Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />CWCB Agenda Item 17.h., <br />November 23-24, 1998, <br />Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br />improve funding. In addition, for EQIP the cost sharing required by the 1974 Salinity Control Act <br />is managed by the CRBSCP Forum, involving cooperative agreements between USDA, USBR, the <br />State Soil Board in Colorado, and individual fanners. The following points update the status of <br />EQIP: <br />. ForFY 1999 the nationwide EQIP program received a funding cut from $200 million down to <br />$174 million. The final impact in Colorado has not yet been determined by USDA. <br />. The Forum as a group and individual basin states continue to push for a designation of the Basin <br />as a national priority area, but so far USDA officials have declined to name any priority areas. <br />A recent effort to have Congress instruct USDA to begin designating national priority areas <br />failed. <br />. Approximately $420,000 of basin state cost share dollars have been made available to soil <br />conservation districts through the Colorado Soil Conservation Board for FY 98. How these <br />funds are distributed to individual participating fanners subject to Forum review and approval <br />continues to occupy staff time as we try to articulate the soil district positions in a way that the <br />other basin states can understand and support. <br />. Monitoring performance of the EQIP projects and refining the overall program to meet <br />Congress' goals and participants needs is an ongoing, and sometimes frustrating process. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />D. Unified Watershed Assessment. <br /> <br />Earlier this fall staff reviewed a draft ''Unified Watershed Assessment" [Assessment] prepared as <br />a joint product of the Colorado Water Quality Control Division (wQCD) and the USDA Natural <br />Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). An assessment of the condition of state watersheds is <br />required under the Clean Water Action Plan [CWAP] initiated by Vice-President Al Gore on <br />October 18, 1997. As we understand it, the intent of the CW AP is for existing federal water quality <br />programs to be carried out in a more coordinated manner. The assessment is to identify those <br />watersheds where existing federal programs should focus their efforts and only programs consistent <br />with the assessment will receive Administration support during budget preparation. The Assessment <br />has now been finalized and adopted by the WQCC. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Watersheds in Colorado were evaluated using 94 hydrologic units previously established by USGS <br />and assigned to 1 of 4 categories: 1. seriously degraded and in need of restoration where future funds <br />will be focused [includes those that impact national salinity standards]; 2. water quality goals being <br />met, but may need help to sustain quality; 3. pristine and wilderness [includes habitat successfully <br />used by endangered and threatened species]; 4. insufficient data as to land use and physical aquatic <br />condition. Evaluation utilized existing water quality data [primarily the state's March 1998 list of <br />stream segments requiring TMDLs to meet water quality standards], whether land in the watershed <br />was primarily under federal or private control, and evaluators impressions of the overall condition <br /> <br />C'SR..\lIUl'.il-<JENEIlAl.'OOAllDMDlSlllll1H.WI'D <br />1'ri.1o<I..n.,....I... ,..,. <br />