United States Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service		 New Mexico Go to Accessibility Information
Skip to Page Content

 

2004 Environmental Quality Incentive Program

Local Work Group Summary for Estancia

Introduction

The Estancia Field office (FO) is located in the town of Estancia, approximately 50 miles mostly east and south of Albuquerque, New Mexcio. Torrance County makes up the majority of Estancia FO service area, along with a small northeast portion of Bernalillo County, and the southern part of Santa Fe County on its northern boundary. The Manzano Mountains border the west boundary and slope east into the Estancia Basin. To the north is South Mountain, to the South Chupadera Mesa, and to the east are gently rolling uplands. The basin contains a significant but limited underground water supply furnishing flood, sprinkler, and small-scale drip irrigation. The majority of crops grown in this area are mainly alfalfa hay, corn silage, oats, and some winter wheat for winter grazing. Other crops such as beans, pumpkins, sweet corn, and other vegetable crops are also grown but on a smaller scale. Along with agriculture there has been an expanding suburban (2 to 40 acre size) type development in the NW corner of the service area that continues to expand. The remaining land base is not suitable for cultivation and is used mainly as grazed range and timberland.

Local Work Group

The official 2004 Local Work Group (LWG) meeting was held on January 6th, 2004.  Those who chose to be involved with the LWG were representatives from the Edgewood and East Torrance Soil and Water Conservation Districts, a representative from the Farm Service Agency (Torrance County Executive Director), and local NRCS representative. The area represented is comprised of southern Santa Fe County, The northeast corner of Bernalillo County, and the majority of Torrance County. Membership is mainly made up of the local conservation districts, FSA County committee members, FSA CED, and local NRCS personnel. Other government agencies are invited and welcome to participate.

The 2004 LWG meeting, held January 6, 2004, reviewed the last years recommendations on establishing LWG working procedures, national and local resource priorities, fund distribution, cost document and eligible practices, cost share rates, priority setting, batching periods, and ranking criteria. Minor revisions were made.

Priority Resource Concerns

The resource concerns were reviewed on January 6, 2004 and it was decided that there were no needed changes. The concerns as listed below have not changed over the past 5-6years.

  • Watershed Health
  • Brush/Forest Management
  • Water Conservation
  • Water Availability/ Sustainability/Quality
  • Noxious Weed Management
  • Information/Education (to support above concerns)

EQIP can financially assist in conservation practices that benefit watershed  health both on irrigated cropland and range/woodlands.

Funding Considerations

The following was accepted to distribute funds based on resource concerns:

  • Irrigated Cropland-45%
  • Rangeland-45%
  • Woodland-5%
  • AFO/CAFO-5%

These percentages are established as a “general rule” and not hard lines. Funds will be moved between these priorities based on number of applications in each category and the integrity of applications addressing the resource concerns. The ranking criteria will establish order of funding and degree of environmental benefits.

Cost Document

After review of the Torrance County component cost list by the Estancia Field Office, Santa Fe Field Office, Mountainair Field Office, and Local Work Group all component items have been accepted with the exception of those that have been modified on the 2004 component list.

Cost share rates for those applicants who self-certify they meet the Beginning Farmer (BF)/Beginning Rancher (BR) criteria will be fifteen percent higher than the cost share rate established for non-BF/BR applicants for each practice within the Field Office/LWG area. Those who self certify as Limited Resource Farmers will receive 90 percent cost share on all conservation practices.

The Torrance County component cost list was sent to the designated Area Conservationist for review and approval on January 9, 2004.

Eligible Practices

All practices were determined eligible by the LWG. A $50 K cap limitation will be set on all practices. The purpose for this is not to allow a single landowner to use all cost share funds if he or she ranks high, leaving other landowners and resource concerns not addressed. Setting a cap will ensure the best distribution of funds to a variety of resource concerns.

Cost Share Rates and Incentive Payments

The LWG recommended all practices be cost shared at a 50% rate, except for the following, which are identified as high priority practices, are to be at a cost share rate of 75%:

  • Brush Mgt (314)
  • Range Planting (550)
  • Forest Stand Improvement (666)
  • Irrigation System Trickle (441)
  • Diversion (362)
  • Pest Management (595A)
  • Grade Stabilization Structure (410)
  • Critical Area Planting (342)
  • Windbreak/Shelterbelt (380)

The purpose for the increase in cost share rate to 75% for Brush Mgt. and Forest Stand Improvement is that it was identified as on of the primary resource concerns in the upper reaches of the Estancia Closed Underground Water Basin. This practice is a high cost item for private landowners with benefits that improve animal and plan diversity, forest and woodland health, reduce erosion, and decrease fire hazard.

The purpose for the increase of Diversion, Grade Stabilization Structure, Range Planting, and Critical Area Planting to 75% is for the main reason of erosion control. These practices serve as a long-term erosion control measures. Currently, many landowners see the need for erosion structures but are reluctant to install them because the lack the equipment and the cost of hiring or renting does not match our cost document. We have submitted a revised cost for this component and believe that increasing the cost share rate would encourage more people to put in erosion control structures. The Range Planting and Critical Area planting fall along the same lines of erosion control. Our area still has many old bean fields that are still eroding. The Cost of the seed was decreased and a request to increase items that help to establish seeding was requested. The LWG felt that seeding critical range areas would be a long lasting conservation practice whose benefits would be long lived.

The LWG also determined that irrigation system trickle cost share be increased due to the excellent use of water on critical items that may improve additional conservation of soil and water my helping to establish windbreaks and wildlife habitats. Trickle irrigation systems and windbreak/shelterbelts should be cost shared at 75% to encourage the application of windbreaks and wildlife habitat plantings. The Estancia service area is also known for high wind periods and windbreaks is a practice needing promotion.  Pest Management should be 75% due to the Class A and B weeds that are located in our area. This is a high priority concern that needs the additional cost share to motivate landowners to spray weeds. The weeds may exceed the cost to control them. If they are not handled as soon as possible their rates will increase exponentially if not handled at that time of planning.

Ranking Criteria

Ranking criteria worksheets for irrigated cropland and grazing lands have been reviewed and changed to meet the needs of the priority resource concerns identified for each land use type. An additional 10 points were added to Pest Management on both irrigated cropland and grazed land ranking sheets. The intent of this was to give those addressing the concern of Noxious Weeds more points. Previous ranking did not allow for those with this concern to be approved for funding.

Under the irrigated cropland, Section 2A identified as Surface Water Pollutants, this section has been deleted. The reason is this section identifies surface water pollutants with live bodies of water, which does not apply to our area since no live bodies of water are located within the Estancia Closed Basin agricultural area. The average depth to ground water, in the majority of the irrigated agriculture area ranges between 100 to 200 feet in mostly loamy soil, irrigated agricultural area ranges between 100 to 200 feet in mostly loamy soil, which does lend itself for any leaching readily to the ground water table. There are concerns however with direct deposition of fertilizer and pesticides from well back flow, but this is addressed already in our proposed ranking under Section 2b and 3.

All other ranking sheets were accepted with no changes by the Local Work Group.

Timelines and Evaluation Periods

The LWG decided that tentative time frames were needed for upcoming batching periods. The reason for this is so that if a person was a approved the landowner could install practice(s) to meet planting and livestock timelines. The following batching periods were requested:

The above are the official batching periods for FY 2004. Applications will still be accepted throughout the year, but those individuals wanting assistance for this program year will need to get their application in before the last day or they will have to wait for the following program year.

< Back to EQIP County Documents