Maybe they wont be as enticed to farm it fenceline to fenceline and will let some of the less profitable ground lay idle or go fallow. A few rotations of weed growth might do wonders.
Misguided thoughts on Conservation
- Thread starter moellermd
- Start date
Maybe they wont be as enticed to farm it fenceline to fenceline and will let some of the less profitable ground lay idle or go fallow. A few rotations of weed growth might do wonders.
UGUIDE
Active member
I agree but I think that is easy. Right now our system seems to always agree when there is a major failure like the dust bowl or mortage/housing meltdown or the current federal deficit (government is broke).
Taxpayers are the shareholders of this nation. My questions is, "Whose on the board?".
And further more I don't think these threads about about attacking farmers as that makes about as much sense as attacking mortgage bankers for the current housing crisis.
If anyone is responsible it whould be the landowners as they ultimately control all the property rights.
Nobody should be bashing, attacking or blaming anybody. Let's just get the real issues on the tables and discuss contructive ways to move forward.
Theres going to be plenty of conflict and heated arguements in that process.
When we go to Pheasant Fest I suspect there will be some major Ag players from Washington present as there has been in years past and the issues will be at the forefront and there will be many conversations and brainstorming around the issues. I know the PF biologists are starting to understand that they cannot talk to farmers about conservation if they do not understand the production issues and constraints and opportuities (they and all of us have a long way to go in this arena).
UGUIDE
Active member
The bible prescribes a fallow every 7 years. Why don't we fallow every 7 years? Leave fencelines in? Grass in waterways?
One simple answer: WE DON'T VALUE THOSE THINGS!
If someone could show a farmer that fallowing every 7 years would be more valuable in his operation than not, he would do it in a heart beat. it is that simple. It's simple its just not easy as they say.
carptom1
Well-known member
I work with Fannie Mae and Hud everyday, I could tell you stories about this mess that would turn your stomach far worse than farm subsidies or CRP payments. They piss away 10 times that amount everyday. There is a ton of blame for the mortgage mess, from the shareholders who drove it to the politicians who turned a blind eye. Farmers are no different then any other business. You have to be profitable to exist. I have always felt in addition to your suggestion, some conservation could be accomplished through fees during licensing. I know for me to pay 20.50 for a three month license in kansas is a joke. But anytime it is brought up residents go ballistic. Listen I would easily pay 5 times that much for a little better habitat to hunt. So how about having different levels of WIHA. You get more if you do more conservation. Food plots etc. It is no different than me asking one of my contractors to do a bunch of extra work and not get paid for it.
I certainly would spend a little extra to have better hunting opportunities.
UGUIDE
Active member
Carptom1, I think the James River CREP is a good example a creative solution to CRP open access. It cost the public a 40% bump to the rental rate to get the opens access. I do know that state funds were used but not sure if license funds were used.
I believe state funds also subsidize the employment of the PF Farm Bill Biologists staffed in the state. They are rocks stars in my book.
I guess I'm confused because you mentioned buffer strips would be a realistic expectation. My confusion might also be because around me there's not a lot of livestock operations anymore - mostly all cash crop. The buffer strips I see are simply the result of an area being too wet to work and protected as a wetland from being drained. It's not a perceived value to have these few strips, but simply a matter of situation that keeps them around.
I fail to see how you'd convince a farmer who is concerned with squeezing every last acre they can out of their operation with disregard to wildlife or conservation, that they should leave buffer strips of any width greater than what little they can't work for fear of getting stuck. As best I see it the "realistic expectation" is that only what is impossible to work will be left for "conservation".
Simple acid test for "Big Ag" producer, quality of life is defined as a new piece of equipment, a new Chevy truck in the driveway, a trip to a warm climate to spend the winter, a fatter bottomline, even if it's pennies, paying $5000.00 + per acre of ground. At the possible expense of a pheasant in a hedgerow, hereing a lark sing on a warm spring morning, the joy of a clear pool in a fish filled stream, listening to the breeze rustle through the cattails, watching the leaves and prairie grass turn colors with the seasons. I say possible expense, because we can't prove that the acts of any one producer dozing the hedgerow led to the death of the lark or pheasant, or the drain tile caused the stream to silt in, or that the very atrazine applied by any one individual family farmer, caused cancer in the lady 100 miles down stream, or the roundup caused genetic deformity in the local frogs. Those are just the breaks of life, for which no individual has responsibility. But the new chevy, and fatter wallet on the other hand, now that's tangible benefit, after all you can take it with you when you die, can't you? besides you gave $50.00 to the american cancer society, two years ago, and $50.00 to pheasants forever just last year, even put a bumper sticker on the new chevy, and ate at the banquet. I set aside 100' by 100' patch of perpendicular goat pasture in CRP after the government paid me for it, especially since it was nearly usless and the silly government paid me more than it earned in 20 years previously. Surely I did my part, those birds can survive on that little patch of isolated, fragmented chunk, those city people, scientists, left leaning enviornmentalists, just don't understand the realities of country life, they are just day dreamers, out of touch with reality, they don't understand how resilient those birds are! Let some other chump provide for habitat, esthetics, heck that stuff doesn't make any money anyway, let somebody else care for the sick, or cure cancer, heck we have professionals for that,it's their job! I don't know that lady downstream anyway, Mayo cured my 12 year olds leukimia, muttered something about ground water, but I was watching my corn futures so I didn't really listen. Fire when ready, Griswold.
