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 Socorro

Introduction:

The Socorro Field Office serves the Socorro Soil and Water Conservation District which is located close to the geographic middle of New Mexico.  The great majority of the irrigated land lies within the floodplain of the Rio Grande. Virtually all of this land is surface irrigated from MRGCD canals and ditches. One legally recognized acequia is located on the East side of the Rio Grande and South of US 60. All of its lands are also surface irrigated from a main ditch which is owned and maintained by the respective acequia.  There are several vineyards located outside of the floodplain which are drip irrigated.

Approximately 75% of the irrigated land is considered hayland.  Irrigated pasture, chili, oats and corn are some of the other crops which are grown on the irrigated lands. All of the irrigated land is in the “SD” MLRA  The Socorro FO has over 1 million acres of native grazing lands.  Land ownership is characterized by intermingled deeded, state and federal lands.  All of the grazing lands lie within the SD, WP or CP MLRA’s.

Local Work Group

Membership of the Local Work Group (LWG) consists of local officials of the following entities:     

  • Bureau of Land Management
  • Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District
  • NM State Land Office
  • Socorro County Commission
  • Socorro Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD)Board
  • Socorro County Ag Extension Service
  • Socorro County FSA Committee
  • Socorro SWCD District Program Manager
  • NM Game and Fish Dept
  • NM Environment Department
  • Bosque Del Apache National Wildlife Refuge
  • Natural Resources Conservation Service

 Other Entities include:

  • US Fish and Wildlife Service
  • NM Department of Agriculture Field Representative

District Conservationists from adjoining field offices are also invited to the local meetings in order to facilitate coordination of ranking criteria and cost-share rates etc.. 

The LWG meeting was held on January 17, 2004 in order discuss and develop the 2004 EQIP program. 

Priority Resource Concerns

National Priorities were identified and discussed at the LWG meeting. The LWG agreed that these were all priorities that would be addressed with the implementation of this years program.  Local priorities and concerns to be addressed were identified as:

-Water conservation on irrigated cropland and rangeland.                                                                                       -Soil erosion on rangeland.                                                                                                                               -Water quality on rangeland, irrigated cropland, and groundwater related to animal feeding operations.

Funding Considerations

 The LWG divided the funding as follows:

  • AFO’s – actual amount allocated to Socorro FO for AFO’s from statewide formula will be used for funding applications from AFO’s.
  • Funds received from rangeland and irrigated cropland will be added together and then split between  the two land uses with approximately 67% going to irrigated cropland and 33% going to rangeland.
  • These proportions may vary depending  on the actual amount of money needed to fully fund the highest ranking grazing land or water resources contracts.

Cost Docket - Please refer to the Cost Docket link for specific information.  

Eligible Practices - Please refer to the Eligible Practices link for specific information.

All practices not pertaining to Ag Waste Structures are eligible. For AFO contracts, only  “Waste Treatment Lagoons” – 359,  “Pond Sealing or Lining – Flexible Membrane” and related components for each practice are eligible for cost share. 

Cost Share Rate and Incentive Payments - Please refer to the link for specific information.

All eligible practices will be cost-shared at 50%. No incentive payments are eligible.  This rate and decision not to make incentive payments was recommended by a consensus of the local work group.  A $50,000 limit was recommended  for each respective practice for each contract.

Ranking Criteria - Please refer to the Ranking Criteria links for specific information.   

The  LWG recommends that the ranking criteria worksheet provided for  2004 will be used for Grazing Lands. The concerns and conservation practices and points  identified under conservation practices in the Grazing Lands Ranking Criteria  will reflect what was shown in the 2003 ranking criteria.  It also recommends that the 2004 ranking criteria worksheet  for Irrigated Cropland be used. However it recommends that section A under “Water Quality” be changed to reflect what was used last year concerning the presence of field drains.  This would more accurately reflect local conditions. The practices and points identified under section 3, “Selected Conservation Practices” will also reflect what was shown in the 2003 ranking criteria worksheet. The LWG is proposing to change the ranking criteria for AFO’s slightly in order to reflect local conditions. Section E under  “Manure Utilization” will be changed to show “Evaporative System”. Applicants will be awarded points for either A-D or just E, but not both. Recommended points for each section for each respective Ranking Criteria Worksheet is shown on each respective worksheet.  The proposed ranking criteria worksheets are attached.

The following criteria will be used to break ties which may occur when ranking applicants for each respective resource concern.

  1. Irrigated Cropland
  • highest change in efficiency
  • distance to ground water
  • distance to surface water
  1. Grazing Land
  • percent change in trend in down to upward trend of contracted area.                                   biggest upward change in similiarity index of contracted area.                                             highest percent of deeded land compared to state and federal land in contracted area.
  1. Animal Feeding Operations
  • depth to ground water
  • exact distance to surface water

Timelines, Evaluation Periods: 

Please refer to the EQIP Application Information link.

< Back to EQIP County Documents