2018 Farm Bill
- Thread starter IowaBowHunter1983
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
Hmmmm. Good point. This next round is supposed to go down a bit.
The part I have trouble with....... would we really want to get rid of it? I’m not a fan Of Gov spending but..... our landscape would be a disaster without it. Our water quality would be far far worse. Our wildlife wouldn’t have a twig to hide behind if we didn’t have this in some parts of our state.
I get what ur saying and agree. BUT..... on flip side.....
1) Iowa is the most transformed state of the 50 states, period. We also now have more in CRP than any other state. We put 1.6M acres in CRP of 36M acres. That’s 4% of our land being conserved, saving vulnerable top soil, creating habitat & protecting water. The whole ecosystem of: bees, rare animals, bugs, soil nutrition, building organic matter- the full circle of life of an ecosystem can finally exist because of crp.
2) limits on how much a household can enroll. A guy with $50M in land (say a mega rich dude) - likely couldn’t enroll any or him alone: $50k be his limit and he’d be taxed on that income.
3) at least “welfare for farmers” (don’t disagree with u!!!) - at least the $ is going to people who pay more in taxes than they take home from stuff like this. These are NET givers into our tax system. Not like the $ is going to the dude that sits on the porch drinking 40 oz’s all day & leaching off the system.
4) This “subsidy” absolutely protects the environment. Iowa needs cover too. If we want to cut back welfare subsdies- heck, lot higher costs on one example like the crop insurance subsidies.
This CONSERVATIVE CONSERVATIONIST (who doesn’t care for most things government & all the waste) hopes this program stays & even grows. Find other programs to cut - this one actually works.
Anybody hearing anything? The news prefers to cover tide pod eaters on antigun marches and prostitutes.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
No, but I did hear conservation is a top priority and they are looking at increasing CRP acres.
turkeyriver
PMA Member
I did hear from a very reliable source(high ranking PF guy) yesterday that cost share for establishing CRP may be under the gun. Not to eliminate it, just lower it. Not a bad thing IMO, no reason it should be almost free. One thing I hate is buy-out provisions. If you sign-up, you should have to abide by the contract, otherwise why have a 10 year contract. I'm a farmer and PF committee guy and have planted a lot of CRP ground for landowners. Nothing worse than a beautiful stand of prairie being plowed up 3 yrs. in just because corn goes up a little and a greedy farmer bids $5 more than CRP rates to buy it out. That same guy will drop that marginal ground 2 yrs. later and leave a landowner high and dry if corn drops.
Farm bill has stalled, but I am sure they will get some version thru.
In the meantime, Continuous CRP is back open.
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/news-room/news-releases/2018/nr_20180601_rel_0093
In the meantime, Continuous CRP is back open.
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/news-room/news-releases/2018/nr_20180601_rel_0093
Good news!!!
I’m at fsa right now certifying & waiting to sign stuff. They said rates will be down a decent bit. They said applications need to be in by August (at least the program this office was talking about). So- if interested- I’d get in to office soon & try and avoid the crunch time in July when guys r flooded in certifying crops.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
Just a little heads up, I have a friend in habitat management business and he gets full updates...
CRP.....will have a bit lower payment, less cost share--no bonus payment, and fewer programs available...Pollinators is not available at this time.
CRP.....will have a bit lower payment, less cost share--no bonus payment, and fewer programs available...Pollinators is not available at this time.
Poliinator program is/was good for a lot of reasons, but it would not be part my first choice by any means for the simple reason that you don't get the 10% foodplot allowance with it. CP-42 bans foodplots within the programs fields.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
It was a nice option for smaller parcels that maybe did not fit into other CRP options...cool cover, but expensive seed.
Duckriver
Active Member
Crp is now accepting applications for several continous practices but not all of them. Riparian buffers and filter strips, etc are available from now to September 2018. The rental rates have been adjusted nation wide with many being lowered. Also this sign up period does not have any signing bonus or additional cost share.
Also contracts set to expire in September will have opportunity to extend for 1 year.
Better than nothing and is a sign of what maybe coming down the pipe in future.
Also contracts set to expire in September will have opportunity to extend for 1 year.
Better than nothing and is a sign of what maybe coming down the pipe in future.
A couple corrections to the comments above as I work closely with the CRP programs. First to Sligh, Iowa has some of the highest rental rates in the nation on some of the more productive ground in the nation. Iowa's rates were set with a near sighted approach and due to maximum decrease in rate limits the rates huge acres were bid in at were WELL above cash rental rates being paid by farmers for similar ground so Iowa landowners/CRP participants got a sweet deal! Second, outside of a couple instances there are penalties for breaking the CRP contract to rent out for more $ per acre to the tune of 100% of all payments received including cost share plus liquidated damages of 25%. Last, I see the cost share argument but part of the reason for the cost share is that the CRP plantings are dictated by the type of program. If the rental rate was equal to cash rent and there was no cost share why would anyone pay $400 to $500/ a.c. to put in CRP and earn the same as cash rent??
The $400 to $500/a.c. above is what some of the pollinators mixes cost to seed. There is a big push to limit acres on a farm to the most sensitive areas so not 100% of a farm can go into CRP. The SNAP program (food stamps) is a double edged sword when it comes to the farm bill as rural America is losing power in DC so getting legislators to negotiate this for that is a tool to give farm bill issues some bargaining power. If SNAP is taken out the total cost of a farm bill the bill would appear much lower cost BUT farm interests/CRP would have more convincing to do to win over urban legislator votes.
Each county will vary then each soil type has a different payment with the payment typically being based off the three predominate soil types in the acres being submitted. So too much variation to quote numbers. I'd suggest talking to your local FSA office and they could likely give an average for the county. I do know there are $80 to $100/a.c.. differences in per acre payments from counties in N MO compared to VERY similar quality farms just across the border in Iowa. I think you can figure out which landowners are the winners from my posts above. Duckriver's comment above is correct so if interested in a continuous practice which typically is not entire fields then I'd suggest getting a hold of your local FSA office where the farm is carried.
So- being in the office the other day, the gal used an “example”.... “so, say u got $210 per acre on last sign up 3 years ago.... the newer rates may be around $140 for example”. So- obviously, based on a loose example- one could see rates down by 1/3rd & also not the other funds there were before. Which- whatever & I get why.
Does that example of a 33% decrease (1/3rd) from previous crp rates sound like a viable ballpark/guesstimate range That u have been hearing talked about?
Dang- I hope they update that farm bill to update the cropping history years!!! Sounds like this sept 1 sign up is still based on old crop years until new farm bill the way I understand.
Does that example of a 33% decrease (1/3rd) from previous crp rates sound like a viable ballpark/guesstimate range That u have been hearing talked about?
Dang- I hope they update that farm bill to update the cropping history years!!! Sounds like this sept 1 sign up is still based on old crop years until new farm bill the way I understand.
A correction in rates is/was justified. If it's that much i don't think we will have to worry about hitting CRP acre cap again, especially if they are going to 30M acres as rumored. I think they are overcorrecting and not for the good for conservation.
What u mean? Expand..... like- u think Lower rates won’t get the demand to enroll? Is 30m “high” vs previous years? I only follow how many acres Iowa does so I don’t know If this is high or low. & what u mean by “overcorrecting & not for good of conservation”?
Acres caps: The 2014 farm bill capped CRP acres at 24M. That's nationwide. That was down from 32m acres in previous farm bill. CRP has been shut down for the last ~ year because we were up against the 24M acre cap, nationwide. Some acres have expired, so it is now back open. The new farm bill has been rumored to raise the acreage cap to about 30M, nationwide.
Rental Rates: If we are looking at a 1/3 cut in rates, I think it swings too far, and thus makes it unattractive, financially. Example.... I cash rent some ground at $170/acre. CSR2 50ish. I would PREFER that the marginal portions of that go into CRP and continue cropping the rest. Previous CRP rate probably would pay about $200. So that rate gets cut by 1/3. CRP rate becomes $132. So, Landowner is now faced with a decision.... keep renting all ground possible at $170 or take LESS, $132 to put some in CRP. For me, I might do it anyway. For MOST people, particularly those not connected to the land, they will just crop everything they can, it pays more. Conservation loses.
I agree that big farms should not be able to enroll everything into CRP, especially "the good stuff". That's what happened because of the 2014 farm bill with its rates. The 2018 is going too far the other way. They need to "match" cash rent rates, not be well below them. A potential solution would to be not "locked" into a set rate, but rather mirror the county average cash rent adjusted for CSR. That, however, brings a lot of variables into the equation that probably would be unmanageable.
Bottom line, if they are cutting rates THAT much, CRP becomes unattractive for a lot of people and marginal ground will just be farmed. In that regard, conservation loses. Even if CRP rates were identical as cash rent rates, its still a financial loser if all of the cost share goes away on putting the CRP in.
We shall see.