fall 2010 garfield county conservation district newsletter

8/3/2019 Fall 2010 Garfield County Conservation District Newsletter

1/8

Garfield County Conservation District News http://garfieldcountycd.org

Inside this issue:Fall 2010 Issue

MRCDC hires CoordinatorRussian Olive DebateUSDA stops using leaf beetlesMMRIC News Release80Women Stepping Forward forAgricultural SymposiumCanada thistle ResearchProject75th Anniversary a peek atThe past

OUR LIVES BEGINTOENDTHEDAYWEBECOMESILENTABOUTTHINGSTHATMATTER-MARTIN LUTHER K ING

L o c a l C o m m o n S e n s e C o n s e r v a t i o n

Missouri River Conservation Districts Council

(MRCDC) hires new Coordinator:MRCDC welcomes Laurie Riley as its new coordinator. Riley comes from

Corvallis, Montana, where she served as executive director of the Bitterroot

Water Forum. Prior to joining the Water Forum in 2007, she was a restoration

and business development specialist with an ecological restoration company

specializing in restoration projects across the West. Riley earned a degree in

wildlife biology from the University of Montana. She has experienced in grant

writing, basin planning and community involvement.In the continuing debate over the fate of the Russian

Olive in Montana:There are arguments on both sides of the fence when it comes to this

tree/brush/weed. When the Russian olive was brought to America from Europe

and western Asia it was used as an ornamental plant and for windbreaks and

erosion control. It was many years later that Russian olive (and tamarisk/salt

cedar) came to be considered an invasive plant. It is considered a noxious weed

in Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming parts of Utah, and Treasure County Mon-

tana. There is no federal state concerning Russian Olive. In August, 2008,

Russian olive was petitioned for inclusion of the Montana state noxious weed

list by Montana Audubon and the Montana Native Plant Society. The following

link is to the Montana Audubon Russian Olive Policy Guidance Document

adopted by the Montana Audubon Board in January 2006 and update as of Au-

gust 2, 2010: http://mtaudubon.org/issues/hot/documents/Russian_Olive_Policy-5-07_update_8-2010.pdf.

-taken from the Montana Conservationist


2/8

Local Common Sense Conservation


USDA stops using leaf beetles against invasive saltcedar concern for endangered bird promptschange.article taken from Farm & Ranch Weekly

Concern about an endangered bird has caused the US Department of Agriculture to declare a ceasefire

in its biological war against saltcedar, an invasive tree that has taken over riparian areas across the West.

The USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service ended its program of releasing saltcedar leaf

beetles to eat saltcedar, also known as tamarisk, in 13 states; Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska,

Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Montana, Washington and Wyoming.

The reason for the programs demise is the south-western willow flycatcher, and endangered species

found in scattered pockets around the Southwest. The bird nests in saltcedar, as well as in native willows and

cottonwoods.

Concern that beetles could destroy much of the birds nesting habitat was why the USDA excluded New

Mexico, Arizona and California form the beetle-release program, which began in 2005.

Now, scientists think the beetles are likely to spread from the states where they were introduced. They

say it could be just a matter of time before the insects chew through saltcedar all the way down the Colorado

River drainage in Arizona and eastern California.

The beetles move around. They dont stay where you put them, Alan Dowdy, director of invertebrateand biological control programs for APHIS in Riversdale, MD.

The USDA moved to end the beetle program last year, he said. A June 15 memo from Dowdy told

APHIS state directors that APHIS no longer endorsed releasing saltcedar leaf beetles and stated that doing so

could be prosecuted and punished by a fine up to $250,000 per violation.

The change has environmentalists who opposed the use of saltcedar leaf beetles from the beginning say-

ing I told you so. They also said it might be too little, too late to prevent one artificially introduced species

from destroying another and wiping out an endangered native species in the process.

Its very serious, said Robin Siler, with the Center for Biological Diversity. The Tuscan, Arizona based

group and the Maricopa Audubon Society sued APHIS and the US Fish and Wildlife Service last year over the

release of saltcedar leaf beetles in southern Utah in 2006. The released beetles proliferated, the groups said, de-stroying several saltcedar trees containing south-western willow flycatcher nests.

The release also opened a door for the beetles to spread southward, the groups said. Saltcedar grows up

to 30 feet tall. The tree was introduced to the West during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s and has since spread

along streams throughout the region.

One of the problems with the trees is it concentrates salt in its leaves. When those leaves fall, salt can

concentrate around the trees and prevent anything else from growing. Saltcedar has been successful in part be-

cause of the dams built in the West during the 20th century, said Matthew Chew, an assistance research profes-

sor at the Arizona State University.

The dams altered the natural flow of Western rivers like the Colorado, giving saltcedar trees an advantage

over native willows and cottonwoods. They are adapted to this new grime this new, artificially managed re-gime, Chew said. We created a habitat. We created the perfect conditions.

The federal governments view that saltcedar leaf beetles could do no harm was an illusion, said Jeff

Ruch, executive director of the Washington, DC based for Environmental Responsibility. Perhaps the best

hope for the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher is for it to develop a taste for leaf beetles, Ruch said.

END OF ARTICLE

Page 2


3/8

News Release

Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee

MRRIC Briefed on high water & adaptive management; transmits values summary

The Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee (MRRIC) met for the eleventh time on July

20-22 in Sheridan, Wyo. The 70-member committee is comprised of stakeholders and representatives of state,

tribal, and federal governments throughout the basin that provides recommendations to federal agencies on ex-

isting and future federal programs for Missouri River recovery.

Jody Farhat, Chief, Missouri River Basin Water Management for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

(USACE), reviewed the causes of high river flows and flooding since spring and the agencys plans for evacu-

ating 9 million acre-feet of water from reservoirs before March 1, 2011 (a typical family of 5 uses an acre-foot

of water per year). The Missouri is a run-off driven system,: Farhat explained, noting the daily actions her

agency takes to capture as much flood water as possible.

Farhat described how sufficient flood water storage appeared to be available in the six mainstream res-

ervoirs on March 1, 200, but late snow and heavy rain resulted in run-off at 145% of normal, making this the

7th wettest year to date since 1898. Total mainstream reservoir storage is now at 66 million acre-feet. The

Corps must now draw reservoir levels down so that storage capacity is restored for spring 2011 run-off. Re-

leases from Gavins Point Dam (the lowest mainstream dam) will increase to 46,000 cubic-feet per second (cfs)

by mid-August and will continue at the rate until mid-December. These flows will allow a 10-day extension of

the navigation season.

MRRIC is directed by Congress to make recommendations for recovering the least tern and piping

plover, both listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) offi-

cial Henry Maddux updated the Committee on the impact on high water on these species. Maddux reported

that birds nests on banks and sandbars have been inundated by high water and the chick-fledging rate is likely

to decline this year. Some previously constructed bird habitat has been inundated. Farhat also noted that addi-

tional habitat construction this year will be delayed.

USACE and USFWS staff briefed on the concept of Adaptive Management and how this environ-

mental decision-making tool will be used in the Missouri River recovery program. Adaptive Management

uses successive rounds of monitoring, analysis, and informed experimentation to achieve recovery program

objectives in highly uncertain conditions. MRRIC and federal agencies plan to discuss how the Committee

may be involved in this Adaptive Management program for the Missouri River.

In business sessions, MRRIC members reached final consensus to transmit to the Corps a summary of

social, economic, tribal and cultural values about the uses and benefits of the Missouri River agency considera-

tion in developing the long-term (30-50 years) vision for Missouri River recovery (Missouri River Ecosystem

Restoration Plan or MRERP). The values described in the summary, collected during a five-month process,

are the opinions of individual members and alternatives and are not themselves a consensus recommendationof MRRIC.

The Committee also reached final consensus on recommendations to the Corps on the agencys

FY2011 recovery program work plan and how the Corps should deal with a different funding level (either re-

duced or increased) that is currently included in the Presidents budget. The Presidents budget includes $78.4

million for habitat creation, monitoring, scientific investigations, and other projects supportive of ongoing ef-

forts to recover threatened and endangered species and habitat associated with the river.

Article continued to page 4

Page 3 Local Common Sense Conservation



4/8



If more funds are appropriated, MRRIC recommends the additional funds be used to support science programsand nesting birds. If funds are reduced, MRRIC recommends emphasis still be given to science programs andhabitat for the least terns and piping plovers.

In other actions, the Committee: Finalized a recommendation to the Secretary of the Army and other federal agencies that MRRIC members

be eligible for reimbursement for meeting-related travel. MRRIC members are unpaid volunteers who,unlike federal advisory groups, are not reimbursed for their travel. Reached tentative consensus on recommendation regarding pilot projects for least terns and piping plovers

nesting habitat in ears beyond those currently utilized to be included in future work plans on how USFWScan help to facilitate their implementation.

