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

2025 CRP PAYMENTS

I received my government cheese last week.. Sadly it was after black friday. Still getting that big screen tho.. or possibly another heated blind. Unfortunately this is my last year getting the rediculous $330+ an acre I have been getting. Will have to resort to getting a smaller tv and maybe even an unheated blind next year.
 
booneriverbucks said:
I received my government cheese last week.. Sadly it was after black friday. Still getting that big screen tho.. or possibly another heated blind. Unfortunately this is my last year getting the rediculous $330+ an acre I have been getting. Will have to resort to getting a smaller tv and maybe even an unheated blind next year.
Click to expand...
Pears sent....

Has anyone received the payment paperwork yet?
 
booneriverbucks said:
I received my government cheese last week.. Sadly it was after black friday. Still getting that big screen tho.. or possibly another heated blind. Unfortunately this is my last year getting the rediculous $330+ an acre I have been getting. Will have to resort to getting a smaller tv and maybe even an unheated blind next year.
Click to expand...
Ha ha … You might have to mix your venison stew with Dinty Moore to save money !:)
 
No offense to people currently enrolled in CRP. But I hope they cut the payments per acre way back. Currently theres a fair amount of land right around here(good Iowa land growing nothing but weeds) and thats a shame. Theres a place for CRP but paying 300+ for prime Iowa land isnt one of them.
CRP competes with the young producer on land availability.

CRP belongs along rivers, waterways, low lying flood ground and heavily eroded and steep slopes. 50-60CSR Sand and gravel are great candidates. But the 80-90 CSR2 ground doesn't belong in the program just because its the easy button for the land owner.(Some of them dont want to deal with anyone so they just enroll it)
 
Trapshooter1 said:
No offense to people currently enrolled in CRP. But I hope they cut the payments per acre way back. Currently theres a fair amount of land right around here(good Iowa land growing nothing but weeds) and thats a shame. Theres a place for CRP but paying 300+ for prime Iowa land isnt one of them.
CRP competes with the young producer on land availability.

CRP belongs along rivers, waterways, low lying flood ground and heavily eroded and steep slopes. 50-60CSR Sand and gravel are great candidates. But the 80-90 CSR2 ground doesn't belong in the program just because its the easy button for the land owner.(Some of them dont want to deal with anyone so they just enroll it)
Click to expand...
I see pros and cons to CRP but I can tell you hiding behind an excuse that it competes with “young producers” is not correct. A SMALL percentage would go to young producers at the same share as non-CRP cropland now. Farmers are human and humans are greedy by nature. If the land you describe is good cropland the majority would go to well established competitive producers paying the highest dollar. Morally do I think CRP has its problems, yes, but the problem with land availability for beginning/young farmers is that big want to get bigger and older generations won’t turn over control.
 
I think his point is crp has gone beyond the boundaries of established intent, like every government program ie unemployment, disability, welfare, ptsd, tbi and a million others. The intent is good but fuzzy parameters, subjective variables and greed cause bleeding of the program.
 
Muskrat24 said:
I see pros and cons to CRP but I can tell you hiding behind an excuse that it competes with “young producers” is not correct. A SMALL percentage would go to young producers at the same share as non-CRP cropland now. Farmers are human and humans are greedy by nature. If the land you describe is good cropland the majority would go to well established competitive producers paying the highest dollar. Morally do I think CRP has its problems, yes, but the problem with land availability for beginning/young farmers is that big want to get bigger and older generations won’t turn over control.
Click to expand...
Morals speak to one's beleief in right and wrong. I am curious what makes you say CRP is morally wrong.
 
Created in 1985 the crp program was intended to reduce severe soil erosion from HIGHLY erodible farmlands and decrease crop surpluses, supporting farm income by paying farmers to take environmentally sensitive land out of production,

I’d say much of the property in crp does not fall in the those categories. My neighbor has hundreds of acres in crp that’s not close to being highly erodible where he makes money selling pheasant and quail hunts on. Idk. What’s highly erodible? Very subjective.
 
Windlooker said:
Created in 1985 the crp program was intended to reduce severe soil erosion from HIGHLY erodible farmlands and decrease crop surpluses, supporting farm income by paying farmers to take environmentally sensitive land out of production,

I’d say much of the property in crp does not fall in the those categories. My neighbor has hundreds of acres in crp that’s not close to being highly erodible where he makes money selling pheasant and quail hunts on. Idk. What’s highly erodible? Very subjective.
Click to expand...
Ya i think land should have an HEL designation to qualify. Or proximity to streams, creeks, etc.
 
The problem is the whole Goverment AG program need to be redone. I would like to know the cost to the taxpayer for the average acre of farmed land to the tax payer vs that same acre in Crp. With the projected subsidies being rolled out now and the crop insurance premium payments the crop acres on my farm will receive more Government money than my CRP. This doesn’t count the Arc/PLC and any of the farm loan programs as I don’t use those.
 
IowaBowHunter1983 said:
Morals speak to one's beleief in right and wrong. I am curious what makes you say CRP is morally wrong.
Click to expand...
Choice of words may have been bad there. Kind of. The topics you, HANS1 and windlooker all brought up are what I was referring too. The window 8 - 10 years ago when entire fields of non-HEL farmland were enrolled into CRP pollinator habitats at well above market rental rates I do have a moral problem with. Keep in mind I like CRP but taxpayers paying a farmer to retire and paying record rental rates of over $300/ac at the time is not a good use of taxpayer dollars. Do pollinators need help, YES. But that program was taken advantage of and it was fixed as that window was fairly short lived as the intent of the program was not to enroll entire farms. Another issue I have from a moral standpoint is some NRCS offices have no teeth. A neighboring property has a severe scericea lespedeza and tree/brush problem. The farm was recently bid back in for another 10 year CRP contract and all the new landowner did was mow it to hide the issues. Now two years later the trees and brush resprouted and the scericea is still there for neighbors to deal with. CRP is a net winner to soil erosion, wildlife and decreasing over production but as with everything has its issues.
 
The are several basic qualifications to be eligible to enroll in CRP.
One of those is based on soil, water, or wind erosion. There are places that are very flat but qualify based on wind erosion. Any of those, wind, water, or soil are determined by NRCS , not fsa.
Continous practices bypass those determinations because of their location to water. Instead of waiting a year or 2 for a general sign up, those high priority locations move to front of the line.
Nationaly about 30% of crp is general whole fields, 30% continuous, and 30 is crp grassland. Crp grasslands rentals rates are much lower, but have less environmental benefits. It may have never been cropped, but is over grazed introduced and exotic grasses. But the eat up 1/3 of the total crp acres.

Crp ain't perfect. But without it, 20 million more acres would be in production and the prices of committees would reflect a 20% change that farmers don't need.
 
My parents have passed. I was visiting my uncle in Denver three years ago and we were talking about when my wife and I bought a farm in CRP. Uncle said my parents were aghast that I was "sucking on the govt teat". They never said it to my face. Uncle said he thought it was a great move. The farm is classified as HEL. We opted out when the contract came up on the land we bought.

As noted by others, there is a time and place for everything. Most programs need tweaked.
 
Windlooker said:
Created in 1985 the crp program was intended to reduce severe soil erosion from HIGHLY erodible farmlands and decrease crop surpluses, supporting farm income by paying farmers to take environmentally sensitive land out of production,

I’d say much of the property in crp does not fall in the those categories. My neighbor has hundreds of acres in crp that’s not close to being highly erodible where he makes money selling pheasant and quail hunts on. Idk. What’s highly erodible? Very subjective.
Click to expand...
Well if it’s truly in crp- he can’t sell hunts. So there’s that
 
Yes it’s truly in crp, I know the guy. My understanding is he can sell hunts. Nothing precludes private land enrolled in crp from being hunted for a fee. I leased a farm enrolled in crp in Illinois to deer hunt. No difference.
 
Last edited:
WAY BACK when I read our CRP contract, leasing/selling hunts was about the only way a person could make money off the land enrolled. They had a long list of prohibited activities like an airfield (thought the ground was HEL/steep?), camping, fairs, other random things.

I would be fine if they added hunting fees/leases to the prohibited acts.
 
The government can’t interfere with recreational activities on the crp land. The prohibited activities you list would damage the acreage and/or reduce the enrolled acreage. Hunting doesn’t do that.
I removed my land from crp a few years ago after 20 years in the program. Best thing I ever did. You do not want the federal government dictating anything. My .02.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom