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

Future of CRP

Hardwood11 said:
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 .
Click to expand...
Just read your last statement...so you are saying if you can't have the government pay for the ground, you don't want to own ground?

The purpose on owning ground for me.. that is 2 folds. 1. Investment because everyone wants it but not all can afford. So it's a commodity. 2. I will always have a source of income.

But as we all know, you don't really own anything when it comes to property in 'Merica
 
IowaBowHunter1983 said:
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/hoises that are getting section 8 or other federal subsidy?

Can we have dinner off those getting food cards?

If the dermining factor of what becomes "public" is if thst thing has government funds tied to it, we'll we have entered communism.
Click to expand...
No holes really because you can't get blood out of a turnip. If you have seen those properties they get to stay in. I've stayed in better places in 3rd world countries. If you want to eat the food they get to use, sure. I'd rather eat my cattle from the feed lot

What I'm saying is most of those people don't have a pot to piss in or are in hard times...no "investments" per day. So your statement is comparing apples to oranges. Those that are buying land...is an investment. And you have other sources of income to do so. The government doesn't buy me gold coins...or...does it?

I knew this ruffle the feathers of the landowners that "rely" on the government welfare dollars to offset the cost of purchasing ground. If the government took it away would you be able to keep your dream of owning ground?

Communism is a bit far stretch. Hopefully you have had the opportunity to be in a communistic society because if you have...I think this statement would be different. We bit different.

But then again...who's the puppet and who's the puppet master. If government is involved... you are under the government microscope. And at their "requirements".
 
Steve-O said:
Just read your last statement...so you are saying if you can't have the government pay for the ground, you don't want to own ground?

The purpose on owning ground for me.. that is 2 folds. 1. Investment because everyone wants it but not all can afford. So it's a commodity. 2. I will always have a source of income.

But as we all know, you don't really own anything when it comes to property in 'Merica
Click to expand...

No that’s not what I said. If I have to let everyone hunt on my land it defeats the purpose! That’s public land ? I could just hunt public …

I own land for several reasons, letting everyone on it is not on the list . Huge liability risks, wrecks the hunting. I mean it’s CRP way off the road. They can’t get to it anyway . Moot point—zero interest !
 
Steve-O said:
No holes really because you can't get blood out of a turnip. If you have seen those properties they get to stay in. I've stayed in better places in 3rd world countries. If you want to eat the food they get to use, sure. I'd rather eat my cattle from the feed lot

What I'm saying is most of those people don't have a pot to piss in or are in hard times...no "investments" per day. So your statement is comparing apples to oranges. Those that are buying land...is an investment. And you have other sources of income to do so. The government doesn't buy me gold coins...or...does it?

I knew this ruffle the feathers of the landowners that "rely" on the government welfare dollars to offset the cost of purchasing ground. If the government took it away would you be able to keep your dream of owning ground?

Communism is a bit far stretch. Hopefully you have had the opportunity to be in a communistic society because if you have...I think this statement would be different. We bit different.

But then again...who's the puppet and who's the puppet master. If government is involved... you are under the government microscope. And at their "requirements".
Click to expand...
Land is an investment, sure, and the buyer had put a lot of money down to own it. $5000 CRP payment, as in Hardwood's case covers the tax with a little leftover. You are calling it the govt. paying for the land is way off.
CRP is the govt's way of keeping some acres in what they want it to be and offer the landowner some rent for it.
 
Hardwood11 said:
No that’s not what I said. If I have to let everyone hunt on my land it defeats the purpose! That’s public land ? I could just hunt public …

I own land for several reasons, letting everyone on it is not on the list . Huge liability risks, wrecks the hunting. I mean it’s CRP way off the road. They can’t get to it anyway . Moot point—zero interest !
Click to expand...

Iowa law protects the landowner from liability IF no fees are charged to hunt. Lawyers and health insurance types will still try to sue to recoup $. Don’t care to hire lawyers to defend baseless claims.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think walk-in programs are good. They offer some type of liability protection . It’s suited more for pheasant/duck hunting… or large chunks out west ?

If a guy has a 160 acre block of CRP in Iowa and wants to offer public walk in—I’m all for it !

As an avid hunter I’d pass on CRP if public hunting was required. It would mostly be no hunters that sign up for walk in access .
 
Can of worms! ;) can’t cherry pick subsidies to keep/eliminate.. kind of an all or nothing type of thing. If not, the government/ donor class is just picking winners and losers.
 
Steve-O said:
No holes really because you can't get blood out of a turnip. If you have seen those properties they get to stay in. I've stayed in better places in 3rd world countries. If you want to eat the food they get to use, sure. I'd rather eat my cattle from the feed lot

What I'm saying is most of those people don't have a pot to piss in or are in hard times...no "investments" per day. So your statement is comparing apples to oranges. Those that are buying land...is an investment. And you have other sources of income to do so. The government doesn't buy me gold coins...or...does it?

I knew this ruffle the feathers of the landowners that "rely" on the government welfare dollars to offset the cost of purchasing ground. If the government took it away would you be able to keep your dream of owning ground?

Communism is a bit far stretch. Hopefully you have had the opportunity to be in a communistic society because if you have...I think this statement would be different. We bit different.

But then again...who's the puppet and who's the puppet master. If government is involved... you are under the government microscope. And at their "requirements".
Click to expand...
Not picking fights but want readers here to realize how many government tax $ go to subsidize federal crop insurance. I’d be willing to bet that average farmer Gov subsidy is far more than the average CRP payment earned and far more acres subsidized. So should all crop acres subsidized by federal crop insurance programs also be public hunting?? Quick Google search said $1.77 billion for CRP and $12 billion for crop insurance. I’m a lender and can tell you which one has more impact to increasing land values and destruction of habitat, soil erosion and water quality issues….
 
The part I am not understanding is the Government did pass a 2025 budget on April 10th which included a 1 year extension of the 2018 farm bill. On the surface I would think at that point funds would become available for CRP. Maybe they are working through the reconciliation process?
 
Don’t forget that the majority of the farm bill funding goes towards SNAP (food benefits for low income families). The other smaller parts of the bill go towards crop insurance, conservation, and other parts of the bill.
 
Screenshot_20250509_104356_Google.jpg
 
There’s an article in the Outdoor News (Minnesota) about conservation programs . The article states Trumps budget outline has a cut to the USDA by 18%.

The biggest concern was funding for the NRCS (mainly technical assistance) could be cut by $754 million.

The bottom of the article states “cut will not impact commodity programs, most conservation programs, crop insurance & SNAP”

So basically it’s saying CRP will exist, but might be cut back …
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom