Sodsaver Legislation

1pheas4 said:
Ideally you are correct and this would be the ultimate desired outcome. Unfortunately there just is not enough funding coming into these orgs to match the $ gov't conservation programs can generate trough tax $. (or in our modern American case--through printing $:D)

Much of the work these orgs do is through the help of dollars matched through gov't programs. For example, a PF or Du chapter raises $1, the gov't will match it with $3-$4. --again, amount is an example.

With that kind of $, projects can happen. Without it, that is, using PF/DU funds solely, there just simply is not enough for widespread projects.

As O&N basically stated, at this time help from the gov't is our only way out of this particular issue.
Click to expand...

Think about the access to private land when you drive into the landowners yard with your PF and DU sticker in your window right after the guy finds out what congress has done to him.
 
haymaker said:
Think about the access to private land when you drive into the landowners yard with your PF and DU sticker in your window right after the guy finds out what congress has done to him.
Click to expand...

LOL.......Don't take offense to this Haymaker, but I had to laugh a bit at this statement.:)

Reason being here in Illinois the vast majority of farmers haven't given permission to folks to hunt for some time now. Doesn't matter what stickers you have on a vehicle.

You're not getting access unless you have a few thousand $ or more to lease the land or have an in with the farmer via family or close friends.:(
 
Last edited:
1pheas4 said:
LOL.......Don't take offense to this Haymaker, but I had to laugh a bit at this statement.:)

Reason being here in Illinois the vast majority of farmers haven't given permission to folks to hunt for some time now. Doesn't matter what stickers you have on a vehicle.

You're not getting access unless you have a few thousand $ or more to lease the land or have an in with the farmer via family or close friends.:(
Click to expand...

Spot on, phez, that's it only widespread.:(
 
One other thing.....:confused:

What is it exactly that the farmer is not going to like about PF and DU raising funds through volunteers, get the funds matched/increased through gov't conservation programs, supply equipment, man power, seed, herbicide if/as needed to the land owner that in-turn makes him tell someone with PF or DU stickers on this truck "no you can't hunt here because you supported PF and DU"?

Every land owner we've helped with land improvements has been VERY thankful for the assistance we've given no mater how large or small;):)
 
1pheas4 said:
One other thing.....:confused:

What is it exactly that the farmer is not going to like about PF and DU raising funds through volunteers, get the funds matched/increased through gov't conservation programs, supply equipment, man power, seed, herbicide if/as needed to the land owner that in-turn makes him tell someone with PF or DU stickers on this truck "no you can't hunt here because you supported PF and DU"?

Every land owner we've helped with land improvements has been VERY thankful for the assistance we've given no mater how large or small;):)
Click to expand...

Exactly what it is that I do not like is good intentioned organizations that want to decide what happens on my land. I own it and pay the taxes on it but they want to control it. I am sure that PF and DU do alot of good things. In all fairness I need to read the new provision. This may not be as bad as the last go round. As badly as that got shot down they probably have changed it quite a bit. I will report back after I get a chance to find out.
 
Seems like a current sod saver program exists in GRP, WRP, Grassland and Wetland easements by NRCS and USFW.

These easements are voluntary and pay the landowner a market rate for value of easement for the ground to never be broken.

It really comes down to the $ and competition in the end.You'd like to think good will would prevail but to be realistic good will is a factor it is just not a large enough factor to be competitive with other driving market forces that are affecting cropping decisions as well as conservation concerns.
 
Chris, who do you contact for wetland easements?
 
haymaker said:
Exactly what it is that I do not like is good intentioned organizations that want to decide what happens on my land. I own it and pay the taxes on it but they want to control it. I am sure that PF and DU do alot of good things. In all fairness I need to read the new provision. This may not be as bad as the last go round. As badly as that got shot down they probably have changed it quite a bit. I will report back after I get a chance to find out.
Click to expand...

To let everyone who owns land (most of us do) do anything and everything they want to do with it can turn into a very very costly disaster for not just wildlife but humans as well.

When that time comes, it will be your fellow Americans who bail you and other landowners out with their taxed income and other sources of tax revenue. How do I know this? History my friend. And how soon we forget it too!:(

The unfortunate part of human nature is we continually push the envelope until it's too late. This becomes particularly true when we humans see dollar signs. Don't get me wrong, $ is good and necessary thing for survival and a comfortable life style. But times come when self control and restraint are necessary. When these virtues are absent, good ol' Uncle Sam sees an "in" for more regulation and increased control/taxes. This is the fault of our own making.

Conservations organizations are simply trying to reach a happy medium. Pay the land owner to conserve in hopes that wildlife, clean water, air, etc. get a boost.
 
1pheas4 said:
To let everyone who owns land (most of us do) do anything and everything they want to do with it can turn into a very very costly disaster for not just wildlife but humans as well.

