Kansas Technical Committee Minutes - February 2009

Kansas Technical Committee (KTC)
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
10:30 a.m.

Troy J. Munsch, Assistant State Conservationist for Programs, called the meeting to order and introduced Eric B. Banks, State Conservationist (STC). Eric made some brief opening remarks after which all attendees introduced themselves and stated who they represented. Troy introduced Rod Winkler, Farm Service Agency (FSA), to discuss some Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) related items.

Conservation Reserve Program

Rod Winkler reviewed the following recommendation for extending the prescribed burning window for the western part of the state.

Current Kansas Statewide Policy:

• Soils with an “I” value of 86 or greater (these are sandy soils) must be burned during the period April 1 through April 30.
• All other soils must be burned from February 1 through April 15.
• Use Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Standard and Specifications No. 338.

Recommendation:
Modify the currently burning window on CRP to read as follows:

• Soils with an “I” value of 86 or greater (these are sandy soils) have an allowable burning period of April 1 through April 30.
• All other soils in the western part of the state from Smith to Barber Counties and all counties west thereof have an allowable burning window from February 1 through April 30.
• All other soils in the counties east of the line described in the previous bullet have an allowable burning window from February 1 through April 15.

Justification:

• Increased time frame permits greater flexibility and improved conditions for safe burns.
• Burn school instructors recommended longer period to complete burns in western part of state.
• Typically this area is drier with a later native spring growth delaying burns to end of current window to prevent erosion.
• Majority of CRP lies in the western third of the state, where conditions on a daily basis do not meet the criteria for completing burns.
• Provides greater flexibility for participants and burn contractors to complete numerous CP25 burns in the west.
• Assist in keeping western wheat and smooth brome in check so warm-season grasses can persist.

Negatives:

• Impact on early nest.
• Fewer forbs in the cover.
• Slower cover re-growth during drought

KTC Recommendations Received:

Steve Sorenson, National Wildlife Federation, suggested that the western side of the state be divided as follows: allow the area north of Highway 96 the extended time period to burn through April 30 and leave the current dates for the area south of Highway 96. He felt that allowing the southern counties such as Barber County to burn at the end of April would be too late and this could have more of a negative impact on the wildlife.

Troy Schroeder, Kansas Rural Center, questioned whether it should be permissible to allow burning on CP25 practices that late because this could affect the forbs in this mix.

Steve Sorensen asked if the date could be extended on the front end to as early as January 1 instead of the later date in April. Perhaps this would broaden the time frame for participants who need extra time to burn.

Joe Kramer, Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP), commented that January 1 would be too early to start burning with hunting still occurring on Walk-in Hunting Areas (WIHA) acres. We do not want to make this more complicated for producers.

Dana Peterson, Kansas Association of Wheat Growers, said that they had received many comments on the burn dates for western Kansas. One comment was that the ground still had snow cover and/or still frozen the middle of April and they needed the extra time for the burn.

Jon Ungerer, Resource Conservationist, NRCS, indicated for soils with no I-factor, ground blowing is an issue, so the producers prefer to wait until the grass has started to grow and then burn. There is a better cover when the burn is later and this creates less ground blowing problems. The burn will probably not have a large impact if completed one time in ten years.

Matt Smith, KDWP, stated the issue that came up at the previous burn workshops were areas being burned before grass was established. Need to emphasize that the stand of grass must be established before doing any burning.

These recommendations will be submitted and reviewed with Jack Salava, Acting State Executive Director and State Committee, FSA, for a final determination.

Rod Winkler, FSA, reviewed National Notice CRP-631 reporting the following goals and accomplishments:

He also reviewed the 2008 Critical Feed Use Data as indicated below:

Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP)

Clint Evans, Resource Conservationist, NRCS, presented a PowerPoint presentation with an overview of the WHIP including suggestions from the February 3, 2009, subcommittee meeting. Clint also handed out a WHIP eligible practice list.

Documents on this page require Acrobat Reader.

WHIP Eligible Practice List (PDF; 28 KB)
WHIP Presentation (PDF; 61 KB)

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation: Add ranking points for rangeland that has been managed to prevent infestation of woody species with invasive potential.
STC Decision: After additional discussion with staff about the difficulty in determining previous management goals and the question regarding what additional documentation requirements would be necessary and what would be gained through expenditure of program dollars the STC made the decision not to assign points to rangeland fitting this situation. STC did not concur with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To strike the language that referred to state, federal, or county property in the assignment of points for applications adjacent to property with easements. This would allow credit for private entities holding conservation easements.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To add criteria ranking wetlands or shallow water developments of less than 10 acres as highest priority. To require an adequate buffer be established around all developed wetlands or shallow water areas.
STC Decision: STC concurred with these additions to the ranking criteria.

KTC Recommendation: To assign ranking criteria points to applications with wildlife priority as the primary concern.
STC Decision: The WHIP ranking tool only includes wildlife habitat resource concerns; therefore, applications should be wildlife based, therefore, these points would be claimed by all applicants, thereby negating any benefit to these points the STC decided not to include points for this question. STC did not concur with this recommendation.

Eligible Practice List

KTC Recommendation: To separate the cost of pond sealing and lining from the $3,500 payment rate cap for ponds.
STC Decision: The STC made the decision to continue to include pond sealing and lining in the $3,500 cap for ponds. STC did not concur with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To increase the contract cap from $10,000 to $20,000 per contract.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To remove all conservation practice components that include seeding of introduced grass species.
STC Decision: No practices were found to be planned to plant to introduced grass species, so it was decided planning needs should be left up to the planner to utilize whatever tools are available. The STC did not concur with this change.

KTC Recommendation: Add a mowing cost-share component to the Firebreak practice.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

WHIP Funding Decisions

KTC Recommendation: To designate 10 percent of the total funding for historically underserved participants.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)

Gaye Benfer, Resource Conservationist, NRCS, was introduced to discuss the EQIP. Gaye presented a PowerPoint presentation of the EQIP accompanied by a handout of ranking category eligible practice lists.

EQIP Eligible Practice List (PDF; 238 KB)
EQIP Presentation (PDF; 414 KB)

Cropland Health Ranking Category

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: To add the primary resource concern of “Water Quantity – Inefficient Water Use on Non-irrigated Land.”
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To add Northern Bobwhite Quail to the at-risk species list.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation: To include ranking criteria determining available soil moisture based on dominant soil type.
STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

Eligible Practices

KTC Recommendation: To add Conservation Crop Rotation, Tree/Shrub Site Preparation, and the Upland Wildlife Habitat Management practices of brood strips in wheat stubble and unharvested strips in hayland.
STC Decision: STC concurred with these recommendations.

Forestland Health Ranking Category

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: Add Plant Condition – Productivity, Health, and Vigor (Cropland), Soil Erosion – Streambank, and Water Quality – Excessive Suspended Sediment and Turbidity in Surface Water.
STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To add Arkansas River Shiner and Arkansas Darter to the at-risk species list.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To add Fish and Wildlife as a primary resource concern. Much discussion followed including the following primary points:

1. the WHIP cannot pay incentives;
2. if someone wishes to improve their land for the Topeka Shiner or other at-risk species, there is no avenue to accomplish this other than to have another primary resource concern;
3. wildlife management on grazing lands deserves to be a primary resource concern;
4. cannot accomplish wildlife management if already doing a good job of rangeland management; and
5. many landowners have primary interest of wildlife. These individuals should be able to qualify on their own.

STC Decision: STC did not concur with this recommendation. The interest from the wildlife groups to have wildlife as a primary concern was noted. However, the recommendation causes great concern that this would conflict with and jeopardize the WHIP in Kansas, including contribution agreements with our partners. The same species are targeted and the same structural/vegetative practices are available for the treatment of the habitat. WHIP is available for those participants who have already treated other resource concerns.

