|
| |
FY08 EQIP/GSWC - Local Issues
Priorities for EQIP/GSWC funding are established locally, based on locally identified
natural resource needs consistent with state and national priorities. Local
Work Groups convened by local Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs)
provide advice to NRCS about natural resource issues and priorities within their
counties. EQIP applications are evaluated based on these county priorities and
are then prioritized for funding.
Applications that best address local issues are prioritized for funding.
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Is the property located within the Upper Willamette 8 digit HUC?
(17090003) 40 |
40 |
| 2 |
Is Nutrient and Organic Wastes a potential concern? 50 |
50 |
| 3 |
Is Water Management, relating to Irrigated land, a potential concern? 40 |
40 |
| 4 |
Is Soil Quality, on Cropland, a potential concern? 40 |
40 |
| 5 |
Will invasive weeds be managed in order to benefit wildlife habitat? |
30 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Will the practice limit or prevent the potential of nutrients and
pesticide leaching into ground water or surface water? Will the
treatment result in a irrigation score index rating of 50 or greater? Is
the treatment a part of a multi agency project that will conserve
irrigation water? Will the treatment result in a .5 increase in the Soil
Conditioning Index (SCI) rating? Will the treatment result in the
documentation and management of applied irrigation water, nutrients and
pesticides? |
70 |
| 2 |
Will the practice limit or prevent the potential of nutrients and
pesticide leaching into ground water or surface water? |
50 |
| 3 |
Is the treatment a part of a multi agency project that will conserve
irrigation water? |
35 |
| 4 |
Will the treatment result in a .5 increase in the Soil Conditioning
Index (SCI) rating? |
25 |
| 5 |
Will the treatment result in the documentation and management of applied
irrigation water, nutrients and pesticides? |
15 |
| 6 |
Have nutrients been applied according to a soil test in the last 3
years? |
5 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Will the treatment result in a dedicated in-stream water right? Will the
treatment result in an overall water savings of greater than 150 acre
feet per season that will indirectly provide water back in the Deschutes
River? Will the treatment result in a irrigation score index rating of
50 or greater? Is the treatment a part of a multi agency project that
will conserve irrigation water? Will the treatment result in the
management of livestock and livestock waste? Will the treatment result
in the documentation and management of applied irrigation water,
nutrients and pesticides? |
65 |
| 2 |
Will the treatment result in a dedicated in-stream water right? Will the
treatment result in an overall water savings of greater than 150 acre
feet per season that will indirectly provide water back in the Deschutes
River? Will the treatment result in a irrigation score index rating of
50 or greater? Is the treatment a part of a multi agency project that
will conserve irrigation water? Will the treatment result in the
management of livestock and livestock waste? Will the treatment result
in the documentation and management of applied irrigation water,
nutrients and pesticides? |
45 |
| 3 |
Will the treatment result in a dedicated in-stream water right? Will the
treatment result in an overall water savings of greater than 150 acre
feet per season that will indirectly provide water back in the Deschutes
River? Will the treatment result in a irrigation score index rating of
50 or greater? Is the treatment a part of a multi agency project that
will conserve irrigation water? Will the treatment result in the
management of livestock and livestock waste? Will the treatment result
in the documentation and management of applied irrigation water,
nutrients and pesticides? |
40 |
| 4 |
Will the treatment result in a dedicated in-stream water right? Will the
treatment result in an overall water savings of greater than 150 acre
feet per season that will indirectly provide water back in the Deschutes
River? Will the treatment result in a irrigation score index rating of
50 or greater? Is the treatment a part of a multi agency project that
will conserve irrigation water? Will the treatment result in the
management of livestock and livestock waste? Will the treatment result
in the documentation and management of applied irrigation water,
nutrients and pesticides? |
20 |
| 5 |
Will the treatment result in a dedicated in-stream water right? Will the
treatment result in an overall water savings of greater than 150 acre
feet per season that will indirectly provide water back in the Deschutes
River? Will the treatment result in a irrigation score index rating of
50 or greater? Is the treatment a part of a multi agency project that
will conserve irrigation water? Will the treatment result in the
management of livestock and livestock waste? Will the treatment result
in the documentation and management of applied irrigation water,
nutrients and pesticides? |
15 |
| 6 |
Will the treatment result in a dedicated in-stream water right? Will the
treatment result in an overall water savings of greater than 150 acre
feet per season that will indirectly provide water back in the Deschutes
River? Will the treatment result in a irrigation score index rating of
50 or greater? Is the treatment a part of a multi agency project that
will conserve irrigation water? Will the treatment result in the
management of livestock and livestock waste? Will the treatment result
in the documentation and management of applied irrigation water,
nutrients and pesticides? |
15 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Will treatment improve irrigation system efficiencies or improve
irrigation water management? |
30 |
| 2 |
Will treatment better position the Ag Operation for CSP? |
25 |
| 3 |
Will treatment make use of new and innovative conservation technology? |
20 |
| 4 |
Will treatment conserve water in a "restricted aquifer" or reduce
withdrawals from a stream? |
25 |
| 5 |
Have you submitted an NRCS "approved design" for any irrigation systems
by the application deadline? |
20 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Previous contracts with this applicant are current or completed,
cancelled with concurrence from NRCS for reason(s) beyond the control of
the client, or this will be the applicant's first contract? |
25 |
| 2 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 61.00 to 63.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
122 |
| 3 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 58.00 to 60.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
116 |
| 4 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 55.00 to 57.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
110 |
| 5 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 52.00 to 54.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
104 |
| 6 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 49.00 to 51.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
98 |
| 7 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 46.00 to 48.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
92 |
| 8 |
For
applications with an estimated net water savings of 43.00 to 45.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
86 |
| 9 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 40.00 to 42.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
80 |
| 10 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 37.00 to 39.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
74 |
| 11 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 34.00 to 36.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
68 |
| 12 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 31.00 to 33.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
62 |
| 13 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 28.00 to 30.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
56 |
| 14 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 25.00 to 27.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
50 |
| 15 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 22.00 to 24.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
33 |
| 16 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 19.00 to 21.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
29 |
| 17 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 16.00 to 18.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
24 |
| 18 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 13.00 to 15.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
13 |
| 19 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 10.00 to 12.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
10 |
| 20 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 7.00 to 9.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
7 |
| 21 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 4.00 to 6.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
4 |
| 22 |
For applications with an estimated net water savings of 0.01 to 0.99
acre-inches/acre, select this ranking score. (Use standard FIRI Ranking
criteria worksheet to calculate net water savings). |
1 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Will planned system replace flood irrigation with sprinkler or sprinkler
to a micro or drip irrigation system? |
40 |
| 2 |
Will planned system convert to low pressure, Mid level spray Application
(MESA)? |
30 |
| 3 |
Will planned system include new water management tools such as variable
speed pump controllers, automated pivot controls, automated moisture
sensors and flow control? |
25 |
| 4 |
Will irrigation be scheduled based on soil moisture measurement or
irrigation scheduler that uses ET and local weather data? |
15 |
| |
Score Question 5 or 6, not both |
|
