Land is up significantly across all classifications. Tillable, rec, pasture, you name it.
There are some practices that create more timber (Tree CRP programs) but there are certainly a lot of flaws in it.
Spysar
Well-Known Member
I'm learning a bit about Iowas history, trying to answer my own questions. I found out Iowa was first settled in 1833, indians were mostly booted out. It seems the eastern side of iowa was where the trees were, and towards the west was grassland with few trees. Farmers had a boom and bust around the 1st WW. About 1933 they created a farm (act)? Where farmers were subsidized by the gov and paying them not to farm..... I'm still reading about it all... I haven't found much info yet on how many trees there were originally. And it seems like farmland is way more valuable than timbered land, .... I was wrong about that. But hunting has defiantly made timbered land more valuable.
Windlooker
Well-Known Member
Iowa has about 8.43 percent timber. At one time the state was as much as 20 percent timber. It’s called farming. Bulldozing acres for production.
As little as 20 years ago farmers considered timber in Iowa garbage because it wasn’t tillable. Many resident and NR landowners bought very cheap.
Iowa’s video stars caused the influx of hunting in Iowa not Governors tags. Today they’re not called Governors tags btw, they’re called specialty tags.
Iowa can blame their famous video hunting residents for the battles each year and soaring rec land prices.
As little as 20 years ago farmers considered timber in Iowa garbage because it wasn’t tillable. Many resident and NR landowners bought very cheap.
Iowa’s video stars caused the influx of hunting in Iowa not Governors tags. Today they’re not called Governors tags btw, they’re called specialty tags.
Iowa can blame their famous video hunting residents for the battles each year and soaring rec land prices.
Last edited:
Spysar
Well-Known Member
I realize trees were cleared for farming.....then the government pays people to not farm...? Just trying to learn how Iowa got to where it is today, it's interesting
Windlooker
Well-Known Member
CRP programs are designed to deter crop planting citing soil erosion and preservation. It’s an attempt to strike a balance between planted and non planted acres. Which is fine. One could argue that crp is paying people not to farm.
It’s actually closer to 8% now. Based on fed data.
It bounces around between 6 to 8.5% based on the source & the year. Just after 2012-2013, we lost a lot. When grain spikes- we doze out timber.
There’s approximately 138,000 private landowners that own all this forest across the state. That’s not very much if u think about it….
We have APPROXIMATELY 2x that amount that are hunters.
These timbered acres are largely stacked on the S bottom tier, West edge & East edge of iowa. Top 2/3rd of state are extremely open & void of significant forest.
Again, 138,000 private landowners who own forest. Over 15,000,000 hunters across the US. If .01% of hunters wanted to own land in iowa- we would not have enough. Is it that many? Probably not. But we absolutely could bring in another 10,000-20,000…. We can’t handle that amount. Even as it sits- there’s pressure on the land & resource that’s currently growing worse.
Saying it how it is… my NR friends who come from extremely expensive but poor quality hunting land in their state, many have no issue paying $4-8k for land. Give them tags after 10 years- They will come by the thousands. I know countless who won’t stop at 80 acres. They will buy 100-500. These are great people who want great hunting but we don’t have the land! We can’t increase the demand for this tiny slice of land. We can’t handle it. Some of these states need to fix their own broken system so it doesn’t collapse ours!!!!!!!
It bounces around between 6 to 8.5% based on the source & the year. Just after 2012-2013, we lost a lot. When grain spikes- we doze out timber.
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
There’s approximately 138,000 private landowners that own all this forest across the state. That’s not very much if u think about it….
We have APPROXIMATELY 2x that amount that are hunters.
These timbered acres are largely stacked on the S bottom tier, West edge & East edge of iowa. Top 2/3rd of state are extremely open & void of significant forest.
Again, 138,000 private landowners who own forest. Over 15,000,000 hunters across the US. If .01% of hunters wanted to own land in iowa- we would not have enough. Is it that many? Probably not. But we absolutely could bring in another 10,000-20,000…. We can’t handle that amount. Even as it sits- there’s pressure on the land & resource that’s currently growing worse.
Saying it how it is… my NR friends who come from extremely expensive but poor quality hunting land in their state, many have no issue paying $4-8k for land. Give them tags after 10 years- They will come by the thousands. I know countless who won’t stop at 80 acres. They will buy 100-500. These are great people who want great hunting but we don’t have the land! We can’t increase the demand for this tiny slice of land. We can’t handle it. Some of these states need to fix their own broken system so it doesn’t collapse ours!!!!!!!
JNRBRONC
Well-Known Member
The western part of the state was more open grassland (praire pot hole region), which occasionally caught fire, most times via lightning. The burning off of the grass prevented the spread/intrusion of brushy plants and trees. Very common practice on CRP switch grass ground to burn it off every couple of years to get the invading trees and multiflora rose out of it.
A fair amount of timber along creek, lakes and rivers.
A fair amount of timber along creek, lakes and rivers.
Windlooker
Well-Known Member
Come by the thousands is a gross assumption. Iowa will have a bigger influx of people now that Gov Reynolds dropped the tax on pensions. Hunting is the least of states population influx problems with this development.
Now you’ll have “thousands” of previous NRs convert to R’s and buy up the land. I guess that’s ok. This tax development will have big impact.
While focused in one area they slipped one by over there. Lol. Gotta love politics
Now you’ll have “thousands” of previous NRs convert to R’s and buy up the land. I guess that’s ok. This tax development will have big impact.
While focused in one area they slipped one by over there. Lol. Gotta love politics
Last edited:
Spysar
Well-Known Member
I did wind up reading that most of the total wooded land in Iowa is privately owned. So non res hunters hunting public land in trees are packed in the few wooded areas. The great hunting can be gone quick if bad choices are made. Even a small thing like raising the amount of non res tags by a few hundred could probably ruin public land.
Disagree. In 20+ years I’ve personally witnessed THOUSANDS of farms be purchased by NR’s. In any given year- I personally speak or discuss land with hundreds of NR’s. If I had a dollar for “if I could hunt iowa every year, I’d buy ground today”…. I’d have “thousands” of dollars. We have 5 times the applicants currently than tags allotted at $550+ per tag.
If folks understood the amount of $ out there + guys that are fleeing their disastrous states- it’s thousands of people in every state: MI, PA, NY, MN, WI, LA, NC, SC, AR, AL, FL, GA, etc etc. I’ve literally seen landowners from all of these states in my neighborhoods. I don’t fault them or blame them a bit. We just need to wake up to the sleeping giant of demand that will buy up the tiny amount of land we have vs other states.
These people would literally have 100x++ the amount of great land if they all fixed their own states. They are leaving them because they are ruined. When a fraction of them come here- it will easily eat up any farms that come to market. Let me put it this way- there’s enough demand where they could easily buy 100% of the timbered acres in iowa.
*tax reductions act as an incentive for people to MOVE to the state. Becoming RESIDENTS. I had the benefit of moving to this state 20+ years ago with the benefit of being a R & hunting yearly. If folks want that benefit - they can move here.
Last edited:
tall@wide
PMA Member
I would have bought land in Iowa instead of Illinois if I could have hunted there every year instead of every 4 years. I think out of state hunters buying land would be a good thing overall for whitetail management, but opening up Iowa to NR resident hunters like Illinois, would be a disaster.
Windlooker
Well-Known Member
Again. I’ll challenge your thousands comment anytime. That’s a number you’re throwing out there with zero support. Please support it with data from somewhere.
Again the recent tax changes will impact this topic more than anything.
Again the recent tax changes will impact this topic more than anything.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
You can add timber with CRP. I have probably done 80-100 acres on farms in Minnesota and Iowa .,It’s a fun process, takes time. I love planting oaks, spruce, cedar, plum, crabapple.
If you ask your NRCS/FSA … the plans out there ! 15 years of good CRP Payment right now . I’d advice landowners to look into it.
Remember you can split a crop field with a 5 row windbreak or shelter belt. I’m telling you the wildlife love it !!
I saw 70+ pheasants fly into one of our shelter-belts in Minnesota. That made me bit proud that day.
If you ask your NRCS/FSA … the plans out there ! 15 years of good CRP Payment right now . I’d advice landowners to look into it.
Remember you can split a crop field with a 5 row windbreak or shelter belt. I’m telling you the wildlife love it !!
I saw 70+ pheasants fly into one of our shelter-belts in Minnesota. That made me bit proud that day.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
I also had a 170+ inch buck living in my tree plantings … but he got hit by a car in December (cry tears)
One thing I see on a daily basis that has def accelerated is chopping tracts up. Look at alot of the auctions. Farms getting sold in multiple smaller tracts. It's sad to see honestly but I also understand why it's done. This will def have an impact on quality in certain neighborhoods.
Daver
PMA Member
FWIW, "Iowa's video stars" are/were often receiving Governor's tags. Perhaps that was more true 10-15 years ago, but A LOT of the rationale behind someone successfully getting a Governors tag was whether or not they would be filming their hunt and promoting the herd in Iowa, etc.
I worked for a company in those days that had multiple applicants every year for the Governor's tags and that was one of the key points made on the application(s) that were sent in to the state...FWIW.
As far as who to "blame" for the soaring land prices...it is not accurate to identify only Iowa video hunting residents, although they are certainly in that mix. I could take you to dozens of farms though that were purchased by out-of-staters quite a few years ago as they came to realize that Iowa was "special" in that they could hunt during the rut with archery tackle and see more BIG bucks in a few days than they could in YEARS worth of hunting in their home state. That recognition and understanding is not just a recent phenomenon.
Rous14
PMA Member
I mentioned this very thing in a post with regards to Skip and I talking about the hunting in Michigan. These smaller chunks of land within a block might be the most overlooked least talked about reason why quality goes down hill so fast regardless of state/area. Obviously the more hunters you pack in to a block....even if they’re selective “trophy hunters” that let young deer walk, the less chance a mature deer has to survive. Very difficult to have quality hunting in these types of areas/states.
I think it's actually worse to have "selective" neighbors as they pass up the marginal quality bucks and select the high potential 3 year olds.