Giant Deer of Iowa are rapidly becoming a past memory

[tall@wide]

Not doubt you will see a more balanced age class and an overall increase in antler size going to a one buck State. But not top end deer. You will high grade the herd. You will have tons of 130-140 class 8 points that get to 4,5,6,7 years old and virtually no 160+ inch deer over 3. The only people that will benefit from going to one buck initially is the large landowners as they will have enough cover and food to pull those young bucks onto their properties and hold them. Their only issue is being able to cull enough older low scoring bucks to keep the young studs that have the best genetics alive. Because when the 160+ bucks become the rare opportunity in the woods they only have to roam off the reservation one time to be killed. Over time even the large landowners won’t be able to overcome the high grading effects and will suffer the genetic consequences of 130-140” 8 points doing 90% of the breeding. Just look at the Amana colonies 20,000 acre debacle. Some of the best habitat in the State with abundant high quality tillable run into the ground by having a one buck policy for the last 20+ years right here in the Great State of Iowa. They used to produce several giants year in and year out. Now it’s rare. Now they are going back to 2 bucks but the damage has been done. The genetic pool has been compromised. It could take decades of culling to reverse the damage that was done. Only time will tell.

Just use some common sense and think about yourself if you are managing for 170”+ deer for example. Now think about all the money and time spent to put in food plots etc. Let alone the cost of the land. Let’s say after monitoring cameras all summer you have one 5 year old that is close to 170” on your farm that you are going to target. Are you going to be willing to burn your one and only buck tag in a one buck State on one of the five 130” 8 points on your farm or will you hold out til the last minute trying get the opportunity at your target buck? Then after season you find out a guy hunting a half mile away killed the 170” the last couple weeks of the season. Then the next year you have 7 130” 8 points and one 165” 10 that you believe is 4. You decide to pass to let him get to 5. He gets shot the last week of October a mile away chasing a doe. Now your just hoping a big boy moves into your farm for does during the rut or for food late season so you hold off taking out a cull because you only have one buck tag and who wants to shoot another 130” 8. You’re not spending thousands on food plots and box blinds to shoot 130” bucks. So you hold off. Before you know it you haven’t filled a buck tag for three, four, five years and so on. All the while you see more and more upper age class deer sporting 130” racks and less and less high scoring bucks. Now every neighbor that was kinda managing that used to try for 160”+ deer will shoot the first buck that breaks 150” regardless of age but still passes all the 130 class 8 points.

That is high grading. You will get an increase in average antler size, more balanced age structure and virtually no top end bucks.

If you manage the only thing you can control is yourself and your property. Having multiple buck tags is the best herd management tool in your arsenal. Just like a chainsaw is the best habitat tool in your arsenal. Both used correctly will yield tremendous results.

Cull those 130” 8 and let the better genetic bucks breed and get age on them. It helps you and the neighborhood regardless of what the neighbors are doing.

I’d rather have 50% of the hunters shooting 1 1/2 year old bucks as a land manager than those same guys targeting 160” bucks or even young 10 points. Because 160” bucks or young 10’s that could potentially reach 160”+ are far fewer across the landscape than 1 1/2 year olds.

Anyone that is serious about managing and wanting top end bucks that is pushing for one buck is advocating for their own demise in my opinion.

When you think of high grading. Take a look at Texas. The whole State was high graded to the point that anyone that wants to hunt higher scoring deer have to high fence their properties and stocked the place with better genetics. That is because the genetics have been compromised for decades and decades by guys trying for higher scoring 10 points and passing cull 8 points. The battle to bring it back by now culling 8 points will take more years than most guys have left to hunt. So the only option is to clear the landscape and just start over inside their high fence.

That is what will ultimately happen in Iowa on the larger managed farms. When land segmentation and high grading leads to widespread low scoring genetics. There will be no other alternative. There is no place left for the guys with money to flee to. Because there is really no other States with regulations conducive to growing top end bucks. Baiting, crossbows, and November gun seasons have basically ruined all the other midwest States.

Without increasing the overall deer population significantly and culling lower scoring bucks Iowa will continue down the high grading road. Just a question of how fast. Land segmentation speeds it up. Hard to slow that with land prices and everyone wanting there own place. Social media pimping big bucks for likes speeds it up. Hard to slow that with everyone on their phones 24/7. But if you want to really speed it up just go to a one buck State. We will be there in just 15-20 years. Just like the Amana Colonies accomplished.

I agree high grading is a big problem. If hunters take the best genetic bucks and leave the poor, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what happens over time. My home farm in southern Iowa contains a lot of poor genetic bucks. You can really gauge hunter pressure in a neighborhood by buck quality. The heavily hunted areas always contain tons of culls and poor genetics.

 

[MN Slick]

Iowa needs a grassroots movement to get the population up signicantly! Without it, high grading will only intensify, just like iowaqdm stated. This is true even if Iowa goes to one buck. Where are the young, tech savvy social media guys?

 

[letemgrow]

Not doubt you will see a more balanced age class and an overall increase in antler size going to a one buck State. But not top end deer. You will high grade the herd. You will have tons of 130-140 class 8 points that get to 4,5,6,7 years old and virtually no 160+ inch deer over 3. The only people that will benefit from going to one buck initially is the large landowners as they will have enough cover and food to pull those young bucks onto their properties and hold them. Their only issue is being able to cull enough older low scoring bucks to keep the young studs that have the best genetics alive. Because when the 160+ bucks become the rare opportunity in the woods they only have to roam off the reservation one time to be killed. Over time even the large landowners won’t be able to overcome the high grading effects and will suffer the genetic consequences of 130-140” 8 points doing 90% of the breeding. Just look at the Amana colonies 20,000 acre debacle. Some of the best habitat in the State with abundant high quality tillable run into the ground by having a one buck policy for the last 20+ years right here in the Great State of Iowa. They used to produce several giants year in and year out. Now it’s rare. Now they are going back to 2 bucks but the damage has been done. The genetic pool has been compromised. It could take decades of culling to reverse the damage that was done. Only time will tell.

Just use some common sense and think about yourself if you are managing for 170”+ deer for example. Now think about all the money and time spent to put in food plots etc. Let alone the cost of the land. Let’s say after monitoring cameras all summer you have one 5 year old that is close to 170” on your farm that you are going to target. Are you going to be willing to burn your one and only buck tag in a one buck State on one of the five 130” 8 points on your farm or will you hold out til the last minute trying get the opportunity at your target buck? Then after season you find out a guy hunting a half mile away killed the 170” the last couple weeks of the season. Then the next year you have 7 130” 8 points and one 165” 10 that you believe is 4. You decide to pass to let him get to 5. He gets shot the last week of October a mile away chasing a doe. Now your just hoping a big boy moves into your farm for does during the rut or for food late season so you hold off taking out a cull because you only have one buck tag and who wants to shoot another 130” 8. You’re not spending thousands on food plots and box blinds to shoot 130” bucks. So you hold off. Before you know it you haven’t filled a buck tag for three, four, five years and so on. All the while you see more and more upper age class deer sporting 130” racks and less and less high scoring bucks. Now every neighbor that was kinda managing that used to try for 160”+ deer will shoot the first buck that breaks 150” regardless of age but still passes all the 130 class 8 points.

That is high grading. You will get an increase in average antler size, more balanced age structure and virtually no top end bucks.

If you manage the only thing you can control is yourself and your property. Having multiple buck tags is the best herd management tool in your arsenal. Just like a chainsaw is the best habitat tool in your arsenal. Both used correctly will yield tremendous results.

Cull those 130” 8 and let the better genetic bucks breed and get age on them. It helps you and the neighborhood regardless of what the neighbors are doing.

I’d rather have 50% of the hunters shooting 1 1/2 year old bucks as a land manager than those same guys targeting 160” bucks or even young 10 points. Because 160” bucks or young 10’s that could potentially reach 160”+ are far fewer across the landscape than 1 1/2 year olds.

Anyone that is serious about managing and wanting top end bucks that is pushing for one buck is advocating for their own demise in my opinion.

When you think of high grading. Take a look at Texas. The whole State was high graded to the point that anyone that wants to hunt higher scoring deer have to high fence their properties and stocked the place with better genetics. That is because the genetics have been compromised for decades and decades by guys trying for higher scoring 10 points and passing cull 8 points. The battle to bring it back by now culling 8 points will take more years than most guys have left to hunt. So the only option is to clear the landscape and just start over inside their high fence.

That is what will ultimately happen in Iowa on the larger managed farms. When land segmentation and high grading leads to widespread low scoring genetics. There will be no other alternative. There is no place left for the guys with money to flee to. Because there is really no other States with regulations conducive to growing top end bucks. Baiting, crossbows, and November gun seasons have basically ruined all the other midwest States.

Without increasing the overall deer population significantly and culling lower scoring bucks Iowa will continue down the high grading road. Just a question of how fast. Land segmentation speeds it up. Hard to slow that with land prices and everyone wanting there own place. Social media pimping big bucks for likes speeds it up. Hard to slow that with everyone on their phones 24/7. But if you want to really speed it up just go to a one buck State. We will be there in just 15-20 years. Just like the Amana Colonies accomplished.

