# Get Rid of CRP



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Everyone complaining out there about G/Os, NRs and not enough land to hunt just call your Representatives and Senators and tell them to get rid of CRP!

You may think just because you live in ND you have a divine right to all of the game your state has to offer.

Remember way back when before CRP!

Other than a period in the 1970s The ducks were not doing so great!

When I was in high school I applied 3 years in eastern ND for a Deer licenses and did not receive one. Where did all of the Deer come from?

Should we talk about pheasants? Before CRP almost everyone had to travel west of Bismark to get into ok hunting. Now its great across the whole southern part of the state and out west its fantastic! Is that just because we have had mild winters?

The biggest reason for more GAME, G/Os, NRs, and a pile of whining is 
CRP!

Get rid of the farm welfare that keeps your state afloat and and you will see a reduction of all of the above.

Where do you think all of that Federal money to pay for CRP comes from? 
Surely you don't think that ND with its insignificant and declining population of around 600,000 pays for this. One county in MN has more people than your entire state.

The problem is not NRs its Outfitters! Controll them and alot of the problems will go away.

Park


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Jeez, with all the answers how come you couldn't save Minnesota.

If ya didn't drain all the wetlands, you wouldn't have to worry about what was going on in ND, or any other state for that matter.

NR dollars have saved ND, we owe it all to you. THANKS


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Brad

Intellegent resopnse, did you have to think along time about it?

By the way I have not drained any wetlands.

And as far as saving Mn I would like to.

Did you know that there use to be alot of wetlands in the Red River Valley?

Where are they now ? Did you drain them?

Probably not they were drained because the land was to valuable for farming which is the case for MN.

How many bushels of corn do you get in the Red River Valley?

How many bushels of corn do you get out by Jamestown?

Try to think before you respond.
Park


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Go back to school Park!! This crap has been hashed and rehashed here for well over a year, your arguments are full of holes and flaws and you want just to rial up the water again. :roll:

Just go back even a month or so and you can read all you want on this dead horse!! dd:


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

You really don't have a clue do you.

Hunters owe the good hunting in ND to the farmers. If it wasn't for a couple of farmers who don't sell out to commercial interests and allow freelancers to hunt, we wouldn't even have the opportunity. Regardless of CRP, dirt fields, sloughs or stubble, if the farmer won't let you hunt, it really doesn't matter now does it.

Your ignorance is displayed by your lack of reasoning. Try to look outside the box for a change. Cause or consequence.

ND is one of the last places a person can freelance successfully. Some would like to think we owe it all to NR, the truth is if it wasn't for the few farmers who let us enjoy our sport, we would have nothing.


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Brad 
AND the farmer owes his livelyhood to the tax payer!
Why do you think the farmer still owns his land..... The almighty Federal Tax $$. If it was not for the farm program many farmers would be in Fargo looking for work. Have you ever heard of the "Buffalo Commons".

This post was meant to be tongue in cheek to show everything in this country is interconnected. I do not want them to get rid of CRP. It has been a blessing to wildlife.

Should you have any more rights to the bounty of this land just because you live on the right side of a river?

Should Florida say how many people can come and enjoy the beeches in the winter?

Should we able to limit the number of poeple who come to Minnesota to enjoy our lakes?

Discrimination is discrimination no matter how you want to justify it.

I thought in America all men were equal. I guess that does not apply to NR Hunters.
Park


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Redleg

What holes and flaws-There facts.
Kick your brain in gear and elaborate please.
Park


----------



## Eric Hustad (Feb 25, 2002)

:lame:


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

Kind of reminds me of the Mother in law that won't mind her own business when it comes to your marriage.


----------



## gaddyshooter (Oct 12, 2003)

This has got to be the most beaten dead horse ever. Once again, It is THEIR state and yes states have the right to govern the use of the resources within the state. Once again if you don't like to follow the rules the state has adopted, stay home and stop whinin' like a little kid.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Brad Anderson said:


> Hunters owe the good hunting in ND to the farmers. If it wasn't for a couple of farmers who don't sell out to commercial interests and allow freelancers to hunt, we wouldn't even have the opportunity. Regardless of CRP, dirt fields, sloughs or stubble, if the farmer won't let you hunt, it really doesn't matter now does it.
> 
> Your ignorance is displayed by your lack of reasoning. Try to look outside the box for a change. Cause or consequence.
> 
> ND is one of the last places a person can freelance successfully. Some would like to think we owe it all to NR, the truth is if it wasn't for the few farmers who let us enjoy our sport, we would have nothing.


Brad, finally I can agree with one of your posts. 8) This is where it's at park. Read it twice if you have to.


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Private land is private land. Public land is public land. Don't get the 2 confused.

The farmer owes his livelyhood to sweat and hard work, not the federal gov't. Next time you ask for permission to hunt, tell the landowner he owes his livelyhood to the federal gov't. See what kinda response you get.


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

park

Your are probably right CRP did help. Where is your CRP?Oh thats right you have more people in one county than our entire state.No room for CRP. YOUR PROBLEM not ours.Why dont you try a new tactic to improve your state? Birthcontrol, lower the population and the number of farms and you will have all kinds of room for CRP.Go ahead and Piss off the farmers with attitude and they will post up thier land so tight that North Dakota could issue 100 licences and you would have trouble finding land to hunt.


