ALUS PAC MEETING AGENDA June 26, 2015

Transcription

1 ALUS PAC MEETING AGENDA June 26, 2015 Page 1.0 CALL TO ORDER 2.0 APPROVAL OF AGENDA 2.1 Additional Agenda Items 3.0 ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES OF ALUS PAC MEETING Adoption of the Minutes of the ALUS PAC Meeting of April 30, Question/ Matters Arising from the Minutes 4.0 DELEGATIONS / PRESENTATIONS 5.0 REPORTS Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions BA SP SJ JH JD CP CH HR 6.0 DISCUSSION 6.1 Fundraising 6.2 Update from the 3 ALUS Municipalities Meeting in Camrose ALUS Payments Based on Measured Range or Riparian Health - one concept and it's pros and cons 7.0 ADJOURNMENT Page 1 of 50

2 Red Deer County Alternative Land Use Services Partnership Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes April 30, CALL TO ORDER The Red Deer County ALUS Partnership Advisory Committee meeting was held at Red Deer County Centre located at Rge Rd 275, Red Deer County, Alberta and was called to order by Philip Massier at 9:04 a.m. Present: Don Church (Chair), Philip Massier, Richard Lorenz, Russel Horvey, Stephen Smith and Jim Fisher. Staff Present: Art Preachuk, Ken Lewis, Aimee Delaney and Lindsay Thompson (Recording Secretary). Guests: Absent: Adrienne Herron (Alberta Agriculture), Darwin Chambers (Ducks Unlimited), Ken Bordstrom and Gerald Pitt. David Goldstrom and Derek Mathon. 2.0 APPROVAL OF AGENDA Moved by R. Horvey to approve the agenda with the addition of item 6.4 Nature s Benefits vs. Ecosystem Services. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3.0 MINUTES Moved by P. Massier to approve the minutes of the February 26, 2015 meeting as submitted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4.0 DELEGATION 5.0 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects Administration presented information regarding potential ALUS project BH. The project includes fencing around ephemeral wetlands, willow planting, an internal fence to protect willows during grazing periods and annual payments for 2.48 acres of ecosystem services. Moved by P. Massier to accept RDC ALUS project BH as presented. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Administration presented information regarding potential ALUS project KB. The landowner is not interested in pursuing the project at this time, but discussed priorities for project decisions with the ALUS PAC. The Committee supported a future discussion to revisit pricing Administration presented information regarding potential ALUS project MH/DK. The project includes riparian zone fencing and an offsite watering system and annual payments for 8.9 acres of ecosystem services. Moved by R. Horvey to accept RDC ALUS project MH/DK as presented. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Adoption of the Minutes of the ALUS PAC Meeting of April 30,... Page 2 of 50

3 5.1.4 Administration presented information regarding potential ALUS project AT. The project includes fencing, seeding and planting, an off-site watering system and annual payments for 7.61 acres of ecosystem services. Moved by P. Massier to accept RDC ALUS project AT as presented. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6.0 DISCUSSION The meeting recessed at 10:09 a.m. The meeting resumed at 10:20 a.m. 6.1 Fundraising J. Fisher gave an overview of national and provincial level fundraising activity. The National Conservation Plan (NCP) has already provided $36,800 to be used for projects in NCP will provide an additional estimated $33,000 for projects in 2015, and an estimated $24,000 for projects in The funding is available for wetland related projects and up to 15% may be used for administrative or delivery costs. The Weston Foundation grant for will provide $500,000 in funding across Canada. Project funding will be flexible with amounts dependent on the needs of communities. Project funding may be used for non-wetland related projects. Mr. Fisher also gave an update of ALUS National activities across Canada. 6.2 Mallard Tunnels Administration initiated discussion regarding mallard tunnel use to reduce predation of eggs and ducklings. The goal is to include them in areas with duck habitats. Administration will invite the installer to an upcoming meeting and look into advertising the program in the Red Deer County News. 6.3 ALUS National Vs. ALUS Local Administration initiated discussion regarding the functions distributed between ALUS Canada (National) and the local level. 6.4 Nature s Services vs. Ecosystem Services Administration initiated discussion regarding appropriate use of terminology. Ontario has used the term Nature s Services successfully, however, production focused approach may be more beneficial locally. Ecosystem Services is the term used in the scientific community. The PAC favoured the term Ecosystem Services. 7.0 ADJOURNMENT Moved by R. Horvey to adjourn the meeting. TIME: 10:45 a.m. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Adoption of the Minutes of the ALUS PAC Meeting of April 30,... Page 3 of 50

4 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 4 of 50 Potential ALUS Projects For June RDC ALUS PAC Meeting

5 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 5 of 50 Project 1: BA (Overview)

6 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 6 of 50 Project 1: BA (surrounds)

7 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 7 of 50 Project 1: BA (SW14)

