# Say goodbye to CRP



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

Snooze, you lose. How many sportsmen contacted their congressmen on CRP? Two articles from the Dickinson Press:

*Conservation Reserve Program acres essentially vanish from region by 2012 *

By John Odermann [email protected] 
Pheasants, a game bird that is currently in ample supply in the area, may see a dramatic drop in numbers over the course of the next few years. 
New regulations instituted to the federal Conservation Reserve Program will see thousands of enrolled acres in southwestern North Dakota expire by 2012, which could have devastating effects on the local pheasant population. 
"It's scary," Randy Kriel, Game and Fish Wildlife Division chief said. "When the USDA offered new extensions, very few were offered in the southwest part of the state." 
Land is now considered for the CRP by running it through an environmental benefit index (EBI), which the USDA utilizes to help it in the approval process for the program. While the EBI considers many plots in southeastern North Dakota to be a fit for the program due its classification as a wetlands area, the southwestern corner of the state does not fit as well. 
As a result, much of the land that is currently held as in the CRP expires by 2012. 
"We've been telling people that unless the USDA changes how they look at things that this was going to happen," Kriel said. "Now it's here." 
When you look at the breakdown of the numbers county by county, they become even more startling. 
Stark County, which currently stands at 88,625.9 enrolled acres, falls to 3,154.7 acres, or 3.9 percent of current acreage by 2012. 
Adams County is expected to fall from 69,587.9 
enrolled acres to 3,226.5 or 4.6 percent of existing, 
Billings County falls from 17,135.60 acres to 24 acres or 0.1 percent, Bowman County drops from 63,113.5 acres to 790.3 acres or 1.3 percent, Dunn County falls from 19,706.2 acres to 614.1 acres or 3.1 percent, Golden Valley County falls from 35,622 acres to 2,230.2 acres or 6.3 percent, Hettinger County drops from 115,034.8 acres to 6,236.5 acres or 5.4 percent and Slope County slips from 21,548 acres to 567.90 acres or 2.6 percent. 
Hettinger County is home to Mott, which is known nationwide for its fantastic pheasant hunting, and looks to be one of the counties that would be hardest hit. 
The loss of CRP land could lead to catastrophic impacts on the upland game bird population in the region, specifically the pheasant. 
"Prior to 1986 when CRP hit, people didn't go to Mott to go pheasant hunting," Kriel said. "In fact, the only really good pheasant hunting was found in the Ceder and Cannonball river drainages." 
Roger Rostvet, deputy director of the Game and Fish, started his career in the Mott area in 1977 as a game warden and echoed Kriel's statement. 
"When I first moved down there, seeing a pheasant was a rarity," Rostvet said. "After CRP was implemented, we saw a dramatic rise in the bird population." 
The Game and Fish states prior to the institution of the CRP, the annual pheasant harvest was around 100,000 birds. Twenty years later, the annual pheasant harvest is around 800,000 birds. 
Kriel said these CRP changes have been on the landscape for sometime, but people were more concerned with other issues, such as out-of-state hunters coming to the area. 
"People were basically fiddling while Rome was burning," Kriel said. "They were wasting their time arguing about stuff like that. We are looking at about a 90 percent loss in birds." 
Kriel and Rostvet mentioned that just like other federal programs, the way the CRP is implemented can be changed, but only if people speak up. 
"I think one of the problems is that CRP has been a significant part of the landscape for 20 years now," Kriel sad. "People have become complacent and just assumed CRP would always be there." 
From a policy standpoint, the Game and Fish cannot do much because the CRP is a federally run program overseen by the USDA. 
Jim Jost of the Farm Service Agency in Fargo said the USDA really has to follow what is laid out in the farm bill. 
"Once the farm bill becomes law, the agency develops regulation based on that law and the policy for the program," Jost said. "Once the bill passes, we will have a better idea of the future of CRP in North Dakota." 
The current status of the farm bill is up in the air. It was passed by both chambers of Congress and now enters conference committee. 
Kriel said the state's congressional delegation is their, "best approach to solving the problem." 
Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., said the CRP program is constantly being reviewed. 
"We're going to have to do some hearings to evaluate the consequences of taking this land out of CRP," Dorgan said. "The CRP program has been a very beneficial program." 
Dorgan added Congress does paint the broad picture, but the specifics are laid out by the USDA. 
Regardless, the hunting landscape in southwestern North Dakota is likely to see some changes, said Rostvet. 
"The way it looks right now&#8230;crystal balling it, in the next five years things are going to look a lot different than they do right now," he said.

