Disturbing trend??

moellermd said:
Yet many hunters demand that farmers should run at less than peak effciency so they can shoot a pheasant
Click to expand...


It's more than that moe. It's about being stewards of the land. Each of us has a responsibility to our fellow man, and this planet--to keep it well.

Every business has regulations to follow to keep the land and water clean. To do so costs us all $ and a loss of profit.

I remember from one of your posts you take to the field (I believe you said) around 45 times a year. Do you want your children and their children to have the same opportunities? Do you want them to make the same memories your making for yourself today? Do you want them to look up to our creator and give thanks for what He has done? Maybe you don't, but I believe you probably do.

Farmers hold a loaded deck of cards in their hands when it comes to habitat and the future of wildlife. You know this, yet it's all about removing this fence line. Ripping out that fence line. Do everything you have to to make more $.

This attitude in nothing new. But it has become more wide spread with this past generation or two. Profit profit profit. At all costs become more profitable. --this attitude obtains to many farms and businesses today.

Yes profit is good but not when it comes at the cost of our beloved nat'l resources that are hanging on by a thread (at this point).

You are a steward moe, not the official owner of that land. You will not bring that land with you when it comes time to meet your maker. Use the land as you do, just leave some for the rest of creation too. They too need to eat, sleep, flee from danger, and seek shelter.;)

I've got to get off this computer now. Happy Thanksgiving everyone. Let's be thankful for the wildlife we have today!
 
Last edited:
After being away from the forum for awhile i think these pheasant hunter/farmer arguements are futile.

I see another trend emerging. Studies show that farmers net income has been declining for the last 20 years. We all know the last few years have been good as far as gross revenue. What I see happening is croppoing systems have to get bigger, faster, quicker and more efficient. I have heard story after story of farm operators buying lots of new equipment. I have never seen more used equipment sitting on the John Deer lot in Parkston ever.

Farm operators have the choice to upgraded their equipment and get a tax break or pay the tax on thier net income.

I think they like all the rest of us consumers in this country can get caught up in this spend/upgrade cycle. It is an invest in your business strategy that never ends.

Once you have a taste of new equipment and technology you tend to find ways to make the income to support the upgrades.

I'm embarking on a journey that is more microfarm focused than macro. Maybe I will learn the hard way but I have to believe it is better to try and yield 200 bushel corn on 100 acres than settle for 100 bushel corn on 200 acres.

Micro/macro...small ag/big ag......sustainable ag/short term ag.....

Our new economy....yes....global ag will continue to put extreme pressure on producers to produce more more more to feed the world. They want acres acres acres.

That's allstates stand:confused:
 
UGUIDE said:
Our new economy....yes....global ag will continue to put extreme pressure on producers to produce more more more to feed the world. They want acres acres acres.
Click to expand...

I agree Chris. These discussions aren't going to change a thing. Economic flucuations are the mega movers of man's ways and practices. We do what we do for this reason or that. What needs to be done needs to be done.

Look, I tend to run on hope in the future. I know most of us do. But the fact is the future for wildlife is not good. What's happening within ag is going to continue and expand throughout the country.

It will get to a point were there is nothing (habitat) left on most private crop lands. Wildlife is going to suffer. #'s will continue to drop.

We will see the day that hunting story's of old will be told. "I wish you could see what I've seen" will be echoed through out our homes and taverns.

A close life long friend of mine is farming with his dad. This year they farmed over 7,000 acres. Crop to crop. Massive fields. Fields that look cleaner than my lawn. Heavy machinery that takes a man's breath away. Beautiful machines!

When talking about the roll of habitat on his land he simply states "Nick, I can't feed the word and wildlife too."

Basically he tells me wildlife just has to be put on the back burner and go away at this time. That's that. It's ugly as Hell. But that's were we are at this point in time.

This attitude is not going to change. To the contrary it will spread through out the country. It's just a matter of time.

The fact is there is no future for wildlife in the corn belt. We can only delay the enviable with willing land owners who love wildlife.

This is not how it's supposed to be but it is. This movement is a mammoth that's just too big to change until something very drastic happens. Knowing how this planet works, that time will come. When? God only knows. But by then it will be too late.
 
I agree, dollars and efforts by pheasants forever and like organizations are a drop in the bucket, facing a massive tide of forces aligned to strip mine the planet, for short term gain. Aside from making us feel better the actual effect currently is minimal. But from tiny acorns, mighty oaks grow. Make enough noise, maybe someone will listen. We have a message to spread wide and far, and it applies to all of us. In reality, are these massive clean farming operations any worse than the suburban residential lot holders who apply tons of fertilizer, kill every weed, every pest, with massive amounts of chemicals, that turn the country into a monoculture of fescue/bluegrass,and run the residual into the water supply to be removed at great expense downstream. We need to face reality that man is a consumptive greedy user, always has been and always will be, trouble now is the more of us there are the greater the damage,till we hit the breaking point. There will be warnings, aquafiers go dry, abnormal weather, species extinction, gee that sounds familiar.
 
You have stated it well. In South Dakota the ditch to ditch farmers are not going to produce many pheasants. CRP helps but that won't cut it by itself. You need serious winter cover near food to get through the tough winters. I belive it is going to come down to pay hunting to a large extent. I think that the U GUIDE habitat partnership theory is about right. If those type of operations can make enough profit they will compete with the ditch to ditch guys. We pay to golf or go to movies or to go dancing or whatever, it really isn't that much different except that it isn't the way it used to be.
 
1pheas4 said:
It's more than that moe. It's about being stewards of the land. Each of us has a responsibility to our fellow man, and this planet--to keep it well.
Click to expand...

Despite the fact that we disagree on this, you are alright.

I agree it is about being stewarts of the land. I have no problem with taking out fences and mowing ditches for brome hay. I do not believe that is going to be the make or break of pheasant populations. At the same time when I see neighbors burning sloughs that have been sloughs for 40 years because they think next year they will be able to farm it I cry inside. We don't have a lot of CRP but we put a few 5 to 10 acre plots in CRP that are no good farmland.

We can balance productivity and conservation in a rational manner. This idea that "big farmers" are the death of pheasants is not going to help the cause. Having unrealistic expectations of landowners will not create more pheasants. The problem needs to be looked at in a pragmatic way.
 
niceshot said:
Maybe you should try take them hunting so their not so bored.
Click to expand...

Yea the sad thing was Uncle Bruce burned his ditch next to his house last week. You are correct that bored farmers mean lots of tillage and fires. By the way when are you going to take me hunting?
 
UGUIDE said:
Exactly. Probably safe to add in Minnesota at 64% down this year.

Let's hope for mild winters and dry springs.
Click to expand...

Can't forget MN...... I think MN had some good years back in the 60's, maybe the 70's. I know they had some 1-2 million bird harvests.
 
haymaker said:
You have stated it well. In South Dakota the ditch to ditch farmers are not going to produce many pheasants. CRP helps but that won't cut it by itself. You need serious winter cover near food to get through the tough winters. I belive it is going to come down to pay hunting to a large extent. I think that the U GUIDE habitat partnership theory is about right. If those type of operations can make enough profit they will compete with the ditch to ditch guys. We pay to golf or go to movies or to go dancing or whatever, it really isn't that much different except that it isn't the way it used to be.
Click to expand...

But I don't subsidize the movie theater, the golf course or the dance hall, and then pay again to patronize them.
 
ranchodeluxe said:
http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/li...cle_53b1bd20-160b-11e1-90b5-001cc4c03286.html

Being that a great many farmers also ranch, is this the beginning of a vicious cycle?
Click to expand...

The subsidy that you pay is so in the governments mind you will have cheap food and over the years the cattle feeder has benefited form corn that at times was below the cost of production. Now the feedlots are having to deal with a new situation where the subsidy is working the other way. The blenders credit is going away at the end of the year. Frankly I think all subsidies should go away including the oil subsidies, let the market figure it out. Unfortunately it looks like the crop insurance subsidy is going to get larger. The subsidy that you pay does not buy you hunting rights or the ability to decide how the land is managed. It is just for cheaper food, so I guess that means that you are subsidized at least in congress' mind, if they have one.
 
haymaker said:
The subsidy that you pay is so in the governments mind you will have cheap food and over the years the cattle feeder has benefited form corn that at times was below the cost of production. Now the feedlots are having to deal with a new situation where the subsidy is working the other way. The blenders credit is going away at the end of the year. Frankly I think all subsidies should go away including the oil subsidies, let the market figure it out. Unfortunately it looks like the crop insurance subsidy is going to get larger. The subsidy that you pay does not buy you hunting rights or the ability to decide how the land is managed. It is just for cheaper food, so I guess that means that you are subsidized at least in congress' mind, if they have one.
Click to expand...

Very good points, I certainly did not mean to insinuate that paying subsidies entitles one to hunt private land, only that that I should just have to support the farmer/rancher at the point of sale,not cradle to grave.
The consumer does have power here, such as buying grass fed beef. Corn is not a natural feed for bovines and causes them some intestinal and ethical issues (inhumane concentration in feedlots, for instance). I did see a growing movement from consumers toward knowing where their food comes from when I lived in WI. I hope this spreads around the country. Subsidies only give the false illusion of cheap food. And if you have seen the size of a bag of corn chips shrink like I have noticed in the last couple years, then the cost vastly increase, it's really not much of an illusion anymore.
 
ranchodeluxe said:
Very good points, I certainly did not mean to insinuate that paying subsidies entitles one to hunt private land, only that that I should just have to support the farmer/rancher at the point of sale,not cradle to grave.
The consumer does have power here, such as buying grass fed beef. Corn is not a natural feed for bovines and causes them some intestinal and ethical issues (inhumane concentration in feedlots, for instance). I did see a growing movement from consumers toward knowing where their food comes from when I lived in WI. I hope this spreads around the country. Subsidies only give the false illusion of cheap food. And if you have seen the size of a bag of corn chips shrink like I have noticed in the last couple years, then the cost vastly increase, it's really not much of an illusion anymore.
Click to expand...

You are preaching to the choir now. I raise grass fed beef. The last 2 years I have made considerable investment in different genetics to be able to produce gormet grass fed beef. I think you are right that things are changing and they should. That is what happens, things change. I am going to try to keep my little slice of of the world hunters paradise. Yes that means I am going to share what I have for a price. As long as people leave with a smile on there face I am OK with that.
 
haymaker said:
You are preaching to the choir now. I raise grass fed beef. The last 2 years I have made considerable investment in different genetics to be able to produce gormet grass fed beef. I think you are right that things are changing and they should. That is what happens, things change. I am going to try to keep my little slice of of the world hunters paradise. Yes that means I am going to share what I have for a price. As long as people leave with a smile on there face I am OK with that.
Click to expand...


:10sign::cheers:
 
ranchodeluxe said:
But I don't subsidize the movie theater, the golf course or the dance hall, and then pay again to patronize them.
Click to expand...

You don't get to tell the movie theater what movies to play or were to put the golf holes either. The farm program dictates what producers can do. I am fine with getting rid of farm payments. I have always wanted to straighten a few creeks. It would be a real boom for the tile industry to.
 
Last edited:
moellermd said:
You don't get to tell the movie theater what movies to play or were to put the golf holes either. The farm program dictates what producers can do. I am fine with getting rid of farm payments. I have always wanted to straighten a few creeks. It would be a real boom for the tile industry to.
Click to expand...

Of course I get to dictate the movie being played and the condition of the golf course simply by choosing to buy a ticket or by paying the green fees (or not). Where is my choice as a consumer on the supply side when it comes to subsidies?
 
moellermd said:
You don't get to tell the movie theater what movies to play or were to put the golf holes either. The farm program dictates what producers can do. I am fine with getting rid of farm payments. I have always wanted to straighten a few creeks. It would be a real boom for the tile industry to.
Click to expand...

If you want to straighten creeks, I am positive the Farm Program will subsidize you to do so, later when you decide to restore it, they ill pay you for that too! All this straightening, ditch mowing, and wetland burning, might explain why you have to go to South Dakota instead of hunting at home in Iowa. Your luckier than most of us, in that you have the ability to make a difference, on the land, and we hope you do, and thank you for it whether I ever hunt your ground or even your county or state. We want you to make a profit, we want you to be comfortable and have all the advatages, benefits, available to all the rest of us. We hope your creative enough to figure out how to accomplish this in a sustainable manner,with room for pheasants, jackrabbits, meadowlarks, native plants, and clean water. We would be happy to subsidize or contribute to that end. I bring all this up, because a common thread in my conversation with farm producers is a rationalization of why as you say, " the fencelines must go". Justification of something somebody wants to do anyway. Sounds a lot like whistling past the graveyard, trying to convince yourselves of something you really don't even believe yourselves. If you do, I pity you all the more. I know for a fact Moe you don't believe it, your posts are designed to make the rest of us think, hunter, conservationist, suburban lawn fanantic, farmer, landowner alike. We share the burden and responsibility together, we all live here, we need to seize control, figure out what works, from everyones point of view. There willbe sacrifices for gain and no one should be excempt, from the producer to the consumer. What we make of it is all on us. As the parable says, To whom much is given, much is expected.
 
moellermd said:
Your exactly right farming is a buisness and buisness should be ran at peak efficeny. No asks or expects other buisness to run at less than peak efficeny. Yet many hunters demand that farmers should run at less than peak effciency so /QUOTE]


I have no problem with farmers making all the money they can, but in a free market no welfare, it's not right for people to have to pay farmers to not grow, or subsidize corn and beans. I don't know all the welfare programs, but its a scandal in my opionion.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top