Uncle Sam giving Farmers $$$ Not to Use Their Land ??

[Helena]

Went to buy hay from an old farmer we have been dealing with for many years now. He told us that his land in hay about 40 acres ...won't be used fro the next 10 years. The goverment has offered him money not to use it. He can not hay it or raise crops or even put cattle for grazing for the the next 10 years and in exchange he will get aprroximately $100 an acre. Another neighbor told us the same thing ! Does anyone know anything about this ?? I realize that farmers have been paid not to plant corn etc in years past but this is something new to me !!

[Snowdancer]

I think you're talking about the CRP program and it's been around for at least 10 yrs that I know of, since one of our neighbors in WI used it instead of harvesting his hay fields.

Some odd programs out there, this one seems to be one of them. But I don't know all the ins & outs of it, just what I was told by the neighbor.

[CraftyDiva]

This might be what he's talking about...............
http://www.extension.umn.edu/distrib...s/5946_04.html

There's a lot of abuse of this program. City dwellers buy up country land and then apply for this program. They never farmed a day in thier lives but get a yearly check from Uncle Sam.

[nicholascovey]

The CRP program started in the mid-80's. It allowed farms that fall under certain categories to be taken out of production. This was to combat (at that time) a slump in the grain market by lowering the number of arable acres and respectively the number of bushels of grain produced.
It was supposed to be a one-time thing. But like all government programs, it has skyrocketed. After the first ten years were up the program was made permanent, even after the NAFTA subsidiary treaties made US farmers directly compete with Brazilian grain markets (they have a similar ecology).

After the last revision, it was not just crop ground that got taken out. You can enlist pretty much anything at this point as long as it CAN be used agriculturally. I have heard about some farmer in souther Iowa that put in a piece of property that was deemed a federal wetland and had NEVER been farmed. It also could not be farmed under threat of fine from the Federal Govt.

I believe that this program has done horrible harm to the American family farm. In creating a revenue off of land unfit for anything else, it allows urban people to purchase the land and expect it to generate enough to make it's own payment without raising a finger. This has helped drive up rural land costs when it was there to help farmers. It's a sad thing really.

[Jenn]

We get conservation payments to not plow too close to the slough on our farm, but cattle grazing it is permitted. Don't know if we get the money or how much or if it goes to the farmers renting from us- guess we would get it, they just rent fewer acres since can't use whole acreage. Don't know- brother keeps the books.

[palani]

I haven't checked into this program for years. It started out for HEL (highly erodeable land) only. This was land that never really should have been cultivated to begin with but since farmers have always been cash strapped the motivation was always to make the most with what you had.

By the way. the total ag department budget going to farmers amounts to around a whopping 1/4 of 1 per cent of the entire budget. If there is any cash laying around it in a farmers pocket it goes to buying machinery or inputs which always seem to end up in the pockets of someone in the city.

If you know of a "rich" farmer in your area you might try putting his name in the search engine of the secretary of state (UCC search) and you will most likely end up finding who holds the paper on everything that he "owns". There is nothing underhanded about doing a search like this. This system became part of the public records after gold was prohibited in the 1930's. Seems the banks needed a little extra protection when people started going bankrupt.

As far as federal program payment to farmers check out www.ewg.org. On the right side of the page there is a buttone for FARM SUBSIDY DATABASE. You can find out who the highest paid farmer is in your county, state or township going back 5 or more years. Course farmers generally hate this site with the extra detail it provides but it is all about public funds and public records. If they hate the attention too much they can always stop taking public funds. By the way, to make a lot of money off the government you have to farm a LOT of land. The dollars sound impressive but with combines going for $160k and tractors in the $200k region who do you suppose is ending up with the cash? Again, compare the secretary of states UCC database with the ewg database and consider carefully.

[caballoviejo]

Nobody is making any money on acerage that pays on $10.00 per acre per year. In our area you sign up for 10 years and agree to more or less let land go fallow that is withing 100 feed (?) or so of a creek, drainage ditch, river, or other body of water. I think you can graze on it or plant trees.

Seems like a good conservation move and one that helps the farmer get something for his stewardship of marginal or non-productive land.