| 5 |
Will planned system replace open ditch conveyance with pipe (Score
question 5 or 6, not both)? |
30 |
| 6 |
Will planned system replace old, leaking mainline with new pipe (Score
question 5 or 6, not both)? |
20 |
| |
Score Question 7 or 8, not both |
|
| 7 |
Will planned system include the measurement of irrigation water flows to
the farm (score question 7 or 8, not both)? |
20 |
| 8 |
Will planned system include the measurement of irrigation water flows to
each field (score question 7 or 8, not both)? |
30 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
If funded, will this be the first Environmental Quality Incentives
Program contract awarded to this applicant? |
30 |
| 2 |
Does proposed treatment result in conservation of ground or surface
water resources and monitor irrigation water use for efficiency? (IWM) |
30 |
| 3 |
Does the applicant irrigate from water that supports any threatened and
endangered fish species? |
00 |
| 4 |
Does proposed treatment result in significant reductions of non-point
source pollution nutrients to protect ground and surface water? |
10 |
| 5 |
Does proposed treatment result in reduction of irrigation induced
erosion? |
10 |
| 6 |
Do existing buffers meet NRCS requirements (greater or equal to 35’)
between management area and surface water or concentrated flow areas? or
Is applicant willing to install filter strips, or riparian buffers for
this application? |
10 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Previous contracts with this applicant are current or completed,or this
will be applicants first contract. |
100 |
| 2 |
Irrigation index for installed practices must have a minimum score of a
15 point or greater increase. |
45 |
| 3 |
Project is located within the Keating SWCD Watershed boundary. |
45 |
| 4 |
Practices result in a 30 point or greater increase in the irrigation
index score. |
25 |
| 5 |
Practices result in a 25 to 29 point increase in index score. |
25 |
| 6 |
Practices result in a 20 to 24 point increase in the irrigation index
score. |
10 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Is the irrigation index score 30 points or greater? |
75 |
| 2 |
Is the irrigation index score 25-29 points? |
40 |
| 3 |
Is the irrigation index score 20-24 points? |
25 |
| 4 |
Is the irrigation index score 15-19 points? |
10 |
| 5 |
Is this the applicant’s first contract with NRCS, OR are all cost shared
practices in active contracts on schedule, AND were all cost shared
practices in previous contracts completed as agreed? |
20 |
| 6 |
Has the applicant provided nutrient application and herbicide/pesticide
information for all lands, AND tillage and crop rotation information for
hay/crop lands and grazing rotation records for pasture by field (Cons.
Records book or other form of documentation)? |
20 |
| 7 |
Has the applicant applied for improvements on grazing or hay lands or
has he provided a copy of a soils test taken on cropland dated within
the last three years? |
20 |
| 8 |
Will the conservation plan result in positive impacts on wildlife
habitat? |
10 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Installed practices result in greater than a 30 point increase in the
irrigation index score. |
55 |
| 2 |
Installed practices result in a 25 - 29 point increase in the irrigation
index score. |
35 |
| 3 |
Installed practices result in a 16 - 24 point increase in the irrigation
index score. |
25 |
| 4 |
Installed practices result in a 5 - 15 point increase in the irrigation
index score. |
15 |
| 5 |
Are wildlife concerns treated in the plan to meet or exceed quality
criteria? (water, cover, food, etc.) |
20 |
| 6 |
Previous contracts with this applicant are current or completed, or this
will be the applicants first contract. |
30 |
| 7 |
Installed practices result in a 10 percent reduction in energy use. |
10 |
| 8 |
Installed practices result in a 15 percent reduction in energy use. |
20 |
| 9 |
Installed practices result in a 20 percent reduction in energy use, or
is a gravity system, or is a conversion from flood to sprinkler. |
30 |
| 10 |
Installed practices result in decreased water use not accounted for in
the irrigation index score. |
20 |
Local Issues
|
| 1 |
Installed practices result in a 30 point or greater increase in the
irrigation index score. |
40 |
| 2 |
Installed practices result in a 25 to 29 point or greater increase in
the irrigation index score. |
30 |
| 3 |
Installed practices result in a 20 to 24 point or greater increase in
the irrigation index score. |
20 |
| 4 |
Installed practices result in a 15 to 19 point or greater increase in
the irrigation index score. |
10 |
| 5 |
Project is located in a Priority Water Quantity limited watershed (Bear
Creek, Lostine River, Hurricane Creek). |
25 |
| 6 |
Previous contracts with this applicant are current or completed, or this
will be applicants first contract. |
75 |
Last Modified:
02/07/2008
< Back to EQIP/GSW
| |
|
About Us
Back to Top