Been quiet

[fletch920]

Ok I'll ask is this your first 99 posts on this site? You sound like a former contributor!

Yes. But, if I also posted under "Batman", would it really matter? Is Hardwood11 your only online persona? Dont answer that, I really dont care. Would the truth hurt less if I used a different name? Would the facts be different if the faces and names were changed?

Not sure where you guys are going with this, but its amusing. You looking to take it to a personal level? Are threats the last resort to getting your way? It wont work.

 

[fletch920]

Iabwhntr, pretty strong comments. I could care less if you don't like NRLO's, but please explain what fraud is being committed against the state and the feds? You may want to ask the Attorney General about the extortion of a natural resource at the expense of NR hunters who pay way too much for a deer tag.

Seriously, I laughed out loud!

Guess what, there is a good chance that you dont own the mineral rights under your ground either. Gonna fight that fight? Remember, that coal doesnt grow antlers...lol. The deer are owned by the state. The state is made up of its residents. Become one. Then you could vote for change. But, you wouldnt.

Extortion! THAT is hilarious! Have you checked into getting a tag for Kodiak Bears? How about an elk tag in Arizona? You just embarrassed a lot of NRLO's. You really did.

 

[Jdubs]

Fletch, I was kidding about the extortion part, geez. But please explain what fraud is being committed against the state and feds as stated by iabwhntr. You remind me a lot of an old poster named Cedarcreek.

 

[hoosierhunter]

Oh look, another nonresident with hurt feelings. Bummer. So unfair.

I'm just calling a spade a spade. When you want to contribute something other than garbage bashing of NR's let me know. Until then go back to posting on your other tagline and quit hiding behind this one.

 

[iabwhntr]

Fraud is a false representation as a matter of fact. I.e. claiming your a resident of Iowa when in truth you reside in another state. I will do some asking but it will entail taxes, voter registration legalities and theft of state/government property. Or in other words harvesting game on an illegally purchased state issued license.

To be honest I'm sorry that its come to this. Afterall, we are all sportsmen. We all like deer hunting. I respect the majority of the people who comment on this forum. What I cannot respect are some of the arguments and attitudes that have come to light here. But like I said, I'll call the attorney generals office tomorrow as well as my representatives and get all the facts on this issue. I'll probably start s new thread on this to keep everyone up to speed on what I find out.

 

[Jdubs]

I don't think any NRLO commenting on this thread said they ever claimed residency. I never have and I don't think the others have. Good luck with your phone call.

 

[fletch920]

I'm just calling a spade a spade. When you want to contribute something other than garbage bashing of NR's let me know. Until then go back to posting on your other tagline and quit hiding behind this one.

I know it hurts. But look, you could always move here. Or, you can buy ground somehwere else. Like I said, every state has deer. A lot of them now have a lot more deer than we do. Check it out.

The only NR's I have EVER had a problem with, are those that want to change things for their own selfish wants. Selfish people just dont sit well with me.

I am not hiding behind anything. This is a hot topic for me and one that I strongly lobby. Its about the only topic that spurs me to post. Do you want to change a rule about that too? Should there be some minimum standard set as to how many different topics I must post on? Maybe after 50 posts on different threads I could be guaranteed the opportunity to go back to bashing selfish NRLO's? Sound fair? We all only want whats fair, right?

 

[fletch920]

I don't think any NRLO commenting on this thread said they ever claimed residency. I never have and I don't think the others have. Good luck with your phone call.

No, but they supported the efforts of those that try. Birds of a feather.

 

[hoosierhunter]

When I first started commenting on this thread I really didn't mind nrlos. But after reading all complaints about the laws in a state you don't live in are "cheating" you, I have decided that I really don't want you here at all. You behave like ungrateful kids who think something is owed to you. On top of that some of you try to cheat the system and the rest of you think that's OK. In this case the ends do not justify the means. I think some of you may be commiting fraud. Against the state and possibly the feds. It may even be considered theft. Now that I think about, I'll have to call the attorney general tommorow and see what his office has to say. Stay tuned, I'll let you all know

IAB-

You know better than that. The DNR changed the laws. We all know that's a load of crap. No one is asking for the same rights as residents. Most of us have openly said we like what Iowa has going and continue to support it. What we don't agree with is bias judgment against some and not others.

I'm not sure where you were going with the fraud comment and attorney general other than just to be salty.

It's amazing though that everyone completely rips NRLO's but then complain that they can't hunt their ground. Good grief, yeah no way I would ever consider letting a resident hunt if this is the attitude displayed towards me. Why would I?

All the people are complaining and saying they let people hunt their ground. We all know that's crap. If you have good whitetail hunting you aren't letting just anyone hunt your ground because if you were it wouldn't be good ground!! Yeah maybe a buddy who thinks like you gets to hunt, but not just anyone.

 

[iabwhntr]

I don't think any NRLO commenting on this thread said they ever claimed residency. I never have and I don't think the others have. Good luck with your phone call.

Even though I know you don't mean it. Thank you anyway.

 

[Jdubs]

Fletch, have you posted in the past under the name Cedarcreek? Iabwhntr, in one of your posts it sounds like you're accusing the NRLO's on this thread of committing fraud. That's a bold comment that you better be able to back up. Fletch, we're not birds of a feather. Not one NRLO on this thread want to be residents or said they claimed residency. Again, a Cedarcreek moment of spinning and mischaracterizing.

 

[iabwhntr]

Jdubs, I have accused no one specifically of anything. I did state my intention to discuss the possibility of fraud being committed by people falsely claiming an Iowa residence. That conversation will occur with Tom Millers office. I will also see what my state reps have to say about NRLOs and the current laws regarding their ability to acquire deer tags.
I will also discuss voter registration laws and penalties for theft of state property.
The possibility does exist that is a non issue for them. We'll see.

 

[Hardwood11]

Jdubs, I have accused no one specifically of anything. I did state my intention to discuss the possibility of fraud being committed by people falsely claiming an Iowa residence. That conversation will occur with Tom Millers office. I will also see what my state reps have to say about NRLOs and the current laws regarding their ability to acquire deer tags.
I will also discuss voter registration laws and penalties for theft of state property.
The possibility does exist that is a non issue for them. We'll see.

Ask him if it's fraud or theft when a R poaches a buck off a NR property, well technically they pushed it off mine and shot it on the neighbors. I suppose that is just simply "poaching"

I kind of felt robbed though!

 

[fletch920]

Fletch, have you posted in the past under the name Cedarcreek? Iabwhntr, in one of your posts it sounds like you're accusing the NRLO's on this thread of committing fraud. That's a bold comment that you better be able to back up. Fletch, we're not birds of a feather. Not one NRLO on this thread want to be residents or said they claimed residency. Again, a Cedarcreek moment of spinning and mischaracterizing.

Your really are stretching. I mean really.... I absolutely beg you to check with the admins and see if I ever posted as "Cedarcreek". They have my permission to make that info public. Do you think I am the shooter from the grassy knoll? lol Talk about a conspiracy theorist. You are spooking yourself.

Again, please tell us what the resident deer hunters in the state of Iowa have to gain by letting NRLO's be guaranteed a tag. Please tell us.

Then, admit that thousands more acres would be bought up and locked down. I know several that would. They told me so. If you cant admit the facts, then you are unable to admit the reality of it all.

Selfish is as selfish does.

 

[fletch920]

Ask him if it's fraud or theft when a R poaches a buck off a NR property, well technically they pushed it off mine and shot it on the neighbors. I suppose that is just simply "poaching"

I kind of felt robbed though!

What on earth does that have to do with you not being guaranteed a tag every year? Your focus has been questionable throughout this entire thread, but you really have gone off course here. I had a local poacher shoot a buck on one of my properties this year from the road. It happens everywhere. But, has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Even if it had been a NRLO it would have zero to do with this topic. I have yet to hear one single unselfish reason from ANY NRLO as to why they should be given any preferential treatment for tags. What if Iowa just gives you free fishing priviledges? How about a free dove stamp? Face it, the only reason many of them have ground here is because of Iowa's deer. I made the sacrifice to stay here after college when I could have made twice the income in other states. Anyone can make that same sacrifice and enjoy what I do. But simply buying ground does not come with that priviledge. It just doesnt. And it wont.

 

[Jdubs]

The issue is larger than a guaranteed buck tag. NRLO's regardless of property size get one doe tag that is ridiculously expensive not letting them manage their land. Whether you like it or not NRLO are at over 20% and growing. NRLO's care about the resource as well and have tied hands in many cases. On one hand you complain about NRLO's and supporting efforts to keep them at bay and on the other complain that NRLO sanctuaries harbor too many deer causing herd issues.

