2018 Farm Bill

Discussion in 'Iowa Whitetail Conference' started by IowaBowHunter1983, Sep 5, 2017.

  1. IowaBowHunter1983

    IowaBowHunter1983 Super Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    SC Iowa
    Starting this thread to get people's thoughts on next years farm bill.

    I really wish they would truly make it an agriculture only bill and put things like food stamps in a different bill.

    Regardless.... there is plenty to talk about.

    Personally, I will be watching what they do with CRP as it affects me the most. As many know, especially anyone that has looked into it in the last month, we are basically completely out of CRP acres with the 24 million acre national cap. 10 years ago there was over 36 million acres in the program. Personally, looking at stats, 30M acres seems appropriate.

    Tons of other things to watch....income caps, farm payment caps, trade policy, Crop insurance programs.

    What are your issues? What are you looking for?
     
  2. AdBot Guest Advertisement

  3. Sligh1

    Sligh1 Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,430
    Likes Received:
    946
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Central, IA
    I am most interested in the food stamps. Guess we're starting out right outta the gate on differing views. All my baby mama's need em and with 17 kids & 13 different mama's - we takes all we can get! ;)

    Seriously- I sure hope they up the Crp acres. We need em bad. My concern is Crp rates generally follow grain prices with a 2-4 year delay. Well- that was good for last few years- low grain but Crp based on high grain prices. Now - we run the risk of not liking the new prices. I hope they hold firm but I need to ask around. I know one house of rep members (friend, not Iowa) who is working on farm bill. I'm supposed to connect. I simply want to get a feel for what's coming and how it's going. I know he won't have all the answers by far but I know an update on "possible direction" could be sought out. Up acres & keep prices the same would be my magic wish. I love the pollinator & native programs which is different than the 80's and 90's where fields got seeded to garbage (to wildlife) brome and fescue. So, last wish- continue with natives and pollinators. Which I'm almost certain that will remain.
    Some new rumblings.... short term Crp (half rate of normal contract)- like 3 years for example. Also- getting more strict on putting "whole farms of non erodible soil in". Pushing towards enrolling parts of farm that have most vulnerability to erosion water quality & run off, etc. which I can't disagree with.
    If any of u talk to Trump- make sure u put a plug in for Iowa Crp funding! :)
     
    MN Slick likes this.
  4. IowaBowHunter1983

    IowaBowHunter1983 Super Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    SC Iowa
    To the point about erosion and water quality.... The buffer strip program should ALWAYS be available and not subject to acreage cap in my opinion. That one has so many benefits and makes so much sense for so many reasons.... Be a nice tweak to the program.
     
  5. hans1

    hans1 Member

    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    18
    It would be nice to see riparian buffer acreage enrolled at the rates the soil rent dictate regardless of crop history. Grass and or tree buffers do work and if they were enrolled as marginal pasture the rates actually went down. Have owned, farms that were enrolled in the tree buffer and are now expiring tough to re enroll 65crs fields that only pay 89.00 an acre. Also Hate to clear off these trees that I had planted myself.
    FSA also needs to crack down on the volunteer tree/brush some of the farms in our area have been in for 30 years and are totally over grown to the point of needing a dozer to get them back.
     
  6. Hardwood11

    Hardwood11 PMA Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Minnesota & 270 acres in Iowa
    My guess is CRP will be funded, key Midwest states need CRP, and they know it. Colin Peterson of Minnesota is the ranking member on the House Committee of Ag. He is a Democrat, but often leans Republican (he gets votes from both sides). He will push for CRP. I don't know him personally, but have seen him at various events and he is always adding the importance of CRP in his little newspaper clips.

    Like Hans1 said, I would love to see them add riparian buffers without crop history for sign-ups and renewals.

    I have advocated for a 5, 10, 15 acre block of CRP where the landowner can control the habitat. Example: 10 row tree plantings on the outside, with switchgrass in the center, along with a food plot or pond--with strong cost share, solid payments and 15 year or even 20 year contract Imagine if several landowners took advantage of that, each farm could have a little wildlife paradise, even in the heart of farm country.
     
  7. Hardwood11

    Hardwood11 PMA Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Minnesota & 270 acres in Iowa
    It would be nice if they make this a priority early part of next year...otherwise without sign up available, more acres will come out.
     
  8. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC PMA Member

    Messages:
    7,908
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    63
  9. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,029
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    Don't take this personal, but why should taxpayers give someone a wildlife paradise? I'm all for increasing CRP acres, someone mentioned 30 million acres, I'd want even more IF the nation can afford it both in payments and the potential increase if the cost of food. But to get the benefits of a taxpayer funded program for a hunting paradise without benefit to anyone but the land owner, to me, is just not right. You had me all the way up to "strong cost share".

