Farming

[horst]

I made a post in another forum, an Iowa based hunting forum, about todays farming practices.I was refering to the habitat loss associated with it in my original post.In a lotta areas here theyve taken out everything, fencelines, small groves, they bail and burn the roadditches and waterways every fall, grass patches are burnt right before winter sets in after the combinings done, they farm right into the road ditches in some cases, wetlands and low lying spots are still being tiled out and dissapearing, even the ones that continue to flood every year no matter how much tile you put into them.

From thier it kinda snowballed, a few people agreed with me and they also brought up hog confinements, erosion, and all the water sources that are polluted or silted in every year to to some farming practices.A couple years ago one of these hog operations had a manure spill into the river 20+ miles up stream from here, anoth crap got into the water we had dead fish all over clear down here by the following morning.Less than 2 years later the same farm had another spill, in the same place.Theyre still in operation and only paid fines in both events.

First I want to say that my original post on the subject was pretty harsh, there are a bunch of landowners in there who are very bad at trying to push thier own brand of ethics on other people who are hunting in accordance with all the laws and doing nothing wrong.In their latest post they wet so far as to tell me I should thank them for what wildlife I did see.There was more to and it got me pretty mad so when I started the post it was just to see how they felt when the criticism was pointed at them.It got ugly fast.

The majority of the people on the sight though really suprised me.Heres a few of the things that I was told.

Its thier property, they can do what they want with it.Even if it effects everyone downstream from them.

Im not a farmer so any opinion I have on the subject is uneducated and therefore not right.

Theyre just trying to make a living and keep thier status as independant buisinussmen.The argument that any other businuess that destroyed that much habitat and dumped that many tons of raw sewage and chemicals near a water source wouldnt be in businuesse long apparently didnt hold up.It went right back to its thier land......

Some other gems included I should move to Los angelas or join PETA if I didnt like it.

I finally got even more irritated and told em I could do that but it wouldnt make the problem go away.I couldnt believe that that many people wouldnt even admitt any of this is going on and the ones that did felt it should be ignored.

Just curious as to your thoughts, because they own the land and feed thier families farming it should everything thats happening to the land and water as a result be justified?most people seemed to think what happens on these farms has no effect on them.I believe I even got blamed for the corn prices not going up in 30 years in one post Is farming the only profession where your not accountable for anything that happens as a result of what your doing?

The original post like I said was in an Iowa based websight, i just posted it in here to get a little broader view from different areas on the subject.I have nothing against farmers, and really do appreciate what they do for the most part, but some of the farming methods in recent years I dont agree with, every square inch of ground shouldnt be plowed under IMO and its happening here at a little faster pace every ear.So am I outta line in my thinking or do these things affect everyone, and not just the guy who owns the land??

[buckee]

Re: Farming

A subject that is dear to my heart.

I think there should be a restriction put on all farmers when it comes to land use. Just a restriction that restricts 100% use of the land for crops. I believe there should be a certain % of land that needs to be left for the wildlife and to prevent corrosion of the land.

Hedgerows should be a mandatory minimum width to allow for natural wildlife corridors and any streams or natural ponds should be enhanced around the edges with natural foliage.

Some farmers already practice these common-sense ideas, but others try to use every square inch of ground they have for farming and don't give a thought to the environment and the wildlife in the area.

[popgun]

Re: Farming

horst, I can understand where you are coming from. The farmers are needed, and should be able to do whatever they want with, and on their own property, but should stop at the point of endangering other property.

Pollution is a sad thing that causes destruction for decades down the road.

There was a nice skeet range not far from here, and did a good business until two years ago when some chicken farmers opened up about a half mile from the range location. The stench and flies were so bad that the skeet range closed. Since it was not within any city limits or under any kind of county restrictions the chicken farmers were allowed to do whatever the wanted on their property. It actually pushed the shooters off their own property next door.

There used to be more courtesy for one another than there is now.

I remember when "A man had the right to swing his fist all he wanted, but his right to swing his fist ended where the next guy's chin began."

I think this situation may be another one of those cases that the lawyers have messed up.

.....popgun

[oldksnarc]

Re: Farming

They do own the land but they don't own the environment.

The landowner/buddy I hunt on here in Kansas is totally restricted in what he can do with his land. The land has been in the family since homesteaded in the 1880's, but he has about 75 of the 600 acres in CRP program. Since he takes CRP money they totally control what he can do on this land. If he does something wrong their climbing up his poop-chute. The government also controls what/how much land can be used for cultivation.

