# Does DNR offer Farmers Incentive?



## 2Rivers (Nov 15, 2018)

Everyone is crying about loss of habitat, but does the DNR offer to farmers or individual land owners to put aside acreage for wild life? Like pay them for so many acres not to grow cash crop.

I was just curious. Let me know comments?


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

I know that the DNR does crop share where the farmer gets to keep a portion of what he plants on public land. Usually the outside is left for wildlife and the interior is taken for profit. I believe I was told the split was 50:50.

There is also the conservation reserve program paid for by the Feds. 

Michigan has more public hunting land than any other state east of the Mississippi. I’m sure there is not much concern with loss of habitat unless it’s for an endangered species.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

PA is very close to having what Michigan does for public hunting land. They do have way more "State Game Lands" land owned by the Game Commission for public hunting. There is about 1.5 million acres of state game lands.


----------



## wpmisport (Feb 9, 2010)

Found this -
*Specialty Crop Block Grant Program*
The SCBGP funds can be requested to enhance the competitiveness of specialty crops. Specialty crops are defined as fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and nursery crops (including floriculture).
https://www.usda.gov/topics/farming/grants-and-loans


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

DecoySlayer said:


> PA is very close to having what Michigan does for public hunting land. They do have way more "State Game Lands" land owned by the Game Commission for public hunting. There is about 1.5 million acres of state game lands.


I’m the UP alone Michigan has more land open to public hunting than what you are stating. There are ~6 million acres split between state, federal and CFA land.


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

2Rivers said:


> Everyone is crying about loss of habitat, but does the DNR offer to farmers or individual land owners to put aside acreage for wild life? Like pay them for so many acres not to grow cash crop.
> 
> I was just curious. Let me know comments?


Research the C.R.P. program.
Also commercial forest act.
Local land trusts.
Conservation easements.

Who is crying about habitat loss? Those who do not own it and watch critical yarding areas in the U.P. be neglected or removed? Hey I'll join that cry.

In the lower it is simply progress as usual.
"Clean" farming removing fence and windrows.
Prime farmland still in use not having wetland or un tillable acreage vs farms in poorer areas with less easy tilling and no obstacles / avoided areas that used to hold wildlife.

Many farms were conveniently bought with decline of the family farms for building subdivisions. Where crops once bloomed ,houses do. No tree clearing required.


----------



## Charles Hooke (Dec 29, 2018)

This is such a complex issue for sure. As an owner of a fairly large family timber & farm estate I can attest to the travails of property ownership. It is really difficult to keep a big tract together over the generations. Our property is prime wildlife territory. One things that helps a tiny bit is a few government programs. But property taxes are certainly a major burden.

All around our property the large tracts have been constantly broken up. Flat lander's come up north and buy property then break it up into small pieces. Before long hunting enthusiasts have a cottage and begin to hunt their 5, 10 or 20 acres. This works out well at first because they benefit from being next to the larger tracts -- one being ours. 

Then they invite their friends into hunt. Ok for bow but four or five hunters on even 20 acres all with high power rifles gets a bit dangerous for everyone. A 30.06 is lethal to at least 400 yards. A 20 acre parcel is how wide and how tall? It doesn't take long before we see hunting blinds all situated right on the property lines. And of course the shooting windows look out in all four directions. Soon hunters encroach onto our property.

If they just hunted one might overlook the issue. But it isn't long before we see major thefts and property damage done by someone. Our game cameras sometimes pick them up. Photos of hunters on ATV's show up regularly. Of course we deal with some through the DNR and police but it is a hassle we never had previously. 

Two years ago we had thieves cut down beautiful "veneer" sugar maples and use them for firewood in their camp. I am a hunter myself. I feel for other hunters that want a good place to hunt. We routinely turn down requests to rent portions of our property. We have plenty we could rent out. But the the liability and risks are enormous for landowners. Michigan law provides limited protection for the landowner if the hunter does damage to himself. But if that hunter is not warned of every property danger in writing the hunter can hold him responsible. And if the hunter harms anyone else the landowner that has major liability.

