1
HABITAT CONSERVATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
for the Washington County Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)
A regular meeting of the Habitat Conservation Technical Committee (TC) was held in the commission chambers of the Washington County Administration Building on
September 19, 2017.
Members present were:
John Kellam, ChairmanBureau of Land Management (BLM)
Ann McLuckieUtah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR)
Kristen ComellaSnow Canyon State Park (SCSP)
Mike SchijfHCP Biologist
Marshall TophamLocal Biologist
Members present via conference line:
Hilary Whitcomb, Vice ChairU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Also present were:
Sarah ThomasWashington County HCP Recorder
Cameron Rognan Washington County HCP Administrator
Linda AllisonDesert Tortoise Recovery Office (USFWS)
Lacey McIntyreWashington County HCP Outreach and Admin Coordinator
Celeste MaloyWashington County Attorney
Myron Lee Dixie MPO Director
1.Call to Order
John Kellam noted a quorum existed and called the meeting to order at 1:08 p.m.
2.Approval of Minutes
- August 17, 2017
Page 4, Paragraph 1, Sentences 1, 4, 6:
Changed from: “Snow Canyon Citizen Advisory Team (SC-CAT)”
Changed to: “Snow Canyon Citizen Advisory Team (SCCAT)”
Page 4, Paragraph 1, Sentence 5:
Changed from:“This recommendation was presented to the Snow Canyon Join Management Committee in April.”
Changed to: “This recommendation was presented to the Snow Canyon Joint Management Committee in April.”
Page 6, Paragraph 2, Sentence 2:
Changed from: “She recommended meeting outreach and education needs without actually having to bring people into a brick and mortar building.”
Changed to: “She recommended meeting outreach and education needs without actually having to bring people into a brick and mortar building or outdoor amphitheater space.”
Page 6, Paragraph 2, After Sentence 2:
Add sentence: “She said that maybe indoor presentation space could be met within the new county facility.”
Page 6, Paragraph 4, Sentence 3:
Changed from: “He suggested that rather than spending 1 million dollars on a building to talk about tortoise conservation, it might be better to spend that money on land for a satellite reserve that would protect more tortoise habitat.”
Changed to: “He suggested that rather than spending 1 million dollars on a building to talk about tortoise conservation, it might be better to spend that money on conservation land in the Reserve.”
Page 6, Paragraph 4, Sentence 5:
Changed from: “She said Commissioner Cox commented recently that he foresees the HCP being removed completely in the next 20 years and any facility built for them being reverted to the State Park.”
Changed to: “She said Commissioner Cox commented recently that he foresees the HCP being removed completely in the next 20 years and any facility built for them being reverted to another owner.”
3.GENERAL BUSINESS
a. Discussion of field trip to potential locations for future HCP Offices and possible action on HCAC Assignment to evaluate locations
Kristen summarized the field trip: committee members briefly toured the current county
facility before visiting the Desert Garden and Snow Canyon State Park to see if there
were any additional pros or cons to add to the list. Kristen noted that the 5,500 ft2 floor
plan proposed for future HCP offices at the Desert Garden location didn’t include any
storage space. She realized that this floor plan anticipates meeting storage needs with
exterior tuff sheds, but cautioned the HCP not to sell themselves short on storage.
Next, Kristen stated for the record that it’s awkward this assignment was given to the
Technical Committee (TC) because it’s not a biological issue. She suggested that John
doesn’t frame the write-up as a formal recommendation because it’s not a biological
issue. Marshall said he agrees with Kristen that the TC is getting out of bounds with this
assignment. However, he believes that anything they can do to educate people to be
more respectful of the Reserve is a biological issue.
John agreed that he will only present the summary of concerns and list of pros and
cons created by the TC. He will write a draft and send it out for comments prior to the
next HCAC meeting.
Cameron added that the assignment included to rank the building locations in order of
which would be the best educational resource for the public. The committee agreed to
send their rankings to John via email for his inclusion in the presentation to the HCAC.
Mike asked Lacey if it would work logistically to have offices in one location and a
separate educational facility at the Desert Garden. Lacey said she thinks it would
be doable, but not efficient. She foresees needing more volunteers and staff with this
arrangement.
b. Continuation of TC Assignment #3-c-1, July 17, 2017 - Evaluation of tortoise monitoring program
Ann shared exhibit 3-b-1, a page of tables title “Total Line Length required for several target precision levels.” She explained that she used multiple years of data to determine the real value of b, the variance inflation factor, for zones 2, 3 and 5 of the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve. Then she put that unique b value (1.8) into an equation that produced the total line lengths necessary for a variety of different precision levels (CV’s). These tables will help the TC determine the amount of effort needed for several target CV’s.The results of the table will allow the TC to look at two factors: the monitoring intensity (the number of kilometers per season) and the frequency (how often to monitor).