Reached tentative consensus on a recommendation to the Corps and USFWS that the agencies conductgovernment-to-government consultation with tribes about participation in MRRIC.

MRRIC was authorized by Congress in the 2007 Water Resources Development Act and established in 2008by the Assistance Secretary of the Army (Civil Works). Its duties include providing recommendations to theSecretary of the Army and other federal, state and tribal governments on efforts to recover ESA-listed species,mitigate habitat loss, and restore the ecosystem to protect other native species. MRRIC is staffed by RE-SOLVE, a Washington DC dispute resolution firm, under a contract with the U.S. Institute for EnvironmentalConflict Resolution and with the assistance of federal agency staff.

The next MRRIC meeting will be in Sioux Falls, Iowa, on October 1-21, 2010. For more information onMRRIC, please contact John Thorson, Committee Chair, at 406-826-0500 or by email at [email protected] links related to the Missouri River recovery effort are: mrric.org and moriverrecovery.org.

END OF ARTICLE

Women Stepping Forward For Agricultural Symposium

Women Stepping Forward for Agricultural Symposium will be held October5 & 6 2010 at the Montana Club in Helena, Montana. Registration is $60 prior toSeptember 22 and $70 following September 22. A block of rooms have been re-served at the Holiday Inn downtown. Mention the Symposium when calling to re-serve your room. To receive the special rate rooms must be reserved by September22, 2010. For more information or to obtain a registration form contact your local

USDA Service Center or log on to the Montana NRCS website at

http://www.mt.nrcs.usda.gov/news/womenag.html.

You may also contact Andrea Ceartin, NRCS to attend at 406-522-4025 oremail at [email protected]


5/8

Canada thistle Research Project-By Shanna Murnion Garfield County Conservation District Field Technician

This was the first year of a research project to determine if stem mining weevils can control Canada

thistle in Garfield County. The weevil attack the plant by boring into it and mining towards the main stem.

The older larvae will mine the stem, crown, and root. The project started in July when four sites around thecounty were chosen with heavy thistle infestation. These sites are named A, B, C and D.

The beginning of the project consisted of data collection. Each site has a treated (bug release) and un-

treated (control) area. The perimeter of the treated areas were recorded with a GPS. Ten plots were invento-

ried in the treated area and five plots in the untreated area. Canada thistle stems and the average plant height

were counted in a one yard square frame plot.

The next part of the project was to release the stem mining weevils. The bugs were picked up from In-

tegrated Weed Control in Bozeman. The cost for one container was $100. Each site had a predetermined

number of containers to release. At sites A, B and C, four containers were used and at D, one container was

used. Each container carries approximately 100 bugs. The sites the bugs were released were marked with a

fence post and GPS.

The rest of the project will continue over the next three years. More data will be collected at each plot

on how the weevils are controlling the thistle. Each site will be revisited each summer in hopes to find less

Canada thistle until it is gone!


Garfield County Conservation District News http://garfieldcountydc.org


6/8

.


Garfield County Conservation District http://garfieldcountycd.org

75th Anniversary - A Peek at the PastSoil Conservation in the New Deal Congress

Office of History and Preservation, Office of the Clerk,

U.S. House of Representatives

http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/highlights.html?action=view&intID=463

April 27, 1935

On this date, as blistering heat sapped the American West of much needed moisture, President Franklin D.

Roosevelt signed into law the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act. Throughout Texas, Oklahoma,

Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, and the Dakotas during the early 1930s, high winds stirred the arid soil, loos-

ened after years of rapid homesteading and commercial agriculture. Nearly 180 dust storms ripped across the

southern plains during 1933, a prelude to the major

storm of May 1934, which whipped an estimated 350 million tons of earth into the sky. It trapped people in

their homes and suffocated cattle on the plains. Dust fell like snow in Chicago and eastern cities. Sailors on

ships 300 miles off the Atlantic coast swept Kansan soil from their decks.

Similar storms plagued Americas center well into 1935.

In response, western House Democrats introduced H.R. 7054, to provide for the protection of land re-

sources against soil erosion, and for other purposes. Unlike the ecological forces at work on the plains, John

Marvin Jones of Texas explained, the bill is simple and easily understood. Bill sponsor John Joseph

Dempsey of New Mexicowhom colleagues described as a soil erosion enthusiastargued that the meas-

ure was of national interest, and therefore vital. John Conover Nichols of Oklahoma, whose state dust storms

hit particularly hard, noted that in uprooting its subsoil, the United States [had] been living in a fools para-

dise, with respect to the security of [its] most basic asset. With the understanding that such storms posed a

national threat, the New Deal Congress approved the bill.

The ambitious act established the Soil Conservation Service to combat soil erosion and to preserve natural

resources, control floods, prevent impairment of reservoirs, and maintain the navigability of rivers and har-

bors, protect public health, public lands and relieve unemployment.

The Soil Conservation Act rewarded farmers who planted grasses and legumes to support the soil, rather

than commercial crops which exhausted its nutrientsa difficult measure for many farmers to agree to during

the Great Depression. The act, however, classified commercial harvests

like wheat as a threat to the plains soil, giving farmers a chance to wean their fields from surplus crops at the

federal governments expense. While the act appropriated no money upfront, it left open the option to fund

projects with such sums as Congress may from time to time determine

necessary. President Roosevelts advisor, Rexford Tugwell, lauded the measure. Under this plan, said Tug-well, it will pay farmers, for the first time, to be social-minded, to do something for all instead of for himself

alone.

It has been a joy & privilege to work for the Soil Conservation Service & now the Natural Resources Conservation Ser-

vice for the past 25 years. The local farmers and ranchers feed the nation providing a healthy & abundant food supply.

It is a pleasure working with all of you. Sue FitzGerald


7/8



Fried Zucchini

1 LG egg, beaten1/3 cup milk1 cup flourSalt and pepper, to taste

6 zucchini cut into circles1 cup olive or canola oil

In a bowl mix egg, milk, flour,salt, and pepper until smooth. Iftoo thick, add water. If too thin,add flour. Dip zucchini in batterand fry in hot oil until goldenbrown. Serve hot!

ITEMS FOR SALEWeeds of the West $28.00Grassland Plants of South Dakota $25.00Range Plants of Montana $17.00Landownership Map Book-one township per page $50.00Landownership Map Book-four township per page $25.00Garfield County Wall Map $25.00Garfield County Road Map $10.00RentalNo Till Drill $2.00/acreFabric Layer (min of $10.00) $0.10/ftSoil Sampling Probe 5 day loanATV Sprayer $25.00/dayATV Broadcast Spreader $15.00/dayATV Herbicide Applicator $15.00/day

Plant SuppliesTree Sentry $2.75Mesh Tube, 3ft $0.50Bamboo Stake, 4ft $0.20Fabric Staple- 6 x 1 $0.10 each

Fabric Staple- 10 x 2 $0.15 eachLandscape Fabric6 x 500 roll $130.006 x 300 roll $100.00

ATV SPREADER

ATV SPRAYER

NO TILL DRILL


8/8

Garfield County Conservation District307 Main (PO Box 369)Jordan, MT 59337PRSRT STDUS POSTAGEPAIDBillings, MTPERMIT NO. 11

All Garfield County Conservation District and Natural Resources Conservation Service programs are offered on a nondiscrimi-natory basis without regard to race, color, gender, political beliefs, national origin, religion, sex, age, marital status or handicap.

Board of SupervisorsMonte Billing..ChairmanDean Rogge,.Vice ChairmanTravis Browning.SupervisorMike McKeever...SupervisorAlan Pluhar..SupervisorNathan Saylor.....Urban SupervisorNicole Downs..Urban Supervisor

The public is welcome to attend the meetings of the Conservation DistrictBoard of Supervisors. Please call for meeting date and time.

Views expressed by individual columnists in this newsletter do not necessarilyreflect the official policy of the Garfield County Conservation District.

Field Office Staff:Garfield County Conservation DistrictAmanda Lammers,District Administrator

Kayla Higgins,Administrative AssistantNatural Resource Conservation ServiceSue FitzGerald,District ConservationistJohn Monahan,Soil ConservationistB.G. FitzGerald,Soil Conservation Technician

310 PermitsA 310 permit is required if you are planning any project including the construction of new facilities or the modification, operation, andmaintenance of an existing facility that may affect the natural existing shape and form of any stream, its banks, or its tributaries. Any privateentity or non-governmental individual that proposes to work in or near a stream on public or private land must obtain a 310 Permit prior toany activity in or near a perennially flowing stream.Contact the Garfield County Conservation District for Permit Applications.

Garfield County Conservation District News http://garfieldcountcd.org

fall 2010 garfield county conservation district newsletter

Documents