Good post Mr. Byrd, CRP all good. Long term investment in ourselves, As Maynard says, has short term benefits as well. Hard to find something that pays dividends on so many levels. We may think we can't afford it as a nation, but with careful analysis, we can't afford not to continue it!
CRP-message from PF
- Thread starter 1pheas4
- Start date
I am not opposed to CRP but I really don't think things are going to be the same in the near future as in the past as far as CRP is concerned. There is still going to be some but if CRP is going to compete with grain it will be expensive. So what will make up the difference?
M. R. Byrd
Well-known member
I testified at the EIS hearing on CRP at Manhattan, Kansas a few years ago and one of the first on the floor was a rancher from Alta Vista. He owned no CRP, but asked the question(my paraphrase) , "Why would so much money be spent to establish grass on the prairie, only to plow it under?" He was the only one to get an applause during the hearing.
OKIEGunner
New member
Maynard,
I took the time today to read some of the attached documents to the website that you posted above. One observation based on the economic situation this country is facing is that I see un-productive or wasteful spending within the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
As suggested by others, I have written congressmen & Senators, but after reading some of these strategic goals/plans and the distribution of funds within the USDA programs, I wonder if we all should also focus our concerns in writing to the Secretary of Agriculture as well. The amount funds planned for the Conservation Reserve Program is a drop in the bucket!. Heck we subsidize tobacco commodities at a higher rate per participant.
As long as the Cap of CRP is limited to a maximum of 32 million acres by the 2008 Farm Bill there will be very little gains in additional habitat.
My point is, yes writing Senators and Congressman helps our cause, but the USDA distribution and or allocations of funds within the USDA Budget need to change. We need to start knocking on the door of the USDA as well.
Sounds like a good direction to go. Doesn't surprise me on Tobacco, we subsidize farmers to grow it, surgeon general, CDC and the like spends mllions to keep Americans from using it, and failing, not to mention the cost we all share of treating the cancer stricken, heart attack, emphysema, and stroked out users. Did I mention we spend USDA matching marketing dollars to advertise and export it to third world countries, where use and related hazzards are not well know or excepted. A few years ago largest recipient of subsidy funds was ABC's Sam Donaldson for his New Mexico sheep ranch. May have been all legitimate,but sure sends the wrong signal, when a New York millionaire, is the big subsidy winner. I saw a large percentage of subsidy recipients recieved payment at Manhattan Island addresses. It's how you play the game. We need to learn how to play effectively!
M. R. Byrd
Well-known member
USDA could shrink that entire pie by 25% as far as I am concerned.