It's one of those questions that sounds radical until you actually run the numbers. What if the Midwest pulled 10% of its corn and soybean acres out of production and put them into something like CRP? Not a working landscape program, not a buffer strip here and there, but actual set aside acres dedicated to habitat.

On a recent episode of the Prairie Farm Podcast Coffee Time, Nicolas Lirio spent two hours digging through over 40 sources to try to answer that question at the county level. And what he found might surprise you, because the math doesn't go the direction most people assume.

The Losses Are Real, But They're Narrower Than You Think

Let's start with what you'd lose. Iowa alone planted roughly 13.1 million acres of corn and 10.1 million acres of soybeans in 2024, according to USDA NASS. That's over 23 million acres of row crops in one state. Take 10% off that, and you're looking at about 2.3 million fewer acres in production statewide, or roughly 23,000 acres per county on average.

The biggest economic hit falls on the middlemen. Seed companies, chemical companies, fertilizer dealers, co-ops, grain elevators. These are the businesses that make money on every acre that gets planted, and when 10% of those acres disappear, so does roughly 10% of their revenue. On a per county basis, the estimated loss in grain handling, input sales, and related services comes out to somewhere around $11 million per year.

Then there's cash rent. Prime farmland in Iowa's best counties is pulling north of $300 an acre. CRP rental rates sit considerably lower, often in the $150 to $225 range depending on soil type and location. That gap is real money for landowners who are used to top dollar cash rent checks.

Total it up and the county level economic reduction lands somewhere between $15 and $20 million per year. That's not nothing.

But Here's What You Gain

This is where it gets interesting. When you take supply off the market, prices move. And not in a straight line.

Agricultural markets are famously inelastic. A 10% reduction in supply doesn't produce a 10% increase in price. It can produce a much larger spike, because buyers don't just shrug and buy 10% less corn. They compete harder for what's available. Researchers at institutions like the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy have studied this dynamic extensively. Nicolas cited estimates suggesting that corn prices could increase by roughly a dollar per bushel on average, which would be roughly a 15% bump. And because that increase goes directly to the farmer's bottom line rather than being absorbed by input costs, it could effectively double what many grain farmers actually take home at the end of the year.

Then there's the recreation economy, which is enormous and often overlooked. Whitetail deer hunting alone generates over $12 billion in positive economic activity annually across the United States, according to research published through the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute. The total economic impact of hunting and shooting sports nationally exceeds $107 billion, per a 2024 Sportsmen's Alliance report.

Iowa is already one of the top whitetail destinations in the country. At the Iowa Sportsman's Club banquet, as discussed on the podcast, a single non-resident governor's tag auctioned for $43,500. That's $43,500 for the opportunity to hunt, with no guarantee of harvesting an animal. That kind of demand tells you what people would be willing to invest in Iowa if there was more habitat to support it.

CRP rental payments themselves would bring between $3 and $6 million per county annually at current rates. And the higher commodity prices from reduced supply would represent the single biggest economic gain, potentially adding $30 million or more to a county's bottom line when you combine all the factors.

What the Numbers Don't Capture

Even if you called the gains and losses a wash (and the research suggests gains actually outweigh losses), there are enormous benefits that are almost impossible to put a dollar sign on.

Water quality is the big one. Iowa's waterways carry some of the highest nitrate loads in the country, and the Des Moines Water Works has spent millions treating drinking water contaminated by agricultural runoff. Set aside acres with deep rooted perennial vegetation act as natural filters, pulling nutrients out of runoff before they reach streams and rivers.

Then there's what Kent Boucher pointed out on the podcast: Iowa's natural habitat has been reduced to a fraction of what it once was. The state was once covered by roughly 80% tallgrass prairie, according to the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation. Today, less than 0.1% of that original prairie remains. Add in the loss of forests and wetlands, and the total natural habitat left in Iowa is a tiny sliver of what it used to be. Iowa's landscape has been so thoroughly converted that even its famously productive soils owe their fertility to the prairie root systems that built them over thousands of years, root systems that are almost entirely gone now.

More habitat means more wildlife, and not just deer and pheasants. The podcast crew talked about the dream of elk and bison eventually returning to Iowa's landscape. That sounds far fetched until you consider that around 30 elk are reported in Iowa every year already, finding their way in despite the lack of connected habitat. With 10% more ground in conservation, and especially if that ground was placed in corridors rather than random checkerboard patches, you'd start building the foundation for a whole new tier of wildlife and recreation opportunities.

Why It Hasn't Happened

If the economics favor set aside acres, why don't we have them? The short answer is lobbying.

The crop insurance industry is a major player. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the federal crop insurance program cost taxpayers $17.3 billion in 2022 alone, with approximately $12 billion going to subsidize farmer premiums. Taxpayers cover roughly 62% of premium costs on average, while insurance companies have averaged a 16.8% annual rate of return on retained premiums from 2011 through 2022, well above the market rate of 10.2%.

The American Farm Bureau and crop insurance lobbyists have historically blocked proposals to tie subsidy eligibility to habitat set asides. As Nicolas discussed on the podcast, Senator Shaheen's efforts to cap insurance company administrative fees at $900 million per company were killed by crop insurance industry opposition. When there are billions on the table, the incentive to maintain the status quo is powerful.

The Bottom Line

The question isn't really whether 10% set aside acres would work economically. The research, and Nicolas's deep dive on the podcast, suggests it would more than pay for itself through higher commodity prices, recreation revenue, and CRP payments before you even factor in water quality, soil health, and wildlife benefits.

The real question is whether we have the political will to do it. And that starts with conversations like this one, where we actually look at the numbers instead of assuming the worst.

If you're a landowner looking at CRP enrollment or prairie restoration, spring is the time. Hoksey Native Seeds has been helping landowners build diverse, high quality seed mixes for over 30 years, from CRP plantings to pollinator habitat to full prairie restorations. Give us a call or check out our mixes online.

Sources: USDA NASS, U.S. Government Accountability Office, Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, Iowa Prairie Network, Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Sportsmen's Alliance, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Prairie Farm Podcast