How many hunters are actually burning tags on older bucks many consider culls in 2-3 tag states? Here in MO, I don’t see anyone doing that with their one archery tag and one firearms any-deer tag.

I see the majority of OOS hunters shooting/hunting “quality” bucks on both tags only. The residents and youth are holding out more and more for 130” deer, which means more 130” 2 year olds getting popped since they’re a touch less harder to kill than a 130” 5 year old.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rous14]

Cwd counties which are probably pushing 25% of the state now.

Gotcha. Didn’t know that. Can they be killed w any weapon/season as well?

 

[MN Slick]

How many hunters are actually burning tags on older bucks many consider culls in 2-3 tag states? Here in MO, I don’t see anyone doing that with their one archery tag and one firearms any-deer tag.

I see the majority of OOS hunters shooting/hunting “quality” bucks on both tags only. The residents and youth are holding out more and more for 130” deer, which means more 130” 2 year olds getting popped since they’re a touch less harder to kill than a 130” 5 year old.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow, it's hard to believe NR's are responsible for 25 to more than 50% in the northern tier counties.

 

[Daver]

Wow, it's hard to believe NR's are responsible for 25 to more than 50% in the northern tier counties.

I don't have a lot of "on the ground" insight on the goings on in Missouri, but I don't find that number surprising, FWIW.

Lots of NR's flow to northern Missouri v. southern Iowa to purchase land because as a NR there they can get buck tags every year there v. waiting 4+ years to draw in Iowa.

 

[JBAGS]

Make this 1,001 posts I've seen. All good. All within the rules. We cant say that cell cameras haven't fundamentally changed things tho.
View attachment 130577

Saw this and several others like it as well. Kind of embarrassing IMO to post something like this. There were people praising how good of a hunter he is, blah, blah, blah. Gimme a break, he got a pic, drove overnight and killed it in the first hour of the hunt. Without a cell cam, he's nowhere near this farm when the buck is on it.
Cell cams have to go. And I own an out of state farm too and use them. They're great for monitoring what's around. Just like they "clarified" the party hunting loophole, they need to do the same to using electronics to aid in hunting. It's already in the regs. Force the camera companies to dump photos every 48hours or once a week whatever. On demand pics are cool but that's not "hunting". You want to see what's on the cams more often, you should have to walk in and check the camera or at least be within cell service of it.

 

[Muskrat24]

Saw this and several others like it as well. Kind of embarrassing IMO to post something like this. There were people praising how good of a hunter he is, blah, blah, blah. Gimme a break, he got a pic, drove overnight and killed it in the first hour of the hunt. Without a cell cam, he's nowhere near this farm when the buck is on it.
Cell cams have to go. And I own an out of state farm too and use them. They're great for monitoring what's around. Just like they "clarified" the party hunting loophole, they need to do the same to using electronics to aid in hunting. It's already in the regs. Force the camera companies to dump photos every 48hours or once a week whatever. On demand pics are cool but that's not "hunting". You want to see what's on the cams more often, you should have to walk in and check the camera or at least be within cell service of it.

I get the point that a lot of people don’t like cell cams being utilized to harvest the target buck. My question goes back to have cell cams increased the harvest success of buck tags. Has anyone dove into those numbers? Have cell cams increased the buck harvest and the percentage of buck harvests to the overall harvest. IF NOT, then a buck was going to get harvested but doesn’t that mean there is another buck still alive and the older age class buck is now dead? I can get on the bandwagon of cell cams contributing to high grading but without the numbers I have my doubts that cell cams have increased the overall buck success but maybe I am wrong. I can also jump on board with the premise that a few of the larger bucks would get another year older and another year bigger without trail cams but again unless the success rate on bucks has gone drastically up with the increased weapons and cell cams we are just pounding sand like on the one buck argument. IAQDM numbers clearly don’t support the multiple buck harvests substantially impact buck numbers and I would suspect trail cams/weapons haven’t drastically changed the harvest data either. IMO the population has to increase to get everyone (trophy/meat/casual hunters) happy with the experience again. But with that, access goes down because of greed. We are in a bad spot and comes down to rich man’s game if this spiral continues.