Short of banning NRLO's what do you propose we do? The answer is not allowing open hunting on NR land. I'm sure you don't allow open hunting on the 500 acres you manage. NRLO's should be able to manage their land with tags and hunters they choose. Your position is a contradiction.

 

[Jdubs]

Why not propose legislation that caps NRLO at 20% with the current NRLO's able to resale to residents and/or non-residents; with the ability to get tags every year. Current NRLO's maintain the value of their investment and get to hunt and manage their property and residents can be assured of only 20% NRLO.

 

[fletch920]

The issue is larger than a guaranteed buck tag. NRLO's regardless of property size get one doe tag that is ridiculously expensive not letting them manage their land. Whether you like it or not NRLO are at over 20% and growing. On one hand you complain about NRLO's and supporting efforts to keep them at bay and on the other complain that NRLO sanctuaries harbor too many deer causing herd issues.

Short of banning NRLO's what do you propose we do? The answer is not allowing open hunting on NR land. I'm sure you don't allow open hunting on the 500 acres you manage. NRLO's should be able to manage their land with hunters they choose. Your position is a contradiction.

Not at all. Only a contradition for your argument which is full of fallacy. In no way are those things a contraditction. In fact, your points fully support my postition. NRLO's cause huge problems for state deer management. At no point could a NRLO "control" the doe population. So why buy here? I'll tell you why...because they were operating under the pretense that they would one day be given special priviledges and really only cared about a chance at a B&C buck anyway. Didnt happen. Dont you see, keeping NRLO's at bay IS helping to eliminate the sanctuaries that only have a deer or two killed off them every few years and allow zero hunting to residents.

You are right, I do not allow open access to my managed land. But I think you would be very surprised to know how many trusted hunters I do allow to share my ground as long as they play by my rules. ONLY mature bucks and as many does as you can shoot. As I said earlier, I have even allowed nonresidents to hunt for free. I am not an oger that hoards the resource like most of the NRLO's. Not all NRLO's do, but many thousands of acres are absolutely off limits to all but a couple of hunters and are vigorously patrolled. Cant blame them I guess, but it does cause huge problems for the resident hunters that are displaced and for the DNR in managing the herd. Its a serious problem and the elephant in the room that no NRLO ever wants to acknowledge or admit to. But those are primary reasons for not opening the flood gates.

Bottom line, you are never going to admit to the issues NRLO's cause resident hunters and the state of Iowa's DNR. I dont have to convince you. I, and others like me, only need to continue to put the facts in front of the people that listen and understand. The people that continue to keep the best interest of Iowa and its hunting citizens paramount. So far, we have done a great job of it because our points are valid and backed by facts, not selfish wants. Fair??.....you bet its fair to the true resident hunters of Iowa.

Again, you all have the same opportunity I have......live in Iowa. Enjoy hunting deer every year and live on the ground you hunt.

 

[fletch920]

Why not propose legislation that caps NRLO at 20% with the current NRLO's able to resale to residents and/or non-residents; with the ability to get tags every year. Current NRLO's maintain the value of their investment and get to hunt and manage their property and residents can be assured of only 20% NRLO.

The better question would be why? That seems extremely self serving. Ties in nicely with the entire thought process of most NRLO's though. Kind of makes for a great example of the mentality of those that bought ground planning on better regulations ahead. Why reward them for their mistake? None of them have lost any value of their current investmet unless they paid a stupid price banking on the regulations changing. Which is their own fault.

Now it just seems like begging. Still no.

 

[Jdubs]

Old argument after old argument. The facts are NRLO's are in Iowa and do have deer management problems not foreseen by the DNR or politicians. Many NRLO are serious deer managers and know killing big bucks depends on the overall health of the herd and ratios. I also permit hunting and allow resident hunters. So, under your scenario you have the ability to manage your land and I don't. Resident owners contribute to the deer issues as well. If you remember I have over 1500 acres around me owned by residents that allow no hunting. As you said earlier the state owns the resource and apparently don't care about the health of that resource on NR owned ground?

As I proposed introduce legislation that caps NR land ownership at 20% with guaranteed tags and the ability to sell to R's or NR's. Land management is achieved and worried residents are assured of minimal NR land ownership.

Fletch, you're completely unreasonable, have all the answers and nobody has anything of value to contribute, you win? NRLO's bought because the state of Iowa allowed it. Things change constantly and the state didn't anticipate the number of NR's who would buy land. What's the solution? Have the state take it all back and give it to you to manage.