I would say if there's no control in the area discussed above they don't have an ASCS office that stays on top of things like they do in the area of my friends land.

[dg]

Re: Farming

I can understand regs to prevent something from going into the wastestream. But farming practices to aid wildlife? No way. In some places, I've seen deer eating up meadows which prevents having enough hay for the cattle in winter. Throw in low rain, poor mast in the woods and the deer come flying out to the meadows. Also, how much do we contribute to the farmers land taxes, machinery, labor, 7 day work-week, etc, etc? Farmers get pennies while big business makes the money when we buy boxes of cereal, meat, etc, etc. Now we should regulate their business so we can have wildlife? hmmmm. Nope, can't agree with that one. I'm not typing an essay on the subject, but that's what I feel for the most part.

[horst]

Re: Farming

[ QUOTE ]

Farmers get pennies while big business makes the money when we buy boxes of cereal, meat, etc, etc. Now we should regulate their business so we can have wildlife?

[/ QUOTE ]

Farmers sell an unfinished product.After it leaves thier field it has to be dried, stored,transported, ground, mixed, cooked and packaged before it becomes a box of cereal.Cattle have to be inspected, butchered, inspected some more, packaged shipped, and frozen and the carcasses disposed of.Theres a lot more that goes into the products we buy then raising the grain or livestock, thats just the begining point.Thats why they cost more than the farmers make when they sell, but it also adds to the cost of the finished product.Consider the gas, labor, and equipment on top of the grain it costs to turn it in to something and it almost makes a 4.00 box of cereal seem lke a deal.

Personally I cant help but think the farmers are digging a deeper hole for themselves by destroying habitat to get more bushels of corn.The more corn that is produced the lower corn prices seem to get.Theres a surplus of it.Throwing more crops into an already flooded markets never gonna make em more money.Its basic supply and demand.I was told by a farmer in the other site so I dont know how true the statement is corn prices havent increased hardly in 30 years.Almost makes me think if thats true theyd start looking at doing something different rather than trying to make up the difference in more corn and beans.I also know farmers who have 1/2 million dollars worth of eqipment sitting around and qualify for foodstamps.My grandmas disabled and living on a real small pension and cant qualify.I cant feel sorry for them.

Ive seen deer eating farmers crops as well.Ive also seen smaller less noticable species completely disasapear from this area.Spotted skunks, grey fox, partridge, quail, badger, jackrabbitts, even some snake species arent here anymore.Others are so far gone theyll never make a comeback, I havent seen a red fox in 3 years, and even the guys that hunt em gave it up.These were all animals I used to see as a kid, Im only 31 yrs old and thats a lotta species to dissapear.You force all these animals into smaller and smaller habitats some of em arent gonna be able to compete.These are all things I cant show my kids now, or my grandkids later unless something changes.

A lotta what I talked about wouldnt even change anything, leave the ditches and weed patches till spring to burn.Leave the watersheds untill spring to mow off.You tear out out an old 18 inch overgrown fenceline what are you gaining?One row of corn.

Ive also worked on and around farms all my life, I still work for most of the local farmers, sometimes I work for free for the ones who let me hunt.But in the last 10 years Ive seen more habitat dissapear then in the previous 20.And it dont sit right somehow.100 yr old groves get cut down so we can have another giant pile of corn rotting on the ground cause all the dryers are full and theres no place to store it, our elevator heres got a pile about 150 ft long and 40 ft deep sitting on the ground, as do all the nieghboring towns.Some farmers have had to quit combining now till theres enough room for more.Its crazy.

[fisherguy]

Re: Farming

His point was that the price is low due to oversupply. Therefore if they produce less, they will have less expenses, and be able to charge more. Obviously for that to work they have to get together and all produce less.

[dg]

Re: Farming

[ QUOTE ]

His point was that the price is low due to oversupply. Therefore if they produce less, they will have less expenses, and be able to charge more. Obviously for that to work they have to get together and all produce less.

[/ QUOTE ]

And then we'll gripe because the price is much higher and blame those darn farmers for actually making money!

[oldksnarc]

Re: Farming

Travis: Well said.