onpoint
Active member
I would love to wade into this but I'm afraid my ideas and those who have only 6-7$ corn on their mind..wouldn't mesh well. Money isn't everything and some generation is going to have to clean up the mess from this generations greed.
southernblues
New member
Price of corn has nothing to do with greed. If farming commodities followed the rate of inflation, Corn should be closer to $11/bu (in the 40s price was $1.40, 6-7 yrs ago it was $2.65).
I come from farm background (with aspirations of getting back in) but also love to hunt. Conservation and Agriculture are sometimes on separate sides of the aisles. However, like any entrepreneur, farmers deserve the opportunity to make the American Dream, profitable.
What we need to be less concerned about is what farmers make and more cooperation on farming practices (no till, strip till, vertical till all benefit wildlife and can still have similar or better NET profits....this is nationwide, not all areas apply).
This is my humble opinion of course.
This isn't aimed at anyone. It's just that SouthernBlues made me wonder. I had hoped the opposite would occur. I had hopes that higher grain prices would make life easier on the farm, and thereby allow for a little leeway for wildlife. Seems when we get comfortable in life it allows for some generosity of spirit, based on some sense of gratitude for good fortune, some real or imagined obligation to the rest of the world, maybe just concern for their image, or even their immortal soul . Carnegie built libraries, others endowed universities, a little strip of weeds, a grassy border here or there, a small woodlot doesn't seem a lot to ask. Why the need, where's the motivation to tame every inch, force everything on the earth to conform to a monoculture vision. I don't understand, furthermore I can't even believe that the justifications put forth here by some of the defenders of these practices believe what they espouse themselves. Sounds a lot like whisling past the graveyard to me. I don't understand how they could. So maybe somebody can explain to me some sound reasons, beyond all my neighbors do it, or if I don't do it someone else will, or I can therefore I will, or I can make an extra $200-300 dollars, and make one less turn. It's that kind of herd mentality that got us here, on a whole lot of issues. Are you gonna believe what I tell you? or trust your lying eyes? Look around.
A few posts back Downtown bang made this comment "it is the system that is flawed and producers are only acting in their best interest within the context of the system."
I agree 100% with that entire comment. I do not fault a farmer for trying to work in his best interests to make a better living for himself and his family.
While it is also true that the price of corn has not kept up with the rate of inflation. At the same time corn yields have far outpaced the rate of inflation.
What is done with the excess grains.
It is exported.
It is in the best interests of the US Government to keep grain exports high. Hence the reason the government tries to assist farmers (to them a farmer is anyone or company who can produce) via farm bills, which in reality skew a free market. (case in point, how can a 30 something year old afford to buy enough land to farm and support his family) The government could truly careless who is producing the grains. Just get them produced so an export can be made. This intern creates those who can and will abuse the system to their own advantage. Leaving those who do attempt to do the "right thing" SOL. Either play the game as the rules are written or be forced out of the game. Until the rules of the game are changed, no real change to farming can come.
No offense to any hard working farmer. Every offense meant to anyone abusing the system, somehow I doubt they read this forum.
I agree 100% with that entire comment. I do not fault a farmer for trying to work in his best interests to make a better living for himself and his family.
While it is also true that the price of corn has not kept up with the rate of inflation. At the same time corn yields have far outpaced the rate of inflation.
What is done with the excess grains.
It is exported.
It is in the best interests of the US Government to keep grain exports high. Hence the reason the government tries to assist farmers (to them a farmer is anyone or company who can produce) via farm bills, which in reality skew a free market. (case in point, how can a 30 something year old afford to buy enough land to farm and support his family) The government could truly careless who is producing the grains. Just get them produced so an export can be made. This intern creates those who can and will abuse the system to their own advantage. Leaving those who do attempt to do the "right thing" SOL. Either play the game as the rules are written or be forced out of the game. Until the rules of the game are changed, no real change to farming can come.
No offense to any hard working farmer. Every offense meant to anyone abusing the system, somehow I doubt they read this forum.
Boys lets face it..ITS OVER!
I am 50 and never expect to see a return, even remotely, to what we saw ending in about 2009 in N & S Dakota. It will be released "hunting" from here on.
I remember one of my quotes back in 07' on the old Pheasant Country forum if any of you were around then: " The obstacles we now face are insurmountable".
Some posters thought I was crazy because they could not see past the then phenominal bird numbers.
