Folks, I don't know how to word this without things spiraling out of hand. I had a conversation with someone very high up in the conservation world yesterday and it was mentioned that in the versions of the farm bill currently being drafted, the conservation reserve program is to be written out. I am not looking to spread rumors, just to get awareness out there that this is a real possibility, and if we value the program, we need to do everything in our power to fight for it.
Windlooker
Well-Known Member
I’ll be in the minority here. When I first learned of the crp program many years ago I couldn’t believe the Govt would pay yearly not to plant crops claiming erosion control, building soil carbon and so on. I was in the program for 20 years and saw little benefit. Had the occasional covey of quail and a pheasant or two but nothing sustainable.
Last year I removed my acreage and rented it. I see more wildlife in my fields, as I do have plenty of cover otherwise, and more benefit than compared to the crp program. I know many will disagree. Quite frankly I got tired of the fsa telling me how to maintain what amounted to weeds.
Last year I removed my acreage and rented it. I see more wildlife in my fields, as I do have plenty of cover otherwise, and more benefit than compared to the crp program. I know many will disagree. Quite frankly I got tired of the fsa telling me how to maintain what amounted to weeds.
Last edited:
Need some more information as in no new contracts or ending all existing contracts. I could see the new farm bill not having any new signups or lower rates for sure. I don’t think we need 20 million mostly marginal crop land back in production. Thats the part that is missed, removing Crp does not save the government any money if those acres are now insured with federally subsidized crop insurance.
This is the problem with CRP. I dont like seeing giant fields of it on good CSR dirt.
I LOVE seeing farms that incorporate CRP and row crops. Farming the good stuff. CRP on sidehills, etc.
There needs to be a better way to implement it so we don't deal with "Lets just get rid of it"
I LOVE seeing farms that incorporate CRP and row crops. Farming the good stuff. CRP on sidehills, etc.
There needs to be a better way to implement it so we don't deal with "Lets just get rid of it"
Agreed. Those large high CSR farms going into pollinator certainly gave a lot of bad press.
I sought more information, but I was told that is all they could give me at this time. I imagine if the program was written out, they would let existing contracts sunset, but that is only speculation.
Maybe putting a slope rating or CSR rating or combination of both on it would work? Then the more poor soil or hilly areas that shouldn't really be row crop anyway would qualify and it would keep the good CSR and flatter ground out of it.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
I would be surprised if they cut CRP completely?
The fallout of that would be devastating on about 20 different levels.
Duckriver
Active Member
Crp is not perfect. It has problems all across the country. Dont throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Please be vocal with legislators about your desires. The project 2025 plan clearly has identified "Elimination of conservation reserve program". Much of the current ongoing align with the project 2025 agenda.
Crp is a price support program primarily with soil, water, and wildlife benefits. Expect major economic impacts when 20 to 30 million more acres are producing crops. Expect grain prices to downturn, plus all the water, soil, and wildlife reductions.
Please be vocal with legislators about your desires. The project 2025 plan clearly has identified "Elimination of conservation reserve program". Much of the current ongoing align with the project 2025 agenda.
Crp is a price support program primarily with soil, water, and wildlife benefits. Expect major economic impacts when 20 to 30 million more acres are producing crops. Expect grain prices to downturn, plus all the water, soil, and wildlife reductions.
Attachments
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
Trump won about 70-75% of the farmer vote. I doubt he axes this program …Plowing up CRP would definitely hurt corn & soybean prices !
I’m not sure they will convince the House/Senate members from the agricultural states to end CRP completely?
Could there be some way to use Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited to help cost share the program ? I would think so .
It’s more likely to be cut back.
I’m not sure they will convince the House/Senate members from the agricultural states to end CRP completely?
Could there be some way to use Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited to help cost share the program ? I would think so .
It’s more likely to be cut back.
Nrharris
PMA Member
You would be shocked how many farmers think we should do away with crp. Many are too stupid to realize if it went away the crop prices would take a nosedive.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
I know there are plenty of farmers that don’t like CRP. The cattle guys would probably be glad to see the grass acres available for grazing .
It’s hard to say how many would support it, and be against it .
It’s also a water clarity/run off issue in many areas , like my home state of Minnesota. They have incentives to enroll in watersheds with lakes/rivers.
Lucky 13
Member
Maybe we are long overdue to take a hard look at changing crop insurance standards and other subsidies (ethanol) too.
Reducing those subsidies- wouldn't that help reduce overproduction, increase land for sale, reduce gov spending, reduce chemical use/runoff, increase carbon sequestration etc?
More ground natually taken out of production due to eliminating subsidies could allow the gov to be more picky on what is allowed in CRP and how that CRP is managed.
I definitely don't know the answer but changes are coming.
Reducing those subsidies- wouldn't that help reduce overproduction, increase land for sale, reduce gov spending, reduce chemical use/runoff, increase carbon sequestration etc?
More ground natually taken out of production due to eliminating subsidies could allow the gov to be more picky on what is allowed in CRP and how that CRP is managed.
I definitely don't know the answer but changes are coming.
$1.8B is the annual cost of CRP- NATIONWIDE. Start there & think of that!!!!! That’s NOT an expenditure that needs to be ripped to shreds IMO.
CRP more than pays for itself. If we are looking at government waste. Reductions in pollution (someone pays for that in a variety of ways!), recreation & economics from wildlife, retaining & building SOIL. Economic impact to landowners & making farming far more efficient. The list literally could go on for pages here.
I absolutely agree that anything is on the table & we can make things far more efficient - whatever they are. I like the thoughts above!
If we had to make some adjustments because of a $1.8B expense …. The long term solution would be converting more of these highly erodible & non-sustainable acres to TREES.
CRP more than pays for itself. If we are looking at government waste. Reductions in pollution (someone pays for that in a variety of ways!), recreation & economics from wildlife, retaining & building SOIL. Economic impact to landowners & making farming far more efficient. The list literally could go on for pages here.
I absolutely agree that anything is on the table & we can make things far more efficient - whatever they are. I like the thoughts above!
If we had to make some adjustments because of a $1.8B expense …. The long term solution would be converting more of these highly erodible & non-sustainable acres to TREES.
ANOTHER unpopular comment among the farmers here I’m sure but crop insurance subsidies have promoted more soil erosion and fraud than CRP has saved in soil erosion or cost in rental payments. Countless acres farmed and ditches cleared that should not be farmed yet they can farm it for crop insurance and get rich. I am VERY close to this in my work and see it every day. Why in the H&77 do we subsidize crop insurance and STILL make government economic “disaster” payments to farmers. The crop insurance system has revenue coverage option to limit losses but USDA is about to pay $30B in economic disaster. That payment justification is based off the two preceding years of farm revenues which were two of the highest farm revenues out of the past 10. 2024 farm revenue was still above the 10 year average. VERY strong lobby evidently….
Last edited:
Agriculture in Iowa is long over due for reform. There are too many active and potential factors that put current agricultural stability at risk. I think, and honestly hope that some of these changes will force the hand of diversification of farming operations. Using different crop numbers and maturities for two different crops is not enough. I am aware of the big business road blocks, but installing the infrastructure for us to sell different crops would be huge. The Des Moines lobe pothole country for example. This area is very suitable to grow rice. The habitat and water quality benefits of that would be huge. But that lack of infrastructure prevents that. Just a few thoughts typed out.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
Buffer strips, riparian buffer, field windbreaks, wetland restoration.
Those are all CRP programs that should be considered valuable. Maybe you cut back on the big huge fields of CRP?
I like to see trees in CRP, because once the contract expires, the landowner is more likely to leave it as habitat ! Rather than bulldoze the trees !
We should be able to figure it out, it’s a small budget item !
Those are all CRP programs that should be considered valuable. Maybe you cut back on the big huge fields of CRP?
I like to see trees in CRP, because once the contract expires, the landowner is more likely to leave it as habitat ! Rather than bulldoze the trees !
We should be able to figure it out, it’s a small budget item !