I dont understand

[Rich M]

Landowners have no obligation to allow folks to hunt their land, cross or trespass their land, etc. IMO, it is in their best interest to keep the public out.

 

[sasquatch]

Landowners have no obligation to allow folks to hunt their land, cross or trespass their land, etc. IMO, it is in their best interest to keep the public out.

I agree

But I also agree tax payers have no obligation to subsidize business losses!

Private profits, private losses

Not

Private profits, socialized losses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[sndmn11]

I agree

But I also agree tax payers have no obligation to subsidize business losses!

Private profits, private losses

Not

Private profits, socialized losses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Exactly, if wild animals on private land were such an issue they would build high fences to keep the animals off their property. Instead, they make minimal effort to prevent animal intrusion, take dollars for perceived ag loss, take dollars for tags, lobby for more dollars, and repeat every year.

 

[sasquatch]

It’s just another form of welfare

It seems highly addictive to me but I wouldn’t know


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Billy Goat]

Kinda curious to those who think it's just accepted to have losses, its something you need to deal with since you decided to farm there.


That specific to ungulates? Or you feel the same way about depredation from wolves and coyotes? Or just kill all those you can?



Hunters and landowners want to look at everything from their perspective. Any hunter complaining about landowners getting tags for damages do you feel the same way if it's for wolves? Or being paid for damages does that only anger you when it's for elk? Where I am if I can prove it was dogs killed my livestock, the county sends me a check. The county dog tags pay for it. If they can determine who the owner is, the owner pays the damages. So is that exceptable?

I do factor in losses, but it's not a year to year thing. I assume it's much like winter forage losses. Some years it's more than others, just depends on the year.

 

[Rich M]

I agree

But I also agree tax payers have no obligation to subsidize business losses!

Private profits, private losses

Not

Private profits, socialized losses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

What about folks who get welfare?

I'd rather see money go to farmers than the big banks and multinational businesses.

 

[cuerro viejo]

I agree

But I also agree tax payers have no obligation to subsidize business losses!

Private profits, private losses

Not

Private profits, socialized losses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I go back and forth on this.

Biggest actual to the farm subsidy is crop insurance premiums. Remember 75% of farm bill is free food stamps/nutrition.

With subs we have found a way to keep grain from not following inflation.

1975 price for corn was $3.55 bushel, you follow inflation and it should be $17.36 in 2021, today it’s 5.46.

So we spend roughly $10-$31 a year a person to insure safe, and affordable food.

At same stand point maybe if we had more expensive food, there would be less waste. Unfortunately the lower incomes will get hit significantly in costs, and/or worse have to sub in imported non USDA oversight food...

Any one that’s ever been to a cattle Ranch in Mexico or seen Malaysia seafood shipments knows what I’m talking about.

I don’t know the answer, but it’s not a just a simple yes or no

 

[Rob5589]

What about folks who get welfare? They don't produce anything. What about all the subsidizing you do for them?

I'd rather see money go to farmers than the big banks and multinational businesses. You fund them too - but you don't complain about it. You only complain about farmers and ranchers out of the greed in yer heart cause you want to hunt and shoot stuff on that land.

You don't want to equate farmers to welfare recipients. And there is plenty of complaining about welfare. I would prefer not to subsidize any business losses.

 

[sasquatch]

What about folks who get welfare? They don't produce anything. What about all the subsidizing you do for them?

I'd rather see money go to farmers than the big banks and multinational businesses. You fund them too - but you don't complain about it. You only complain about farmers and ranchers out of the greed in yer heart cause you want to hunt and shoot stuff on that land.

Actually, no. I personally don’t care to hunt their lands. Have never even eyed up any fam land before on my hunts. I just know what goes on and don’t agree.

Also, I don’t like any forms of the welfare. I only expressed one form here as this thread is about one form, no?!??

I’m not here to talk about bank welfare. Start a thread on that and I’ll participate also!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[sasquatch]

I go back and forth on this.

Biggest actual to the farm subsidy is crop insurance premiums. Remember 75% of farm bill is free food stamps/nutrition.

