DWQ-2016-020001

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 1

UTAH
NONPOINT SOURCE
POLLUTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Pinto Creek, Washington County

FISCAL YEAR 2015
ANNUAL REPORT

January 2016

Prepared by:
The Utah Department of Environmental Quality
In cooperation with the Water Quality Task Force

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Appreciation is expressed to the following individuals for contributing information and writing
portions of this report: Nancy Mesner, Rhonda Miller, USU Extension; Norm Evenstad, Natural
Resources Conservation Service; Rebecca Weissinger, U.S. National Park Service; Mark Muir,
Forest Service; Jeremy Jarnecke, Bureau of Land Management; Alan Clark, Bill Zanotti, Utah
Department of Natural Resources; Carl Adams, Mark Stangart, Lenora Sullivan, and Jim Harris,
Utah Division of Water Quality; Diane Menuz, Utah Geologic Survey; RJ Spencer, Utah
Department of Agriculture and Food. The DWQ also appreciates the progress reports submitted
by the Local Watershed Coordinators as follows: Wally Dodds, Upper Sevier;; Alan Saltzman,
San Pitch; Marian Hubbard, Jordan River; Andy Pappas, Upper Weber; Justin Elsner, Lower and
Middle Bear; David Dodds, Cedar/Beaver; and Arnie Hultquist, South Eastern Utah.

Thanks is also expressed to Gary Kleeman, Watershed Team, US Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 8 in Denver for his review and input to the report.

Cover Photo: Pinto Creek restoration project. Implemented in FY-2015 using State NPS funding.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 3

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION AND PROGRAM OVERVIEW ................................................................... 4
2. GRANT MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION ........................................ 4
2.1. STAFFING AND SUPPORT .............................................................................................................. 6
2.2. FY-15 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND MILESTONES ............................................................................. 7
2.3. SUMMARY OF ACTIVE UTAH 319(H) GRANTS DURING FY-15 ..................................................... 9
2.4. WATERSHED BASED PLANS/ TMDLS........................................................................................... 9
2.5. PROJECT PROPOSALS APPROVED FOR FUNDING DURING FY- 15 SOLICITATION PROCESS ........... 9
3. NPS PROGRAM STRATEGIC APPROACH ...........................................................................10
3.1. TARGETED BASIN APPROACH .....................................................................................................10
3.2. UTAH STATE NPS FUNDING ........................................................................................................10
3.3. PROGRAM MATCH STATUS .........................................................................................................11
3.4. INTEGRATING WATERSHEDS AND NPS FUNDING (BASIN WIDE SUMMARY) ................................11
3.5. NPS WATER QUALITY TASK FORCE/ MONITORING COUNCIL .....................................................16
3.6. GRANTS REPORTING AND TRACKING SYSTEM ............................................................................18
4. WATER QUALITY INFORMATION .......................................................................................18
4.1. SAMPLING AND ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES- JIM HARRIS ..............................................................18
4.2 DATA ANALYSIS AND ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................19
4.3 VOLUNTEER MONITORING ...............................................................................................................20
4.4 THE AMBIENT WATER QUALITY MONITORING SYSTEM (AWQMS) DATABASE .............................21
4.5 GROUND WATER PROTECTION .........................................................................................................22
5 OUTREACH ACTIVITIES .........................................................................................................22
6 STATE/LOCAL AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS .......................................................................24
7 FEDERAL AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS .................................................................................29
8 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY REVIEW AND NPS PROJECT TOURS FOR FY-15 .............37
9 APPENDICIES ..............................................................................................................................52

FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP……………………………………………………. 52
TABLE A COMPLETED AND ACTIVE 319 PROJECTS…………………………………. 53
TABLE B 319 FINAL PROJECT REPORTS SUBMITTED IN FY-2015…………………. 53
TABLE C SUMMARY OF ACTIVE UTAH 319(H) GRANTS FY-15…………………….. 54
TABLE D APPROVED TMDL……………………………………………………………… 56
TABLE E WATERSHED PLANS…………………………………………........................... 58
TABLE F STATE NPS FUNDS ALLOCATED IN 2015…………………………………... 59
TABLE G FUNDING USED WITH SECTION 319 FUNDING IN FY-2015……………… 60
TABLE H SUMMARY CONSERVATION PRACTICES- NRCS FISCAL YEAR 2015… 61
TABLE I MILESTONES OF THE UTAH STATEWIDE NPS PROGRAM FY-2015…….64
TABLE J FY-2015 BLM WRI PROJECTS………………………………………………… 68

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 4

1. Introduction and Program Overview

This report fulfills the requirements of Section 319(m)(1) of the federal Clean Water Act of 1987.
The Utah Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Water Quality annually prepares
this report to inform the public, the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) on the state’s progress in the area of nonpoint source water pollution abatement. Although
this report should not be considered a complete account of all nonpoint source activities, it
describes the most important features of Utah’s program.

The mission of the Utah Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Program is to support the
environmental protection goals of the state as described in Utah Administrative Code R317-2,
in part to: 1) to conserve the waters of the state; 2) to protect, maintain, and improve the
quality of the waters of the state for public water supplies, species protection and propagation
and for other designated uses; and 3) to provide for the prevention, abatement and control of
new or existing sources of polluted runoff. The Utah NPS Management Program works to
achieve these goals by working in concert with numerous local, state and federal agencies and
private parties pursuant to the Utah NPS Pollution Management Plan.

Nonpoint source pollution refers to diffuse pollutants that when added together from an entire
watershed can significantly impact water quality in streams, lakes and reservoirs. Nonpoint
source (NPS) pollution is diffuse, coming from land runoff, percolation, precipitation or
atmospheric deposition. Precipitation washes pollutants from the air and land and into our
streams, lakes, reservoirs and groundwater. Such pollutants can include sediment, nutrients,
pathogens (bacteria and viruses), toxic chemicals, pesticides, oil, grease, salts and heavy
metals. In Utah, our most common problems are nutrients, pathogens, metals, sediment, and
salts. These pollutants alter the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the water and
can impair their designated beneficial uses. Most waterbodies are listed on the State’s
303(d) List of Impaired Waters because of nonpoint source pollution. Some of the common
sources of NPS pollution include agricultural activities, runoff from paved surfaces, mining
and timber operations, recreational activities, onsite septic systems, construction,
stream/riparian habitat degradation and natural sources.

2. Grant Management and Program Administration

In Fiscal Year 2015 (FY-15) the Utah NPS program received $1,381,900 in Federal Section
319(h) funds. Of these funds, $502,379 was used for program related staffing and support, while
the remaining $879,521 was dedicated to 7 project grants. This was a 1% decrease from the year
before, thus reducing the amount of funding dedicated for project implementation by $14,100 in
FY-2015.

Section 319(h) funds are distributed at the local level to help address water quality issues
contributing to nonpoint source pollution. Recipients of these funds can include local
governments, watershed groups and individual cooperators. The projects selected for funding in
FY-15 include the statewide volunteer monitoring program, support of local watershed
coordinators, and Best Management Practice (BMP) implementation.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 5

Figure 1

In addition to the FY-15 Section 319 funds, Utah continues to manage five other federal 319
grant awards which have been partially or completely expended. Table 1 summarizes grant
awards by year and the approximate percentage that has been expended in each grant. The FY-
2010 grant has been closed out.

Table 1
Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source Funding Project Allocations
Federal Fiscal Year Grant Award Expenditures
in FY-2015
Total
Expenditures
Percent
Expended
FY-10 $1,131,582 $214,869 $1,131,582 100%
FY-11 $832,921 $13,161 $769,927 92%
FY-12 $830,800 $105,089 $640,291 77%
FY-13 $861,621 $556,582 $693,628 81%
FY-14 $893,621 $334,678 $334,678 37%
FY-15 $879,521 $0 $0 0%
Total $6,764,984 $1,224,379 $3,570,106 53%

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 6

2.1. Staffing and Support

In FY-15 the Division of Water Quality devoted 6.2 FTEs to the NPS Pollution Management
Program that are funded 60% with 319 funds and 40% state revenue. Table 2 shows the positions
and FTEs funded by the Division of Water Quality using Section 319 funds.

Table 2
PERSONNEL
(# FTE's)
SALARY FRINGE
(44%)
TOTAL
EXPENSES
STATE
(40%)
EPA 319
(60%)
Program
Coordinator (1.0)
$64,064 $28,188 $92,252 $36,901 $55,351
Program
Assistant (1.0)
$33,869 $26,611 $100,800 $40,320 $60,480
Environmental
Scientist (0.50)
32,155 14,148 46,303 18,521 27,782
Environmental
Scientist (1.0)
57,691 25,384 83,075 33,230 49,845
Environmental
Scientist (0.50) 30,454 13,400 43,854 17,542 26,312
Environmental
Scientist (0.30)
17,307 7,615 24,922 9,969 14,953
Environmental
Scientist (0.50)
28,846 12,692 41,538 16,615 24,923
Monitoring
Specialist (1.0)
50,383 22,169 72,552 29,021 43,531
Two Seasonal
Temps (0.50)
42,333 18,627 60,960 24,384 36,576
Watershed
Section Manager
(0.60)
41,856 18,417 60,273 24,109 36,164
Asst. Div.
Director (0.20)
16,420 7,225 23,645 9,458 14,187
Division Director
(0.10)
10,768 4,738 15,506 6,202 9,304
TOTAL
6.2 FTEs
$426,146 $199,213 $665,679 $266,272 $399,407
SUPPORT
Travel $6,400 $2,560 $3,840
Direct and
Indirect Staff
Support
$141,656 $56,663 $84,994
Supplies $2,063 $825 $1,238
Monitoring $21,500 $8,600 $12,900
Total Support $171,619 $68,648 $102,972
Total Staffing and Support $837,298 $334,920 $502,379

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 7

Section 319 funds allocated to staffing and support functions are also used to pay for laboratory
analysis of water samples and report preparation. Phytoplankton and macroinvertebrate samples
are collected annually from selected waterbodies by DWQ monitoring staff. The analysis of
these samples and annual reports are paid for in part with 319 funds, and help determine if the
BMPs that are being implemented are achieving the desired environmental benefits. The direct
and indirect staff support includes expenses such as phones, rent, maintenance, security, printing,
books, and data processing.
2.2. FY-15 Accomplishments and Milestones

FY-15 Accomplishments
 Utah closed out the FY-09 Section 319 Grant, and all information has been entered into
the Grants Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS)
 Water Quality Task Force meetings were held on August 25th, 2014, December 4th, 2014,
February 12th, 2015, and June 17th, 2015.
 The annual agency coordination meeting was held on March 3rd, 2014. This meeting
allowed partner agencies the opportunity to give a 15 minute presentation highlighting
the NPS pollution issues their agencies are currently addressing.
 The Utah Watershed Coordinating Council (UWCC) met 3 times during FY-14 including
a Fluvial Geomorphology and Stream Restoration training where Patrick Belmont from
Utah State University taught a one day course on the subject. A tour was also conducted
in the Bear River Watershed highlighting water quality improvement projects that had
been implemented.
 Success stories have been submitted to EPA for approval highlighting the environmental
benefits of NPS project work that has recently taken place on the Spring Creek
Watershed in Cache Valley, the Wallsburg Watershed, and the Strawberry River
Watershed.
 A Federal Consistency Review was conducted with the Division of Water Quality and the
Forest Service in the Uinta-Cache National Forest on August 12th, 2015.
 The Utah Division of Water Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency
participated in a project evaluation tour in the Bear River and Weber River Watersheds
on August 18th through the 20th, 2015.
 The Utah Division of Water Quality and the Natural Resource Conservation Service
worked together to identify three 12 Digit HUCs in the Upper Sevier and Wallsburg
Watersheds in which the National Water Quality Initiative funding will be spent.
 The Water Quality Task Force Charter was update and approved by the Water Quality
Task force.
 The process of updating the State NPS MOU was initiated on June 17th.
 The Echo and Rockport TMDLs were approved by EPA.
 A website was developed for the NPS program (utahcleanwater.org). This website will
serve as a central location in which various agencies can publicize their NPS efforts and
post educational materials focused on reducing NPS pollution.

Annual Milestones
To help the State of Utah gauge the success of the Statewide Nonpoint Source Management
Program the State has developed annual milestones. These milestones are based on the five
objectives of the Statewide NPS Management Program identified in the Management Plan. These
objectives and milestones are as follows:

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 8

Objective 1: Environmental Protection

Annual Milestones
 Number of TMDLs completed.
 Number of TMDLs initiated during the state fiscal year.
 Number of nine element watershed based plans developed.
 Number of nine element watershed based plans initiated during the state fiscal year.
 Number of projects dedicated to the protection of threatened waterbodies identified in
Utah’s 303(d) list.
 Number of projects focused on groundwater protection throughout the state.

Objective 2: Improve Program Efficiency and Effectiveness through Reporting and
Evaluation.

Annual Milestones
 Total number of stream miles restored (beginning 2013)
 Total estimated load reductions (P,N,TSS) in project areas (beginning 2013)
 Number of final project reports submitted (beginning 2013)
 Number of 319 grants currently open during the fiscal year
 Amount of unexpended funds in each open 319 grant
 Number of success stories submitted to EPA for approval showing the environmental
benefits of completed NPS projects

Objective 3: Improve Public Participation and Understanding of NPS Issues.

Annual Milestones
 Number of participants involved in the Statewide Volunteer Monitoring Program
 Number of I&E projects implemented with Section 319 and State NPS Funding
 Updates made to the State NPS Program Website

Objective 4: Improve Data Collection and Management

Annual Milestones
 Track updates made to enhance NPS monitoring in the Division of Water Quality’s
annual monitoring strategy
 Number of Sampling Analysis Plans developed
 Track status and updates of Utah’s AWQMS database
 Report on water quality data uploaded to the EPA WQX database

Objective 5: Improve Coordination of Governmental and Private Sectors

Annual Milestones
 Hold annual NPS Management Program coordination meetings
 Conduct annual consistency reviews with state and federal agencies
 Number of Water Quality Task Force meetings held during the fiscal year
 Amount of funding used to leverage 319 funding throughout the state. This funding can
include program funding from UDAF, UDEQ, UDWR, USDA, and other state, federal,
and local agencies

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 9

For a complete report of how these annual milestones were met in FY-14, refer to Table I in
the appendices.
2.3. Summary of Active Utah 319(h) Grants During FY-15
For an entire summary of active Utah 319(h) projects see Tables A, B, & C in the
appendices.
2.4. Watershed Based Plans/ TMDLs

Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to develop and submit for
approval a list of impaired waters every two years. This is referred to as the 303(d) list. The most
recent version of the 303(d) list approved by EPA for the State of Utah was issued in 2014.
Waterbodies listed as impaired require additional study to determine the sources of impairment,
and if appropriate, have a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) determination made for the
pollutant of concern. Currently the State of Utah is implementing 63 TMDLs, (See Table D and
E in the appendices). Additionally, a comprehensive tracking tool for TMDLs and waterbody
assessments has been provided by EPA that will assist in accurately reporting the status of
completed TMDLs. The Division of Water Quality has also been working to prioritize the
waterbodies listed on the 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies to determine where efforts should be
focused to develop TMDLs and implement watershed plans.
2.5. Project Proposals Approved for Funding During FY- 15 Solicitation Process

Due to the high demand for 319(h) funds the State of Utah has required that entities applying for
funding submit pre-proposals to the State for review. 64 NPS pre-proposals totaling nearly $4.5
million were accepted from the middle of April to the first of June for the 2015 fiscal year. These
pre-proposals were reviewed by the Utah Division of Water Quality using a project selection
ranking criterion developed by the Water Quality Task Force. Once the proposals were ranked
they were reviewed by a subcommittee of the Water Quality Task Force, and the final grant
awards were determined. Of the proposals received, 7 projects were selected for funding with
Section 319 funds. The Colorado River Watershed received the majority of project funds
available, since it was the targeted basin in FY-15. However, one project was funded in the
Strawberry River Watershed to help complete that project as well. The local watershed
coordinators and an information and education grant to USU, including the volunteer monitoring
program, were also funded (Table 3). The projects that were not selected for funding with
Section 319 funds were then considered for funding with State NPS funding.

