2003 Environmental Quality Incentive Program

Local Work Group Summary for Artesia

Introduction:

Field Office setting: The Artesia field office is located in southeastern New Mexico along the Pecos River. The field office work area encompasses the North half of Eddy county and the boot heal and Southern end of Chaves county. The area has a long history of farming and ranching. There are approximately 35,000 acres of irrigated cropland located in the Central Valley SWCD. Rangeland makes up the remainder of the work area and is in the Penasco SWCD.

The work area is in the northern limits of the Chihuahuan Desert. The climate is mild and dry with an annual rainfall of 10 to 12 inches on the eastern part of the area and 14 to 16 inches on the western edge of the work area.

Irrigation is essential to the farming community in the area. Water for irrigation is pumped from deep artesian well and some shallow wells. Very little water is diverted from the Pecos River for irrigation in the area. Crops grown historically have been alfalfa and cotton. The Dairy industry moved into the area 10 to 12 years ago. With the start up of the dairy industry corn silage and small grain for green chop are being grown. Chile is also grown in the area. The rangeland resource found in the work area is warm season grassland. The area supports both sheep and cattle.

Local Work Group:

 The local work group has held two meeting over the past few months to provide input into the 2003 EQIP program for the field office area. The work group is comprised of board members from both the Central Valley and Penasco SWCDs. Other members include New Mexico Fish and Game, New Mexico State Lands, The Bureau of Land Management, Farm Services Agency representatives and board members, the New Mexico Cooperative Extension Service and Forest Service.

Priority Resource Concerns:

The group agreed that Grazing Lands, Water Resources and Livestock Manure Management would address the resource problems in the work area.

Funding Considerations:

EQIP funds received at the field office will be divided as follows:

• Grazing lands (50%)
• Water Resources (45%)
• Livestock manure management (5%).

Cost Docket: Refer to Cost Docket

Practices to be Eligible and Associated Cost Share Rates:

The Local Work Group (LWG) recommended that all practices be cost shared at 50% with the exception of brush management. The LWG felt that do to the size and scope of the brush problem, and the cost to the producer to address this problem it would require a higher incentive payment. The LWG felt that the benefits to range land following brush management go far beyond just increased forage for the producer. The benefits extend to the general public as a whole in improved rangeland health; improved water shed condition, and improved wildlife habitat. The LWG recommended a 75% cost share rate for brush management.

Practice limits were discussed and the LWG agreed that they were needed.  The LWG recommended that a single practice limit of $50,000 be set on Grazing Lands, and a $50,000 single practice limit be set on Water Resources.  It was felt that the amount of money available for livestock manure management would be the limiting factor for this concern.  No single practice limit was set for AFOs.

Ranking Criteria:

Draft ranking criteria was presented to the group. It was reviewed in detail and approved by the group. (See attached proposed ranking criteria work sheet for grazing lands, water resources, and livestock manure management).

Ties between producers were discussed. The group's recommendations on criteria to use in the event of a tie are as follows:

1. Preference for individuals that do not have existing contracts or who have not had a contract.
2. Percentage of operating unit in contract.

< Back to EQIP County Documents