So the point really is that farmers and landowners that don't allow hunting --- well there is a side to their story too. The whole issue is complex. But if your really want to hunt great property one needs to own a big chunk of it. Candidly there is less and less big chunks left. 
Don't even think one can buy a little slice of large chunk and that the rest of the surrounding properties will remain "as is". The big chunks are being whittled down. 

The good news is that property prices are very depressed right now so if you can and if you ever want it buy some. But buy at least 80 acres. More is better yet. 40 acres is very marginal for a good hunt unless one is surrounded by hunt clubs that will never sell. And don't count on that because the pressure to sell grows every year.


----------



## Liver and Onions (Nov 24, 2000)

Charles Hooke said:


> ......
> 
> Two years ago we had thieves cut down beautiful "veneer" sugar maples and use them for firewood in their camp. ............


Any idea why would anyone would cut down green wood for firewood ? No dead ash on your property ?

L & O


----------



## Charles Hooke (Dec 29, 2018)

Liver and Onions said:


> Any idea why would anyone would cut down green wood for firewood ? No dead ash on your property ?
> 
> L & O


Tons of dead ash! Tons of dead ash logs already cut up as well as we timbered ash over the last three year. But still someone thought beautiful veneer maples about 70 foot tall would be great firewood. By the way we finally identified the culprit and he was sentenced. 

We also plant a variety of different species in tree tubes to improve the genetics and in an attempt to replace the ash taken by the ash borer. Last year criminals stole young trees and tubes we have been watering and fertilizing for several years. It is not an easy proposition to water young trees in the woods and clearings through the summer dry spells we have been getting. Young trees need 10 gallons of water per week in the first few years to get a good survival rate. Of course that can come from surface ground water if we get regular rain. But again in summer dry spells our losses are significant. It is not inexpensive to plant trees and to care for them. It promotes anger when I find nothing but holes where the trees have been growing. 

We suspect some of the new landowners but it is not easy to prove. It is not like one can search their acreage for our trees. Plus more people are planting trees and ours are not branded so we can prove they are ours. We are putting up many more game cameras but we have them stolen as well. Owning land is more difficult than in previous generations. 

I wrote earlier that one needs at least 80 acres if one wants good hunting but I am rethinking that. I think it takes much more. Much depends on the size of neighboring properties but one can't control what people do with their property and when they decide they can't afford to own it anymore. The better answer is probably hunt club ownership and then maybe 640 acres is probably a minimum if it is in a good area. Owning land is not easy unless it produces substantial income.


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

The DNR has the grant program where they give away up to $15k for habitat projects to private groups once or twice a year. I think that amounts to about $150k each cycle and I recently saw a notice for a current cycle for the UP only. They are accepting applications right now.

Beyond that, there are programs available through USDA, Fish and Wildlife and other federal agencies.

As we speak, I have a contractor removing 40 acres of tag alders to create nesting habitat for woodcock and a bird called the Yellow Winged Warbler. This project is thru a private group, but is funded thru USDA. It’s not a moneymaker as we’re going to be paying what we receive from USDA directly to the contractor, but this improvement in habitat will be good for all wildlife including deer. This program was written up in a small article in the Traverse City Record Eagle and I simply made the phone call to see what it was about. 

We were/are in two other 5 year habitat improvement projects, one of which was planting of 4 acres of pollinators.

There’s programs and money out there, you just have to research and seek it out.


----------



## Charles Hooke (Dec 29, 2018)

bucko12pt said:


> The DNR has the grant program where they give away up to $15k for habitat projects to private groups once or twice a year. I think that amounts to about $150k each cycle and I recently saw a notice for a current cycle for the UP only. They are accepting applications right now.
> 
> Beyond that, there are programs available through USDA, Fish and Wildlife and other federal agencies.
> 
> ...


Remember that one is ceding a portion of control of their property when one enters these programs. This is not a reason not to take advantage of these programs. However be prepared for DNR visits etc. To qualify one has to put in some of their own money and labor. So far I have preferred to do it on my own as I simply can't always be sure I will have the time or manpower to complete the job as the plan might require. Again not a reason not to take advantage of the State Programs.


----------



## 2Rivers (Nov 15, 2018)

Luv2hunteup said:


> I know that the DNR does crop share where the farmer gets to keep a portion of what he plants on public land. Usually the outside is left for wildlife and the interior is taken for profit. I believe I was told the split was 50:50.
> 
> There is also the conservation reserve program paid for by the Feds.
> 
> Michigan has more public hunting land than any other state east of the Mississippi. I’m sure there is not much concern with loss of habitat unless it’s for an endangered species.


I had heard about land owners up in the Thumb that put aside some land for habitat. This has really helped the wild life for hunting and their survival.
More and more people are putting in food plots of various sizes which I appreciate because the powers to be are more paper pushers than getting there hands dirty, they may already be dirty and it's not in the sportsmen's Best interest.


----------



## 2Rivers (Nov 15, 2018)

Charles Hooke said:


> Remember that one is ceding a portion of control of their property when one enters these programs. This is not a reason not to take advantage of these programs. However be prepared for DNR visits etc. To qualify one has to put in some of their own money and labor. So far I have preferred to do it on my own as I simply can't always be sure I will have the time or manpower to complete the job as the plan might require. Again not a reason not to take advantage of the State Programs.


Is that part of the CFR program?
Why would they want to visit property? They are spread so thin now.

I agree with you if I plant on my own, I don't need some individual(s) checking my property in the whole or telling me this is how you do it. I was curious of feed back. I guess if I was a cash crop grower of corn and beans and didn't hunt maybe, probably not, but my gut tells me no. Every individual must make there own choice in the matter, they can live with. Thank you.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

Charles Hooke said:


> Remember that one is ceding a portion of control of their property when one enters these programs. This is not a reason not to take advantage of these programs. However be prepared for DNR visits etc. To qualify one has to put in some of their own money and labor. So far I have preferred to do it on my own as I simply can't always be sure I will have the time or manpower to complete the job as the plan might require. Again not a reason not to take advantage of the State Programs.


The last grant I received I was required I was required to allow the NRCS forester one visit to ensure I planted the trees i received and protected them plus put up a sign saying I was a habitat cooperator. Obligation was over at that point. I did not qualify initially but someone dropped out so I was chosen as an alternate.


----------



## 2Rivers (Nov 15, 2018)

Righ


Waif said:


> Research the C.R.P. program.
> Also commercial forest act.
> Local land trusts.
> Conservation easements.
> ...



Right on with your Statement, you answered a lot!
I look at it this way too, if you have poor areas for growing or meadows within property, don't let go to waste, plant something, why not put in food plots of something? Maybe the expense, extra man power, short on finances, equipment needs to be repaired. 
Our state could be so much better overall, I don't think the mind set is there, but for who?, maybe there is a reason for that, this can really open up another can of worms. Especially if I had acreage in an urban sprawl area and good food plots started, then I would have all these unknowns visiting.
No ditch cover, fields planted to edges, it's all about volume. Like my cousin from the fish and wildlife would say "They scrape & Rape the land", it's true, I see these subs going up or existing ones everywhere, no parks or wooded areas, what a loss. Thanks.


----------



## 2Rivers (Nov 15, 2018)

Luv2hunteup said:


> The last grant I received I was required I was required to allow the NRCS forester one visit to ensure I planted the trees i received and protected them plus put up a sign saying I was a habitat cooperator. Obligation was over at that point. I did not qualify initially but someone dropped out so I was chosen as an alternate.


After reading different comments, I will just plant on my own and stay out of Harms Way,
I would rather be able to grow and maintain what I want to help wildlife, I'm not really sold on those folks, I'm sure there are some good ones there, but the others are pencil pushers/desk jockeys.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

2Rivers said:


> After reading different comments, I will just plant on my own and stay out of Harms Way,
> I would rather be able to grow and maintain what I want to help wildlife, I'm not really sold on those folks, I'm sure there are some good ones there, but the others are pencil pushers/desk jockeys.


I looked into buying the farm next to my land and putting it into wetland reserve program. I met with the USDA. There would be use restrictions placed on the property. Basically I would have to own the property for 5 years, since revised 7 years, prior to application. I could only hay 1/3 or 1/3 of the enrolled acreage annually but I could rotate the locations annually across the farm. Ponds would be designed by Ducks Unlimited and installed by contractors that were paid by the USDA. Survey paid for by the USDA. Non currently farmed land could not be enrolled. I would receive $1,000 per acre that I enrolled. The farm was being sold for $1,000 per acre but all of it would not qualify. No buildings could be built on land under contract but you could exclude whatever you wanted. 

Once the pond work is completed government access is done. Compliance is done via satellite. Unless I violated by building or excessive farming there would be no reason for access to be granted. I met the tax assessor informally but could not get an answer on future tax obligations. My best friend purchased the farm so my investigation ended at that point.


----------



## Mi. Chuck (Jun 12, 2018)

Waif said:


> Research the C.R.P. program.
> Also commercial forest act.
> Local land trusts.
> Conservation easements.
> ...


Well said. I'm in the CP-42 pollinator program and it is working out quite nicely. I'm doing my small part to provide good cover to the wildlife that has been stripped by modern farming. Just saw a farmer winter plow frozen ground. Not sure how that is cost effective and wonder about no till planting. After all the cost effects are weighed such as top soil loss, added fuel, runoff, and probably more, I wonder if it's really worth it? My club once paid a farmer to leave 16 acres of corn standing throughout the winter. Poor investment as it was harvested along with all the other crops.


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

Charles Hooke said:


> Remember that one is ceding a portion of control of their property when one enters these programs. This is not a reason not to take advantage of these programs. However be prepared for DNR visits etc. To qualify one has to put in some of their own money and labor. So far I have preferred to do it on my own as I simply can't always be sure I will have the time or manpower to complete the job as the plan might require. Again not a reason not to take advantage of the State Programs.



We’ve been in some of these programs for over 10 years and haven’t experienced that at all. The person overseeing the program may visit after the work is completed and once a year, or so, after that (if I invite them out), but we’ve never relinquished any control. Two of the programs were for 5 years and we’re paid once a year for five years. Once the contract is fulfilled and we receive the final payment, it’s dropped from their books and they don’t look at it again. Likewise, we have no responsibility carrying forward.


----------



## Dish7 (Apr 2, 2017)

bucko12pt said:


> We’ve been in some of these programs for over 10 years and haven’t experienced that at all. The person overseeing the program may visit after the work is completed and once a year, or so, after that (if I invite them out), but we’ve never relinquished any control. Two of the programs were for 5 years and we’re paid once a year for five years. Once the contract is fulfilled and we receive the final payment, it’s dropped from their books and they don’t look at it again. Likewise, we have no responsibility carrying forward.


 I agree. I've been in CRP for 18 years and never ceded control other than you are required to maintain whatever the planting is as specified in the contract.That's what they pay you to do. In 18 years I've had maybe three or four visits from the conservation district. Always a friendy quick look with some maintenance suggestions. Along the lines of "you have some saplings creeping into the field that need to go."


----------



## DigitalGuru (Feb 25, 2019)

Reviving an older post...

Good points raised here. I'm looking into the EQIP program for our new property. I'm trying to get the MACD (Michigan Association of Conservation Districts) and the USDA to walk the property with me in the next couple weeks. Glad to hear from people that have used this type of program be happy with the results / involvement. It'll be interesting what they say for our small riverfront property.


----------

