Introduction

The High Country Resource Conservation and Development Council’s (HCRC&D) original area plan was adopted and approved in 1981. Even though that plan was developed to meet the needs at the time, it served the Council well for 20 plus years. However, since the original plan was developed many changes have occurred and continue to occur in the area. The Council’s area plan must evolve to meet new challenges and define the RC&D niche. Some of these changes include:

Ø The area’s population is increasing and diversifying. New demands are being placed on the areas natural resources, community infrastructure and services, and economic resources.

Ø The demographics, character, and economic base of some communities is rapidly changing.

Ø In some locations private land ownership and land use are dramatically changing. Traditional agricultural uses are being replaced with small acreage ranchettes, second homes, and subdivisions.

Ø New organizations and partnerships have formed that can assist the Council to address issues. Economic development organizations, land trusts, watershed councils, and volunteer groups offer additional expertise for a RC&D Council to implement an area plan.

Ø New state and federal programs have been developed which present new opportunities for the Council and our sponsors.

Plan Process

The process to revise the area plan began in January, 2004 with the appointment of an Area Plan Revision Committee made up of members of the Board of Directors. The committee included Gerald Jeppesen, HCRC&D Chairman; Boyd Bowles, HCRC&D Vice Chairman; Dave Radford, Bonneville County Commissioner; Richard Ball, Jefferson SWCD; and Lou Christensen, Mayor City of Driggs. The committee started by evaluating and prioritizing the goals and objectives from the old plan. The goals or objectives that no longer apply were culled. A power point presentation was developed. The committee developed a questionnaire that was mailed to all sponsors soliciting input on what the revised plan should contain. Nine questionnaires were returned. Sponsors provided in put during the 2005 Sponsors meeting. The draft plan includes the following three sections:

Needs and Opportunities Section

This section briefly describes some of the current conditions in the HCRC&D Area. This section is not intended to be a comprehensive discussion of all the regions issues but rather a focused discussion of issues that the HCRC&D will target Council’s resources on during the next 5 years.

Because of it’s regional aspect, the HCRC&D is in a unique position to assist our partners to address these concerns. HCRC&D will provide support for Council approved initiatives and projects with city, county, state, or federal agencies; local units of government; and local groups. RC&D support may include, but not be limited to:

Ø Researching issues, evaluating impacts, and developing reports.

Ø Linking federal and state programs and assistance with local needs.

Ø Providing project scoping, planning, and design services.

Ø Providing project facilitation and coordination services.

Ø Providing educational opportunities and resources.

Ø Providing fundraising, grant research, and grant writing services.

Ø Providing project oversight and grant administrative services.

Work Plan Section

This section identifies the goals, objectives, and strategies the HCRC&D will utilize during 2006 – 2010 to address some of the issues identified in the Needs and Opportunities section. The work plan further describes outcomes and timelines for each strategy.

Reference Section

This section contains the data that was researched and assembled during the revision of the area plan. The reference section contains backup data, maps, charts, graphs. The reference section is viewable at the HCRC&D website at http://www.hcountryrcd.org

Comments: (After making ALL comments on the area plan, please print page and mail to High Country RC&D office)

Needs and Opportunities

Element 1) LAND CONSERVATION

“Back ground” or natural erosion is occurring on all undisturbed lands within the HCRC&D area. With the exception of an occasional land slide or overland flooding, background erosion generally goes unnoticed. “Accelerated erosion” occurs when the land has been disturbed in some manner and adequate management has not been applied.

Generally soil erosion on pasturelands, hay lands, rangelands, and woodlands is slight or near background levels. Exceptions may occur on rangeland and woodland following a wildfire, prolonged drought, overland flooding, over-grazing, timber harvest, road construction, or other land disturbance.

Soil erosion on cropland due to wind and water is not a major factor in Lemhi County, Custer County, or Butte County because of low wind velocities, low precipitation, and a predominance of permanent vegetative cover. Soil erosion is a significant concern on cropland located in the southern portion of the area.

Wind erosion is primarily a concern on irrigated cropland on the valley floors in Bonneville, Jefferson, Madison, Fremont, and Clark Counties. Blowing dust from unprotected fields is a common sight in the spring. Interstate 15 near Osgood may close during severe dust storms. Blowing and drifting sands occur along Highway 33 in the Mud Lake area of Jefferson County and near Dubois in Clark County. On sandy soils ‘blow outs’ occur that result in crops needing to be replanted. Actively moving sand dunes are located in Fremont County. Wind erosion may also occur in the uplands of Bonneville, Madison, Teton, and Fremont Counties following spring tillage on silt loam soils. These storms are not common but may result in significant soil loss when they occur.

