Sharp-tails petitioned for listing???
- Thread starter 1_pointer
- Start date
Ithaca 37
New member
Nemont, I was wondering how the cows knew when they had grazed the CRP from 3 feet high to 18 inches, not 50% of the acreage. Besides, I was just trying to kid around. What I've noticed on much BLM is that when there's supposed to be a certain height of stubble left, it's often grazed down to the bare dirt.
As for private land, if it's in CRP and receiving gummint payments, I think the public has a right to comment on it's use.
As for private land, if it's in CRP and receiving gummint payments, I think the public has a right to comment on it's use.
BuzzH
Well-known member
What needs to happen with CRP is this:
If you enter into the agreement, you live by it.
If you want out early, you refund the ENTIRE payment, every cent.
This is a classic example of farmers/ranchers (many do both) taking with both hands. They want the gummint money as well as their livestock to graze it.
Do they care about wildlife???? I dont think so, they care about their bottom line. If they cared about wildlife so much why do they need the gummint to pay for them to "care" about wildlife?
The CRP is a good program, or I should say was a good program. Now its just another welfare program being taken advantage of.
The funny thing is, most of these republican ranchers bellyache nonstop about paying high taxes and welfare programs....maybe a look in the mirror would clarify a good portion of the welfare/high tax problem THEY help create...
If you enter into the agreement, you live by it.
If you want out early, you refund the ENTIRE payment, every cent.
This is a classic example of farmers/ranchers (many do both) taking with both hands. They want the gummint money as well as their livestock to graze it.
Do they care about wildlife???? I dont think so, they care about their bottom line. If they cared about wildlife so much why do they need the gummint to pay for them to "care" about wildlife?
The CRP is a good program, or I should say was a good program. Now its just another welfare program being taken advantage of.
The funny thing is, most of these republican ranchers bellyache nonstop about paying high taxes and welfare programs....maybe a look in the mirror would clarify a good portion of the welfare/high tax problem THEY help create...
Nemont
Well-known member
Hey Buzz, did you read about the part where you forgo the payment if you hay or graze it. You know a ton about public land policy and public lands management.
You are incorrect about CRP and whether farmers or ranchers "care" about wildlife. Also the last time I checked farms and ranches are a business and as businesses the bottom line is what it is all about. That is the American way.
If you have a problem with farmers or ranchers making a living and running their operations to maximize the return on their investments I guess there are still job openings in Mainland China, They are looking for consultants.
Nemont
You are incorrect about CRP and whether farmers or ranchers "care" about wildlife. Also the last time I checked farms and ranches are a business and as businesses the bottom line is what it is all about. That is the American way.
If you have a problem with farmers or ranchers making a living and running their operations to maximize the return on their investments I guess there are still job openings in Mainland China, They are looking for consultants.
Nemont
BuzzH
Well-known member
Nemont,
Yep, I read where they have the amount decreased, but still receive partial payment.
Thats BS, if they graze or hay a single acre, they should get NOTHING and have to repay the entire CRP funds they received.
This is a classic case of welfare fraud, something any good Republican is sick and tired of.
Also, I'm not wrong about whether ranchers or farmers really care about wildlife. If they cared about wildlife they wouldnt have to be paid to take unproductive/marginal lands out of production and get paid a government subsidy for it. They'd do it because its a proper management strategy and because they really do care about wildlife.
I have no problems with anyone maximizing profits. But the problem here is maximizing profits at the expense of the taxpayers and the abuse of an otherwise good program. Good to see the marlboro man and all the rugged individualism is alive and well...except for the big fatty government check they rely on so they can maximize profits...
If the ranchers and farmers continue on this trend, they can look forward to having the program cut. The taxpayers of today are informed, and they realize when a system is being abused, and it is being abused.
I read a CRP contract in 1987 and helped my buddy and his Dad with a lot of the work fencing and seeding CRP on their place just south of Great Falls. Under that contract they were not, under any circumstances, allowed to graze or hay that for any reason. I guess the CRP has now officially evolved into another "fleecing of America" story...sad really.
Yep, I read where they have the amount decreased, but still receive partial payment.
Thats BS, if they graze or hay a single acre, they should get NOTHING and have to repay the entire CRP funds they received.
This is a classic case of welfare fraud, something any good Republican is sick and tired of.
Also, I'm not wrong about whether ranchers or farmers really care about wildlife. If they cared about wildlife they wouldnt have to be paid to take unproductive/marginal lands out of production and get paid a government subsidy for it. They'd do it because its a proper management strategy and because they really do care about wildlife.
I have no problems with anyone maximizing profits. But the problem here is maximizing profits at the expense of the taxpayers and the abuse of an otherwise good program. Good to see the marlboro man and all the rugged individualism is alive and well...except for the big fatty government check they rely on so they can maximize profits...
If the ranchers and farmers continue on this trend, they can look forward to having the program cut. The taxpayers of today are informed, and they realize when a system is being abused, and it is being abused.
I read a CRP contract in 1987 and helped my buddy and his Dad with a lot of the work fencing and seeding CRP on their place just south of Great Falls. Under that contract they were not, under any circumstances, allowed to graze or hay that for any reason. I guess the CRP has now officially evolved into another "fleecing of America" story...sad really.
Nemont
Well-known member
The contract you saw did not require improvements for wildlife either. Nor did it require native grasses to be planted nor did it require shredding or burning twice during the contract.
If anything was a pure give away it was the pre 1995 CRP contract. In addition the FSA and sportsmans groups made a startling discovery from the old contracts, like the one you read: If the land was not grazed, burned or shredded the birds and other wildlife discontinued use of that land after the fifth year. They preferred habitat that had some of the biomass removed in some way. Therefore the new contracts were changed to allow for grazing or haying, only in areas where drought was taking place, or shredding to revitalize the land. In addition each bidder for CRP dollars had to show what kind of improvements they would make to benefit wildlife.
CRP payments are not purchase payments they are rental payments. Therefore they are renting your land to idle it. If you, the land owner, comes in and takes something of value, ie forage, then the renter should have their rent reduced however if the renter wishes to maintain a portion of the forage they should still pay for that half. To do any different would run counter to every other contract in the U.S.
Farmers and ranchers have to put crops and cattle first. That land has to pay for itself one way or another. As wildlife starts to become more valuable because of the money a farmer and rancher can make off of hunters then their management practices will also change. It is already happening here and it will turn hunting into the European Model where only the rich will hunt the good areas and the average people will be forced to choose a different form of recreation.
Of all the programs the government has put forth to benefit farmers and ranchers CRP is the only one that I know of that has had a real positive impact on wildlife populations. You have your opinion but news flash for you it doesn't make you right in this case.
Nemont
If anything was a pure give away it was the pre 1995 CRP contract. In addition the FSA and sportsmans groups made a startling discovery from the old contracts, like the one you read: If the land was not grazed, burned or shredded the birds and other wildlife discontinued use of that land after the fifth year. They preferred habitat that had some of the biomass removed in some way. Therefore the new contracts were changed to allow for grazing or haying, only in areas where drought was taking place, or shredding to revitalize the land. In addition each bidder for CRP dollars had to show what kind of improvements they would make to benefit wildlife.
CRP payments are not purchase payments they are rental payments. Therefore they are renting your land to idle it. If you, the land owner, comes in and takes something of value, ie forage, then the renter should have their rent reduced however if the renter wishes to maintain a portion of the forage they should still pay for that half. To do any different would run counter to every other contract in the U.S.
Buzz, I generally agree with you regarding wildlife policy, hell even public lands policy, but I think you have fallen into a trap of thinking you are so smart and have been involved with land policies for so long that you know it all.
Farmers and ranchers have to put crops and cattle first. That land has to pay for itself one way or another. As wildlife starts to become more valuable because of the money a farmer and rancher can make off of hunters then their management practices will also change. It is already happening here and it will turn hunting into the European Model where only the rich will hunt the good areas and the average people will be forced to choose a different form of recreation.
Of all the programs the government has put forth to benefit farmers and ranchers CRP is the only one that I know of that has had a real positive impact on wildlife populations. You have your opinion but news flash for you it doesn't make you right in this case.
Nemont
smalls
Well-known member
Nemont, totally agreed.