Table 3

2015 Project Implementation Plans (PIPs) for CWA Section 319 Funding
(Prepared June 30th, 2015)
Proposal Title Allocation

1. USU Volunteer Monitoring and I&E $ 83,250
2. Local Watershed Coordinators $ 340,000
3. Spanish Valley Watershed Implementation $ 118,686
4. Strawberry River Restoration $ 75,000
5. North Fork Virgin River Irrigation Project $183,855
6. Castle Creek Restoration $12,530
7. Fremont River Restoration $66,200
Total $ 879,521
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 10

3. NPS Program Strategic Approach

To be eligible for funding, NPS projects must be located on a waterbody, or be tributary to a
waterbody, identified on the 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies. A current watershed plan
should also be in place which covers all nine elements required in an EPA approved watershed
based plan. Using a targeted basin approach allows watershed planners time to develop
watershed plans between funding cycles. To help facilitate the development of watershed plans
and identify sources of pollutant loading, the Utah Division of Water Quality conducts annual
intensive monitoring runs two years before funding is scheduled to be received by the targeted
basin.
3.1. Targeted Basin Approach

The State of Utah uses a targeted basin approach to reduce nonpoint source pollution. FY-15
represents the sixth year of implementing the targeted basin approach (see Table 4). This
approach allows the state to focus implementation efforts on a specific watershed and will
promote effective implementation of TMDLs and watershed plans.

The Colorado River Watershed obtained the majority of the 319 funds allocated for BMP
implementation, and will also receive an additional $150,000 in State Nonpoint Source funds in
FY-16 if the need is present. The majority of these funds will be used to implement projects in
the Spanish Valley and surrounding areas that were identified by the Moab Area Watershed
Partnership (MAWP) as identified in the watershed plan that was recently developed for this area.
Several other projects were funded that are not located in the MAWP, but are located in the
Colorado River basin as well.

Table 4
Basin Priority Funding Schedule
Watershed 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2021
(1) Jordan/ Utah lake
(2) Colorado River
(3) Sevier, Cedar-Beaver
(4) Bear River
(5) Weber River
(6) Uinta Basin

3.2. Utah State NPS Funding

The Utah Division of Water Quality uses funds generated from interest earnings on loans
awarded by the Utah Water Quality Board to address NPS issues. Individuals, businesses, private
entities, associations, and government agencies are eligible to receive these grants. Much like
Section 319(h) funds, all project proposals received are ranked and prioritized. The highest
priority projects are those that address a critical water quality need, human health concerns, and
would not be economically feasible without the grant. In FY-15, 33 projects were funded using
State Nonpoint Source grants, totaling $973,897. In addition to these projects an additional
$26,103 was reserved for on-site septic system projects that may arise during the year. For a
complete summary of FY-15 funded projects see Table F in the appendices.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 11

3.3. Program Match Status

The 319(h) federal money received by the State requires a 40% non-federal match for both the
staffing and support funds used by DEQ and the dollars allocated for projects. Most of the match
for projects is provided at the local level by individual producers and landowners. The DWQ
provides State NPS funds as match to selected 319 projects to provide an additional incentive to
implement BMPs.

There are several state and local programs which have been very helpful in generating match for
the 319 projects. The Division of Wildlife Resources manages several state grant programs,
which include Habitat Council funds, Blue Ribbon Fishery program, and Watershed Restoration
Initiative funding. These funds are dedicated to the improvement of wildlife habitat on public
and private lands, while improving water quality. Table G in the appendices gives a summary of
these funds used in conjunction with Section 319 funding.

The Utah Conservation Commission manages the Agriculture Resource Development Loan
Program (ARDL), which in recent years has been expanded to include water quality improvement
projects on farms and ranches. The Grazing Improvement Program (GIP) at the Utah
Department of Agriculture and Food also provides state revenue to improve management of
upland and riparian areas throughout the state. All of the programs mentioned above have
provided match for 319 revenues in jointly funded projects. These state programs are tremendous
assets to the improvement of water quality in this state.

The Department of Environmental Quality provides state revenue to match the staffing and
support 319(h) funds that are part of the Performance Partnership Grant (PPG). The Utah
Association of Conservation Districts also tracks all match accruals through projects managed by
the Local Conservation Districts via an annual contract. Table 5 shows the amount of match
accrued for all open Section 319 grants.

Table 5
Grant Year 319 Funds Spent
in FY-15
Match Accrued
in FY-15
Total 319 Funds
Spent
Total Match
Accrued
FY-10 $214,869 $143,246 $1,131,582 $754,388
FY-11 $13,161 $8,774 $769,927 $513,285
FY-12 $105,089 $70,059 $640,291 $426,861
FY-13 $556,582 $371,055 $693,628 $462,419
FY-14 $334,678 $223,119 $334,678 $223,119
FY-15 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total $1,224,379 $816,253 $3,570,106 $2,380,071

3.4. Integrating Watersheds and NPS Funding (Basin wide summary)

Watershed coordinators have proven to be very effective at helping implement water quality
projects on the ground. Local watershed coordinators develop relationships with landowners and
educate them on the benefits of installing Best Management Practices (BMPs). They also oversee
all project planning, design, project implementation, and reporting. They help organize and
facilitate meetings for local watershed groups involved in watershed planning and in the project
solicitation and selection process.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 12

Southeastern Colorado River Watershed- Arne Hultquist

Currently there’s only one local watershed group in Grand and San Juan counties, the Moab Area
Watershed Partnership (MAWP) and it has been in existence a little over 4 ½ years. Last fall in
November 2014 the MAWP completed its first version of the Management Plan. The MAWP will
probably update the Plan in 2016. The MAWP was also required to produce a Project
Implementation Plan for both Spanish and Castle Valley because it received 319 funding for
several projects. Both of those were completed in November of 2014.

The MAWP received funding for four new projects this year. The Utah State University
Sustainability Office received funding for a rainwater harvesting project, the Moab City Wagner
Street project funding was completely funded and an education/information water monitoring
signage project was funded this year. There was also a small amount granted to the San Juan
Conservation District to help fund a watershed management plan for the Upper Montezuma
Creek Watershed. Several of the projects that were within the MAWP that were accepted in the
prior State fiscal year but were not funded by the 319 program until this State fiscal year have
been started. The MAWP, the Grand Conservation District and San Juan Conservation District
appreciate the funding and are looking forward to submitting several very good projects next
year.

The projects completed this year include the Kiosk and the Dog Waste station projects. The on
the ground work on the 2013 USFS Spring Development project was completed in late June and a
final report is forthcoming. The on the ground work for the Pinhook Seeding project was also
completed and the report is awaiting the results of monitoring that will take place in September.

Cedar/Beaver- David Dodds

The Cedar City watershed coordinator position is relatively new and as such this year has been
focused on implementing projects and acquiring funding for future projects. The North Fork
Chamberlain Ranch project has seen some changes this year. A meeting was held in March with
the involved agencies and it was decided that we should try the low cost alternative of a rotational
grazing system before implementing a high cost irrigation system. The grazing system began June
2015 and we hope to see results by the end of the summer. Also, the North Fork Virgin River
Watershed Plan was completed this year and has been submitted to EPA for final approval.

A stakeholder meeting was held for the Pinto Creek Watershed in January. Landowners and
agency personnel attended and were able to collaborate on their goals. One land owner agreed to
let the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources consider using his land for some fish barriers that
they may construct for establishing a cutthroat fishery. Also, the Pine Valley Ranger District
agreed to let the land owners use willow cuttings and 6,000 cubic yards of rock for future stream
restoration projects in the Pinto Watershed.

The local watershed coordinator completed one project in the Pinto Creek Area in FY-2015. He
is also managing nine other NPS related projects throughout his assigned area. In addition to the
project implementation work that he is doing, he is also gathering monitoring data, and
conducting various information and education related activities throughout the basin.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 13

Jordan River Watershed- Marian Hubbard

Over the past twelve months, the Salt Lake County Watershed Planning and Restoration Program
of Salt Lake County has engaged in several restoration and planning efforts, aimed towards
achieving TMDL and Salt Lake County’s Water Quality Stewardship Plan’s goals.

Salt Lake County has continued to work on Red Butte Creek. In FY-2015 the County partnered
with the University of Utah to install signage along the creek that educated the general public
about storm water impacts to the system. They also installed additional stream gauges that will
help monitor flow and water quality in project areas.

The Murray/Taylorsville Jordan River Restoration project is located at 5200 S through 4800 S on
the Jordan River. Working with partners Murray City, Taylorsville City, Utah Division of
Forestry Fire and State Lands and Salt Lake County Parks, Salt Lake County Watershed Planning
and Restoration has begun work on restoring 3100 feet of Jordan River Bank. 24 riparian sod
mats and bare root stock have been planted to date. Weed control measures including phragmites
spray and cutting are slated for August and 265 trees and shrubs will be planted on September
15th. Major construction activities at the Little Cottonwood confluence area is slated for this fall.

The Emigration Creek implementation project accomplished all objectives and tasks of the
project, including some extra achievements. These include:
 Regrading the slope at Rotary Park Detention Basin Pond to assist with public safety and
vegetation establishment.
 Installation of a fence around the detention basin to minimize dog and human traffic to
Emigration Creek.
 Riparian and upland seeding in both the spring and fall of 2014.
 Mechanical weed removal and trash removal.
 Optical brightener study and 2 caffeine studies to determine anthropogenic sources of E.
coli in May and September 2014.
 Bioenegineering along Emigration Creek at the Rotary Park Detention Basin and west of
Hogle Zoo.
 Stakeholder and Public Meetings.
 Water Quality Monitoring as well as photo monitoring.

Bingham Creek: In cooperation with the UACD, watershed personnel will design and install soil
bioengineering strategies and wetland plants to reduce sediment loading and E. coli
contamination in Bingham Creek and subsequently, the Jordan River. UACD will install fencing
and manure management strategies to keep cattle from adversely affecting this area. Once the
fence is complete and the manure management has been established by the UACD, Salt Lake
County will then design and install the bioengineering.

Jordan River Channel Repair at Winchester St.: In cooperation with the State of Utah Division of
Forestry, Fire and State Lands and Murray City, watershed personnel have designed and installed
a design focused on Natural Channel Design concepts and re-contoured the Jordan River channel.
This includes four rock cross vanes to drop the river the necessary 10 feet. Design work began
summer 2015 with construction activities concluding in mid-September. All plantings including
1000+ container plants and over 2500 live stakes will be installed in Fall 2015.

In addition to the project implementation that is taking place, the watershed coordinator continues
to fulfill their reporting responsibilities, as well as the information and education component of
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 14

the watershed. This included the Jordan River Symposium, a water quality newsletter, and a river
clean-up day in the watershed when trash is collected.

Weber River Watershed- Jake Powell/Andy Pappas

In FY-2015 a new local watershed coordinator was hired. This coordinator is learning quickly,
and has already begun identifying projects that need to be implemented within his watershed.
Currently the local watershed coordinator is working with landowners to implement five projects.
These projects focus on protecting the riparian area by fencing animals from the stream corridor
and stabilizing eroding banks, thus allowing the vegetation to reestablish along the reach. In
addition to the implementation of these projects, the watershed coordinator has also been tasked
with monitoring these projects.

The watershed coordinator continues to work closely with the East Canyon Watershed
Committee. This committee is currently working to develop an outreach and education campaign
focused on increasing awareness about the low flow issues in East Canyon Creek. The
coordinator also acts as the website administrator and frequently develops new content for the
website and keeps current events and information up to date. He has also been heavily involved
with the Weber River Partnership. This group seeks to act in the capacity of a watershed
committee working to increase the coordination and effectiveness of groups working in the larger
Weber Watershed.

The local watershed coordinator continues to develop the CRMP for the South Fork of Chalk
Creek. This watershed was identified as a high priority area in the Echo/Rockport TMDL because
of its high contributions of sediment to the larger Chalk Creek watershed. A final draft of this
document has been submitted to the Division of Water Quality. This planning process has raised
awareness among the landowners of watershed scale issues as well as provided a foundation of
partnership, collaboration, and planning within the watershed.

The watershed coordinator continues to participate in and lead the way for water quality
education within the watershed.

Middle and Lower Bear River Watershed- Justin Elsner

During FY-15 the local watershed coordinator completed 4 projects to help improve water quality
in the watershed. These projects consisted of a stream bank stabilization project and three animal
feeding operations. In addition to completing these projects, the local watershed coordinator
continues to work on 7 other projects that are scheduled to be completed in the next couple of
years.

In addition to project implementation, the local watershed coordinator has been actively involved
in educating the general public in his watershed. The local watershed coordinator continues to
facilitate two different watershed groups in the Middle and Lower Bear River Watersheds. The
Cutler Reservoir Advisory Committee is active in the Middle Bear River Watershed, and is
currently developing the implementation plan for the Cutler Reservoir TMDL. The watershed
group in the Lower Bear River has recently begun the process of revising the TMDL on the
Lower Bear River.

The local watershed coordinator has also developed several final reports as funding has been
spent out, and grants completed. The local watershed coordinator had a large amount of funding
that needed to be spent on water quality projects and was able to identify projects that could be
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 15

used for that funding, and has submitted adequate reports showing how this funding has been
spent.

San Pitch Watershed- Alan Saltzman

During FY-2015 one project was completed in the San Pitch Watershed, and the local watershed
coordinator continued to work with two other land owners that were implementing projects.
However, as the targeted basin for FY-2016 the local watershed coordinator focused mainly on
applying for funding and doing the planning for several projects that are projected to take place in
the San Pitch Watershed over the next 3 years. In FY-2016 six projects will be funded using
State NPS grants totaling $271,397. Six additional projects will also be funded using Section 319
funding totaling $196,326. These projects will begin to be implemented as early as the fall of
2016.

In addition to project implementation the San Pitch Watershed Coordinator has been helping the
local Conservation District develop a coordinated resource management plan that will encompass
all 9 of the EPA required watershed planning elements. He also continues to assist with the
collection of water quality data that will be used in the development of this plan. He has also been
involved with the monitoring of projects that have been implemented in his watershed to show
project effectiveness. The watershed coordinator has completed all of his reporting requirements
for his project funds, and has submitted his reports in a timely manner

The watershed coordinator has continued to conduct information and education related projects
throughout the watershed. This includes a watershed field day that was held on April 30th at
Snow College. All of the local 4th grade classes in the district attended this field day.

Upper Sevier Watershed- Wally Dodds

FY-2015 was a busy year in the Upper Sevier River. In addition to the coordinators’ normal
duties, he has also been called over to the Fremont River to help implement a restoration project
since the previous project manager had retired. The local watershed coordinator helped complete
the South Canyon Pinion/Juniper removal and reseeding in FY-2015, and in addition to that
project he continues to work on 9 other projects that will be completed in the next couple of
years. Since two HUC 12 watersheds in the Upper Sevier were selected for NWQI projects from
the NRCS totaling over $300,000 the watershed coordinator has been busy working to do the
conservation planning involved for those projects. Two nationwide applications are in place, and
as soon as these are issued they will start construction on two of the four projects that were
funded with NWQI this year.

In addition to the project work that is currently being planned, the watershed coordinator has been
working on updating the watershed plan for the Upper Sevier Watershed. It is anticipated that
this plan will be completed before the targeted basin funding is received in the spring of 2016.

The local watershed coordinator is also heavily involved in water quality information and
education activities. This includes a natural resource field day that is held annually in the
watershed. This allows students from local schools to learn about water quality issues in their
watershed, and they get the opportunity to go out and help plant willows along the Sevier River
near Panguitch.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 16

Project Summary

In 2015 local watershed coordinators were involved with the completion of 8 projects throughout
the State of Utah. These projects used $246,097 in Section 319 funds and generated over
$858,884 of funding from other sources. These projects are estimated to result in a reduction of
1,479.8 pounds of phosphorous and 243.9 tons of sediment per year. In addition to the projects
that have been completed, additional funding is also being spent on projects that are scheduled to
be completed in the next fiscal year. Table 6 shows a summary of the projects that were
completed in each watershed.

Table 6
Watershed Number of
Projects
Completed
319
Funding
Funding
from Other
Agencies
Estimated
Total P Load
Reductions
(lbs/year)
Estimated
Sediment
Load
Reductions
(tons/year)
Weber River 1 $143,935 $85,314 44.1 81.5
Cedar/Beaver 1 $0 $58,570 60.5 45.5
Bear River 10 $70,529 $0 382 3
San Pitch 1 $31,633 $15,000 350 39.6
Upper Sevier 1 $0 $700,000 643.2 74.3
Total 8 $246,097 $858,884 1,479.8 243.9

3.5. NPS Water Quality Task Force

The mission of the Utah Water Quality Task Force is to facilitate coordinated and holistic
management of Utah’s watersheds for the protection and restoration of Utah’s surface and
ground waters.
The Utah Nonpoint Source (NPS) Program is administered by the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) through the coordination and
assistance of the Utah Water Quality Task Force, and its established ad hoc committees. The
responsibility of the Utah Water Quality Task Force is to advise the DEQ in the holistic
management of Utah’s watersheds, with a focus on reduction of nonpoint source pollution.
DEQ is responsible for the chairmanship of the Water Quality Task Force.

Specific functions of the Utah Water Quality Task Force include:
 Serve as a coordinating body for the review and direction of federal, state and local NPS
management programs to assure that these programs are implemented consistent with the
Utah Nonpoint Source Management Plan (approved by EPA in 2013 and as amended or
revised);
 Promote and foster better alignment of relevant programs to assure efficient and effective
watershed management efforts that improve water quality, in addition to other benefits;
 Provide a forum for the exchange of information on activities which reduce nonpoint
source pollution;
 Provide a forum for discussing and implementing project monitoring (before and after)
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 17

 Provide a common storage area for all data collected
 Provide a forum for discussion and recommended resolutions to program conflicts;
 Work with partner agencies to coordinate the prioritization of watersheds for nonpoint
source activities. Prioritization criteria should include local involvement (e.g. locally led
watershed committees), effective use of partnerships, and evidence of leveraged sources
of funding;
 Establish and implement a process for field inspections of nonpoint source mitigation
activities on public and private lands to ensure that best management practices are
installed and functioning as designed to protect water quality; and
 Serve as a coordinating body for outreach and education to increase public awareness
regarding nonpoint source pollution management.
Specific Products of the Utah Water Quality Task Force include:

 The Annual Utah Nonpoint Source Program Report. This report is required by EPA, but
is not restricted to 319 funded efforts. The report is prepared by DEQ in coordination
with UDAF. The task force will assist in providing content, advice and review. The
report will highlight the planning efforts, projects, and successes statewide that are
possible with the broad coalition of partners encompassed in the Water Quality Task
Force;
 Presentation of the Annual Utah Nonpoint Source Program Report each year to the Utah
Water Quality Board and the Utah Conservation Commission.
 Organize a NPS Conference periodically to share information, highlight successes, and
improve networking throughout the state and region.
 Provide annual water quality awards to individuals and organizations whose actions or
products have protected water quality and exemplified good stewardship of our waters.
 An institutional repository (e.g. a web site) that includes originals or links to documents,
reports, and minutes.

Membership:

The Task Force includes representation of those entities with programs that could potentially
cause or mitigate nonpoint source water pollution. As new NPS program components are
developed and implemented, additional entities will be invited to participate. Current
membership includes representatives of:

Local Governments
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Planning Division
U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management
U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation
U.S. Department of Interior National Park Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
Utah Association of Conservation Districts
Utah Department of Agriculture and Food
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 18

Utah Department of Natural Resources
Utah Department of Transportation
Utah Farm Bureau,
Utah State University Cooperative Extension
School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration
League of Cities and Towns
Farmers Union
Utah Association of Counties
3.6. Grants Reporting and Tracking System

The Section 319(h) Grant Reporting and Tracking System (GRTS) is a national database
developed by EPA to track projects and activities funded with CWA Section 319(h) funds. The
primary purpose of the database is to track project progress, accomplishments, funding
information and environmental results using several nationally mandated information items that
are reported to Congress annually by EPA. Information extracted from this system forms part of
the justification to Congress for funding the Section 319 Program. EPA Region VIII uses GRTS
to enable the States to electronically fulfill reporting requirements using the Project Evaluation
Form and other attachment features in GRTS such as final reports, GIS maps or other project
publications.
4. Water Quality Information
4.1. Sampling and Assessment Activities- Jim Harris

As more restoration projects are being implemented around the state, monitoring of individual
projects is becoming more difficult to perform. The majority of 319 projects in Utah address
impacts to stream and riparian habitats in order to restore aquatic life beneficial uses. Often,
these projects substantially reduce erosion and inputs of nutrients to streams and rivers, in
addition to improving the localized conditions of aquatic habitats. Unless restoration is
widespread and inclusive of a large portion of a watershed, it is often difficult to document
improvements in ambient water quality trends given the resources available. The DWQ’s
monitoring strategy identifies a couple of key changes in the approach to assessing the
effectiveness of nonpoint source projects.

The first of these monitoring approaches involves the direct measure of the aquatic communities
affected by restoration utilizing UCASE protocols in a BACI (Before-After-Control-Impact)
approach. DWQ staff have already performed UCASE monitoring at sites where restoration
projects are planned and linking them to sites of similar condition not anticipating management or
restoration changes (Before-Control). In coming years, those same sites will be visited again to
assess the changes from restoration activities (After-Impact). The BACI design provides
statistically rigorous comparisons between the control site(s) with the restored site (impact) to
quantify changes in biological and physical parameters that have occurred since the restoration
was conducted. In reality, grab samples of chemistry are sufficiently variable that even
statistically rigorous approaches like BACI may not demonstrate discrete changes in the chemical
composition of surface waters following restoration activities. However, similar analyses will be
conducted for measures of biological composition, which may help demonstrate relatively rapid
improvements that result from remediation activities. Measures of biological composition are
also useful because they directly measure improvements of the biological designated uses the
numeric criteria are intended to protect. Of course, measures of both biological and chemical
improvements will be dependent on the relative size of the watershed and restoration activity.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 19

In FY 2015, the majority of the biological monitoring occurred as part of the Probabilistic
Surveys performed in the Jordan River/Utah Lake Basin and as a result there were few sites
targeted specifically for the evaluation of nonpoint source projects utilizing UCASE protocols.
However, the focus of the Targeted Monitoring Program which collects primarily water
chemistry data was centered on the Bear River watershed as well as the Weber River beginning in
October 2015. These sites were targeted with several objectives in mind: supplying data for
assessment and listing, Total Maximum Daily Load analysis, permitting and compliance and
nonpoint source assessment. As such, many of these sites may fulfill more than one of these
objectives and to create an efficient annual monitoring plan the monitoring section consults with
Water Quality Management and Watershed Protection staff to identify particular assessment and
evaluation needs to meet their program objectives.

Another proposed improvement to monitoring nonpoint source projects on a watershed or sub-
watershed scale is the installation of long-term continuous monitoring stations. Depending on the
parameters of concern and the nature of restoration activities, these automated stations could
measure a variety of constituents, including dissolved oxygen, specific conductivity, pH, turbidity
and discharge. Since these probes collect a limited set of water quality parameters, surrogate
measures may be used and additional water chemistry monitoring implemented to develop
relationships between parameters of concern and the surrogate measures. For instance, positive
relationships may be developed between continuous turbidity data and chemistry data such as
nutrients to provide the necessary linkage between changes at long-term stations and project
effectiveness. While the installation of long-term stations isn’t feasible for the assessment of
individual projects on a small scale, they could be used to document the effects of a number of
projects implemented as part of a watershed-scale implementation strategy as in the case of
irrigation efficiency projects to reduce TDS or range improvements to reduce TSS (turbidity).

Currently, Sandy Wingert is implementing a long-term monitoring project in the Strawberry
River Basin in conjunction with Division of Wildlife Resources and the Forest Service. This
project seeks to evaluate the relationship between phosphorus and other measures such as
turbidity to generate data sets sufficient in size to perform trend analysis. In this way, watershed
improvements due to restoration activities may be discernable over time. In 2012, DWQ
negotiated a Monitoring Initiative Grant to benchmark similar long term station projects which
will lead up to a small scale pilot project in a NPS restoration targeted basin (TBD) . DWQ staff
are currently evaluating field methods for deployment of water quality stations as well as
developing assessment methods for the evaluation of continuous data against water quality
criteria.
4.2 Data Analysis and Assessment

Data analysis for evaluating the effectiveness of nonpoint source projects will vary depending on
the type of project and the available data sources. Biological monitoring will provide background
condition of the biotic community for both the “Before” and “Control” collection events. Once
implemented, projects will be assessed by revisiting the “Control” and “Impact” site. Data will
be compared using similar tools described in the biological monitoring component of the
probabilistic and targeted assessments. Scores of biological condition can be evaluated for the
“Impact” or restoration site (Before vs. After) in conjunction with the “Control” site not receiving
treatment (Before vs. After). In this way, changes in the biological condition can be evaluated
against year-to-year variability.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 20

Methods for long-term trend analysis have yet to be developed. However, these sites will likely
utilize a combination of continuous monitoring data coupled with water chemistry to establish a
relationship between the surrogate measures and chemical parameters of concerns linked to PIPs
and TMDLs. For example, correlations can be readily established between total dissolved solids
collected by grab samples and specific conductance as measured by probe sensors. Continuous
monitoring datasets are sufficiently large enough to perform trend analysis with a level of
confidence not possible through periodic grab sampling. Developing correlations between probe
data and other parameters such as nutrients and sediment prove more difficult than the above
described scenario. In these cases, measures for dissolved oxygen, turbidity or other surrogates
may need to be evaluated. As mentioned above, specific monitoring plans will be developed
individually for implementation strategies and QAPPs and subsequent reporting documentation
will detail specific data analysis for each project.

Since much of the work performed during FY2010 was part of the new Strategic Monitoring
Plan, TMDL and NPS staff have not had the opportunity to evaluate or analyze these initial
datasets. Results of these analyses will likely be published on a watershed basis as these analyses
become available.
4.3 Volunteer Monitoring
Nancy Mesner (USU Water Quality Extension Educator)

Utah Water Watch Citizen Monitoring

In 2015, the Utah Water Watch (UWW) program continued to expand its
reach, but also began to focus on data presentation and interpretation. The
UWW website (https://extension.usu.edu/utahwaterwatch) contains
information about the program and protocols, but also maps and graphs of
volunteer collected data with easy to understand interpretation, our
newsletters, videos and other social media links, access to UWW’s online
database, and more.

UWW volunteers collect stream and lake data for different
purposes. Tier 1 (entry level) volunteers monitor primarily
for educational purposes. Monitoring protocols are simple
and designed for easy interpretation in the field. Tier 2
volunteers receive additional training on discharge
measurements, sample collection and handling, and more.
They work with watershed coordinators and other
professionals to collect data that can be used for decision
making and research purposes.

A total of 110 new volunteers joined the program in 2015, resulting in a total of 980 participants.
Tier 1 volunteers sampled 34 lakes and reservoir sites and 120 stream sites throughout the state.
Tier 2 volunteers assisted in higher level monitoring at 2 reservoirs and 46 streams or rivers.

UWW continues to participate in “big day” events such as Monitor Utah, part of Utah’s Water
Week. UWW volunteers collected data to provide a snapshot of Utah’s water quality. The data
were all mapped and are available on UWW’s website.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 21

As UWW’s datasets increase, they have begun
to develop interpretive maps and graphics to
help citizens better understand their results. In
coordination with a statewide NSF project,
UWW has also completed a set of interpretive
signs about stream water quality and citizen
monitoring, installed along the Provo and
Logan Rivers and Red Butte Creek.
Additional signs are planned for next year.

This year, UWW conducted a survey of all their volunteers to assess the value of the program
after 3 years. Among other results, the survey found that volunteers have a better understanding
of the purpose of water monitoring and of the organizations who conduct monitoring. They also
have a greater understanding of the scientific process. Interestingly, as volunteers learn more
about their local waters, they understand that
most of our water is actually in good shape.
This positive message is reflected in the high
percentage of volunteers who have become
more active stewards of their waterbodies as a
result of joining. Results of the survey were
presented to the Utah Water Board, at the Salt
Lake County Watershed Symposium and are
available on the UWW website.
4.4 The Ambient Water Quality Monitoring System (AWQMS) Database

The Ambient Water Quality Data Management System (AWQMS) is currently undergoing an
update to the current version 4.0 and is targeted to be completed in January of 2016. The new
version will bring a wide range of quality control features that can be incorporated into our
current data review process along with a more user-friendly format and bug fixes.

The UDWQ data review, data validation and verification process has continued to be streamlined
during this year and continues to be a work in progress. During the past year, river and stream
data collected during 2014 was imported and is currently available online. The 2015 data is
currently undergoing data review and will be imported into AWQMS early next year after the
database update has been completed. Data collected for lakes and reservoirs during 2009 has
been imported into AWQMS and the overlap between migrated data has been resolved for this
data set. Lakes and reservoirs data for 2010-2014 has undergone data review and is currently
being imported into AWQMS.

UDWQ has partnered with EPA to establish a data flow to the EPA STORET Data warehouse
utilizing the WQX schema. Efforts will include reduction of duplicated data caused during data
migration from STORET to AWQMS and developing import configurations for other types of
data such as bacteriological, and biological data.

