Potentially good news boys.

In the land of 10,000 lakes, Minnesota duck hunting is some of the best. Log in and discuss your Minnesota duck hunting experiences.

Moderators: beretta24, commander019

Potentially good news boys.

Postby MinneKans » Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:44 am

“The 2014 Farm Bill is arguably one of the best agriculture conservation bills for sportsmen and ducks that we’ve seen in a long time,” said DU CEO Dale Hall. “Our nation is currently experiencing a rate of wetland and native prairie loss not seen since the Dust Bowl. The proactive conservation programs included in the 2014 Farm Bill will help deter wetland drainage and incentivize the conservation of these valuable lands while keeping working farmers and ranchers on their land.”

More than $1 billion was also allocated for wetlands and grasslands conservation easements, representing some of the most successful private-lands conservation programs, providing a voluntary, non-regulatory, incentive-based way for private landowners, farmers and ranchers to protect and restore wetlands and grasslands on their property. The programs had expired and were not accepting new acreage enrollments.
MinneKans
hunter
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:16 pm


Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mutthunt » Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:31 am

Now let's see if our idiots in D.C. can pass it.
“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers
User avatar
mutthunt
hunter
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 1:51 pm

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby MinneKans » Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:41 am

Hopefully Bo-Bo-The-Clown will sign it, if it gets to his desk.
MinneKans
hunter
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:16 pm

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:37 am

I hate to say it but its nothing more than a huge subsidy. As much as I like the land being set aside for hunting, as a taxpayer I see it as a waste. It is quite simply the Fed government spending money we don't have on something we don't need, and getting involved where it doesn't belong. It's a vote for increased taxes.

If we want land set aside we should be buying it outright instead of providing incentives farmers will ignore as soon as the crop prices are right. Just my two cents.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mauserfan » Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:37 am

Beretta-If this is your opinion, you may want to reconsider publically jabbing at farmers. Looks to me like you field hunt some.....mauser
The greatest duck call known to mankind?....A fresh cup of coffee from the Thermos.
User avatar
mauserfan
hunter
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:53 am

Tell me what I said that wasn't true. It's inconvenient to say as a hunter, but it doesn't change reality. I'm not trying to bash anyone, just pointing out that there's another side to the coin. Farmers are looking for the interests of themselves and their families first, as they should. In many cases they would be fools not to till under ground if it's more profitable to them.

However, IMO too few people take the time to consider the opportunity cost. You can tip toe around the farmers if you want, but all the while another tax is being levied against us and more realistically our children. That's the cost and we don't have the money.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mauserfan » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:21 am

Beretta-I agree somewhat with your premise though I believe that all Federal workers & benefits need to be addressed before we do anything. That's a whole different conversation. Please realize, though, that farmers are not able to pull out of the CRP at will based upon advantageous crop pricing. They are committed for an agreed number of years before being accepted into the CRP. Most of the land being set into CRP is marginal at best and was a great option for a lot of acreage & farmers. With our food basket being driven by world interests, even this marginal land is now profitable. I have many farming/ranching friends and have witnessed first hand what they have gone through in the past years just to keep the bank happy. Yes, there are a number of corporate acreages that make it look as if all farmers are rolling in it. But there are also the many, many single family farmers that need their wives part time Cenex jobs to make ends meet, let alone have health insurance, an IRA or 529's for the kids. This an extremely broad issue that influences absolutely all of us every day, and there is a lot needed to be learned before we can attack any of it. It's very easy to act like we can solve things looking from the outside/in.....mauser
The greatest duck call known to mankind?....A fresh cup of coffee from the Thermos.
User avatar
mauserfan
hunter
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:40 am

I understand there's contracts, but it takes years to for a piece of land to become productive. And the second a farmer chooses not to re-up its gone.