Additionally, due to the need for the development of specific assessment tools and required habitat threshold levels for targeted wildlife species, the designation of Fish and Wildlife -Threatened and Endangered Species, Declining Species, Species of Concern as a primary resource concern will not be implemented in Program Fiscal Year (FY) 2009.

At this time, I charge the Programs Staff, Resource Staff, and KTC members to work together to find a specific option for wildlife treatment in EQIP that will not affect the WHIP in Kansas. This shall be accomplished prior to the 2010 program year discussion.

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation: To include the Kansas Forest Service Forest Stewardship Potential data layer. This would eliminate the need for the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and receiving water body ranking criteria as these are built into the stewardship data.
STC Determination: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Eligible Practices

KTC Recommendation: To add Channel Bank Vegetation, Windbreak/Shelterbelt establishment, Riparian Forest Buffer, and Windbreak/Shelterbelt Renovation
STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

Grazing Lands Health Ranking Category

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: To remove Least Tern from at-risk species and add Topeka Shiner and Northern Bobwhite Quail.
STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: To add Fish and Wildlife as a primary resource concern.
STC Decision: See decision under the same recommendation in Forest Land Health Ranking Category.

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation: In at-risk species habitat, remove the reference to specific species and change it to “woody species with invasive potential.”
STC Decision: STC concurred with this change.

KTC Recommendation: To treat low levels of brush infestation and provide higher ranking points for low level infestations.
STC Decision: STC did not concur with this recommendation since a participant may receive payment through the WHIP for low level brush infestation. STC did concur with providing higher ranking points to medium level infestations as compared to high level infestations. Low level infestations will not receive points.

Eligible Practices

KTC Recommendation: Add a payment component for 90 percent grazing deferment
STC Decision: STC did not concur with the recommendation to add a payment for 90 percent deferment as more research is needed to determine that this practice would provide the desired benefits.

KTC Recommendation: To add the Upland Wildlife Habitat Management practices of burning only one in three years from a north south line from Washington County to Cowley County and all counties east thereof and unharvested strips in hayland.
STC Decision: STC concurred with the addition of the Upland Wildlife Habitat Management practices.

Livestock Waste Ranking Category

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: To add Topeka Shiner, Arkansas Darter, Neosho Mucket Mussel, and Neosho Madtom to at-risk species list.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Ranking Criteria

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed ranking criteria.

Eligible Practices

KTC Recommendation: To add the Upland Wildlife Habitat Management practices of brood strips on wheat stubble and unharvested strips on hayland.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Sedimentation Above Federal Reservoirs Ranking Category (New ranking category FY 2009)

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation:

• Primary
  • Soil Erosion – Streambank
  • Water Quality – Excessive Suspended Sediment and Turbidity in Surface Water
• Secondary
  • Fish and Wildlife – Threatened and Endangered Species, Declining Species, Species of Concern
    • Species designated – Topeka Shiner, Arkansas Darter, Neosho Mucket Mussel, Neosho Madtom, Bald Eagle, Spotted Skunk

STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Ranking Criteria

KTC recommendation:

• Location
  • Reservoir priority set by State of Kansas
  • Location
    • Must be located in a Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 8 or 11 that drains directly into a federal reservoir (include Little Blue River above Tuttle Creek Reservoir and Cottonwood River above John Redmond Reservoir and Marion Reservoir)
    • Kansas Source Water Assessment Area
    • Kansas Geological Survey (KGS) Sensitive Groundwater Area
    • At-Risk Species Area

STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Eligible Practices

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed eligible practice list.

Water Quality Ranking Category

Resource Concerns

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed resource concerns.

Ranking Criteria

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed ranking criteria.

