NRCS Grant County

Local Work Group

MEETING MINUTES

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

OR Dept. Forestry, Conference Room

1:00pm-3:00pm

Attending:

Aaron Roth - NRCSMatt Wenick –Grant Weed Control

Jason Kehrberg – Grant SWCDSue Greer - OWEB

Steve Ussery –Monument SWCDTrent Luschen – Farm Service Agency

Pat Holliday – Grant SWCDTony Malmberg –Freshwater Trust

Amy Charette- CTWSRMT Anderson - Landowner

Jack Southworth - LandownerKirk Ausland – OR Dept. Forestry

Zola Ryan - NRCSTereasa Perkins - NRCS

Vic Schuck – LandownerRoje Gootee – Landowner – Rush Creek Ranch

Justin Primus – ODFWChast Koenig – WyEast RC&D

Elaine Eisenbraun – NF Watershed Council

PURPOSE OF THE DISCUSSION

Provide a forum for NRCS to work collaboratively with our partners so we can develop a plan that strategically utilizes limited resources in a way that benefits all of us.

OBJECTIVES

Provide an update on the status of 2013 funding priorities, identify priorities for 2014 funding pools, and identify any emerging natural resources problems or opportunities.

OPENING - Aaron

Zola stated the goal of today’s meeting will be to summarize last year’s meeting and 2013 funding pools. The group will also discuss potential 2014 projects, identify any emerging natural resource issues, and rank projects.

INTRODUCTIONS - Zola

Each person introduced themselves and stated something or somewhere they always wanted to go or do.

HISPANIC/WOMEN’S FARMER RANCHER CLAIMS PROCESS INFORMATION – FSA- Trent Luschen

Trent reported Hispanic and women farmers and ranchers who believe they have faced discriminatory practices in the past from the USDA have until March 25th to file a claim. Trent stated he will be available after the meeting to answer any questions. Informational handouts were passes around the room and made available.

PROGRESS REPORT - Aaron

Aaron reported the Local Work Group first met in 2010. The group over the last few meetings has reviewed the County resource concerns and prioritized the following concerns:

  • Invasive Species -Juniper, Medusahead, Toadflax, White top, Leafy spurge
  • Forest Health – Prioritize thinning where private lands meet Malheur Forest. Priority area was the Seneca/Canyon Creek area.
  • Proper Grazing Use – increase awareness of problem, tours & workshops to provide education, cost-share assistance
  • Water quality and quantity – riparian vegetation management, off-stream watering facilities, irrigation

2012 programs included the following:

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)

  • Mule Deer Winter Habitat – 17 contracts totaling $227,000
  • Organic EQIP Initiative – 2 contracts
  • Seasonal High Tunnel Initiative – 3 contracts

Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP)

  • AG – 13 contracts
  • Private Forest – 7 contracts
  • Total: $359,700

2013 program summary:

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)

  • Mule Deer Winter Habitat (Juniper cutting) – 36 applications –currently funding of $265,000 to cut 2,177 acres
  • Mule Deer Winter Habitat (Aspen restoration) – 12 applications – currently funding of $35,000 to improve 22.6 acres
  • JDU Basin Forestry Thinning – 6 applications – currently funding of $48,000 to treat 127.5 acres
  • Rudio Creek CCPI – 2 applications
  • Seasonal High Tunnel – 1 application

Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP)

  • Currently on hold, 2013 sign up unknown

IDEAS FOR NEW PROJECTS

Aaron stated NRCS has several new focus ideas proposed for potential projects to be implemented in 2014. The ideas include:

  1. Rangeland Soil Health Strategy – Invasive Species
  2. Use new techniques to rehabilitate abandoned dryland farm fields. In the 1940’s Grant County reported approximately 15,000 acres of small grain hay harvested acres. Less than 1,000 in 2007
  3. May be able to tie into National Soil Health Initiative
  4. Potential to improve production on rangeland
  5. Reduce invasive species
  6. May help with deer/elk damage on hay fields
  7. Annual Grasses in Upper John Day Valley – Invasive Species
  8. Treat medusahead and ventanata invaded rangeland
  9. Reseed to perennial bunch grasses
  10. Increase forage production
  11. May help with deer/elk damage on hay fields
  12. Yellow Starthistle/Mediterranean Sage/Perennial Pepperweed/Whitetop – Invasive Species
  13. Containment of Up and Coming Weeds – Present in scattered locations throughout the county
  14. Could address issues before infestation becomes large
  15. Juniper: New Strategy – Invasive Species
  16. Lower Cost Treatment
  17. Burning
  18. Herbicide
  19. Follow up treatment for old projects
  20. Juniper: Same Focus more acres
  21. Proper Grazing Use – Proper Grazing
  22. Education – Workshops including Recovery Based Grazing to educate landowners
  23. Grazing Plans
  24. Infrastructure: Cross fencing, stockwater, access roads/trails
  25. Water Quality/ Quantity
  26. Address potential changes to ODA’s Ag Water Quality Manamgent
  27. Riparian vegetation planting
  28. Ecoli reductions on the Upper John Day River

Participants offered the following comments:

  • Need strategic approach to juniper removal. Opposed to doing follow up work in areas previously treated.
  • Prescribed burning is an effective tool. Important to include cost-share assistance to lease ground to provide rest for land being treated.
  • Prioritize juniper removal funding in specific areas to achieve greater impact
  • Invasive species occur because of ecological events over period of time. Design and change management practices to address sequential events.
  • Juniper removal important to continue. Allow other practices such as stockwater developments as follow up.

Zola asked participants to identify their resource concerns and potential projects. She then wrote them on flip charts taped to the wall, which included NRCS proposed project ideas. The following concerns were recorded on the flip charts.

  • Invasive Species
  • Abandoned farm fields
  • Medusahead, Ventanata
  • New weed containment – White top, Med sage
  • Low cost treatment of juniper
  • Expanding existing program of cutting in Mule Deer Initiative Area
  • Forest Health
  • Middle Fork Family Forest Collaborative
  • OR Dept. Forestry projects
  • Proper Use Grazing
  • Proper grazing education
  • Use of grazing plans
  • Infrastructure improvements
  • Range Inventory
  • Water Quality/Quantity
  • Prioritize projects that address Ag Water Quality Management Plan priorities
  • Improve riparian vegetation
  • Address high concentration of e-coli
  • Emerging Issues
  • Provide financial assistance for education workshops
  • Elk damage on private land

Rojee Gootee stated she represented the Middle Fork Family Collaborative Group, made up of private forest land owners. They are a collaborative group formed to address forest issues, including wildfire risk and prevention, on a landscape level. The group believes that by working together it will be more appealing for contractors to accomplish forest health activities. The group is currently focusing on the Ritter area. If the idea is successful it may expand to the entire Middle Fork Basin. She would like to see if there is a way to involve NRCS as many of the group members are currently working with NRCS.

Jack Southworth stated he would like to see an adaptive management workshop. He attended a workshop on using a Grazing Response Index (GRI) based on the recovery of plants. Feels we are reacting instead of being proactive. Landowners could use assistance in improving grazing skills and monitoring that could lead to increasing stock density.

Kirk Ausland stressed the importance of forest health issues throughout the entire county. OR Department of Forestry is applying for grants to assist landowners with forest health issues including a new target area focusing on the Austin Junction/Prairie City area.

M.T. Anderson stated he felt it was important to be proactive with juniper control. He is disappointed there is no longer financial assistance available through EQIP for spring developments. It is important to capture water resources increased as a result of juniper removal.

PRIORITIZATION OF PROJECTS

Participants were each asked to state their number one resource concern/project listed on the flip charts.

Each proposed project was assigned a number to be used in the project priority ranking.

  1. Forest Health - Middle Fork Family Forest Collaborative
  2. Forest Health – OR Dept. Forestry Grants
  3. Water Quality/Quantity – Ecoli
  4. Water Quality/Quantity – Riparian Vegetation
  5. Invasive Species – Abandoned farm fields
  6. Invasive Species – Medusahead/ventenata
  7. Invasive Species – New weed containment
  8. Invasive Species – Low cost juniper treatment
  9. Invasive Species – Expand existing program of juniper removal in Mule Deer Initiative Are
  10. Proper Use Grazing – Proper grazing education
  11. Proper Use Grazing – Grazing Plans

A blank decision matrix was handed out to all participants. Each person was asked to rank the eleven proposed projects regardless of recourse concern with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest.Each project was ranked on 5 levels. 1) Project importance 2) Ability to address the issue in the next 3-5 years 3) Does the project have willing participants 4) Are there willing partners 5) How ready is the project to be implemented (Thiscategory was weighted by a factor of 2). Zola inputted each participants concern’s and came up with the following overall scores.

Resource Concern / Project / Overall Score
Invasive Species / Low Cost Juniper / 30.71
Invasive Species / New Weed Containment / 30.60
Invasive Species / Medusahead/ventenata / 28.64
Proper Grazing Use / Proper Grazing Education / 27.81
Invasive Species / Expand Mule Deer – Juniper / 27.57
Proper Use Grazing / Grazing Plans / 24.09
Forest Health / ODF Grants / 23.67
Invasive Species / Abandoned farm fields / 23.34
Water Quality/Quantity / Riparian vegetation / 22.33
Forest Health / Middle Fork Family Forest / 21.45
Water Quality/Quantity / e-coli / 17.76

ADJOURN

The meeting was adjourned at 3:45pm.