2005 Environmental Quality Incentive
Program
Local Work Group Summary for Albuquerque
Introduction:
The Albuquerque Field office is located at 6200 Jefferson NE, Room 125, in
Albuquerque, New Mexico. More than 1,260,000 acres make up the land area that
is included within the field office boundaries, which is split between two Soil
& Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs).
Coronado SWCD is in southern Sandoval County and includes land owned by five
Pueblos; Cochiti, Santo Domingo, San Felipe, Santa Ana, and Sandia, interspaced
with a number of small agricultural communities; Peña Blanca, Algodones,
Placitas, and Bernalillo. The Ciudad SWCD is much more urbanized and serves
land in the Albuquerque metropolitan area, Rio Rancho and the developing West
Mesa, as well as the West face of the Sandia mountains.
The field office works with close to 300 cooperators that irrigate
approximately 23,000 acres of cropland, hayland, and orchards. A number of
small mountain communities use acequia systems to water the crops, while the
balance of the irrigated acreage is serviced by the Middle Rio Grande
Conservancy District, which diverts river water for agricultural uses. Average
farm size is 5-10 acres, with the majority of water users irrigating 1-2 acre
pastures. Another 50 to 75 cooperators make up the ranching industry in the
area, which varies from less than a section of land and very small herd sizes,
to a few large ranches that have not yet been subdivided or developed.
Local Work Group:
A Local Work Group (LWG) meeting was held November 8, 2004, at the USDA
building at 6200 Jefferson, NE, Albuquerque. Historically, both Districts have
worked together to convene the meeting as the natural resource concerns are very
similar and USDA programs are administered by the same field office. This year,
Ciudad SWCD served as host for the meeting. Attached are the letter of
invitation, the list of invitees, and the minutes of the meeting. Prior
meetings were held in April and December, 2002, March 13, 2003 for the ’03
program year, and December 10, 2003 for the ’04 program year.
Priority Resource Concerns:
The LWG reviewed resource concerns that were identified at prior meetings.
Following is a list of those concerns, in order of priority.
- Water Quantity – Improved Irrigation Efficiency
- Water Quality – Sediment and Nutrient/Pest Management
- Grazing Lands Improvement
- Riparian/Bosque Vegetation Management
- Noxious/Invasive Weed Control
- Wildlife Habitat Improvement
Other issues that were raised at the LWG meeting included gopher problems on
farm fields, education requirements for all resource concerns, and watershed
health necessitating that all systems and programs transcend both political and
physical boundaries. Outreach to Pueblos will again be necessary to ensure that
knowledge and opportunity are afforded to Native American farmers and ranchers.
Funding Considerations:
The goal is to distribute available funds at the following percentages on
non-tribal land:
68% Irrigated Cropland
25% Rangeland
7% Animal Feed Operations (If no applications, add to Rangeland)
On tribal land, in the absence of any large feeding operations, the split
will be 60% to cropland, 40% to rangeland. Flexibility will be needed based on
applications received.
Tribal applications will not compete separately, however, a certain
percentage of funds (a minimum) will be earmarked for tribal lands. That
percentage will be determined by the NRCS 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:
The cost docket has been reviewed and compared with neighboring field
offices. Recommended changes for Bernalillo County have been submitted for
approval.
Please refer to the links for the cost docket and eligible practices to view
final approved practices, cost share rates and component costs.
Eligible Practices:
The same practices will be used this year as was used in 2004, please see
attached list. It is understood that the state has approved pumping plants for
irrigation wells that are converting from surface (flood) to sprinkler systems.
Given the small units in the Albuquerque Field Office, it is anticipated that
drip systems might also fall under this applicable use of the practice and would
recommend cost-sharing pumping plants for wells converting from flood to drip
irrigation. The only other recommended changes to the practice list applies to
the management incentive payments discussed below.
Please refer to the links for the cost docket and eligible practices to view
final approved practices, cost share rates and component costs.
Cost Share Rates, Incentive Payments and Cap:
Cost share rates for practices that address priority resource concerns are
again recommended to be set at 75%, as economic justification still exists
today. The smaller than average parcels that are being farmed and ranched in
this field office typically do not generate the incomes that allow for
conservation improvements to the land. Though several are eligible for the
Limited Resource Producer designation, many fall into the $40,000 to $50,000
household income range that still makes it hard to pay more than 25% of a
$10,000 or $12,000 pipeline project (for example). It was also noted by the
Local Work Group that the field office funded all applications received in 2004
and had to return unobligated funds to the state. With increased cost-share
rates, more applicants might apply and the funds would be obligated in the area
intended by the state’s allocation formula.
Please refer to the links for the cost docket and eligible practices to view
final approved practices, cost share rates and component costs.
Ranking Criteria:
The ranking criteria used in 2004 will again be used this program year, with
only minor changes to points awarded to conservation practices based on the
identified priority concerns. In the event that ties exist (same total points),
then the tie breaker would be the application with the greatest number of
practices identified in section 3 for irrigated cropland, and section 2 for
rangeland.
Please refer to the links for ranking criteria to view final approved
criteria.
Timelines, Evaluation Periods:
All applications and any supporting documentation must be submitted by
January 28, 2005.
< Back to EQIP County Documents
| 
About Us
Back to Top