Next, Hilary shared exhibit 3-b-2, a table titled “Scenarios explored for future range-wide monitoring.” This table allowed TC members to see the relationship between precision level and the power to detect the rate of change over a 25 year period while sampling every other year.
Hilary cautioned that choosing a higher CV would increase the confidence intervals, making it more difficult to detect changes in shorter term time scales. The lower the CV, the higher the ability to determine the rate of change.
Cameron asked Linda if she recommends a target range for detecting rate of change. Linda replied that when the recovery criteria were being written, experts thought that that the maximum rate of change tortoises could experience in good years was 2%, and that only positive change would be observed. Linda said she thinks 2% is too low, but that it’s up to the TC to decide if they would they like to stick with just the recovery criteria, or if there are any other criterion they would like to use for this data.
Hilary said the TC needs to decide if they would like to be able to look at shorter time frames so that they can be more proactive in their responses. She said that more precise data would let them start to see trends earlier.
Mike noted that when comparing CV’s in the Reserve to those of other recovery units, it appears that we’re holding ourselves to a much more precise standard. He asked for an explanation.
Linda responded that what makes Red Cliffs unique is that it’s much smaller than every other critical habitat unit. Additionally, Red Cliffs is the only representative for its recovery unit. She said her CV’s are much larger for critical habitat units, but not for recovery units. The reason she doesn’t have to be as precise is because she works with 3 or more critical habitat units that are all giving a trend, and she can average those trends. She concluded by saying that she’s not relying on critical habitat precision to get recovery unit precision.
Hilary said that compared to other units, the Upper Virgin River Recovery Unit has development right on top of tortoise populations. When that intersection occurs, it’s important to understand what’s going on. She concluded that this exercise shows that effort can be reduced a little bit, but asked if the monitoring objectives need to be rephrased.
Kristen said that it comes down to dollars. Other recovery units have landscapes so vast that they can’t afford to survey everything. Cameron added that money is the impetus for this exercise as well. He said that the HCP has capped out the money it can spend on monitoring to get mitigation credit and needs to figure out how it can fund monitoring in the future.
Mike asked Linda if she had any recommendations for a minimum CV. She replied that it’s more important to figure out everything the data will be used for, and offered the following ideas: -the TC may find that they have to work with time horizons that aren’t 25 years, -they may use the data coming from inside critical habitat to figure out what’s typical or not typical outside critical habitat, and –they may use data to show that development occurring outside critical habitat influences what’s happening inside critical habitat. She said that since the Upper Virgin River Recovery Unit has a declining trend right now, the TC may want to keep the CV pretty strict until they see that trend turn around.
Cameron returned to Linda’s original recommendation of a 50 tortoise cap: after observing 50 tortoises, they would have a high enough precision level. He said that calculations based on a 15% CV show that on average they would see about 81 tortoises in 263 km of transects. This is significantly higher than the 50 tortoise cap recommended by the Management Oversight Group (MOG). Cameron said that tortoise density is so high at Red Cliffs that they’d reach that precision level a lot quicker.
John cautioned that density can fluctuate because of disease, drought and fire, and that data can’t be pooled here because it’s a small recovery unit.
Kristen brought the discussion back to monitoring objectives. She said that they want to be able to assess changes in tortoise population, and that distance sampling is still the best method. The objectives haven’t changed. In terms of CV’s, 15 to 17% could work well.
The TC took a vote on whether a 15% CV would be acceptable. All members voted yes. Hilary added that a 15% CV could be an interim approach until positive trends are identified, and that this exercise should be revisited after 3-5 years of data.
Ann said she could write a draft of the TC recommendation paper on the tortoise monitoring program and then send it out for review. John said he will present a brief summary at the next HCAC meeting.
c.HCP Administrator Updates
1. Tortoise survey reports
Cameron told the committee that surveys on private in-holdings and at the Green Valley
Gap area have been completed. He sent a copy of the reports to the TC members.
2. Washington Parkway update
Cameron told the committee that there have been recent meetings with officials from
The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), the State, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to discuss the Washington Parkway (formerly called the Northern Corridor). He said that the Washington County Commission will soon pass a resolution that changes the county’s preferred route of the road to a more tortoise-friendly southerly route. This resolution will show the county’s support of the road with its new alignment and their support of acquiring additional lands to benefit the tortoise in exchange for the road.
Kristen asked where this new route originated. Cameron replied that it was discussed in
a meeting of local biologists organized by Henry Maddux. They presented a more
southerly alignment to take the road as close as possible to the southern boundary of
the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve. The route proposed in that meeting was reviewed by the
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and Horrock’s Engineering which returned
an amended route positioned as far south as possible based on geography.
Cameron said the Washington Parkway will likely be on the agenda for the next
meeting. Additionally, there will be a site visit to see if the proposed route makes sense
and to take stock of concerns. John asked if they would also discuss a mitigation
package during this discussion. Cameron replied that this will happen in the future.
John said for the record that the biologist-preferred route is for the road to hug the
southern boundary of the Reserve. Cameron said that he shared the biologists’ map at
the meetings, and that this new alignment is what the engineer’s are capable of
building.
Kristen said that since the road cuts through critical tortoise habitat, discussion isn’t
really needed. Cameron replied that the County wants to get the TC involved and hear
their voices. Kristen asked if the new alignment will go through the middle of Bob
Brennan’s property. Cameron replied that it would.
d.Review 2018 HCP Budget
The committee members requested more time to review the budget. John asked TC
members to email him comments to the budget for inclusion in his draft Technical
Committee Report for September.
Kristen noted that monitoring was completely removed from the budget. Cameron
replied that it’s because there’s no monitoring next year. Ann pointed out that there’s a 2
year contract: the first year for physically monitoring and the second year for write-ups
and analysis.
Kristen said for the record that the politics being inserted into the budget don’t sit well
with her. She said that the monitoring program, a core piece of the HCP, is under
assault. Cameron replied that Washington County can’t spend $100,000 on a 2 year
commitment for monitoring when they don’t know if they will have an HCP permit in 2
years. He clarified that the county is not going to cut monitoring funds. They just are not
planning to pay for it 2 years in advance. Instead they’ll pay for it yearly, even if it’s a
larger lump sum in the monitoring years.
John asked how much of the itemized budget is funded by conservation dollars from
building permits. Cameron said that this is 100 % of their budget. John said that cutting
funds for monitoring (which is a critical component of the HCP), but spending tortoise
conservation dollars on a new building seems counterintuitive. He asked who makes
decisions on how the conservation fund money is dispensed. Cameron replied the
county commissioners do. Ann added that how the money is allocated is identified in the
Washington County HCP. So much money is allocated each year for particular line
items in the budget, but these calculations are based on 1996 dollars.
Cameron said that as they spent the budget incrementally, they received mitigation credits in each category. Many of those categories are now maxed out. The county has already met all those financial obligations and is no longer required to spend money on them under the agreement. The county has the discretion to decide how to spend money after they’ve maxed out their credits. At the end of the permit, they’ll no longer charge impact fees. He concluded by asking the TC to comment on the budget prior to next HCAC meeting.
4.OTHER REPORTS FROM TC MEMBERS AND REQUESTS FOR FUTURE
AGENDA ITEMS
a.Update on fall plantings project
Ann said that the division will be planting 1,500 plants on November 4th at the same site as part of original plan to plant 5 thousand plants in the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area (NCA) and 5 thousand plants in the Beaver Dam NCA.
Mike noted that the Red Cliffs plots aren’t doing so well. Ann said that she is seeing a 6-7% survival rate. This is related to the challenges of rocky soil, high winds, herbivory, and cool temperatures that caused the plants to go into dormancy immediately after being planted. That’s why she moved up the plantings from mid November to early November.
Mike asked how the plot locations were selected. Ann replied that sites were selected based on the presence of exotic weeds, having been burned, access via road, and being fenced.
John said that in the Beaver Dam NCA, he’s seeing a 59.1% rate of survivorship at six months. He will be planting 500-600 plants there during the second week of November, and will use a new method. The Song Dog Nursery at Lake Mead is growing plants in cylindrical paper tubes and a drill and auger machine will be used to dig the holes to plant them.
Hilary updated the committee on the Kayenta emergency watershed program. They are working in the Ivins area to put in detention basins. Also, the Sand Hollow Pipeline has been making progress. Hopefully those consultations will be completed soon.
5.Next meeting dates
- October 5, 2017
The committee agreed to move the next meeting date to October 19th, with a likely field trip of the proposed Washington Parkway route beforehand.