CRP signup

I keep hearing about new CRP signup, than I hear that it is probably just lip service and won't result in any more being enrolled(this from farther south). What is happening with the signup in ND? Is it worthwhile to the land owners? Will it result in more or will the loss just continue? Is there anyway to help, such as contacting fish and game?
 

Brickhouse

New member
There is a new CRP sign up however the new payments are less than the previous. The best soils get paid more while the worst soils that should be in CRP get paid peanuts. I would expect to see more CRP get taken out as they cannot compete with farmer rental rates.
 

hunter94

Active member
There is a new CRP sign up however the new payments are less than the previous. The best soils get paid more while the worst soils that should be in CRP get paid peanuts. I would expect to see more CRP get taken out as they cannot compete with farmer rental rates.

The best soils get paid more while the worst soils that should be in CRP get paid peanuts.

this is the problem, they have it ass backwards.
 

remy3424

Member
With commodity prices low, the farmers are still willing to pay rental rates that about insure no profits, they are an optimistic bunch. They just don't want to give-up any ground for when things get good (high grain prices) again. With poor ground that produces little, it shouldn't take a big payment to entice an owner to take that ground out of production and have the government pay the "rent". Highly productive ground should/does demand higher cash rent payments, (farmers can make more, they can pay more), so it will take larger government payments to entice the owners to take that ground out of production. Sure, it makes the most sence to only place the most highly erodible ground in the program (in the interest of saving the soil) and I think there were times when the programs only allowed HEL acres to be placed in the program. Basing the payment rates on soil types allowed almost any ground in production to quailfy. On the current program, I am not sure it is soil type, it may be any ground in production, but the payment is based on a percentage of the county rent average, so now it will likely only be the most unproductive ground being put in. The payment by soil type last time around really took some good productive ground out of production and put great bird habitat where you won't see it enrolling now. I am in Iowa and I am guessing this is how it works everywhere.
 

Brickhouse

New member
Very good points on the program for the most part the only disadvantage I see is the topagraphry Iowa ground is definitely better the CRP payment is over 100 bucks an acre but in North Dakota it is considerably less where cash rent can compete with the payments considerably. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the payments for new CRP have been slashed considerably and most will not re-enlisted
 

hunter94

Active member
Very good points on the program for the most part the only disadvantage I see is the topagraphy Iowa ground is definitely better the CRP payment is over 100 bucks an acre but in North Dakota it is considerably less where cash rent can compete with the payments considerably. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the payments for new CRP have been slashed considerably and most will not re-enlisted
from what i am reading (in some areas) poor soil types are not qualifying for enrollment.....the good farm ground is worth too much to enroll with the diminished payments being offered.
this and a 100 million acre corn planting forecasted means very few new contracts will be offered/accepted.....downhill from here.
 
Last edited:

BRITTMAN

Active member
The bubble will burst whether it is weather related or commodity related. Then the US tax payer will be on the hook to bail these over extended farmers out.

CRP was created in the 80s to take out lower productivity land which in-turn helps conservation, provides farmers will a base income, and maybe helps improve supply-demand economics for the farmer too.

I guess I see the idea that taking out highly productive farmland provides more "bang for the buck", but this land will not get enrolled.

Devils' advocate:
CRP is often viewed as a highly negative impact to the ag industry which makes more money on every acre planted. More seed, more chemicals, more equipment.

Small towns benefit more because of these sales and jobs at the local elevator and in the field.

Killed plenty of pheasants pre-CRP. Still seeing them and getting them now with less CRP. Endless seas of grass often do create a huge surplus of pheasants ... many end of dying during the next severe winter.

Delayed ditch mowing still has benefits to pheasants and some species of ducks

CRP has done little for Huns.
 

hunter94

Active member
i remember when CRP and WIHA programs just began in Kansas, way back when, .....there was grass everywhere, had to look for a cornfield close by to find birds
now it is becoming the opposite.....cornfields everywhere, havre to find some CRP to locate birds. this will soon be the norm as contracts expire and ground goes back into production.
 

Brickhouse

New member
Sounds like BRITTMAN has been through this cycle a time or two. Pretty much hit the nail on the head. One thing I am seeing is that the preexisting CRP has a fair chance of reenrollment if you really want it in. The biggest benefit to pheasants is thermal cover. I know I might sound crazy but if preference for CRP enrollment was based on a tree planting that would definitely help the population long term.
 
Top