----------



## curty (Sep 18, 2003)

Also I am not against NRs at all it just seems nobody is looking at the big picture and is willing to bash than to talk sensibly.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Park will get his wish and CRP will be gone inside of 8 years. Simple economics will revert the land back to farm land and the current native grass will go the way of the plow. While I am not agreeing with Park he underscores why it is do important for ND to handle theirs issue properly and soon.

I have aside this before but ethanol will be the biggest bite into wildlife in the Dakota's since the last drought. To many people have bought into the farce that you can create energy by converting grains to fuel. When this happens the supply will go down and the prices will go up and the land will be worth more in corn than grass lands.

Then the GO will have cornered the last available land and all freelance hunters will be frozen out. Guys like Park will never see that until it bites them in the butt. Then it will be to late and the cry will be why did they not stop this from happening.

OUT!


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

Seriously *LAME*! Just starting up the same issue we debated over for about a month! Park read his Brad's post again without ignorance and see how it reads! To say that the farmers owe their livelyhood to tax payers is one of the most dimwitted things I have herd! Why don't you slap them in the face instead? Seriously would love to see you say that to a farmers face and see what kind of a reaction you would get! Even one in your home state! I I can pretty much bet he would throw you off his land, and no I didn't think long on this one!!

Brad .."Your my boy, blue!" If he only new!!! I think he wouldn't have opened his mouth like that!

Mav....


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

MAV.

Why did the farmer get two mail boxes?

So he could get two Goverment Checks.

Let supply and demand rule and see how many farmers there are left in 5 years.

Farming is a job, a way to make living. In in some peoples minds it is has become a RIGHT for a family farmer to make profit.

If your local Grocer,Insurance salesman, Car dealer, Doctor, Nurse, Carpenter, Plumber, Electrician, (you get ther idea) is not making any money, he or she will find a new way to make living they WILL NOT EXPECT THE FEDERAL GOVERMENT TO BAIL THEM OUT!

And yes many people farming today do owe thier livelyhood to the Tax Payor.Every thing from subsidies to CRP to low intrest loans. Due you think that the farmer could really make it on his own without this Gov. help? Now who's kidding who?

Mav-I have made this argument to some farmers and maybe you should ask them about this because I definatly didn't get the reaction you would expect. And no they didn't slap me in the face.

What new things are you going to call me? I kind of liked dimwitted.

But this is getting off the subject, The problem is not NR's its Outfitters.
Regulate them like you do licquor licenses allowing only so many that can lease only so much land and not hunt any other and you eliminate alot of the problem.

Have Great Day
Park


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Park...your'e half right and half wrong....We have 2 problems here....G/O leasing is the major problem...

BUT when our GNF does a study and comes out with a plan on the total number of hunters THEY think is right for the available habitat...then NR are also a problem.In other words they are saying ...even if there was no leasing...According to them...there must be restrictions put on how many people can hunt here.

Their data shows how many TOTAL hunters is acceptable...then subract the number of resident hunters from that total....the number left is how many NR can come here.

This is what all of us are going by when we say there needs to be a limit on NR hunters...What else makes more sense???


----------



## Bert (Sep 11, 2003)

Park,
Sounds to me as though you have a real problem with farmers.
Probably have a problem with anybody who makes a living partially from tax dollars.
There is an ilk like you who need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Start listing all of the professions where tax dollars pay salaries.
Now think about those professions as if they were private industry and think about how different things would be... how much they would cost you as an individual.
CRP was dreamed up by the Federal Government. It wasnt 5 guys in bib overalls sitting in a cafe. There are reasons why they did it. There are reasons why they created "soil bank" (basically CRP) in the late 50s early 60s. There are reasons why CRP has lasted as long as it has.
Farmers will utilize CRP. They would be bad businessmen if they didnt. It is not however welfare as you call it. They could plow everything black again but then, in the eyes of guys like you, they would be jerks too.
Tell ya what. Why dont you go buy a couple of sections of land, pay taxes on it and then volunteer to take it out of production?
If you are so much more intelligent than the branch of the Federal Government that makes these decisions, why dont you do us all a favor and run for office?


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Park,

In some ways I agree with you. Without Gov't involvement and tinkering with the market system (almost a necessity, since most if not all other major competing countries do so also) US Agriculture and the related ND economy would surely suffer. It is ironic, then, when some of the most ardent hunting "commercializers", who are directly benefited by the non-market ND ag. system, stand on a soap box demanding that the ND hunting world be left to the forces of a free market system.

O/g's are certainly a problem today. Left unchecked, someday they will be the biggest problem, as they will have become essentially single source providers, ala many other parts of the country.

But we currently have another major problem, and that's unchecked demand from NR's, freelancers and pay hunters. It's this demand and the related competition that sends waterfowl packing early and drives folks into o/g's and makes them feel they need to secure some peace and exclusivity through buy/lease/day-lease. After one round of o/g/lease/buy exclusivity-seeking, those remaining are displaced onto even less land and compete further with themselves and the seemingly endless supply of new comers; the process fuels itself and intensifies.

As in agriculture (and steel, and lumber, and...), quality hunting in ND for the average person will not be saved without altering market forces. In this case we need a cooling of demand by caps and other restrictions on NR hunters that will both directly preserve the quality of hunting intra-season by keeping hunter-days under control and tolerable, and inter-season by discouraging the rush to exclusivity.

This coming from a right-leaning sort. But, it seems to be the case - without intervention to cool demand, we are probably no more than a decade or so away from Texas-style hunting. If that occurs, and the less-hunters-using-more-land model is fully implemented, many who supported the unrestricted expansion of ND hunting (even NR numbers) as if it were a money-printing machine without consequence, will be left with less than when this whole process started. Big winners: some landowners and the relatively very small o/g industry. Big losers: rural main street, urban main street, ND employers and the state as a whole.

It's unpopular today in some ND business circles to talk of turning away any business. But, if we look past the end of our noses at what is inevitable, restricting NR hunters is the only way to sustain and maximize all that hunting means to ND for several more generations. Sometimes less is more, at least in the long term.


----------



## tsodak (Sep 7, 2002)

Dont repress your emotions Coot, just let it out man..... say what you feel.......

ROFLMFAO!!!!!!!!


----------



## administrator (Feb 13, 2002)

Keep the personal attacks in check guys. I don't want to see this get out of hand.


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

Dan, thanks for your well thought-out reasonable response.


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

Saying farmers do nothing but collect welfare checks and attacking the very people who are the ones that grant access to sportsmen is not the way to solve a land access problem. Maybe you think it works in Minnesota but not here.

Someone needs to explain to these Minnesota yahoos that hunting in their state sucks and it is because of the way their resource was managed. Now they want to come here and tell us in ND how to run things. Why would we want to listen. Doing so would just make ND like Minnesota and hunting would then suck here too. No thanks.

You also show your lack of knowledge, park, on the importance CRP has for nesting waterfowl, but I guess I shouldn't expect a Minnesotan to know anything about waterfowl because your state has next to none.

cootkiller


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

..


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

I think we should lobby to have the CRP land converted to PLOTS land if it is phased out of the farm bill.

Park if you want to pay $20 for a hamburger or $15 for a loaf of bread maybe we should eliminate the farm program, you know the farmers of this country feed the world. I used to be one of them a long time ago but my father told me to go to college and make something of myself, so I did.

The farmers of this country that are in the generation of my father were from the WW II era they served their country and returned to the farm after. they did not have the education that is available today, so the eeked out a living farming because they knew how to farm.

Todays farmers are a whole different breed they are educated and they have to be to keep up with todays farming technology. Most of the farmers that I know today have a wife that works in town to make ends meet and some of the guys take jobs in town over the winter.

Do you know if a farmer takes out Federal crop insurance and is hailed out the insurance payment usually does not even cover the cost of planting the crop. Is it the farmers fault that prices for everything we buy is increasing, who is making the money? it is the people in the middle, not the farmer. there are some farmers that do very well, but I would venture to guess that they are a minority.

The next time you take a bite of your sandwitch think about everything that went into getting that sandwitch to your mouth, it may just give you a new outlook. or maybe not I have put in my two cents worth

Have a good one.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Hey guys take the total amount of farm income in the US and compare it to the total of amount of crp payments and you will see the farmers are not dependent on any one but them selves.

As far as crp effecting food prices I don't think it has much impact, goto a mcdonalds in newyork and you will see what I mean.

To say any farmer that has devoted his life to raising a family on a farm has eeked out a living is absurd, but I guess we all judge quality of life differently.

I think it is very disrepectful to tell the men and women who have been feeding this country they are uneducated and cannot compete with other countries. Learn about foreign trade and you may get an understanding of how our government controls food.


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Farmers are the reason this country became what is is today. We were able to feed all the people and then some. Sure manufacturing and the service industry helped, but it all comes back to agriculture. Where did all the food come from??

Something so basic, yet totally taken for granted.


----------



## Rangers (Dec 13, 2003)

Speaking of Govt. Farm Subsidies, ever visit that site shows how much gets paid out to beet growers in the RRV. That's an eye opener. And they don't seem to care if your from MN or ND everybody gets their fair share, no border war on this point.


----------



## nilsmaster (Sep 26, 2003)

It's scary Ron that CRP is on target to be gone in 8 years. I read through all the posts of old and new about farmers and subsidies. It urks me that you (Park) forget that the pasta you just picked up at the grocery store is only .99 cents. In the big picture it is not the farmer that is subsidized it is the consumer. Cheap food is created from controlled markets and the "gracious luring" of welfare systems. The phrase "don't slap the hand that feeds you" comes to mind. You know, I never said anything bad about the Minnesota Twins and now I can't watch them on TV. A controlled market that will do good or worse? To be determined...


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

ALLAS PARKS you are wrong again! I never called you dimwitted, I said that was one of the most dimwitted thing I have herd. Again you read it wrong, kind of like Brad's post, and proving my point. As for what you have to say about farmers, does EVERY SINGLE famer have 2 mail boxes? *NO*! Now you are generaizing them all! Which is half yor problem, not all farmers are like that. So if we stop our subsidiaries in america for all the famers what does that do for the farmers. makes them weaker when it comes to foreign trades. They don't have the $ to keep up with the rest of the world! So let's stop all the subsidiaries in all of the world and see how many people farm? 
And your still wrong when you say they owe their livelyhood to the tax payer's!! That's like saying when I get my ferderal check back from the goverment that I owe that money to the taxpayer! Well guess what I am a taxpayer so I owe it to me! You must be forgetting that farmers are taxpayers also!
By you typing that you have made this arguement to some farmers, I type then that I have and they gave me a much different answer than you got!
You are 100% correct when you say it's the Outfitter's that are the problem! I have been saying that since 1990. When my area of hunting was completely leased up (250,000 acres)! I never disagreed on that issue for one minute! Hell I hunted with 3 MN boys this weekend! One of which is a good friend! Do I want to keep them out?NO? I just don't want to have to pay money to hunt here!

Mav....

Ohhhh some times I wonder.....


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Nils I think you miss my point. I am not in favor of CRP being gone nor am I opposed to the subsidy of the farmers. I am opposed to the window dressing of ethanol to disguised more or new subsidization that will negatively affect the wetlands in the PPR.

The Farm Program over the last 50 years is the number one contributor to the destruction of our wetlands and loss of native grass lands in the Dakota's and other states. The program is broken and needs fixing, that is not the same as saying get rid of the Farm subsidies.

The most blatant back peddling is in the SWampbuster provisions that Dashle authored from SD then he along with Dorgan and Conrad have systematical gutted with underfunding of enforcement and watering down of the definitions of a wetland to allow the wetland to be farmed or drained. ND has chosen to *opt out * of the Swamp-buster provision that restricts payments if wetlands where drained. No state should have had the option to do this and not lose Fed program money designated to protect our wetlands. Once again the reason the program is broken and needs fixing.

Having grown up in SE central ND I saw huge amounts of this happen and it is still happening. The program encourages the farmers to seek the new acres instead of compensating them for protecting them. That is why as I stated before it will boil down to economics. The farmer will seek the best return for the acre he can. It will be from the Gov program or the market, but one thing remains the same that 5 acre wetland makes them little or no money so it needs to go or they need to be paid-ed to protect it.

Then one better look to the sate of the federal government spending commitment and see where Sen and Reps from non AG states are going to want to fund CRP in the future with SS and other social programs are demanding almost 70% of the tax revenue that will be generated and see if it sits high on a priority list.

Dorgan and the boys are looking at ethanol as a way to continue to support the Farm Programs in the future tying it to ethanol knowing the nations thirst for gas. Without this tangible as the population change takes with more and more leaving the rural settings and farms getting bigger and the disconnect to farming that is occurring. Tax dollars for farm bills will grow less and less popular and in the end be eliminated. I have listen to many debates and read a tremendous amount of documents that have crafted and shaped these bills over the years. Reality is that the Farm Bill is not a high priority to most of Wash politicians and will become less and less over the course of time.

The farm program does not provide us with cheap food. The cost of bread and meat would be lower on average if imports of Ag products had not been restricted. Look at sugar and flour and other high consumption commodities and you will see this for yourself. Once again I am only pointing out something not endorsing it.


----------



## nilsmaster (Sep 26, 2003)

Ron,

I was agreeing with you. Just drove by some very good pheasant country back home and about 200 acres of CRP has been broken up in an area I like to hunt. The profit of farming it had increased to the point that no matter how much the guy (good friend) wanted to keep it in (although he was turned down when submitting it) the difference between CRP and farming it became too different.

As for my comment on "welfare relief" to farmers keeping food prices down I was throwing out my thoughts and no doubt need factual statistical backbone. Never the less, it just seems cheap food exists because people in america would rather pay for cheap foreign grain or food products to save their dollar. When this happens the farmer here in the states has to settle with a "competitive" price which has continued to plummet while the costs to raise that product have continued to increase. To compensate, farmers have to take wetlands out of production and when the price of beef was so bad farmers who did both ranch and farm started selling cows and busting grasslands up. Scary.

I didn't miss your point I just didn't say I got it I guess. I was agreeing with you and if anything I got you to respond back with more info. I like info. Perhaps my thinking on the prices of cheap food is flawed but it makes sense to me. Markets make a lot go round. As a farmboy I'd gladly pay more for my food product as long as the farmer here in the states made his fair share on it. If so, the subsidies needed could be related only to disaster and releated issues. Leaving more "reward" money for wetland protection and CRP keep sake. Of course, I usually state things that are "crap in the one hand and wish in the other and see which fills up first" defined.

This ethanol stuff is hard for me to grasp. So much economic numbers that get thrown into it and the bad part is all those economic numbers rely on pure "perfect scenerio" conditions. We all know such occurances never happen. Just like everything else I suppose it's Bush's fault...hee hee hee.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Nils I missed your intent when I went back and read your post again I got it. Don't tell the wife I miss things know and then as I am trying to keep here believing me that I am always Right! :beer:


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Dan B. Ken W. And Ron Gilmore

Thanks for the responses.
You are obviously poeple that use your minds and not just your emotions.
I agree with just about every thing you said and encourage everyone to go back and read your responses.
Thanks again
Park


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Mav

You are correct you didn't call me dimwitted. I stand corrected.

I was just trying to make a point when I brought up the old joke about the 2 mail boxes.

The point is that maybe its time for the family farm to go the way of the buggy and horse carraige.

Ask yourself these questions and I know your not the one that said food prices would go up but please think about them anyway.

What was the price of the last TV you bought?
How much was your last long distance phone bill?
How much did you pay for your last plane ticket?

Right or wrong prices always come down with deregulation and compitition? Supply and demand. Will alot farmers go out of business if we eliminated subsidies? Absolutly. Is the playing fied fair across the world - no way. But why is the farmer any different the the guy who lost his job because they are making TVs in Mexico and Aisa now? That feild wasn't fair either. This is just one example there are many others. Would the loss of the family farmer and subsidies hurt hunting and wildlife? I think so.

Should we have subsidised TV's Clothing, electronics in general or anyone 
of a number of other industries to keep them here? Why is the farmer any different?

If you get a check back from the goverment that is not a subsidie its a refund because you had too much withheld from your pay. Thats not bright. Why would you want to loan your money to the Gov. interest free for a year? You might want to get yourself educated on that one.

SUBSIDIES are NOT REFUNDS.

Have great day
Park


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

Cost of Technology?

And now you are comparing TV and electronics to hunting? Maybe yes we should have made them subsidised other industries out there. Industries could fight over the quality of their work instead of the quantity of thier work!
If we get rid of CRP we will be losing nesting grounds for YOU to come HERE to hunt?
Try saving your own state before worrying about OURS! Or move here!
If you had done that years ago there wouldn't be a law suit from the state of MN against the state on ND?

True Subsidies are not refunds but you cannot denny that you are eating the food that they grow for us!Maybe you should educate your self on that?
Try growing your own food and not being a consumer. See how easy it is!



> Posted: 04 May 2004 03:41 Post subject:
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...


 Posted: 01 May 2004 04:15 Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



> Brad
> 
> Intellegent resopnse, did you have to think along time about it?


Talk about acting on emotion?

Whatever I'm done with this topic...
I'm not worried about deregulation and competition I'm looking out for the natural resource!
Without it we don't get the chance to hunt...

Mav....


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

Mav, some people don't understand.

Getting back to the subject, farmers own the land and LET people hunt.


----------



## nilsmaster (Sep 26, 2003)

park,

It's different because the ag industry in the U.S. is one of the largest and in North Dakota it's how the state remains afloat. You can't compare apples to oranges. If you want to compare TV's to farming then just think about this. Just like the electronics to vehicles in this country could farming in the U.S. end up controlled by the cheap foreign control? Soon it will be large multinational / international corporation farms. Do you think they will give a hoot about a blade of grass or drop of water? However, they'll have the pull because you can't survive not eating but now it seems that people can't survive without a TV...so what's the difference right. Sad what the country is coming too. Not what we want is it? I was just putting it into a consumer perspective when it comes to subsidies. Ask many farmers around if they are infavor of them. The answer is, "yeah we need them at times, but we'd rather not be stuck to depending on them".


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

park,
I think some of us would like to know your name or at least you vehicle license plate number. So that when you come to ND to hunt becasue MN hunting sucks a$$ we will know exactly who it is that is asking and we can then go back to this thread.

I am sure you will get a whole lot of land access from farmers that you have basically called free loaders and have publicly said that you could care less if they go out of business and sell to the big corporate farm. Oh yeah, I am sure you will get loads of farm access............NOT!

cootkiller


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Park...you just don't understand the importance of food. It must be trivial to you but about two thirds of the people on this planet have alot of concern for food.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

buckseye is right about the importance of food. The level of ag subsidies in the US is amazing and frustrating. However, eliminating them would require us to pay a fair market price for our food. That would make food unaffordable for many, leaving people hungry. One of the first things a government does to keep a content citizenry is to keep them fed. When people are hungry they get ornery, and revolutions start in countries that let this happen.

Food production is also linked to national security. I know a guy who had a German exchange student on his farm a few years ago. This kid's family lived on a 200 hectare farm in Germany (that's about 400 acres) and could afford to hire hands to do most of the work. This kid never had to do work at all (couldn't even drive a tractor), and his dad was simply the farm manager who directed the foreman. How could a family live so well on 200 hectares? The answer is because all of their inputs (seed, fertilizer, fuel, etc) were subsidized. Why? Because lots of Germans still remember WWII when the country ran out of food. Germans realize that depending on foreign suppliers of food is linked directly to national security, and they want to make sure that their growers will produce enough food to feed the citizens.

Let's be honest, however. People of my generation (Generation X) or the baby boomers have for the most part never been hungry in the US. Ask the folks who lived through the 30s how much they valued food.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Right On BigDaddy....great post. One of the reasons we still have the thirty's mentality about food is because many or most of the high level advisors to our politicians were around back then. We are lucky to have their experience and direction.


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Mav you said

"True Subsidies are not refunds but you cannot denny that you are eating the food that they grow for us!Maybe you should educate your self on that? 
Try growing your own food and not being a consumer. See how easy it is!"

I have news for you, I turned on my heat this morning and got all warm and fuzzy using coal fired electricity that was produced in MN but the coal was mined in ND. I don't think I will try to grow-- opps I mean produce my own Electricity in fact maybe I will let Detroit to continue producing the cars I drive and the foriegners produce most of the cloths I wear.

And by the way Mav I am a native ND in fact I have lived most of my 44 years there. Just moved over to MN a few ago so I haven't had a chance to save it yet.

The hunting in MN is different but I wouldn't say it sucks seeing how they kill about 3 times as many deer as ND. And guess who kills the most Geese. Its not ND! Lets not mention Ruffed grouse either.

Park


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Buckseye,

I do understand the importance of food but I also realize that most of the world doesn't have a free market system that we do. Supply and demand always produces the lowest prices and generaly the best deal for consumers.
So just because food is important does not mean that the capitalist free market sytem will drive up prices in fact it will lower them.

How does this relate to wildlife? I do not think it would be possitve but whos to say what is right or wrong? Cheaper food for the poor or more ducks for you and me to shoot.

Park


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

And now you are comparing electricity to hunting?
You know PARKS your right about everything you say..or atleast you think you are?
your confidence amuses me!
and your age confuses me?
and ignorance bores me!
Blah blah bla..

If you forgot this website is about hunting and fishing, not the price of food!



> The hunting in MN is different but I wouldn't say it sucks seeing how they kill about 3 times as many deer as ND. And guess who kills the most Geese. Its not ND! Lets not mention Ruffed grouse either.


I never said the hunting sucks in MN? Why did you assume that I did? The fact about MN killing more deer is true also. Were you including how many were taken with cars? True ND doesn't kill the most geese ( but I don't really care who does as long as I have a few day out of a year where the crew can still get togethor and pound a few, I am happy)( That's what people like myself and other's on this website are trying to preserve) As for Ruffed Grouse...Umm Hungarian Partridge are just as good!!

Mav....
Have a Nice Day!!


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

The quality of hunting in ND is great. We don't have 1,000,000's of people competing for the same game. Who cares who shoots the most game. I certainly don't. If I can have a quality hunt, without having to give somebody money, that is what it's all about. I've seen on TV how you city boyz hunt, what a complete joke. Hunting clubs and lodges are the most ridiculous organizations.

Economics, supply and demand, money... you city boys all think alike. Think "outside the box" for a change. Some of the school books don't apply out here.

The upcoming elections will be interesting. Hunting has already been at the forefront of the political debates. The people of ND will speak...


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2004)

Mav, I remember you posted about all the geese you saw in MN when you went to school or something, it was a long time ago. Buy a N/R license and stamp and hunt with us here!! See what it's like, have some fun, party it up, then decide what it's like hunting here. I can't see MN as having the highest Goose slaying #, how the hell does that happen??? :lol:


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

ND won't do anything to hurt it's enonomy, further NR restrictions are unlikely after what has already developed.


----------



## snowflake (Apr 2, 2004)

Yea Mav, buy that N.R. license here and hunt w/us jackpine savages up here in the N. country,and we won't even care where you're from.I guess we still have plenty to go arround,and will have for some time because of Mn.'s superior game management program run by someone that actually goes hunting,etc.Youall have some damn yuppie moron doing his thing w/out regard of who's toes he's steppin' on!Keep the c.r.p. program going even if it costs an extra $2 or so on lic. fees etc.,crp is critical habitat to loose.


----------



## Brad Anderson (Apr 1, 2002)

JSM, don't worry. You won't be voting in ND's upcoming elections. 8)


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Another thread gone south :eyeroll:


----------



## cootkiller (Oct 23, 2002)

I agree gg, happy trails to another conversation that started out ok.

I still say we would have better conversations here if everyone went by the age old saying

"It is better to keep your mouth shut and let people THINK that you are a pointy headed, L.L. Bean wearing, raised pinky tea sipping, yuppie, suburban idiot, then to open it and REMOVE ALL DOUBT."

cootkiller

(NOTE: I do not think that all suburban dwellers are idiots, just the ones that try to tell us boys out here on the prairie how to take care of said prairie.)


----------



## james s melson (Aug 19, 2003)

I agree, the topic went sour, at least another "old saying" was used without being screwed up and having to be edited by its author.


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

I would be glad to show you guys where some birds are at in your own state! I am really serious about it this year! Although is the limit 1 or 2 this year in MN? and how about the early season?

ANY time anybody's wants to go out hunting, they know how to reach me!
Always in the mood to hunt with some one new!

Mav...


----------



## northdakotakid (May 12, 2004)

Park,

We do have a right over you to hunt. BUt we openly accept non-residents to join us. If you feel you need to hunt here that strongly, move here...earn the right to hunt by paying state taxes, by providing something worth while to society...heck...even try to understand how the state economy is linked to the national economy and how it is controlled by the world econonmy. We need farmers to have some help, have you ever tried to understand how the Ag Economy works. Do you understand why farmers get upset when we allow Canadian wheat to come across the border because they can get a better price here or gain control over the price by flooding the market?

Your ignorance is only elevated by your inablilty to show any sort of compassion for the vary people that supply you with the luxury..thats right the luxury, not the right.... to use their lands. In no place in the Constitution or any other Civil Document does it state that you have the right to come here and hunt..you can bear arms but that will not get you very far.

You are so worried about your individual rights that you fail to see the greater good or the higher right. You are the typical self-loathing individual that we would prefer not to have enter our state. You make great outdoorsman from Min. and any other non-resident look bad. PLEASE SPARE US YOUR $100 DOLLARS...........there are plenty of respectable non-residents to take oyur place.


----------



## Ryan_Todd (Apr 11, 2004)

hey mav, last season the limit was 2 during the reg season and 5 during the early and late season. but the dnr screwed it up during the early season by letting hunters hunt the geese on water. on opening day at shooting time there was about 5 minutes of war and most of the roosts were wrecked. the geese were so skittish after being jumped off of every roost that a lot of them just left the area. 
hopefully this fall they change it back to only hunting on land during the early season. leave the roosts alone!!


