  |
 |
 |
 |
Arizona Home
About Us
News
Programs
Technical Resources
Partnerships
Contact Us |
;
   |
|
|
Minutes of the Arizona CRM Executive Group Meeting (April 16, 2008, 8:30 – 11:30 AM, NRCS Phoenix State Office)Members in AttendanceDavid McKay, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service David McKay called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone to the CRM Executive Group Meeting. He discussed how important the CRM concept is in Arizona due to the mixed land ownerships and the overlapping responsibilities of the various regulatory agencies. Minutes from the last meeting of the Executive Group were approved as read. First item of discussion was the Proposed Watershed Field Group Boundary Change to keep the Gila River together in one group. Don Decker explained that since the last meeting of the Executive Group, it was proposed to change the alignment of the Field Groups (map handout provided) by shrinking the Santa Cruz Group to include just the Santa Cruz River, and add the rest of the Gila River to the Gila Group. It was also proposed to change the Salt Area to end at Granite Reef Dam. There will still be ten CRM Field Groups. Recommendation: Realign the Watershed Groups as described above. There was no further discussion on the subject. Decision: The Recommendation was approved by a unanimous vote. David McKay discussed how the Watershed approach led to the realignment of the CRM Field Groups in Arizona. This is a three-tier resource management style consisting of the Executive Group, State Task Group, and Field Groups. Steve Barker provided an explanation of the CRM organization. He handed out two examples of actual minutes from Field Group meetings. Field Groups were formerly based on County boundaries. They would meet maybe once a year to update goals and accomplishments. Landowners with mixed use land areas who wanted to participate in a coordinated plan were identified. Landowners did not have to wait for the next meeting to be included on the interagency business plan. Some of these groups are very active and functional and we do not want to eliminate those who are already working as interagency groups. How do we work with these groups while incorporating the watershed field groups? David McKay discussed coordination of all entities involved in a resource plan. We need to send a clear direction to producers as a coordinated group of agencies involved with the resources at the field level. This committee, state task leaders and field groups need to be coordinated. David McKay asked for volunteers from the agencies to coordinate this effort. Steven Williams, Arizona State Land Department, expressed concern in struggling with creating the structure for task groups. Lower Colorado and Gila have well structured teams already. We need direction on how to approach existing groups. David McKay said we should not try to replace or change the function of existing groups. We can offer assistance and direction where they need it. First we need to establish leads in the watersheds and then work on the mechanics of task groups. Mike Taylor of BLM would like to focus on the San Pedro/Upper Gila area as well as the Southeast area of the state to enhance their abilities. He is concerned about interagency coordination with all the forest land in the area. Tonya Norwood-Pearson from AACD reported that Khaki Roland, Chair of the Water Resource Group, Verde Valley NRCD, is working on discussions with the watershed groups to plan a Healthy Watershed Conference. The conference will serve to coordinate management on healthy watersheds. The NRCD’s are offering their help with any of the areas in the state. (Tonya had to leave to attend a legislative meeting.) Sal Palazzolo, Arizona Game and Fish and Debra Bills, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service volunteered to help with the Verde Field Group. Dave Stewart, USDA Forest Service says his agency is involved in many of the CRM Field Groups in Arizona, but he does not want to commit his people and resources at this time without consulting with them first. The Forest Service is vitally interested in all the areas that contain National Forest lands. He would need to determined roles for leadership in the various forests. Carol Erwin, DOI Bureau of Reclamation, would be uncomfortable with creating new organizations. Maybe we should start by identifying existing groups and their connections to the involved agencies. Her hope is that within ten years she would like to see State-sponsored watershed groups. Kristine Uhlman, U of A Extension, has a list of active groups and contact information on their NEMO website. Carol Erwin says that the BOR is already involved in San Pedro, Verde, Salt, and Little Colorado/ San Juan Field Groups so they would like to continue to participate in these areas. Linda Taunt of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality knows of a lot of groups that are already functioning quite well and does not want to create a state-run group. ADEQ is interested in Lower Colorado, Bill Williams and Salt areas. David McKay said NRCS will take the lead on the rest of the CRM areas. We will assess what is there now and what is needed for the future to make a more equitable effort state-wide. How can we be sure all agencies concerns are represented on the ground? Jim Christenson, U of A Extension wants to help back-up the organization and is willing to get faculty involved in the inactive CRM Field Group areas. David McKay posed the question how can we use our agency efforts to support concerns from the landowners at the landscape level? We need to be working with individual group meetings and coordinate it at the watershed level. Mike Taylor, BLM is not sure who to commit but has interest in the Lower Colorado River area below Imperial Dam. David McKay pointed out that NRCS has interest in every one of the watersheds in Arizona, but we cannot take the lead on all ten of them. We need to begin to communicate as a state task group before we can concentrate at the local level. Mike Taylor added that we need guidance. What do we need to focus on first - the areas that already have active groups or the inactive ones? Faye Krueger, Forest Service, feels we need to identify what groups are out there. What are the goals for the watersheds? What agencies are involved? Where are the gaps? Carol Erwin, BOR asked, what goals do we have that have not been addressed by the existing groups or could be enhanced? How can we make the connections between the various groups? Dave Stewart, Forest Service said we need to identify groups already out there and what they are doing before we can decide how we need to be involved. David McKay said we don’t want to go in and stir things up, but offer assistance where needed. We need to identify what we need to focus on as a group. We need to be able to apply conservation to improve and conserve our resources. Steve Barker, NRCS, stated that each lead agency needs to bring a report back from their area to the next meeting indicating what’s out there, what’s needed, and what direction we need to take. This will not be accomplished immediately so we need to be patient. Carol Erwin, BOR, reported that the Bureau is working on a Watershed Initiative to provide a limited amount of funding for watershed improvements. We need to determine where limited funding should be focused first. Where is the greatest need? David McKay: We would need to be able to contact an existing group in a short period of time to focus funds for projects. Carol Erwin: We need to develop a priority list for needed resources before funding becomes available. Mike Taylor: That’s why we need to identify what groups are already out there who are functioning and use them as linkage for funneling funds as they become available. David McKay: What can we do on the ground to get things moving? Mike Taylor: Maybe we should focus on existing groups and use them as an example for others. Don Decker, NRCS: We need help in areas with no organization. We could initiate a forum of all interested parties in the area to get things started. In areas that have on-going successful efforts, how do we integrate with them? Some are active in range management but not watershed management. Some are regulatory in nature. The Task Group needs some direct guidance. Sal Palazzolo: Incentives are good for getting programs started. What can we identify as incentives for bringing people together to discuss these issues? David McKay: Incentives can be 1) something you can get, or 2) something you can lose. It all goes back to what gets people excited about an issue. How can we use the Farm Bill for projects? Carol Erwin: Coordination must be done by watershed first because they may all be different. Then we can coordinate as a state. David McKay: What are the issues that can get people motivated to participate? Go back to the task leaders to identify where we need to focus resources and how we can coordinate agencies. We don’t want to regulate everything, just assist with concerns where we can. Don Decker: I can bring an example of a successful Willcox Playa watershed meeting from RC&D Coordinator, Donna Matthews, to the next Task Group meeting. At 9:50 am we took a break and David McKay and Faye Krueger had to leave to attend other meetings. 10:05 am: Steve Barker will chair the remainder of the meeting. Don Paulus, NRCS: Watershed Forum Discussion. Things to consider: Lead Watershed Agencies – Assignments/Responsibilities - Status on watershed, who is involved, who is working together, how are they linked? What is the next step? What are the needs? - Do we need a watershed forum? - Identify agency goals/ responsibilities and local goals/ responsibilities and how they align. - The CRM Memorandum of Understanding should cover agency goals. - Local work groups should enhance agency goals. Agency goals should work as a management framework. - What is the next step? Identify issues. Kristine Uhlman, U of A Extension Service: Kristine provided a demonstration of the Arizona NEMO (Non-point Education for Municipal Officials) website located at www.srnr.arizona.edu/nemo/index.php?page=crm. The goal of NEMO is to educate land use decision makers to make choices and take actions that will lessen nonpoint source pollution and protect natural resources. This will be accomplished by non-regulatory, research-based education using geospatial information and other advanced technologies for outreach, education, analysis and research. Kristine showed the newly created CRM link on the AZ NEMO webpage, but it is in draft mode and is not accessible at this time. (The Task Group helped to put this together since the last Executive Meeting). It also contains links with contact information for the AZ CRM agencies. Should CRM have its own AZ webpage? - Jim Christenson said we could host it through the U of A but not through NEMO. - Steve Barker: Other states have CRM websites with links from agency websites. - David McKay: NRCS Arizona could host the CRM site, but it would have to have the NRCS banner at the top of the page. - Sal Palazzolo: Who are we trying to reach with this webpage? Should we poll landowners to see where they would look for such a website? - Maybe we could have an AZCRM.org website similar to SharePoint where each agency could update their contact information. - U of A Extension has volunteered to host the site. - Kristine asked everyone to go to the AZ NEMO site, look at the AZ CRM link and send any comments or suggestions to her since the site went down during her demonstration. Round Robin BOR: A new watershed planning program will be coming next year. Limited funds will be available so we need to determine priorities. Water conservation funds will go to restoration projects. AZ Game & Fish: The new director, Larry Voyles, has come up from the field level and is very supportive of CRM. He feels it is very important for his people to attend ranch planning meetings. U.S.F.S.: New employees in the Southwestern Region, Region 3 include Corbin Newman, Regional Forester and Faye Krueger, Deputy Regional Forester. Some of the top priorities are: -Restoration of Fire Adapted Eco-systems -New Planning Regulations going out in the Federal Register next week -Forest Planning Revisions – will take 1-2 years -Travel Management Planning for vehicle use on all national forests ARS: American Water Resources Association Consortium database coming for water quality and quantity in watersheds to track conservation affects in the AZ hydrologic system. ADWR: Working on: -Drought Impact Studies for long and short term droughts -Interagency Drought Impact Coordination Groups’ -Water Protection Fund – Approximately $4 million in grants available for riparian efforts -Working with BOR on feasibility studies AZ State Parks: Working on Interagency Service Agreement with U of A. AZ State Land Dept.: Really impressed with the efforts of Alan McBee, NRCS District Conservationist, Kingman, AZ, for his work with the Lower Mohave CRM group in the Kingman area. The group “Conserving AZ Water and Land” is circulating a petition for signatures to place a State Trust Land Initiative on the 2008 ballot. The conflict between Forest Guardians and those with grazing allotments is on-going. The revamping of assessments for agricultural lease rental rates for State Trust land is on-going. There is a state hiring freeze which is making it hard to refill vacant positions. AACD: Remember, local NRCD’s are good contacts to work through to coordinate watershed planning. AACD is in the middle of legislative discussions on uranium…. BLM: BOR and BLM are working on the “Healthy Lands Initiative” regarding energy production impacts on the land. It is not just oil and gas production areas that need restoration. There is a need to allow non-energy states to receive funding. The Arizona Strip area has projects going on. San Pedro, and Upper Gila are looking at projects. Lower Colorado River below Imperial Dam is being evaluated for restoration projects. Yuma has a project that is on-going. U of A Extension Service: We will work something out for a contact list. We are concerned that we have moved from a county-based to watershed-based effort. We will probably need to revisit this in the future. We will need to educate all parties involved. ADEQ: We are working with the U of A to get contact information out to the public for the CRM Field Groups. We are looking for projects with the greatest need for funding. The Colorado River Clean Water project is one major project that we are focusing on. Bio-Solids is another. U.S. FWS: Working on: -Endangered Species Projects -Water Protection Fund Grants -Bald Eagle back on the Endangered Species list in Arizona -Working with U of A on Climate Change Workshop -Working to learn more about and work more closely with NRCS. NRCS: Passage of the new Farm Bill is still uncertain. The President will extend the current bill for another year if nothing new is passed by Congress. Arizona NRCS has gone from 3 Areas to 2 Areas as of March 3rd so basically things are back to what they were about 14 years ago. J.B. Martin is the Area Conservationist in Area 1 (Northern half of Arizona) and Ralph Ware is the Area Conservationist in Area 2 (Southern Arizona). The Conservation Security Program (CSP) sign-ups start Friday, 4/18/08. Agua Fria Watershed is the only eligible area in Arizona. The program is only available on private and tribal lands. Outreach to tribal participants: a letter was recently sent by EPA to the tribes seeking participants. Topics for the Next Executive Group Meeting: -Watershed CRM reports from lead agencies -What are the next steps for the Executive Group? -What should be done about the CRM Website? -Report on charges to the task groups Next Meeting: October 21, 2008, 8:30 AM, NRCS State Office, 3rd Floor Conference Room Adjourned: 11:30 AM |
|
Back to Top