In an effort to improve data quality, data migration issues are currently being reviewed and
prioritized. Other data cleanup efforts that were identified during data review will also be
prioritized and addressed after the database update has been completed. The new version of
AWQMS will allow data corrections to be implemented across records and will streamline data
cleanup efforts.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 22

4.5 Ground Water Protection

Ground water protection remains a priority in the State of Utah. In the past, various projects were
funded using 319(h) funds to help analyze ground water around the state. Recently the State has
noticed an increase in nutrients in various ground water sources. This monitoring will help assess
the problem, and identify the sources of the contaminants. The Utah Division of Water Quality
and the Division of Drinking Water will continue to fund monitoring and information and
education programs around the state to identify groundwater issues, and educate the public on
what they can do to protect groundwater in the State. The Utah Division of Drinking Water
(UDDW) completed a grant which generated a groundwater model that used water quality data
that had been gathered from wells in northern Utah and compared it to the land uses in those
areas. The model was able to generate maps showing where the areas of concern are for ground
water contamination, specifically nutrients. UDDW contracted with Utah State University to do
an informational campaign educating landowners on what they can do to help protect
groundwater in their area. However, the local agencies decided that no educational campaign
should be done so as not to worry the residents about the quality of their drinking water. Most of
the elevated nitrate concentrations were found in water wells used for irrigation only and not for
drinking water.

Additionally, several grants have been given to Utah State University to help educate septic
owners on how they can properly maintain their septic systems to reduce pollutants from entering
into groundwater. Technical service providers that commonly install and maintain those systems
are also being trained on how to properly install and pump these systems.
5 Outreach Activities

Utah State University Extension- Nancy Mesner (USU Water Quality Extension Specialist)
Outreach Activities

In 2015, USU Water Quality Extension (USU WQE) delivered a wide range of outreach and
education activities targeted to different audiences, but all with the goal of increasing awareness
of the protecting Utah’s water from nonpoint source pollution. They leveraged their 319 funding
with grants and support from NSF, USDA, USU and Americorps to greatly expand their capacity.
Below are highlights of several of USU WQE’s programs.

Support for Utah’s Water Quality Task Force:

In 2015, the Utah State Water Quality Task Force I&E
subcommittee identified several high priority needs: to improve
coordination of outreach efforts between the different partners in the
state and to more effectively highlight our successes. In response to
the subcommittee’s input, USU WQE developed a new website to
highlight NPS water quality efforts and successes within the state
(www.utahcleanwater.org).

The site explains Utah’s NPS program, highlighting successes and watershed specific contacts,
project information, data and reports.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 23

USU WQE also produced 6 short (~ 1 minute)
videos about specific watershed projects throughout
the state. These were completed at the end of 2015
and are available on the website. They will also be
“packaged” on flash drives and given to legislators,
agency administrators and other decision makers so
they can hear from their own constituents about the
effectiveness and efficiency of Utah’s NPS
programs.

USU WQ Extension also assists Utah’s watershed
coordinators through training, assistance in
monitoring, and development of watershed specific
factsheets. WQE organized a workshop on sediment
for our watershed coordinators. Dr. Patrick Belmont
guided the group through techniques in quantifying
sediment, understanding sediment sources and fates, and using these tools in TMDL development
and implementation.

Youth outreach and teacher training:

Utah State University’s water education program continues
to reach youth across the state. In 2015 they provided
hands-on water quality activities for over 8,000 youth and
parents at camps, water fairs, competitions, and other
events. In total,
they assisted with or
organized 35
different youth or
family events in 10 counties.

They also continued to provide training for teachers and
informal educators on water quality related, hands-on
lessons. Working with the Utah Office of Education and
Utah’s Stem Education advisor, they re-designed their Stream Side Science website
(https://streamsidescience.usu.edu) to provide more content, easier access to materials, and easier
ways for teachers and others to sort through the material by age, interest, or core curriculum
requirements.

With other funding, USU WQE piloted a new model for teacher education, which involves a total
of 4 different workshops with teachers throughout the school year. This expanded version of our
existing training provided teachers with more time to work collaboratively with other teachers at
their schools, to tailor activities for their own needs and to receive feedback. The program was
also designed to introduce families to Extension’s education centers (e.g. USU Botanical Center,
Swaner EcoCenter and Thanksgiving Point) where water related programming helped enhance
the training and learning for the students.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 24

Nutrient Management Education- Rhonda Miller
Activities have focused on educating producers about the new Concentrated Animal Feeding
Operation (CAFO) regulations. Eight workshops for Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs) and
CAFOs were held in January and February, 2015. These workshops covered the latest
developments in the AFO/CAFO regulations, and the options available to producers. Information
on nutrient management plans (NMPs), record keeping, and other regulations affecting producers
were presented. A Producer’s Website, which provides “one-stop” shopping for the producers, is
being maintained and expanded. This website provides information, in laymen’s terms, on the
regulations producers are likely to encounter.
State/Local Agency Contributions

1) Utah Conservation Districts/Utah Association of Conservation Districts

Utah Conservation Districts have statutory authority for the prevention of nonpoint source
pollution (Utah Code 17D-3). They provide local leadership to identify resource needs and assist
private property owners and managers in obtaining the resources to address those needs. The
Districts and UACD partner with the Utah Division of Water Quality to implement Section 319
projects throughout Utah.

Assistance available through Utah Conservation Districts includes conservation planning,
engineering, and GIS/GPS services. Further, Districts promote and fund educational activities for
children including the Utah Envirothon, fairs, field days, and in-classroom presentations.

UACD has contracted with the Utah Division of Water Quality for agricultural NPS management
contract tracking and administration. The state-level administration is accomplished through
member conservation districts that contract NPS program funding for best management practices
with district cooperators. UACD administers the cost-sharing grants by making payments to
landowners implementing projects.

2) Utah Division of Natural Resources- Alan Clark

The Watershed Program in the Department of Natural Resources focuses on protecting and
enhancing core values for our present and future quality of life including watershed health
(structure and function), water quality and yield, wildlife populations, and sustainable agriculture.

This is accomplished through the Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative (WRI), a diverse
partnership of state and federal agencies working together with non-governmental organizations,
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 25

industry, local elected officials and stakeholders, coordinated by the Utah Department of Natural
Resources. Locally led teams identify conservation issues and focus areas using existing plans to
address needs at the landscape (watershed) level. Program partners then propose projects to
address these needs and receive input from other partners. Projects are reviewed and ranked by
the regional teams using a standardized scoring system and then are funded from a variety of
sources and contributors.

In fiscal year 2015, the WRI partnership (122 partners participating) completed over 110 projects
restoring 93,000 acres of uplands and 121 miles of stream and riparian areas (see table 7). Many
of these projects are designed with the goal of improving water quality and quantity. The
Watershed Program finished a complete revision of our online geodata base that was launched in
December. For a full list of WRI projects completed go to: watershed.utah.gov. Through the
partnership effort, general funding ($1.95 million) to the Watershed Program from the Legislature
was successfully leveraged at over 8 to 1 in on-the-ground projects.

The long-term results from this effort will be reduced acres burned by wildfires and resulting
suppression costs, reduced soil loss from erosion, reduced sedimentation and storage loss in
reservoirs, improved water quality and yield, improved wildlife populations, reduced risk of
additional federal listing of species under the Endangered Species Act, improved agricultural
production, and resistance to invasive plant species.

Table 7

3) Utah Department of Agriculture and Food- R.J. Spencer

The Utah Department of Agriculture and Food regularly collaborates with state and federal
partners to assist agricultural producers to maintain viable and productive agricultural lands and
to protect Utah’s natural resources. A strong partnership provides technical and financial
resource options to Utah’s agriculture producer while promoting agricultural sustainability. A
watershed approach is used to work cooperatively with private land owners to prepare
conservation plans that will solve resource problems. Funding options are available from
multiple state and federal programs. This year the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food
partnered with the Division of Water Quality to monitor selected head waters in the state for
nutrients. Funding was acquired to purchase monitoring equipment which consisted of a flow
meter, Multi-parameter meter, and eight data sondes. UDAF hired two seasonal employees to
help the two dedicated staff from the Division with this project. Monitoring consisted of a
selection of sites being visited once a month, from June thru September, on average there where
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 26

8-10 sites visited each week throughout the state. The monitoring sondes were deployed at least
once during the summer at all sites to collect real time data for at least a week. The data collected
from this partnership will help provide needed information on how much and where excess
nutrients are a concern in our state’s headwaters. Once that is determined the state will move
forward with a plan to address areas of concern. UDAF plans on continuing to monitor projects
affecting agriculture in the future to provide information to both producers and the public on what
has been achieved by implementing best management projects.

Utah Conservation Commission (UCC)

The UCC is authorized under Title 4, Chapter 18 of the Utah Code. The Act's purpose declaration
states that "The Legislature finds and declares that the soil and water resources of this state
constitute one of its basic assets and that the preservation of these resources requires planning and
programs to ensure the development and utilization of these resources and to protect them from
the adverse effects of wind and water erosion, sediment, and sediment related pollutants." With
this in mind, the Legislature created in 1937 this unique state government entity and it has been
active continually since, evolving to meet new environmental and social conditions. Today this
16 person board strives to protect the natural resources within the state.
Utah Agriculture Certificate of Environmental Stewardship (ACES)
The ACES program assesses storage, handling and application of fertilizer, pesticides, fuels, and
hazardous wastes. It also assesses grazing management, soil erosion, cropping and irrigation
systems, storage and application of manure, and other agricultural practices that may cause an
impact on our natural resources.

The ACES workbook has been written by UDAF and reviewed by agriculture producer groups,
environmental groups, and some State and Federal agencies. Comments have been very
favorable and incorporated into the final version of the workbook. The UCC approved the final
version of the workbook on September 15, 2014 and the program is now ready to start certifying
agriculture producers, this will be a milestone in moving conservation forward and protecting our
natural resources. Currently one operation is moving forward in the certification process.

Utah Grazing Improvement Program (UGIP)

The Utah Grazing Improvement Program is a broad-based program focused on rangeland
resource health. Its mission is to “improve the productivity, health and sustainability of our
rangelands and watersheds.” A keystone benefit is the reduction of NPS water pollution and the
protection and improvement of water quality and habitat components.

A staff of Grazing Coordinators, located in six regions throughout the state, offers the livestock
industry sound information and assistance regarding grazing issues. A main focus of the program
is to invest in and help facilitate improved resource management. Grants are provided for projects
that will enhance grazing management and rangeland resource health.

Agriculture Resource Development Loan Program (ARDL)

Projects eligible for ARDL loans include animal waste management, water usage management
(irrigation systems), rangeland improvement, on farm energy projects, wind erosion control,
disaster mitigation and cleanup, water conveyance projects for both private individuals and canal
companies, and providing crop storage facilities and other farm structures outlined in the ARDL
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 27

Policy. These projects all have a direct impact on protecting our natural resources, preventing or
reducing pollution both to water and air and in sustaining the economic viability of rural
communities.
The ARDL section also underwrites loans for the State Revolving Fund (SRF) under the Division
of Water Quality financing projects that eliminate or reduce nonpoint source water pollution on
privately owned lands. That program was recently expanded to include grants as well as loans.
We also underwrite loans for the replacement of Petroleum Storage Tanks for the Department of
Environmental Quality. This program is designed to assist owners and operators in rural Utah by
upgrading, replacing, or closing existing underground tanks to comply with Federal regulations
and to protect the environment.

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program

The State of Utah currently receives approximately $2 million yearly from the Colorado River
Basin States Salinity Control Forum to reduce salt that enters the Colorado River, which has
increased significantly from the initial $350,000 received in 1997. Most recently the funds have
been used to pipe irrigation canals in Daggett and Duchesne counties.

The irrigation projects installed through the salinity program are an economic benefit to
agriculture in eastern Utah. The new irrigation systems increase watering efficiency, decrease
water loss through seepage, and improve crop production and uniformity

Agriculture Sustainability Task Force

To better understand and address the role that agriculture plays in promoting Utah’s security,
economy, society, culture, and well-being, a Utah Agriculture Sustainability Task Force gathered
and analyzed data and information to make recommendations to promote the sustainability of all
types of agriculture. Eight major issues emerged:
1. Food Security
2. Invasive Species
3. Grazing Management
4. Immigration
5. Urban Agriculture
6. Agriculture Promotion and Profitability
7. Next Generation Farms
8. Irrigation Infrastructure

In order to address these issues, the Task Force developed a list of proposed actions which can be
found at http://ag.utah.gov/conservation-environmental.html that state, local and federal
governments and the private sector can implement. Ag sustainability and protection of natural
resources go hand-in-hand.

Resource Assessments

Utah’s local Conservation Districts are working in each County to prepare a county-wide
resource assessment to identify local resource concerns. In preparation for that effort, each
county has prepared a list of priority resource concerns identified by the local work group, and
has submitted those to UDAF. Subsequently, UDAF has prepared a Statewide Resource
Assessment which identifies all County priorities. The Resource Assessments will be one tool
used to fund priority projects.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 28

Information and Education

UDAF is willing to provide assistance to Utah agricultural groups, and fairly represent
agricultural interests at the many committee meetings staff are involved with. Some of those
committees include:

Utah Conservation Commission
Utah Association of Conservation Districts
Local Conservation Districts
Utah Water Quality Task Force
Utah Nutrient Core Team
Utah Animal Feed Operation Committee
Local Watershed Committees

UDAF works closely with Utah Legislators to make sure that agriculture is fairly considered in
any legislation that is considered. We also maintain an up-to-date website (www.ag.utah.gov)
that provides information to agriculture producers and the public.

4) Forestry, Fire and State Lands- Bill Zanotti

The Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands monitor timber harvesting on private and state
lands within the State of Utah for the Department of Environmental Quality-Division of Water
Quality. The overall goal of this monitoring evaluates the application of Utah’s Forest Water
Quality Guidelines (FWQG) that is in Utah’s State Non-Point Pollution Prevention Plan.
Protocols for conducting FWQG’s monitoring have been developed for use by FFSL’s service
foresters.

