Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance

committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports

if they are used for other purposes.

Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).

Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and

attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR Nunez

DATE TYPED 2/10/05

HB 89/aHAGC

SHORT TITLE Non-Native Phreatophyte Removal Program

SB

ANALYST Woods

APPROPRIATION

Appropriation Contained Estimated Additional Impact Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY05

FY06

FY05

FY06

$10,000.0

Recurring General Fund

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to the appropriation for New Mexico State University in the General Appropriations Act.

Relates to HB88

Relates to SB190

Relates to HB7

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

New Mexico Department of Agriculture (NMDA)

New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)

New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission (ISC)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of

HAGC Amendment

House Agriculture and Water Resources Committee Amendment to HB89 clarifies both the

functional responsibility, as well as the parameters of the statewide non-native phreatophyte re-

moval program as follows:

On page 1, line 17:

After the word “university,” the phrase “through the soil and water conservation districts” is

inserted.

On page 1, line 19:

House Bill 89/aHAGC -- Page 2

After the word “program,” the phrase “, including restoration of riparian vegetation, monitor-

ing and long-term management and maintenance in accordance with established templates

and protocols” is inserted.

House Agriculture and Water Resources Committee Amendment to HB89 attaches no additional

appropriation to the bill.

Original Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 89 – Making an Appropriation for a Statewide Nonnative

Phreatophyte Removal Pro-

gram – app

ropriates $10 million from the general fund to the Board of Regents of New Mexico

State University to conduct a statewide non-native phreatophyte removal program for expendi-

ture in fiscal year 2006. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of

FY06 shall revert to the general fund.

Significant Issues

NMDA indicates the nonnative phreatophyte program was originally initiated in FY02 and con-

tinues to be funded with through annual appropriations. In response to language in HB2 (2004

legislative session), an interagency work group (HB2 Work Group) was formed to create a

statewide strategic plan to guide future nonnative phreatophyte management and associated res-

toration activities. While release of the HB2 Work Group strategic plan is pending, NMDA notes

that one recommendation calls for creation of sustainable funding for this program for two rea-

sons:

•

the severity of watershed conditions in the state; and

•

federal finds (which will require state matching funds) will be available to offset program

costs (pending federal appropriation).

NMDA suggests that New Mexico has been at the forefront of nonnative phreatophyte manage-

ment and restoration activities; further that implementation of projects has been accomplished in

collaboration with the soil and water conservation districts with support from the soil and water

conservation commission and NMDA staff.

However, NMED calls attention to the fact that, if not properly implemented, phreatophyte re-

moval could induce bank destabilization that in turn would increase the risk of erosion leading to

water quality impacts, sedimentation and diminished capacity of the state’s reservoirs. Further,

effective revegetation with native species is necessary to minimize this possibility, and should be

a funded, mandatory component of every phreatophyte eradication project.

Also commenting on native species revegetation, the ISC indicates that, while water uptake by

phreatophytes can constitute a significant portion of a basin water budget, the latest analyses by

the United States Academy of Sciences and the American Council of Civil Engineers indicate

that actual water salvage by phreatophyte removal programs are much less than predicted and

may even be non-existent unless accompanied by a carefully planned program for reintroduction

of low water use native plants.

House Bill 89/aHAGC -- Page 3

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The appropriation of $10 million contained in this bill is a recurring expense to the general fund.

Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of FY06 shall revert to the gen-

eral fund.

ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS

The New Mexico Department of Agriculture would retain oversight of the program.

CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP

Language in HB7 and SB190 (general appropriation acts) states, “None of the money appropri-

ated to the state engineer for operating or trust purposes shall be expended for primary clearing

of vegetation in a phreatophyte removal project, except insofar as is required to meet the terms of

the Pecos river compact between Texas and New Mexico. However, this prohibition shall not

apply to removal of vegetation incidental to the construction, operation or maintenance for flood

control or carriage of water or both.”

OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

This request was not in the list of priority projects submitted by the NMSU Board of Regents to

the CHE for review. Accordingly, it was not included in the CHE’s funding recommendations

for FY06.

BFW/yr