westksbowhunter
Well-known member
You "Lose" the ability to hunt them when they disappear. I don't really like hunting bare dirt. Didn't you just join this forum?
Notion on CRP
- Thread starter KSnative
- Start date
Practices, not rental payments:
“The U.S. Department of Agriculture is increasing incentive payments for practices installed on land enrolled in the Continuous Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) is upping the Practice Incentive Payment for installing practices, from 5 percent to 20 percent.”
I find it rather ironic then that you say KS sportsman/women are losing hunting access and that potentially one way to get it back is if any land enrolled in CRP should automatically be open to public hunting -- I can see your perspective and do not like the gov't handout form of Agriculture we have today - but dont think landowners should be told to open their properties.
My point is it seems rather hypocritical of you to so quickly and vehemently be against enrolling your land in WIHA based on your other comments here and how we can solve the problem of access. Figured you being so vocal about gaining more public hunting access would be so kind as to have your property enrolled in WIHA access.
Not what I said at all. I said I've never taken a dime from the state (WIHA). I'm not sure how you can characterize that as "vehemently" against WIHA - I just don't personally sell access, either via the state (WIHA) or via private leases.
I'm not sure we share a common understanding of the term "hypocritical" or "ironic". What I proposed was that if one does accept CRP funds - which I DO - then one should provide the public an opportunity to enjoy what they paid for. That means that the access I provide would cease to be at my discretion. The intent was to broadly increase hunting access (and maybe snuff out a deer lease or two). It wouldn't do a thing for me, personally - I just think it would be more fair to others who don't have the good fortune to have the limitless access to great ground that I enjoy.
Mine was not a popular notion, as I have learned. But that's OK, this forum at least gave me an opportunity to float the idea and that's all I could ask for.
I will cut/paste this to the "Trespass" string, hope you don't mind - it just seems to have gotten a lot of views. Over 12k when I last checked. That's good for a full airing of the issue, and I think good for this great forum.
Perhaps it works differently in NW Iowa, but where I am - the FSA prescribes practices on your CRP. And yes, the stated objective is to increase CRP payouts. Did you also notice the ongoing initiative to expand CRP by a million acres?Practices, not rental payments:
“The U.S. Department of Agriculture is increasing incentive payments for practices installed on land enrolled in the Continuous Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) is upping the Practice Incentive Payment for installing practices, from 5 percent to 20 percent.”
I never did understand the practical difference between a "grant" and a "forgiven loan" either, but then I self identify as "clueless".
And I sincerely thank you for that. I think I am beginning to grasp the basics.
FWIW, the difference between a "grant" and "forgiven loan" is that for the first, you have to convince a bureaucrat that the effort being funded lacks sufficient economic merit to justify the expense on the front end; for the latter, you just have to prove it by failing.
Although it will be done anyway, there may not be much of a need to grow funding for CRP (or carbon trapping, or whatever the new way of reimagining terms may be). Thanks to the intentional shut down of American oil independence, crude prices are projected to double (roughly) by year end. Agriculture is a particularly energy use intense industry - not just for trucks, tractors, combines etc but especially for production of fertilizers and other chemicals. Coupled with recent advancements in our ability to rather precisely identify outputs vs inputs for sub-components of any agricultural field, this will significantly reduce the economic motivation to farm marginal soils - CRP (or carbon banking, or "improved practices") expansion not withstanding.
FWIW, the difference between a "grant" and "forgiven loan" is that for the first, you have to convince a bureaucrat that the effort being funded lacks sufficient economic merit to justify the expense on the front end; for the latter, you just have to prove it by failing.
Although it will be done anyway, there may not be much of a need to grow funding for CRP (or carbon trapping, or whatever the new way of reimagining terms may be). Thanks to the intentional shut down of American oil independence, crude prices are projected to double (roughly) by year end. Agriculture is a particularly energy use intense industry - not just for trucks, tractors, combines etc but especially for production of fertilizers and other chemicals. Coupled with recent advancements in our ability to rather precisely identify outputs vs inputs for sub-components of any agricultural field, this will significantly reduce the economic motivation to farm marginal soils - CRP (or carbon banking, or "improved practices") expansion not withstanding.
Yes, but what made them "yours" to lose in the first place? You sound somehow entitled. If not because your tax dollars funded the CRP in the first place - then why?
Also, yes, I lack seniority on this forum. I doubt last long enough to accrue much, but so far it has been both interesting and educational. Hence, I persist for now.
westksbowhunter
Well-known member
Because I had permission from the landowner. I was entitled, from the landowners, even had written permission for most of them. It's called years of making and keeping friendships. They were my places to hunt, not yours. One in particular that I hunt is owned by one of our KDWP biologist. And that permission is exclusive, so yep entitled.
So, just to be clear. These properties aren't yours; you are simply an invited guest. Nothing wrong with that - but an entitlement, it is not. And that is exactly my point. Of greater importance, since they are friends that you cultivate and keep in touch with - why did they say they were dropping "your" (meaning, their - not your, not my) CRP? it would be good to know why they heck all these people are dropping, essentially, free money. That is not a natural human trait in my experience. Do they intend to re-establish these plots as CRP after negotiating higher rates, maybe? Not trying to steer an answer, just wondering what is causing this sudden mass exodus.