[rambler]

Originally Posted by Helena

Went to buy hay from an old farmer we have been dealing with for many years now. He told us that his land in hay about 40 acres ...won't be used fro the next 10 years. The goverment has offered him money not to use it. He can not hay it or raise crops or even put cattle for grazing for the the next 10 years and in exchange he will get aprroximately $100 an acre. Another neighbor told us the same thing ! Does anyone know anything about this ?? I realize that farmers have been paid not to plant corn etc in years past but this is something new to me !!

Both the fedral govt & my state govt have 'wildlife' programs that rents land from farmers to create wildlife areas. In general it targets poorer land - slopes, low spots, etc. There are sign up periods, and the govt selects the better deals from all of those that apply. For the most part the programs last 10 years, and may be extended for 1 year periods after that.

In my state no mowing at all is encouraged, but you must control the weeds, and you must prepare & reseed the land _just_ so, generally in rather fussy & expensive ways. So you do not get to collect the whole check; much of it goes into seeding & maintaining the land.

The various govts hope that trees establish on the land, & that after 10-15 years it remains in natural condion. Also if it is naturally wet & you are not planting a crop on it in 5 years, the state can claim it as a wetland & you basically get to pay taxes on it but lose all control or use of that land forever.

There are 1000's of details, but this is not a simple program, & it is not 'free money' either. There is a lot of responsiblity & costs involved geting into it, and long-term issues of what happens to the land once the govt stops renting it.

As with all govt programs, there are some that have found ways & people to abuse the system & get free money out of the deal, but in general the programs are barely break-even for most people in them, with a lot of risk of permanently losing the use of your land.

Now, we can agree or disagree with the whole premise that the govt rents land for wildlife, but that is what is offered & I do not knock people who make use of govt programs..... Generally the govt is about competitive with other people willing to rent the land. So, it's no big scandal or anything.

--->Paul

[bugstabber]

Good post palani. Another thing to consider is that while a "farm" might have a large check coming in from the government, there could be several families in that corporation.

[Quint]

CRP has probably done more for wildlife populations than anything else I can think of in recent memory. Around here CRP ground was CRaP ground to begin with. Highly erodible, next to waterways or flood prone, or in a couple of cases I know of a mile or two away, such crappy soil it had to be very heavily fertilized to even make a passable crop. You can't just let it lay fallow either in many cases. It may have to be mowed periodically, have certain grasses planted and other growth controlled among other things. In emergencies it can be used for hay or grazing. I remember that being done once. Around my farm it has done wonders for the quail, pheasant, turkey and certain songbirds. Probably helped about as much as some of my personal conservation efforts. Helped the deer population not that it needed it particularly. My corn and beans keep the deer fat and happy.

[Chuck]

We have a few acres in the CREP program on our farm. I get about $100 an acre per year, and I had to plant trees on the CREP easement. (the county paid me to do it, and gave me the trees). it's all the land within 150 feet of any water on the property, and after 15 years I could clear cut it if I so desired (I don't) and start over. While it is in the CREP easement I can't build on it or put animals on it, but I had to mow between the trees for the first few years to keep the weeds down.

Personally, I like woods better than pasture, and I hate to mow. So when someone wanted to pay me to plant trees - I was all over it. In our county the program is partially funded by organizations such as ducks unlimited.

[BamaSuzy]

Any time the governmnet gets involved in doing major problems there is always too much red tape and lots of corruption....and that's a shame....

The government says they want to protect and help the small family farmer but most of their programs are geared to help the huge industrial-agriculture type folks....

Small farms and small homesteads instead of conglomerations will be what eventually holds this country together, or the lack of them will be this country's downfall....

[john#4]

Bama,

You are absolutely correct. With drought in the mid west, lack of water in a lot of places we better start to wake up.
Pay the farmer not to grow, so we can import, BS. Some of the older people here can remember before we did’t imported all the third world country stuff, we didn’t go without.
We ate what was in season, and very happy with it.
We don’t need to pay farmers not to grow, any more then a welfare check to farmers
who over stock there land. If we stopped the farm subsides we would be better off.
Yes for a little while it would hard, but it will come back around.
Just think what it will cost for that shipload of produce to come to port, then shipped 1000’s of miles to get to you.
But no, people don’t wont to here the truth until they get hit on the head.
Now is the time to stop and wake up.
John#4