When that time comes, it will be your fellow Americans who bail you and other landowners out with their taxed income and other sources of tax revenue. How do I know this? History my friend. And how soon we forget it too!:(

The unfortunate part of human nature is we continually push the envelope until it's too late. This becomes particularly true when we humans see dollar signs. Don't get me wrong, $ is good and necessary thing for survival and a comfortable life style. But times come when self control and restraint are necessary. When these virtues are absent, good ol' Uncle Sam sees an "in" for more regulation and increased control/taxes. This is the fault of our own making.

Conservations organizations are simply trying to reach a happy medium. Pay the land owner to conserve in hopes that wildlife, clean water, air, etc. get a boost.
Click to expand...

Paying the landowner to conserve is fine as long as it is voluntary. That is different than legislating what I can and can't do with my land. The first land that my family aquired well over a hundred years ago is still native. It could be as good as farmland as any land on any side of it. I prefer to have it that way now. There is still 800 acres of native sod here. If I had broke that up 20 years ago the sodsaver provision would not make any difference to me. But because I have protected it this long I am now to be penalized for that. The guys that broke it up and are farming it and having the dirt blow off of it are fine, nobody is legislating anything aimed at them, but the guy who has protected the grass for over a century, that is the guy we need to go after.
I am not pushing any envelope. I am doing the opposite, I plant trees and food plots. I manage my grass to benefit my livestock and the wildlife. The crops are planted to create more edges and diversity.
I have done a little research on the new version and so far it looks to be very watered down. I doubt that it will have much of an impact either way. I will look into it further.
I am seeing good sized chicks and broods as I am cutting alfalfa several with 10 chicks and some good sized ones.
 
haymaker said:
I have done a little research on the new version and so far it looks to be very watered down. I doubt that it will have much of an impact either way. I will look into it further.
I am seeing good sized chicks and broods as I am cutting alfalfa several with 10 chicks and some good sized ones.
Click to expand...

I agree. Time will tell what this is about. As I've said before, God forbid it's a bill that's counter productive for grasslands and land owners.

Glad to hear about the chicks. That's a great site indeed:thumbsup:;)
 
UGUIDE said:
MNMT, NRCS is contact for WRP (which I don't care for their program). You can contact your local USFW office for grassland and wetland easements.

I put most all of my ground in a permanent no drain no fill USFW wetland easement.

Let em know if you have other questions.
Click to expand...

I'm in the "thinking about what to do with the land"
Lots of water and wetland on the ranch.
 
mnmthunting said:
I'm in the "thinking about what to do with the land"
Lots of water and wetland on the ranch.
Click to expand...


Like leaving a legacy kind of thinking?

For me the USFW deal was less restrictive than WRP but one should look at both. MN might have its own options too.

For me the easement was not going to affect current operations, secured resources for the future, allowed me to be good steward of the land for generations and I got some equity out of deal now so I could re-invest it back into farm habitat improvements. No restrictions on cropping or grazing either.

My kids are coming out for Fathers day weekend and it will be fun to see how they react to the place and show them changes since they were last out at the farm.
 
I noticed PF took the link down to their article on Sodsaver down.

Haymaker, they must have been reading your posts my friend.:rolleyes::D

I just received an email about another bill in the Senate that talks about opening up more access to fed'l lands to hunting.

I'm apprehensive to put a link to it in case it's the same bill. LOL
 
Last edited:
1pheas4 said:
I noticed PF took the link down to their article on Sodsaver down.

Haymaker, they must have been reading your posts my friend.:rolleyes::D

I just received an email about another bill in the Senate that talks about opening up more access to fed'l lands to hunting.

I'm apprehensive to put a link to it in case it's the same bill. LOL
Click to expand...

Do you think they are afraid of me? I have a lot of power in high places.
 
haymaker said:
Do you think they are afraid of me? I have a lot of power in high places.
Click to expand...

:cheers:LOL....in that case your just the guy I need to talk to about getting a few other things done with the help of Nat'l PF.:D
 
1pheas4 said:
:cheers:LOL....in that case your just the guy I need to talk to about getting a few other things done with the help of Nat'l PF.:D
Click to expand...

I had the opportunity to visit with Krist Noem today about the sodsaver provision among other things. In short the biggest benefit will be a saving to the taxpayers. It won't save that much sod and it won't cost me in terms of my future net worth. So I don't have a problem with this version of the sodsaver bill.
 
haymaker said:
I had the opportunity to visit with Krist Noem today about the sodsaver provision among other things. In short the biggest benefit will be a saving to the taxpayers. It won't save that much sod and it won't cost me in terms of my future net worth. So I don't have a problem with this version of the sodsaver bill.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your input haymaker. It's always good the get the other side of the these things. Glad to hear it's not going to be a problem bill after all. (so we hope);):cheers:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top