New EQIP system gives funds to counties

By LORI COPE | East Texas Edition

May 15, 2003 -- A new system to allocate federal Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) funds in Texas is in place, and East Texas ag producers stand to fare better than they have in past years.

In December 2002, a meeting, organized by a newly-formed East Texas Conservation Work Group, shed light on the unbalanced distribution of the state's EQIP monies. It was cited at the meeting that 18 of the 22 deep East Texas counties received no EQIP funds in 2001, even though there were millions of dollars available and many East Texas applications had been submitted.

In the past, producers' requests for EQIP monies went before the state technical committee. Each request was evaluated on a point system. When producers' requests from one region (for example, West Texas) accumulated a lot of points, it topped the list to receive the available EQIP funds.

Under the new system, "each county will be provided a base allocation" of EQIP funds, announced Dr. Larry D. Butler, state conservationist for the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) in Texas, on May 6.

On May 7, U.S. Congressman Max Sandlin's office issued news that $1.4 million in EQIP funding will be made available for farmers his in East Texas congressional district. The congressman pointed out that following the December meeting, he wrote the U.S. Department of Agriculture about the "extreme disparities concerning EQIP" and that East Texas farmers should "get their fair share" of the funds.

Doug Shera, state EQIP program leader, officed at the NRCS state office in Temple, noted on May 8 that all congressional districts (counties) in Texas will receive an allocation of funds.

Before June 13, ag producers interested in improving their land through environmental, or conservation, methods should apply for this year's cost-share EQIP funds. Application should be made at their county's NRCS office before the June 13 deadline.

One NRCS spokesperson estimated producers would receive the funds, for projects that can be seasonally carried out, in August. For projects, such as tree- or grass-planting, the funds would be given at the appropriate time for planting.

Not all the EQIP money in Texas is going to the county level. Basically, there are two "pots of money" at the state office, Shera explained. One will be divided among the counties (in a way Shera said was still being determined) to fund individual producers' environmental quality/conservation projects that meet the county's priority goals; and the other will fund individual producers' environmental quality/conservation projects that meet the state's priority goals.

Jim Wyrick, district conservationist at the Hopkins County NRSC office, said producers shouldn't worry about what pot their money will come out of. "They just need to come in by the June 13 deadline to sign up. We'll sort them out."

To determine the county's priority goals for environmental quality/conservation, local work groups (LWGs) were organized.

"The local work group is set by EQIP law," explained Shera. "It's comprised of federal, state, and local-elected or -appointed officials. ... It's a large group."

Kenny Crawford, district conservationist at the Bowie County NRCS office, explained each county's office organized a LWG. In his county, which contains a variety of ag production, the LWG was "made up of several ag entities, such as the Soil and Water Conservation Board, the Farm Service Agency committee, the Extension agent, the Texas Forest Service, and Marie Martin (representative for Congressman Sandlin's office.)"

Already, most county's LWG have met. They first heard recommendations from the public - mainly ag producers - about what should top the county's list for environmental quality concerns. Then in a closed session, the LWG set the practices that will work toward eliminating the county's environmental and conservation concerns.

For instance, in Bowie County, Crawford said water quality was determined as the top environmental concern for the county. "Seven practices were determined to improve the water," he said, and each project/fund request by a producer will be considered as to how well it fits into the county's goal of achieving better water quality.

Although a new pond may be needed by a producer, the producer's plan will rank higher in Bowie County if the plan includes such things as crossfencing to rotational graze cattle and therefore control waste runoff into the pond.

According to the NRSC technical guide, projects achieve a specific rating, or score, that will determine the awarding of the county's allocated EQIP funds to the producer.

But producers should keep in mind the county has EQIP funds, and the state has EQIP funds. Curt Roberts, district conservationist at Titus County's NRSC office, noted the state has funds specifically targeted for improving environmental quality on poultry, and dairy, operations. In Roberts' county where many poultry and dairy farms exist, a producer's request could draw EQIP funds from the state and county pots (leaving more in the county funds for other producers).

In one East Texas county, an ag producer voiced his displeasure with the new system and how the LWG's determined priorities. Vernon Swor, an Angelina County FSA committee member and a member of the East Texas Conservation Work Group, felt his recommendations on what would benefit the county's producers were not considered. "We met to make legal, or sanctify, what (practices) they'd already determined. It was a done deal when we went into there (to the meeting)."

One NRSC district conservationist, when asked if the new system was better than in previous years, he replied: "Let's just say it's a different system. We stress it allows more (local) voice at the local level."