    I'm not a CRP expert (CPR, maybe) all I have learned about CRP is campfire talk and bits and pieces here. I think it is a needed and necessary set of programs that will help stabilize soil, clean water and increase wildlife habit in general. But to use the program for nothing but creating a private wildlife paradise is, to me, not what the program was created for. Perhaps I'm naïve about how it all works and this goes on anyway.
     
    Tim Hull and JNRBRONC like this.
  10. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC PMA Member

    Messages:
    7,908
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    63
    CRP probably has it's place, but reading through the contract, it used to be very specific that the landowner could not make any money off the property except hunting rights could be leased. I lost access to a lot of pheasant ground back in the '80's when some outfitters started leasing up CRP ground for pay to play operations. Never cared for that exception.
     
  11. IowaBowHunter1983

    IowaBowHunter1983 Super Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    SC Iowa
    about guaranteed not to happen in time for new sign ups to replace 2018 crops. Plan on farming open acres in 2018.
     
  12. Hardwood11

    Hardwood11 PMA Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Minnesota & 270 acres in Iowa
    It is a good debate, and I see your side of this argument. As a strong conservative, taxes are a topic that comes up often. Is the CRP program a good program, should it be 100% tax payer funded? Personally I think the wildlife groups should fund some of CRP (pheasants forever, Ducks Unlimited)??

    Does a non-landowner benefit, I would say yes, in most cases, without it, we certainly would have more erosion, and less wildlife. In some states, landowners get an extra $3-5 an acre if they allow public hunting, PLOTS, which has been a successful program.

    We waste so much $$ at the government level, I think this is one program that actually is beneficial? Just my two cents. I think the program could change a bit, to allow more flexibility and unique programs. I hope they fund it properly, but as mentioned earlier I can see the opposite side of this argument.
     
  13. Oct-Lull

    Oct-Lull PMA Member

    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Iowa, close enough to Wisconsin to worry
    I think crp is absolutely necessary and important. It is among other things directly causing more flooding due to extreme runoffs especially in our area. I'm not against people using it to creat habitat, I am against cost share to do it. If you can get 300$ an acre that's great. But, why should taxpayers fund any part of the planting or maintenance? You should pay for seed, fuel, equipment, labor just like anyone else running tillable or pasture acres.
     
  14. Hardwood11

    Hardwood11 PMA Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Minnesota & 270 acres in Iowa
    The main reason would be ....you’d have few people sign up without cost share.
     
  15. Oct-Lull

    Oct-Lull PMA Member

    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Iowa, close enough to Wisconsin to worry
    So you can make 175$ an acre rent, or 300$ and pay for your own inputs? Crp is still better than row crop for habitat. I don't care if it cuts back, it's bs. It's enough that the per acre is high. No chance you can average 300$ an acre for 10-15 yrs renting. No guarantee

    Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
     
  16. Hardwood11

    Hardwood11 PMA Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Minnesota & 270 acres in Iowa
    The average CRP payment in the US is under $100. They can't base cost share nationally by how much potential rent is in Iowa.

    Some counties have good CRP payments, others do not.
     
  17. Oct-Lull

    Oct-Lull PMA Member

    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Iowa, close enough to Wisconsin to worry
    It's still a personal choice. Each landowner can decide for himself. I cannot decide where my tax dollars go, I am not for paying anymore than "rent" per acre. Tax $ already get spent on tons of crap I am against. No inputs. Sorry if it takes some acres out. I'm not here to argue, just stating my point of view.

    Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
     
  18. Hardwood11

    Hardwood11 PMA Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Minnesota & 270 acres in Iowa
    I'm not arguing either....But if you eliminate cost share, I guarantee you will end CRP.
     
  19. IowaBowHunter1983

    IowaBowHunter1983 Super Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    SC Iowa
    I'd still do CRP without input cost share if I had flexibility in what I could plant. I re-did my own brome fields (existing CRP) without a penny cost share, cuz I wanted better habitat.
     
    Tim Hull likes this.
  20. Hardwood11

    Hardwood11 PMA Member

    Messages:
    3,026
    Likes Received:
    185
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Minnesota & 270 acres in Iowa
    You are a serious hunter/habitat guy. Most (70-80%) of CRP participants are not. The contrast is guys from say Texas, North Dakota, they just won't participate if they do not get cost share.

    Farmers will not pay $10,000-50,000 up front to put in CRP to get $75 an acre in those states.

    I would doubt they do that in Iowa in most cases for $250/acre CRP.

    I'll be the first to admit, I take advantage of the government on cost share and CRP. Same crew that tripled my health insurance and takes 1/3-1/4 of my income...so I don't feel bad at all
     
    10hunter and HorseDoctor like this.
  21. IowaBowHunter1983

    IowaBowHunter1983 Super Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,464
    Likes Received:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    SC Iowa

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice