Search results

Unfortunately, the DNR will bend to Farm Bureau’s desire to keep the population shot down. The DNR will continue to issue high doe tag quotas. Fortunately, it is up to us to either fill those tags or not. That is where we need to be educating other fellow deer hunters to stop shooting does...

You are correct that going to one buck only saves 4,500 bucks Statewide. What everyone needs to realize is that what gives a buck the opportunity to get older is the hunters choice to pass or hold out for a better buck. The opportunity to hunt another season saves way more bucks than it kills...

Agreed. As far as Minnesota and Missouri gun hunting the rut. Their choice but they will obviously decrease buck survival rates due to bucks being more exposed and the effective range of the firearm. Like has been mentioned, Iowa has the right regulations in place, especially for the midwest...

That’s not good. That will definitely increase NR land ownership/demand. It will also drive recreational ground prices up. Making it harder for Iowa residents to be able to afford land in their own backyard or get access to it. Instead of a NR landowner having to wait 3-5 years for a tag...

That is my exact point. These other “ideas” just pits one guy versus the other guy. The guy that likes to hunt for meat verses the trophy hunter, the landowner vs the non-landowner, the guy with 41 acres vs his neighbor with 39 acres. The party hunter vs the non party hunter. The old...

This is the exact opposite of what should happen. Let’s say you only get one buck. But you like deer meat. Maybe you want to bow and gun hunt. Now instead of shooting two bucks in an area with low deer numbers you shoot a buck and a doe. Now you’re hurting the population trend. Everyone...

Those that were questioning my numbers and thought they were fuzzy math because of cities etc. I jumped on OnX. I drew a rectangle going from NW of Grimes 26 miles east to north of Mitchellville down 21 mile to just SW of Carlisle back 26 miles to just SW of Cumming then back to the starting...

Increasing the population is the only way to improve our hunting. Buck quality will improve if we increase our deer numbers. We have to work on educating other hunters. We have to convince them to stop shooting does in areas where the population is low.

Nothing fuzzy. There are 416 square miles of water that wasn’t included. There are deer living everywhere in this State. Even in Northern parts of Iowa that are predominantly Ag. Even those parts have groves, CRP, drainage ditches, creeks, rivers, sloughs, public hunting areas. Everyone...

I can’t help but laugh at everyone saying I will give up my LOT anysex tag because I think it will help the herd. Many of which bought their land not to make a living off it but solely to deer hunt on it. Then others say you should have to have at least 40 acres to qualify. I really don’t...

Your point is mute. Because the tag costs are just a portion of what it costs. He said he bought 4 anysex tags, three hunting licenses with habitat stamps. So that should be $237 HE spent on licenses. Let’s say he spent $100 on gas. Ammo, let’s say $100 (3-20 round boxes of 350 legend) Food...

I agree with Obsessed on the costs being high when trying to get your kids into hunting. JBAGS, you can’t exclude the cost of equipment because it is part of the total cost associated with the hunt. You can’t hunt without equipment. Just like you can’t exclude the cost of golf clubs, shoes...

Those of us who are die hard deer hunters will pay whatever the tag price but the average person which is 80%+ of the guys who deer hunt won’t. So if you want to push the cost envelope you better be prepared to loose some of those hunting privileges you cherish. Because when you no longer have...

Increasing resident tag costs will decrease licenses sales and affect hunter retention and recruitment. Short term gain with real long term negative consequences. I like the idea of raising tag costs for non-residents to generate more income. The demand is there and they will sell out. I...

I am curious on how you think the DNR or the State of Iowa will make up the lost revenue? Every bow hunter I know gets a second tag either shotgun or ML tag. If we cut doe tags to get the population up and we are only allowed one buck tag how do you propose making up the lost revenue? Not...

I would agree that going to a one buck State won’t work. Lower deer numbers and one buck tag will cause high grading and decreased top end potential. However, if Iowa’s deer numbers were at early 2000’s levels the trophy potential would be incredible due to the limited access and current...

The point I was making on buck tags is thinning cull bucks to take pressure off your better genetic bucks and getting the doe to buck ratio higher makes it easier to keep a buck on your farm and shrink his home range and decrease his chance of roaming. If you have 110” 5 1/2 year old 8 pointers...

What do we do? Leave the seasons dates alone. They have been what they are for 30 years. Nobody was complaining about quality 30 years ago, they weren’t complaining 20 years ago, even 10 years years ago people were more worried about declining population after the antlerless season debacle...

The only thing is they are sharing it with me anyway. I have a valid gun tag. I will be sitting in a stand with a gun. Why can’t I use my bow which is a lesser weapon?

This is exactly why we shouldn’t decrease buck tags available. He is 100% correct. The herd is and has been being high graded for 20 years driven by the big buck craze. That will only worsen going to a one buck State because nobody will want to burn their only buck tag on a cull. It has...