Habitat questions

Just a couple quick facts about the EQIP program for y'all...
Some have said they would not want it because it gives Gov too much control over what they do.
Well actually you still have complete control over what you do on your land if you sign the contract. There is no penalty to pay if you break your contract, you just have to pay back whatever amount they give you. Which I feel is totally fair. So I'm my case, if they paid me $300 to establish native grass and the next year I decided to plant soybeans, I would just have to give the $300 back and being an honest person, I would.
The prescribed burn areas, there is nothing I couldn't do if I understood him. I could plant the firebreaks, cut the timber, whatever I want to do is fine. He said I could go in the burned areas and make a new food plot if I want.
So I don't really see why some have a problem with it. I'm researching this, asking questions and learning.
The plan is made specifically to help landowners manage their land. Some for agriculture, some, like me, just for wildlife. I pay taxes so if I can get a small part back in the way of improvements to my land for wildlife, I'll happily do it. Thanks again for everyone's input!

Well, since you put it THAT way... :)
That really doesn't sound bad at all. A little different than I had understood it. I never considered breaking the contract. Figured if I agreed to 10 yrs, then I would do 10 yrs. I like the way you are looking at it better than the way I looked at it.
 
I guess I just don't see the point of signing a contract for $300??

My WHIP project cost over $8000....I think I ended up paying around $3000 out of pocket.....and I negotiated the contract to make the improvements I wanted to make, the way I wanted them done, before I signed the contract. That kind of money made it worthwhile to pursue a contract......I wouldn't even consider it for $300.

You asked for opinions, this is mine......$300 is chump change when it comes to property expenses.....there is no way I'd risk even the remote possibility of even a slight aggravation that *might* come with a government contract. I'd spend a few hundred of my own money to hire a dozer and have the food plots expanded and the fire breaks created exactly the way I wanted and I'd plant whatever I wanted wherever I wanted it!:D

But, the good part is......it's your land, do what makes YOU happy.
 
In Oklahoma NRCS EQIP, there is a 20-25 acre minimum size for burn units....other states or counties may differ....check that before enrolling. EQIP burn pay here is $6 per ac ....a little more with a grazing deferral.....and then allowance for dozed breaks. Fire safety is increased if the Dozer pushes slash piles at least 60 yards inside the unit and off the edge. These additional lanes increase edge for wildlife. This pic shows a fire break cleared with bobcat/trees shears.....background is lane where slash was piled 60 yards inside. The only thing I don't like about mechanical clearing in this area is the soil phosphate cycle is disrupted and brooms hedge bluestem dominates. There is much less 'foot print' on the land when a fire guard is done with leaf blower, chainsaw and/or weedeater.....planned grazing can also create a fire break albeit with heavier foot print.
b6738ca016861b96365120f8ede91276.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've looked at government programs several times and just can't pull the trigger on any of them. Signing too much control of MY property to them just doesn't set right. I know people do it and have great results for them. I guess I change my mind to often to venture down that road.
Not saying I won't do it if the right program or deal comes along, I just haven't found it yet.

Annually or so NRSC will come out and make sure paid jobs were implemented.

Cat....renewed 5 yr CSP contract last week....about 5-6 new enhancements....we have already been doing those for at least 3 years now.....intensive grazing management, grazing plan for wildlife habitat/needs, hinge cutting, prescribed fire for wildlife, legumes and manures to meet 90% of nitrogen needs, and mixed cover crops in tame pasture. That was just a no-brainer.

There are 5 more we are considering for the next renewal....one of those we could do with more control over cattle herd....and another involves transects which district conservation has to collect and monitor data....not something they really want to do and a bit more science than I want in a low-input ranch. The program will likely change in next five years so no point in looking too far forward.

So....I really don't have to do any new jobs other than money management....just continue pics and documentation. Being able to hire some things done adds to quality of life!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I guess I just don't see the point of signing a contract for $300??

My WHIP project cost over $8000....I think I ended up paying around $3000 out of pocket.....and I negotiated the contract to make the improvements I wanted to make, the way I wanted them done, before I signed the contract. That kind of money made it worthwhile to pursue a contract......I wouldn't even consider it for $300.

You asked for opinions, this is mine......$300 is chump change when it comes to property expenses.....there is no way I'd risk even the remote possibility of even a slight aggravation that *might* come with a government contract. I'd spend a few hundred of my own money to hire a dozer and have the food plots expanded and the fire breaks created exactly the way I wanted and I'd plant whatever I wanted wherever I wanted it!:D

But, the good part is......it's your land, do what makes YOU happy.

I mentioned this a few times but you may have not read it... the $300 was just one, very small part of this whole deal. I wouldn't consider it either if it was the only management practice they were recommending.
The aerial herbicide would pay $85 an acre, the firebreak install is .28 cents per foot plus a little per acre burned.
So I am talking about it saving me possibly thousands of dollars.
And again, on the burning, I am not signing away any rights.
 
Annually or so NRSC will come out and make sure paid jobs were implemented.

Cat....renewed 5 yr CSP contract last week....about 5-6 new enhancements....we have already been doing those for at least 3 years now.....intensive grazing management, grazing plan for wildlife habitat/needs, hinge cutting, prescribed fire for wildlife, legumes and manures to meet 90% of nitrogen needs, and mixed cover crops in tame pasture. That was just a no-brainer.

There are 5 more we are considering for the next renewal....one of those we could do with more control over cattle herd....and another involves transects which district conservation has to collect and monitor data....not something they really want to do and a bit more science than I want in a low-input ranch. The program will likely change in next five years so no point in looking too far forward.

