Ideas to get more habitat

There is no plan for a general sign up that I have heard. If you want to make a significant difference, you need to get political. Join Pheasants Forever and make sure that their lobbists are heard. Why do we have to relearn the lessons of the past? If it was right to put this erosive, non-productive land in the program in 1985, why isn't it wise to keep it in the program? We're not being heard here somewhere.
 
Prairie Drifter said:
There is no plan for a general sign up that I have heard. If you want to make a significant difference, you need to get political. Join Pheasants Forever and make sure that their lobbists are heard. Why do we have to relearn the lessons of the past? If it was right to put this erosive, non-productive land in the program in 1985, why isn't it wise to keep it in the program? We're not being heard here somewhere.
Click to expand...
Is it because of a lack of funding. cut backs ect. in KS. We are lucky here now to have nearly 10 million acres of public hunting to help sustain some of this. Pluss there is just so much land in the state that is just not tillable private land. I have no idea of how many acres will be coming out here. There has been quite a bit though as you look around. It will definatley be a much bigger problem for the open priarie states.
 
The only problem with that is you are continually paying to keep that ground in the program and at some point you are going to run into the same problem. There's alot of CRP that never gets hunted, it should be tied into a walk-in program if it's CRP. I would rather see dollars go to permanent change and where public has access. Buy up ground that should never be farmed. FCS is on the right path, you see it in MN and NW IA where habitat groups are making a difference.
 
It's all a change in politics. Priorities have shifted away from this most successful conservation effort of all time. We need to find a way to refocus the government on the needed conservation policy. It would be much cheaper to keep this land in CRP than to put it back in in years to come. In the absence of CRP as we know it now, we need to educate farmers, biologists, and NRCS agents so that the most benefit is gleaned from the programs that are still getting land signed into beneficial habitat types. As conservationists (and hunters are surely this), we need to fucus on the species we value without consideration for access to ensure our own future. That is how groups like PF, QU, QUWF, DU, and other organizations operate. We need to make sure that these programs are putting beneficial habitat on the ground, not planting exotic species like brome and fescue like CRP did originally or other herbacious types like pine plantations that aren't beneficial to wildlife. These plantings were a part of the original CRP and were a loss to an otherwise beneficial program. Imagine every farm with native grass waterways in every low spot, with field borders along every dirt road and tree row, with partial field CRP plantings taking our unproductive ground so that the farmer can maximize his income while reducing his negative producing acres. This is a landscape plan that could support the wildlife populations we desire for generations. It could also prevent the increasing turnover of family farms, keeping good people on the land for the forseeable future.
 
Pheasant addict, you're awful loose with your stepping on landowner rights here. THEY own the land, and the only reason there is a need for federal programs is because the government and politics control food, and therefore comodity, prices; not the farmer. If the farmer could set his own price, he could afford to maintain these conservation practices on his own......he could figure those costs into his farm plan. That's not the case. Look at rural America and you can see what is happening to our farm based societies. They are dying because they have had to get bigger or die. Politics created this problem and it has to answer to these conditions in order to ensure our food supply for the future. That is what these programs do.
 
One thing we can do is not argue on here, please everyone just stick to bringing up ideas. PD is right when you look at there situation. It seems forigen to me I guess, because like I have said before we never realy had that many acres of CRP. 1.7 million acres is what comes to mind. I will have to look it up. But there are CREP acres, RIM and now the back forty SAFE program. MN has been pushing the Perpetual programs, weather public or not. We don't have the majior CRP battle they are in. The new SAFE program enhances small tracts, 10-40 acres. So here the things I talked about are working. It does not fit the bill IN an area where we are talking 35 million acres. In MN it is our only option, most lands aquired are 80 acres 160, 220, ect. But over time it has added up. You will not get the big 5,000 acre chunks.

It seems land rent is out weighing the CRP payments, that may have to change and have less acrage. But utilize the best acrage, and match rental payments closer. I don't know.
 
Everything is tied to comoditys and the price they can get for something. Farmers were going bankrupt like crazy in the early 80's. Its a good thing government helps them out or there would be to much fluctuation. Alot of Americans don't get bailed out if their business is losing money or their job goes over seas. Buffers, people at least get a benefit in clean water and control flooding. There's not a whole lot of benefit to tax payers for putting large tracts of land idle. If you buy up that ground and its open to the public then they are getting a return on their investment. Prices for grains will go up if there's less produced.
 
pheasantaddict said:
There's alot of CRP that never gets hunted, it should be tied into a walk-in program if it's CRP. I would rather see dollars go to permanent change and where public has access.
Click to expand...

That type of change would be the death of CRP. A lot of guys do not want everyone hunting their ground for reasons we have discussed on this forum. If they wanted to they could enroll their CRP in a walk-in program right now and make the extra buck.

In my neck of the woods the issue to me is that there is a lot of ground around sloughs and waterways that could be enrolled in CRP programs that the producer chooses not too. Many out of state landlords are not aware of the programs available and why would they want to enroll it for less money then they can make with cash rent. The producer does not want to tell the landlord about the programs in fear that if they can get that much for crappy ground then they should be able to get more cash rent for the good stuff. This is the thought process I hear from all kinds of producers.

I know some producers that will convince the landlord to have ground tiled that will be wet no matter what in hopes that they can farm more ground.
 
PAddict, I happen to live in a state that produces a lot of wheat. The wheat they grow is in great demand, not be the american people, but our government. They are buying it and then sell it overseas. The Metric Tons is enormous. Train after train of grain cars going to the coast here in Washington or Portland for shipment. The reason the gov. wants the grain is to keep our Gold here. Yes gold, we owe China and other nations so many Billions, they are demanding payment in gold or food. So the grain goes Bye Bye........Bob
 
Bobeye, we, as Americans, need to realize that the export of our grain is also the export of our land's fertility. Fertilizer only replaces a small fraction of what a crop removes from the soil. If you think that the middle east was at one time the garden of eden, then how did it become the sand box that it is now? The Aztecs had a thriving society at one time, what made them disappear? I think that loss of fertility played a role in both. We need to conserve our land's fertility to provide for our own future and quit using our land's productivity to feed the world. We need to teach the world to feed itself and depend upon our people's productivity to trade for importer products. Governement is often short sighted, and we sit back and allow it. We need to work smarter.
 
Prairie Drifter said:
Bobeye, we, as Americans, need to realize that the export of our grain is also the export of our land's fertility. Fertilizer only replaces a small fraction of what a crop removes from the soil. If you think that the middle east was at one time the garden of eden, then how did it become the sand box that it is now? The Aztecs had a thriving society at one time, what made them disappear? I think that loss of fertility played a role in both. We need to conserve our land's fertility to provide for our own future and quit using our land's productivity to feed the world. We need to teach the world to feed itself and depend upon our people's productivity to trade for importer products. Governement is often short sighted, and we sit back and allow it. We need to work smarter.
Click to expand...

PD I am having a hard time grasping what you are suggesting. Are saying that we need a paradigm switch in the way we farm. That is not a realistic solution.
 
PD, Most of the land here is on a 3 year rotation to help keep its' fertility. The U.S. farmers today are a lot smarter in good farming practices than you are giving them credit for. But I get the impression from your post that you would rather let the U.S. Go into Bankruptcy. In the name of good hunting and keeping the CRP programs alive.......Bob
 
I don't know how the aztecs indains fit in here, but if you can mention them I can mention bigfoot just for a laugh:) Great dicussion keep up and keep it nice towards one another:)
 
Modern farming is a lot different then traditional.

Before combines grain was thrashed and the thrash pile burned, sometimes used as animal bedding. little going back to the soil.
Now with fertilizer, chemicals and technology on seed and hybrids and such there is so much more plant and root matter. All plant matter returned to the soil except the seed.
Soil that was nearly ruined a couple decades ago is now rich.
Do you know for example how much organic matter is put into the soil after a 200 bushel corn crop? It would blow your mind.

Fact! Modern tilling minimizes erosion mixing all this plant matter with the soil. And the more plant matter the less commercial fertilizer.

Soil is very much a renewable resource.
 
I always laugh when people say us farmers are over fert. spraying maybe 25 years ago, but with the way the farming landscape is now you really need to watch every input. Can we get better yes. I was looking at my states crp programs and I don't think the gov't agencies are working together. State seems to like trees in IA pay more to plant them on crp, but when I drive by the refuge they want to cut them all down turn it back before the land was settled. All grass is terrible winter habitat just fills with snow.
 
I guess I didn't understand that folks would have this much trouble understanding what I'm trying to display. Mmd, I'm saying that probably 10% of farmers are adequately utilizing federal programs that they are eligible for to minimize their negative profit acres and maximize their profits. Bob, it has nothing to do with the US going bankrupt. We are currently federally subsidizing overproduction of farm commodities so that we can play in the world wide market and have significant exports of commodities. We would be much better off in the long term to teach those countries to make their land productive in agriculture instead of shipping our fertility in the form of low priced federally subsidized commodities out as exports. Coot, you're just being foolish. If there is one thing that Americans are poor at, it's remembering our history. We shouldn't have been surprised at Pearl Harbor, we shouldn't have been caught with our pants down on 911, and we should take note that the Aztecs exhausted their soil and disappeared off of the face of the earth without the use of a John Deere. Mnm, Soil is a natural resource, but it can take thousands of years to replace it if it is lost of severely damaged. We live in generations measured in 20 year blocks. Coot, most fertilizers used are a combination of nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium. very few micronutrients are replaced on an annual basis even though EVERY crop removes them from the soil. Further, even modern tillage generally reduces organic matter in the soil. This is because, with every crop, tons of organic material is loaded into trucks and driven to the elevator,etc never to be returned to the soil. What I am saying is that if we can get every farmer, or most, to maximize their use of the EXISTING farm programs to REMOVE their negative profit acres from production and put those acres into habitat that is beneficial to wildlife species as those programs are set up to do, that we wouldn't be in the critical state with respect to losing family farms or losing our gamebird populations. The system is in place, it just isn't being used to the extent needed to meet either goal. Coot, both pheasants and quail would be in trouble in Kansas during the winter without grass based habitat. It is THE primary winter escape cover/thermal cover that they use.
 
Push for road sides for wild life. There are millions of acres of road ditches, weather hunted or not, that are mowed flat. Townships, counties ect. and some land owners mow them. Spray can be implemented for noxious weeds, and it would add a ton of nesting cover, and cover through fall. Our township only mows the 3-4 foot area next to the gravel. They later cruise by with a truck, a tank, and a guy spraying thistle ect. Cost is cheaper then mowing all the time, and the ditches look great for cover. The county does not, they mow, the whole ditch looks like a pool table. Some argue they will get road hunters, but so what if it helps the whole picture 10 fold. Seems where those areas are that have miles of great roadsides, have more birds. Weather you can hunt them or not. I hear the snow therory as well, that snow will fill the ditch. "Bull" the ditch mowed fills up right away as well, all ditches do cover or not, first thing to fill with snow.
 
Last edited:
Drifter you are right that most farmers us npk and forget about the micro nutriuents. But farmers are getting better with the micros. I have test done and try to repentish the soil best I can. Really makes a difference. I'm all for grass but I fell you need a variety to have a healthy ecosystem. Just don't understand why they cut down the good wintering habitat. I understand what you where saying about the aztexs lessons to be learned there also. I was just making a joke. FC dicthes are good habitat and I wish they would quit mowing them also every little bit helps. They fill with snow first, but until they do people without there own private place to hunt got somewhere decent to go. I remember alot of good ditch hunts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top