During the SFY-2015, the following monitoring activities were completed:

 Processed 4 notifications to conduct timber harvesting activities
 Conducted 0 post-harvest inspections
 Conducted 4 pre/in progress inspections of timber harvesting activities
5) Utah Geologic Survey- Diane Menuz
The Utah Geological Survey (UGS) provides timely scientific information about Utah's geologic
environment, resources, and hazards. The Groundwater & Paleontology Program (GW&P), one
of five programs at the UGS, conducts detailed studies on groundwater and wetland resources.
Three GW&P studies during the past year relate to nonpoint source issues: watershed-based
wetland assessments, contamination of a public water supply well in Millville, Cache County,
likely due to septic tanks, and salinity issues in southern Sanpete County.
In the summer of 2014, GW&P conducted a probabilistic survey of 72 wetlands in the Weber
River watershed. Survey data included water quality samples brought back to the Utah Public
Health Laboratory for analysis and observations of potential indicators of water quality stress,
including excessive soil disturbance and nuisance algae. The final project report, due in March
2016, will provide estimates of how common potential water quality disturbances are in the
watershed and can be used for nonpoint source project planning.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 29

GW&P has completed a two-phase study on a Millville City public supply well with nitrate-
nitrogen concentrations near the U.S. EPA’s maximum contaminant level of 10 mg/L. GW&P, in
cooperation with Utah State University, detected measurable quantities of chemical constituents
of pharmaceuticals and personal care products commonly found in septic systems, indicating that
at least some of the nitrate contamination is contributed by private septic system discharge.
Millville is injecting approximately 15 acre-feet of fresh, treated spring water into the aquifer via
the well during periods of low water demand and then pumping the injected spring water back out
of the aquifer via the well during periods of high demand. The primary benefits of this project
include identifying the source of nitrate contamination, and effectively decreasing reported nitrate
concentrations in the Millville City well.
GW&P also worked on a project to determine the sources and extent of salinity in the lower San
Pitch River drainage and adjoining Gunnison Irrigation Company (GIC) canal system in southern
Sanpete Valley. We spent two field seasons documenting water quality and quantity in the lower
San Pitch River drainage along different reaches within the San Pitch River and Twelvemile
Creek, as well as nearby canals and springs. We used geologic mapping and geophysical
techniques (Transient Electromagnetic Method [TEM]) to isolate and identify regions in the
subsurface that likely have an influence on river salinity. We produced GIS maps that show
salinity concentrations and groundwater along the San Pitch River channel, 2D-TEM images and
interpretations, and a simplified geologic map with a cross section. Overall, the maps emphasize
the areas of higher and lower salinity. Our combined geologic, geophysical, and hydrologic
assessment indicates the source of salinity in the San Pitch River and Twelvemile Creek is
dissolution of salt from the Arapien Shale and its erosional remnants by groundwater and seepage
from irrigation works. The data collected for this study provide information necessary to make
targeted management decisions to reduce salinity and provide for a sustainable supply of
acceptable/suitable quality irrigation water for the GIC and its water users. Ultimately, we made
recommendations to mitigate the influence of the highly saline groundwater inflow: limit settling
pond seepage, canal seepage, and irrigation return flow near areas having Arapien Shale subcrop,
and divert high-salinity water out of the San Pitch River downstream of saline inputs and
upstream of higher-quality springs and groundwater seepage.
6 Federal Agency Contributions

The original MOUs between the Department of Environmental Quality and the Forest Service
and the Bureau of Land Management were executed in 1992. These MOUs have been reviewed
and were revised in 2009. In FY-2015 these agencies began reviewing this MOU and a newly
updated MOU is anticipated to be in place by the spring of 2016. The following entities will be
part of the newly revised MOU: Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park
Service, Utah Department of Agriculture and Food, Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands,
Utah Division of Wildlife, and DEQ – Division of Water Quality. The MOU is to be reviewed
and updated as needed every 5 years.

1) Natural Resources Conservation Service- Norm Evenstad

NRCS employees work in partnership with land users to conserve natural resource on private
lands. These employees are distributed among 26 field offices and 2 area offices that cover the
state of Utah. The individual field offices are managed by District Conservationists who may
cover multiple offices. NRCS employees along with Conservation District employees report
progress on activities in the USDA-NRCS performance results system, which is the basis for the
following information.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 30

Financial and technical assistance was provided to land owners, sponsors & managers in Utah
during FY2015 through the various USDA-NRCS programs. There were no identified
Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMPs) written or applied in FY2015.

Non-Point Source/Water Quality related practices: The results shown in the table H in the
appendices shows all the conservation practices planned and applied during fiscal year 2015. A
number of the practices listed have direct & indirect water quality benefits, that as a whole, can
show overall positive benefits for surface and ground water quality.

NRCS Water Quality Initiative (NWQI) 2015: $ 248,000 Used in FY2015

The NRCS National Water Quality Initiative (WQI) establishes priority watersheds nationwide to
help farmers, ranchers and forest landowners improve water quality and aquatic habitats in
impaired streams. NRCS offers producers an opportunity to implement conservation and
management practices through a systems approach to control and trap nutrient and manure runoff.
Qualified producers can receive assistance for installing conservation practices such as cover
crops and filter strips.

In 2015 the Utah Division of Water Quality recommended that projects in the Hillsdale
(160300010307) and Tebbs Hollow (160300010506) watersheds, located on the Upper Sevier
River, should be funded using NWQI funds. While there is a high demand for funding in these
watersheds, and a large amount of interest with the landowners in the area, it was determined that
the possibility of restoring the Upper Sevier River is not very likely. Other funds went to the
Lower Main Creek watershed (HUC #160202030404) in Utah County.

Partners sometimes offer financial assistance in addition to NRCS programs. Practices planned
with WQI assistance may include: Waste Storage Facility, Pond Sealing/Lining, Solid/Liquid
Waste Separation Facility, Waste Transfer, Pumping Plant, Fence, Irrigation System, Sprinkler,
Pumping Plant, Structure for Water Control, Irrigation Pipeline, Forage and Biomass Planting,
Obstruction Removal, Nutrient Management, Irrigation Water Management, and Riparian
Herbaceous Cover.

NRCS will continue to coordinate with local and state agencies, conservation districts, non-
governmental organizations and others to implement this initiative. This strategic approach will
leverage funds and provide streamlined assistance to help individual agricultural producers take
needed actions to reduce the flow of sediment, nutrients and other pollutants into impaired
waterways.

NRCS-Utah’s intent for prioritization of watersheds for the WQ initiative is to coordinate with
local, state and other federal partners as much as possible to leverage any available technical and
financial resources.

2) Forest Service- Mark Muir

The Forest Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, manages National Forest
System (NFS) lands across the country. All or a portion of six National Forests are in Utah. These
public lands are managed by staff at Forest Supervisor Headquarters and Ranger District offices
throughout the State, with support from the Intermountain Regional Forester’s office in Ogden,
Utah.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 31

High-quality water is one of the most important natural resources coming from these NFS lands.
In addition to providing drinking water and other municipal needs, this water sustains populations
of fish and wildlife, affords recreation opportunities, and provides supplies to meet downstream
agricultural and industrial needs throughout the State.
Non-point source pollution control is a key component of managing NFS lands for high-quality
water. Direct control is accomplished through two primary mechanisms:
 prescription, implementation, and monitoring of best management practices (BMPs) for a
variety of land use and management activities1, and
 implementation of watershed improvement projects.

Additionally, direct non-point source pollution control may occur after wildfire if burned area
emergency response (BAER) assessments prescribe the implementation of treatments designed to
mitigate fire effects.
Indirectly, the Forest Service provides for non-point source pollution control through sustaining
or restoring watershed function and resilience so that NFS lands are resistant to catastrophic
events such as fire, insects and disease, and a changing climate.
In 2015 the Forest Service continued implementation of a national Best Management Practices
(BMP) program that provides a standard set of core BMPs2 and a consistent means to track and
document the use and effectiveness of BMPs on NFS lands across the country. These core BMPs
integrate individual State and NFS regional BMPs under one umbrella. They are general and non-
prescriptive and will not change the substance of site-specific BMP prescriptions. Site-specific
prescriptions will continue to be based on State of Utah BMPs, the Intermountain Region Soil and
Water Conservation Practices (SWCP) handbook, Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP)
standard and guidelines specific to each of the six Forests, annual BMP monitoring information,
and professional judgment.
The national forests in Utah, in addition to their long-standing use of State BMPS, the SWCP
handbook, Forest Plan guidance, annual BMP monitoring, and professional judgment, are using
these national core BMPs in project planning, design, and implementation. Implementation and
effectiveness monitoring by individual personnel and interdisciplinary teams is a core part of
Forest Service best management practices. In 2015, thirty of the national core BMPs were
formally monitored by interdisciplinary teams. Results of the reviews will be entered into a
national database, which over time will help demonstrate and document the effects of
implementing BMPs for different activities across the region and country.
In 2015 the Forest Service continued implementation of the Watershed Condition Framework
(WCF)3. Forests within Utah continued implementation of integrated (essential) projects
identified in priority watershed restoration action plans written in 2011. These projects are
specifically designed to improve or maintain watershed health, including the reduction or
elimination of non-point source pollution. During 2015, two watersheds (12 digit HUCs) were
moved to an improved condition class, meaning all identified restoration work or essential
projects were completed within the watershed: 1) Left Hand Fork Blacksmith Fork and 2) Saddle
Creek, both on the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest. In addition to work in these priority
watersheds, Forests completed watershed improvement projects in additional watersheds that
1 For example, motorized and non-motorized recreation, leasable and locatable minerals, range
management, timber management, special uses permitting, wildlife and fisheries habitat management 2 http://www.fs.fed.us/biology/resources/pubs/watershed/FS_National_Core_BMPs_April2012.pdf 3 http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/watershed/
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 32

directly improved watershed conditions. The type of watershed improvement work varied but
included projects such as road and trail re-routing or decommissioning, recreation site restoration,
gully control, spring and riparian area protection, and stream or wetland restoration (See Table 1
for a summary of Watershed Improvement acres in Utah). Additional projects were implemented
that will have an indirect effect on sustaining and restoring watershed function and resilience,
such as fuel reduction, aquatic habitat improvement, invasive plant treatment, and forest and
rangeland vegetation improvement.
Table 1. Watershed Improvement Projects Completed on National Forest System
lands in fiscal year 2015 (October 1, 2014 – September 30, 2015).
Forest Soil and Water Acres
Improved
Soil and Water Acres
Improved with Partners*
Total Acres
Improved
Ashley 1,426 0 1,426
Dixie 5,153 154 5,307
Fishlake 624 83 707
M-L 9,397 512 9,909
U-W-C 98 0 98
Total 16,698 749 17,447
* Acres improved with partners include a mix of National Forest System (NFS) and
external funds.
In addition to BMP implementation/monitoring, and watershed restoration activities, Forest
Service (BAER) teams assessed fires that burned in Utah on NFS lands that had potential effects
on life and property, long-term soil productivity, and water quality. Common recommendations
for burned areas included Early Detection, Rapid Response (EDRR) treatment of noxious and
invasive plants, seeding and mulching of hillslopes with moderate to severe soil burn severity,
and road or trail drainage improvement projects.
Per the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the State of Utah and federal agencies, a
federal consistency review of activities and conditions on NFS lands occurred on the Uinta-
Wasatch-Cache National Forest in 2015. Personnel from the Utah Division of Water Quality
joined Forest Service personnel for field reviews of various projects, including watershed
improvement work done in the Left Hand Fork Blacksmith Fork and Saddle Creek watersheds.
Projects reviewed on site included dispersed recreation site relocation out of riparian areas,
floodplain reconstruction and reconnection, livestock pasture fences, prescribed fire operations to
improve vegetative conditions, road relocation out of riparian/wetland areas, and unauthorized
roads or trails that were restored and closed in order to increase vegetation cover and reduce soil
erosion. Federal consistency reviews are a useful opportunity for coordination and collaboration
on nonpoint source protection issues between the state and federal agencies, and are planned to
continue on a different forest each year in Utah.
3) Bureau of Land Management (BLM)- Jeremy Jarnecke

BLM manages approximately 23 million acres of Utah’s public lands with the mission to:
‘sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of public lands for the use and enjoyment of
present and future generations.’ BLM manages lands and resources through a multiple-use
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 33

framework that provides for a variety of uses including; energy & mineral development, livestock
grazing, recreation, and timber harvest, while protecting cultural/ historical properties, water
resources, wildlife, and other natural resources.

Utah BLM continues to implement land and watershed improvement projects to benefit water
quality through a variety of programs and partnerships including BLM’s Clean Water and
Watershed Restoration (CWWR) Program, BLM Healthy Lands Initiative, State of Utah
Watershed Restoration Initiative, the Bureau of Reclamation Salinity Control Forum, and many
local watershed groups. These efforts include implementation of watershed improvement
projects designed to improve land health and reduce long-term erosion and sedimentation rates.
Watershed improvement based activities are discussed below by Field Office or Management
Unit.

To better address watershed conditions, water quality, and to develop watershed improvement
projects, BLM Utah is in process of adding Hydrologist/Soil Scientists for all areas of Utah.
Currently, the agency has established new positions or augmented current staff by adding
Hydrologists in the Moab Field Office, Richfield Field Office, Cedar City Field Office, and the
West Desert District (Fillmore and Salt Lake Field Offices).

BLM Healthy Landscape Initiative (HLI) and Utah Watershed Restoration Initiative (WRI)
Utah BLM is in its twelfth year of cooperative implementation of the statewide Utah Watershed
Restoration Initiative through its participation in the Utah Partners for Conservation and
Development. This is a multi-agency Federal, State, and private partnership treating lands for
watershed improvement and long-term habitat restoration. Funds are contributed by partners,
including non-governmental organizations and wildlife groups. Projects are submitted and
prioritized by regional teams prior to submittal for final approval and funding by the statewide
oversight team. BLM funds primarily come through the Wildlife, Fuels, and Healthy Lands
Initiative programs. Moab BLM continues to participate in the agreement with the Delores River
Restoration Partnership, which has multiple NGOs, private, BLM, and other federal partners
focusing efforts on the Delores River.

Under the HLI/WRI program, over 14,000 acres of BLM lands in Utah were treated in 2015,
although total treatment area including other Federal, State and private lands as part of the
cooperative effort is well more than 2 to 3 times that number. Treatments include riparian
restoration, tamarisk and Russian olive removal, sagebrush restoration (Dixie-harrow and
seeding), removal of juniper through bullhog and hand thinning methods, wildlife and rangeland
seeding, cheatgrass treatment and reseeding degraded rangelands, and other similar projects. The
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources website has interactive maps and project
descriptions: http://wildlife.utah.gov/WRI/

The table J in the appendices is a tally of the projects completed during FY 2015. These are
interagency funded projects and funding for most projects is based on the state fiscal year so
some of these were actually started in the fall of 2015. More information can be found searching
the database utilizing the project number and various report features.

BLM Moab Field Office

The BLM Moab Field Office constructed several additional grazing exclosures in moderately
saline soils (8-16 mmhos/cm). This project has been ongoing since FY10, with a goal of one
grazing exclosure in every allotment with more than 10% saline soils. Most new exclosures are
located adjacent to long-term study sites maintained by BLM range staff. The USGS Southwest
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 34

Biological Science Center (Mike Duniway) continues to collect comprehensive soil and
vegetation data at permanent paired study plots located inside and outside these grazing
exclosures. Monitoring data from these long-term study sites will help direct grazing
management actions to ensure stable and healthy soil conditions in these sensitive and highly
erodible soils. With good soil conditions, soil erosion and associated salinity loading to the
Colorado River Basin is minimized.

This year the BLM worked together with the Grand County Road Department to complete a
feasibility study which assessed potential re-location alternatives and stabilizing techniques for
the Onion Creek road. This road is located in a narrow canyon corridor and crosses Onion Creek
over 25 times in less than 8 miles. With a steep gradient, Onion Creek originates in the La Sal
mountains and enters the Colorado River in less than 30 miles. This leads to frequent large floods
which damage the roadbed and adjacent stream banks. The feasibility study will identify the
most stable location for the road and develop a priority list of future stream bank stabilization
projects.

The Moab Field Office also conducted riparian restoration projects along 11 miles of the
Colorado and Dolores River Corridors. These projects received over $250,000 in funding from
multiple partners including BLM Clean Water Watershed Restoration funds (CWWR), the Utah
Watershed Restoration Initiative (UWRI), the Dolores River Restoration Partnership (DRRP) and
The Nature Conservancy (TNC). Restoration actions included removal of invasive Tamarisk
trees, herbicide treatments on secondary weeds such as Russian Knapweed and Kochia, and
planting 1000 locally-sourced plants at previously treated sites along the Colorado and Dolores
Rivers. The plantings were maintained by weeding and watering throughout the year, and are
showing great survival rates.

Grazing exclosure in moderately saline soils

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 35

BLM recently closed 12 primitive campsites located within the Onion Creek floodplain
Other NPS related work completed by the Moab Field Office includes constructing 5 spring
protection fences to protect water quality conditions from grazing uses and closing 12 primitive
campsites within the Onion Creek corridor and floodplain. BLM funds a local non-profit group
Moab Solutions to work in Mill Creek Canyon to clean up trash, close duplicate hiking trails and
pull invasive species.

Vernal Field Office

Arid Land Study

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Green River District (GRD) has issued reclamation
guidelines for lands managed under its administration that involve the development of a
reclamation plan for all surface-disturbing activities. The long-term goal of the reclamation plan
is to “facilitate eventual ecosystem reconstruction by returning the land to a safe, stable, and
proper functioning condition”, and the short-term goal is to “immediately stabilize disturbed areas
and to provide the necessary conditions to achieve the long-term goal”.
The nature of the soils in the Uinta Basin present a challenge to successful reclamation of well
pads. The rating of these soils as potential topsoil resources and reclamation materials for
revegetation is poor to fair (mostly poor) due to factors such as elevated salinity, high sodium
content, high alkalinity, low organic matter content, shallow depth to bedrock, and high rock
content.

The study project area is located within the Pariette Watershed. This project involves reclamation
techniques on disturbed arid lands. Reclamation success following disturbance has been quite
poor.

The project is entering the 5th year and soil amendments were completed in 2014. The study sites
were established using different carbon amendments, and barley cover crop for reclamation
success. Specifically, treatments consisted of following amendments: control site– no carbon;
wood chips; activated carbon; biochar; compost, and desilt material from Pariette Wetlands. Nine
plant species were selected for revegetation and included: Indian rice grass var. White River,
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 36

Galetta grass var. Viva; Russian wild rye; Needle and threadgrass, Globemallow; Gardiner
saltbush; Western wheatgrass; Black sagebrush; and Shadscale saltbush. There were planted in
late fall (Dec. 4, 2014) after the soils were frozen.

In 2015 salinity funding was utilized to assess the soil amendments which were initiated in the
summer of 2014. Results of field surveys indicate that the greatest factors limiting the successful
restoration and revegetation of well pads by desirable native species are lack of soil water, soil
salinity and sodicity, shallow soils, and soil compaction. The three main invasive weed species
found on well pads are halogeton, cheat grass, and Russian thistle. It appears that wood chips and
biochar were able to hold more soil moisture than non-treated controls, and the barley cover crop
was initially able to limit weed invasion. It appears that cheat grass was able to capitalize on the
greater moisture content provided by wood chips.

BLM VFO is planning on continuing monitoring of the existing soil amendments along with new
objectives that were developed from the existing study.
 Minimize weed establishment
 Produce or build quality topsoil from sediments dredged from the Desilt Pond in the
Pariette Wetlands
 Identify appropriate revegetation species and determine the best planting methods to
ensure the establishment of desirable species.

Barley Cover Crop

4) U.S. National Park Service- Rebecca Weissinger

The National Park Service is a significant land manager of 2.1 million acres in Utah, or about
3.9% of the state, and hosts 9 million visitors per year. National Park System units have a dual
Congressional mandate to preserve natural and cultural resources and to provide for their
enjoyment by the public in such a manner that will leave them unimpaired for future generations.
There are 13 National Park System units in Utah. On-going water quality monitoring, in
cooperation with the State of Utah, occurs at seven of these National Park units. In addition to
routine water quality monitoring, sampling for pesticides, wastewater indicators, pharmaceuticals,
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 37

and personal care products also occurred at seven national park units in Utah in cooperation with
the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Geological Survey.

In 2015, the National Park Service and USGS completed the second year of a three-year study to
investigate mercury bioaccumulation in Lake Powell, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.
The study is collecting detailed, multi-parameter limnological profiles from 24 sites throughout
the reservoir and water, sediment, and biological samples from 13 sites, including the San Juan
and Escalante River. The samples are being analyzed for a multitude of geochemical and
microbiological constituents to evaluate the processes driving the mercury accumulation in
striped bass and the consumption advisory issued for the southern portion of the reservoir.

A cooperative effort with Utah Division of Water Quality to resolve E. coli contamination in the
North Fork Virgin River continued upstream from Zion National Park in 2015. Several agencies
and landowners were involved. A pasture rotation system for irrigation and livestock grazing was
tested in an attempt to reduce fecal contamination in irrigation return waters. Monitoring in 2015
showed that the contamination is continuing similar to previous years, except that levels of E.
coli entering the project area from upstream on the watershed were higher than in the past.

The National Park Service also completed the third year of a three-year funded project to treat
non-native tamarisk trees and herbaceous non-native invasive plants at priority sites in the
riparian corridors of the Colorado and Green Rivers in Canyonlands National Park. The primary
benefits of this project include creating better visitor experiences, reducing fire risk in river
campsites, preserving biodiversity by decreasing risk of fire spreading into native tree stands, and
the eventual replacement of beetle-impacted tamarisk stands with native vegetation. Indirect
benefits include overall reduced erosion of bank sediments into the river as fire frequency and fire
size is reduced.
7 Federal Consistency Review and NPS Project Tours for FY-15

During FY-15, DEQ continued to use a combination of approaches to work collaboratively with
federal land management agencies and others to promote federal consistency with the State NPS
Pollution Management Program. As part of this program, tours of projects implemented by
federal agencies are organized every year. The following is a summary of a tour that took place
in the Uinta-Cache National Forest in 2015.

Utah Federal Consistency Review
Location:
Uinta-Cache National Forest
August 12th, 2015

Participants:
Jim Bowcutt (UDEQ), Carl Adams (UDEQ), Mark Muir (USFS), Charlie Condrat (USFS),
Jennifer Parker (USFS), Ron Vance (USFS)
Left Hand Fork of the Blacksmith Fork River
The Blacksmith Fork River near Hyrum Utah is a very popular location for recreational activities,
especially camping and ATV use. The U.S. Forest Service has been implementing several Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to help reduce the environmental impacts of recreation and
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 38

livestock grazing in this watershed. Where the Forest Service property begins in the Left Hand
Fork of the Blacksmith Fork they were having problems with campers setting up their campsites
too close to the river. To help deal with this issue they were able to install a fence and berm that
made it more difficult to pull camper trailers down to the river. They then reseeded the area, and
re-established the flood plain to help better convey high flows downstream. Overall, the grass
has come in well, and the project seems to have been a success. They have also implemented
several illegal trail closures that have resulted from some of the ATV use that occurs in that
canyon.
Reclaimed riparian area near the mouth of the Left Hand Fork of the Blacksmith Fork River

Higher up the canyon people were driving ATVs up the river bed, and parking vehicles in the
riparian area. This was causing erosional issues, and compacted the soil which did not allow
riparian vegetation to grow. While the Forest Service did not want the vehicles near the river,
they did not want to discourage campers from using the area. To address this issue the Forest
Service installed large boulders around the camping area and seeded the riparian area. As a result
the riparian area is beginning to re-establish, and the illegal ATV and vehicle use have markedly
decreased.
Boulders Placed to prohibit vehicles from entering into the riparian zone
Saddle Creek Restoration Project
Saddle Creek is located between Elk Valley and Hardware Ranch in the upper reaches of the
Blacksmith Fork Watershed. Historically the riparian area along Saddle Creek was heavily
impacted by over-grazing by livestock. The road to access Elk Valley also followed the river
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 39

very closely, and at times actually entered the creek bed. Over-grazing and recreational use was
causing excessive soil erosion and degrading wildlife habitat along the riparian corridor.
The Forest Service, in cooperation with several partners, decided that they would address the
entire watershed beginning with the riparian area. The Forest Service has moved the road within
this watershed, placing it higher on the mountain and removing it from the riparian area. They
then installed several miles of buck and pole fence along the west side of Saddle Creek which
limited livestock access to the creek. Sage brush treatments as well as controlled burns were also
implemented in the uplands to help improve feed for livestock and evenly distribute them
throughout the watershed. Since the project has been implemented the grass within the riparian
area has recovered well, and willows are beginning to re-appear along the stream channel. While
Saddle Creek is dry most of the summer, it still provides habitat for cutthroat trout during the
spring and allows fish to access beaver ponds found higher in the watershed. The Forest Service
hopes that this project will allow water to flow for longer periods of time, allowing the cutthroat
trout to continue to exist in this watershed, while improving water quality downstream.

Old Saddle Creek Road that was decommissioned

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 40

Saddle Creek Riparian Fencing

Successful controlled burn in the Saddle Creek Watershed

End of report

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 41

2015 EPA Project Tour
August 18th-20th, 2015
Location:
Bear River / Weber Watersheds

Participants:
Gary Kleeman (Environmental Protection Agency), Jim Bowcutt, Carl Adams, Michael Allred,
Kari Lundeen (Utah Division of Water Quality), Brady Thornock, Nathan Daugs, Christian
Nelson, Andy Pappas (Utah Department of Agriculture and Food), Justin Elsner (USU Extension)
Doug Garfield (Utah Association of Conservation District)

Day 1 August 18th
Upper Bear River Watershed
Saleratus Creek (Rich County)
The Saleratus Creek watershed has long been impacted from season-long grazing of livestock.
These grazing activities have been taking place for over 100 years, specifically in the upper areas
of the watershed. Landowners and state and federal agencies have been working together to
improve the uplands in the watershed over the past several years with much success.
During this tour, five adjacent grazing management projects were visited. These five projects
consisted of 14,251 acres of uplands that were treated and seeded. The purpose of these projects
was to reduce the amount of woody shrubs such as Rabbit Brush, Sage Brush, and Pinion/ Juniper
trees and increase forbs and grasses. This allows the more desirable species to grow thus
improving the forage available for wildlife and livestock which will help evenly distribute them
over the land scape and reduces soil erosion . This change in vegetation will also increase the
amount of precipitation that percolates into the soil, thus increasing the amount of recharge to the
aquifer. This can help increase stream flow lower in the watershed as well.
Watering systems were also installed throughout each of the grazing allotments. These systems
consisted of a large tank located at the highest point of the basin. These tanks are filled by
pumping ground water from a well on site. Pipelines are then run from the large tank to several
troughs distributed throughout the rangeland. Many of these troughs are spread out several miles
apart. This also help evenly distribute the animals across the rangeland, reducing potential soil
erosion.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 42

Range Reseading Large Water Holding Tank

Watering trough being installed

Another treatment that was implemented is the thinning of the Pinion / Juniper stands in the
watershed. This allows the desirable forbs and grasses to grow, and reduces the amount of water
consumed by evergreen trees in the upper part of the watershed. The State of Utah has
recognized that erosion coming from Pinion / Juniper stands can be quite large, and these types of
treatments are becoming more common around the state. To treat these sites, a brush hog
implement was used. The brush hog shreds up the cedar trees, and scatters the wood chips across
the soil. This further helps to reduce erosion until the grasses are able to establish. Another
common method is chaining the trees, which is a cheaper method, but tends to be more labor
intensive.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 43

Pinion Juniper Brush Hog Treatment Pinion Juniper Brush Hog Treatment

Day 2 August 19th
Middle Bear River Watershed
Cold Water Ranch- Blacksmith Fork River
Coldwater Ranch is a beef cattle operation located in the head waters of the Blacksmith Fork
watershed. The ranch consists of roughly 40,000 acres, and runs roughly 1,200 head of cattle
from the late spring to the early fall.
In 2009 the owner of Coldwater Ranch approached the NRCS, in hopes of improving the grazing
practices that were being used on the ranch. One of the main concerns of the landowner was
getting the cattle out of the riparian area, and utilizing the feed that was in the upper reaches of
the drainages.
Since the project was initiated, close to 8 miles of riparian fencing has been installed, and two
spring developments were created to provide water for cattle higher in the watershed. While
fencing was only installed on one side of the creek, the ability for the cattle to obtain water away
from the riparian area in locations where the feed is more plentiful has allowed the riparian area
to vastly improve. During the tour very few cattle were observed, and most of them were higher
in the mountains, away from the riparian zones. Additional fencing is planned using funding
from the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food’s Grazing Improvement Program. This will
be used to better manage the grazing in the upper reaches of the watershed, creating more
pastures that livestock will be rotated through during the grazing season.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 44

Coldwater Ranch Before Fencing Coldwater Ranch After Fencing

Spring Development
Benson/ Amalga Dairy
This dairy began working with the NRCS several years ago to help increase manure storage. On
one of the visits to the dairy the local watershed coordinator realized that the water that was
draining across the corrals was entering into a drain system the emptied into the Bear River. To
help treat this problem the owner of the dairy installed a system designed to prohibit runoff from
the dairy from entering the drain and instead enter into a liquid storage system under ground.
This tank is equipped with clean out access boxes, and has been a very good fix for the situation.
In addition to the infrastructure that was installed to help capture rain water, the operation also
worked to improve the capacity and ability of the dairy to store manure. This was done by
installing a larger solids storage area, as well as a structure that holds liquids which is equipped
with a pump. This allows the liquids to be applied to neighboring fields when and where
appropriate according to the dairy’s comprehensive nutrient management plan.
Runoff Drain Structure Solid Waste Storage Area

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 45

Liquid Storage Pit

Cutler Reservoir Shoreline Protection Project
Due to wave action, and the constant fluctuation of water levels in Cutler Reservoir, several
shoreline areas in Cutler Reservoir have begun to dramatically erode. While Pacificorp that owns
and manages much of the reservoir shoreline has been working to reduce some of this erosion,
some of the property where this erosion is taking place is privately owned. Three years ago, the
Bear River local watershed coordinator began working with the Larsen family to treat one of the
areas that had steep banks caused by this erosion. To treat this area the bank was sloped back and
vegetation was planted to help stabilize the area. They also installed a small line of rocks in the
water in front of the treatment area. The purpose of these rocks was to help dissipate the waves
before they could reach the banks. Overall the project has recovered very well, and it continues
to be maintained by the landowner. This project was funded using Section 319 funding.
Cutler Reservoir Bank Stabilization Project

Newton Dairy
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 46

Before this dairy began working with the local conservation agencies they were having a difficult
time containing all of the manure and wastewater that was being produced by the dairy. As a
result sometimes their ponds would overtop sending animal waste down a ditch bank where it
would eventually enter Cutler Reservoir.
To help treat this problem the dairy installed a larger earthen storage pond. They also installed a
new state of the art liquid-manure separator. This separator takes all the animal waste that is
produced by the dairy, and sends it through the mechanical belt press separator. This separator
presses the waste. The dry waste can then be reused as bedding, or can be used as compost that is
then applied to the land owner’s fields. The liquids can be reused to flush the system of
additional manure, or it can be pumped to the larger liquid storage pond.
The manure handling system has been very effective for the landowner, and it has allowed him to
store all the animal waste that the dairy is producing, and the landowner is happy with the
efficiency that the new system has added to his dairy. This project was funded using NRCS and
State NPS funding.
Mechanical Separator

Lewiston Dairy
This dairy was having a hard time containing all of the animal manure that was being produced,
and as a result runoff was entering into an adjacent wetland. To help remedy this situation the
dairy owners are in the process of installing a new manure bunker. This will be one of the largest
bunkers that have ever been installed in Cache Valley, and will be roughly the size of a football
field when completed.
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 47

Manure Bunker Installation

Day 3 August 20th
Lower Bear River Watershed
Bear River Fencing Project
In East Garland, Utah, a landowner has been working with the local conservation district to
improve water quality as well as control invasive Russian Olive trees along the main stem of the
Bear River. This producer runs large numbers of sheep and cattle, and has fenced nearly 0.7
miles of the Bear River. He is also removing the vast acreage of Russian Olive trees that are on
his property. This project was funded using NRCS and Section 319 funding.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 48

East Garland Fencing Project

Bear River City Feedlot Runoff Project
This project helped address runoff from a large feedlot that was entering into the Bear River via a
drainage ditch used to convey storm water from the town of Bear River city. The storm water
ditch would run past the feedlot owned by the landowner and during large storm events, manure
from the landowners feedlot would wash across a road and enter into the Bear River. To remedy
this problem the ditch was placed underground and the old ditch was decommissioned. Since the
landowner still used the storm water for irrigation on his adjacent pastures, pipes were installed
on the ditch, allowing the water to be applied to his pastures more uniformly. Overall this project
has made the management of the storm water much easier while improving water quality.
New Piped Water Conveyance Structure

Maple Creek Riparian Project
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 49

Maple Creek is a tributary to Mantua Reservoir, which is impaired for nutrients. According to the
TMDL Spring Creek is one of the major sources of nutrients to the reservoir. Recently a stream
bank fencing/stabilization project was initiated using State NPS funding. Approximately 350 feet
of stream bank were treated. While this is a small project, it will be the starting point for many
good projects to come. Since this project has been implemented many of the adjacent landowners
have expressed interest in implementing similar projects in the future. It is anticipated that this
watershed will be one of the targeted basins in FY-2017. This project was funded using State
NPS funding.

Untreated Maple Creek Reach Maple Creek Fencing Project

South Fork of Chalk Creek

Over the years several projects have taken place in the lower reaches of Chalk Creek. The local
watershed group and the local Conservation District has begun to focus on doing work in the
upper section of the watershed. One of the recent projects that was implemented in this portion of
the watershed was a culvert removal and restoration project. This project was identified when a
large culvert failed causing thousands of tons of sediment to enter into Fish Creek. Several
partners joined forces to remove the remaining culvert, slope the banks back, and plant native
grass mixes and willows to stabilize the banks along this stretch. While there is some erosion that
is still occurring the project sponsors are satisfied with the project which reduced a large sediment
reservoir, and helped restore habitat for the native cutthroat trout.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 50

Fish Creek Culvert Before

Fish Creek Project After

The tour also consisted of visiting other projects in need of implementation in the upper reaches
of the watershed. The CRMP for the South Fork of Chalk Creek will be completed soon. To
develop this CRMP several assessment activities were done, and several projects were identified
that should be implemented. Some of these projects include improved grazing practices in the
headwaters of the watershed. They plan to implement projects similar to the ones visited in the
Upper Bear River where off-stream watering sites will be developed that will draw the cattle out
of the riparian areas and help better utilize forage in the uplands. They will also address erosion
that is taking place as a result of past oil drilling activity. It is anticipated that the majority of
these projects will be implemented when they are the targeted basin in FY-2018.

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 51

Cattle in the Riparian Area on Fish Creek Abandoned Oil Well Pad on Fish Creek

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 52

8 APPENDICIES
Figure 1 Project Location Map

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 53

TABLE A- COMPLETED AND ACTIVE 319 PROJECTS (SEE FIGURE 1)

TABLE B- 319 FINAL PROJECT REPORTS SUBMITTED IN FY-15
Project Title Total 319
Award
Date
Received
FY-09 Lower Bear River TMDL Implementation $41,000 12/30/2014
FY-09 Upper Bear River TMDL Implementation $153,140 12/15/2014
FY-09 Middle Sevier TMDL Implementation $44,984 12/15/2014
FY-09 Upper Sevier TMDL Implementation $122,790 9/05/2014
FY-09 West Colorado River TMDL Implementation $85,017 12/29/2014
FY-09 Forest Water Quality Guidelines $33,870 12/15/2014
FY-09 Emigration Creek Implementation $46,633 12/15/2014
FY-09 Little cottonwood Zinc Project $24,807 1/13/2015
FY-10 USU NPS I&E Outreach $37,000 8/12/2014
FY-10 West Colorado River Watershed Improvement $45,000 12/29/2014
FY-10 USU Septic system Education Enhancement $51,100 10/20/2014
FY-10 Salt Lake County Stream Guide $31,100 12/19/2014
FY-14 Wallsburg Watershed Restoration Project $150,000 2/11/2015

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 54

TABLE C- SUMMARY OF ACTIVE UTAH 319(H) GRANTS FY-15
Project Title Total NPS Award Grant Status
Matt Warner/Pot Creek Road
Rehabilitation FY-10

$63,600

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
USU NPS I & E Outreach FY-
10
$37,000

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
Lower Bear R TMDL Impl.
FY-10
$44,000

Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
Middle Bear R TMDL Impl
FY-10
$136,000

Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
Upper Bear R TMDL Impl
FY-10
$70,000

Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
West Colorado River
Watershed Improvement FY-
10
$45,000

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
USU Septic System Ed.
Enhancement FY-10
$51,100

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
Utah Watershed Coordinating
Council FY-10
$30,000

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
Upper Bear Riparian
Restoration FY-10
$15,600

Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
East Canyon Stream
Restoration - Phase IV FY-10
$50,000

Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
Mud Ck/Scofield Riparian
Restoration FY-10
$50,000

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
Salt Lake County Stream
Guide FY-10
$31,100

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
Jordan River Council Capacity
- I&E FY-10
$41,600

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
TMDL Local Watershed
Coordinators FY-10
$400,000

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
Utah NPS Program -
Management Review FY-10
$66,582

Project Complete Final Report
Approved
Utah Watershed Coordinating
council FY-11
$10,000 Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
USU Volunteer Monitoring
and I&E FY-11
$102,500 Project Complete Final Report
Submitted
Utah Watershed Coordinating
council FY-11
$340,000 Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
East Canyon Restoration FY-
11
$380,421 Ongoing
TMDL Local Watershed
Coordinators FY-11
$340,000 Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
Utah Watershed Coordinating
council FY-12
$10,000 Ongoing
USU Volunteer Monitoring
and I&E FY-12
$102,500 Ongoing
East Canyon Restoration FY-$283,070 Ongoing
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 55

12
Upper Weber TMDL
Implementation FY-12
$95,230 Ongoing
TMDL Local Watershed
Coordinators FY-12
$340,000 Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
USU Volunteer Monitoring
and I&E FY-13
$97,000 Ongoing
Strawberry River Restoration
FY-13
$358,044 Ongoing
Duchesne River Restoration
FY-13
$66,577 Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
TMDL Local Watershed
Coordinators FY-13
$340,000 Project Complete Awaiting
Final Report
USU Volunteer Monitoring
Program FY-14
$84,525 Ongoing
Local Watershed Coordinators
FY-14
$340,000 Ongoing
Wallsburg Watershed
Restoration Project FY-14
$150,000 Project Complete Final Report
Submitted
Jordan River Restoration
Project FY-14
$319,096 Ongoing
USU Volunteer Monitoring
Program FY-15
$83,250 Ongoing
Local Watershed Coordinators
FY-15
$340,000 Ongoing
Strawberry River Restoration
FY-15
$75,000 Ongoing
Spanish Valley Watershed
Implementation FY-15
$118,686 Ongoing
North Fork Virgin River
Irrigation Project FY-15
$183,855 Ongoing
Castle Creek Restoration FY-
15
$12,530 Ongoing
Fremont River Restoration $66,200 Ongoing

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 56

TABLE D- APPROVED TMDLS
Water Body Date Approved
Chalk Creek 12/23/1997
Otter Creek 12/23/1997
Little Bear River 5/23/2000
Mantua Reservoir 5/23/2000
East Canyon Creek 9/1/2000
East Canyon Reservoir 9/14/2010
Kents Lake 9/1/2000
LaBaron Reservoir 9/1/2000
Minersville Reservoir 9/1/2000
Puffer Lake 9/1/2000
Scofield Reservoir 9/1/2000
Onion Creek (near Moab) 7/25/2002
Cottonwood Wash 9/9/2002
Deer Creek Reservoir 9/9/2002
Hyrum Reservoir 9/9/2002
Little Cottonwood Creek 9/9/2002
Lower Bear River 9/9/2002
Malad River 9/9/2002
Mill Creek (near Moab) 9/9/2002
Spring Creek 9/9/2002
Forsyth Reservoir 9/27/2002
Johnson Valley Reservoir 9/27/2002
Lower Fremont River 9/27/2002
Mill Meadow Reservoir 9/27/2002
UM Creek 9/27/2002
Upper Fremont River 9/27/2012
Deep Creek 10/9/2002
Uinta River 10/9/2002
Pineview Reservoir 12/9/2002
Browne Lake 2/19/2003
San Pitch River 11/18/2003
Newton Creek 6/24/2004
Panguitch Lake 6/24/2004
West Colorado 8/4/2004
Silver Creek 8/4/2004
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 57

Upper Sevier River 8/4/2004
Lower and Middle Sevier River 9/17/2004
Lower Colorado River 9/20/2004
Upper Bear River 8/4/2006
Echo Creek 8/4/2006
Soldier Creek 8/4/2006
East Fork Sevier River 8/4/2006
Koosharem Reservoir 8/4/2006
Lower Box Creek Reservoir 8/4/2006
Otter Creek Reservoir 8/4/2006
Thistle Creek 7/9/2007
Strawberry Reservoir 7/9/2007
Matt Warner Reservoir 7/9/2007
Calder Reservoir 7/9/2007
Lower Duchesne River 7/9/2007
Lake Fork River 7/9/2007
Brough Reservoir 8/22/2008
Steinaker Reservoir 8/22/2008
Red Fleet Reservoir 8/22/2008
Newcastle Reservoir 8/22/2008
Cutler Reservoir 2/23/2010
Middle Bear River 2/23/2010
Pariette Draw 9/28/2010
Emigration Creek 7/18/2012
Jordan River Phase I 6/05/2013
Echo Reservoir 9/16/2014
Colorado River 6/17/2014
Rockport Reservoir 9/16/2014

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 58

TABLE E- WATERSHED PLANS
Watershed Date Approved
Middle and Lower
Sevier October-10
San Pitch January-06
Upper Sevier June-04
Virgin River February-06
Paria River 2006
Escalante River 2006
Salt Lake Countywide
Water Quality
Stewardship Plan 2009
Wallsburg CRMP 10/01/2012
Duchesne River 7/31/2014
Strawberry River
Watershed 12/18/2014
Spanish Valley
Watershed Plan
Submitted to EPA for
Approval
North Fork of The
Virgin River
Submitted to EPA for
Approval
Upper Bear River
Watershed Plan
Submitted to DEQ
for Approval
San Pitch Watershed
Plan (revision) Initiated
Weber River Initiated
Price River
Submitted to EPA for
Approval
South Fork of Chalk
Creek
Submitted to DEQ
for Approval
Spanish Fork River Initiated
Pinto Creek Initiated
Upper Sevier River
(revision) Initiated
Huntington Creek Initiated
Maple Creek Initiated
Montezuma Creek Initiated

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 59

TABLE F- STATE NPS FUNDS ALLOCATED IN 2015
Project Title Watershed Project Type
Amount
Awarded
Local Watershed Coordinators Statewide Technical Assistance $30,000
Mercury Take Back Statewide Mercury $6,000
North Fork (Upper) Irrigation Project Colorado Irrigation $154,443
Moab Technical Assistance SE Colorado Technical Assistance $35,000
La Sal Spring/Wetland Protection SE Colorado Grazing
Management
$31,500
Wallsburg Streambank Restoration Jordan River/Utah
Lake
Stream Bank $85,000
Maple Creek Stream Bank Project Bear River Stream Bank $15,000
Wallsburg Septic Study Jordan River/Utah
Lake
Study $16,100
Producers Education Through
Workshops and the Producers Website
Statewide I&E $20,125
Utah Envirothon Statewide I&E $3,500
St. George Detention Basin Colorado Storm Water $78,510
Provo River I&E Jordan River/Utah
Lake
I&E $15,000
Kunzler AFO Bear River AFO $20,000
Siddoway Ranch Conservation
Easement
Weber conservation
Easement
$5,000
Rick Hafen Stream Bank Cedar/Beaver Stream Bank $14,729
Burningham Stream Bank Weber Stream Bank $23,000
D&S Dairy Manure Management Bear River AFO $20,000
Riparian Grazing Management
Workshop
Statewide I&E $20,000
Onsite BMP Manual Statewide I&E $30,000
Water Week Statewide I&E $5,000
Mike Morgan Fencing Weber Fencing $11,300
Sutherland Stream Bank Weber Stream Bank $30,000
Turpin River Project San Pitch Stream Bank $75,000
Hafen Pinto Creek Stream Bank Cedar/Beaver Stream Bank $29,783
Blaine Nature Preserve Riparian
Demonstration Project
Jordan River Stream Bank $10,460
Fish Lake Parking Lot Project Colorado Road Maintenance $25,000
Tie Fork Road Stream Crossing #1 Utah Lake Road Improvements $36,290
Pack Creek Stream Bank Restoration SE Colorado Stream Bank $36,709
Parry Stream Bank Project San Pitch Stream Bank $15,000
Porcupine Watershed Restoration SE Colorado Watershed
Restoration
$16,157
Bench River Project San Pitch Stream Bank $45,000
Farmington Bay Student Research GSL Study $2,000
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 60

Project
Strawberry River Restoration Uinta Basin Stream Bank $13,291
On-site Reserve Statewide On-site $26,103

Total $1,000,000

TABLE G- ADDITIONAL FUNDING USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH SECTION 319
FUNDING IN FY-15.
Funding Source Amount
Utah State NPS Funding $318,000
Watershed Restoration Initiative $147,747
Bureau of Reclamation $960,000
Environmental Quality Incentive Program
(EQIP) $496,244
County Funds $132,896
NRCS Salinity Funding $1,500,000
Irrigation Companies $17,845
Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District $41,000
Watershed Groups $50,000
USGS $80,720
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources $8,600
Local Conservation Districts $4,120
Utah Department of Agriculture and Food $100,000
Utah Grazing Improvement Program $25,874
U.S. Forest Service $18,526
Total $3,901,572