So....I really don't have to do any new jobs other than money management....just continue pics and documentation. Being able to hire some things done adds to quality of life!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When the time comes I'll look a lot closer into it. I looks like I need to go into someone's office and ask some specific questions.
 
When I talked to them in the local office about any of this stuff a couple years ago they always had no money for anything. Only thing they said they could help me with was crossfencing but I would have to pay out of pocket to have all boundary fences completed...I don't need any crossfencing...We did fence boundaries at our own expense. Never would talk to me about a pond, told me my cost to burn was $20 acre + drop and cost of dozer for fire breaks...

I am going to do it all myself with no taxpayer funded help so nobody can gripe and I can do what I want, when I want, wherever I want...I have a strong body, great chainsaws, a buddy with a dozer and a nice tractor with implements and I certainly know how to "flick a bic"... On my hinge cuts and clear cuts I amaze myself with the amount of area I can do in 4 hours ;)
 
When the time comes I'll look a lot closer into it. I looks like I need to go into someone's office and ask some specific questions.

You can find the CSP application paperwork and supporting formation online for some states (Think I found a PA form and supporting information from ND)......your state form will be essentially the same questions. The application is MUCH more detailed than in the past so you will need to have good access to e-maps for measurement and a rough idea of plant composition on the landscape. It also takes some time to research the questions as they are not explained in detail on the form.Took me 2-3 weeks on the application. 'Rating points' are determined from the application....then pay schedule for each job is determined by points and unit of measure (ac, ft or whatever). I think they did it this way to weed out people who milk the system. CSP is basically for beginning farmers/ranchers, ethnic groups, and innovators.....people essentially who need help getting to the end goal of sustainable management. Each conservation district within each state will only get a certain amount of money annually....so there is competition for funds and agency preference for use of those funds.

Hoping the pay for burning on CSP is better than EQIP. My cost to burn (including gas, food, torch fuel, hire labor etc) runs $25-30/ac...at 30 ac cost is $900.....EQIP provides $6/ac for the burn ($180) and $80 for 1 season grazing deferral.....so $260 in cost share. Since we cut/blow breaks rather than doze, we don't incur erosion mitigation or revegetation expenses. We do lose a second growing season of grazing to allow full plant recovery from fire, then graze dormant season. I was working with them to get mown/blowed breaks allowed into the burn plan.....as that is one of the methods the Noble foundation and other top burn agencies recommend. It kinda bothers me that a conservation district will pay to doze a lane on low productivity erodible land. I have dozed seismic lanes from the 80s which to this day do good to grow 8" tall three-awn....the loss of a little topsoil can have dire consequences! I was displeased with cost EQIP share for burns due to above mentioned economics and land concerns....maybe CSP will differ there!

Is $260 important?.....depends on your disposable income....it will pay for 2 new drip torches....or ~3 days of hired labor! Which is a little more than we had starting out!

If you are wanting to intensify grazing and need more hard fenced paddocks to create 'cells' (which I do recommend....say 400 ac is broken into 4 hard cross-fenced cells of 40-200 ac in size) and more ponds for stockwater/better grazing distribution is needed, then EQIP is a good program to look at. Each cell is then broken down into paddocks with temporary fencing (at your expense). The only stipulations for those is a 3 yr time frame to complete work, specs on H-braces/corners, minimum lineal ft (I think)....and.....minimum pond yardage, a minimum depth below spillway, and dam/bank slope specs. Cost share on the fence will help pay for extra expense of good long-term coated wire and pipe corners (and labor if your time is short) for better long term economics of hard fence...or if there are special fence needs for certain wildlife (say lesser prairie chicken), then there is share on that fence type too...aka 'wildlife friendly fencing' which is popular out west. EQIP does NOT pay on perimeter fence install/replacement nor on repair/replacement of existing hard cross-fence. I was pleased with cost share on both hard cross fence and on ponds. Intensive grazing under CSP basically involves increasing paddock numbers by 75% and the funding helps pay for infrastructure cost of that (which can include temp fencing, wells, water lines, tanks, etc etc). I will save the post on our next CSP obligations for a later date in time.

One big perk, these programs have afforded us is increased flexibility to cope with an ever changing ecosystem!

Ranching, even low input, has a narrow profit margin window due to commodity market volatility....and many times the wildlife side is a money sink (or squirrely tax deduct) rather than a profitable enterprise. Undertaking steps to reduce cost of practices which favor good long term farm family economics for the 'average Joe' and sustainable land use is something IMO which should be 'rewarded and encouraged'!

In my country right now, there are folks lined up at FSA filling out forms for 'drought relief pay' on cool season pasture! Which is nothing more than 'subsidy pay' or 'welfare' because one has a management plan which fails in dry seasons and succeeds in only wet seasons. The same folks could be in the NRSC line for EQIP and CSP money to help cover some of the infrastructure cost of planned grazing which takes into account forage shortage and slow growing conditions. Are they out of cool season pasture because of weather?.....or are they out of cool season pasture because of poor planning? (ie inadequate recovery time allowance for less than average growing conditions...or too late planting).

As I have said many times no two years are the same.....and the time span from January to April can be quite long and challenging for the grazing/browsing animal. Adequate grazable forage regrowth was to be had in 70 days last winter.....this winter 90+ days are needed for the same height of forage but with less density. It does me little good to rant about gov't 'welfare' programs or belittle those who partake. It does more good to contemplate a plan for going from one end of the ranch to the other in 150 days with each move onto fresh forage to cope with truly poor growing conditions while keeping 41 head of cows content, productive, and on less stored feed than average. What do we need for that 150 day plan?....logistics?....supplies?....infrastructure costs?....capital improvements?
 
Back
Top