Water induced soil erosion is primarily a threat in the sloping foothills and benches of Bonneville, Madison, Teton, and Fremont Counties where silt loam soils are used for irrigated and non-irrigated cropland. Slopes are moderate to steep and the landscape is dissected by intermittent or perennial stream channels. Water erosion is a threat during spring runoff and during intense summer rains. Ephemeral gully erosion in draws and water courses is not uncommon. In some locations the soils are shallow to bed rock or to a calcareous horizon. Irrigation induced erosion is primarily a concern on steep slopes being used to grow potatoes. Excess tail water from irrigated cropland may result in gully erosion.

Soil and Water Conservation Districts within the area have implemented numerous watershed scale planning projects and land treatment projects since the 1980’s. Landowners have increasingly adopted soil conservation techniques including improved crop rotations, reduced tillage systems, permanent cover, and structural treatments, and windbreaks.

Streambank erosion is occurring throughout the RC&D area during spring runoff. Sediment and debris recruited into streams degrades spawning habitat, reduces channel and reservoir capacity, clogs culverts and head gates, re-routes flows, and may result in localized overland flooding.

Land Conservation Opportunities

The planning and application of erosion and sedimentation control on private agricultural lands is primarily the responsibility and jurisdiction of the private landowner, Soil and Water Conservation Districts, and supporting state and federal agencies. HCRC&D will provide support when requested by our sponsors through RC&D Council approved projects. RC&D support may include, but not be limited to:

Ø Assisting USDA to implement Farm Bill programs.

Ø Assist communities to address soil erosion and sedimentation issue.

Ø Assist sponsors to plan, implement and evaluate new conservation strategies.

LAND CONSERVATION ELEMENT		YEAR
GOAL	1) PROMOTE CONSERVATION OF SOIL and LAND RESOURCES	06	07	08	09	10
Objective	1-Support sponsor’s efforts to plan and implement land conservation projects.						OUTCOMES
Strategy	1. Evaluate SWCD LRPs and meet with all SWCDs to identify opportunities for collaboration.	x	x				Plans developed
Strategy	2. Develop a resource that identifies non-traditional funding methods and sources for conservation.			x			Publication produced
Strategy	3. Assist sponsors with grant writing and proposal development as requested.	x	x	x	x	x	Proposals developed
Objective	2-Explore, and develop new strategies for mitigation and enhancement of land resources.
Strategy	1. Assist sponsors to develop 2 field trials related to resource conservation priorities				x		Trials implemented
Strategy	2. Assess opportunities for large scale riparian buffer projects. Develop report to sponsors.		x	x			Acres Planned

Comments: (After making ALL comments on the area plan, please print page and mail to High Country RC&D office)

Element 1) Water Resources

The management of the area’s water resources is critical to the economy and ecology of the area and has implications across all of southern Idaho. Competing uses for water including agriculture, livestock, wildlife, recreation, industry, communities, irrigation, hydroelectric operations, salmon recovery, and individuals all place demands on the available surface and ground water resources. Prolonged drought conditions like those experienced during the last six years severely test surface and ground water supplies.

The first water right in the RC&D Area was recorded in 1874 on Willow Creek in Bonneville County. Since that time a complex irrigation system based on Colorado River Doctrine of Water Rights has evolved in the Area and State. A network of water districts, irrigation districts, canal companies, and water users associations were created to develop canals, ditches and/or pipelines to convey water to where it was needed. Individually or collectively, these organizations developed water storage impoundments on small streams.

In 1987, the Snake River Basin Adjudication process began to determine all water rights in the Snake River Basin began. The process continues today. In 1992 the State issued a moratorium on all new water rights in the Snake River Basin. Up until the 1990’s, surface and ground water were managed as separate resources by the state. Idaho now manages groundwater, spring and surface water as a single linked resource under conjunctive management.

Irrigation water can be short during dry years. This shortage is increased by water loss in the delivery systems and poor efficiency of on-farm systems. Improvement of irrigation canals and delivery ditches is needed to reduce water losses. Irrigation water management on the cropland is also needed.

The High Country RC&D Area is divided into three major drainage areas:

1) Upper Snake River: The headwaters for the main stem of the Snake River are in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. The river passes through Jackson Lake in Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming, and is joined by the Buffalo Fork, Gros Ventre, Hoback, Greys, and Salt Rivers before entering Idaho at Palisades Reservoir in Bonneville County. The Henry's Fork of the Snake River originates at Henry's Lake, passes through Island Park Reservoir, and is joined by the Buffalo, Warm, Fall, and Teton Rivers before it merges with the Main Fork of the Snake River in Jefferson County. The Snake River leaves the Area southwest of Idaho Falls.

