyre spring complex two miles to the north (control area) in summer-fall 2018. Railroad Springs PJT occurred during November-December 2019. Treatment was followed by unusually wet (2019-2020) and dry (2020-2021, 2021-2022) winters. We are currently analyzing the data. Preliminary inspection of the data does not reveal obvious changes in spring flow or chemistry. Visual inspection of aerial imagery indicates less dense P-J coverage in the treatment area compared to the Mud Spring 2 treatment area. Our NDVI analysis of satellite imagery will quantify the differences in pre-treatment P-J density between the two treatment areas. There may be a minimum P-J density necessary to yield measurable results after treatment. Alternatively, most of the potential groundwater recharge available by reduced ET following the treatment may have restored soil moisture and not resulted in greater shallow groundwater availability. We are currently working on analyzing the results and may present some at the statewide UWRI meeting, or later in a report. Vernon Creek (BDA) Working with the Division of Wildlife Resources, we defined an open reach of Vernon Creek along which we established monitoring in 2019 and DWR delayed a planned BDA installation until sufficient pre-implementation data could be collected (about 2 years). We wrapped up monitoring at the end of 2024 and are currently analyzing the data, and will present preliminary results at the UWRI statewide conference. Our monitoring network included continuous stream flow measurements of Vernon Creek and Little Valley Creek at the upstream end of the study area; Vernon Creek at the midpoint; an established U.S. Geological Survey gauge on Vernon Creek; and at the lowest culvert above the reservoir. We monitored groundwater levels and electrical conductivity in 9 piezometers to characterize stream-groundwater dynamics. We sampled Vernon Creek for turbidity and total suspended solids. During 2021 we established two stations for measuring sediment accumulation, behind an existing BDA and behind a future BDA. These sites remained relatively intact during high spring runoff in 2023. A letter of concern over installation of the treatment BDAs delayed their implementation, but installation occurred in June 2023. Grouse Creek Mountains (PJT) The Grouse Creek Mountains project area includes two subareas -- southwest and southeast of the southern range crest -- established in 2018. The Keg Spring PJT in the southwest subarea is tentatively planned for Fall 2025. Treatment in the southeast subarea was completed in fall/winter 2019. In the southwest subarea, we are monitoring spring flow continuously at Keg Spring (treatment), Lower Rocky Pass Spring (control, but see below), and two springs in Willow Springs Canyon (one treatment, one control). We also measure spring flow monthly at several other sites. We installed shallow groundwater monitoring wells in Keg Spring wash just above the impounded pond, Willow Springs Canyon, Lower Rocky Pass Spring, and adjacent to Cluster Springs 1 and 3 (the Keg Spring treatment area is in the likely catchment area of the Cluster Springs complex). An unnamed spring north of North Bedke Spring serves as a control for Cluster Springs. Continuous monitoring at Keg Spring was disrupted by installation of a diversion line to watering troughs but is now well established. We are measuring flow quarterly at Mudhole Spring, in the center or a newly proposed treatment area north of the Keg Spring treatment (U.S. BLM, 2024, WRI Project 6689). We installed staff gages in the Keg Spring and Lower Rocky Pass Spring ponds, and we share those data with the Division of Wildlife Resources to assist with their species population and habitat monitoring. In the southeast subarea, we established monthly spring flow monitoring and chemical sampling of four developed springs above and below the Emigrant Pass treatment (WRI Project 3524) -- Bovine (treatment), Sheep Trail (treatment), Chokecherry (originally control, but see below), and Willow (control). Alterations to Willow Spring plumbing prevented continuation of flow measurements, and flow at Sheep Trail spring has reduced to barely a trickle so we no longer measure these sites. In late 2018, treatment occurred on private land in the upper catchment areas of Lower Rocky Pass Spring and Chokecherry Spring. Both springs showed significant flow increase during 2019, however, the previous winter had relatively high snowfall, so continued monitoring is required to determine if the treatments affect long-term flow. These sites now act as controls for the Keg Spring treatment. Montezuma Creek Tributaries (PJT) This work has been supported by grants from UDWQ's Nonpoint Pollution Source fund in addition to UWRI. The project includes two PJT treatment areas -- the Cedar Park and Cactus Park benches above Coal Bed Creek drainage -- and a control area in the Boulder Creek drainage to the northwest. The treatments occurred during early 2025. We plan to continue monitoring during 2025 and 2026 to provide two years of post-treatment data. Monitoring equipment was installed during November 2018 and January/March 2019. We installed a total of nine piezometers and ten temperature loggers on the Coal Bed Creek and Boulder Creek streambeds. The piezometers measure groundwater flow to the streams and streambank storage. The temperature loggers will measure changes in soil temperature possibly related to changes in pore water (i.e., saturated streambed sediment) or intermittent flow. We installed three soil moisture probes (SMP) in the Cedar Park and Cactus Park treatment areas, and three in the Boulder Creek control area, at 4 to 5 feet depth. During summer 2020, we installed additional SMPs at 1 and 2 feet depths at all stations to track infiltration of snowmelt and precipitation to the root zone. In both lower Coal Bed and lower Boulder Creeks, we have temporary v-notch weir plates on site to measure flow if present at the time of monitoring. During most of the year, surface flow is negligible in both creeks, with more flow recorded at lower Boulder Creek than Coal Bed Creek. Flow from springs and seeps in upper Boulder and lower Coal Bed is not measurable. Most stream flow occurs during flash flood/monsoonal season and after heavy winter precipitation. Montezuma Creek is impaired for Selenium, however, Se is negligible in the Coal Bed Creek and Boulder Creek groundwater-surface water systems. If the treatment results in greater discharge from Coal Bed Creek to Montezuma Creek, the potential exists for improvement of water quality in the latter stream by dilution. Three Creeks (MG) We joined the Three Creeks stream & riparian restoration project in 2020 but were hindered by COVID, staff availability, and uncertainty over whether we would see measurable results and did not collect data during 2021. In early 2022 we learned that measuring soil physical parameters to 1 m depth had been added to the vegetation and water quality monitoring and conducted a field review with some of the PIs which convinced us that we should be involved in this project. The general objective is to realize measurable gains in riparian ecosystem functions through modified grazing systems that move the cattle through the environment rather than allowing them to stay in one place during the entire grazing season. UWRI has supported fifteen restoration projects in the Otter Creeks-Big Creek area. We installed 20 monitoring piezometers, five stream-stage sites (staff gages), and three continuous stage monitoring sites in April and May 2022, and expect to continue at least through 2025 to evaluate whether we are able to detect hydrologic changes. Our objective is to establish hydrologic and hydrochemical monitoring at paired sites within and outside of existing exclosures along Big Creek and Middle Otter Creek. Monitoring on grazed reaches will establish how (or if) surface water and groundwater interact and whether these interactions change during the course of a spring to winter cycle. Over time, we hope to detect changes in surface water-groundwater interactions as soil health metrics improve. Specifically, connection between surface water and groundwater should improve and groundwater storage in streambank aquifers should improve. Late-season stream flow and temperature may improve due to movement of groundwater into the stream as stream stages decline. Potentially, the volume of groundwater stored in the streambank aquifer is small compared to the volume of stream water, so that flow of groundwater into the stream may not be detectable. We installed streamflow measuring stations and piezometers in the streambank aquifers at five sites -- two sets of paired sits in and outside of existing cattle exclosures, and one site where grazing practices will not change. The objective is to evaluate stream-groundwater connection and monitor possible changes derived from restoration of streambank aquifers that will result from less intensive grazing. The working hypothesis is that the tuft structure in heavily grazed streambanks will gradually fill in with sediment and vegetation, and hydraulic permeability will be restored, re-connecting the streambank aquifers to the stream water. Three Creeks BDA We have been working with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management on a pilot BDA project in the Three Creeks area. We have selected control and treatment reaches and the work has been incorporated into the BLM's NEPA for the project. BLM intends to fund much of the study through project 7379, however, those funds are currently frozen. If this new BDA project proceeds we will spend much of the funds from project 7379 to use a contractor to install new groundwater monitoring wells using a hydraulic press rig and we will collect vegetation and UAV data; and some funds from this project to collect the groundwater data. Remote Sensing and GIS We are analyzing satellite imagery to evaluate the landscape-scale effects of PJTs using NDVI to quantify bulk vegetative changes resulting from PJTs, to estimate change in evapotranspiration (ET) over entire treatment areas. Rebecca has demonstrated statistically significant differences in late summer values of NDVI before and after treatment in some project areas (predictably, bullhog projects where pre-treatment tree density was high and nearly all the P-Js were cleared). Preliminary work indicates that statistically significant changes in bulk ET also occur. There are several models for calculating ET from NDVI, and now that the OpenET site is functional, we plan to update our calculations. We plan to investigate using these analyses combined with Soil-Water Balance modeling to estimate the resulting change in infiltration of snowmelt and precipitation and, therefore, groundwater recharge.

Treatment Schedules (as currently known): Northwest Tintic Valley Railroad Springs -- completed, winter 2019-20 Mud Spring 2 -- completed, winter 2021-22 Death Creek -- uncertain Vernon Creek BDA: -- June 2023 Grouse Creek Mountains Keg Spring -- Fall 2025 Keg Spring North (aka Mudhole) -- uncertain Montezuma Creek Tributaries: uncertain, likely Fall 2024 -- Winter 2025.

Fuels reduction is a major motivation for the PJTs. Monitoring groundwater will not likely inform outcomes for this goal. If late season flows are observed in the BDA project, potentially higher instream flows and reservoir levels may aid firefighting during late summer/early fall.

We are monitoring water chemistry of springs, streams, and shallow groundwater to identify possible changes in major-solute and stable-isotope composition related to increased recharge in the treatment areas. We are monitoring Selenium concentration in surface water in the Montezuma Creek tributaries study, because this area has a TMDL for Se. We are monitoring flow, temperature, and turbidity in Vernon Creek.

The U.S. BLM is leading the NEPA process for the Three Creeks BDA project and we have supplied them with the necessary information. We completed NEPA for monitoring equipment installation on U.S. Bureau of Land Management or U.S. Forest Service land. MOU with Utah State Institutional Trust Land Administration to install and conduct monitoring. Monitoring well permits from Utah Division of Water Rights for wells greater than 30 feet deep. Installation of monitoring equipment was in coordination with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and BLM to avoid disturbance of critical habitat. UDWQ protocol for appropriate water-quality samples. The Vernon Creek BDA monitoring was on private land and we were in communication with the landowner. The current study areas are in the Sheeprock Mountains Sage Grouse Management Area, Box Elder Sage Grouse Management Area, and Montezuma Creek and Lower San Juan-Four Corners Coordinated Resource Management Plan (San Juan Conservation District).

Spring and stream flow: ramp flumes or V-notch weirs as appropriate, equipped with stilling wells and pressure/temperature loggers; temperature loggers in stream beds along reaches of intermittent flow. Shallow groundwater: Piezometers screened below the water table, equipped with pressure transducers. Climate: Precipitation, temperature, and snowpack from local weather stations. Chemistry: Periodic sampling of springs, groundwater in piezometers, surface flow, and precipitation. Soil moisture: 100 cm multi-depth probes at lowland wet meadow sites, and nested TDR probes as much as 15 feet deep at forested upland sites.

As appropriate to each project area, we monitor spring flow, stream flow, shallow groundwater, major solutes, oxygen-18 and deuterium isotopes in water, soil moisture, climate, and aquatic and wet meadow vegetation. Monitoring systems are tailored to the most important hydrologic features of the study areas and to the goals of the restoration projects. Monitoring occurs in paired treatment and control (i.e., untreated) areas having as similar hydrogeology as possible. Monitoring ideally begins 3 years before the treatments and continues for 3 to 5 years after. We attempt to characterize the response of groundwater and surface flow to climatic fluctuations under current conditions and determine if changes in these patterns occur following treatment. Coeval monitoring of nearby untreated (Control) areas while we monitor after the treatments extends the record of groundwater response to climate variability. For BDA projects, we monitor stream flow above, at the midpoint, and below the stream reach scheduled for restoration. Piezometers adjacent to the stream measure changes in shallow groundwater levels. Seasonal changes in both stream flow and shallow groundwater levels together will show the patterns of surface water-groundwater dynamics; we will look for changes in these patterns due to BDA installation.

U.S. BLM -- Fillmore, Salt Lake, Moab, and Monticello Field Offices. BLM partners have shared long-term treatment plans and are willing to coordinate treatment schedules to benefit the monitoring projects, e.g., delay treatments of heavily monitored areas to allow accumulation of baseline data. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources -- Salt Lake, Ogden, and Price Field Offices USU Community-Based Conservation Program - outreach and coordination with other agencies Local land owners - access and project explanation/outreach. Rose Creek Irrigation Company and Herriman City (Yellow Fork).

If conditions favoring increased groundwater recharge are identified, this could aid planning, management, and promotion of future PJT and BDA restoration programs. Anticipated Future Annual Budgets: FY 25 Total Project $233,000 (UWRI $174,749, UGS $58,251). FY 26 Total Project $233,333 (UWRI $175,000, UGS $58,333). FY 27 Total Project $233,333 (UWRI $175,000, UGS $58,333). FY 28 Total Project $233,333 (UWRI $175,000, UGS $58,333).

If increased water yield is documented, the case for continuing treatments statewide would be supported in addition to known environmental benefits.