Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Public land purchases HF542

Farm Bureau wants to prohibit state purchase of land because that takes it away from ag practices. Did I get it right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Farm Bureau wants to prohibit state purchase of land because that takes it away from ag practices. Did I get it right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reminds me of trying to get by on cliff's notes.

There is a subtle difference in this bill. I would be interested to see if you (or anyone) have the same take away and see the twist as I did. I'm looking for affirmation.
 
Even looking to restrict gifts to counties unless it comes with enough money to fund maintenance for 10 years. Sons of biscuits!!!!!!
 
Redirects funds (principal and interest) from the blufflands protection to the soil and water quality division. I also saw some “non point” water quality wording that might protect farmers from down stream water liability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Playing some shell game between county conservation commissions and the board of supervisors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The bluff lands part. So who can farm river bluffs? This is a new low. FB already wants to keep the public from acquiring poor farm ground for recreational use now it wants to keep non farm ground out of the public domain.

I don't know what the rules are on what is and what isn't bluff ground but I just can't see an s790 with a 16 row corn head making it up some of those bluffs.
 
Opposition to taking land off the tax rolls, as like forest reserve?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Hmm... BOR institutions are exempt, I thought. Figured it applied to all state agencies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Bonker I have no clue how declarations work and all but any idea why the Iowa DNR is undecided when this seems like a no brainer for them

The DNR legislative liaisons (they don't call them lobbyists but a spades a spade) have been instructed (and not by the DNR) to declare undecided on everything. I think I saw once, maybe twice where they declared in favor of something. The only reason they declare on anything is so they can legally speak with the legislators on the bill. And officially they only give information not opinions.

The way it is supposed to work, to the best of my understanding, a lobbyist must register on a bill so they can speak to legislators on a bill. "Undecided" means the lobbyist can ask the legislator the premise of the bill or just get background information. The lobbyist then relays the information to the group they are registered to represent who then evaluate the information and then ask the lobbyist to declare either for or against the bill.

In reality there is so much uhhh, unofficial information passed in the hallways that a group really doesn't need to declare and if they do 99.9% of the time it will be undecided. That doesn't mean they are undecided it just means they are playing the game to stay within the rules. So when folks see the DNR or even the IBA as undecided on a bill it doesn't mean we are undecided it just means we are playing the game.

I hope this helps. I'm not sure I made it any clearer because in reality it is murky at best.
 
Top Bottom