Federal government paying farmers to post land

[skhunter]

Talked to a farmer today about shooting geese on his land. He told me the federal government is paying him $3.00/acre to keep hunters from shooting the birds on his pea stubble.

 

[Brutus]

Is he being truthful or is it another non government organization such as DU? Within Saskatchewan flyways there are numerous so called conservation organizations that contract land agreements with crop farmers to limit or eliminate public access to migratory bird hunting. Three bucks per acre seems like depression era prices.

 

[skhunter]

Is he being truthful or is it another non government organization such as DU? Within Saskatchewan flyways there are numerous so called conservation organizations that contract land agreements with crop farmers to limit or eliminate public access to migratory bird hunting. Three bucks per acre seems like depression era prices.

Checked with a crop insurance adjuster. He told me it is a federal program.

$3.00/acre is pretty good considering the peas have already been harvested.

 

[Archer Sam]

If it was the government would it not be illegal to sell us a license to hunt while at the same time paying someone else to stop us from doing what we paid for the right to do?

 

[skhunter]

If it was the government would it not be illegal to sell us a license to hunt while at the same time paying someone else to stop us from doing what we paid for the right to do?

Not as long as hunting is a privilege.

But then I am no lawyer.

 

[icontact]

If it was the government would it not be illegal to sell us a license to hunt while at the same time paying someone else to stop us from doing what we paid for the right to do?

Actually hunting on deeded land is a privilege not a right at least that is the case in Alberta.

 

[Galt]

The question is why?

 

[Grizzly Adams]

The question is why?

Yeah, we're not talking threatened or endangered birds here, in fact the opposite.

Grizz

 

[FLHTCUI]

The question is why?

They need another reason to raise taxes next fiscal year...
Rob

 

[skhunter]

The question is why?

The theory is that if the birds are left undisturbed they will not feed on yet to be harvested crops. What they don't understand is as soon as the peas are gone the birds move on to non harvested crops anyway.

 

[Dukester]

Does the farmer have to agree to not hunt the birds?
$3 / acre might buy some spray or fert but I wouldn't give up my bird hunting for that. A large acre non-hunter farmer, not a bad deal.

 

[skhunter]

Does the farmer have to agree to not hunt the birds?
$3 / acre might buy some spray or fert but I wouldn't give up my bird hunting for that. A large acre non-hunter farmer, not a bad deal.

Yes, no hunting by anyone.

 

[TheTooner]

The theory is that if the birds are left undisturbed they will not feed on yet to be harvested crops. What they don't understand is as soon as the peas are gone the birds move on to non harvested crops anyway.

Are farmers with unharvested crops entitled to some kind of compensation from the Federal government if birds feed on their unharvested crops? Why would the Federal government think it should be spending taxpayers' money on bird-brained schemes* to protect the private property of some individuals from wild creatures?




*Dead birds don't eat. Hunters will pay the government for licenses to reduce the feeding bird population at their own expense. The government should encourage more hunting, especially of snow geese.

 

[skhunter]

Are farmers with unharvested crops entitled to some kind of compensation from the Federal government if birds feed on their unharvested crops? Why would the Federal government think it should be spending taxpayers' money on bird-brained schemes* to protect the private property of some individuals from wild creatures?


*Dead birds don't eat. Hunters will pay the government for licenses to reduce the feeding bird population at their own expense. The government should encourage more hunting, especially of snow geese.

Yes.

If the farmer has a crop lying in swath and the birds get to it an eat it. The farmer puts in a claim, an adjuster comes out and assesses the amount of grain lost to thee birds.

The government then pays the farmer for the amount of grain lost.

 

[Suka]

Talked to a farmer today about shooting geese on his land. He told me the federal government is paying him $3.00/acre to keep hunters from shooting the birds on his pea stubble.

I'd say look down, someone's pulling your leg.

 

[skhunter]

I'd say look down, someone's pulling your leg.

I checked it out with a crop insurance adjuster and he confirmed it. He told me it is a federal government program.

The farmer is a friend of mine, not some stranger.

 

[limit time]

No hunting means NO GUNS !

 

[MackForce]

Unreal. Gotta find a way for those portfolios to spend the money.

 

[frabill]

If I was the farmer I would take it as being paid to hunt my own land. Right after mr government drives off.

 

[Grock-co]

Actually hunting on deeded land is a privilege not a right at least that is the case in Alberta.

This is exactly the truth, I decide who hunts on my land, if the government wants to pay for that decision all the better. It's the land owners choice nobody else's.