# Phrag Action??



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

Alright guys.... Time to get serious about this. 

To many issues are coming around due to this invasive weed. What can we do about it? 

Utah Air quality Department has issues with burning of the phrag and our current gov wont do diddly about it. 

We need to raise a fuss to our state reps about the problem this is causing...

Canals are being choked out due to the stuff, water levels from the GSL are shrinking due to the water sucking phrag... To help our drought we NEED the GSL back to normal levels and phrag is NOT helping... 

Anyone have Ideas on who to email or contact? I feel that internet venting isn't helping...


Here is a link for Utah State Legislature Members... Find your district and EMAIL YOUR REPS to let them know your issues and concerns for the well being of our waterfowl and GSL....


Wondering if we need to get some of the conservation groups, like DU, Delta Waterfowl and maybe even some of the bigger ones since snow pack directly impacts big game... 

WE NEED TO RAISE OUR VOICE.... We need action not talk! Who's with me and how can we get our voices heard????


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

One of the issues is that a permit is needed for any burn in excess of 20 acres in size and those require certain conditions etc which sometimes are hard to meet in advance. What needs to be done is to get with the DWR at burn time and provide them with manpower. If there was sufficient manpower, fire lines could be created and a series of 20 acre plots burned in a single day. With enough men and equipment I believe several hundred acres could be burned in a day safely. However that is going to require probably a minimum of 50 people willing to devote a day to help. I do have some experience in controlled burns having done some of them in college and work.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

There is major reluctance among the various counties to add Phragmites to the noxious weed listing because it would force them to act on it and that is expensive. So that makes controlling it in canals, ditches, ponds, etc, very difficult.
The phrag on the Great Salt Lake marshes is where the vast majority of it resides. This land is administered by the State of Utah (Dept of Fire, Forestry and State Lands - FFSL). Here is what they are supposed to be doing with our state lands by law:

 *Under State and Federal law, the governing doctrine is that of **Sovereign Lands. The state recognizes this according to the following from the Division of Fire, Forestry & State Lands **website: *
*http://www.ffsl.utah.gov/index.php/state-lands *
 *State Lands *
 *"The State of Utah recognizes and declares that the beds of **navigable waters within the state are owned by the state and are among the basic resources of the state, and that there exists, and has existed since statehood, a public trust over and upon the beds of these waters. It is also recognized that the public health, interest, safety, and welfare require that all uses on, beneath or above the beds of navigable lakes and streams of the state be regulated, so that the protection of navigation, fish and wildlife habitat, aquatic beauty, public recreation, **and water quality will be given due consideration and balanced against the navigational or economic necessity or justification for, or benefit to be derived from, any proposed use."* 

Obviously, the State of Utah has shown that it can not handle the demands of administering our state-owned public lands. But, nonetheless, the FFSL is the best chance we have of phrag being managed. There is a new generation of mangers at the FFSL over the last few years that actually seem to care about the Great Salt Lake and the invasive species that threaten our wetlands...so I have higher hopes now than ever before. 
R


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

rjefre said:


> There is major reluctance among the various counties to add Phragmites to the noxious weed listing because it would force them to act on it and that is expensive. So that makes controlling it in canals, ditches, ponds, etc, very difficult.
> The phrag on the Great Salt Lake marshes is where the vast majority of it resides. This land is administered by the State of Utah (Dept of Fire, Forestry and State Lands - FFSL). Here is what they are supposed to be doing with our state lands by law:
> 
> *Under State and Federal law, the governing doctrine is that of **Sovereign Lands. The state recognizes this according to the following from the Division of Fire, Forestry & State Lands **website: *
> ...


Does the DWR have the authority to burn on WMA's?


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)




----------



## JuniorPre 360 (Feb 22, 2012)

This man is our answer! We need to free him, fuel him up, and just watch him go!

http://fox13now.com/2015/09/08/wildfire-contained-near-antelope-island-burned-50-100-acres/


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

RJ, 

I emailed the davis county commissioner and also my district legislative and rep about this issue this morning. I did hear back from Todd and he mentioned he would consider it and appreciated my email. What more can the average joe do? 

How can we hold these people accountable? Does this need to be brought to the steps of a building or what?


----------



## JuniorPre 360 (Feb 22, 2012)

tallbuck said:


> RJ,
> 
> I emailed the davis county commissioner and also my district legislative and rep about this issue this morning. I did hear back from Todd and he mentioned he would consider it and appreciated my email. What more can the average joe do?
> 
> How can we hold these people accountable? Does this need to be brought to the steps of a building or what?


Petitions by duck hunters, social media attention, and some volunteers and raised money can go a LONG way. First step is having access to some keys to the kingdom.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

That dude that started a fire out by howard slough had a good idea, but the FFSL spent many thousands of our tax dollars with air tankers and helicopters putting out a fire that was burning outside of the dike and had no where to go but out to the GSL. It would have burned itself out and provided a great service toward removing deep thatch of phragmites out there. Oh well, that is our state managing our public lands.

The DWR has to coordinate with the FFSL fire boss and with Dept of Air Quality before a burn can occur. If the atmospheric conditions are perfect, they will then need to scramble a fire crew. Obviously this is an insurmountable task, so we will probably never see a prescribed burn in Davis or Weber counties.

Contacting your legislator is a GREAT way to keep them aware of their responsibility to protect our public wetlands. Sadly, they try and de-fund efforts to protect our state-owned marshes every year during the legislative session. But there are a couple of groups that fight for the marsh every year and they have succeeded in stopping the worst of the worst ideas. 
R


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

rjefre said:


> That dude that started a fire out by howard slough had a good idea, but the FFSL spent many thousands of our tax dollars with air tankers and helicopters putting out a fire that was burning outside of the dike and had no where to go but out to the GSL. It would have burned itself out and provided a great service toward removing deep thatch of phragmites out there. Oh well, that is our state managing our public lands.
> 
> The DWR has to coordinate with the FFSL fire boss and with Dept of Air Quality before a burn can occur. If the atmospheric conditions are perfect, they will then need to scramble a fire crew. Obviously this is an insurmountable task, so we will probably never see a prescribed burn in Davis or Weber counties.
> 
> ...


Does that go for any size burn or can you burn at your own discretion if the burn size is under 20 acres?


----------



## cootlover (Sep 26, 2015)

To bad mother nature doesn't have a repeat flood of the 80's and let all the salt water kill it all with out all the damage to the dikes.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

They can't manage the Great Salt Lake but by god if they got a hold of our BLM and Forest Service lands they'd be able to manage those. Their incompetence and hypocrisy should be pointed out and plastered everywhere. If these idiots can't take care of the few state lands we have, you have to be a real idiot to buy into their idea they can manage millions of acres of land under constant attack. 

Post up some emails and phone numbers and I'll send them to as many as needed. The GSL needs to be protected, preserved, and improved and so does its shorelines and water sources before development destroys them. It's too important to important to waterfowl and other species to let it slowly die away.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

As for getting a permit to burn without getting a fire crew put together--
Apparently private lands (like duck clubs) can burn. The WMA's have not been able to...maybe because they can't subdivide the units into small parcels to be under the limit. I'm just not sure about that. The end result is no burns in the WMA's for the last 5 years or so. The one time that the atmospheric conditions were perfect and they were able to get a fire crew, was the same day Gov Herbert was giving a speech about air quality in the Wasatch Front. They had to cancel the fire because it would have looked bad to have plumes of smoke showing on the same day he wanted to tout our clean air.
We begged and pleaded with the state for the last 15 years to help with phrag, but they were not interested (mostly because our wetlands don't have any extractive minerals on them). By law, they have a public trust obligation to protect and maintain our state-owned public lands...but our locally elected legislators have no appetite for actually doing it. Sad, very sad.
R


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Rjefre what are the emails/contact info so we can start applying our opinions and pressure on the issue. If each of us and others we know can continue to apply pressure they might begin taking notice.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

rjefre said:


> As for getting a permit to burn without getting a fire crew put together--
> Apparently private lands (like duck clubs) can burn. The WMA's have not been able to...maybe because they can't subdivide the units into small parcels to be under the limit. I'm just not sure about that. The end result is no burns in the WMA's for the last 5 years or so. The one time that the atmospheric conditions were perfect and they were able to get a fire crew, was the same day Gov Herbert was giving a speech about air quality in the Wasatch Front. They had to cancel the fire because it would have looked bad to have plumes of smoke showing on the same day he wanted to tout our clean air.
> We begged and pleaded with the state for the last 15 years to help with phrag, but they were not interested (mostly because our wetlands don't have any extractive minerals on them). By law, they have a public trust obligation to protect and maintain our state-owned public lands...but our locally elected legislators have no appetite for actually doing it. Sad, very sad.
> R


Could the DWR put together a "volunteer fire crew" and do their own burn if one of the crew had a degree in say um Forestry or Forest Management?


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

Gentleman,

So I emailed a group of reps and commissioners yesterday and I got a response back from Timoth Hawkes. He is the Rep for District 18. Here is what he said. I am trying to formulate my email back to him.

Thanks for reaching out and for your interest in this important issue. My sense is that we're already doing a lot to control phragmites and those efforts are increasing. In other words, it's not fair to characterize the issue as "on the back burner." If I'm not mistaken, in FY2014 we appropriated significant money for phragmites control, and again in FY2015, where we devoted both one-time and ongoing (year-over-year) dollars to the program. You can get a sense of the scope and scale of the State's efforts by viewing the following presentation: http://arcg.is/1HioDet. That's no small effort.


Bottom line: we share your concerns about phragmites, and are doing what we can to address this difficult problem. Expect those efforts to continue.

Best regards,

Tim Hawkes


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

tallbuck said:


> Gentleman,
> 
> So I emailed a group of reps and commissioners yesterday and I got a response back from Timoth Hawkes. He is the Rep for District 18. Here is what he said. I am trying to formulate my email back to him.
> 
> ...


If you study the website, it repeatedly calls for burns yet no burns have taken place according to the website...interesting.


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

Okay so here is what I wrote.

Timothy, 


Thank you for your quick and thoughtful response. I do know that the state has approved money for fighting this invasive weed but I feel that it is falling short with the amount of damage it is causing. After digging further into this issue, Pharg has spread to Utah Lake, Cache Valley and to the Bear Lake Region. This is of horrible news and needs to quickly dealt with accordingly. 

I know that the state is working hard to fight the weed. Means like grazing cows at Farmington Bay Wildlife Management Area with help and dedication from local ranchers to help control the problem, this has been a win but is also not a long term solution. I also know the state has purchased a type of trax bull hog mower to help with the spread but I feel it is not enough as it is limited to manpower and also the size of the mower. In short, we need to allow more treating and burning to eradicate the invasive weed. This will allow the nutrients to generate back into the soils to help the native ecosystem again get a foot hold on growing and providing a natural balance for the GSL. 


Private lands are able to burn with great success to help control the Phrag on their lands. But with the winds blowing seeds back onto there property from state lands they are in a world of hurt to fighting the problem. 

NOT allowing the state to burn this weed is loosing the battle that we cannot afford to loose not only for wildlife but also for the State as tourism dollars. Something needs to be done to allow burn permits and to speed up the process for when there are adequate burn conditions. I again beg of you to help with this process.




Thank you again for your time.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

Nice letter! I would like to call attention to the fact that last year the legislature was going* to remove* a big chunk of phragmites funding from the budget. It had already been voted on and was about to be lost, when Friends of Great Salt Lake worked with a few powerful interests and got the funding put back in the budget at the very last minute. 
It is true that the state is doing more now than they ever did before, but it is still very little. For the last 15 years (up until the last 6-7 years) they came right out and said it was of no importance. Luckily, there are some new people working their way up the ranks and hopefully they can talk sense into our silly elected legislators. Tim Hawkes and a bunch of other legislators (like the Natural Resources Committee) would do well to take a boat ride out to the GSL wetlands and see the mass destruction they have wrought upon us due to their lack of concern over the years. 
R


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

So today at lunch on ksl news radio was speak to the governor. So I called in and spoke to the lady from ksl and told her my question. A few minutes later she came back on and said that she wanted to get my name and number and that someone from the gov office would like to call and talk with me. So I left my info and I cannot wait for the call.

Rj, If i do hear back from some of the commissions or reps from davis and weber can we schedule some boat time for them to see the issue first hand? 

If so I would love to offer it for them to see the large scope of the issue. What about the news media by chance? 

Thanks

Tallbuck


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

Introduce feral pigs to the wma. What would be better than a duck hunt with a bonus hog


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

Here's the follow up response...

The presentation I linked in my original response shows that Utah is actively fighting phrag in all of the areas you describe. Burning is a solution, but it?s constrained by concerns about air quality, meaning that phrag can be burned only in limited windows when our air quality is otherwise good and other climatic conditions (lack of wind; relative humidity) permit it. To my knowledge, the state is pursuing ALL options, including burning on state lands, but there is no silver bullet solution, and we have to deploy the full-range of treatment options to control the grass. (I don?t think anyone thinks we can fully eliminate it.) We need to treat the freeway underpass areas, for example, which are thick with it, but UDOT doesn?t want to because it puts their workers at risk of being struck and killed by oncoming traffic. Again: tough problem. 

Regardless, it?s good to know you care, and the more citizens who advocate on this issue, the more likely the State will devote resources to it. 

Best,
Rep. Tim Hawkes


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

I read over the weekend where a Colorado rancher over a 2 year period had purchased 1700+ wild horses and sent them to slaughter. He bought them for like $10 each! Now I have brought this up before that the state and BLM could get together and loan the state a few hundred or a couple of thousand wild horses each year after hunting season is over and let them do their thing on phrag. The state seems to think that it would be very difficult to have our state officials cooperate with the BLM. So here is another thought. Why not have the state buy 2-3 thousand and let them graze on the WMA's outside of hunting season. If the state would own the horses there would be no issues with trying to cooperate with the feds. Once the phrag was wiped out sufficiently they could then sell the horses or just keep them and have them make sure to keep the phrag down. If the state is spending $500,000 for phrag control and you can get the horses for 10$ per head that would be some serious return on your investment for the state.


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

Trying to get the state to work with the feds would be a Royal Pain in the butt! I like the idea!


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

The horse idea makes too much financial sense to be acted upon by our elected leaders. They would much prefer hating the feds and refusing to cooperate in any way.
As a side note, I did a TV show that aired on Saturday night, and I got in some good licks about Phragmites and the loss of our wetlands. Most of it was edited out, but still got in some sound bites about it. The show is called At Your Leisure with Chad and Rhea Booth.
R


----------



## WTRFWLN (Dec 12, 2012)

R, I saw that Saturday with you and Chuck. Wish they would have aired more time on the Issue's but it is a TV production and Commericals seem to pay the bill's not talking about Phrag? Every little bit helps?


----------



## dubob (Sep 8, 2007)

*Just trying to be realistic*

Let me state up front that I agree that phrags are a scourge and definitely should be controlled a/o eliminated to the best of the state's ability to do so. That said, I also realize that it's an uphill battle all the way. I'm very happy to see that the state has actually recognized the problem and thrown a minimal amount of funding at it. That's a good thing.

And the more noise we can make to our legislators, the better. But have you ever really thought about just how much impact the duck hunting community can have based on our family size? The state currently has a population of 3 million residents, give or take a few thousand. Based on duck stamp sales to hunters within our borders, the average number of actual duck hunters over the latest 10 year period I could find (2003 -2012) was around 24,300. And since the area of the state that has a problem is confined to less than 1% of our land mass, the number of farmers being affected is very minimal, I would guess maybe a couple hundred farmers are experiencing any major impact from phrag growth. So let's say there are maybe 25,000 residents that are having a major problem with phrag growth impacting their lives to any extent at all. That equates to 0.0083 % of the residents that have enough concern with the problem to complain to their legislators. Is it any wonder that the phrag problem isn't seen by the legislature as a major concern? I would think we are dam lucky they have addressed it at all and actually come up with a plan to combat it and fund it regardless of how little it really is at this point.

I'm really not trying to rain on anybody's parade here, but we should be aware of the reality of the situation and that we as a group will have a very small influence on the issue. But all of us should be making as much noise as we can by writing/calling/talking to our individual state representatives at every opportunity. Just be aware that it will not be easy or quick to accomplish change on this issue.


----------

