Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Grasses, Pastures & Hay
CRP grazing/haying apparently on hold
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ROB" data-source="post: 558691" data-attributes="member: 3467"><p>an excerpt from the letter sent to the District Judge:</p><p></p><p>"A penalty-free early release of the magnitude you are considering-millions of acres-would deliver a devastating blow to the nation's soil, water, and wildlife habitat, and significantly increase global warming," said the letter.</p><p></p><p>"Because most CRP lands are marginal for cropping, even if all CRP acres were brought back into commodity production, the impact on aggregate commodity supplies and prices would be modest… We urge you to protect the taxpayers' investment in soil quality, water quality, and wildlife habitat and not allow landowners to leave CRP contracts early without fully reimbursing the Treasury for the taxpayer-funded investment in those lands."</p><p></p><p>could someone explain this: </p><p></p><p><strong>other than voicing their opposition to everything good- what purpose does this blockage serve when under the CRP Program, every year up to 1/3 of all CRP acres are able to be hayed or grazed?</strong>a landowner can buy-back 1/3 of their contracted acres each year, or all of their contracted acres every 3 years at a rate of 25% of the contract payment amount. </p><p></p><p><strong>has there been any significant studies done by these environmentalist groups that proves haying or grazing CRP acres is a detriment to our nation's soil, water and wildlife, and significantly increases global warming?</strong> (when done according to USDA guidelines)</p><p></p><p><strong>what does bringing CRP acres back into commodity production have anything to do with haying or grazing?</strong>landowners can't plant corn or any other row crops on CRP acreages. if the landowner want to row crop those acres, he/she has to pay back the entire amount of payments recieved on those acres for the term of the contract to date.</p><p></p><p><strong>who would be leaving CRP contracts early under this modification?</strong> best i can tell, the landowner is still under contract with the USDA/FSA. this modification was only intended to be for this year. next year things go back to normal.</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>IMO, the Judge who made this decision should be banned from the judicial system. it is evident that these environmentalists have him in their hip pocket. i think it is amazing that a judge from the west coast has the gall to make a decision which affects people over our whole nation without consulting his constituency located in other parts of the country. just another example of how our nation is letting the loudmouths run things - and just another judge who woke up one morning and decided to be a congressmen instead of a judge. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite4" alt=":mad:" title="Mad :mad:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":mad:" /> (interpret the law, not make the law)</p><p></p><p>ROB</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ROB, post: 558691, member: 3467"] an excerpt from the letter sent to the District Judge: "A penalty-free early release of the magnitude you are considering-millions of acres-would deliver a devastating blow to the nation's soil, water, and wildlife habitat, and significantly increase global warming," said the letter. "Because most CRP lands are marginal for cropping, even if all CRP acres were brought back into commodity production, the impact on aggregate commodity supplies and prices would be modest… We urge you to protect the taxpayers' investment in soil quality, water quality, and wildlife habitat and not allow landowners to leave CRP contracts early without fully reimbursing the Treasury for the taxpayer-funded investment in those lands." could someone explain this: [b]other than voicing their opposition to everything good- what purpose does this blockage serve when under the CRP Program, every year up to 1/3 of all CRP acres are able to be hayed or grazed?[/b]a landowner can buy-back 1/3 of their contracted acres each year, or all of their contracted acres every 3 years at a rate of 25% of the contract payment amount. [b]has there been any significant studies done by these environmentalist groups that proves haying or grazing CRP acres is a detriment to our nation's soil, water and wildlife, and significantly increases global warming?[/b] (when done according to USDA guidelines) [b]what does bringing CRP acres back into commodity production have anything to do with haying or grazing?[/b]landowners can't plant corn or any other row crops on CRP acreages. if the landowner want to row crop those acres, he/she has to pay back the entire amount of payments recieved on those acres for the term of the contract to date. [b]who would be leaving CRP contracts early under this modification?[/b] best i can tell, the landowner is still under contract with the USDA/FSA. this modification was only intended to be for this year. next year things go back to normal. 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. IMO, the Judge who made this decision should be banned from the judicial system. it is evident that these environmentalists have him in their hip pocket. i think it is amazing that a judge from the west coast has the gall to make a decision which affects people over our whole nation without consulting his constituency located in other parts of the country. just another example of how our nation is letting the loudmouths run things - and just another judge who woke up one morning and decided to be a congressmen instead of a judge. :mad: (interpret the law, not make the law) ROB [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Grasses, Pastures & Hay
CRP grazing/haying apparently on hold
Top