*New CRP regulations impact all of the state's wildlife resources *

By John Odermann [email protected] 
Hunters and fishermen who rely on the Conservation Reserve Program to provide them with opportunities in the North Dakota outdoors will find themselves looking down the barrel of a enviable situation in the near future. 
The USDA has instituted new regulations regarding the CRP program that look to have a great impact on wildlife population statewide, representatives from the North Dakota Game and Fish said. 
"It will certainly affect Game and Fish, but it's going to especially affect those who hunt and fish," Game less-thanand Fish Director Terry Steinwand said. "People are not going to see the opportunities they have in the past. 
New regulations are not the only reason for the decrease of the CRP land available for wildlife to find cover in over the next few years. A lot of farmers have chosen to not resign for the program due to abnormally high commodity prices. 
"You can't blame landowners for taking the land out of CRP to put it into production," Steinwand said. "It wouldn't be a good business decision with where prices are now." 
Steinwand and his staff are keeping an eye on the changing landscape of the CRP program and will "adapt" where they see as necessary. 
The Game and Fish also is pursuing other conservation opportunities in an attempt to stave off the affects of the lost CRP land. 
Whatever they do, the number of wildlife in North Dakota will most likely take a hit. 
"It'll affect ducks, grouse, pheasants and deer to some extent," Steinwand said. "Water quality is also a component that a lot of people forget about when considering CRP." 
The duck population is one area that the Game and Fish is concerned about, especially because ducks numbers have been up in recent years. 
"It can't be good," Game and Fish waterfowl expert Mike Johnson said of the forecast reduction in CRP acres. "We've seen tremendous duck production in the state since CRP and the water returned. Any loss of CRP is going to hurt that." 
The CRP acres provide nesting cover for the ducks that cannot be found near waterways. Female ducks travel miles to find the appropriate nesting area and most of the time their search ends when they find a field of CRP. 
"Basically what we have found was that by providing that additional grass habitat, you are providing additional habitat for birds," said Ron Reynolds of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. "If you increase the amount of grasslands available, you will see an increase in the number of birds." 
Reynolds said while the U.S. Fish and Wildlife has not done any studies regarding the direct impact of the CRP shift, it is not out of the question to assume a loss of CRP will result in a lower number of wildlife in the area. 
In the mid-60's with the end of the Soil Bank program, the state of North Dakota saw a drop in the population of several species. If things continue as is, we are set to repeat history and see dramatic drops in not only the duck population, but also grouse, turkey, pheasant and deer. 
There is a lot of literature that has been created regarding the impact that CRP has had on the population of migratory and nesting birds, but not much has been done concerning big game animals. 
"It'll probably mean fewer deer," said Bill Jensen, Game and Fish big game biologist. "How exactly it will play out is yet to be seen though." 
Jensen notes over the past few years, there has been a shift to greater numbers in the mule deer population, a trend that he sees will reverse when the CRP acres decline. 
"Mule deer will probably be hit the hardest," Jensen said. "You'll probably see a shift back to whitetail and we will probably see lower numbers of both. 
"You can't stockpile deer&#8230;if CRP isn't going to be around, they probably aren't going to make it." 
One game bird that may actually benefit from the CRP change to cultivated land is the sharptail grouse. 
"Grouse like large expanses of grassland," Game and Fish upland game specialist Stan Kohn said. "They like to be in areas with native prairie or planted cover." 
Kohn said the game birds that will be most affected are turkey, pheasant and ducks. 
While the CRP was never originally intended to be a way to increase the wildlife population, it has been a welcome consequence of the program. This is especially true for those farmers and ranchers who have taken advantage of the recreational agriculture dollars that have come to North Dakota. 
"When CRP went in, it wasn't for wildlife, it was for soil erosion and water quality," Kohn said. "Now you look at it and because it has provided such good recreational income and created jobs. It's been a great boost to the economy." 
Kohn said it's hard to say which part of the state is going to be hit hardest by the loss of CRP acres, although he did say the regions where the most CRP is lost is probably a good place to start. 
"It's going to be a balancing act over the next few years and we need to keep an eye on it," Jensen said. "You can't overreact; you have to deal with it as it comes. 
"The wetlands in the southeastern part of the state will moderate the loss, but there is still going to be a loss of habitat that affects the numbers."


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

From what I'm hearing it will not even make 2012 if we have a drought. The world supply of grain is so short that if we have any weather scares they are going to allow early outs.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

we all knew is was coming, still it just seems so huge and devestating.
pay to hunt will be the only game in town...maybe cannonball will even close their doors. $10 wheat beats $10 roosters i am sure the landowners will see it that way too.


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Something to think about.

I think we all realize, as the global population grows, and demand for food production and alternative energy intensifies, more and more land will be utilized for crops and less will be left for habitat. Can anyone blame a landowner, for utilizing his resource in the way that the market dictates he can make the most return on his investment. The "free" wildlife, that he is not allowed to charge for, offers no economic incentive so it become secondary. The result - wildlife populations suffer and hunting opportunies disappear. This will creat more competition for lisences and tags on state and federal land. The net result will be fewer opportunities and less success as a hunter.