I just don't think the Fed government has any business deciding what industries should be subsidized. If there's an investment opportunity let's talk, but I have not seen anyone show that this is anything more than a subsidy. To each their own.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby MinneKans » Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:44 am

You and I are paying for this subsidy. Farmers should be required to set aside a portion of their land for conservation in exchange for our tax dollars.
MinneKans
hunter
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:16 pm

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby pj » Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:24 pm

My only beef with farmers is when the complain about all of the 'city people' on welfare or unemployment or any type of government program. Tell them they are on welfare too and they get their panties in a bunch. But we need crops as much as we need grass. Finding the right mix through programs like the Duck Stamp buying WPAs until we reach a happy medium of crops/grass sounds like a better alternative to using tax payers dollars.
For every tear a smile.
User avatar
pj
hunter
 
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: The STP, or St. Paul

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mauserfan » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:02 pm

I dislike any government intervention as much as most but, let me put it this way; would anybody like a $8 loaf of bread, $10 Gallon of milk or $8 per pound of pasta? That is the issue at hand. Basically we are all on these subsidies either directly or indirectly. Also, what happens when a late August hail storm wipes out his Duram crop? These guys take a tremendous amount of risk in everything they do. Agreed, we absolutely need large tracts of native land set aside and, with no money, how do we do it?....mauser
The greatest duck call known to mankind?....A fresh cup of coffee from the Thermos.
User avatar
mauserfan
hunter
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:09 pm

It should be bought instead of leased if people want it, and the federal government shouldn't be involved. It's not the purpose of the Fed government.

Your fear of extreme price hikes is unfounded. We're pay for the subsidy now through taxes. We don't give a 2 dollar subsidy for a 4 dollar price drop. Take away the subsidy and prices could go up, but the tax burden would be decreased by even more because there's no middle man taking some off the top for the money exchange.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mauserfan » Wed Jan 29, 2014 3:06 pm

Point taken. Have you taken the loss of ag land property tax payments into this as well? Also, please clarify your following statement for me;" but the tax burden would be decreased by even more because there's no middle man taking some off the top for the money exchange." Thanks....mauser
The greatest duck call known to mankind?....A fresh cup of coffee from the Thermos.
User avatar
mauserfan
hunter
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 3:45 pm

mauserfan wrote:Point taken. Have you taken the loss of ag land property tax payments into this as well? Also, please clarify your following statement for me;" but the tax burden would be decreased by even more because there's no middle man taking some off the top for the money exchange." Thanks....mauser

Where would there be a loss of property taxes?

To answer your second question, when you pay taxes the IRS has to take in the payment, and the government has to appropriate and deliver funds to the proper entity. In this case, to pay the farmer. If there's no subsidy the government doesn't have to handle taking money and giving it to the farmer. The farmer simply sets a different price.

An extreme example to reduce the money handling would be to set a flat tax rate. How many IRS personnel and accountants are employed solely because the tax code is too difficult or not worth people's time to figure out? It's waste that could be driven towards areas of innovation to improve productivity...the only real means to grow an economy.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mauserfan » Wed Jan 29, 2014 3:49 pm

You had made the statement"It should be bought instead of leased if people want it". If Federally purchased, the tax base would be lost....mauser
The greatest duck call known to mankind?....A fresh cup of coffee from the Thermos.
User avatar
mauserfan
hunter
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:03 pm

mauserfan wrote:You had made the statement"It should be bought instead of leased if people want it". If Federally purchased, the tax base would be lost....mauser

I never said the federal government should buy it. They have no business owning land in my opinion. However, if a state wants to that should be up to the individual state. Or an organization/individual could purchase it.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mauserfan » Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:21 pm

Here lies the rub. As an organization, possibly a purchase could make some sort of meaningful difference but most likely not. As a private purchase, in most all cases there would have to be a return on investment. Although forwardthinking,private environmental purchases could not make a significant difference anyways in the overall scheme of the issue. If I remember correctly, it would have to be ag related to qualify for the CRP. I believe that there are currently alot of ag landowners that would go into the CRP if the dollars made sense. Only big brother has the dollars to fund that. Also,please keep in mind that the reason some of the farmers won't go in is due to the price of corn. Why is corn so high? Ethanol funding from Uncle Sam. Aside from the CRP withdrawl, we are currently losing about 100 wetland related acres daily throughout the Dakotas. Minnesota is no longer on the NA Waterfowl census as a result of losing 95%+ of our wetlands since European settlement- 1880's and on. Yes, some of this due to farming to feed the burgeoning populous. Just don't bite the hand that's feeding you by blaming the farmers for the woes of development. We are feeling it now and will feel it all the more in the future. The Dakotas are being changed before our eyes and once gone, won't be replaced. Very unfortunately,it seems that unless it is a Hollywood Environmental type issue, it falls to the wayside. The CRP of the plains doesn't have the bling to make it to primetime. We should all be concerned. When it comes down to it, involving our Gov't. in this problem may not be the perfect solution, but, it may be the best bad option that we have. Talk to me.....mauser
The greatest duck call known to mankind?....A fresh cup of coffee from the Thermos.
User avatar
mauserfan
hunter
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:13 pm

The massive fault in your thinking is "big brother has the dollars". They don't. Period. They only thing they have that you individually don't is an established organization to facilitate the transfer of large sums of cash, supported by debt, that they don't have collateral (unless you count future taxpayers) to back up.

Another way of saying what I tried to express earlier is any dollars they do have come from us, therefore the government has access to no more than the people have in their possession or are capable of obtaining.

The fact is that today our government is flat f'ing broke. They don't have the money for this. However, the government is good at spending WAY ahead of tax revenues. We are getting bent over and most don't even realize it. The extent will ensure today's standard of living is as good as it will be for decades to come for most Americans. It's already going down.

I hope there are no hard feelings, but it's a joke to think the government has the money.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby recker » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:54 am

The bill I read didnt have any good news. Sure it had a few provisions to keep farmers from draining land, etc. However, the CRP wil be capped and more then likely keep decreasing as there is no incentive for farmers to go into CRP. It wont make them any money. The subsidies keep rolling to farmers and the government will just keep borrowing to pay for it. Now if anyone can explain to me how this benefits ducks I would love to listen?
recker
hunter
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 10:52 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mutthunt » Thu Jan 30, 2014 7:05 am

The status quo of our country's natural habitat is so bad that this is good news. The capped CRP sucks, but the sod saver program seems alright. There could just as easily been squat for conservation effort.

I really wish I had the cash to go out and purchase ag land and convert it to native grass and wetland, but in some parts of the state I could afford about a half acre. I'll gladly take land the government owns/subsidizes.
“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers
User avatar
mutthunt
hunter
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 1:51 pm

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Thu Jan 30, 2014 7:29 am

Mutthut, (edited due to tapatalk misquote),
Then you better support the next bill to increase mental healthcare funding for cats or increased funding for Somali artists because right now you're asking to take THEIR tax dollars for YOUR pet project. And as I stated previously, we can not afford this. It's going on another new credit card. Think about it.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mauserfan » Thu Jan 30, 2014 7:39 am

Beretta-They DO have the money. Always have. It's the appropriation of it that has changed. There is a large overhaul needed, but that's a whole different conversation. Secondly-there are some intelligent individuals weighing in on this forum. If you don't agree with, or understand, their position, don't insult them by throwing your junior high locker room attitude at them.

Recker-I hope you weren't asking how CRP benefits ducks-right?

Have a great day....mauser :thumbsup:
The greatest duck call known to mankind?....A fresh cup of coffee from the Thermos.
User avatar
mauserfan
hunter
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby MinneKans » Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:04 am

Looks like I opened a can of worms with my initial post. The Farm Bill is a complex issue. When DU sees it as favorable to ducks that's a good thing in my eyes.

Long live the mallard...and the walleye! :smile:
MinneKans
hunter
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:16 pm

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby beretta24 » Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:05 am

We are 17 trillion in debt, plus there are many more trillions in unfunded liabilities. That is a fact regardless of whether or not some fund claims to have dollars. We have no means to pay those debts off as they stand.

I have been blunt and direct, and as far as I know I have also been truthful. I'm sorry if that bothers you or anyone else. I usually try to ignore this stuff outside of the CI forum because people get wound up too fast, but I'm sick of people thinking everything is ok. It's hypocritical to support a program that benefits you or your group and then to rail against others when they want money.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5552
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Potentially good news boys.

Postby mutthunt » Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:19 am

Beretta I love the conversation. Lots of good points. I guess I don't feel maintaining/bettering the natural habitat is a pet project. It's a basic government function. Even though we, as a country, suck at it. If I thought private citizens/organizations could pony up the billions of $ needed to keep habitat I would be on board instantly (coming from a DU/PF member).

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
“If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went.” - Will Rogers
User avatar
mutthunt
hunter
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 1:51 pm

Next

Return to Minnesota Duck Hunting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests