Project Details

The landscape of the northeast part of the Abajo Mountains is dominated by pinyon-juniper foothills. The Peters Point area was treated by chaining in the 1960's, and limited retreatment has been done in the area on Forest Service lands. Pinyon and juniper have reestablished on the plateau, increasing in size and abundance since the DWR range trend study was set up in 1985. It is still a phase I woodland and currently has a density of 80-100 trees per acre dominated by Utah juniper. The mountain sagebrush component has become increasingly decadent and in 2019 36% displayed heavy utilization. In order to maintain productive range with a herbaceous and desirable browse understory, treatment of the encroaching juniper and pinyon is needed. The treatments would also interrupt the continuity of dense woodland fuels in an area rated High in the Utah Wildfire Risk Assessment.

The project will expand similar treatment types from past projects, increasing the size of treated areas within the watershed. It would build on prior investment to further improve landscape resilience and resistance to catastrophic disturbances by creating a variety of seral stages and age classes in all ecological types within the project area.

Provide evidence about the nature of the problem and the need to address it. Identify the significance of the problem using a variety of data sources. For example, if a habitat restoration project is being proposed to benefit greater sage-grouse, describe the existing plant community characteristics that limit habitat value for greater sage-grouse and identify the changes needed for habitat improvement.

Provide an overall goal for the project and then provide clear, specific and measurable objectives (outcomes) to be accomplished by the proposed actions. If possible, tie to one or more of the public benefits UWRI is providing.

Local land management agency personnel have been wanting to do vegetation treatment in the Harts Draw/Peters Point area for several years. BLM completed pinyon-juniper mastication/bullhog treatments on adjoining land on Peters Point over 10 years ago. The area to be treated on Forest Service land has been previously chained, and the encroaching conifers are currently a good size for mastication treatment, averaging 8-10 ft tall (too large for lop and scatter).  There is still a decent understory of seeded and native grasses, forbs and big sagebrush. The risk of delaying treatment is the trees get larger, more costly to treat and suppress more of the understory, reducing habitat value. WildlifeTracker data for the area shows that while deer and elk move through the project area on NFS lands, there is a concentration of use (especially from elk) on the adjacent treated BLM land and private agricultural fields. The treatments on USFS would create more usable habitat, potentially reducing pressure on adjacent lands while also reducing fuel hazards. 
Sagebrush habitat with a healthy forb and grass understory are an essential ecosystem in the southwest- they provide range for livestock as well as game species. Encroachment of pinyon and juniper into the sage flats is degrading the resource value of these ecosystems. Inaction will result in the winter range/shrub community's continued decline due to increased dominance of conifers, infrequent fire return intervals due to fire suppression, and over utilization of shrubs with declining herd health for wintering big game and livestock in the area.

LOCATION: Justify the proposed location of this project over other areas, include publicly scrutinized planning/recovery documents that list this area as a priority, remote sensing modeling that show this area is a good candidate for restoration, wildlife migration information and other data that help justify this project's location.

TIMING: Justify why this project should be implemented at this time. For example, Is the project area at risk of crossing an ecological or other threshold wherein future restoration would become more difficult, cost prohibitive, or even impossible.

The project is consistent with the STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES OF THE MANTI-LA SAL FOREST LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN OF 1986. 
* Maintain/improve habitat capability through direct treatment of vegetation (LRMP III-23).
* Provide habitat needs for deer and elk (LRMP III-19), especially improving the cover: forage ratio. 
* Minimize hazards from wildfire - Reduce fuel loading, stand and crown/canopy density, and resultant fire hazard to vegetation, the public, private property, and firefighters (LRMP III-5).
* The Utah Fire Amendment has a goal to reduce hazard fuels. The full range of fuel reduction methods is authorized, consistent with forest and management area emphasis and direction. 
* Certain vegetative types are to be managed such that varying successional stages will be present to provide for a high level of vegetative diversity and productivity (III-2).

SAN JUAN COUNTY GENERAL PLAN (2018): Support the use of various vegetation manipulation tools (such as mechanical, chemical, biological, prescribed and controlled wildland fire and livestock grazing) to enhance production of wildlife and livestock habitat and forage and improve watershed and water quality conditions on woodland areas with potential for improved ecological condition.

STATE OF UTAH RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN: This plan specifically identifies the importance of protecting critical mule deer habitat, maintaining desired vegetation for wildlife and livestock, and actively managing invasive plants and noxious. Specific treatments in the plan include removal of pinyon-juniper. The plan also specifically identifies working with partners in WRI to restore critical habitat for species of greatest conservation need. The proposed treatment will improve forage for livestock and wildlife and diversify vegetation structure.
UTAH DIVISION OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES STATEWIDE MULE DEER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2024
Strategy for habitat improvement: Initiate broad scale vegetative treatment projects to improve and restore mule deer habitat with emphasis on drought or fire damaged sagebrush winter ranges, ranges that have been taken over by invasive annual grass species, and ranges being diminished by encroachment of conifers into sagebrush or aspen habitats. According to maps in the statewide plan, Peters Point is a High Value migration corridor.
	
DEER HERD UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN Deer Herd Unit # 14 San Juan September 2020
Reduce expansion of pinion-juniper woodlands into sagebrush habitats and improve habitats dominated by pinion-juniper woodlands by completing habitat restoration projects like lop-andscatter, bullhog and chaining.

UTAH STATEWIDE ELK MANAGEMENT PLAN 2022
Habitat Objective: Maintain sufficient habitat to support elk herds at population objectives and reduce competition for forage between elk and livestock.

ELK HERD UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN Elk Herd Unit 14 SAN JUAN December 2023
Maintain and improve winter foraging areas through browse regeneration and pinyon-juniper removal projects.

UTAH WILDLIFE ACTION PLAN 2015 
Conservation actions to address threat of inappropriate fire frequency and intensity:
Conduct mechanical control of invasive/problematic species.
Conduct upland vegetation treatments to restore characteristic upland vegetation, and reduce uncharacteristic fuel types and loadings.
Mountain sagebrush is a Key Habitat in the WAP. Recommendations to improve condition include mulching/cutting invading pinyon and juniper trees.

The proposed treatment will increase understory herbaceous production, benefitting prey species such as cottontails and jackrabbits. Creating openings provides foraging opportunities for golden eagles in pinyon-juniper, especially important in this area to provide alternative foraging areas further from the Latigo Wind Park. Yuma myotis and long-eared myotis were documented in the project area via mist-netting in September 2024. The project addresses the threat of fire impacts to these species habitat, and would also be beneficial to foraging habitat by increasing the diversity and productivity of the shrub and herbaceous component which can increase insect diversity and abundance.

List management plans where this project will address an objective or strategy in the plan. Describe how the project area overlaps the objective or strategy in the plan and the relevance of the project to the successful implementation of those plans. It is best to provide this information in a list format with the description immediately following the plan objective or strategy.

If applicable, detail how the proposed project will significantly reduce the risk of fuel loading and/or continuity of hazardous fuels including the use of fire-wise species in re-seeding operations. Describe the value of any features being protected by reducing the risk of fire. Values may include; communities at risk, permanent infrastructure, municipal watersheds, campgrounds, critical wildlife habitat, etc. Include the size of the area where fuels are being reduced and the distance from the feature(s) at risk.

Describe how the project has the potential to improve water quality and/or increase water quantity, both over the short and long term. Address run-off, erosion, soil infiltration, and flooding, if applicable.

Description of efforts, both completed and planned, to bring the proposed action into compliance with any and all cultural resource, NEPA, ESA, etc. requirements. If compliance is not required enter "not applicable" and explain why not it is not required.

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.

Describe plans to monitor for project success and achievement of stated objectives. Include details on type of monitoring (vegetation, wildlife, etc.), schedule, assignments and how the results of these monitoring efforts will be reported and/or uploaded to this project page. If needed, upload detailed plans in the "attachments" section.

List any and all partners (agencies, organizations, NGO's, private landowners) that support the proposal and/or have been contacted and included in the planning and design of the proposed project. Describe efforts to gather input and include these agencies, landowners, permitees, sportsman groups, researchers, etc. that may be interested/affected by the proposed project. Partners do not have to provide funding or in-kind services to a project to be listed.

Detail future methods or techniques (including administrative actions) that will be implemented to help in accomplishing the stated objectives and to insure the long term success/stability of the proposed project. This may include: post-treatment grazing rest and/or management plans/changes, wildlife herd/species management plan changes, ranch plans, conservation easements or other permanent protection plans, resource management plans, forest plans, etc.

Potential for the proposed action to improve quality or quantity of sustainable uses such as grazing, timber harvest, biomass utilization, recreation, etc. Grazing improvements may include actions to improve forage availability and/or distribution of livestock.