In my case I am the guy that still has native grass, I did not break it up. The last time they tried the sod saver it did not work. Now they are trying a new version. They can't make me not break up the sod, they can make me take more of the risk. That tells me I should have broken it up a long time ago. Now my concern is when are they going to declare it an endagered species and not let me do anything with it. I am being punished for doing what they want me to do. That seems stupid to me. If they get this new version through that will be the straw that broke the camels back, and there will be less quarters of sod because of the do gooders that don't know or care what they are doing. I will probably plant it back to grass after I get rid of the native sod designation, but I think that they being stupid again. There just seems to be a need of some to have control over others. I am sure that there is a name for that disease. I hope the wedding goes well.
Pictures Don't Lie: Corn And Soybeans Are Conquering U.S. Grasslands
- Thread starter onpoint
- Start date
In my case I am the guy that still has native grass, I did not break it up. The last time they tried the sod saver it did not work. Now they are trying a new version. They can't make me not break up the sod, they can make me take more of the risk. That tells me I should have broken it up a long time ago. Now my concern is when are they going to declare it an endagered species and not let me do anything with it. I am being punished for doing what they want me to do. That seems stupid to me. If they get this new version through that will be the straw that broke the camels back, and there will be less quarters of sod because of the do gooders that don't know or care what they are doing. I will probably plant it back to grass after I get rid of the native sod designation, but I think that they being stupid again. There just seems to be a need of some to have control over others. I am sure that there is a name for that disease. I hope the wedding goes well.
haymaker, I comend you for the way you take care of your land and wish there were more landowners like you that think of more than just there bottom line. Sad reallity is many around here don't give the environment or wildlife a second thought in there decission making when it comes to how they farm. We are now dealing with water qualtiy problems in many of our lakes including lake Erie. Now it will take time and millons of dollars to fix our waters but I am hopeful that we can. I believe however it will take mandates and not just voluntary actions. These mandates will have to include homeowers and there actions as well as sanitary sewer systems and there practices.So we can reduce our nutrient load on our waters that cause harmful algal blooms.As to whom to make the recomendations could be a joint group of soil and water conservation districts, local group of landowers and area busnisses that have a intrest in the outcome.As I have said before we can farm and make money but also take care of our land and wildlife. I feel we should leave a little room for all to exist.
That is a much better post. I can't argue with what you said, I just don't want a buch of washington types having the final say because they don't know as much as they think they do.
Here's a couple of interesting links to articles about the Brown's North Dakota Ranch and their sustainable agriculture techniques. It seems there may be hope for a more wildlife friendly modern agriculture but more people have to be made aware, be better educated and get involved. It's a no brainer that the american public would for the most part support this given all of the pluses.
See;
Bismarck rancher wins national award from NRDC
http://bismarcktribune.com/news/local/bi...19bb2963f4.html
Gabe Brown- On Sustainable Farming
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabe-brown/sustainable-farming_b_1522538.html
---------
Here's a DU video on the state of the prairie pot hole region that's pretty interesting;
"…just in the last 5 years we've lost almost 400,000 acres of native prairie…."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ9D1S8sm7w
Tell me again how it's a bad idea for the government to be involved in trying to slow the loss of native prairie.
On the issue of government involvement with conservation I tend to think of the U.S. government as a tool developed (and hopefully maintained) by "we the people" with the intention of building a better world to live in. Just like any organization it's subject to ups and downs and fits and starts, corruption, etc.. If you hit your finger with a hammer you don't quit using it.
*
See;
Bismarck rancher wins national award from NRDC
http://bismarcktribune.com/news/local/bi...19bb2963f4.html
Gabe Brown- On Sustainable Farming
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabe-brown/sustainable-farming_b_1522538.html
---------
Here's a DU video on the state of the prairie pot hole region that's pretty interesting;
"…just in the last 5 years we've lost almost 400,000 acres of native prairie…."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ9D1S8sm7w
Tell me again how it's a bad idea for the government to be involved in trying to slow the loss of native prairie.