I am 50 and never expect to see a return, even remotely, to what we saw ending in about 2009 in N & S Dakota. It will be released "hunting" from here on.
I remember one of my quotes back in 07' on the old Pheasant Country forum if any of you were around then: " The obstacles we now face are insurmountable".
Some posters thought I was crazy because they could not see past the then phenominal bird numbers.
moellermd
Super Moderator
There are continuos signup crp programs that are designed for areas around waterways. If it floods every couple years and farmers can't plant or it does not produce a crop it is competitive with producing a crop. I have talked to several farmers in my neck of the woods about it and a few have signed up. That is a program that makes sense for a lot of producers.
onpoint
Active member
Then truckers should be able to do whatever is needed to earn as much money as possible. Including hauling 80 ton or more on our roads, pull double trailers, driving as many hours as they can, Etc.
Bar owners should be able to serve as much booze to a customer as they want and stay open 24 hours a day if need be to raise profits.
Construction company's should be able to build buildings the way they see fit, no codes. Codes cost them profit.
I'm just saying all these examples would effect each of us. What is done on a farm and it's land effects us all as well. Silt, run off, pesticides, loss of wildlife and habitat, water quality in both our ground water and lakes, rivers and streams, Etc. Everything started off with little restrictions and rules. Profit driven people who didn't do what was right, caused restrictions and rules to be put in place.
Have you ever walked some of those drainage ditches in southern Minnesota? The smell of the manure run off, farm chemicals, stagnate water, dangerous bacteria, blue green algae, Etc. Even the most ignorant profit driven farmer in the world would have to admit. The water wasn't like this before him and that he wouldn't swim in that water or recommend your dog drink from it. The more buffer zone one has along ditches, rivers & streams. The better the water quality gets. The Minnesota river is a fine example of just how feed lots, agriculture practices and population encroachment effects the water quality. The more habitat that gets removed. The worse the water quality becomes. Drinkable water in the future will be something that threatens our very survival.
http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/naturalresources/DD7079.html
Good conservation and plenty of good habitat all help not only the game population but many other things that will help us as a people survive. Water being the big one. Plowing fence line to fence line, much like clear cutting our forests are prime examples of greed and profit driven individuals that are blind to the future generations in this world. There's plenty of difference between making a fair living and having to have wealth that puts all of us at risk.
UGUIDE
Active member
One of the finer posts on this forum. Well said Old and New!
We can't look past our own desire to want a new tractor and want to sink that plow in the ground. I know I did. My first tractor was an ATV with pull behind disk. Farmers are just little kids wanting to play with there tonka trucks in the sand box. I am no different. Gotta go shop for my new John Deere Lawn Tractor (not really...I live in a townhome)
UGUIDE
Active member
Way to go Moellermd, you are a change agent. I also forgot to mention there are additional programs like CSP and EQIP that offer incentives to producers for conservation practices.
My NRCS guys said to stop in a see him this summer as he would have some possible assistance for going to a more intensive rotation and adding in cover crops as well.
I think educating the farmer like moeller did is the biggest gap.
Assitionally I would argue that if CRP were optimizing it could be deployed more effectively on 25 million acres that it is on the 32 million acres now.
Last edited:
moellermd
Super Moderator
We would be in agreement here Chris. These are things farms will do. Complaining about the current situation and about how bad farmers are to the environment does nothing to help conservation it only alienates farms and ranchers.
I think it's impossible to leave the entire conservation movement to the " things farmers are willing to do". Mainly because most of the operations aren't willing to do anything different than they are now, except at the point of a gun figuratively. I doubt that 30' filter strips and a few 1-5 @ patches of monoculture grass per section will save much wildlife, or water quality. Heck most of it will be planted in fescue or brome, get mowed, and or baled on a waiver anyway. There would need to be real teeth in anything like this proposal and that will be fought by a myriad of ag lobbiests, who eventually will actually write the rules, so they can be renegged on at the first sign of a better alternative or percieved need. This whole discussion has frightened me to the point I now believe there is no middle of the road accomodation. We had to declare national parks and send the army to defend them to avoid the destruction of sensitive areas. Sorry to say it, but I believe that sanctity, and preservation of the natiions greatest natural resource, farm ground is far to important to be left to the policies and individuals, corporate or otherwise who seem to be in charge now. When, not if, the current mentality runs us all off the cliff this time, maybe we can affect change, protect the land, protect the water, put a safety net under the producer, level out the radical market swings, but this will be my second turn in the barrel, and I have little hope.
moellermd
Super Moderator
The reason to focus on those activities is because that is what can be done right now to get things done. Is it perfect NO. But it is moving us in the right direction, a lot more than playing the blame game.
The idea of some radical change in farm programs and EPA oversight is pie in the sky. We can argue the merits of it but would near term solution does it offer? The changes you would like to see are 5 plus years down even if everyone agreed on them.
FYI I do not think current CRP rules allow monoculture of non-native spices. At least not in my area. I might be mistaken.