A second ARCHERY tag in Iowa??

[8bitnes]

No I didn’t. My point is no way can 2 ac make an ag impact. Should be 20 minimum for a lot tag. Also it’s way too easy to qualify. Timber is a crop, what’s a nursery 5 trees or 100, enroll in a program etc and you have a third tag.

Iowa needs to make the lot tag legit and eliminate party hunting. That alone would have huge positive impact.

You've now edited three of your previous comments. So, yes, that's what it appears you are saying now. But initially your comments suggested that anyone can just go buy two acres, qualify for a LOT, and then use it wherever they pleased.
Have a great day and good luck this season

 

[Nrharris]

I do know of a guy that had a good sized acreage( like 6 or 7 acres) that shot a good buck(like 160+) that had it seized by the dnr for using a landowner tag. He did shoot it on his land but didn't meet any of the lot requirements. Assume someone that had been hunting this buck was upset and turned him in. I know people that get around the rules by planting a couple dozen pine trees to sell as Christmas trees.

 

[sep0667]

Not in favor. Bucks are the most vulnerable during the archery seasons. I see this having a negative impact on the age structure. Muskrats point with people using one buck tag to shot a smaller buck then saving their second for a 'big one' is what I think would happen a lot. Going to result in a lot of 1.5 and 2.5's being shot early on and then guys saving their other tag for a bigger one. IMO we need to quit tweaking our regs. Every year on social media etc I see people throwing out ideas. Just leave it alone IMO. If anything make changes that are more conservation minded for the deer.

 

[sep0667]

I do know of a guy that had a good sized acreage( like 6 or 7 acres) that shot a good buck(like 160+) that had it seized by the dnr for using a landowner tag. He did shoot it on his land but didn't meet any of the lot requirements. Assume someone that had been hunting this buck was upset and turned him in. I know people that get around the rules by planting a couple dozen pine trees to sell as Christmas trees.

So if he had a landowner tag for his property and shot it there how could it be seized? Doesn't make sense.

 

[iowavf]

Not in favor. Bucks are the most vulnerable during the archery seasons. I see this having a negative impact on the age structure. Muskrats point with people using one buck tag to shot a smaller buck then saving their second for a 'big one' is what I think would happen a lot. Going to result in a lot of 1.5 and 2.5's being shot early on and then guys saving their other tag for a bigger one. IMO we need to quit tweaking our regs. Every year on social media etc I see people throwing out ideas. Just leave it alone IMO. If anything make changes that are more conservation minded for the deer.

I agree, archery season falls during the prime time for the rut. How about letting me trade an archery anysex tag for another gun anysex tag? I have no issue with a landowner getting another anysex tag for their property, after all landowners support larger population of the Iowa deer herd. As to the person who complained about not being able to archery hunt during gun seasons, you already can hunt 88 days in iowa during archery seasons! You really need those thirteen days to full fill your archery needs?

 

[JNRBRONC]

In the past, I have had both a resident archery and a LOT archery tag. It has been a long time since I have "bought" a LOT, I just don't see the need to kill more deer. I figure buying a resident archery license is money well spent to support the DNR. I'm not into gun party hunting, but gun hunt on a whim sometimes.

I'm in the leave the regs alone camp.

 

[seven twenty]

You are asking for 2 buck tags during the rut. Throw a LOT tag in their and some would have 3 anysex tags to hunt the rut. Definitely going to affect the age structure if guys are shooting 3 5 yr olds a year. Use your bow during late muzzy, Wouldn’t that be the same as trading your gun tag? As it is, we can archery hunt for almost 3mos continuously right now. Compare that to someone who only gets the 1st season shotgun. (4 days) Also, how about reversing the idea. Gun hunters trade and can hunt both shotgun seasons. Good conversation but probably not feasible.

 

[Nrharris]

So if he had a landowner tag for his property and shot it there how could it be seized? Doesn't make sense.

Read windlookers post on the first page about who qualifies as an owner. He did not qualify. This was also at least 10 to 15 years ago. Before you had to put in a parcel number to qualify to get a landowner tag.

 

[sep0667]

Read windlookers post on the first page about who qualifies as an owner. He did not qualify. This was also at least 10 to 15 years ago. Before you had to put in a parcel number to qualify to get a landowner tag.

then how did he get a landowners tag with his name on it? I dont understand

 

[Nrharris]

then how did he get a landowners tag with his name on it? I dont understand

This was before you had to prove you were a landowner or tenant with parcel numbers. There was a time where LOT tags were sort of on the honor system. You didn't have to provide any proof to get one so people that shouldn't have been able to get them still got them. I do not know what year that changed. Thinking maybe around 2010?

 

[Obsessed]

No I didn’t. My point is no way can 2 ac make an ag impact. Should be 20 minimum for a lot tag. Also it’s way too easy to qualify. Timber is a crop, what’s a nursery 5 trees or 100, enroll in a program etc and you have a third tag.

Iowa needs to make the lot tag legit and eliminate party hunting. That alone would have huge positive impact.

Bad ol' party hunting again. Bad...

I own less than 20 acres, and I solely hunt my land with my lot tag(s). No way it should be changed to 20 acres min, and yes, even a single acre can make an ag impact.

Both should be left alone IMO.

 

[Stoney]

The first time I bow-hunted the rut, I could not believe my eyes. “Where are all these bucks coming from? I never see them.” That was over 25 years ago but I remember thinking that like it was just yesterday.
Honestly, I think this proposal would be a near complete disaster for buck age structure overall and significantly reduce the quality of deer hunting in Iowa. And god forbid, what about cross bows becoming legal.
In my opinion, what makes Iowa great is how few bucks do get killed in the rut. I would very strongly support having a 1 buck limit. If I were to propose a change, that would be it.

 

[sep0667]

This was before you had to prove you were a landowner or tenant with parcel numbers. There was a time where LOT tags were sort of on the honor system. You didn't have to provide any proof to get one so people that shouldn't have been able to get them still got them. I do not know what year that changed. Thinking maybe around 2010?

wow didnt know that, im sure that was abused a lot.

 

[Windlooker]

8btines. My point is most will get creative enough with only two acres to somehow qualify. It’s not hard. One is have an orchard or nursery. There’s no definition of what that means, 5 or 100 trees. Timber is a harvestable crop. Have a TSI plan and you qualify. That’s what I meant.

 

[78mac78]

I am for the one buck tag only no matter what. Roll the dice and pick your season let the odds fall where they may!

 

[Ishi]

My reaction for two archery tags…..

 

[2-bucks]

I love archery deer season. A second archery tag does nothing but degrade the heard, just like many othe changes proposed to the iowa deer seasons. Please leave them alone!!!

 

[stunmags]

I say yes to trading the tag, but it must be ANTLERLESS only! I moved from WI to Iowa for 2 reasons…get away from people AND to hunt in a state that has age structure. I am probably not going to make many friends when I say this but let’s also take it one step further and make Iowa a 1 BUCK state. That will help the dwindling age structure in the herd as well.

 

[Obsessed]

I say yes to trading the tag, but it must be ANTLERLESS only! I moved from WI to Iowa for 2 reasons…get away from people AND to hunt in a state that has age structure. I am probably not going to make many friends when I say this but let’s also take it one step further and make Iowa a 1 BUCK state. That will help the dwindling age structure in the herd as well.

I could get on board with this idea of an any-sex tag from one season being traded to another season for an antlerless tag. (I don't see it getting used much though, and what a logistical nightmare for the state to modify their SOR to accommodate for it. Not much, if any, ROI for the state or the hunters.)

I'm starting to get on board with Iowa becoming a 1 buck state too, with the following caveat...

* The single any-sex tag can float from season to season until filled, just like a youth tag. (Currently, if I hunt solo, I can legally harvest 3 bucks annually in IA. If this becomes restricted by 66.666%, or 2/3's, I see this as being the absolute minimal compromise. You've got to give a little to get a little... I don't see this being as much of a logistical nightmare or requiring extensive changes to the existing SOR either, for what it's worth.)

 

[iowavf]

I'm ok with one statewide buck tag, but not ok with taking a tag away from land owners. Let them still get an anysex land owner and statewide anysex tag. I think it goes hand in hand with owning property and supporting the deer herd for habitat and food they need. If you want to get a land owner's tag, go buy some land and get it qualified for the tag.