 

[MarkF]

Not doubt you will see a more balanced age class and an overall increase in antler size going to a one buck State. But not top end deer. You will high grade the herd. You will have tons of 130-140 class 8 points that get to 4,5,6,7 years old and virtually no 160+ inch deer over 3. The only people that will benefit from going to one buck initially is the large landowners as they will have enough cover and food to pull those young bucks onto their properties and hold them. Their only issue is being able to cull enough older low scoring bucks to keep the young studs that have the best genetics alive. Because when the 160+ bucks become the rare opportunity in the woods they only have to roam off the reservation one time to be killed. Over time even the large landowners won’t be able to overcome the high grading effects and will suffer the genetic consequences of 130-140” 8 points doing 90% of the breeding. Just look at the Amana colonies 20,000 acre debacle. Some of the best habitat in the State with abundant high quality tillable run into the ground by having a one buck policy for the last 20+ years right here in the Great State of Iowa. They used to produce several giants year in and year out. Now it’s rare. Now they are going back to 2 bucks but the damage has been done. The genetic pool has been compromised. It could take decades of culling to reverse the damage that was done. Only time will tell.

Just use some common sense and think about yourself if you are managing for 170”+ deer for example. Now think about all the money and time spent to put in food plots etc. Let alone the cost of the land. Let’s say after monitoring cameras all summer you have one 5 year old that is close to 170” on your farm that you are going to target. Are you going to be willing to burn your one and only buck tag in a one buck State on one of the five 130” 8 points on your farm or will you hold out til the last minute trying get the opportunity at your target buck? Then after season you find out a guy hunting a half mile away killed the 170” the last couple weeks of the season. Then the next year you have 7 130” 8 points and one 165” 10 that you believe is 4. You decide to pass to let him get to 5. He gets shot the last week of October a mile away chasing a doe. Now your just hoping a big boy moves into your farm for does during the rut or for food late season so you hold off taking out a cull because you only have one buck tag and who wants to shoot another 130” 8. You’re not spending thousands on food plots and box blinds to shoot 130” bucks. So you hold off. Before you know it you haven’t filled a buck tag for three, four, five years and so on. All the while you see more and more upper age class deer sporting 130” racks and less and less high scoring bucks. Now every neighbor that was kinda managing that used to try for 160”+ deer will shoot the first buck that breaks 150” regardless of age but still passes all the 130 class 8 points.

That is high grading. You will get an increase in average antler size, more balanced age structure and virtually no top end bucks.

If you manage the only thing you can control is yourself and your property. Having multiple buck tags is the best herd management tool in your arsenal. Just like a chainsaw is the best habitat tool in your arsenal. Both used correctly will yield tremendous results.

Cull those 130” 8 and let the better genetic bucks breed and get age on them. It helps you and the neighborhood regardless of what the neighbors are doing.

I’d rather have 50% of the hunters shooting 1 1/2 year old bucks as a land manager than those same guys targeting 160” bucks or even young 10 points. Because 160” bucks or young 10’s that could potentially reach 160”+ are far fewer across the landscape than 1 1/2 year olds.

Anyone that is serious about managing and wanting top end bucks that is pushing for one buck is advocating for their own demise in my opinion.

When you think of high grading. Take a look at Texas. The whole State was high graded to the point that anyone that wants to hunt higher scoring deer have to high fence their properties and stocked the place with better genetics. That is because the genetics have been compromised for decades and decades by guys trying for higher scoring 10 points and passing cull 8 points. The battle to bring it back by now culling 8 points will take more years than most guys have left to hunt. So the only option is to clear the landscape and just start over inside their high fence.

That is what will ultimately happen in Iowa on the larger managed farms. When land segmentation and high grading leads to widespread low scoring genetics. There will be no other alternative. There is no place left for the guys with money to flee to. Because there is really no other States with regulations conducive to growing top end bucks. Baiting, crossbows, and November gun seasons have basically ruined all the other midwest States.

Without increasing the overall deer population significantly and culling lower scoring bucks Iowa will continue down the high grading road. Just a question of how fast. Land segmentation speeds it up. Hard to slow that with land prices and everyone wanting there own place. Social media pimping big bucks for likes speeds it up. Hard to slow that with everyone on their phones 24/7. But if you want to really speed it up just go to a one buck State. We will be there in just 15-20 years. Just like the Amana Colonies accomplished.

What your describing is exactly what’s happening already in my areas, only difference I see is almost everyone is using they’re 2nd and sometimes 3rd tag to kill another really good genetic buck, virtually nobody is killing the poor genetic older bucks. At least with a one buck state it stops someone from shooting multiple good bucks a year. Currently all I see is high grading times 2 or 3, I know of multiple guys that have already killed 2 and 3 bucks and not one was a turd, all 3-5 year olds with at least 10 points and score 130 to 160. Guys talk about needing the extra tags to “manage cull bucks” but I bet 1% actually do.

 

[newfarmer]

What your describing is exactly what’s happening already in my areas, only difference I see is almost everyone is using they’re 2nd and sometimes 3rd tag to kill another really good genetic buck, virtually nobody is killing the poor genetic older bucks. At least with a one buck state it stops someone from shooting multiple good bucks a year. Currently all I see is high grading times 2 or 3, I know of multiple guys that have already killed 2 and 3 bucks and not one was a turd, all 3-5 year olds with at least 10 points and score 130 to 160. Guys talk about needing the extra tags to “manage cull bucks” but I bet 1% actually do.

I shot 2 bucks last year, one was wounded and I doubt would have made it. The other one was a spike on one side and 4 pt on the other (was that way 2 years in a row). This year I have a 130" 6 pt running around that I am trying to kill and a very mature 10 pt...those are the only 2 that will get shot near me... I am in the 1% I am sure, but I will admit this- I dont necessarily "care" what I put my tag on once I actually need meat. Send a yearling my way, whatever- I think there are an awfully lot of people who are putting deer on a pedestal. I am in a no doe area, so it doesnt make a lot of sense to use my LOT anterless tags either... I think again, first and foremost, we just need to scale back doe tags with the amount of EHD and CWD shooting that is going on in the state right now. Add in the possibility of does losing fertility or the ability to produce twins all the time like they used to, its a perfect storm for the "1 any sex tag and unlimited doe tags" to make the state a whole lot worse with the lack of cover we have.

 

[Daver]

What your describing is exactly what’s happening already in my areas, only difference I see is almost everyone is using they’re 2nd and sometimes 3rd tag to kill another really good genetic buck, virtually nobody is killing the poor genetic older bucks. At least with a one buck state it stops someone from shooting multiple good bucks a year. Currently all I see is high grading times 2 or 3, I know of multiple guys that have already killed 2 and 3 bucks and not one was a turd, all 3-5 year olds with at least 10 points and score 130 to 160. Guys talk about needing the extra tags to “manage cull bucks” but I bet 1% actually do.

I don't know the number, but I certainly will use an "extra" tag to knock out a lo po buck. I sense it is more than 1% that will do this...but I think it is probably a low number, FWIW. I am not really opposed to a one buck limit, but I am not at all convinced that it is the solution to the high grading dilemma.

 

[iowaqdm]

What your describing is exactly what’s happening already in my areas, only difference I see is almost everyone is using they’re 2nd and sometimes 3rd tag to kill another really good genetic buck, virtually nobody is killing the poor genetic older bucks. At least with a one buck state it stops someone from shooting multiple good bucks a year. Currently all I see is high grading times 2 or 3, I know of multiple guys that have already killed 2 and 3 bucks and not one was a turd, all 3-5 year olds with at least 10 points and score 130 to 160. Guys talk about needing the extra tags to “manage cull bucks” but I bet 1% actually do.

Not sure where you are located, but if in Iowa. Going to one a buck State will only add one buck back per twenty hunters. If you figure 3400 additional bucks are killed and there are 80,000 hunters with two tags to equal the 160,000 tags sold. So one buck per twenty hunters or it works out to around one buck per 10 square miles if that is easier to visualize. So you have to ask yourself, is it better to add back one buck per twenty hunters (one buck per ten square miles) and take away the best management tool to cull low scoring bucks from everyone like yourself who are trying to manage? And for what??? To hopefully stop a neighbor from killing two good bucks? Remember 50% of the buck harvest annually are 1 1/2 year olds. So maybe not in your specific case but as a whole you are more than likely adding back one buck that needs at least three more years of survival to be a buck most managers desire. Meanwhile, the next three years your waiting for that 1 1/2 to grow old enough, that 130” 8 that was present because no one will shoot them in a one buck State continues breeding. What really sucks is that 1 1/2 that you saved three years ago turns out to be another cull 8 and now he gets to continue the high grading process because nobody can or will cull him.

I as a manager would prefer to be able to cull bucks I know won’t be upper end RIGHT now and let the cards fall where they may in future years. The more breeding the better genetic bucks get to do the better off the future potential for top end bucks will be. If a buck doesn’t have the genetics right now, then you know they will never will. If they have the top end genetics then they just have to survive to 4, 5, 6. That’s where a manager mindset comes in. What can I do to help get them there. Improve habitat, provide food, provide sanctuary, reduce bully 8’s. If you can do those things to keep them home then you have won half of the battle.

I think we should be recommending guys shoot cull 8 point bucks instead of does for a several years to fill freezers. We have to get the population moving upward fast.

What is more important for the herd long term and ultimately the future of Iowa deer hunting? I think the absolute most important thing is a significant increase in population and culling of low scoring bucks. That will improve and sustain trophy potential longer than anything else. If we can slow land segmentation that will help as well. So limiting or decreasing NR access will help curtail that in regards to deer hunting parcels. Obviously, preventing crossbows during regular archery is critical to preserve our trophy potential.

I will say it again. Over and over until it sinks in.

Managing for top end bucks starts and ends with you. That is really the only thing you can control…yourself.

So if you spend all your time worrying about what the neighbors will kill, your Fall will not be as enjoyable as it would be if you just worried about what you can control. Pick out a target buck be it a top end buck and maybe an old cull 8. Make your goals in September and if a new top end buck shows, great adjust your goals. If the neighbors take out your top target it wasn’t meant to be. Make your property the best it can be and try to hold as many deer as possible and enjoy the management. You will be rewarded. Just don’t expect to wrap your hands around a top end buck every year. That is unrealistic unless you have huge acreage or great neighbors.

 

[IowaBowHunter1983]

The political powers that exist are not going to allow populations to get appreciable bigger. If you have a large management block maybe you can do it on a very local level but statewide.... no chance. The other side wants zero deer. Let that sink in. Zero.

 

[Butch973]

How about the party hunting aspect? I’m sure there are instances of hunters killing more than 1 buck but they are using others tags in the group so that wouldn’t show up in your surveys? Time to pull back the reigns on that as well. The landscape is much different than back in the “good old days”!

 

[Bucksnbears]

Decrease in good habitat is happening. Deer can't eat dirt.
Although I've spent 45 years " party hunting" in Mn, (and have loved it), it gets abused HUGELY! (Guilty).

Senerio #1 let's say you own 100 acres. You have one buck tag. You fill that tag early. Way more prone to let a few others hunt.
#2, you have 2 tags, filled the first early but another Biggie shows up (on camera). Gonna let a youngster come in and hunt?

We all (self included), need to look in the mirror, and realize what greed has done to the overall aspect of hunting.
Alot of us oldtimers dont know the feeling, the utter joy it was to just have a place to hunt because WE DIDN'T need too! I grew up hunting when no permission was needed. GO!.
Whenever,wherever, just go.

Gotten to the point where I'll just say it: if you own a piece of ground that's (sizable) and won't allow a new hunter to come and hunt, shame on you.

Shooting big bucks every year on ground you (me) manage doesn't make us great hunters.

Deer hunting is a management tool to keep a healthy population.
Having multiple buck tags does not accomplish that.

 

[iowaqdm]

The political powers that exist are not going to allow populations to get appreciable bigger. If you have a large management block maybe you can do it on a very local level but statewide.... no chance. The other side wants zero deer. Let that sink in. Zero.

I understand that Farm Bureau as a general rule wants less deer, however they aren’t the ones buying the licenses or shooting the deer. We hunters have the power to control what we shoot. Just like when the DNR asked us hunters to step up and shoot more does in the late 2000’s and we did it willingly. That wasn’t FB out there shooting deer. That was us hunters doing it. Nobody is making you pull that trigger or release that arrow on a doe. Quit shooting does. Tell every deer hunter you know the same. It is that simple. In three years there will be so many more deer we will be able to resume some doe management in a responsible way in areas where the population is abundant. We will also benefit from huge increase in the number of bucks on the landscape. Everyone needs to be sure to buy a few doe tags and then don’t fill them in your county. That does two things. First, it funds the DNR so they don’t have to look for other revenue sources and then secondly it decreases the doe harvest success rate. Easy to explain to the FB leadership. DNR can say we sold the licenses however, success rate was down due to less opportunities for does due to decreased population.

As a FB member you can call and tell them how you feel. Tell then to lay off the deer herd. Tell them as a FB member, resident of Iowa, landowner, farmer, and sportsman you are tired of their out of touch position of kill every deer. If you are a landowner you should be a member. If you are an Iowa resident and sportsman you should be a member of FB. Their policies affect everything from CRP payment rates, to water quality and landowner rights. My experience with FB leadership is that they will listen to reason if you can articulate your point. I have called and talked with past presidents of Farm Bureau on numerous occasions and have gotten them to change their position 180 degrees and actually stop proposed bills from advancing that they were previously supporting. Back when Randy Taylor was President of the IBA we (IBA) were able to lobby legislators and FB and basically kill every critical bill. That is why Iowa didn’t go the way of Illinois 15-20 years ago. I know Skip also made calls and emailed legislators back in the day because we were on top of it every year.

So it is disappointing to hear a defeated attitude coming from ISC leadership with regard to FB. If the ISC is throwing in the towel because of Farm Bureau’s basic stance of too many deer and are not able to articulate how the sportsmen, residents and many farmers/hunters feel about the deer numbers being way too low in most areas than maybe ISC needs to find someone who can. Or step aside and donate the funds you raise to the IBA and let them continue protecting what has made Iowa great. Because the IBA has done a great job up to this point.

All I hear from ISC leadership is too many weapons, need to shorten seasons, need to take away bucks tags. Who needs this many days or this many bucks and when is enough enough.
Look, not everyone can hunt 7 days a week from opening day to the end of season like many in the ISC leadership. The average guy that deer hunts have busy lives. Some have kids in activities, help care for parents or loved ones, some are in school or college, some only get this day or that day off, only have time off over Christmas or New Years, work second or third jobs to help save money to buy their own piece of heaven, etc. There is absolutely no reason to change our season structure, it’s length or buck limits.

My biggest problem with these types of thoughts is they are not inclusive to all the hunters of Iowa. Many in lSC leadership have farms or access in not only Iowa but other States and if they shoot their target buck in Iowa early no problem. They will just go hunt Missouri, Kansas, Ohio, Indiana. So their season doesn’t end with the filling of one buck tag. They aren’t filling just one buck tag every year. They are filling one in every State they go to. Seems elitist or at least out of touch with average guy to me. Even though I am blessed to get to hunt way more than I probably should and have been invited to hunt in other States, I don’t normally because I would rather be sitting in a tree stand or blind in what I feel is the the best deer State in the country thanks to the IDNR and IBA. Regardless of the antler size of the bucks that come by me in any given year. Iowa is home and always will be. I hope to witness as many sunrises and sunsets from a stand in the Iowa woods as God will bless me with.

If ISC wants to do something legislatively then work to get rid of party hunting as I have previously mentioned. No reason adults can’t shoot their own deer. This will save a lot of bucks each year. Besides we make the youth hunter fill their own tags. Also, I personally would like to get late muzzleloader season back to regular muzzleloaders, bow and crossbow only. No pistols unless it is a muzzleloading pistol and no smokeless muzzleloaders. But neither of these things will reverse the course we are on without addressing our two real problems.
Number one is the population is too low and number two we are high grading the herd. Both are problems that can only be fixed by educating hunters to lay off does and kill low scoring bucks with your second buck tag.

 

[Windlooker]

Decrease in good habitat is happening. Deer can't eat dirt.
Although I've spent 45 years " party hunting" in Mn, (and have loved it), it gets abused HUGELY! (Guilty).

Senerio #1 let's say you own 100 acres. You have one buck tag. You fill that tag early. Way more prone to let a few others hunt.
#2, you have 2 tags, filled the first early but another Biggie shows up (on camera). Gonna let a youngster come in and hunt?

We all (self included), need to look in the mirror, and realize what greed has done to the overall aspect of hunting.
Alot of us oldtimers dont know the feeling, the utter joy it was to just have a place to hunt because WE DIDN'T need too! I grew up hunting when no permission was needed. GO!.
Whenever,wherever, just go.

Gotten to the point where I'll just say it: if you own a piece of ground that's (sizable) and won't allow a new hunter to come and hunt, shame on you.

Shooting big bucks every year on ground you (me) manage doesn't make us great hunters.

Deer hunting is a management tool to keep a healthy population.
Having multiple buck tags does not accomplish that.

Best post in this thread. Most here are trying to shoot the biggest deer they can, me included, with little regard for what hunting once was.

I grew up hunting in PA and if someone in your group shot any buck we had a party. Last week I mistakenly shot a 3 year old 10 pt and I’m apologizing for shooting a “young deer” while posting it for my team in the contest. Sad. We need to rewind.

 

[IowaBowHunter1983]

I understand that Farm Bureau as a general rule wants less deer, however they aren’t the ones buying the licenses or shooting the deer. We hunters have the power to control what we shoot. Just like when the DNR asked us hunters to step up and shoot more does in the late 2000’s and we did it willingly. That wasn’t FB out there shooting deer. That was us hunters doing it. Nobody is making you pull that trigger or release that arrow on a doe. Quit shooting does. Tell every deer hunter you know the same. It is that simple. In three years there will be so many more deer we will be able to resume some doe management in a responsible way in areas where the population is abundant. We will also benefit from huge increase in the number of bucks on the landscape. Everyone needs to be sure to buy a few doe tags and then don’t fill them in your county. That does two things. First, it funds the DNR so they don’t have to look for other revenue sources and then secondly it decreases the doe harvest success rate. Easy to explain to the FB leadership. DNR can say we sold the licenses however, success rate was down due to less opportunities for does due to decreased population.

As a FB member you can call and tell them how you feel. Tell then to lay off the deer herd. Tell them as a FB member, resident of Iowa, landowner, farmer, and sportsman you are tired of their out of touch position of kill every deer. If you are a landowner you should be a member. If you are an Iowa resident and sportsman you should be a member of FB. Their policies affect everything from CRP payment rates, to water quality and landowner rights. My experience with FB leadership is that they will listen to reason if you can articulate your point. I have called and talked with past presidents of Farm Bureau on numerous occasions and have gotten them to change their position 180 degrees and actually stop proposed bills from advancing that they were previously supporting. Back when Randy Taylor was President of the IBA we (IBA) were able to lobby legislators and FB and basically kill every critical bill. That is why Iowa didn’t go the way of Illinois 15-20 years ago. I know Skip also made calls and emailed legislators back in the day because we were on top of it every year.

So it is disappointing to hear a defeated attitude coming from ISC leadership with regard to FB. If the ISC is throwing in the towel because of Farm Bureau’s basic stance of too many deer and are not able to articulate how the sportsmen, residents and many farmers/hunters feel about the deer numbers being way too low in most areas than maybe ISC needs to find someone who can. Or step aside and donate the funds you raise to the IBA and let them continue protecting what has made Iowa great. Because the IBA has done a great job up to this point.

All I hear from ISC leadership is too many weapons, need to shorten seasons, need to take away bucks tags. Who needs this many days or this many bucks and when is enough enough.
Look, not everyone can hunt 7 days a week from opening day to the end of season like many in the ISC leadership. The average guy that deer hunts have busy lives. Some have kids in activities, help care for parents or loved ones, some are in school or college, some only get this day or that day off, only have time off over Christmas or New Years, work second or third jobs to help save money to buy their own piece of heaven, etc. There is absolutely no reason to change our season structure, it’s length or buck limits.

My biggest problem with these types of thoughts is they are not inclusive to all the hunters of Iowa. Many in lSC leadership have farms or access in not only Iowa but other States and if they shoot their target buck in Iowa early no problem. They will just go hunt Missouri, Kansas, Ohio, Indiana. So their season doesn’t end with the filling of one buck tag. They aren’t filling just one buck tag every year. They are filling one in every State they go to. Seems elitist or at least out of touch with average guy to me. Even though I am blessed to get to hunt way more than I probably should and have been invited to hunt in other States, I don’t normally because I would rather be sitting in a tree stand or blind in what I feel is the the best deer State in the country thanks to the IDNR and IBA. Regardless of the antler size of the bucks that come by me in any given year. Iowa is home and always will be. I hope to witness as many sunrises and sunsets from a stand in the Iowa woods as God will bless me with.

If ISC wants to do something legislatively then work to get rid of party hunting as I have previously mentioned. No reason adults can’t shoot their own deer. This will save a lot of bucks each year. Besides we make the youth hunter fill their own tags. Also, I personally would like to get late muzzleloader season back to regular muzzleloaders, bow and crossbow only. No pistols unless it is a muzzleloading pistol and no smokeless muzzleloaders. But neither of these things will reverse the course we are on without addressing our two real problems.
Number one is the population is too low and number two we are high grading the herd. Both are problems that can only be fixed by educating hunters to lay off does and kill low scoring bucks with your second buck tag.

It is not just "that simple". Never is.

If hunting was open year round tons of people would do it. Self regulation does not work. Never has. American hunters about made the buffalo go extinct.

This is a very long winded rant about ISC and its leadership, pretty much none of which I agree with.

What and who are you even talking about? Seriously? Defeatist attitudes? By whom?

Tons of changes in the last decade have made it harder on the deer and the solution is to tell everyone you know to stop shooting does. Really? Thats out of touch with reality along the lines of saying cell cams haven't changed anything.....

 

[MN Slick]

I don't have a lot of "on the ground" insight on the goings on in Missouri, but I don't find that number surprising, FWIW.

Lots of NR's flow to northern Missouri v. southern Iowa to purchase land because as a NR there they can get buck tags every year there v. waiting 4+ years to draw in Iowa.

Yeah, not really surprising. I'm a NR too but I bought there before the Drury's made it cool!!!

 

[TheBig8]

I can't remember who said it or where I saw it posted, paraphrased, "everyone wants to talk about antler inches, the only inch that matters is the 1/2" your trigger finger moves"