Download Early draft of multi-state SAFE Proposal

Multi-State CP 38E
SAFE Habitat for Lesser Prairie Chickens and Playa
Lakes
Contacts:
Barth Crouch
Playa Lakes Joint Venture, Inc.
205 S Santa Fe
Salina, KS 67401
(785) 823-0240
[email protected]
Partners:
Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks
New Mexico Dept. of Game & Fish
Texas Parks & Wildlife
Oklahoma Dept of Wildlife Conservation
Colorado Division of Wildlife
Pheasants Forever
Quail Forever
Ducks Unlimited
The Nature Conservancy
USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service
USDA-Farm Service Agency
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Partners for Fish and Wildlife
States: Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Texas
For areas to be targeted for sign-up eligibility, see attached GIS map of area
Project goal
Improve populations of lesser prairie-chickens (LEPC) and other grassland-associated wildlife by
creating nesting/brood-rearing habitat in crop field dominated landscapes that create habitat
corridors to connect reproductively isolated populations of LEPC while simultaneously conserving
the functionality and integrity of playa lakes thus facilitating recharge of the Ogallala Aquifer, the
main source of irrigation and potable water in most of the region.
Project outcomes:
Establish and maintain 75,000 acres of diverse native grass and forb cover within intensively
cropped areas that contain playas throughout Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and
Texas with emphasis in several focus areas, shown in the attached maps, that serve to connect
current LEPC Population Areas to preserve genetic variability and to provide nesting and broodrearing habitat which research has shown to be the most limiting factor for LEPC. By only
enrolling crop fields containing playas, the acres enrolled will insure that the functionality of the
playas enrolled will be maintained which will add to potential aquifer recharge in the Ogallala.
Acres enrolled in the SAFE adjacent to the playas will also provide water quality benefits and
reduce soil erosion.
Project Description
Introduction
CP38E in Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Texas has the potential to positively
impact lesser prairie-chickens (LEPC) by connecting areas of current populations. Since those
connecting areas are also shown to have high concentrations of playa lakes, including the playas
in crop fields as part of the project will help enroll significant acres of playa lakes simultaneously
helping both LEPC’s and playas. Enrollment in this practice will be available only in the HUC’s
identified by the attached focus area map.
CRP could have a positive effect on the LEPC populations and habitat in the 5 state area as is
evidenced by the following excerpt from the draft LEPC Conservation Initiative:
“The quality of habitat within the southern Great Plains ecosystem contributes to the effectiveness
of many other factors regulating LPCH populations. Drought, disease, predation, hunting, and
disturbances are less likely to affect populations and the individual birds and the populations are
quick to recover when habitat quality is high. Population impacts from unfavorable weather
conditions are also ameliorated by having high quality habitats. Managing for quality habitats,
while maintaining and restoring habitat quantity, are likely the two most important factors for longterm sustainability of LPCH populations.
Lands enrolled in CRP might provide an important management opportunity for increasing and
improving LPCH habitat. LPCH have expanded their range in response to multiple-species native
grass CRP stands in the central plains, particularly in west-central KS. CRP grasslands in Kansas
comprise 13% of the total area of 15 core counties in southwestern counties enrolled in CRP and
in one case provide the only available grassland habitat.”
The amount of CRP grasslands currently in the counties of the five states that are occupied by
LEPC amounts to over five million acres, of which almost half will expire in the next five years.
With many of the existing CRP acres in the southern Great Plains coming up to the end of their
existing contracts and with heavy pressure to convert back to cropland, the effectiveness of CRP
as part of the current habitat situation for LEPC may suffer significant inroads.
With most of the area encompassing the LEPC populations and the playa lakes region in private
ownership and nearly all of that in agricultural production, habitat must be provided in association
with working lands to have any real impact on populations.. CP38E, when targeted both by
location in potential corridors and by being adjacent to either existing native rangeland or CRP
acres, could be an effective tool to build corridors in crop field dominated landscapes.
.
Project Boundary: Limited to areas delineated on attached map in Appendix
See Appendix A for a listing of the 8 digit HUCs included in the above targeted areas:
Also see attached map showing possible targeting corridors for outreach efforts to landowners.
CRP acreage request: 75,000 acres
Practices eligible: CP2, CP4D, CP10, CP12
Additional SAFE requirements:
 Eligible location:
 Area should be either adjacent to or within one mile of existing native grassland or established
CRP with established NWSG (Native Warm Season Grass) and forb mixtures.
 Area should contain 10% or more of the acreage in playas.
 Enrollment of expiring or expired CRP acres is ineligible for fields of non-native grasses,
including fescue, brome, Old World Bluestem, Caucasian bluestem, yellow bluestem,
Lehman’s lovegrass, Weeping lovegrass and Bermuda.




CP38E acres may be established immediately adjacent to native perennial grass enrolled
in CRP under the same management unit. CP38E acres may intersect with any Continuous
or General CRP.
 Acres may be enrolled next to grazed native pasture.
Contract length: 10 to15 years.
CP12 (food plots) is eligible in a CP38E. CP12 is limited to the lesser of 5 acres or 10% of the
field enrolled in CP38E and may include seed producing crops or legumes such as alfalfa.
Expired or expiring CRP may be enrolled but existing cover must contain wildlife suitable cover
including a diverse native grass mix, with a forb/legume component comprising 10% or more
of the plant composition, and must not contain >5% non-native grasses. If the existing cover
does not contain 10% forb/legume in the plant composition or the grass cover is a
monoculture, the cover needs to be upgraded. An approved management practice must be
completed on existing grass cover during the first or second year of enrollment.
Technical SAFE requirements

Conservation plans and planting specifications will be designed to maximize wildlife
benefits.

Eligible size:

Minimum enrollment per tract is 80 acres.

Maximum enrollment per tract is 320 acres

Seeding mixes may be found in the NRCS Field Office Tech Guide 645 Specification
(Upland Wildlife Habitat) and in CRP Guidance 38 issued 5-15-03. All seeding mixes must
contain a mix of a minimum of four species including two native warm-season grasses and
at least one forb or legume. Seeding rates for the grass component may be reduced, with
an approved variance, to provide a more open stand for brood rearing habitat where
erosion is not a concern.

Trees are not eligible.

Mid-contract management requirements will apply to SAFE enrollments, with activities
designed in the conservation plan to maximize the benefits for wildlife throughout the CRP
contract period. Management must be conducted on a rotational basis once in each 5-year
segment of the contract. Management practices cannot be applied in consecutive years in
the same portion of the field. Practices available include burning, light disking, and
forb/legume interseeding. Grazing is allowed once in each 5 year interval. Mowing without
removal of residue shall not be considered an acceptable form of management except to
facilitate burning, disking, or interseeding. Burning is allowed every fifth year as a midcontract management or maintenance practice.

Noxious weeds must be controlled. Undesirable plants, insects, and pests shall be
controlled, as necessary to avoid an adverse impact on surrounding land. Spot spraying
shall be the method of choice for herbicide application.

Habitat shall not be used for turn rows, roads, or for feeding or storage of hay, or
equipment storage.

