lawnviewfarm
Well-known member
According to the this article in the Seattle Times, CRP grazing and haying appears to be on hold for now.
--Marc
--Marc
The fallow lands under the CRP program have been crucial to wildlife. In Washington, much of the remaining population of sage grouse, now under consideration for listing under the Endangered Species Act, lives on CRP land, said Don Larsen, of the state Department of Fish and Wildlife.
You are absolutly correct and it is the USDA as the RENTER who is now saying anyone who wants can pay me a $75 fee per tract and graze it or hay 50% of it. They are now subleasing it to everyone.Jogeephus":1m2iuxg0 said:Unless I'm missing something Somm, the gov't is the rentor. They bought these people's rights to graze their own property. Would be the same if I rented it from you.
It would be right if you the renter gave me permission to do it just as the USDA as the renter has given others permission to graze their rented acres. Now I am very certain no Wildlife Federation should be able to interfere with any lease agreement between 2 groups in which they are not a party involved. You will never see an end to the lawsuits against agriculture by wildlife and peta people if this deal wins in court.Jogeephus":1m2iuxg0 said:It wouldn't be right for you to put your stock on it after I paid you rent for it. Same thing is applying here.
Yep keep the whole thing it is none of your business as the landowner what the renter wants to do with the property as long as they pay the rent they agreed to and have not violated any of the terms of the contract.Jogeephus":2vz7u1jj said:Thanks for clearing that up. So if I had 400 acres in CRP and they were paying me $50/acre I could give them $75 and graze or hay 50% of the land and keep the money too or would I have to forfeit the payment or is it prorated? (BTW, I got no problem with any cattlemen grazing CRP land and seriously doubt any sage grouse or any other bird is nesting this time of year. I'm just asking out of curiousity)
I never said anyone is buying back any contract of any kind.ROB":y7mgj07j said:Somn - i can't find anywhere where anyone other than the landowner would have the option to buy back his/her contract. i believe you stated than anyone could buy back contracts for their own use. where's this coming from - i'd like to see it.
ROB
somn":vy63h3nw said:You are absolutly correct and it is the USDA as the RENTER who is now saying anyone who wants can pay me a $75 fee per tract and graze it or hay 50% of it. They are now subleasing it to everyone.Jogeephus":vy63h3nw said:Unless I'm missing something Somm, the gov't is the rentor. They bought these people's rights to graze their own property. Would be the same if I rented it from you.It would be right if you the renter gave me permission to do it just as the USDA as the renter has given others permission to graze their rented acres. Now I am very certain no Wildlife Federation should be able to interfere with any lease agreement between 2 groups in which they are not a party involved. You will never see an end to the lawsuits against agriculture by wildlife and peta people if this deal wins in court.Jogeephus":vy63h3nw said:It wouldn't be right for you to put your stock on it after I paid you rent for it. Same thing is applying here.