On the issue of government involvement with conservation I tend to think of the U.S. government as a tool developed (and hopefully maintained) by "we the people" with the intention of building a better world to live in. Just like any organization it's subject to ups and downs and fits and starts, corruption, etc.. If you hit your finger with a hammer you don't quit using it.
*
Last edited:
RE Du and "Sodsaver".
I don't see where ranchers and farmers are being told by DU or anyone else that they CAN NOT plow up sod. The "Sodsaver" legislation says that if farmers do plow up established native sod that the crops grown on that plowed acreage will not ever benefit from the same government / taxpayer subsidies and protections that most previously established ag acreage does. I don't see much wrong with that approach to help reduce the effect of plowing up more native grassland. I think something similar should be done for draining wetlands for development be it for agricultural, industrial or real estate development.
I don't see where ranchers and farmers are being told by DU or anyone else that they CAN NOT plow up sod. The "Sodsaver" legislation says that if farmers do plow up established native sod that the crops grown on that plowed acreage will not ever benefit from the same government / taxpayer subsidies and protections that most previously established ag acreage does. I don't see much wrong with that approach to help reduce the effect of plowing up more native grassland. I think something similar should be done for draining wetlands for development be it for agricultural, industrial or real estate development.
Last edited:
So what this amounts to is that I should have broke it up years ago and this is the thanks I get from DU for leaving it alone. I have less fear of taking the financial risk than I do being told by a bunch of do gooders what I can or can't do with my land. If it happens I will kill native sod that I would have left alone had DU left it alone.
I am confused? If you don't want to break the sod, I am sure you don't, and I commend you for it, why is sod saver an issue or not? I guess if you break it and produce crops, then you could get grain subsidies currently. In the sod saver bill, possibly not. I am not so sure that leaving like it is, is the smart play anyway! Cattle herds are way down world wide, there is a movement to grass based beef cattle anyway. Prices will go up, commodities will come down, it could be quick! I know it's tough, I wish there could be an equalizer, to give a decent wage to both crop guys and the livestock guys, rather than the wide up and down finances. Sod saver was a ambitious plan by do gooders, without a real knowledge as what might happen on the producers side, and then of course it did! Why don't we provide a platform of what beef cattle trade for, not the hocus pocus formula plan, to provide a beef producer would get. Make the native sod have value through beef. The irony is when I was a kid we thought the better habitat was row crop fields. Latter I found a whole lot of happy pheasants and quail among my own cows! Might be the future of beef cattle and gamebirds are inseperablely linked. like the buffalo and the prairie chicken.
mnmthunting
Banned
Beef Cow/calf operations are the most wildlife friendly ecosystems there is. :thumbsup:
The Sod Saver legislation that DU talks about has no effect on cattle grazing operations. The intention is to reduce turning grassland into cultivated row crops.
I can understand where someone who might be looking at Gabe Brown's ranching / farming operations and see that the Sod Saver legislation is a negative for a farming operations like Brown's ranch that are very wildlife and ecosystem friendly. Maybe some loophole that relates to this should be looked at in these programs. There has to be a start somewhere to try and put a check on the short sighted, short term maximum profit focus that most industrialized agriculture and Wall Street love so much.
.
I can understand where someone who might be looking at Gabe Brown's ranching / farming operations and see that the Sod Saver legislation is a negative for a farming operations like Brown's ranch that are very wildlife and ecosystem friendly. Maybe some loophole that relates to this should be looked at in these programs. There has to be a start somewhere to try and put a check on the short sighted, short term maximum profit focus that most industrialized agriculture and Wall Street love so much.
.
Last edited:
Well my friend it is the native label that I would like to get rid of. If the well intentioned do gooders get this new version passed it won't stop the breaking of sod. It may slow it down slightly. In five or ten years they will be back looking for something more. Eventually they will want an Endangered Species designation. There is a significant financial hit to my net worth if they get this passed, as land that can't be insured will have less value, maybe 50%.
