Mine got signed up by the previous owner- $72 an acre . He had no clue what he was going when he signed up stuff and really made a mess of my piece. Tempted to buy it out so I can enroll it differently but really not cost efficient.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
Is it possible (@ $72acre) that he enrolled pasture ? Riparian buffer plan ?
That seems awfully low for crop ground !
So I was told the farmer never recorded the acres- so no history- but the farmer recorded his acres (the amounts of acres never matched apparently)
Duckriver
Active Member
For the past 20 years The national crp acreage cap trends down during a republican administration typically. During a democratic administration the cap slightly goes up and typically higher rental rates and Incentive payments above and beyond.
The kicker has been that the minimum ebi score to get into general crp has been reduced by over 25% in recent years. Many states have had 99% re-enrollment due to the lower minimum ebi score. So in another words...almost everything that is offered is accepted. If you can sign up then almost everything has been accepted nationally. Sure a few offers don't qualify, but it is very rare. That needs to change.
The minimum score needs to go back up. That would leave highly productive and minimally erosive soils would be less likely to be enrolled, while allowing the highest erosive soils to be enrolled. Another change that needs to happen is soil rental should not be based on productivity ,but soil loss. That would reduce incentive to enroll high quality soils. This would help young farmers and meet objectives.
The kicker has been that the minimum ebi score to get into general crp has been reduced by over 25% in recent years. Many states have had 99% re-enrollment due to the lower minimum ebi score. So in another words...almost everything that is offered is accepted. If you can sign up then almost everything has been accepted nationally. Sure a few offers don't qualify, but it is very rare. That needs to change.
The minimum score needs to go back up. That would leave highly productive and minimally erosive soils would be less likely to be enrolled, while allowing the highest erosive soils to be enrolled. Another change that needs to happen is soil rental should not be based on productivity ,but soil loss. That would reduce incentive to enroll high quality soils. This would help young farmers and meet objectives.
The problem is once acres are converted to income producing acres they will never go back to idle. Land today simply costs to much. Acres that get cleaned up and farmed long enough then go to CRP will most likely go back into production of some kind unless crop insurance is also completely changed.
Muddyrem
Active Member
BINGO was his name oooooooo
Windwalker
Life Member
Crop prices are low enough with high input prices. High cash rent is nuts. Do away with CRP crop prices would drop farm economy would do the 1970 thing all over again.
smithhunter1975
Active Member
Have some acres that I am interested in enrolling into CRP now. Has anybody explored this in the last few weeks? Is it feasible now or things put on hold?
DMarley83
DMARLEY83
Hawk32
PMA Member
Honestly if it isn't that many acres and the payments aren't a big deal I would just do your own thing and plant what you want, make the food plots you want, and trails you want without having to jump through their hoops. I know handful of people that are not reenrolling just for those reasons. I just did 25 acres and I really wish I didn't need the payments to replace cash rent so I could have done exactly that. Hate jumping through the BS hoops.
Last edited:
YtailFreak
Active Member
Has anyone heard any new chatter? I'm really curious to see if they'll re-enroll expiring contracts or shut that down.
Duckriver
Active Member
No updates from Washington on crp at this time. Hopefully there will be re-enrollment options. But we have had similar circumstances in the past and may not hear anything till mid summer.
He haven't had a freaking farm bill in 8 years!
Ineptitude in Washington
Ineptitude in Washington
Steve-O
World Member
I think what would be beneficial -- if you get federal funding to not farm, it's automatically public ground. People always state that Iowa has way too little public. This would raise the acres drastically.
That would make people think about federal hands in the money pot more.
That would make people think about federal hands in the money pot more.
Lots of holes in this imo.
Farmers (row crop) get WAY more money is subsidies. Is that all public too?
Can we crash in people's apartments/houses that are getting section 8 or other federal subsidy?
Can we have dinner off those getting food cards?
If the determining factor of what becomes "public" is if that thing has government funds tied to it, well we have entered communism.
Last edited:
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
That’s been brought up many times. You’ll get a few landowners to sign up for that? But there’s issues of course …
I personally would not. I think I get $5000 in CRP right now, and I’m gonna let everyone hunt my farm ?? If the CRP is a 1/2 mile off the road, how would they get to it ??
Defeats the purpose of owning land .
Steve-O
World Member
Yes to all
Steve-O
World Member
Defeats the purpose of the government paying for your land. Maybe the American dream should be paying for what you buy with income you bring in.
Steve-O
World Member
Forgot to answer other question...walkin access is required