CRP and Haying it, NWF Sues

[Nemont]

National Wildlife Federation sues over CRP mismanagement

SEATTLE, WA – Citing the Conservation Reserve Program’s enormous value to ducks, pheasants and many other species of ground-nesting birds, the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) and six state affiliates filed a federal lawsuit here today to stop the mismanaged haying and grazing of lands in the program.

The lawsuit holds that the Farm Services Agency (FSA), the Department of Agriculture Division that administers the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), has violated the program’s conservation mandate by allowing the haying and grazing of millions of enrolled acres in the Great Plains and Interior West at intervals too frequent to sustain healthy levels of the grassland cover required by nesting birds.

“When the Conservation Reserve Program is being managed in a way that works against conservation, something is fundamentally wrong,” said Tom France, NWF senior counsel.

The lawsuit also charges the FSA with compromising the program’s conservation value by, in some states, allowing haying and grazing during primary nesting season – a time when birds are likely to still be on the nest or to be rearing their broods.

“Allow haying and grazing during primary nesting season can turn fields that should be filled with hatchlings into fields full of scrambled eggs,” said Mark Heckert, president of the Washington Wildlife Federation, an NWF affiliate that is a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit.

The nation’s largest private lands conservation program, the CRP pays farmers incentive fees to retire environmentally sensitive croplands for a period of 10 to 15 years. Much of the 34 million acres enrolled in the program consists of high-quality nesting cover, which, collectively, has become essential to sustaining America’s migratory bird population. Between 1992 and 1997, for example, CRP habitat was credited with adding more than 12 million ducks to the fall migration. Every year, substantial numbers of migratory birds that nest on CRP lands in Montana, the Dakotas and other northern states fly south along the Central Flyway to winter in southern states like Texas and Louisiana.

“Habitat quality in the Northern Plains has a big impact on game fowl populations in Arkansas,” said David Carruth, president of the Arkansas Wildlife Federation, a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit. “Arkansas has a direct stake in seeing CRP haying and grazing implemented sensibly throughout the Northern Plains and Interior West.”

From CRP’s inception in 1985 until 2002, haying and grazing on enrolled lands was only allowed during drought emergencies. In 2002, when reauthorizing the Farm Bill, Congress chose to allow managed haying and grazing, based on the rationale that light grazing or very occasional haying could actually make lands more productive for wildlife.

At the time, Congress explicitly mandated that any haying or grazing of CRP lands must be “consistent with the conservation of soil, water quality, and wildlife habitat (including habitat during the nesting season for birds in the area.)”

The FSA subsequently implemented a blanket policy of allowing enrolled croplands to be hayed or grazed every third year on all CRP lands nationwide, even though in the Great Plains and in the Interior West, where rainfall is limited, it can take five to 10 years to establish optimal grassland cover after haying has occurred. When haying or grazing outpaces recovery, according to the lawsuit, the result is degraded habitat.

The FSA’s managed haying and grazing policy is also problematic, the lawsuit holds, because the agency implemented it without conducting environmental impact assessments or providing public notice and comment as required by federal law.
“Procedurally speaking, FSA’s current haying and grazing regime sprang up out of nowhere,” France said.

In seven states - New York, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Washington - the FSA allows haying and grazing to occur during primary nesting season, while its policy of allowing haying and grazing every third year applies in most of the Central Plains and Interior West states.

Among the states with the most enrolled CRP acreage land are Montana (3.4 million acres generating $115 million in annual rental payments), North Dakota (3.3 million acres, $111 million), Kansas (2.9 million acres, $111 million) and Colorado (2.3 million acres, $71 million).

Nationally, the CRP makes $1.7 billion in rental payments to farmers each year.

“We’d like to see the program continue to receive substantial federal support,” France said. “That’s more likely if the Farm Services Agency manages haying and grazing in a way that clearly delivers on conservation.”

 

[BuzzH]

Chalk this one up as a "that was once a good program until some dumbshits ruined it".

Unbelievable.

It isnt good enough to just let a good program continue...tweek it until its a piece of shit government handout for nothing...which is exactly what the CRP now has become.

What a joke.

 

[smalls]

Buzz, I see that Wyoming isn't in the top tier of states that CRP is present. CRP is still having great impacts on wildlife. I see it first hand. We have sharptails and pheasants in places I've never seen them, the deer population is going nuts, and we have more breeding waterfowl than at any time in recent history.

It was hayed in 2002 extensively, and coincedentally in 2003 ND had more pheasants than ever recorded.

So there really is no reason so be so cold and prickly, smile for awhile and you might like it.

 

[Nemont]

Thanks Smalls, I actually posted this to see how long it would take for Buzz, the great defender of wildlife and habitat, to declare this a terrible program. The only program for farmers, that I am aware of, that has greatly benefited habitat, wildlife and hunters. Of course only Ted knows how to manage land to produce quality wildlife so Smalls all those pheasant are a result of what Ted is doing in Western Montana.

Buzz, since you don't trust any landowners you can always hunt the public land adjacent to the CRP because, as you say; those critters cross fence once in while.

Nemont

 

[smalls]

I don't know what buzz does for a living. But I grew up on a small farm and that provided me the opportunity to witness trends in wildlife my whole life. IMO, CRP has had the single greatest impact on wildlife populations in North Dakota. From big game to upland birds to waterfowl to coyotes, CRP continues to carry and support a tremendous amount of wildlife.

For Buzz to deem it "ruined" is proposterous and signals to me that he has no relationship with this land and no idea that certain ranching and agricultural practices have not compromised the utility of the land and program.

 

[BuzzH]

Nemont,

Try reading and comprehending the very articles you post...like this key phrase here:

"The FSA subsequently implemented a blanket policy of allowing enrolled croplands to be hayed or grazed every third year on all CRP lands nationwide, even though in the Great Plains and in the Interior West, where rainfall is limited, it can take five to 10 years to establish optimal grassland cover after haying has occurred. When haying or grazing outpaces recovery, according to the lawsuit, the result is degraded habitat."

Also, if you beleive that the CRP is the only program that allows farmers a way to benefit wildlife and still get a handout...I will direct you to the USDA website for a little education. For starters, check out the Wetlands Reserve Program...then keep looking you'll find all sorts of other similar programs. Some of which have been around for a lot longer than CRP.

As to the CRP program...

If you believe that a blanket policy (on all CRP) of allowing grazing or haying during prime nesting times is good for wildife, you obviously have you're head buried in your butt.

I've seen the benefits of the CRP and in fact I helped a rancher friend of mine near Sand Coulee MT work out many of the details in enrolling and installing fence, finding sources for grass seed, etc.

I've seen the benefits of the CRP and it was a good program. But, like anything else, when blanket policies are applied across the board, through all habitat types, and in all situations, it simply wont work. I used to be a strong supporter of the CRP, but with ridiculous policies like this in place, I wont support it any longer. The program has not evolved into a better program, but has now evolved into a government give-away hell bent on making sure that the farmer can take with both hands.

I'm fully aware of the benefits that correct grazing can have on SOME types, and I'm fully aware of timing, and intensity of that grazing to meet objectives. The problem is, you know as well as anyone that blanket policies across several states and varying types of grassland types is not correct management, and it wont work. Allowing grazing or haying every 3 years on a good portion of CRP is not a best management practice. If you think it is, you're a fool.

The CRP, has just taken a huge step backward.

 

[Nemont]

I read and comprehend fine. I also understand the Wetlands Reserve Program. Have you traveled the praire portion of Montana, where the bulk of CRP acres are? Not many wetlands to preserve. CRP has dramatically increased the bird populations. It has also had a positive impact on big game population. I didn't write the article nor did I say anything about it. I merely cut and pasted it to see how long it would take for you to go off the deep end on it. I never said haying or grazing CRP every three years was a good idea, especially in places like Northern Montana.

I actually support the ban on haying and grazing during the nesting period. Where I live it takes at least five years and usually more like 7 to 8 years to establish a good quality grassland. DU is also considering joining this suit. I know because I am treasurer of our local DU chapter and then send me all kind of info. about what they are doing.

It took you a total of 2 responses to begin to attack me personally:

Allowing grazing or haying every 3 years on a good portion of CRP is not a best management practice. If you think it is, you're a fool.

I see why you can only hunt public land.

I will let Smalls 2nd response speak for itself.

I don't know what buzz does for a living. But I grew up on a small farm and that provided me the opportunity to witness trends in wildlife my whole life. IMO, CRP has had the single greatest impact on wildlife populations in North Dakota. From big game to upland birds to waterfowl to coyotes, CRP continues to carry and support a tremendous amount of wildlife.

For Buzz to deem it "ruined" is proposterous and signals to me that he has no relationship with this land and no idea that certain ranching and agricultural practices have not compromised the utility of the land and program.

Nemont

 

[BigHornRam]

The Buzz H fan club keeps growing.