Enter game farms and preserves. The only privately owned productive farm and ranch land that will be managed with the specific purpose to produce game animals, will be where the producer has control of the production and receives an economic incentive by the ability to sell his production. Ironically there are some who want THIS opportunity to go away.

I believe we could well be seeing the end of an era. The global situation is changing rapidly, and hunting as we know it could soon be a thing that is very limited. I will be as disappointed as anyone else to see it disappear. I have been to third world countries where the population demands every inch of productive land to feed its people, and then its not enough. Hunting there is a none issue. I have seen the opportunistic attitude of immigrants to this country, who see our game and fish as a cheep if not free resource to be exploited.

I don't consider myself an alarmist but more of a realist. These changes may or maynot happen quickly. Current commodity prices will certainly stimulate rapid changes in production agriculture. I can still remember the pre CRP days when every farmer tried to farm every available acre. Hunting in ND in those days was nothing like what we've grown to enjoy.

I may be all wet, but maybe we should think twice before we do away with the game farms. Hunters and hunting are going to see some big changes in the future, maybe we shouldn't elimate this "opportunity" just yet.


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

*4590 said:*


> I have seen the opportunistic attitude of immigrants to this country, who see our game and fish as a cheep if not free resource to be exploited.


It is not only immigrants who have that attitude. Like maybe the commercializers. :wink:


----------



## jhegg (May 29, 2004)

*4590 said:*



> *I may be all wet, but maybe we should think twice before we do away with the game farms. Hunters and hunting are going to see some big changes in the future, maybe we shouldn't elimate this "opportunity" just yet.*


*4590: Yes, you are definitely all wet! *I, for one, will welcome elimination of the game farm hunting "opportunities". Lets put "hunting" back into the hunting experience. Game farms are nothing more than the exploitation of natural resources for personnal gain.

Your opinion of "anything for a buck" (perhaps I should gave said dollar - no pun intended) has no place in a hunting experience.

Jim Heggeness


----------



## 4590 (Jun 27, 2004)

Dick/Jhegg

Still amazed you can't see the difference between someone taking multiple limits of fish from DL and someone raising livestock for legitimate sale. I have never endorsed commercialization or exploitation of wildlife. Domestic livestock is completely different. 40 years of cervid farming in ND and now all of sudden we have a "crisis"??? Go figure!


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

> Game farms are nothing more than the exploitation of natural resources for personnal gain.


No jhegg you are the one that is all wet with that statement. What "natural resources are we exploiting? Farm raised livestock are not any part of your so called public trust. I always love reading posts from uninformed sponsors of this initiative measure. Show how weak you guys are.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

it will simply come down to a supply and demand situation. as CRP disappears, the only residual cover will be professionally managed as game preserves and the owners/operators will charge what the market will bear. no more free lunch, as most of us grew up enjoying. like most hobbies, bird hunting is about to become damn expensive and very limited. and that my friends, just plain sucks! :eyeroll:


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

The conservation provisions of the Farm Bill aren't handed down by God. They are decided by politicans who respond to the squeaking wheel. The sportsman-conservation wheel didn't squeak loud enough, (failure to organize), and CRP is lost. All loses by legislation are failure to organize and take action. 
Lesson: Join a conservation organization that speakes up and get involved. Like NOW!

Jim Posewitz reminded us that Texas has the largest land mass in the lower 48, a huge population, abundant wildlife, and a tiny per capita # of hunters. Because public wildlife is privateized there. Commercializers present you the Texas model like they are giving you a gift. Merry Christmas.
Lesson: Actively oppose the Texas model and commercialization here in ND. Do it before this cancer spreads.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

i live in Texas, it sucks to be a hunter here. i will not pay these ******** $2,000 a year for a quail lease. i drive to Kansas, SD and ND to hunt each season, before i will pay these pricks that kind of money!


----------



## FlashBoomSplash (Aug 26, 2005)

Loss of CRP and Pay farms is going to be the Death of the oldest and best traditions known to man. The Texas model is a perfect example. Soon there wont be any real hunters left. Anyone who pays to hunt is a poser. So when all of the do it yourself hunters are gone there will be no one left to fight for the right to hunt.

And the loss of CRP will kill small towns in ND. There wont be any reason for people to visit and spend there money. Do it yourself hunters have been fueling these small towns for the past 20 years. I keep hearing you cant blame the land owner. Well when there favorite small town bar shuts down or they go bankrupt because they paid to much money for a chunk of land or they lose all there top soil to erosion because they broke up some HEL land, then we can blame the land owner for poor management.

I will be the first to say some land should have never gone into CRP. But I will also be the first to say if you took a chunk of land out that was HEL or under 40-50% productive soil type you're DUMB.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

i agree. if the government wasn't so damn tight, they would have counties go back and assess what is really productive and what is not and highly erodable and keep the questionable ground in the program. but that would make sense........never happen.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Remember "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink" Even if a conservation minded farm program is developed with wheat and corn at their current prices it is unlikely you will get much participation because in all likelyhood no federal program isn't going to or can afford to match crop prices. I still think it is a bit early to predict doom and gloom. It's gonna take a few years for crop prices to bottom out again and get farmers interested in such programs again but it will happen. It will make for some lean times for hunters in between but for those of us who grew up in lean times it won't be anything new. We'll just have to work a little harder for less. If we can't save the CRP it would be nice to see a program that would support a grassland buffer around wetlands though. Even a 100' strip of grassland around the wetlands would make a noticable impact. Unfortunately we will likely struggle just to save the wetlands much less anything around them.


----------



## angus 1 (Jan 14, 2007)

Look on the bight side. For years we landowners have had subsidies shoved in our noses by the hunters. Now you don't have to worry about your tax dollars paying for crp you can't hunt, since there will be no crp or very little anyway. High crop prices are also a + no more price supports. This also brings up the price of land . This will help curb the out of stater from coming in and buying land for hunting. Just look on the bright side.


----------



## FlashBoomSplash (Aug 26, 2005)

angus

I would never shove any subsidies like CRP in any land owners face and I think that goes for most people who care about the environment. CRP benefits everyone even if you're not a hunter. That is what I am more concerned about then anything. They say GO GREEN :rollin: Not only did ethanol destroy thousands of acres of CRP. It released huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere every time a plow was drug across the ground. And the real kicker is ethanol uses fresh water which we have less fresh water reserves than Oil and the emissions are worse from ethanol. OH ya the gas mileage isnt as good as oil either.


----------



## angus 1 (Jan 14, 2007)

ethanol I think is a fad.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

oh it's definitely a fad, unfortunately perpetuated by the government.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

goodbye CRP...


----------



## Rick Fode (Sep 26, 2004)

It's all about the money, it always has and always will. I've been saying this economic development that Hoeven has been preaching was BS from the start. CRP will be a great loss and I don't like it but farmers and blue collar tax payers keep the small towns going not NR hunters and the Guides that disgrace the heritage we have grown up with. Small towns will not suffer with 12 dollar wheat, land prices are crazy and some farmers have been getting it both ways for a long time, they put some rock infested land that couldn't pull 20bu/acre wheat in a perfect year into CRP, they get a check, they hay a pretty good chunk of it and get another check, they post it and let some city slicker come and slaughter everything and guess what, another check, I grew up in a farming family and yes we post all of our land, we allow hunters in certain places when we aren't hunting and never received a dime for it, the 100's of thousands of trees we planted when we were kids, never a cent, it boils down to greed and our Governor has a lot to do with it.


----------



## fargojohnson (Oct 17, 2005)

Don't forget to vote.


----------



## g/o (Jul 13, 2004)

Early outs are starting to happen, talked with a guy today whose contacts expire this fall. He is pulling out now, he pays half of last years payment and all of this years. He will be paying $60.00 an acre basically which is cheap. I'm reading lots of pressure on Washington to let everyone out early, if that happens it will be gone in a year or two.


----------



## Nick Roehl (Mar 7, 2002)

If you guys think these crop prices are going to last you are mistaken. It's just a cycle. Ethanol is far from the end all. There are plants that are half built and no money to finish them.

Rick Fode hit it on the nose.

And g/o is still lost in his own backwards world.
:withstupid:


----------



## FlashBoomSplash (Aug 26, 2005)

You know whats worse than breaking CRP breaking Native prairie/pasture. And it is being broken at an alarming rate. Where is all the hippies when you need them. Probably to stoned to see what is happening. Say good bye to all the endangered prairie wildlife that depend on this fragile eco system.


----------



## dogdoc (Oct 31, 2004)

While not as good as the current CRP, the continuous CRP sign-up is an alternative. It's not as hard to qualify for as the regular CRP and may be the answer. Practice CP24 Cross Wind Trap Strips provide strips of cover about 25-30 feet wide to help trap blowing snow on fields. I know it's not likely as good as the regualr CRP, but it does provide good hatching and brood cover for pheasants in southwest North Dakota. I shoot a lot of birds out of these in that area every year. The only problem is getting the rental rate to compete with the current commodity prices. A ten year sign-up is a good hedge against the volitiliy of commodity pices.


----------

