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
Beginners Board
Get rich farming
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="Farmhand" data-source="post: 141335" data-attributes="member: 1292"><p>Our dirt business relies on cost share programs. We build terraces, waterways, and dams primarily. Most cost share is 50%. Sometimes 75%. It is real easy to rack up a big bill, real fast putting in terraces. Terraces around here usually go in for about $1.00 - 1.50 a foot. Most terrace jobs require 2,000 - 6,000 ft. Have seen quite a few 10,000 - 15,000 feet jobs. Without cost share most farmers could not afford or be inclined to spend that kind of money. In 10 years I have only seen 2 people say I'll put terraces in even if I don't get cost share. They had money behind them though. Farmers pay so much into the government that there is nothing wrong in having them help pay for something they require to be done. Cost share has nothing to do with how many acres you have. It has everything to do with the erosion factor of your land. How steep are the hills? What soil type is it? Is it highly erodible or not? How much upland treatment is in place already? Counties are allocated X amount of money each time. They of course want to get the most amount of erosion under control they can for that money. So the higher erosion factor you have, the better chance you have of receiving money. This means that someone who needs terraces or waterways will receive money before someone who needs a pond or a dam. Then there are also different cost share programs. Some are for wetlands, some for terracing, some for wind breaks, etc, etc, etc. Each program is given different amounts of money based on primary problems for each area. Some are more wet so wetland cost share gets more. Some have a lot of highly erodible cropland so terracing gets more, etc, etc, etc. The headaches involved with each project is sometimes more than one can bear. Each job has a ream of paperwork, construction doesn't always go the way it should, checkouts are a pain in the you know what, having to move back onto a job site because "they" shot a spot 1/10th off, the farmer who doesn't want all those crooked lines on his hilly ground (he wants terraces built straight across fence to fence so he can continue farming like he always has), the billings, the list goes on and on and I have already been too windy here. My point is - cost share programs are a good thing. They help more people, in more ways than one can imagine. I have never seen a case of "lazy farmer welfare" in the cost share programs. There's too much work involved.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Farmhand, post: 141335, member: 1292"] Our dirt business relies on cost share programs. We build terraces, waterways, and dams primarily. Most cost share is 50%. Sometimes 75%. It is real easy to rack up a big bill, real fast putting in terraces. Terraces around here usually go in for about $1.00 - 1.50 a foot. Most terrace jobs require 2,000 - 6,000 ft. Have seen quite a few 10,000 - 15,000 feet jobs. Without cost share most farmers could not afford or be inclined to spend that kind of money. In 10 years I have only seen 2 people say I'll put terraces in even if I don't get cost share. They had money behind them though. Farmers pay so much into the government that there is nothing wrong in having them help pay for something they require to be done. Cost share has nothing to do with how many acres you have. It has everything to do with the erosion factor of your land. How steep are the hills? What soil type is it? Is it highly erodible or not? How much upland treatment is in place already? Counties are allocated X amount of money each time. They of course want to get the most amount of erosion under control they can for that money. So the higher erosion factor you have, the better chance you have of receiving money. This means that someone who needs terraces or waterways will receive money before someone who needs a pond or a dam. Then there are also different cost share programs. Some are for wetlands, some for terracing, some for wind breaks, etc, etc, etc. Each program is given different amounts of money based on primary problems for each area. Some are more wet so wetland cost share gets more. Some have a lot of highly erodible cropland so terracing gets more, etc, etc, etc. The headaches involved with each project is sometimes more than one can bear. Each job has a ream of paperwork, construction doesn't always go the way it should, checkouts are a pain in the you know what, having to move back onto a job site because "they" shot a spot 1/10th off, the farmer who doesn't want all those crooked lines on his hilly ground (he wants terraces built straight across fence to fence so he can continue farming like he always has), the billings, the list goes on and on and I have already been too windy here. My point is - cost share programs are a good thing. They help more people, in more ways than one can imagine. I have never seen a case of "lazy farmer welfare" in the cost share programs. There's too much work involved. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Beginners Board
Get rich farming
Top