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

ND KID
You said
:eyeroll: Your ignorance is only elevated by your inablilty to show any sort of compassion for the vary people that supply you with the luxury..thats right the luxury, not the right.... to use their lands. In no place in the Constitution or any other Civil Document does it state that you have the right to come here and hunt..you can bear arms but that will not get you very far.

You are so worried about your individual rights that you fail to see the greater good or the higher right. You are the typical self-loathing individual that we would prefer not to have enter our state. You make great outdoorsman from Min. and any other non-resident look bad. PLEASE SPARE US YOUR $100 DOLLARS...........there are plenty of respectable non-residents to take oyur place.

When did I ever say I had a right? Have you ever read the constitution?
Did you actually read my posts?Your not judgmental are you? You don't know me and now your making all of these accusations and putting words in my mouth. Who is the ingnorant one?

Park
PS: try reading the 14th amendment


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Park
What the He!! does the 16th Amendment have to do with CRP and Farm Subsidies, Do you feel you are overtaxed? or do you think that your taxes are paying and supporting a "Farm Welfare State"? If that is how you feel don't pay your taxes, maybe they will let you have a computer in prison so you can still post your dumb a$$ views on the forum.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

ND 2003 Crop & Livestock Production Rank Among Sta
3/3/2004 -- Farmers and ranchers in the state maintained North Dakota's #1 ranking in the production of spring and durum wheat, barley, canola, pinto and navy beans, dry edible peas, flaxseed and sunflower in 2003 compared to other states. Oat production in North Dakota moved to first place in 2003, up from fourth place last year. North Dakota remained the second highest all wheat producing state in 2003, behind Kansas

2003 Total Value of ND Crop Production
2/13/2004 -- The total value of 2003 crop production in ND is estimated at $3.54 billion, up 23 percent from the 2002 total of $2.89 billion. The increase in total value is due in part to a combination of higher price levels and/or an increase in production for selected commodities. This is the highest value of crop production on record, since records began in 1924

ND Farm Numbers Decline
2/27/2004 -- The number of farms and ranches in North Dakota during 2003 is estimated at 30,300, down from the revised 30,500 in 2002. All land in farms totaled 39.4 million acres, which has remained the same since 1999

North Dakota Honey Production
2/27/2004 -- Honey production in 2003 from North Dakota producers with five or more colonies totaled 29.58 million pounds, up 23 percent from 2002. North Dakota dropped to second place position in total honey production, just behind California, which produced 32.16 million pounds

2002 North Dakota Cash Receipts
10/2/2003 -- Cash receipts in North Dakota from farm marketings and government payments in 2002 were down 7.2 percent from 2001. Crops accounted for 69.3 percent of total cash receipts, livestock accounted for 20.1 percent and government payments 10.6 percent. Crop receipts rose 13.0 percent from 2001, while livestock receipts were down less than one half of one percent. Total government payments fell 59.6 percent from 2001

2002 North Dakota Farm Income
10/2/2003 -- Net farm income for North Dakota in 2002 totaled $605 million, down 9 percent from 2001 and 37 percent from 2000. Value of Agricultural Production for the state totaled $3.73 billion in 2002, up from $3.35 billion in 2001. This increase was led by a 14 percent greater value of crop production while the value of livestock production decreased 10 percent. Net government transactions decreased 75 percent from 2001. Purchased inputs for 2002 decreased 4 percent from 2001


----------



## Buckshot (Nov 5, 2003)

> ND Farm Numbers Decline
> 2/27/2004 -- The number of farms and ranches in North Dakota during 2003 is estimated at 30,300, down from the revised 30,500 in 2002. All land in farms totaled 39.4 million acres, which has remained the same since 1999


So, the average farm would be tending about 1,300 acres of land. What are the stipulations to be called a farm? 
From the USDA, a farm is defined as "any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products (crops and livestock) were sold or normally would have been sold during the year under consideration." 
A thousand dollars? A person living on a ten acre hobby farm can generate $1000 in revenue yearly. 
I'd like to see some stats on farms that actually produce the mass quantities of food. How about starting at $250,000 in revenue and up? How much will that drop the number of "farmers" according to the USDA?


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Open Feild 
:eyeroll: 
Or should it be closed mind?

I was not responding to you. Your obviously childish mind has to resort to name calling(dumb a$$ views).

I do think we are overtaxed.

What I was refferrring to was the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. I typed misstakenly the 16th.

Open Feild should close mouth and open mind and grow up a little and see just because someone disagrees with you does not mean that you need to personally attack them!

Park


----------



## administrator (Feb 13, 2002)

PLEASE attack the opinions and not the person.

http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/members/phpBB/terms.html

Thanks.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Park 
Please accept my apology, I am sorry! The only connection I could make between the 16th Amendment and the CRP thread is that you were a person that did not agree with the tax system, as the 16th is about taxes.

If you would like to debate the 14th Amendment, Bring it on! Don't beat around the bush, lets get to the MEAT of the issue and we may agree to disagree. I will treat you with respect if you treat me with respect.

Have a good one!


----------



## northdakotakid (May 12, 2004)

Park,

Generally, the question of whether the equal protection clause has been violated arises when a state grants a particular class of individuals the right to engage in activity yet denies other individuals the same right. *There is no clear rule for deciding when a classification is unconstitutional. *The Supreme Court has dictated the application of different tests depending on the type of classification and it's effect on fundamental rights. Traditionally, the Court finds a state classification constitutional if it has "a rational basis" to a "legitimate state purpose." The Supreme Court, however, has applied more stringent analysis in certain cases. It will "strictly scrutinize" a distinction when it embodies a "suspect classification." In order for a classification to be subject to strict scrutiny, it must be shown that the state law or its administration is meant to discriminate. Usually, if a purpose to discriminate is found the classification will be strictly scrutinized if it is based on race, national origin, or, in some situations, non U.S. citizenship (the suspect classes). In order for a classification to be found permissible under this test it must be proven, by the state, that there is a compelling interest to the law and that the classification is necessary to further that interest. The Court will also apply a strict scrutiny test if the classification interferes with fundamental rights such as first amendment rights, the right to privacy, or the right to travel.

If the 14th Amendment had created a national citizenship, imposed upon the states and their citizens, the Amendment would have also created suffrage for women. Prior to the Slaughterhouse cases, every one was using the 14th Amendment to legalize something or another under the claim of being a U.S. citizen. They found out that the Amendment was to give citizenship to the former slaves and to protect their rights, nothing else. In response to the Slaughterhouse cases, the Chicago tribune stated, " The Slaughterhouse cases will put a quietus upon the thousand and one follies seeking to be legalized by hanging on to the Fourteenth Amendment... The decision has long been needed as a check upon the centralizing tendencies of the Government...SO YES, I do understand the fourteenth amenndment and I do see how many have tried to use it to state incorrectly under the "Due process and Equal Protection. But, the framers of the 14th Amendment used the term, "immunities", meaning all rights recognized and protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, including those of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. The framers of the Fourteenth used the word "immunities" because the rights recognized and protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights are rights against action by government, which are "immunities", as distinct from contractual or tort rights.

Park....you are barking up the wrong tree and I am frankly very appalled that you would amuse yourself at the cost of the good citizens of this State. This conversation would have had a very different tone if you would learn to respect people, their property, their pursuit of happiness, and most imprtantly their liberty!!

"The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; It does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship."

Jones v. Temmer 829 F. Supp. 1226


----------



## northdakotakid (May 12, 2004)

rember when you said this Park???
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Everyone complaining out there about G/Os, NRs and not enough land to hunt just call your Representatives and Senators and tell them to get rid of CRP!

You may think just because you live in ND you have a divine right to all of the game your state has to offer.

Remember way back when before CRP!

Other than a period in the 1970s The ducks were not doing so great!

When I was in high school I applied 3 years in eastern ND for a Deer licenses and did not receive one. Where did all of the Deer come from?

Should we talk about pheasants? Before CRP almost everyone had to travel west of Bismark to get into ok hunting. Now its great across the whole southern part of the state and out west its fantastic! Is that just because we have had mild winters?

The biggest reason for more GAME, G/Os, NRs, and a pile of whining is 
CRP!

Get rid of the farm welfare that keeps your state afloat and and you will see a reduction of all of the above.

Where do you think all of that Federal money to pay for CRP comes from? 
Surely you don't think that ND with its insignificant and declining population of around 600,000 pays for this. One county in MN has more people than your entire state. 
*

THAT TO ME MAY BE A LITTLE BIT OF A CLOSE MINDED THOUGHT ON THE ISSUE.........
NO WHERE DO YOU MENTION YOUR RATIONALE FOR YOUR ARGUEMENT OTHER THAN BANTER AND CLOSE MINDED COMMENTS ABOUT OUR STATE POPULATION IN COMPARISON TO A SINGLE COUNTY IN YOUR STATE....


----------



## northdakotakid (May 12, 2004)

I would venture to say that there is a larger portion of our federal tax dollars going to the residents of your state than to our own....proportionately to the population since our meger little state is only the size of one of your counties, but we don't complain.....but seriously, I would like to have a civilized conversation about this issue. It will be well debated in the fall. I understand your compassion for hunting, but question the use of the 14th Am. to protect it across state lines.


----------



## Park (Mar 14, 2004)

Northdakotakid

Thanks for your responses.

I really appriciated the work you put into the question of the 14th amendment.

When you started bashing me--

(Park....you are barking up the wrong tree and I am frankly very appalled that you would amuse yourself at the cost of the good citizens of this State. This conversation would have had a very different tone if you would learn to respect people, their property, their pursuit of happiness, and most imprtantly their liberty!! )

You lost my respect and attention.

1 I am not amusing myself at the cost of anyone.

2. I do resect people and peoples property, liberty and the right for the pursuit of happiness.

3. ND gets way more Fed $$s than most states per capita. I beleive ND is # 2

4. I am not serious about getting rid of CRP. It has been a boon for wildlife. I just wanted to point out to the good sportsmen of ND that thier hunting is great because in large part the FEDERAL $$.

Park


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Park

Federal dollars have something to do with hunting in ND but I would venture to guess that it is minimal, I think license fees, private conservation groups and ND G&F, and the terrain in ND have more to do with the excellent hunting in ND than the Federal dollars.

When you stated that ND is #2 what is that based on?

If you did not want to get rid of CRP why did you title the topic as such?, just to stir the pot?

In one of my other posts to you I asked you to get to the "MEAT" of the issue, what is it that you are looking for? What if anything are you upset about?

If you have a question ask it!


----------

