2003 Environmental Quality Incentive Program

Local Work Group Summary for Albuquerque

Introduction:

The Albuquerque field office includes the Coronado and Ciudad Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Agricultural lands include irrigated cropland in the middle Rio Grande valley, and grazed rangeland on the foothills and mesas.

Local Work Group:

Both Districts held local work group meetings in the Spring of 1997, conducting conservation needs assessments and prioritizing geographic areas, as per the 1996 Farm Bill.

Coronado Soil and Water Conservation District held a stakeholders meeting in April, 2002, agenda and invitation list are attached, however minutes of that meeting were lost on the district’s computer.

Designated conservationist called for a local work group meeting December 5, 2002 in an effort to address workload and end the batching period for applications. It was agreed to close the batching period on December 13. We were later informed by the state leadership, in January, that such an action was not allowable. Applications were accepted through March 14, 2003.

A formal EQIP Local Work Group meeting was held March 13 at 6:00 pm at 6200 Jefferson. Both Districts hosted the meeting. The letter of invitation, list of invitees, attendance list, and minutes are attached.

Priority Resource Concerns:

Coronado Soil and Water Conservation District –

1. Range land improvement, productivity and sustainability including noxious weed control and management, wildlife habitat improvement, water development for flood control, and lack of fencing.
2. Protect, manage and sustain agricultural land, production, water rights, irrigation water, salt content, weeds, and high water table. Tied with: Restore Bosque riparian and wetlands for wildlife, control salt cedar and river bank pollution including solid waste.
3. Water quality and availability for irrigation and drinking.

Ciudad Soil and Water Conservation District -

1. Improvement & enhancement of riparian vegetation and preservation and restoration of wildlife habitat.
2. Storm water management to reduce flooding & erosion by designating adequate drainage. Tied with: Amount of water available.
3. Establish and improve existing ground cover and conduct inventories to monitor and control weeds on grazing lands.

Funding Considerations:

The goal is to distribute available funds at the following percentages:

• 60% Irrigated Cropland
• 20% Rangeland
• 20% Animal Feed Operations

Tribal applications will not compete separately, however, a certain percentage of funds (a minimum) will be earmarked for tribal lands. The percentage of funds will be determined by the state office. Once those funds are allocated, the remaining tribal applications will be left to compete for the balance of the field office budget.

Cost Docket  (Refer to Cost Docket)

Eligible Practices and Cost Share Rates: 

Attached is the practice list that was approved by the local work group. Though the discussion was focused on those practices that are commonly used in this area, the group agreed to make all practices eligible for the EQIP program and to not consider incentive payments for management practices. Since there currently exists little economic incentive for our small scale farmers to make irrigation improvements, the group felt strongly that 75% cost share was necessary in order to implement a viable conservation program. A rancher in the group described his conservation needs and claimed that with cattle prices down and feed costs always increasing, it would be impossible for him to cover 50% of the cost of those improvements. As a result, the local work group recommended all practices to be at a 75% rate.  Specifically, riparian restoration practices and wildlife habitat improvement practices are also being proposed at a higher rate as an incentive for landowners to consider these practices in conservation plan/contract development.

Ranking Criteria: Refer to individual Ranking Criteria

In order to determine which applications provided the greatest environmental benefits, sample ranking criteria was reviewed by the local work group and they determined the range of points that should be given to each section of each criteria worksheet.  In the event that a tie occurs between two or more irrigated cropland applications the section on water quantity will be compared for greatest irrigation efficiency improvement (in one percent increments).  In the event that a tie occurs between two or more grazing lands applications the section on plants will be compared for the greatest improvement in site similarity index (in one percent increments).  If ties still exist, in either criteria, the section that addresses conservation practice selection will be used to break the tie.

Proposed Schedule for Processing Applications & Developing Contracts:

• First Batching Cycle Ended March 14.
• Farm & Dairy Applications Ranked by May 30 & contracts signed by July1.
• Ranch Applications Ranked by June 30 and contracts signed by August 1.

< Back to EQIP County Documents