In Gila's defense, The MT. governor (R) and the new MT AG (R) didn't know bison are livestock either.
American Prairie Reserve - Nothing new
- Thread starter Gila
- Start date
I knew there had to be one guy.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
81-1-101. Definitions, MCA
leg.mt.gov
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
There's always those two "one" guys!81-1-101. Definitions, MCA
R
rwc101
Guest
One more page and Gila will be 100% convinced. I can feel it.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Hunting and Conservation
Restoring and preserving an entire ecosystem is a complicated task, but it is not impossible. As we work toward that goal, we consider the network of animals, plant life, and environmental conditions. An important component of that network that is often under-recognized but never overlooked is...
www.americanprairie.org
Gila
Well-known member
FI460
Well-known member
Check the bolding. I've never been so wrapped up with what somebody else is doing on their private property.
Though, I've probably lamented somebody subdividing their private property and developing it. Sure as chit rather have them running bison that they might not slaughter.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Who cares if they are sold or not? The BLM still collects their paltry grazing fee.
Were stepping over nickels to pick up pennies in this argument.
But yeah, save the cowboy.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gila
Well-known member
Actually you have shown how little you know about farm subsidies or CRP. How do you know how productive the land is? I tell you what, every property is different. So exactly how much of those acquired ranches had acreage in CRP if any? Do you have a clue or are you guessing? Just so you understand, if you purchase a property that has acreage enrolled in CRP, that acreage must remain in CRP until the end of the 15 year period. How much, and exactly which acres are enrolled, how long they have been enrolled, affect the sales price of that property.
You cannot graze, work the land or make hay on CRP lands. However, as I stated, in those counties that AP has acquired land, have been or are now, in emergency grazing and hay production. That means that AP is taking away grazing and hay production that was intended to produce meat. That is if they did purchase one of those properties with CRP. Property tax isn’t the same as income tax. I bought a property once that had been a sheep operation. The property had a swampy area and some wooded grassland in CRP. There was 3 years left. There were quite a few deer in the CRP so I didn’t mind.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Do you know this for a fact or does this go along with your assumptions they also got tags to hand out?
AP does have slaughter & they allow the take of bison in order to manage their herd. Their plans are to grow their herd to a certain number, much how any other livestock producer would grow the genetics and herd size to fit their landscape when starting out.
The genetics behind the AP herd require a slower pace of growth and replacement, so you'll see a lot of dead animals being processed, sent to schools for lunches, donated, etc. That excludes their bison harvest program that allows for over 30 bison to be removed from their herd each year, with 5 of those opportunities going to disabled veterans.
I find it a bit disingenuous to claim that CRP land is being taken out of production because AP doesn't want to use that contract for emergency haying or grazing and then claiming that they are reducing food production. One could easily argue that without AP, many young ranchers wouldn't be able to have a start because they can't afford the lease on other properties or their own families can't afford to lease at a reduced rate.
The economics of Agriculture are what they are, and AP has a role to play in both the positive and negative space but honestly, the argument that they're taking land out of production is belied by the fact that they pay twice the AUM rate on the per capita tax, and they still pay property taxes while ostensibly increasing participation in ag from younger people.
While their purchasing of land does inflate the overall appraised value, it's also silly to think that they're not getting the best deal that they can for each property they purchase.
So while AP isn't all sunshine & apple juice, it's far from the boogerman you continue to make it out to be. In fact, I'd say if we want to do a direct comparison to the billionaires who are not seriously raising cattle, you'd find a much larger economic impact from AP to local communities leading to better jobs & higher wages than through the Billionaire class that UPOM seems to cater too.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
You know what they were doing with those circles? Hay production. You wouldn't believe this, but I saw it with my own eyes.
At this point I'd say you actually couldn't know less about the AP. There are people who have never heard of the AP that already know more.
npaden
Well-known member
I'm not sure how much they have in CRP, if any, you are the one that originally brought it up. I doubt there is very much as it would have had to have been productive cropland in the past to qualify and most of the property they are buying is range land. I would guess there is some bottomland that could be in CRP though.
I actually have 4 different CRP contracts in place right now on 2 different properties that I own so I actually do know a little bit about it. There are emergency provisions that actually do allow you to hay or graze CRP land however I don't think very many people actually participate as you have to pay back your rental for the period that you choose to graze or hay it.
Generally they are 10 year contracts, there are some 15 year ones but they are not the norm. You can also elect out of the program although there are generally penalties and repayment requirements, back in the mid 2000's when commodities spiked there were quite a few farmers who elected out and went back to farming the land.
As far as the price being affected by the contract I've seen it go both ways. People who want to use the land for something else would say that a CRP contract would lower the price, people that want to leave it in conservation would generally say it would increase the price. It all depends on what the buyer of the land is looking for.
Last edited:
npaden
Well-known member
Oh yeah, I forgot to address the property tax vs. income tax. You must not have looked at many rancher's income tax returns. I hate to say it but based on their tax returns you would have to assume that nearly all of these properties were operating on a not for profit basis before and after being acquired by an actual nonprofit organization.
There is a reason they are selling out, it is VERY difficult to make money raising cattle.
There is a reason they are selling out, it is VERY difficult to make money raising cattle.
Gila
Well-known member
Thanks Ben!81-1-101. Definitions, MCA
81-1-101. Definitions. Unless the context requires otherwise, in Title 81, the following definitions apply:
(1) (a) "Bison" means domestic bison or feral bison.
(b) The term does not include:
(i) wild buffalo or wild bison; or
(ii) for the purposes of chapter 9, buffalo.