Muledeer4me
New member
"You know the more I see your posts the more I understand you know nothing about ranches, cows or cattle management. The above statement shows that you have no clue regarding rotations or how to even measure what forage is still remaining in any particular pasture.
I can't imagine how, with you having so little knowledge, you can even begin to complain about the health of any range land. If you don't understand the basics of how to take half the grass and leave half the grass then you should stop attempting to judge the quality of all grazing land until you get a clue on how to tell the difference.
I have yet to figure out how the anti grazing crowd has more back halves of a horse then there are horses."
Good Point's there Nemont.
It should also be pointed out that the grazing and ranching issue isnt the only issue that some poster's have no first hand knowledge of, there expertise is in mimicing the Jon Marvel type hate group's.
Some poster's agenda from the start has never been about good information and pulling user group's together to solve the problem's we have,it's alway's been about shoving there view's and agenda up everyone's butt,trying to degrade good working people by posting whatever proaganda they can pull off the anti-everything site's.
Are there problem's with grazing,logging,rancher's,ATV's,hunter's ?
Sure there are but when any one person can find so much fault and mis-information about everything it's time to start taking a good look at that person's abilty to reason and wonder if they are here to cause more problem's then they are to solve them????????????
It's a balance we need, and as has been pointed out it not at either end of the radical view's.
I can't imagine how, with you having so little knowledge, you can even begin to complain about the health of any range land. If you don't understand the basics of how to take half the grass and leave half the grass then you should stop attempting to judge the quality of all grazing land until you get a clue on how to tell the difference.
I have yet to figure out how the anti grazing crowd has more back halves of a horse then there are horses."
Good Point's there Nemont.
It should also be pointed out that the grazing and ranching issue isnt the only issue that some poster's have no first hand knowledge of, there expertise is in mimicing the Jon Marvel type hate group's.
Some poster's agenda from the start has never been about good information and pulling user group's together to solve the problem's we have,it's alway's been about shoving there view's and agenda up everyone's butt,trying to degrade good working people by posting whatever proaganda they can pull off the anti-everything site's.
Are there problem's with grazing,logging,rancher's,ATV's,hunter's ?
Sure there are but when any one person can find so much fault and mis-information about everything it's time to start taking a good look at that person's abilty to reason and wonder if they are here to cause more problem's then they are to solve them????????????
It's a balance we need, and as has been pointed out it not at either end of the radical view's.
Nemont
Well-known member
M4M,
You know what, I was a moderate regarding the ATV issue. I have used them to gather up cows on the ranch many times. I have used them while helping my inlaws fence a pasture. They are a terrific tool on the ranch. Like having another pickup.
Unfortunately, I cannot and will never support the use of ATV's in a hunting situation or recreational riding in a WSA. I thought the ATV crowd could be reasonable regarding appropriate riding in appropriate areas. That simply is not the case. You think there needs to be a balance that is great, then you should not be on a hunting board because you would not have enough time in your day to reach out and touch the people who ride ATV's illegally.
Nice attempt to piggyback your pet issue on the CRP discussion but that dog ain't hunt long. The truth is that ATV's are ruining land and destroying hunting in areas that they should never even be in. There is no balance to be struck with the majority of riders. If something isn't done soon there will be a total ban on all riding of ATV's except on improved roads.
I have tried to be reasonable on this issue of ATV's but the ATV riders I have talked have had absolutely no desire to reasonable on the issue. They want to rider where ever they want without any consquence.
Nemont
You know what, I was a moderate regarding the ATV issue. I have used them to gather up cows on the ranch many times. I have used them while helping my inlaws fence a pasture. They are a terrific tool on the ranch. Like having another pickup.
Unfortunately, I cannot and will never support the use of ATV's in a hunting situation or recreational riding in a WSA. I thought the ATV crowd could be reasonable regarding appropriate riding in appropriate areas. That simply is not the case. You think there needs to be a balance that is great, then you should not be on a hunting board because you would not have enough time in your day to reach out and touch the people who ride ATV's illegally.
Nice attempt to piggyback your pet issue on the CRP discussion but that dog ain't hunt long. The truth is that ATV's are ruining land and destroying hunting in areas that they should never even be in. There is no balance to be struck with the majority of riders. If something isn't done soon there will be a total ban on all riding of ATV's except on improved roads.
I have tried to be reasonable on this issue of ATV's but the ATV riders I have talked have had absolutely no desire to reasonable on the issue. They want to rider where ever they want without any consquence.
Nemont
Yeah, what Nemont said! 
I was unaware of the contractual obligations you pointed out and am VERY happy to see them in there. I think it is better for the long-term health of the land.
Your stance on ATVs wouldn't have been solidified during a recent pronghorn hunt would it? Outdoor writer John Barsness has related many times in print that antelope hunting in parts of MT are drastically different (for the worse) with the proliferation of ATVs.
Has the Milk River country already reached the Euro-Model? Can po'-folk like me still find 'reasonable' access to some of those deer?
I was unaware of the contractual obligations you pointed out and am VERY happy to see them in there. I think it is better for the long-term health of the land.
Your stance on ATVs wouldn't have been solidified during a recent pronghorn hunt would it? Outdoor writer John Barsness has related many times in print that antelope hunting in parts of MT are drastically different (for the worse) with the proliferation of ATVs.
Has the Milk River country already reached the Euro-Model? Can po'-folk like me still find 'reasonable' access to some of those deer?
Step one in solving a problem is recognizing there is one.
Nemont
Well-known member
1-Pointer,
My position on ATV's was not affected by the recent speed goat hunt as we were hunting on my In-Laws place and didn't see any other hunters. My ATV stance is a result of what is taking place on the BLM land adjacent to the CMR Wildlife Refuge. The holding of CMR, BLM and Corps of Engineers around Fort Peck land is the single largest Contigous piece of public land in the lower 48. The CMR is pretty well controlled to keep ATV's off. The BLM land is so vast and covered by so few guys that ATV's riders are almost certain that their illegal riding will not be detected. They are destroying a true gem for real hunters who don't mind burning up a little shoe leather.
As for Whitetails on the Milk River, The average guy can still find a few deer if you want to hunt hard, scout a lot and more importantly knock on doors and get know some land owners there are still a lot of qualit bucks available.
Here are some pics of the last couple of years of hunting Milk River Whitetails. These were all taken off of the same place, which happens to be right next to the Realtree/Bill Jordan leased property.
Nemont
My position on ATV's was not affected by the recent speed goat hunt as we were hunting on my In-Laws place and didn't see any other hunters. My ATV stance is a result of what is taking place on the BLM land adjacent to the CMR Wildlife Refuge. The holding of CMR, BLM and Corps of Engineers around Fort Peck land is the single largest Contigous piece of public land in the lower 48. The CMR is pretty well controlled to keep ATV's off. The BLM land is so vast and covered by so few guys that ATV's riders are almost certain that their illegal riding will not be detected. They are destroying a true gem for real hunters who don't mind burning up a little shoe leather.
As for Whitetails on the Milk River, The average guy can still find a few deer if you want to hunt hard, scout a lot and more importantly knock on doors and get know some land owners there are still a lot of qualit bucks available.
Here are some pics of the last couple of years of hunting Milk River Whitetails. These were all taken off of the same place, which happens to be right next to the Realtree/Bill Jordan leased property.
Nemont
Nemont- I understand. The problem around Salt Lake is that so much of the BLM land is 'desert' and thus people don't think tearing it up is a problem. The laws and travel plans are improving, but enforcement is a problem. Last year on Memorial Day an LEO gave out 31 tickets to illegal riders, but only one or two was upheld by the judge. 
It's a problem, but things are in motion and it is getting better IMO. Reason I asked on the speedgoat hunt is the stories from the outdoor writer I alluded to, whom I'm guessing used to hunt near the CMR.
Glad to hear about the Milk River country. That would be a DREAM hunt for my dad. He's an avid watcher of the outdoor shows and loves the country and bucks that he's seen come from there. Someday I'll get a trip for him planned up that way.
It's a problem, but things are in motion and it is getting better IMO. Reason I asked on the speedgoat hunt is the stories from the outdoor writer I alluded to, whom I'm guessing used to hunt near the CMR.Glad to hear about the Milk River country. That would be a DREAM hunt for my dad. He's an avid watcher of the outdoor shows and loves the country and bucks that he's seen come from there. Someday I'll get a trip for him planned up that way.
Similar threads