With subs we have found a way to keep grain from not following inflation.

1975 price for corn was $3.55 bushel, you follow inflation and it should be $17.36 in 2021, today it’s 5.46.

So we spend roughly $10-$31 a year a person to insure safe, and affordable food.

At same stand point maybe if we had more expensive food, there would be less waste. Unfortunately the lower incomes will get hit significantly in costs, and/or worse have to sub in imported non USDA oversight food...

Any one that’s ever been to a cattle Ranch in Mexico or seen Malaysia seafood shipments knows what I’m talking about.

I don’t know the answer, but it’s not a just a simple yes or no

I understand why it’s subsidized. It’s to help our massive unchecked population growth afford to feed themselves.

However I’m one of the few that is willing to talk about how can we slow this human expansion and population growth down!! But that’s sooo taboo in today’s world. How dare you say there’s too many ppl etc etc.

One day, not ours, but eventually there will be more ppl than resources! I’d rather see it get addressed before it’s too late!!!

It’s the biggest thing behind habitat and wildlife down trends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[CorbLand]

What about folks who get welfare? They don't produce anything. What about all the subsidizing you do for them?

I'd rather see money go to farmers than the big banks and multinational businesses. You fund them too - but you don't complain about it. You only complain about farmers and ranchers out of the greed in yer heart cause you want to hunt and shoot stuff on that land.

Nope, I bitch about that too but that isnt the point of the thread.

I am to the point in life of it is what it is. Taxes are never going to decrease, you will always pay for things you dont want too. Whatever. I hate it when people act like farmers/ranchers are the salt of the earth, only hardworking, red blooded Americans left. The Farm Bill is one if not the largest welfare program ran in the US, by the USDA and was not passed to provide families with affordable food alone. It was also to save the asses of farmers and ranchers.

I think the Farm Bill was a good thing. What I hate is when farmers and ranchers act like its just everyone else taking advantage of the government and crying poverty from the window of a brand new pickup pulling a trailer full of RZRs.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Nope, I bitch about that too but that isnt the point of the thread.

I am to the point in life of it is what it is. Taxes are never going to decrease, you will always pay for things you dont want too. Whatever. I hate it when people act like farmers/ranchers are the salt of the earth, only hardworking, red blooded Americans left. The Farm Bill is one if not the largest welfare program ran in the US, by the USDA and was not passed to provide families with affordable food alone. It was also to save the asses of farmers and ranchers.

I think the Farm Bill was a good thing. What I hate is when farmers and ranchers act like its just everyone else taking advantage of the government and crying poverty from the window of a brand new pickup pulling a trailer full of RZRs.

Well if you take out nutrition/food stamps which is 80%. The bulk remaining of the left over 20% is Crop insurance and conservation programs.

Which program do you want cut or changed?

anyone can get credit these days, so processions isn’t always sign of financial security.

 

[Rich M]

I agree w you guys. Shame we can't do anything about it.

I'm just a big proponent of private land owner rights. That's the main thing that separates us from the other countries - the ability to buy and own land.

When the feds did the BLM thing, they should have incorporated access into the equation. What use is public land that can not be accessed?

 

[Hunt eat repeat]

I know all this is a hot topic and I honestly believe there is no easy answer to the problem.
I live in an area that is absolutely packed with elk. But an area that is VERY private. Most of the elk reside on private during the seasons. They keep giving out tags, in some cases multiple tags to one individual. But the landowners won’t let people on to hunt.
But it kills me to hear a landowner complain about the elk hammering his place when he planted 300 acres of sainfoin in the heart of elk country. What exactly was he expecting ?
But then there are Dbag hunters that don’t respect the private property.
luckily soon all the big ranches will be held by out of state animal rights activists and we won’t have to worry about this problem.

 

[thewy_2007]

These stories aren't only out west either. Some hunters just don't understand or respect land owners.

 

[Rich M]

These stories aren't only out west either. Some hunters just don't understand or respect land owners.

These stories are everywhere for sure.

Lots of folks respect land owners.

Lots believe that they should be allowed access no matter what.

Always an interedting topic.