The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) maintains a system of reservoirs which provide irrigation water, flood control, and water based recreation benefits to the HCRC&D area. The reservoirs are located in Fremont and Bonneville County as well as Teton County, Wyoming. Irrigators in Bonneville, Jefferson, Madison, and Fremont counties benefit directly from water stored in this system. There are also privately owned irrigation reservoirs in the watershed. There are no water storage facilities physically located in Teton County making those irrigators dependent on surface and ground water. Irrigation water quality is generally good. Substantial quantities return to the Snake River from irrigation return flow and canals.

2) Lost Rivers – Mud Lake: The Big Lost River, Little Lost River, Birch Creek, and Medicine Lodge Creek all disappear into lava flows on the Snake River Plain. Most of this sinking water, which is not diverted by irrigation wells, will eventually reenter the Snake River from numerous springs flowing into American Falls Reservoir and at the Thousand Springs area in south central Idaho.

Mackay Reservoir is the only significant storage facility located on the Big Lost River. It provides irrigation storage, and some flood control, and recreation. There are no storage facilities on the Little Lost River, which presents serious water shortage problems during the dry years. Beaver Creek and Camas Creek, during high flows, replenish Mud Lake, which has no natural outlet.

3) Salmon River: The Salmon River is known world wide as the River of No Return. It is a white water river for most of its length and provides a tremendous challenge for those who use it for recreation. The main tributaries of the Salmon River are the East Fork, North Fork, and Middle Fork Salmon Rivers; Lemhi; and Pahsimeroi Rivers. The Middle Fork as well as a portion of the Main Fork of the Salmon River are classified as Wild and Scenic Rivers.

There are only a few small reservoirs in the Salmon River drainage. They are insignificant in terms of total water supply or for flood control. Water supplies are limited in relation to demands. In the Upper Salmon Basin (Stanley) and the East Fork during normal snow-pack years have adequate quantities of water for irrigation. Challis Creek and Pahsimeroi River water users have limited supplies of both ground water and surface water used for irrigation needs.

Surface Water Quality: Non point source pollutants pose the biggest threat to surface water quality in the area. Sixteen watersheds within the area are required to develop a Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) to meet the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act. A TMDL is essentially a pollutant budget. Fifteen TMDLs have been developed and approved by EPA. Following EPA’s approval of a TMDL, an implementation plan is written which provides details of the actions needed to achieve load reduction and a schedule of those actions. Five implementation plans have been completed. Nine are under development.

Aquifers : The area contains several aquifers that are essential to the area’s water supply. Valley-filled aquifers hold water in unconsolidated sedimentary material, usually in intermountain valleys. Basalt aquifers hold water in the cracks of underground rock and in thin sedimentary layers that are inter bedded with the basalt. Increased ground water pumping for irrigation is suspected of lowering the water tables and adversely affecting down stream surface water rights. Two Ground Water Districts, the Madison and Bonneville-Jefferson have formed to manage ground water resources.

Idaho has prioritized its major aquifers based on their vulnerability to pollution. The Snake River aquifer is considered the second most vulnerable in Idaho. Vulnerable areas exist where groundwater is shallow or where soils are thin or very permeable. Also, the potential for contmination is greater where considerable water is applied to the land surface from precipitation or irrigation water, which can move contaminants below the root zone. Four nitrate priority areas have been identified in the area. In some portions of the area there is concern regarding aquifer depletion as urban areas develop.

Flooding : Flooding is an annual occurrence along some streams with low lying grazing lands, croplands, and riparian areas. In Custer County, the East Fork of the Salmon River is prone to flooding. In Teton County, flooding occurs every spring in the wet bottomlands along the Teton River and its tributaries. In the Henrys Fork area, flooding will generally result from spring snow melt. Flood damage is possible along the lower twenty two miles of the Henry’s Fork and along the Teton River near Rexburg.

Flooding on the Big Lost River is a frequent problem. Big floods occurred in 1965, 1967 and 1986. These floods took out several bridges and damaged highways and county roads. However, the more frequent damage is the increased erosion on stream banks and the flooding of cropland. Camas and Beaver Creeks are sources of surface inflow to Mud Lake, which has no effective outlet other than irrigation canals, evaporation, and seepage. Lands along Camas Creek near the lake and along the south side of the lake are susceptible to flooding. If the volume of inflow were to exceed the available storage capacity of the lake, locally constructed dikes around the lake might fail and permit flooding of farm areas south of the lake. The Mud Lake flood plain is principally in crops. Portions of residential and associated developments in the communities of Terreton and Mud Lake, on the fringe of the flood plain, may suffer minor damages under extreme flood conditions.

Ice jams have played a role in a number of floods in the area. Significant ice jams have occurred on the Teton, Snake, Little Lost (at Howe), Salmon, and Lemhi rivers The most notable of the ice jam flood was on the Lemhi River near Salmon in 1984, an event that led to a Federal Disaster declaration. A study conducted following the Lemhi River ice jam flooding in 1984, revealed that during the period of 1910- 1984, ice jams reached the town of Salmon in 25 years, with jams occasionally building up to Salmon twice during a single winter. Elsewhere on the river, significant ice jams were found to have occurred in nine out of every ten winters between 1899 and 1984.

During the winter 1996-97, the snowpack in the Snake River Drainage exceeded 250% of normal in some higher elevations. By June 11, the flows coming out of Palisades reservoir, coupled with the high tributary discharges, produced the highest flows on the Snake River since 1918. At its peak, the Snake River flooded as far as a mile from its banks, and many places were under five feet of water. River levels were close to overtopping existing flood control levees and flooding of agricultural lands began far from the main channel as irrigation canals overflowed their banks. There were numerous closures of county roads and state highways from water and damage to bridges, especially in Jefferson County, which impacted transportation as well as response activities. There were flood fighting efforts in several small towns, including Menan, Labell, and Roberts where voluntary evacuations were in effect. The State estimated that approximately 500 people were displaced from their homes in Jefferson and Bingham counties. Bonneville, Fremont, Jefferson, Madison, Custer, and Butte counties were declared Federal disasters.

Water Resource Opportunities

HCRC&D will support efforts to manage and conserve the regions water resources and protect surface and ground water quality. HCRC&D will work with SWCDs, NGOs, units of government, and agencies when requested by our sponsors through RC&D Council approved projects. HCRC&D will focus on:

Ø Assisting sponsors to evaluate flood risks and develop and implement mitigation strategies.

Ø Reducing threats to surface water quality.

Ø Conserving water resources and improving water management.

Ø Reducing threats to groundwater resources.

Ø Addressing urban storm water issues.

WATER MANAGEMENT ELEMENT WORK PLAN		YEAR
GOAL	1) ENCOURAGE THE PROPER USE OF THE REGIONS WATER RESOURCES.	06	07	08	09	10
Objective	1- Assist sponsors to identify and assess watershed issues, problems, and solutions. Improve or maintain water quality in the areas lakes, rivers, streams, or aquifers.						OUTCOMES
Strategy	1. Evaluate the status of urban storm water pollution issues in the area. Develop report to sponsors.		x	x			Assesment completed
Strategy	2. Assist sponsors and NRCS to develop Rapid Watershed Assessments.	x	x				Assesment completed
Strategy	3. Provide technical assistance as requested to implement TMDLs.	x	x	x	x	x	Acres planned, treated
Objective	2- Assist sponsors to develop appropriate strategies in flood prone areas.
Strategy	1. Assess flooding risks in the County "all hazards" mitigation plans. Develop mitigation strategies.	x	x	x			Acres planned
Strategy	2. Assist sponsors to implement flood mitigation recommendations.				x	x	Acres treated

Comments: (After making ALL comments on the area plan, please print page and mail to High Country RC&D office)

Element 3) LAND RESOURCES

There are approximately 12,320,320 acres in the HCRC&D Area. Graph 1: Land Ownership, demonstrates how land ownership is distributed. 76.19% percent of land in the area is federally owned and administered by seven agencies. The Forest Service controls the biggest block of federally owned land, followed by the Bureau of Land Management. The rest of federal land is divided among the US Department of Energy INEEL, US Bureau of Reclamation, National Park Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service and Agricultural Research Service.

Private land represents 20.37% of the Area.

The State of Idaho owns about 406,717 acres (3.3% of the Area). Land is managed by three state agencies: State Endowment Lands managed by Idaho Department of Lands (86.56% , 352,067 acres), Idaho Fish and Game ( 10.52% of state owned land, 42,802 acres) and Idaho Parks and Recreation (2.91% of state owned land, 11,848 acres). Generally these lands are leased to private individuals for field crop production, cattle and sheep grazing allotments, and logging. Some State lands are dedicated for wildlife habitat and public recreation.