I have decided to be proactive. I had a very interesting conversation with a DU higher up from the Wasington dc office, and as a result I have extended an invitation for an opening weekend pheasant hunt, that was accepted. So maybe if I can talk face to face while we are looking at what we are talking about, some good can come of it. I may have found one without the typical DU attitude. If I sprayed my native sod and planted a crop and harvest it, I could let it go back to grass it would no longer be called native and then they could not hurt me. That won't be cheap to do but it would work.
onpoint
Active member
What is the common denominator with most people when you talk about nature?
Why do so many dream about hunting areas like the Yukon, Alaska, The Arctic, the mountains, Etc?
Why do most choose if given the opportunity to go back in time or into the future. They choose back in time.
Why do even those who support big till farming and progress, live where they do in rural areas?
To get away from the foot print of "Man" as much as possible. Yet when met with legislation to limit man's foot print. They fight such measures with tooth and nail.
Myself, I believe many approach this issue with. There will always be places to visit where man has had little impact. So I'll do as I please with the land I have.
I'm not much of a crowd type person. I like wild places that I can loose myself in. Where it's so quite that the silence is deafening. Where all you can hear on a calm day is a ringing in your ears. Where even a airplane flying over is a intrusion. I have places like this where I live. Lots of them. Until you enjoy such a place. You wouldn't understand why anybody would want to preserve it everywhere where it still exists..
Everywhere we look, we have men who are looking to concur such places. I see untouched beauty. They see $$$$. For me, no money can buy what I enjoy. It's NOT for sale at any price. I'll eat Roman noodles and crackers 7 days a week 3 meals a day. If it keeps me from having to see what others call progress. I'm minutes from areas where people still get lost and die..some never found. big undisturbed country where I can sit on a sunny fall or spring day, all day and not see a single person, not a car, nothing.
Many have never experienced real wilderness. Try a trip to the Boundary waters in Minnesota. 1,000's of square miles of untouched wilderness. I'm so glad to live in such a place. I'm truly blessed. It kills me to see where the Dakota's are heading and IMO, it's unstoppable. The very reason people chose to settle there. They are destroying. For what? MONEY News flash, being rich don't always mean flush with cash.
Why do so many dream about hunting areas like the Yukon, Alaska, The Arctic, the mountains, Etc?
Why do most choose if given the opportunity to go back in time or into the future. They choose back in time.
Why do even those who support big till farming and progress, live where they do in rural areas?
To get away from the foot print of "Man" as much as possible. Yet when met with legislation to limit man's foot print. They fight such measures with tooth and nail.
Myself, I believe many approach this issue with. There will always be places to visit where man has had little impact. So I'll do as I please with the land I have.
I'm not much of a crowd type person. I like wild places that I can loose myself in. Where it's so quite that the silence is deafening. Where all you can hear on a calm day is a ringing in your ears. Where even a airplane flying over is a intrusion. I have places like this where I live. Lots of them. Until you enjoy such a place. You wouldn't understand why anybody would want to preserve it everywhere where it still exists..
Everywhere we look, we have men who are looking to concur such places. I see untouched beauty. They see $$$$. For me, no money can buy what I enjoy. It's NOT for sale at any price. I'll eat Roman noodles and crackers 7 days a week 3 meals a day. If it keeps me from having to see what others call progress. I'm minutes from areas where people still get lost and die..some never found. big undisturbed country where I can sit on a sunny fall or spring day, all day and not see a single person, not a car, nothing.
Many have never experienced real wilderness. Try a trip to the Boundary waters in Minnesota. 1,000's of square miles of untouched wilderness. I'm so glad to live in such a place. I'm truly blessed. It kills me to see where the Dakota's are heading and IMO, it's unstoppable. The very reason people chose to settle there. They are destroying. For what? MONEY News flash, being rich don't always mean flush with cash.
mnmthunting
Banned
Haymaker, How would these officials or who ever polices the "native Sod" know it's not been plowed? They would probably put 4 posts at the edge of the Teepee Rings and that's about it.
In Richland County MT there are a lot of teepee Rings and Indian Campsites.
Also Bakken Oil under the whole area. Lots of native grasslands to rocky and hilly to farm. Anyway they put the 4 T posts just to protect the actual sites and the heck with the rest.
I doubt anybody will bother with Your little native area
In Richland County MT there are a lot of teepee Rings and Indian Campsites.
Also Bakken Oil under the whole area. Lots of native grasslands to rocky and hilly to farm. Anyway they put the 4 T posts just to protect the actual sites and the heck with the rest.
I doubt anybody will bother with Your little native area
Haymaker, How would these officials or who ever polices the "native Sod" know it's not been plowed? They would probably put 4 posts at the edge of the Teepee Rings and that's about it.
In Richland County MT there are a lot of teepee Rings and Indian Campsites.
Also Bakken Oil under the whole area. Lots of native grasslands to rocky and hilly to farm. Anyway they put the 4 T posts just to protect the actual sites and the heck with the rest.
I doubt anybody will bother with Your little native area
The way that they will know is that we are told that we need to report what we plant or what we do with our land. The gov. has to know every thing about everyone. The land where most of the teepee rings are is safe I am not going to break that. There is other sod that would make just as good farmland as the land next to it and that is what I am concerned about. At maybe $2000 dollars an acre difference between sod after a sod saver bill and sod before a sodsaver bill, that is $300,000 per quarter difference. Whether I like it or not this is a business with balance sheets and net worth statements and all kinds of things I would rather not have to think about. And the frosting on the cake is I don't like to be told what to do by somebody that does not have any skin in the game. What happens here affects my family and it is none of DU or PF business what I do here. I guess I am just enough of a contrarian that if you tell me I can't it makes me want to more, and if you tell me I have to I won't.
onpoint
Active member
What your saying is, pay me the ransom or the land gets it?
I can plant anything I want to on my land or let it grow into brush...I don't participate in any government programs. Then I can do as I like. Should try it sometime. You might like it. I don't barrow money to plant. I don't have to have crop insurance, Etc.
No, what ransom? I am saying I want to be able to operate this place using my best judgement to be a steward of the land and take care of the financial needs of the place and the family. When legislation comes along that affects me negatively in the long term it makes my job tougher. I do get a CRP check. It is smaller than if i rented it out. Crop insurance has been a money loser over my lifetime. Most of the land I operate is in grass, I am a cattleman. I have less gov. involvement that way.
onpoint
Active member
That's the way I do it. I don't have a thing to do with the government or the banker when it comes to our farming. We just settle for as good as things are. We learn to live that way. Just be happy with the life style one can afford and live each day to it's fullest.
God Bless everybody, have a blessed Sunday.
mnmthunting
Banned
I have been in the Cow/calf business a long time.
Raise corn and hay, I've made it OK without government help.
When the survey stuff comes in the mail it some how manages to get lost.
FSA has always crapped on cattlemen and our grasslands, no payments for grassland, Row crops on the otherhand.
Grass is our most important crop, we rotate, keep the land in good shape.
NEVER Fall till, turn the cows in it.
Cattlemen DO NOT drain wetlands. We need them badly during dry years.
We add ponds/dams in waterless areas. Ducks, geese and cattails.
Always have waste grain and haybales here, there and everywhere.
Lots of shelter and windbreaks.
I wonder How much it cost me per year to feed the wild critters?
Wildlife is welcome.:cheers:
Raise corn and hay, I've made it OK without government help.
When the survey stuff comes in the mail it some how manages to get lost.
FSA has always crapped on cattlemen and our grasslands, no payments for grassland, Row crops on the otherhand.
Grass is our most important crop, we rotate, keep the land in good shape.
NEVER Fall till, turn the cows in it.
Cattlemen DO NOT drain wetlands. We need them badly during dry years.
We add ponds/dams in waterless areas. Ducks, geese and cattails.
Always have waste grain and haybales here, there and everywhere.
Lots of shelter and windbreaks.
I wonder How much it cost me per year to feed the wild critters?
Wildlife is welcome.:cheers:
onpoint
Active member
AMEN! MNMT...good job!
Getting rid of those nasty shelter belts. So they can get 10 more rows of corn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUAtn54mu0M
Getting rid of those nasty shelter belts. So they can get 10 more rows of corn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUAtn54mu0M