Eligible Practices

KTC Recommendation: To add the Upland Wildlife Habitat Management practices of brood strips on wheat stubble and unharvested strips on hayland.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Water Quantity Ranking Category

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: To add the Neosho Madtom, Neosho Mucket Mussel, Topeka Shiner, and Arkansas Darter to the at-risk species list.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation: To change criteria to conversion to non-irrigated on 100 percent of the water right acres.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Eligible Practices

KTC Recommendation: A number of recommendations came from KTC members related to the practice payment rate for the practice Irrigation System, Microirrigation (conversion to subsurface drip irrigation)

• $800 per acre cap statewide
• $800 per acre cap in NRCS Areas 2 and 3 and practice not available in Area 1
• $500 per acre cap statewide
• $250 per acre cap statewide
• $40,000 cap per contract

STC Decision: STC decided to implement the $800 per acre cap statewide.

Water Quantity Quick Response Areas (QRAs) Ranking Category

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: To add Arkansas Darter to the at-risk species list. =
STC Decision: STC concurred with this recommendation.

Ranking Criteria

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed ranking criteria.

Eligible Practices

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed eligible practice list.

Beginning Farmer/Limited Resource Farmer/Socially Disadvantaged Farmer (BF/LRF/SDF) Ranking Categories (New ranking category FY 2009)

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: All resource concerns accepted by the STC at the October 2008 KTC meeting except wildlife will be primary. Fish and Wildlife will be secondary resource concern
STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation:

• If a Plant Condition concern:
  • Rest in planned grazing system
  • Invasive species control – percent infestation – rank lowest infestations first
  • At-risk species habitat area greater than five percent infestation eastern red cedar and/or osage orange tree species and plan will benefit lesser or greater prairie chicken
  • Brush treatment – rank lower infestations of brush first
• • If a Water Quality concern:
  • Location
    • TMDL
    • Kansas Source Water Assessment Areas
    • KGS Sensitive Groundwater Areas
    • Within 180 feet of a receiving water body
    • Within 300 feet of a receiving water body
    • Nitrate leaching potential
    • Potential soil loss
    • At-risk species habitat area

STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: In at-risk species habitat, remove the reference to specific species and change it to “woody species with invasive potential.”
STC Decision: STC concurred with this change.

KTC Recommendation: To treat low levels of brush infestation and provide higher ranking points for low level infestations.
STC Decision: STC did not concur with this recommendation since a participant may receive payment through the WHIP for low level brush infestation. STC did concur with providing higher ranking points to medium level infestations as compared to high level infestations. Low level infestations will not receive points.

Eligible Practices

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed eligible practice list.

Tribal Ranking Category (New ranking category FY 2009)

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation:

• Primary:
  • Plant Condition – Productivity, Health, Vigor (grazing land, pastureland, hayland)
  • Plant Condition – Noxious,Invasive Plants
  • Domestic Animals – Inadequate Stock Water
  • Water Quality – Excessive Nutrients and Organics in Groundwater o Water Quality – Excessive Nutrients and Organics in Surface Water
  • Water Quality – Harmful Levels of Pesticides in Groundwater
  • Water Quality – Harmful Levels of Pesticides in Surface Water
  • Water Quality – Excessive Suspended Sediment and Turbidity in Surface Water

STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation:

• If a Plant Condition concern:
  • Rest in planned grazing system
  • Invasive species control – percent infestation – rank lowest infestations first
  • At-risk species habitat area – greater than five percent infestation eastern red cedar and/or osage orange tree species and plan will benefit lesser or greater prairie chicken
  • Brush treatment - Rank lower infestations of brush first
• If a Water Quality concern:
  • Location
    • TMDL
    • Kansas Source Water Assessment Areas
    • KGS Sensitive Groundwater Areas
    • Within 180 feet of a receiving water body
    • Within 300 feet of a receiving water body
    • Nitrate leaching potential
    • Potential soil loss
    • At-risk species habitat area

STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

KTC Recommendation: In at-risk species habitat, remove the reference to specific species and change it to “woody species with invasive potential.”
STC Decision: STC concurred with this change.

KTC Recommendation: To treat low levels of brush infestation and provide higher ranking points for low level infestations.
STC Decision: STC did not concur with this recommendation since a participant may receive payment through the WHIP for low level brush infestation. STC did concur with providing higher ranking points to medium level infestations as compared to high level infestations. Low level infestations will not receive points.

Eligible Practices

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed eligible practice list.

Organic Ranking Category (New ranking category FY09)

Resource Concerns

KTC Recommendation: All resource concerns accepted by the STC at the October 2008 KTC meeting except wildlife will be primary. Fish and Wildlife will be secondary resource concerns
STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

Ranking Criteria

KTC Recommendation:

• Transitioning to an organic system certified by a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Organic Program accredited certification program
• Currently certified
• Location
  • TMDL area
  • Kansas Source Water Assessment area
  • KGS Sensitive Groundwater Areas
  • Within 180 feet of a receiving water body
  • Within 300 feet of a receiving water body

STC Decision: Concurred with this recommendation.

Eligible Practices

There were no additions, deletions, or other recommended modifications to the proposed eligible practice list.

Regular EQIP Allocation Distribution

The above table was recommended for initial funding distribution.
STC Decision: STC concurred with this.

Kansas Association of Wheat Growers

Dana Peterson, Producer Policy Specialist, Kansas Association of Wheat Growers, made a presentation on a Biomass Tool Kit project being put together (Attachment 5).

Biomass Tool Kit Update Presentation (PDF; 179 KB)

Susan Stover, Kansas Water Office, discussed an Agricultural Water Enhancement Program (AWEP) they are drafting along with a number of groundwater management districts.

Eric B. Banks, STC, thanked everyone for attending and for the positive discussion. Mr. Banks indicated he would be meeting with staff the morning of February 11, 2009, to make final decisions on the recommendations.

Attendees

• Gaye Benfer - NRCS
• Jon Ungerer - NRCS
• Clint Evans - NRCS
• Troy Munsch - NRCS
• Shawn Streker
• Thomas Wellington, II - Nicodemus Historical Society/Kansas Black Farmers Association
• Harold Blume - NRCS
• Jan Windscheffel - Netafim USA Precision Irrigation
• Susan Stover - Kansas Water Office
• Wayne Bossert - NW Kansas Groundwater Management District No. 4
• Rob Manes - The Nature Conservancy
• Joe Kramer - KDWP
• Matt Smith - KDWP
• Jeff Keating - Department of Army
• Stephanie Manes - Ranchland Trust of Kansas
• Mary Fund - Kansas Rural Center
• Lindsey Douglas - Kansas Department of Agriculture
• Rod Winkler - FSA
• Carla Wikoff - FSA
• Dana Peterson - Kansas Association of Wheat Growers
• Dennis Carlson - Kansas Forest Service
• Kyle Hoffman - Kansas Association of Conservation Districts
• Ron Brown - State Association of Kansas RC&Ds
• Sharon Falk - Big Bend Groundwater Management District No. 5
• Tim Stroda - Kansas Pork Association
• Tim Christian - Kansas Grasslands Coalition
• Doug Helmke - Kansas Rural Water Association
• Dean Krehbiel - NRCS
• David Kraft - NRCS
• Kerry Wedel - Kansas Department of Health and Environment
• Scott Carlson - State Conservation Commission
• Harold Klaege - Kansas Alliance for Wetlands and Streams
• Roger Wells - Quail Unlimited
• Ron Klataske - Audubon of Kansas
• Steve Sorensen - Kansas Wildlife Federation
• Troy Schroeder - Kansas Rural Center
• Barth Crouch - Playa Lakes Joint Venture
• Terry Conway - NRCS
• Jim Krueger - NRCS
• Brandon Houck - National Wild Turkey Federation

< Back to Kansas Technical Committee

Last Modified: 03/26/2009