New Mexico Statewide Policy and Strategic Plan for NonNative PhreatophyteWatershed Management

1
New Mexico StatewidePolicy and Strategic Plan
forNon-Native Phreatophyte/Watershed Management
Developed by the Interagency Work Group
established by the 2004 NM Legislature
Public Meetings May 26 and 27, June 8, 9, 10,
23, 24, 2005 Presentation by Tim Carlson and
Dr. Abbas Ghassemi Tamarisk Coalition
2

• NM Strategic Plan
• Background
• Summary of Plan
• How you can provide
• Input to the Plan

3
Background

• Before talking about the Plans details
• HB-2 Legislation
• HB-2 Work Group
• The Big Picture Watershed health
• The Tamarisk (saltcedar) problem a primer on
  this watershed problem
• Historic efforts at control

4
2004 House Bill 2 excerpts (140) New Mexico
State University 2,400,000For expenditures
through fiscal year 2006 for the restoration and
revegetation of native species on the Canadian
river, the Pecos river and the Rio Grande
including monitoring, revegetation,
rehabilitation, and long-term strategic planning.
Up to five hundred thousand dollars (500,000)
will be available to an interagency work group
comprising the department of agriculture energy,
minerals and natural resources department state
engineer department of environment and office
of Indian affairs, in consultation with the soil
and water conservation districts. The work group
shall develop a statewide policy and plan to
guide future treatment and to provide templates
and protocols for monitoring, revegetation,
rehabilitation and long-term watershed
management.(141) New Mexico State University
2,400,000For expenditures through fiscal year
2006 for a non-native phreatophyte eradication
and control program on the Canadian river, the
Pecos river and the Rio Grande river contingent
upon a statewide phreatophyte/watershed strategic
plan to be developed by the departments of
agriculture, energy, minerals and natural
resources, state engineer, environment and Indian
affairs.
5
HB-2 Work Group

• New Mexico agencies involved
• Agriculture
• Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources
• Environment
• Indian Affairs Department
• Office of State Engineer
• In consultation with NMs soil and water
  conservation districts
• Tamarisk Coalition contracted through NMDA to
  facilitate development of Strategic Plan

6
The Big Picture Watershed Health

• Forests
• Rangelands
• Riparian

Why is Watershed Health Important ?
7
Healthy and Productive NM Watersheds essential
for
Ranching
Water resources
Recreation
Cultural
8
Healthy and Productive NM Watersheds essential
for
Wildlife habitat
Agriculture
Sandhill cranes, Bosque del Apache NWR
Dona Ana County chili field
Wildfire protection
Economic prosperity
Rio Grande in Albuquerque 4/2002
9
Does NM have a Watershed Problem?

• Many of New Mexicos ecosystems are in an
  unhealthy state, as demonstrated by overly-dense
  woody vegetation, a degradation of biodiversity,
  and fragmentation and wildlife habitat. . . .
  Result is greater susceptibility to catastrophic
  wildfire and drought, compromised watersheds and
  decreased water supply, accelerated erosion, and
  desertification. Forest and Watershed Health
  Plan 2004

10
NM Efforts

• Supportive efforts that complement each other
  with focus on drought, wildfires, invasive
  plants
• Forest Watershed Health Plan a framework plan
• State Water Plan
• This Strategic Plan focus is on riparian
  invasives

11
Realities

• NMs watershed health problems are . . . a
  century in the making and will not be solved
  overnight
• . . .long-term commitment over many decades by
  all those who share responsibility for restoring
  these ecosystems will be required
• Forest and Watershed Health Plan 2004

12
Common Themes among all State Plans

• Landscape scale approaches
• Cross political and landowner boundaries
• Tribal involvement
• Public concurrence
• New State Office to coordinate
• Solutions to watershed issues
• Control
• Revegetation
• Maintenance
• Monitoring

13
The Non-native Phreatophyte Problem Tamarisk (aka
Saltcedar) and Russian olive
Rio Grande near Socorro
Courtesy of Fred Nibling, US Bureau of Reclamation
14
Why are they so Invasive?
Produces 500,000 seeds per plant
15
Competes with native plants
16
Moves into uplands
17
Provides fuel for intense fires
Courtesy of John Taylor, US FWS
18
which kill native plants
19
Tamarisk, however, resprouts after fire 6 to 9
feet growth in first year.
20
Result Extremely invasive
Rio Grande near Socorro Courtesy Fred Nibling,
Bureau of Reclamation
21
So What?

• Why should we care?

22
IMPACTS
Changes stream structure
e.g., Brazos R. in TX channel width reduced
from 500 to 200 in 40 years, resulting in more
flooding
23
Reduces human enjoyment of riparian areas
24
Provides poor habitat
e.g., Pecos R. in NM more birds observed in 80
acres of cottonwood/willow than in 40,000 acres
of tamarisk.
25
Most critical issue Considered to consume
large amounts of water
26
What has NM been doing about this problem? gt
11,000,000 in the past 3 years for control
through the SWCDs
Mechanical Removal with herbicide
27
Extraction w/o herbicides
Courtesy Boss Excavation
28
Aerial herbicide application
Courtesy of Debbie Hughes, NMACD
29
Hand applied herbicide
30
Biological control
31
Hand labor
32
Rio Grande area cleared of Tamarisk and Russian
olive in 2004
Courtesy of Debbie Hughes, NMACD
33
Process to develop Plan

• gt 20 public meetings 4/04 to 3/05 by HB-2 Work
  Group
• Tamarisk Coalition contracted 9/04 to facilitate
  development of Plan
• Interviewed wide range of interests
• Committees on control, revegetation, monitoring,
  long-term maintenance
• Use of supporting documents

34
Vision Statement

• New Mexico will become the national model for
  conservation and restoration of healthy functions
  to its ecosystems and watersheds through
  landscape-scale management of its watersheds,
  including invasive plant species.

35
Guiding Principles

• Composed of
• Tribal
• Hydrologic
• Team Tamarisk principles
• Forest and Watershed Health Plan principles

36
Partners

• Success for NM depends on partnerships
• State agencies
• Federal agencies
• Tribal governments
• Local communities
• Non-governmental
• Individuals
• Private entities

37
Recommendations (24)

• Management
• Planning
• Funding
• Education
• Monitoring
• Research
• Government actions

38
Management

• Concept for new State office of forest and
  watershed health
• NMDAs role
• SWCDs role
• Adaptive management annual review
• Agency autonomy with coordination among agencies
• Information sharing

39
Planning

• Adopt Watershed rehabilitation perspective of
  Forest and Watershed Health Plan, and State Water
  Plan
• Develop comprehensive watershed plans (6) in 2-3
  years
• Integrate other planning efforts
• Prioritization of new projects using objective
  criteria
• Coordinate projects with partners

40
Funding

• Strive for 25 local match for State funds
• Rehabilitation as priority
• Develop specific criteria for prioritizing State
  funding

41
Education

• Educational materials training
• Best Management Practices manual
• Project specific outreach, education training
• Living Laboratory through NM universities

42
Monitoring

• Baseline long-term for all watershed projects
• Engage students in local projects

43
Research

• NM as national leader of research consortium
• Integrated data bases
• To apply best science
• Real time monitoring information
• Annual reports

44
Government Actions

• Continue to be proactive for new continued NM
  and federal legislation
• Intrastate cooperation
• Interstate cooperation
• Continuous, sustainable State funding

45
Implementation

• NMDA as lead with collaboration, coordination,
  execution with partners
• NMDA will perform specific actions identified
  within 1 year within 5 years
• SWCDs to provide the lead for control,
  revegetation, maintenance

46
Templates Protocols

• The guidelines for future projects i.e.,
• What actions need to be taken? Templates
• How actions will be performed? Protocols
• Control, Revegetation Rehabilitation,
  Monitoring, and Long-term Management Maintenance

47
Focus of Templates Protocols

• Systematic approach for selecting solutions
• Control, revegetation, maintenance must be
  considered prior to starting
• Alternatives must be considered
• Costs as well as environmental, social,
  cultural impacts must be considered
• Monitoring to direct long-term maintenance and
  management
• Adaptive Management critical to long-term
  effectiveness efficiency

48
Control TPs

• Historic and Existing setting
• Identify objectives for control
• Alternatives that will accomplish objectives
• Analysis alternatives costs impacts
• Select preferred approach with landowner(s)
• Provide education public outreach to community
  on selected plan

49
Revegetation Rehabilitation PTs

• Historic and Existing setting
• Identify objectives for reveg./rehab.
• Alternatives that will accomplish objectives
• Analysis alternatives costs impacts
• Select preferred approach with landowner(s)
• Provide education public outreach to community
  on selected plan
• Use adaptive management

50
Monitoring PTs

• Landscape-scale
• Water quantity
• Water quality
• Wildlife habitat
• Soils
• Economic, social, cultural impacts
• Landowner-scale
• How effective?
• Identify additional control reveg. needs
• Document with photos

51
Long-term Management Maintenance PTs

• Develop comprehensive watershed plans
• Provide funding
• Implement the watershed plans
• Monitor actions adjust as needed
• Prioritize actions to match watershed planning

52
Process for gaining public input and finalizing
Strategic Plan

• Public meetings (14 at 7 locations)
• Internet ( www.nmda.nmsu.edu )
• Written comments (May 1 to July 15th)
• Final HB-2 Work Group meeting (August) with
  agencies endorsement
• Submittal to Legislature

53
Conclusion

• HB-2 Work Group determined that if NM is to be
  successful in reestablishing health to the
  States watershed, it will require
• Coordinated approach
• Good science be used
• End goal of restoration
• Monitoring adaptive management
• Long-term funding
• Joint implementation of major state plans i.e.,
  FWHP, State Water Plan this Strategic Plan

54
STRATEGIC PLAN PROVIDES THIS FRAMEWORK

• But YOUR INPUT IS NEEDED TO
• MAKE IT BETTER
• New Mexico does have a choice

55
INVASIVES ??
Bosque del Apache NWR
Courtesy of Fred Nibling, US Bureau of Reclamation
56
or Natives?
Rio Grande Nature Center
57
New Mexicos goal Healthy Watersheds that
support NMs communities, Tribes, economic and
environmental needs