Incidental grazing shall be allowed according to CRP policy.
Habitat type to be restored
This practice will provide permanent cover within crop field dominated landscapes for nesting and
brood rearing of upland birds. These habitat types are considered by resource agencies to be the
most limiting factor across the five states for LEPC’s.
Description of benefits
This project will improve habitat for quail and pheasants, which are of economic importance to
rural communities because of their popularity with hunters, as well as for prairie-chickens and
other grassland birds. Habitat for other native grassland wildlife will also improve. Permanent
grass cover will provide soil and water quality benefits in addition to habitat. The project will help
to bridge the gap between isolated populations of LEPC which, as populations drop, tend to lose
genetic diversity and to increase areas that LEPC can occupy. It will also help to buffer playas and
benefit aquifer recharge.
Relations to state and federal wildlife plans
OK: The CP38E Mixed-Grass Prairie Restoration SAFE is directly tied to the species of greatest
conservation need and high priority habitats of the Oklahoma Comprehensive Wildlife Strategy. Within the
Mixed-Grass Prairie Region described in the Oklahoma Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy, the
mixed-grass prairie and the sand sagebrush/bluestem shrubland are two of the four highest priority plant
communities. The restoration of these plant communities will provide new acres of habitat that will benefit
the species listed in Table 1.
TX: Relationship to Texas State Wildlife Action Plan (Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy)
The proposed TX CP38E SAFE for restoration of mixed grass prairie and lesser prairie-chicken
conservation addresses many High Priority species identified in the Texas Wildlife Action Plan (TWAP),
and also address secondary (High Plains) and tertiary (Rolling Plains) Terrestrial Conservation Priority
Areas (i.e., priority habitat areas and systems in the state). Selected grassland species identified in the
TWAP that would benefit from implementation of TX CP38E are listed in Table 3. Further, several
conservation and restoration problems, actions, and monitoring requirements identified for grassland species
listed in the TWAP are addressed with the proposed TX CP38E SAFE for mixed grass prairie restoration.
Restoration of mixed grass prairie in the selected SAFE watersheds will provide new acres, and corridor and
connectivity acres, of habitat that will benefit the selected TWAP species listed in Table 3.
CO: The states of Colorado, New Mexico and Oklahoma have listed the LPC as an at risk species. Federal
agencies have also made the LPC a priority. For example, CO USFWS Partners for Wildlife has identified
LPC habitat enhancement as part of its 5 year strategic goals. CO NRCS identified the LPC as a priority
species for its Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) and Environmental Quality Incentive Program
(EQIP) earning a landowner additional ranking points for applying practices that benefit LPC. OK NRCS
gives extra ranking points for EQIP and WHIP applications according to proximity to known LPC leks.
Kansas has targeted general signup CRP toward LPC priority areas and has been very successful. The
Department of Interior has identified the LPC as an at risk species.
Annual Performance Report
Playa Lakes Joint Venture, Inc. will submit an annual performance report of the CP38E practice to
the FSA.
Estimate of Costs to USDA
CRP rental payments- $42/acre X 75,000 acres = $3,150,000 X 15 years = $47,250,000
 Signup incentive bonus- $100/acre X 75,000 acres =
$7,500,000
 Establishment cost-share- $70/acre X 75,000acres = 5,250,000 X 50% =
$2,625,000
 Practice incentive payment- $70/acre X 75,000 = 5,250,000 X 40% =
$2,100,000
 CRP maintenance payment- $2/acre X 75,000 acres =
$150,000
 Mid-contract management- $11/acre x 75,000 = 825,000 X 3 treatments =
$2,475,000
TOTAL = $62,100,000
Additional State or Private Investment and Out-of-pocket Cost
State Wildlife Agency monitoring: $49,611.48?
Potential for graduate student project, as alternative monitoring, paid for under NFWF grant to
PLJV?: $25,000.00?
Potential for partner contributions from Kansas organizations and agencies?
Public outreach program
 Staff training for resource professionals providing technical assistance to implement the
program
 Announce through USDA newsletters to producers
 Project partners will develop brochures and other educational media
 Focus area outreach will include mailings to landowners and tenants, landowner meetings and
Buffer Coordinator directed enrollment
Monitoring Plan
Lek surveys will be conducted on SAFE acres in March through May to find leks, establish trends
in number of leks and males using leks, and to compare distance from known leks in established
LEPC range. Since native grasses require 2–4 years to become well established in the area
states, monitoring, except for that for LEPC leks and use which will begin immediately after field
selection, will commence after 2 growing seasons following the initial grass/forb seeding. Similar
walking transects will be established using GPS locations in both the SAFE tracts and in the
control fields. Transects will be traversed twice during the month of October between the hours of
10 AM and 4 PM, completing one traverse of both the SAFE tracts and control transects on the
same day (the order will be reversed on the second day). Biologists will record all observed
bobwhite, pheasant, and songbirds using distance-sampling methods (Buckland et al. 2001)
where the distance and angle to the observed bird is recorded. These data will be used to derive
relative densities of the monitored species in the SAFE tracts and control fields. This type of
monitoring will continue for a minimum of 5 consecutive years during the SAFE contract.
Alternative Monitoring: If funds are available and circumstances occur that favor a more-focused
approach, a graduate student project may be developed to measure the impact of SAFE tracts.
The approach would not only require targeted funding, but may also only be conducted if
adequate numbers (20+) of SAFE tracts are clustered in a sufficiently-small area (1-2 counties) to
make such research logistically practical. Potential methodologies would include radio telemetry,
probably focusing on LEPC.
Literature Cited:
Buckland, S. T., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnam, J. L. Laake, D. L. Borchers, and L. Thomas.
2001. Introduction to distance sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations. Oxford
University Press, New York. 432 pp.