8 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 8 of 50 Project 1: BA (SE14)

9 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 9 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 1: BA Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (ALUS) Create wider buffers by stopping crop $0.00 $0.00 seeding in select marginal cropland areas and letting existing buffers widen naturally Seed wider buffer areas if necessary (2016) $2,000 $1,000 TOTAL $2,000 $1,000

10 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 10 of 50 Project 1: BA Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Permanent Wetlands (2+ acres) 27.9 $2 $55.80 Permanent Wetland (<2 acres) 3.25 $5 $16.25 Annual Payment Existing Buffers (arable in dry years)* 31.7 $40 $1, New Buffers (arable in dry years)* 10.7 $40 $ TOTAL $1, *These would not be farmed for the duration of the ALUS Conservation Agreement

11 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 11 of 50 Project 2: SP (Overview)

12 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 12 of 50 Project 2: SP (surrounds)

13 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 13 of 50 Project 2: SP

14 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 14 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 2: SP Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (Cons.Par.) Fencing to manage livestock around (0.3 miles) X $7200/mile = $2,160 $1,080 enlarged permanent wetland TOTAL $2,160 $1,080

15 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 15 of 50 Project 2: SP Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Enlarged Wetland (created by ditch plug) 7.79 $50 $ Grass Buffer around enlarged wetland 3.55 $30 $ Permanent Wetlands (<2 acres) $5 $60.30 Permanent Wetland (2+ acres) 5.45 $2 $10.90 TOTAL $ Annual Payment

16 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 16 of 50 Project 3: SJ (Overview)

17 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 17 of 50 Project 3: SJ (surrounds)

18 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 18 of 50 Project 3: SJ

19 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 19 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 3: SJ Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (ALUS) Ditch Plug to Enlarge Wetland $1,000 (backhoe and material) $800 (backhoe) Seeding Native Grass as buffer around $1,500 (seed, seeding equipment, weed $1,000 (seed and weed control) enlarged wetland control if needed) TOTAL $2,500 $1,800

20 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 20 of 50 Project 3: SJ Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Enlarged Wetland (created by ditch plug) 0.34 $50 $17.00 Grass Buffer around enlarged wetland 0.34 $40 $13.60 Existing Buffer Zones (grazable) 4.53 $30 $ Permanent Wetlands (<2 acres) 9.62 $5 $48.10 Permanent Wetland (2+ acres) 12.6 $2 $25.20 TOTAL $ Annual Payment

21 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 21 of 50 Project 4: JH (Overview)

22 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 22 of 50 Project 4: JH (surrounds)

23 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 23 of 50 Project 4: JH (NW)

24 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 24 of 50 Project 4: JH (NE)

25 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 25 of 50 Project 4: JH (SE)

26 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 26 of 50 Project 4: JH (SW)

27 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 27 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 4: JH Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (CP) NW: Re-instate and expand pasture $5,000 $3,750 pipeline system NE: Get renter to re-install off-site $0 $0 watering system SE: Install a Portable Off-site Watering $10,000 $5,000 System SW: Expand the gravity-fed pasture $6,000 $4,500 pipeline system TOTAL $21,000 $13,250

28 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 28 of 50 Project 4: JH Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Permanent Wetlands (<2 acres) 23.7 $5 $ Permanent Wetland (2+ acres) 67.6 $2 $ TOTAL 91.3 $ Annual Payment

29 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 29 of 50 Project 5: JD (Overview)

30 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 30 of 50 Project 5: JD (surrounds)

31 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 31 of 50 Project 5: JD

32 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 32 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 5: JD Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (ALUS) Conservation Fence $1,000 (backhoe and material) $800 (backhoe) Remove Old Fencing $1,500 (seed, seeding equipment, weed $1,000 (seed and weed control) control if needed) TOTAL $2,500 $1,800

33 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 33 of 50 Project 5: JD Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Riparian Buffer Around Wetland, conserved by fence 9.1 $30 $ Upland Buffer upslope of riparian area, conserved by 0.9 $30 $27.00 fence Permanent Wetlands (<2 acres) 0.5 $5 $2.50 Permanent Wetland (2+ acres) 21.9 $2 $43.80 TOTAL 32.4 $ Annual Payment

34 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 34 of 50 Project 6: CP (Overview)

35 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 35 of 50 Project 6: CP (surrounds)

36 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 36 of 50 Project 6: CP

37 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 37 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 6: CP Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (ALUS) Conservation Fence $1,368 (0.19 miles X $7200/mile) $1,026 Willow and Poplar Planting $8,000 (plants and planters) $6,000 TOTAL $9,368 $7,026

38 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 38 of 50 Project 6: CP Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Riparian Buffer Around Wetland, conserved by fence 15.5 $30 $ Permanent Wetland (2+ acres) 42.7 $2 $85.40 TOTAL 58.2 $ Annual Payment

39 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 39 of 50 Project 7: CH (Overview)

40 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 40 of 50 Project 7: CH (surrounds)

41 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 41 of 50 Project 7: CH

42 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 42 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 7: CH Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (ALUS) Conservation Fence $1152 (0.16 miles X $7200/mile) $844 TOTAL $1,152 $844

43 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 43 of 50 Project 7: CH Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Aspen Forest 26.5 $30 $ Grassed Swale 2.0 $30 $60.00 TOTAL 28.5 $ Annual Payment

44 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 44 of 50 Project 8: HR (Overview)

45 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 45 of 50 Project 8: HR (surrounds)

46 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 46 of 50 Project 8: HR

47 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 47 of 50 Cost Sharing Summary Project 8: HR Project / Activity Estimated Total Cost Possible Cost Share (Conservation Partners) Off-stream watering system $7,974 $3,987 TOTAL $7,974 $3,987

48 5.1 Proposed ALUS Projects: Review and PAC Decisions B... Page 48 of 50 Project 8: HR Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Summary Ecosystem Service Acres Payment Rate (per Acre) Permanent Wetlands (<2 acres) 5.8 $5 $29.00 Permanent Wetland (2+ acres) 14.7 $2 $29.40 Conserved Riparian Zone 6.0 $30 $ TOTAL $26.5 $ Annual Payment

49 Payments for Ecosystem Services Produced, Using Range or Riparian Health Indicators as the Measure of Ecosystem Services BACKGROUIND: The ALUS Program in Red Deer County has wrestled with how annual payments for ecosystem services should be paid to farmers and ranchers. To date, Red Deer County has roughly followed the system established originally by the County of Vermilion River, and since adopted by Parkland County, that outlines a payment scheme based loosely on local land rental rates. RATIONALE 1. In Red Deer County, ALUS pays farmers and ranchers when they increase the ecosystem services that they are producing on their land 2. The Red Deer County ALUS Program is focused on riparian (as defined in our Strategic Plan) lands and uplands adjacent to riparian areas. 3. Riparian areas and adjacent upland areas produce a suite of ecosystem services. 4. Riparian (or Range) Health Assessments are a way of measuring how well a Riparian or Range ecosystem is producing ecosystem services. 5. Improvements in Riparian or Range Health, represent increased ecosystem services from riparian or adjacent upland areas. 6. The Red Deer County ALUS Strategic Plan includes a direction that payments for ecosystem services under the ALUS Program, will be based on measured improvements in riparian or range health. PROPOSED PAYMENT STRUCTURE 1. When a farmer or rancher decides to enroll some land in the ALUS Program, in Year One, a Riparian and/or Range Health Assessment(s) will be conducted of the lands that are being enrolled. 2. The results of this RHA will set the basis for the ALUS Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Produced 3. For Year One, the ALUS Annual Payments for Ecosystem Services Produced will be: a. $0 / acre for RHA Results of Unhealthy (50% or less) b. $5/acre for RHA Results of Unhealthy (but greater than 50%) c. $10/acre for Healthy with Problems d. $20 / acre for Healthy 4. Year Two payments will be the same as Year One. 5. Year Three Payments will be based on RHA Score Change (compared to Year One): An increase of $1.00 per acre for every RHA Percentage score over the Year One results, and a decrease of $1.00 per acre for every RHA Percentage score under the Year One results 6. Year Four payments will be the same as Year 3 7. Year 5 payments will be the based on RHA Score Change (compared to Year 3), as above 8. Year 6 payments will be the same as Year 5 9. Etc. for the duration of the contract. ALUS Payments Based on Measured Range or Riparian Health - o... Page 49 of 50

50 10. IF the RHA results decrease by more than 10% from one assessment to another, for 2 consecutive RHAs (for example, in Year 3 and in Year 5), the agreement will be considered forfeit and payments will cease. Establishment costs (as generally defined in the ALUS Program) will be borne by the producer, and/or other partners such as Conservation Partners, Growing Forward 2, etc. In some cases, the ALUS Program may be cost-sharing on project establishment costs. In those cases, as per the ALUS Conservation Agreement signed with the landowner, if the agreement is forfeited, the establishment costs re-payment provisions in the Conservation Agreement may apply. MANAGEMENT OF THE ENROLLED LANDS 1. Is ultimately left to the Farmer / Rancher 2. The Farmer / Rancher decides how he/she will manage the land, to produce more, the same, or less ecosystem services (i.e. the farmer rancher decides what he/she will do to imrpove, maintain, or decrease the RHA results for the the enrolled lands 3. Staff may provide advice to the landowner but ultimate decisions will be the landowners. 4. Staff may do site visits / coarse assessments in non-rha years (year 2, 4, etc.), to help provide advice to landowners. ALUS Payments Based on Measured Range or Riparian Health - o... Page 50 of 50