A small amount of land is owned and used by municipalities and counties. 1,974 acres (.016 % of all land in the Area) is owned by municipalities. Counties own 15,321 acres (.124 % of all land in the Area).

The land in Area is put to many uses by its various owners. To a great extent land use is determined by the soil, water, topography, and climate. These factors have also influenced settlement and development.

Rangeland represents the largest sector (41.8%) followed by forest (37.74%). Irrigated and non-cropland combined make up the next largest sector with 6% each. Urban land in the area is 0.15%. The remaining land uses are: water (0.53%), wetland (1.3 %), and barren land (6%).

Privately owned agricultural lands are primarily used for crop production and livestock grazing throughout the HCRC&D area. Approximately 10 % of all cropland is enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).

Public lands are managed for multiple uses including wildlife, grazing, timber harvest, recreation, watershed, and wilderness. Within the Area there are three designated wilderness areas encompassing 681,613 acres. A proposed Boulder White Cloud Wilderness Area in Custer Co. would add 500,000 acres to the total amount of wilderness.

Over the past 20 years, acreage developed for new housing almost doubled in Eastern Idaho. This trend is expected to continue. In Fremont County, the requests and approval of building permits has risen 1,500% since 1992. Since 1994, 10-plus acre housing lots have accounted for 55 percent of the land developed in eastern Idaho. New housing growth across the Area is resulting in the permanent conversion of agriculture land to non-agriculture uses with direct impacts on the land base, related natural resources, and the economy.

As land use conversion occurs there are often direct impacts on traditional agriculture operations. Agricultural infrastructure such as canals, ditches, irrigation systems may be negatively impacted. Agricultural land use conversion decreases working farm and ranch unit size and reduces land available for producers to rent. Land values are rapidly increasing beyond a level where agriculture producers can compete effectively. Housing developments in the Wild land Urban Interface, (WUI), create adverse impacts on wildlife especially where traditional winter range, cover, or migration routes are impacted.

Forest health is a major concern throughout the Area. Six years of drought coupled with insect and disease attack have left many forested area with a high number of dead and dying trees. On both public and private lands the build up of hazardous fuels creates extreme risks for catastrophic wildfires.

Invasive species represent a major threat to land and eco-system integrity in the Area. Aggressive terrestrial noxious weeds have gained a strong foothold in every county. Noxious weeds pollute native plant communities, degrade wildlife habitat, reduce land values, and require annual investments of capital, equipment, and staff to combat.

Land Use Opportunities

HCRC&D will support efforts to manage the regions land resources. HCRC&D will work with groups, units of government, and agencies when requested by our sponsors through RC&D Council approved projects. HCRC&D will focus on:

Ø Addressing invasive species issues within the area.

Ø Reducing wildfire risks and threats in the Wild land / Urban Interface.

Ø Addressing the impacts of land use conversion from agriculture to urban uses.

Ø Assisting agricultural producers to evaluate value added business opportunities.

Ø Working with partners to resolve land use conflicts.

Ø Enhancing wildlife habitat.

LAND MANAGEMENT ELEMENT		YEAR
GOAL	1) ACHIEVE BETTER RESOURCE USE ON ALL LANDS AND REDUCE CONFLICTS	06	07	08	09	10
Objective	1: Assist sponsors to retain natural resource values where land use is changing from agriculture to urban.						OUTCOMES
Strategy	1. Develop areawide workshops that address resource conservation and landuse issues.			x		x	Education
Strategy	2. Assist sponsors to develop coordinated resource planning and management for urban areas.		x	x	x	x	Acres planned
GOAL	2) ENHANCE WILDLIFE RESOURCES AND MANAGEMENT
Objective	1- Assist sponsors and agencies to coordinate and implement wildlife conservation progams.
Strategy	1. Develop projects to control noxious weeds on WMAs, riparian areas, and winter range.	x	x	x	x	x	Wildlife habitat improved
Strategy	2. Develop and/or assist with public information programs on wildlife management.	x	x	x	x	x	Education
Strategy	3. Assist sponsors to develop water based wildlife areas.	x	x	x	x	x	Wildlife habitat improved
Strategy	4. Assist agencies to evaluate area wildlife resources including potential endangered species listings, predators, non-game species, and social and economic impacts.	x	x	x	x	x	Wildlife habitat improved
GOAL	3) PROMOTE INVASIVE SPECIES AWARENESS AND CONTROL.
Objective	1- Assist sponsors and agencies to develop comprehensive invasive species control programs.