Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

CRP & Leasing?

I would like to say, that back in the day, without CRP income, my bank never would have loaned me the money for my farm. So THANK YOU to all of the hard workers out there who's tax dollars helped me out! :grin: Should I feel like a dead-beat on welfare because I took advantage of a government program? I don't. I am not leasing my ground but I would if I had to to keep it. I think CRP is a great program for the wildlife and the environment. I've dumped a lot of my own money into water-shed and tree planting projects to help keep run-off to a minimum and enhance the diversity of wildlife. Its not only helping deer and turkey populations but the small game animals and nesting birds also. Maintaining CRP is not cheap and my county DOES NOT offer cost share to do so like many counties use to. I for one am thankful for the opportunities it has given me and will not feel my tax dollars have gone to waste if these programs continue to help others like it has helped me. :way:
 
My(our)tax dollars fund a heckuva lot more idiotic programs than CRP. I don't care if the landowner creates an exclusive playground or a petting zoo for the public to enjoy. His ground is now growing wildlife, preserving erodible topsoil and protecting watersheds.

In the long run, everyone benefits.

Sure its tempting to hate the guy with deep pockets, especially if he's not letting YOU hunt. But if the guy's a conservationist--even if you have to pay him to be one--he's a friend.

I think with the growing emphasis on ethanol and resulting fencerow-to-fencerow corn crops we're gonna see, we're all (even people who don't give a rat's patoot about a pheasant) wish there were a lot more acres under CRP...no matter their use.
 
So the ones that disagree with a farmer leasing out CRP, how do you feel about federal crop insurance or preventive planting payments? Both are from the government which means your tax dollars. So do you think that a farmer should not be able to lease out his ground if he has excepted this type of payment?

I can tell you first hand, and will put numbers down if thats what you need, that a farmer this day and age can get alot more from croping his ground, than the CRP payment is. So what if he leases it out to someone to hunt. The CRP is definitly helping out in wildlife. Think about this, next year CRP acres will probably be down by 60%, and going to crop, what do you think will happen with wildlife habitat? Sometimes you may not like where your tax dollars are going, but sometimes its for the better, even if a farmer is leasing it out to someone who will only hunt it once a year
 
CRP days are numbered with $5 corn, so this whole thread might soon be moot.

The majority of Iowans do not view wildlife as a priority (can't cite a source, so please cite one that refutes this statement).

CRP payments were key in financing my property acquisition.

I never considered leasing hunting rights as it was anti thematic to my plan (and I was personally repulsed by the thought).

I allowed others to hunt the property.
 
I have no problem with CRP other than what's already been said. If you take money from the gov't, you should not be able to lease it out for profit. It's contrary to the original impetus of the program ---> to improve the quality of hunting for all.

The earlier statement made about hunting becoming a rich man's sport rings true, but we should be vigilant to make sure it never becomes the rule. That is why I joined the IBA in the first place, to protect hunting for the common man. CRP is a double edged sword. It creates habitat for game and improves the quality of the hunt, but it also allows people to buy ground and lock it up and away from the common hunter. It is not too much to ask that leasing at least be forbidden if you take a gov't handout.

Owning your own land is a dream that every hunter shares. Being a true steward of that land however is much less a reality than many of us like to believe. If you can harvest enough deer from your property to maintain a healthy and natural balance in your area, than you are doing right and deserve many thanks. If however you simply create a doe refuge and hunt mainly horns, you are a poor steward indeed. Many landowners also GROSSLY underestimate the number of does they need to harvest each year in order to maintain that delicate balance.

Unfortunately this is what I see more often than not. Guys that get together and purchase a couple hundred acres and shut out 2-3 times their number in local hunters, just so they can create their sanctuary. Their heart might be in the right place, and they might even come close to culling the herd a year or two... but then the inevitable happens. They simply live too far away, change jobs and move, get older and less active, and then the out of state hunter comes along and waves some big bills under their noses and the smell of money is too hard to pass up. Now we have an even more uncontrolled population, compounded by the CRP that WE ALL paid for, and we still have a couple hundred acres shut off to local hunters that cannot afford to buy access.

The unfortunate thing is that this just reinforces the trend of grouping together to protect what little hunting availability we have. I don't know what the future holds for deer hunting in Iowa. It is a fine line we tread between a landowner's inalienable rights and the rights or privileges of the common man to pursue his passion for the outdoors and perhaps feed his family in the process. I support the State tripling or even quadrupling it's purchase of public hunting ground in order to protect that future.
 
I put no opinion on this one since I am sitting on the middle of the fence. I agree with both sides on this. I guess my only opinion is that CRP is very good for our wildlife and it doesn't pay as well as corn or soybeans right now. Well, if it's not worth a farmers time to have and be able to make good money on, then big CRP acres will start getting planted into something else. So now what happens. Is it worth having them make less money, possibly forcing them into turning it into corn instead. Just my two cents worth. Seems like a double edged sword.
 
For the people that are upset about farmers doing this I got a question for you. we had two propeties that I believe were givin to the county. I'm not sure how they got the property. Anyway for as long as I can remember there was NO hunting on these properies for whatever reason that was the way it was for probably 10 plus years. Then last year they opened it up to the highest bidder for each propery. The real good one I heard brought $8000 I assume for a year or hunting season from what I've heard the person took a dandy deer off it. I just think that a public hunting ground would have been a more acceptable thing to do. We've hunted property that butts up against it in the past and the deer are stacked in ther like cord wood. I would assume that the care or the land come for taxes or government funding but I'm not sure. Maybe someone who knows more about it than I do could clear it up some.
 
I don't mind anyone benefitting from my tax dollars to have to work a little bit to receive them. aka some restrictions on how that benefit is utilized.
 
I must say this poll has surprised me some, I didn't think it would be this close on the votes (count at 49).
 
Top Bottom