2004 Environmental Quality Incentive Program

Local Work Group Summary for Taos

Introduction:

Taos is located in north central New Mexico approximately two hours north of Santa Fe on Highway 68.  Taos is known for the famous Taos Pueblo, Taos Ski Area and rural living.  The major agricultural industry includes pasture and hayland production, seasonal livestock production and wildlife hunting.  Most of the irrigation water for irrigation is diverted directly from perennial streams.  Surface waters include the Red River, Rio Hondo, Costilla, Rio del Pueblo and others.

Present supplies of livestock water west of the Rio Grande are inadequate for the proper use of range resources.  Surface supplies are virtually non-existent.  Groundwater supplies are limited and when found are extremely expensive to develop.

Local Work Group: 

The Taos Soil and Water Conservation District invited state and federal agencies from within the Taos SWCD boundaries to attend the Local Work Group Meeting.  The meeting was held on December 18, 2003 at the Taos SWCD conference room at 10:00 am.  Attendees were Ray Torres (Taos County Agricultural Extension Service Agent); Edward Flores and his staff (Taos County FSA); Maureen Johnson & Anthony Benson (both with the Taos SWCD): Charlotte Martinez (Taos SWCD Clerk): Norman Vigil (NRCS-NW Area Conservationist) and David Manzanares (NRCS- Acting DC).

Priority Resource Concerns: 

The Taos County Local Work Group identified the counties resource concerns in the following order:

1st Priority:       

• Water Conservation
• Irrigation
• Rangeland
• Wetlands
• Impaired Streams
• Noxious Weeds
• Severe Drought

2nd Priority:      

• Water Quality
• Impaired Streams
• District (Taos SWCD) Available

3rd Priority:      

• Soil Erosion
• Urbanization
• Lack of Land Use (Agricultural land not being used)

4th Priority:      

• Woodlands
• Large P-J communities infested with bark beetle
• Fire Prevention
• Urban Interface
• Noxious Weed Invasion
• Wildlife (concern with high Elk numbers)

Funding Considerations: 

The Taos LWG discussed the funding considerations and it was a consensus that the funds be distributed as follows:

• Rangeland:                                 30%
• Water Conservation:                   30%
• Mixture of Range & Water:           30%
• Woodlands:                                10%

If New Mexico receives or establishes a Tribal assignment of funds, the assignment will be provided to the Field Office based on the percent of Tribal Lands in the Field Office.

The group also discussed and noted that funding should only be allocated to the private landowner’s land within the state of New Mexico.  If the landowner has adjacent land in Colorado, the funding will be eligible to the land in New Mexico only. 

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

The Taos LWG reviewed the cost docket and it was a consensus to make some changes, however David Manzanares advised the LWG that we would seek assistance from the Espanola NRCS Field Office in addressing this part of the proposal.  David Manzanares seeked the advice of Edward Romero (DC in Espanola) and David will use Edwards cost docket since he already has the documentation available.  David will recommend two additional changes to the price of High Cost Seed and Low Cost Seed.  He will provide the needed documentation to justify the cost changes.  

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

Practices listed on the New Mexico website in FOTG IV are eligible for cost share assistance.  The LWG reviewed the list of practices and it was the consensus that the list remains the same.  See attachment.

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

The LWG recommended keeping last year’s cost-share rates at a minimum of 35% and maximum of 75%.  The LWG recommended that the practices with a cost share of 50% or better be practices are most commonly used in the county and because of the high cost of fuel, labor and employment insurance.  The LWG consensus was the practices with 50% or higher would reduce soil erosion and improve water quantity/quality especially during these years of severe drought.

The LWG discussed the issue of Incentive payments and it was the consensus of the work group not to recommend incentive payments for 2004.

Ranking Criteria:  The LWG discussed this item and the consensus of the group was as follows:  

     Cropland:

• Water Quantity:                                    30% (points)
• Water Quality:                                      20% (points)
• Selected Conservation Practices:            40% (points)
• Other Considerations:                            10% (points)

     Grazing Lands:

• Plants:                                                  30% (points)
• Conservation Practices:                          50% (points)
• Other Considerations:                             20% (points)

     Animal Feeding Operations:

• Not Applicable within Taos County.

Timelines, Evaluation Periods:  

Please refer to the EQIP Application Information link.

< Back to EQIP County Documents