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 61

TABLE H- SUMMARY CONSERVATION PRACTICES- NRCS FISCAL YEAR 2014
Utah FY2015 Summary – Conservation Practices (Practice #) Planned
(acres)
Applied
(acres)
Planned
Count
Applied
Count
Access Road (560) (ft) 1,253 1
Agricultural Energy Management Plan, Landscape - Written (124)
(no)
22 22
Agricultural Energy Management Plan - Written (128) (no) 11 2 11 2
Agricultural Energy Management Plan, Headquarters - Written
(122) (no)
6 6
Agricultural Secondary Containment Facility (710) (no) 1 1
Biological suppression and other non-chemical techniques to
manage brush, weeds and invasive species (WQL01) (ac)
208 4
Brush Management (314) (ac) 10,192 10,657 109 116
Building Envelope Improvement (672) (no) 1 1
Channel Bed Stabilization (584) (ft) 520 1,106 10 22
Conservation Cover (327) (ac) 38 1,227 10 24
Conservation Crop Rotation (328) (ac) 916 464 30 17
Cover Crop (340) (ac) 325 520 3 15
Critical Area Planting (342) (ac) 18 2 4 2
Dike (356) (ft) 461 1
Diversion (362) (ft) 6,642 29
Dust Control on Unpaved Roads and Surfaces (373) (sq ft) 181,700 5
Farmstead Energy Improvement (374) (no) 2 3 2 3
Fence (382) (ft) 216,057 242,146 112 99
Filter Strip (393) (ac) 1 1
Firebreak (394) (ft) 12,822 5
Forage and Biomass Planting (512) (ac) 321 288 19 22
Forage Harvest Management (511) (ac) 287 1,370 7 32
Forest Management Plan - Written (106) (no) 1 3 1 3
Forest Stand Improvement (666) (ac) 12 126 8 8
Grade Stabilization Structure (410) (no) 4 4
Grazing management to improve wildlife habitat (ANM09) (ac) 4,928 34
Harvest hay in a manner that allows wildlife to flush and escape
(ANM10) (ac)
2,506 105
Hedgerow Planting (422) (ft) 350 1
Herbaceous Weed Control (315) (ac) 4,906 5,249 68 95
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) (595) (ac) 940 7,326 92 262
Irrigation Ditch Lining (428) (ft) 20,024 23,938 18 15
Irrigation Land Leveling (464) (ac) 492 456 27 27
Irrigation Pipeline (430) (ft) 259,299 291,395 250 361
Irrigation Reservoir (436) (ac-ft) 7 26 6 7
Irrigation system automation (WQT01) (ac) 1,911 17
Irrigation System, Microirrigation (441) (ac) 84 54 21 14
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 62

Irrigation System, Surface and Subsurface (443) (ac) 185 38 21 2
Irrigation Water Conveyance (430) (ft) 2,003 6
Irrigation Water Management (449) (ac) 3,092 13,916 161 760
Irrigation Water Management Plan - Written (118) (no) 16 16
Lighting System Improvement (670) (no) 1 1 1 1
Livestock Pipeline (516) (ft) 209,909 209,949 74 67
Monitor key grazing areas to improve grazing management
(PLT02) (ac)
13,988 109
Monitoring nutritional status of livestock using the NUTBAL PRO
System (ANM17) (ac)
123 6
Mulching (484) (ac) 2 346 1 18
Nutrient Management (590) (ac) 952 5,898 68 282
Obstruction Removal (500) (ac) 1 3
Open Channel (582) (ft) 6,201 2
Pollinator Habitat Plan - Written (146) (no) 2 2
Pond (378) (no) 3 2 3 2
Pond Sealing or Lining, Bentonite Sealant (521C) (no) 1 36 1 2
Pond Sealing or Lining, Compacted Clay Treatment (521D) (no) 1 1
Pond Sealing or Lining, Flexible Membrane (521A) (no) 3 2 3 2
Pond Sealing or Lining, Soil Dispersant (521B) (no) 1 1
Prairie Restoration for Grazing and Wildlife Habitat (ANM21) (ac) 8 1
Prescribed Grazing (528) (ac) 226,638 145,635 178 340
Provide Livestock Protection Away from Sensitive Areas (WQL23)
(ac)
100 5
Pumping Plant (533) (no) 71 70 72 69
Range Planting (550) (ac) 6,195 7,852 65 73
Recycle 100% of farm lubricants (ENR04) (no) 20 20
Reduce the concentration of nutrients on livestock farms (WQL15)
(ac)
108 2
Regional weather networks for irrigation scheduling (WQT04) (ac) 108 2
Residue and Tillage Management, No-Till (329) (ac) 9,942 128
Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till (345) (ac) 65 411 1 16
Restoration and Management of Rare and Declining Habitats (643)
(ac)
3 1
Retrofit watering facility for wildlife escape and enhanced access
for bats and bird species (ANM38) (no)
9 9
Riparian Forest Buffer (391) (ac) 2 1 9 4
Riparian Herbaceous Cover (390) (ac) 5 5
Roof Runoff Structure (558) (no) 1 1
Rotation of supplement and feeding areas (WQL03) (ac) 58,350 13,868 460 108
Seasonal High Tunnel System for Crops (798) (sq ft) 48,771 46,643 26 27
Spring Development (574) (no) 3 5 3 5
Sprinkler System (442) (ac) 4,363 6,054 214 350
Stream Crossing (578) (no) 12 4 12 4
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 63

Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (395) (ac) 4 3 6 1
Streambank and Shoreline Protection (580) (ft) 14,520 10,732 86 39
Structure for Water Control (587) (no) 99 178 96 164
Structures for Wildlife (649) (no) 22,975 4 55 4
Terrace (600) (ft) 40,711 38,388 20 7
Trails and Walkways (575) (ft) 20 1
Tree/Shrub Establishment (612) (ac) 5 35 10 15
Tree/Shrub Site Preparation (490) (ac) 1 1 1 2
Upland Wildlife Habitat Management (645) (ac) 29,011 26,423 84 46
Use deep rooted crops to breakup soil compaction (SQL05) (ac) 121 1
Use drift reducing nozzles, low pressures, lower boom height and
adjuvants to reduce pesticide drift (AIR04) (ac)
2,251 31
Variable speed motor-drive systems (ENR13) (no) 1 1
Waste Facility Closure (360) (no) 1 1
Waste Separation Facility (632) (no) 1 1
Waste Storage Facility (313) (no) 3 18 3 18
Waste Transfer (634) (no) 4 5 4 5
Waste Treatment Lagoon (359) (no) 1 1
Water and Sediment Control Basin (638) (no) 2 2
Water Well (642) (no) 8 2 8 2
Watering Facility (614) (no) 108 109 108 84
Well Decommissioning (351) (no) 1 1
Windbreak/Shelterbelt Establishment (380) (ft) 4,090 3,720 8 2
Woody Residue Treatment (384) (ac) 6,022 7,236 34 40

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 64

TABLE I- MILESTONES OF THE UTAH STATEWIDE NPS PROGRAM
Milestone 2013 2014 2015
Objective 1: Environmental Protection:
Number of
TMDLs
Completed
2 2 1
Number of
TMDLs Initiated
Huntington Creek-
Selenium
Pelican Lake-pH
Nine Mile Creek-
Temperature
Huntington Creek-
selenium
Parley’s Creek-
E.coli
Lower Bear River-
TP
Red Creek
Reservoir-TP
Nine Mile Creek-Temperature
Silver Creek-TDS
Utah Lake-Phosphorus
Jordan River-Ecoli, Arsenic,
Cadmium
Number of 9
Element
Watershed Based
Plans Developed
Strawberry River
Duchesne River
Spanish Valley
North Fork of
Virgin
Price River
Upper Bear River
North Fork of Chalk Creek
Weber River
Number of 9
Element
Watershed Based
Plans Initiated
Price River
North Fork of the
Virgin River
Otter Creek
Upper Sevier
San Pitch
Middle
Green/Desolation
Canyon
Weber River
Watershed Plan
Upper Weber
Watershed Plan
Price River
Upper Sevier
San Pitch
Middle
Green/Desolation
Canyon
Weber River
North Fork of Chalk
Creek
Spanish Fork River
Pinto Creek
Huntington Creek
Maple Creek
Montezuma Creek
Number of
projects
dedicated to the
protection of
threatened
waterbodies
identified in
Utah’s 303(d)
list
0 The Cart Creek
Watershed project
funded using State
NPS funding.
Tie Fork road Stream Crossing
funded using State NPS
funding.
Number of
projects focused
on groundwater
protection
thorughout the
state
One Septic I&E
Program,
One Groundwater
outreach
program.$78,041
total in State NPS
Funding
One Septic I&E
Program,
One Groundwater
outreach program
$41,142. Bothwell
ground water has
continued to be
implemented.
$14,358 for septic
enhancements.
Aside from two grants focusing
on septic system maintenance,
no funding was spent on
groundwater protection using
FY-15 funding.
Objective 2: Improve Program Efficiency and Effectiveness through Reporting and
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 65

Evaluation.
Total Number of
Stream Miles
Restored
0.77 miles of in-
stream restoration
implemented
5.35 miles of
protective riparian
fencing
implemented
.71 miles of in-
stream restoration

2.01 miles of
riparian fencing
2.2 miles of stream restoration
implemented in FY-2015

5.8 miles of riparian fencing
implemented in FY-2015
Total Estimated
Load Reductions
Reduced in
Project Areas
(includes
reductions from
annual and final
reports)
Nitrogen- 10,161
lbs/year
Phosphorus- 3,878
lbs/year
Sediment- 2,500
tons/year
Phosphorus- 8,899
lbs/year
Sediment- 8,942
tons/year
E.coli- 3,100
lbs/year
Nitrogen-20,385
lbs/year
Nitrogen- 7,766 lbs/year

Sediment- 903 tons/year

Phosphorus-4,286 lbs/year

TDS-2,359 tons/year
Number of Final
Project Reports
Submitted
10 (See Table B) 9 (See Table B) 13 (See Table B)
Number of 319
Grants Open
During the Fiscal
Year
6 (See Table5) 6 (See Table5) 6 (See Table5)
Amount of
Unexpended
Funds in Each
Open 319 Grant
(As of June 30,
2014)
FY-08- $90,405
FY-09- $252,811
FY-10- $188,479
FY-11- $341,358
FY-12- $667,452
FY-13- $861,621
(See Table1)
FY-09- $206,697
FY-10- $148,287
FY-11- $76,155
FY-12- $295,598
FY-13- $724,575
FY-14- $893,621

FY-11- $62,994
FY-12- $190,509
FY-13- $167,993
FY-14-$558,943
FY-15- $879,521
Number of
Success Stories
Showing the
envionmental
Benefits of
Completed NPS
Projects
Submitted to
EPA for
Approval
2- Cub River and
East Canyon
Creek
1- Fremont
River
3 -Main Creek
Spring Creek
Strawberry River

Objective 3: Improve Public Participation and Understanding of NPS Issues
Number of
Participants
Invovled in the
Statewided
Volunteer
Monitoring
Program

196

448

980
Number of I&E
Projects
Implemented
3 projects
-AFO Outreach
(NPS)
6 projects
-AFO Outreach
(NPS)
7 projects
-Cedar Beaver I&E (319)
Volunteer Monitoring Program
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 66

with Section 319
and State NPS
Funding
-Septic I&E
Outreach (NPS)
-Volunteer
monitoirng
program (319)
-Septic I&E
Outreach (NPS)
-Volunteer
monitoirng program
(319)
-Mercury Take Back
(NPS)
-Strawberry Valley
I&E (NPS)
-Rain Water Exhibit
(NPS)
(319)
AFO outreach (NPS)
Envirothon (NPS)
Riparian Grazing Workshop
(NPS)
Onsite BMP Manual (NPS)
Water Week AWWA (NPS)

Updates Made to
the State NPS
Program Website
The website was
updated to include
additional
information for
grant applicants
including Final
reporting
guidance, and
grant applications.
In 2014 USU
Waterquality
extension will
begin
development of a
much improved
website.
We have begun
working with USU
Extension to create
a website focused
solely on NPS
pollution. This will
include an
interactive map
showing where
projects have taken
place in the state as
well as movies
highlighting the
NPS projects that
have been
implemented
thorughout the state.
Utah State University has made
good headway on the nes NPS
Program website. This website
will be completed by the end of
the calendar year. The website
can be found at:
http://www.utahcleanwater.org/

Objective 4: Improve Data Collection and Management
Track Updates
Made to Enhance
NPS
Monitoroing in
the Division of
Water Quality’s
Annual
Monitoirng
Strategy
Additional
monitoring
equipment was
purchased for the
Local Watershed
Coordinators to
assist with NPS
project
monitoring.
Trainings were
also offered on the
development of
SAPs.
The equipment that
was purchased in
2013 has been
distributed to the
local watershed
coordinators, and a
training was
conducted during
the sumer of 2014
showing the local
watershed
coordinators how to
use this equipment.
Watershed Coordinators are
now collecting data monthly to
demonstrate the effectiveness
of the best management
practices that are being
implemented. Monitoring
locations were selected for the
Bear River Watershed in
cooperation with the local work
group, and pre-implementation
data has been collected since
the summer of 2015. The local
watershed coordinator is also
working with Tetratech to
develop a SAP in the Upper
Sevier Watershed.
Number of SAPs
Developed
8 2 Many of the
SAPs needed
throughout the
basins were
developed last year.
It is anticipated that
During FY-2015 the local
watershed coordinators
dedicated the majority of their
time to implementing the 10
existing SAPs. In talking with
the local watershed
Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 67

several more will be
developed next year.
coordinators, it is anticipated
that 2-3 more SAPs will be
developed in 2016.
Track Status and
updates of
AWQMS
database
See Section 4.4 of
this report
See Section 4.4 of
this report
See Section 4.4 of this report
Report on Water
Quality Data
Uploaded to the
EPA WQX
Database
See Section 4.4 of
this report
See Section 4.4 of
this report
See Section 4.4 of this report
Objective 5: Improve Coordination of Governmental and Private Sectors
Hold Annual
NPS
Management
Program
Coordination
Meetings
Held February 26,
2013
Held February 26th,
2014
Held March 3rd, 2014
Conduct Annual
Consistency
Reviews with
State and Federal
Agencies
Conducted August
13th and 14th,
2013.
Conducted October
7th and 8th, 2014
Conducted August 12th, 2015
Number of
Water Quality
Task Force
Meetings Held
During the Fiscal
Year
Three meetings
were held.
October 10th 2012,
February 14th,
2013, and May
22nd 2013
Three meetings
were held. August
7th, 2013, November
19th, 2013, and May
19th, 2014.
Four meetings were
held. August 25th,
2014, December 4th,
2014, and February
12th, 2015, June 17th,
2015.

Amount of
Funding Used to
Leverage 319
Funding
Throughout the
State
$1,970,887 (See
Table G)
$4,571,096 (See
Table G)
$3,901,572 (See Table G)

Utah Nonpoint Source Annual Report FY-2015

Page 68

TABLE J- FY-14 BLM WRI PROJECTS
WRI
Project Project Name
Total
Funding
WRI $
Acres Treated
(Terrestrial &
Aquatic)
2931 Little Mountain Bullhog 285,768 1,026
2930 East Tintic Bullhog Phase 3 319,446 1,071
2933 East Tintic Bullhog Phase 4 280,760 855
2951 Diamond Rim Mastication 174,424 624
2900 West Grouse Creek Bullhog Phase 3 318,537 950
2874 Park Valley PJ Treatment Project Phase 1 451,749 1,445
2965
Range Creek Fuels Reduction and Vegetation
Restoration Project Phase-1 279,617 195
2881
Ford Ridge Fuels Reduction and Vegetation
Restoration Project Phase-1 414,152 135
2923
Westwater Canyon Project Phase 3- Colorado
River 79,705 22
2879
Lower San Rafael River and Riparian Corridor
Restoration BLM Land Phase 1 262,235 363
2956
FY15 Southeast Utah Riparian Restoration Phase
2 125,000 470
2861
Cedar Mountain Hazardous Fuels Reduction and
Vegetation Restoration Project Phase-1 590,027 1,017
2942 Upper Kanab Creek Bald Knoll Phase 3 585,495 1,229
2984 South Canyon (Rock Canyon) 1,031,000 1,971
2982 Yellowjacket (Cave Lake) 1,050,000 1,776
3039 South Beaver Buckskin Valley 357,870 1,320
Totals 6,605,785 14,469