Feedlot Public Meeting TONIGHT (10/16) in Lewiston

The latest conservation news, issues, or concerns in our backyard, city, state, or country.
High Stick
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:19 am
Location: Driftless and The West

Post by High Stick » Sun Oct 28, 2018 5:04 am

Maybe dairy farmers, like those planting corn and beans should produce less. Supply and demand. If they supply is so high, putting more rows of corn and more dairy cattle out there isn't going to fix it. Interestingly, I had this very conversation with a farming friend this week. He basically said that farmers need to look in the mirror and stop planting right up to the edge of the stream. Farming's reaction to pricing has always been to produce more.

This romantic idea of what you think farming is, is dying. American agriculture is at a crossroads, and they need to figure some things out.

We'll get to subsidies another day.

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm
Location: I live where dipshit says I do every chance he gets.

Post by S.T.Fanatic » Mon Oct 29, 2018 2:54 pm

Farmers know it but planting less doesn't pay the bills. The clean water bill is on the chopping block. Gotta love how the liberal news outlet makes it sound like there has never been a buffer requirement. Talks about using the amendment money to pay farmers being unconstitutional. It would make the most sense to enter the buffers into a perpetual conservation easement and pay the land owners accordingly. IMO that would qualify as using the funds to protect water quality.

Subsidies, good luck with that one. There are way to many politicians that own farm land to ever see that reduced or eliminated.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

User avatar
mcktrout
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 9:56 am

Post by mcktrout » Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:43 am

IMO

Buffers are a good practice. Compensating farmers, like the proposals being offered, may be more cost effective than trying to monitor+enforce+penalize. Yes, we are paying farmers to do what is already in their best interest. But if the result is increased compliance at reduced cost, it could be a win-win for everybody.

High Stick
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:19 am
Location: Driftless and The West

Post by High Stick » Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:21 am


S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm
Location: I live where dipshit says I do every chance he gets.

Post by S.T.Fanatic » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:47 am

Yup all Trumps fault. There wasn't bad markets before 2016 and rural kids weren't going to college because there wasn't enough money to be made in agriculture. Give me a frickin break CNN. Easy to push down the throats of city slickers that dont know anything about rural america.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm
Location: I live where dipshit says I do every chance he gets.

Re: Feedlot Public Meeting TONIGHT (10/16) in Lewiston

Post by S.T.Fanatic » Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:22 pm

Going to get interesting.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

User avatar
Randy
Site Admin
Posts: 698
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 11:13 pm
Location: Rochester, MN
Contact:

Re: Feedlot Public Meeting TONIGHT (10/16) in Lewiston

Post by Randy » Sat Jan 05, 2019 10:42 am

What's going to get interesting?
Image

brntrout
Posts: 2630
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: Feedlot Public Meeting TONIGHT (10/16) in Lewiston

Post by brntrout » Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:48 pm

Another no brain'er. Allowing a facility that will get rid of animal waste by spreading it on top of thin top soil covering fractured limestone is not a good idea. Whatever is water soluble placed on that top soil will travel straight down to our ground water table, not good. Maybe that's the interesting part?

IMO a lot of feedlot facilities in place now in SE MN should not have been permitted to happen in the first place! In a region cover by Karst geology its not the place for these types of operations, unless the idea of adding further to our existing water pollution problems is appealing to some FOOLS?

At least the MPCA "finally"did the right thing regarding the hog facility by not allowing permitting for that project. Lets hope the same is true for this project.

I completely understand people have to make a living and all that, but it should not be at the expense of polluting our ground water that everyone utilizes. Our ground water is already polluted more than it needs to be, why speed up the process of totally polluting it beyond repair?

I forgot to ask, what is the status of this project and how many meetings have been held since 10-16-18?
Last edited by brntrout on Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm
Location: I live where dipshit says I do every chance he gets.

Re: Feedlot Public Meeting TONIGHT (10/16) in Lewiston

Post by S.T.Fanatic » Mon Jan 07, 2019 7:53 am

MPCA ruled that an EIS wasnt necessary, thus my post.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

brntrout
Posts: 2630
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: Feedlot Public Meeting TONIGHT (10/16) in Lewiston

Post by brntrout » Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:33 pm

What's done is done. As you can tell I'm NOT fond of the MPCA whatsoever! Not that it matters now, but that was a terrible decision IMO!

Post Reply