I also permit hunting and allow resident hunters.
Seriously???
PM sent...
I also permit hunting and allow resident hunters.
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.
it would make the problem exponentially worse.
Dude, first of all, let it die. There has to be something better for you to do with your time. Secondly, it's obvious you like using big words, but if you'd like an explanation of what the quoted post above really means, let me know and I'd be happy to help out. But really guys...enough already
NWBuck
Fletch
I hate to drop this on you but iowa aint what it once was. I had a long conversation yesterday about some serious land ready to change hands and its not oh my in iowa. How could that be? No place is as
Good as here and the primary factor could be not allowing nr a tag on land they own. Funny thing is some serious names came up and the funny thing is this, you can go to walmart and buy a tag. And I want in on it. The people involved are serious hitters and dont want to hunt for free. How can a place where you can buy a tag over the counter be as good as iowa and their A1 approach at management?
And no you cant hunt there as its for me. See 14 hr days at work for many years allows me to say yes or no and I do say yes to some.
Go for it!! Read your posts and ask yourself if you have been civil or friendly (look in the mirror)
There are many residents and non-residents who get along on this site. This issue is extremely controversial for a good reason. Not be able to deer hunt (archery)on land they own is obviously controversial, especially when residents can shoot 3 bucks on the land they own.
It's strictly an access issue, political (group of hunters) have pushed for this. The residents that I have met in person are not opposed to NRLO tags, the small towns In Southern Iowa do care...they are getting smaller, empty buildings ...there are consequences for this of course.
It is what it is, hard to speculate on the future. NRLO have $$$ on their side, less controversy with lawsuits if a tag is issued, increasing numbers of outside buyers.
Residents gave a strong political group, and votes, and right now 9 to 1 tag ratio (best in the nation)
We will see?
This thread seemed to be getting a little inbred so I feel the need to jump in. Everyone has been pretty well behaved but I was wondering if there could ever be any common ground. I believe very strongly in property rights but would hate to see the land rush that would occur if NRLO's were guaranteed tags every year. I'm acquainted with one of the gentlemen involved in the Supreme Court case who owns land adjacent to mine. I am concerned about what will happen to his property; instead of hunting his property himself, will he now lease it to someone like IMB? Or lease it directly to other hunters? what was once a property hunted by one or two people could become a pass-through for many hunters. Earlier someone mentioned that they didn't think many NRLO owned large parcels and I'm wondering if anyone came up with a list or percentages? What are the thoughts on giving NRLO's one any-sex tag per 500 acres? And another thought, why do we keep calling these guys poachers and lawbreakers when they followed the rules put in place by the state of Iowa? 20 years ago one didn't even need an Iowa drivers license, just a voter registration card to prove residency. Now its a lot tighter, and that's a good thing. But it seems a bit like playing a game with the schoolyard bully who changes the rules as he goes along to suit himself. Just sayin'.
I agree 100%....The silver lining to not having a place to hunt or deer to kill is that we have plenty of bike trails.The state isn't interested in preserving the buck herd in Iowa. The state is interested in the revenue it can reap out of the deer herd.
Isn't it ultimately about the money?
The laws are so messed up it's ridiculous. A NR hunter can buy a doe tag party hunt with a group of shot gun hunters kill a good buck have someone in the party tag it and take it home out of state.
We allow rifle hunting in the lower counties for a late doe season. This puts the states money makers that have dropped in jeopardy along with tomorrows bucks (buttons).
For revenue generating and managing the damaged Iowa deer herd maybe the powers that be should consider closing the deer season to residents and adding 5,000 more NR licenses at roughly $500 each for a few years! Can't wait to party hunt the late doe/ shed buck season with my new 223 with a 30 shot mag!