David Lindsey's 236 2/8

[huntemup]

I really think that if you feel all of the names mentioned before are breaking the law, then you need to show proof to the apropriate authorities. Aurguing about it here and calling them law breakers does no good what so ever.

Right now, the law is in a holding pattern on these violators because the big money boys are suing the state for the right to hunt. There were 4 individual cases heard in a Des Moines court on Wednesday with no ruling yet. Seems the rich whiney big money may get their way. Amazing how there is absolutely no press about this injustice. Just another horrible example of the rich pushing as far as they can to finally get their way, and the rest of society rolling over to them. They knew the laws when they bought the land but had a plan to get the rules changed to suit them. Too bad. The residents that dont own land are going to be the big loser in this. We may have sat on our hands too long already. I own land and my hunting future is secure. In fact, if this gets changed, my ground will increase in value and I still am adamantly opposed to it. Its simply the principle behind the issue.

 

[River1]

Right now, the law is in a holding pattern on these violators because the big money boys are suing the state for the right to hunt. There were 4 individual cases heard in a Des Moines court on Wednesday with no ruling yet. Seems the rich whiney big money may get their way. Amazing how there is absolutely no press about this injustice. Just another horrible example of the rich pushing as far as they can to finally get their way, and the rest of society rolling over to them. They knew the laws when they bought the land but had a plan to get the rules changed to suit them. Too bad. The residents that dont own land are going to be the big loser in this. We may have sat on our hands too long already. I own land and my hunting future is secure. In fact, if this gets changed, my ground will increase in value and I still am adamantly opposed to it. Its simply the principle behind the issue.

I haven't heard one thing about that. In the event though, our State should be protected from a ruling like that. There was a ruling in Federal Court not to many years ago that provides State's rights concerning managment of it's wildlife resources. The ruling came from a lawsuit started by a greedy outfitter named George Taulman. He (US Outfitters) was trying to secure more NR tags from Arizona and challenged the State in court. He lost and every State won with that decision. That took place in the 9th District Federal Court. Then Harry Reid carried a bill through the US legislature that protects States rights in managing wildlife.

 

[henry5146]

let me clarify a few things here, game wardens somehow came up with a list of potential violators(nr landowners supposedly acting as residents ) this happened over the summer. no one knows how this list was out together but none the less individuals received a letter basically asking for proof of residency, travel itineraries, adress, utilities, etc etc etc. this information was collected by steve dermand and tamara mullen of the dnr as well as john tack. on wednesday 4 individuals were able to seperatly make their case in front of a judge in des moines. more will follow. but i can assure you , the Drurys , nor the lindseys were part of this process, and given their status, it makes anyone wonder how this could be? it just aggrevates me thinking that the game warden in my county (monroe) is driving around stalking nr landowners instaed of the guy that shot a deer from the road last night when i was doe hunting. I am not saying this is not important, but we have one warden, and i just have to believe more important issues than this . This is very slippery slope for the state, more involved here than just hunting. as i have said in my past posts, My buddy is a lawyer in town and very involved in this, and could be ugly

 

[henry5146]

i think the state should charge legitmate nr landowners $1,000 dollars for licenses , apply half back to the dnr, and take the other half and buy up more land for people like me that cannot afford land. i dont know how mannr landowners there are , but... that is a alot of money, make them pay for our state land

 

[Jbawls]

The DNR just woke a sleeping giant. Should have left well enough alone. That little administrative law court is a circus. Win or lose there, those boys have enough money to take this thing to the top. Eventually it ends up in Monroe County district court where the judges have always ruled against this resident, non-resident issue. If they win and set a precedent, land prices will go up again. I know 2 of the guys you're talking about. They own a home here, pay all their taxes (income, property etc) here, registered to vote, vehicles are all registered here, homestead exemption, you name it they got it. When higher ups in the government find out they are trying to get rid of guys like this who pay a ton of income tax in this state, well you know the out come. You all better go out an buy some land or lease some up because I told you last year the end is coming and it just arrived. You can thank the IBA for this one. Pushing that last bit of crappy legislation through was the biggest mistake. These guys are willing to pour as much money into it as it takes. You were warned!

 

[henry5146]

the judge in Monroe county court 2 years ago , already ruled in favor of a guy from new york who owned a big piece of land north of albia. apparently- the game warden was forced to give up his source in the case. its public information, kind of scary- call the warden , give him a tip , you think you are protected and then he gives you up in court- THAT IS SCARY!!!!. he said, 30 days wasnt enforecable and now 90 days isnt enforceable, so,,, what is enforceable. anyway, i hear your point, if these cases go local, it could be embarassing. i still say- make em pay double for tags , make them kill does, make them give back

 

[huntemup]

The DNR just woke a sleeping giant. Should have left well enough alone. That little administrative law court is a circus. Win or lose there, those boys have enough money to take this thing to the top. Eventually it ends up in Monroe County district court where the judges have always ruled against this resident, non-resident issue. If they win and set a precedent, land prices will go up again. I know 2 of the guys you're talking about. They own a home here, pay all their taxes (income, property etc) here, registered to vote, vehicles are all registered here, homestead exemption, you name it they got it. When higher ups in the government find out they are trying to get rid of guys like this who pay a ton of income tax in this state, well you know the out come. You all better go out an buy some land or lease some up because I told you last year the end is coming and it just arrived. You can thank the IBA for this one. Pushing that last bit of crappy legislation through was the biggest mistake. These guys are willing to pour as much money into it as it takes. You were warned!

The problem is that many of them dont actually live here. Which means they have obtained resident tags illegally. Also, they have obtained a state of Iowa drivers license under false pretense which is a felony. They may win eventually, but for now they are at great risk for prosecution. If they do win, they are probably going to need to live here anyway. Cant imagine the locals allowing them to get away with this without some retribution.

 

[henry5146]

what we dont realize is this, most of these guys have been here hunting for 5-10 yrs, we are not talking 1 yr , ok, 2 years ago, the law was slightly different. the law said 30 days and you could turn in your state drivers license and get an iowa drivers license, the state has recognized these people for how long now as residents , now you change the law, most are registered to vote etc, when you start going back retroactively 2.3. 4. 5 . 10 years, that may be a serious issue , big difference past and future , manipulation of laws after one is already a resident in the eyes of the state. If these guys win, the warden may as well retire. maybe even fired for spending so much time on something like this, apparently the prosecution attorney, doesnt even want to be involved with this case , that is nuts - its messy at best - no doubt- and its very tricky , i have to laugh , at the end of the day if some guy wants to go freeze his a ss off in a tree stand all day , be my guest, not serious about that ,

 

[huntemup]

what we dont realize is this, most of these guys have been here hunting for 5-10 yrs, we are not talking 1 yr , ok, 2 years ago, the law was slightly different. the law said 30 days and you could turn in your state drivers license and get an iowa drivers license, the state has recognized these people for how long now as residents , now you change the law, most are registered to vote etc, when you start going back retroactively 2.3. 4. 5 . 10 years, that may be a serious issue , big difference past and future , manipulation of laws after one is already a resident in the eyes of the state. If these guys win, the warden may as well retire. maybe even fired for spending so much time on something like this, apparently the prosecution attorney, doesnt even want to be involved with this case , that is nuts - its messy at best - no doubt- and its very tricky , i have to laugh , at the end of the day if some guy wants to go freeze his a ss off in a tree stand all day , be my guest, not serious about that ,

At the end of the day, its not about some nonresident landowner that wants to freeze his rear off in a tree stand. It's about all the true local residents that will no longer have that very same opportunity.

 

[River1]

OK, from what I'm gathering now, this isn't a case of people challenging the State for NRLO tags.....this is a case of the IDNR trying to prosecute NR landowners that are falsely claiming residency. CORRECT?

 

[henry5146]

correct and each individual has the opportunity to stand in front of the judge and make his or her case for residency- however it seems that these people will not stop, speaking of lawsuits, unconstitional etc,, lawyer mumbo jumbo civil crap and all that will happen in the local courts where the state has lost in the past , so... could get ugly , my question is this all worth it, is this the best use of the states time, times are tough and this could be long and drawn out

 

[huntemup]

OK, from what I'm gathering now, this isn't a case of people challenging the State for NRLO tags.....this is a case of the IDNR trying to prosecute NR landowners that are falsely claiming residency. CORRECT?

The 4 individuals were denied resident tags and they are suing for the right. Even though they knowingly bent every rule possible for the right. Yes, they paid taxes here, bought a house, have a drivers license, etc, etc, but all for the express purpose to hunt deer. They do not live or work here. I know of one nonresident landowner that gets resident tags that is in law enforcement in Michigan. How does he claim residency here and work full-time there. Another runs a bow shop in Michingan. BS! If they win, it is the end of deer hunting in Iowa as we have known it. It will become a sport of the rich only and that is a crying shame for the many residents that just wont get an opportunity to hunt anymore. Good luck getting young hunters involved in the sport.

 

[henry5146]

lets try and get some facts straight- these specific 4 individuals were not denied their hunting rights this year. all 4 of these individuals hunted as residents of iowa. this is not a lawsuit against the state it is just an appeal for residency and each is making a separate case because each has separate circumstances. if 2 get residency and 2 do not , it will go to appeal, but this is not a state wide group lawsuit. it could certainly get to that , but not at this point. it is the states job to figure out what constitutes residency, place of business does not mean anything, this is all about intent. it is very important for people to understand the facts here. every one has the opportunity to present his or her facts to a judge who will determine whether they meet residenxy requirements, they have already said, their will be no retroactivity on deer harvests in the past etc. in these hearings. clearly you cant be a police officcer in michigan and be a resident, one individual in this case has served jury duty in iowa. personally i live here and i have never served jury duty.

 

[gansomn]

lots of things need to be looked at with our DNR this is just a small part. You people who think this is a jealous thing....give us a break. I have taken some nice deer in my 20 years of bow hunting and take my hat off to those of you who harvest record book deer, just do it with out dicking the rules put in place.

I like topics like this it makes us all stop and think a little more.

 

[huntemup]

lets try and get some facts straight- these specific 4 individuals were not denied their hunting rights this year. all 4 of these individuals hunted as residents of iowa. this is not a lawsuit against the state it is just an appeal for residency and each is making a separate case because each has separate circumstances. if 2 get residency and 2 do not , it will go to appeal, but this is not a state wide group lawsuit. it could certainly get to that , but not at this point. it is the states job to figure out what constitutes residency, place of business does not mean anything, this is all about intent. it is very important for people to understand the facts here. every one has the opportunity to present his or her facts to a judge who will determine whether they meet residenxy requirements, they have already said, their will be no retroactivity on deer harvests in the past etc. in these hearings. clearly you cant be a police officcer in michigan and be a resident, one individual in this case has served jury duty in iowa. personally i live here and i have never served jury duty.

Thanks for the clarification. I had spoken to a nonresident landwoner that had been denied the resident tags as had been some of his neighbors. I made the poor assumption that these individuals were in the same situation. I guess I dont understand why they are having to make an appeal if they still were awarded resident tags this year. Unfortunately, there are a large number of these folks that are getting resident tags by deciet as their only reason for claiming residency is to hunt. Serving jury duty means nothing. Their name was simply called and they made the time to show up and serve. They could easily have come here for a few days to do that. I hope the true residents will do what is right by our state and turn the abusers in to their local CO's. Those that actually move here to become residents I have no problem with. Those that skirt the rules should get exactly what they deserve.

 

[henry5146]

my lawyer friend tells me the reason they were able to still hunt is because they have not been charged guilty yet , so when the appeal process is over and the get a decision, they will either in the electronic system as a resident or nr . i asked the same question

 

[MO-APE]

Man, this is definitely a religious discussion J . You all could come down and buy our unlimited, $225 Missouri NR tags (archery or firearms). You want to talk about a mess, look at Missouri!
I was invited for an archery hunt in Pike County, IL last fall and was shocked to find the ~$500 non-resident license fees ($410 plus other fees) – I didn’t go. In Iowa, if you are lucky enough to get DRAWN for a tag, they will charge ~$545 for a non-resident. In Kansas, again if you get drawn, you are looking at ~$350 plus other fees. Every wonder why Missouri is never spoken in the same breath as Iowa, Illinois or Kansas as a “destination” big buck state (centerfire rifle discussion aside)?
I get the issues you are passionate about, please just don’t forget how good you have it!
As far as the absentee land owner discussion, I was thinking about different situations. So this guy who “lives” in Georgia has a 5,000 acre farm, pays his income taxes to Iowa, registers his vehicles in Iowa, etc., isn’t a non-resident? What about traveling executives…I’d argue that they aren’t home 70% of the time? What about an NFL star, let’s use Brian Bulaga for example (I assume he is originally a farm boy from Iowa), now he probably has a place in the Green Bay area and obviously makes a world-class living. If he owns a home and land in Iowa, but is rarely there…should he be a non-resident?

 

[huntemup]

Man, this is definitely a religious discussion J . You all could come down and buy our unlimited, $225 Missouri NR tags (archery or firearms). You want to talk about a mess, look at Missouri!
I was invited for an archery hunt in Pike County, IL last fall and was shocked to find the ~$500 non-resident license fees ($410 plus other fees) – I didn’t go. In Iowa, if you are lucky enough to get DRAWN for a tag, they will charge ~$545 for a non-resident. In Kansas, again if you get drawn, you are looking at ~$350 plus other fees. Every wonder why Missouri is never spoken in the same breath as Iowa, Illinois or Kansas as a “destination” big buck state (centerfire rifle discussion aside)?
I get the issues you are passionate about, please just don’t forget how good you have it!
As far as the absentee land owner discussion, I was thinking about different situations. So this guy who “lives” in Georgia has a 5,000 acre farm, pays his income taxes to Iowa, registers his vehicles in Iowa, etc., isn’t a non-resident? What about traveling executives…I’d argue that they aren’t home 70% of the time? What about an NFL star, let’s use Brian Bulaga for example (I assume he is originally a farm boy from Iowa), now he probably has a place in the Green Bay area and obviously makes a world-class living. If he owns a home and land in Iowa, but is rarely there…should he be a non-resident?

If he doesnt meet the requirements of the law to be a resident, then yes, he would be considered a non-resident. Its really pretty simple. You either meet the requirements, or you dont. But, bending the rules to suit selfish desires is illegal and should be punished as such.

 

[henry5146]

well that was my whole initial point- why are 4 individuals and others being singled out for claiming to be residents when the rich and famous are left alone, like athletes, politicians, big landowner hunters like those mentioned before. if the state is going to crack down, at least be consistent and their lies a major issue. in some cases the game wardens are taking this personal, putting small lists of people together , in some cases neighbors. must really anger the game warden when he thinks one of his neighbors is killing his big deer every year. seems like a conflict of interest

 

[Non-typ.]

MO-APE
You failed to mention for the $225.00 Missouri non. res. archery tag you can shoot two any sex deer and two turkeys. You can also buy all the doe tags you want for $25.00 each. Missouri needs to get in the game. They have big deer.