I am glad you mentioned grazing because that would do the most. Really intensive, high tonnage grazing that would trample alot of that thatch would really be beneficial. Is there some resaon that the people that make these decisions are opposed to that?
Burning NWSG compared to Mowing and Disking
- Thread starter Freeborn
- Start date
I am glad you mentioned grazing because that would do the most. Really intensive, high tonnage grazing that would trample alot of that thatch would really be beneficial. Is there some resaon that the people that make these decisions are opposed to that?
Prairie Drifter
Well-known member
CRP is a set-aside program. Grazing is production.
Thanks for all the great responses. I will evaluate my grass as it ages and if thatch is less productive I will take care of it. One additional question, what about haying the grass and then lightly disking?
My contract does allow for mowing and if I couldn't burn I could bale.
Is there any value to a bale of NWSG.
My contract does allow for mowing and if I couldn't burn I could bale.
Is there any value to a bale of NWSG.
Yes, I have a contract that I can bale some of after the first of August. It depends on the year, but on a wet year it is still decent hay and should have some value. Around here it would be worth around $25 - $30 dollars a bale this year. It might be different where you are and in a different year.
SDJIM
New member
My contract calls for burning or cut and bale---the bales must be destroyed by burning at a later date,selling them is production and not allowed---you can not even give them away,even to like the 4-H.
I have a contract like that too. It doesn't make sense to borrow money from China to pay me cost share to bale and burn putting carbon in the air when I could graze it for no cost to the government and do wonders for the soil health and sequester carbon instead.
mnmthunting
Banned
You guys worry to much. 
The required Mowing/ burning is nothing but silly gov nonsense I've mentioned. Fires are natural must be good.
FUN to watch a grass fire, devastating to wildlife.
A least Prairie Drifter is now talking 1/3 burn per year per patch, moving in the right direction.
Just another example "gray wolves are natural got to be a good thing" ask the USF&W service. Even the slowest of the study groups biologists now say "Wolves MAY be contributing to Yellowstones 2% elk calf elk recruitment. [Number of calves to survive per 100 cow elk]
Oh well it's all kinda funny, and another story.:cheers:
The required Mowing/ burning is nothing but silly gov nonsense I've mentioned. Fires are natural must be good. FUN to watch a grass fire, devastating to wildlife.
A least Prairie Drifter is now talking 1/3 burn per year per patch,
moving in the right direction.Just another example "gray wolves are natural got to be a good thing" ask the USF&W service. Even the slowest of the study groups biologists now say "Wolves MAY
be contributing to Yellowstones 2% elk calf elk recruitment. [Number of calves to survive per 100 cow elk] Oh well it's all kinda funny, and another story.:cheers:
I understand your point, but the answer really lies in trying to prevent people from double-dipping.
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess I don't get the double dipping thing. There probably is a little benefit, but at what expense are you willing to pay to see to it that someone doesn't double dip. I look at it as an additional incentive to the land owner that actually saves the government money. So you might get some more acres enrolled, which I have been reading here that people are concerned about that.
Why worry about double dipping? The government will issue a "disaster" waiver and let the producer graze to dirt, or cut the crp to the sod, to use to feed their cattle or sell at a windfall profit to their suffering neighbors, of course this is at a time when the ground cover is needed the most due drought, but the logic of this is lost. Personally, I'd like to be done with the hypocrisy. Just allow so many days of grazing, or a portion to be cut for hay annually and used or sold, no payback on fees at pennies on the dollar, just keep the money, consider it an incentive, as suggested, then abide by the rules, no whining, no carbon burning, no renegging, no do overs, and no disaster waiver for anybody. Cheaters get fined the amount paid to them over the life of the contract, this would probably only happen once, and the farmer smoke signals would spread like wildfire insurring compliance, remember Monsanto and roundup ready gene modified seed? Make your choices and live with the results. Much of the current structure is to cumbersome, written one by one, by idiots and unable to deliver it's mission, fostering non compliance, increasing cost needlessly, and disatisfaction from all sides, not to mention waste. Good old soil bank, we pay you, you leave it the heck alone period. I guess to simple to be satisfactory to anybody involved.
SDJIM
New member
Oh how I wish it was this easy, I'm not a farmer, don't know anything about how it all works, I just have about a 1000 acres to do some habitat work and also earn some income from. So I have to depend on the good old FSA and the PF habitat guy to try and make some sense out of all of it. So far they have done pretty good I think as we have gone from harvesting a couple of dz pheasants to about 200 2 yrs ago. It's just all the rules and the paperwork are enough to drive one insane, the current problem--what to do about the bales from last summers required cut and bale then burn on some of my CRP, NO SNOW--dry spring -- RED FLAG warnings and possible burn bans--FSA is trying to decide what to do--don't call us we will call you---SURE THEY WILL
Oh how I wish it was this easy, I'm not a farmer, don't know anything about how it all works, I just have about a 1000 acres to do some habitat work and also earn some income from. So I have to depend on the good old FSA and the PF habitat guy to try and make some sense out of all of it. So far they have done pretty good I think as we have gone from harvesting a couple of dz pheasants to about 200 2 yrs ago. It's just all the rules and the paperwork are enough to drive one insane, the current problem--what to do about the bales from last summers required cut and bale then burn on some of my CRP, NO SNOW--dry spring -- RED FLAG warnings and possible burn bans--FSA is trying to decide what to do--don't call us we will call you---SURE THEY WILL
And a few hundred miles south were guys needing hay badly. The gov could have saved the cost share and the boys down south could have had some help.
SDJIM
New member
HECK you can't even give it away, even to a non profit group--like the 4H kids. Now I have a bunch of hay sitting in the middle of my CRP doing nothing for no one
mnmthunting
Banned
SDJIM, What is the pheasant cover like where the bales were taken off from last year.
Well I am not SDJIM but I can tell you what the pheasant cover is like where I cut two years ago. It is about six inches taller and looks healthier than what I did not cut. I am not sure why it looks that way, I also noticed that there was a lot more seed production than what was not cut. I don't know if that is good for pheasants or not, but I don't think it can hurt.