Hope you don't perceive my interest as negative. It is not, and we are very much on the same side. I really am very much "pro-pheasant"!
Trying hard to understand reported eyes-on field reports of mass drop outs from CRP type programs, just as the acreages allowed and rates paid are increasing.
FWIW, the link below describes some of the various programs and how payment amounts are determined - nothing here, that I can see, that would account for these losses. Just guessing - but in my experience, real farmers are quite well attuned and tend to stay well plugged in on issues relating to their livelihoods. So, wondering if new/upcoming carbon management programs may pay better than CRP (which, naysayers notwithstanding, it quite good already - which is why I and vast numbers of others gladly participate(d)). In which cases these losses may turn into gains! It would be helpful if we could unravel this knot - and hoping Westksbowhunter (one of the good guys here) and others with close connections can help us out on this conundrum.
FWIW, the link below describes some of the various programs and how payment amounts are determined - nothing here, that I can see, that would account for these losses. Just guessing - but in my experience, real farmers are quite well attuned and tend to stay well plugged in on issues relating to their livelihoods. So, wondering if new/upcoming carbon management programs may pay better than CRP (which, naysayers notwithstanding, it quite good already - which is why I and vast numbers of others gladly participate(d)). In which cases these losses may turn into gains! It would be helpful if we could unravel this knot - and hoping Westksbowhunter (one of the good guys here) and others with close connections can help us out on this conundrum.
Corn over $5/bu and beans over $13/bu do not encourage re-enrollment. The rate of decline will increase at these price levels.
And since when is CRP “free money”. Opportunity cost is a real thing. CRP has to pay more than income producing crops, or renting to the neighbor.
And since when is CRP “free money”. Opportunity cost is a real thing. CRP has to pay more than income producing crops, or renting to the neighbor.
Shoot, I said I was done didn’t I. Well, now I’m done.
And arguing semantics isn’t productive.
This might help, it’s a couple years old but is reflective of the situation today:
www.iowafarmbureau.com
And arguing semantics isn’t productive.
This might help, it’s a couple years old but is reflective of the situation today:
The Comparison: General CRP and Cash Rent
Iowa also has some of the highest cash rental rates in the country at...
Prairie Drifter
Well-known member
I haven't read all of this thread, so forgive me if I am travelling ground that has already been travelled. I is possible that the signs that brown dog is noticing (tracks, paint, flags) could be oil exploration grids as well. Could probably throw in wind energy prospects as well. Time will tell!
BrownDogsCan2
Well-known member
I’m not sure Troy , it could be. Transmission lines had crossed my mind. Regardless I think at least 2 of the patches maybe? already out. The other one the terraced one at first I thought maybe they were looking for someone or a downed deer maybe. After seeing paint later in other fields I guess I assumed it was where they had placed a head unit for a transit and they were mapping terraces and waterways acreages to remain in crp. I don’t how all that tractor based software works , gps or land based or what?
I knew you weren't done - and glad about that.Shoot, I said I was done didn’t I. Well, now I’m done.
And arguing semantics isn’t productive.
This might help, it’s a couple years old but is reflective of the situation today:
The Comparison: General CRP and Cash Rent
Iowa also has some of the highest cash rental rates in the country at...
And this is the point I was making. Lots of assumptions being made about who the real bad guys are. We need to correctly identify the targets before we unload on them.
More than semantics here. The source you provide (Farm Bureau) has been previously widely cited as a bad actor on this forum - yes? I am as shocked as you are that the Farm Bureau would advocate for higher payments, as any good lobby would. Even as they note in the source you provide that "individual contract data is not available" for comparison purposes. Meaning - they cherry picked their data. Furthermore, you can't compare the economics of good bottom ground soil productivity to that of marginal soils (as targeted by CRP) and conclude that payments are inadequate.Shoot, I said I was done didn’t I. Well, now I’m done.
And arguing semantics isn’t productive.
This might help, it’s a couple years old but is reflective of the situation today:
The Comparison: General CRP and Cash Rent
Iowa also has some of the highest cash rental rates in the country at...
We've heard widely here that farmers are walking away from CRP in droves. This is, to date, an entirely unsupported assertion (excluding the FB lobby "data"). The proof is in the pudding - has CRP money been left on the table in significant amounts? That would be a simple yes or no, unless one has an axe to grind. Looking for facts here, not "positions".
And welcome back!
BrownDogsCan2
Well-known member
................2.5 million acres were left on the table in 2020
USDA releases CRP rental rates, grants higher rates to 121 counties
By Max Fisher, Vice President of Economics and Government Relations The U.S. Department of Agriculture has released the 2020 county average cash rental rates for non-irrigated cropland that will serve as the starting point for calculating rental rate offers for this year’s Conservation Reserve...
www.ngfa.org
Last edited: