|
Missouri | No.
Unless it's seriously destructive to the environment or affecting the neighboring landowners I generally have no desire to tell a property owner what they can or cannot do with their property. As a waterfowl hunter I understand the desire to ensure quality long term habitat, for not only the birds, but the next generation of hunters. With 5k to 10k becoming common waterfowl lease prices I can see a day when the next generation of blue collar waterfowl hunters are priced right out of the tradition their previous generations enjoyed. The way I see it, they paid for it and can do as they please with it.
The two generations prior to me cleared hundreds of acres river bottoms and made some productive pieces of ground out of what was solid stands of willows and cottonwoods. When the decision was made to put one of the previous 80 acre pieces they spent a nice pile of money clearing, a couple decades prior, into the wrp program, I didn't have much say in the matter... But looking back at the decision I see where it might have been a good idea in the grand scheme of things and respect their ability to set greed aside and ride out a decision that cost them a substantial sum of money.
I'll admit the amount of tax dollars used in the program is substantial, but I'd much rather it go to wrp than the countless other worthless programs it could be funneled into. At least I or the next generation can go shoot ducks or deer off it, I'll never get anything out of the crack addict buying beer and cigarettes with government funding. The fact it acts as a filter strip and erosion control structure for several hundred acres of hill ground above it doesn't hurt my feelings either.
The acres lost to urban sprawl and concrete are a much greater concern to me. If the day comes where wrp needs to be farmed it can be, you'll play hell getting those Walmart parking lots back into production! | |
|
Wrp rant