[horst]

Re: Farming

[ QUOTE ]

Wrong. As a farmer in Iowa I do in fact know more than you about it. This having been said, you are right on almost everything you have said, EXCEPT for this. The middle man (processing) is the one who gouges and hurts others the most. When beef prices rose from $.75 per pound to $1.10 per pound last year, the farmers started to make money again. Now look at your steak that you get from the store. It increased from $8 per steak (average weight of 12 ounces for arguement sake) to $20. Tell me how a farmer make the price jump $12 for 12 ounces or $1 per ounce when he only got 35 cents more money for the entire pound. Corn rose a dollar last year as well (part of the reason beef rose). The cerial makers didn't raise the price per box that much because they already were making nearly 1000% gains on the corn. They transport, dry and manufacture in such a large quantity that apart from the 3.3 cents of raw corn in your box of corn flakes, the other $3.96 dollars are attributed to the drying, mashing and packaging. At the elevators they charge 30 cents per bushel to dry and store which equals one half of one cent per pound. Running tally 3.35 cents per pound. Transportation is done largely by rail to the factory so count on it costing 10 cents per bushel or .17 cents per pound, that kicks it up to an alarming 3.52 cents per pound. At this point the corn is at the factory waiting to be ground, mixed and baked. Also consider labor. Now you have your finished box of corn flakes costing $4 on sale at HyVee. The factory changed from 3.52cents to 400 cents per pound of produce that product. Tell me where, still allowing money for labor and such, these companies like Genaral Mills can pass off a $3.96 cost of production, not viable. The farmer and consumer get gouged by these prices and neither is happy, both blaming the other side, where as General Mills stays quiet because they made upwards of $2.50 to $3.00 per pound on thier box of corn flakes after all costs

[/ QUOTE ]

Good rundown on what it costs after it leaves the field.

[ QUOTE ]

Again, just more info to ponder as you cast your judgement on us lowly farmers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats exactly the attitude I was talking about.You said the same thing I did but somehow Im passing judgement on people, you agree with me but still make it sound like I should be minding my own businuess.Why is that???Its like this subjects taboo and shouldnt be discussed or something.

I agree totally that the ones who do this are mostly the bigger farmers with more land and money.But Ive also noticed the bigger farmers seem to be taking over the smaller farmers a little more every year.If its true that the wealthier farmers are the ones responsible for the most habitat loss, and the trend of them taking over smaller farms continues then were really in deep crap arent we??

Just for the heck of it I went to a bunch of different websights this morning, the USDA, DNR, Fish and Wildlife services and a few more to see what I could find about this.While theres agencies that keep track of how many acres are restored to habitat, near as I can tell none of thm keep track of of the number of acres lost every year.That kinda bothered me as well.

Im just gonna make some numbers up here, nothing factual about them.But say the USDA and NR are showing that 10,000 acres of farm ground were restored to habitat this year that looks really good on paper doesnt it.But if nobodies keeping track and 10, 000 acres was also plowed under, burnt off, mowed, tiled out, and cut down were just keeping even, and nobody even seems to be monitering it.

I never said all farmers are that way, just sunday I got permission to bowhunt a huge farm north of town.The people that live thier are non hunters but very conservation minded.They have terraces, left wetlands in, left a strip along the creek, almost any type of habitat we have here they left at least part of in tact.I seen that right away and commented on it, told him I thought that was great.He even sent me up to the house to talk to his mom and tell her what Id told him, she was blown away, it seems they let a lot of people hunt thier every year and nobody ever seemed to notice it or comment on it before.Like I said, they were non hunters but they were conservation minded enough to know thier land could only hold so many animals, and theyre happy to let just about anyone who bothers to ask in to harvest a few.

seems like this subjects a real touchy one with farmers, you all take offense even when Im just talking about the actions of a few.But I did enjoy reading your input, thanks.

[HuntingInMaine]

Re: Farming

I posted something here about the chemicals pumped into farm animals and questioned the safety of eating said meat and got pretty much the same replies you have gotten at the other web site. (And just to clarify, I was speaking of the HUGE commercial farms that are only concerned with turn over and quick profit, not the smaller family run businesses!)

I believe, as others have stated, that a farmer who shows no concern for their land is effectively running themselves out of business. I don't care if they own the land or not, no one has the right to pollute and destroy the enviroment. I say this with no thought to hunting, but rather a more global thought to the impact that negative farming practices has around the world. Just look at the slashing and burning done to the rain forest to feed their cattle! I am not saying that there aren't farmers in the US that don't also commit such atrocities against the enviroment, but usually not in such extreme measures.

I don't like the idea of the government telling people what they can and can't do on their own land, but if an owner can't show a responsibility for the land they tend, then someone needs to step in.

[Ravin R10 man]

Re: Farming

Being a farmer myself...I dont see why a couple poor managers should effect everybody else who does a good job. Todays prices on our products are a shame! I dont blame a guy trying to plant it all to make a go of it. Yes it does hurt him down the road, but the bank dont want excuses, just the payment. getting farmers together is like catching water with a sien. We are an independant bunch. Im all for cheap food, but it is costing us too many farmers and driving them out of production. Wis. had 44.000 dairy farms in '82....today??? 12,000!!! We have just as many cows producing milk as we did back then! Guess what, they are milking 500 now , not 60. i believe we need wildlife too, and try to practice that here.

[horst]

Re: Farming

onieda man, you have a good point there.Were losing small farmers at a rapid pace.The biger ones are making it harder to compete and they got the ground and equipment to do it.I never realized how many farmers dont even contoll thier own farms anymore.

A guy here was telling me the other day two lawyers made him an offer he couldnt turn down,.They foot the bill for everything from the fuel to everything that goes in the ground, he does the farming, and they pay him so much a year regardless of the market.Works good for him, all his expenses are paid and its the only way he can make a decent profit.But at the same time he doesnt really control whats happening with the farm anymore, hes in effect working for them on his own ground.all thier afters a tax right off, theyre expecting to lose money.At the same time hes worked hard to leave the wetlands behind his house in tact and its hard to say what will happen to them now.

Another guy was telling me about a property he hunts in southern iowa, its a big farm, over run with deer, and hardly ever hunted.i told him Id be interested in hunting it, he said Id have to submit a written paper asking for permission, gie details about what property it was etc.... and then when they had a board meeting.......I quit listening then, it wasnt a farm, it was a corporation.

when these guys buy land they buy lots of land, and they really rape it.Dont matter what they plow under as long as it looks good on paper at the board meetings or they can use it at tax time.The ones who run some of these "farms" have never even seen the property theyre in charge of.

[SaskMan]

Re: Farming

From what I've gathered here, there are a few selfish people in our group. After all, they are asking the farmer to do with his land what THEY would like to see done with the land......remember that you do not own it.

Do I like when farmers get rid of wildlife habitat for another 10 acres of wheat production?? Absolutely not, I'd love to see every acre of possible wildlife habitat left as is but I won't point fingers at any farmer who chooses otherwise.

My own father and I have had a few disagreements over the years. You see he is a small farmer, barely 1000 acres and he is not getting rich on the farm. Over the past 10 years he has cleared approx 100 acres of old tree rows, small bluffs, drainage ditches etc off of his land. In doing so he has gotten rid of any wilflife habitat there was but in turn has another 100 acres of tillable cropland which gets him approx 4000 bushels of wheat each year. I hate the fact that the wildlife habitat is lost forever but can appreciate the fact that those 4000 bushels or so do their part to make ends meet, pay the bills, allow for a little college fund $$ for my son etc. My dad pays the bills on that land, he owns it and I believe he is entitled to do with it as he chooses so long as it does not hurt anybody. Making people upset about losing wildlife habitat is not "hurting them". Like I said, my dad and I have disagreed about what he's done but I respect his decision and know that it is ultimately what is best for him.

I'd love to see the gov't give farmers some incentive to keep wildlife habitat, maybe that would keep some of this stuff around. The south western part of the province where i grew up is losing wildlife habitat at an alarming rate and will continue to unless the gov't steps in. Small farmers like my dad are having a tougher go every year and every acre they can plant makes a difference. Large farms don't seem to care either and they are just getting larger and larger while the little man gets swallowed up. Large farms are very much like corporate business, they'll eat any small farm in their path or any acre of wildlife habitat. Their operations cost big $$ and they'll do anything to get the ultimate return on their investment.

We are fortunate that we do not have to worry about hog farms etc dumping waste into waterways etc so the pollution is not a concern here. It is the destruction of wildlife habitat that concerns me most but I don't blame the farmer, especially the small farmer like my dad. Some of you are quick to point fingers at the farmer, remember that many of them are just looming out for #1 as you are too, point your fingers at the gov't. They should give farmers an incentive to keep wildlife habitat but unfortunately they care alot less about the alnd thatn we do, it's not as important as their big fat pockets!

[brad dryden]

Re: Farming

Well I would have to look at it this way a farmer should do what he want with his land and maybe they should devote a small % to wildlife but when it comes down to chemicals getting into water they need to move their field over and try to prevent this I myself farm and little over halv is woods and I plan to keep it this way becouse I do alot of hunting and try to prevent diffrent wilflife probloms but but it would be nice to see laws to pass for a sertain % of a area to be establish into a wildlife area.

[buckee]

Re: Farming

[ QUOTE ]

From what I've gathered here, there are a few selfish people in our group.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess it depends on which side of the fence your sitting on.

I do agree that the government should create some financial insentives to protect land for wildlife, even if we are just talking about hedgerows.

It is a well know scientific fact that ditch edges and stream edges need to have a certain amount of habitat along them to keep chemicals from leaching into the run-off water. Who is being selfish ?. I guess that's a matter of perception.

My comments in this thread were not made just to enhance my hunting abilities, they were more aimed to protect wildlife and us in the future.

I do agree that there has to be some give and take, inorder for farmers to survive, but I really don't think raping the land is the answer. It will and is effecting us all in the long run.

[SaskMan]

Re: Farming

What about the Urban Sprawl Buckee, I'd call that raping the land more than using your land to make a living.

[buckee]

Re: Farming

Good point Saskman, and what makes me really sick is seeing farm land taken out of the protective status of agricultural use only and turned into sub-divisions or malls.

[OJR]

Re: Farming

[ QUOTE ]

Good point Saskman, and what makes me really sick is seeing farm land taken out of the protective status of agricultural use only and turned into sub-divisions or malls.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a huge problem and as long as the human species is going to reproduce like rabbits, we are going to have more problems with this!

We must take a very hard look at the reproduction of humans and the destruction of habitat!

[horst]

Re: Farming

[ QUOTE ]

What about the Urban Sprawl Buckee, I'd call that raping the land more than using your land to make a living.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on your location Saskman, around the citys its quite a problem, but where Im located the closest thing you could really consider urban sprawls probably 3 hrs away.Here its just miles and miles of unbroken corn and beans.

[ QUOTE ]

From what I've gathered here, there are a few selfish people in our group. After all, they are asking the farmer to do with his land what THEY would like to see done with the land......remember that you do not own it.

[/ QUOTE ]

read something the other day I thought was kinda interesting.90% of the land in Iowa is privately owned.That leaves 10% for public uses.Hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, boating, whatever it is you enjoy everyones got to use 10% of the land to do it on here.Of that 10% a good chunk is tied up in refuges, or has other limits on its usage.

I cant remember exactly but that places us near the top of the list for the least amount of public ground of any state.That means that the majority of any game we hunt heres gonna come off of private land.

A lotta species have entirely dissapeared or at least are so close to dissapearing that they probably arent ever gonna make a comeback in this area.Spotted skunk, badgers, grey fox, quail, to name a few.Partridge, red fox, species like bullsnakes and others are so scarce you hardly see them anymore.These are just the ones im aware of, Im sure theres more.We even have open seasons still on the books for a lotta these, they just arent there anymore.Farming practices and habitat destruction played a major role in a lot of these dissapearing.A lot of these animals were here and plentifull when I was a kid, Im only 31 and in my lifetime Ive watched em dissapear.The ducks and geese have even changed thier flyways, theres nothing here to bring them around or hold them anymore, the wetlands are tiled out.They swing through the Dakotas now instead of here.

At what point do you think it should become my businuess? Owning the land doesnt make it right when it starts affecting everyone else.These are things my kids and grandkids arent gonna see here anymore.Every other industry in the country is regulated, they cant dump crap on the ground by the ton, they cant spray chemicals on the ground by the truckload, and they cant destroy the enviroment to make more money.Even the logging and mining industries have restrictions on what they can do as far as destroying habitat.

Where you got the idea people were being selfish about this is beyond me, how many species should dissapear so a farmer can make a buck??After everythings burned, tiled, baled, and plowed under, how many critters you suppose that 10% of public grounds gonna hold?How is it selfish not want to see 20 miles of river killed off because some guys hog manure got in the river?You got any advisorys up there about not eating the fish because theyre so polluted theyre inedible?But theyre just trying to make a living right?

[SaskMan]

Re: Farming

Horst, I'm not wanting to start an arguement with you and very much respect your opinion for you have many very good points.

However, it was the "small farmer" I was standing behind, not big corperate farms. Small farms are not be blaim for massive pollution of the environment and I simply stated that if a small farmer had to get rid of some wildlife habitat to make ends meet then I was in no position to belittle them, nor should anyone else be. I don't remeber saying that I supported the pollution of rivers and or streams b/c I don't. However, big city industry is as much to blame for this as anybody else.

Yes it is sad that some species of animals are disappearing, I do not like that any more than you do and it will be a sad day when they are gone for good, I feel for my grandchildren for sure. Yes farming is to blame for many of these but if not for farming than something else would do the job getting rid of them too. I'm not sure where you sit on Bush, I read your post there and I'm not wanting to start a political arguement but are you aware of the oil and gas exploration he's supporting in an Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, a refuge that is home to the only caribou calving grounds in Alaska. Your pro sportman President obviously doesn't care too much about the environment and wildlife if he's setting foot in there, after all, he's not hurting his native Texas and he's lining his pockets and the pockets of his corperate buddies.

Ultimately big business is what is going to destroy everything in this world, whether it be big farms, big oil companies, or big cities. Big money wins out over everything, sad and totally unfair but true.

As for the wetlands in Iowa being tilled up and your ducks and geese ging to North Dakota, don't blame farmign and tillage. If it is indeed a wetland how can tillage even happen in it. Maybe you should think further into it and the rold manking is playing in raping the earth and totally destroying the natural cycles of it. Maybe all the pollution and global warming has something to do with the lack of water and this all can't be blamed on the farmers.

Yes it sucks that things are the way they are, I just don't think pointing fingers at farmers is right. I think we should be pointing fingers at the governments. they are to blame in my eyes, they make it hard for small farms to exist, they sure don't give a crap about the environment when compared to the almighty dollar. Like I said before, if they'd give farmers more incentive to keep habitat as is instead of making it harder to exist we'd all be better off.

I'm not sure what to suggest about the inedible fish, that sucks and a poisoned river is dead forever. I guess for that I am thankful that i live where I do, clean water, 1000's of lakes and rivers and some of the best fishing in the world. So far that has not been screwed up but you can bet your a$$ that when oil or gas is found nearby to this wonderful part of the province it'll happen b/c ultimately big money wins.

[horst]

Re: Farming

Saskman, Im not wanting an argument either.IMO small farmers are about the only ones who still do care somewhat about the habitat.Unfourtanately the way things are going Im afraid the days of the small farmer are numbered.sitting here right now I really have trouble thinking of any one guy that still farming like he used to, the rest have either sold out, partnered up with other farmers, or make more money on the side by working other peoples ground for them than they could actually farming.

it was more the comment about "Selfish people" in here that caused me to post, I dont stand to gain nothing one way or the other from the way they run the farms, but a lotta species of animals do.

Id have to re read my post on Bush but i believe I said he was only pro sportsman up to a point, that was in defense of gun rights,and other than that i pretty much agree with what you say about him on enviromental issues.in that post I sided with carbon hunter and slugshooter on his enviromental stance.

As far as tiling the wetlands out youd really have to see it to understand.its like a series of potholes around here, they will run tile in them every year untill they succeed in draining them.ive seen some spots tiled out 5 or 6 times in as many years and they run the tile out in every direction from there.The DNR actually does try to create new ones on the land they get, believe this or not theres one out behind me dads house, a couple acres of water and cattails.they can drain the whole thing by unblocking a tile when they feel the need to, i guesse it improves the cattail growth or something when they do this Anyway, its like pulling the plug out of a big bathtub, thats how many of the fields are around here as well.If you blocked their tile intakes theyd fill back up with water and it might be dry some years but would definately hold water most years.This whole area used to be sloughs and lakes at one time, matter of fact where the town sits today used to be a big lake at one time.

We really seem to be in agreement on quite a bit of this, just seems our areas are quite a bit different.I cant blame Big city industry for polluting the rivers around here because we really dont have much in the way of industry, it all agricultural.I have however seen two manure spills wipe out over 20 miles of river, seeing all the fish, turtles, and such floating bloated on the shores isnt a pretty sight.Im glad a lot of this hasnt reached your area yet, God willing it never will.

niether one of us wants an argument and we agree on most of the points made, just dont confuse what im talking about with selfishness, im not suggesting any of these things to try to better my hunting, and I dont stand to gain much besides that from it, I just want to see a variety of species of animals still around here in another 30 years, and they way things are going were not gonna have much room for em by then.

[SaskMan]

Re: Farming

Well said Horst, and I agree with you on most everything. You're right about our areas being different and us having different opinions on certain areas due to this. I can see that you are not being selfish, I do still think that maybe some are but can clearly see you are not.

It's sad to see things going the way they are and you're right small farms are or soon will be a thing of the past.....a real shame as that is what built a good portion of this country, yours maybe too.

[superguide]

Re: Farming

Our ranch has been in the family for almost 90 years and Saskman can attest to the habitat we've left. There is more species and numbers of wildlife on our place than ever before. But from a ranchers point of view-why should I put the party on for urban dwellers with no financial reward-we struggle money wise year after year but town folks expect to drive on my land to pick berries,hunt deer cut their x-mas tree-dump their garbage etc. I'm not an enviromental activist I'm am active enviromentalist-it is pretty hypocritical to work in town and criticize farmers and ranchers who are growing the food you eat. Bulldoze a few shopping malls-flatten the new cabella';s store and revert it to wildlife habitat if you are so serious about the enviroment or else PAY US FOR THE BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF THE LAND. Dang I can see why I stay out of the political forum.

[horst]

Re: Farming

[ QUOTE ]

Bulldoze a few shopping malls-flatten the new cabella';s store and revert it to wildlife habitat if you are so serious about the enviroment or else PAY US FOR THE BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF THE LAND. Dang I can see why I stay out of the political forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Getting rid of every tree, weed, and wetspot, on a property is being a good steward of the land?Because thats what the point of this post was talking about. You said you leave all sorts of habitat on your place, then this post proably didnt apply to you to start with.I also already told saskman, I cant really comment on urban sprawl like the malls and Cabelas, and things your talking about, thats not the problem here in my area.we dont have urban sprawl like they do around the citys.

Superguide, just talked to a buddy of mine whos a farmer, .His dads an old retired farmer, they have a large chunk of land across the road from thier house, not sure how many acres but its a good size chunk.He was faced with a decision, he doesnt farm anymore, and couldnt afford to keep the land.He was seriously considering selling it like so many others have around here.First he checked with the state, thinking they may lke to buy it for public hunting ground.

instead he got into a program where they lease the land from him, they give him 2900$ an acre to restore it to prarie and wetlands.They plan on putting two large ponds in there and seeding it back down with native prarie grasses.The state pays for all the dirtwork, seeding costs, and anything else donre to the land.The owner contiues to own the land but instead of farm ground he signs a contract where the land cant be farmed for the next 99 years, unlike the old programs where the ground was only out of production for 5 or 10 years this program makes sure it stays in wildlife habitat for along time.The owner also keeps the hunting rights for this land, its not open to the public.

A lotta people are pissed off about this part where the government pays for it and it remains private but Id rather see it happen that way then be sold to to someone else and having every square inch of it plowed under.

The nice thing about this is the farmer can continue to make money off the land, the hunting rights can be leased to others on a yearly basis,, the ground can still be sold to others as long as they leave it in the program.He can probably make more money off it per year now then he ever did farming if he chooses to.I know these guys though and theyll just hunt it themselves, and still let others in who ask rather than trying to profit more from it.But the possibilities still there if theyd ever chose to do it.

Another guy here I dont know got into the same program.When he bought the land it was with the sole intention of putting it in this program.After the states payed him and restored the land he plans to start a hunting club there.He will charge a yearly membership fee to a handfull of guys to hunt the place.Non residents will pay some pretty good money a year to hunt here.He should have his initial investment payed off and be making a profit off the place in a few years.

Ive seen non hunters put land in similar programs and not allow any hunting on it, which is also fine with me, it provides little sanctuaries for the animals but they wont stay in them all thier lives.The populations grow theyll be forced out into other properties.

You said to pay them for being good stewards of the land, but the outfits Im talking about arent good stewards of the land.If they were they would realize there are other programs, and other ways to make money off the land while still keeping some kind of balance on it rather than than clearing it so theres not even room for a rabbitt to hide on it.