Demand for Mid-West Land

[River1]

How is this bad for any of us?

They are moving in to exploit what tends to be a local market. Great for the sellers and people not living in Iowa's economy, not good for local buyers. Who in this State wants to compete with East and West Coast buyers? I sure the hell don't. These "specialized" realtors will get after anything and everything that "looks" like it could sell for rec ground.

There's many of us here who wish to buy land at some point in our lives. These guys aren't gonna make it any easier for us.

I'll be the guy wearing military camo and plaid shirts when all my old stuff finally wears out.

 

[150 Class]

Specialized realtors are a result of the demand. Good for them for recognizing the opportunity to make a buck. It's the American way.

Do a google search for Iowa Hunting Ground and see what you find. One more specialized Realtor trying to make a buck? Big deal. Why would we want to sort out and pick on one of the many? It doesn't matter if the buyer is local or not, the buyers are the ones doing the knocking and the doors to knock on are already there.

The values of rec ground almost tripled from 2000 to today and they did that without this one additional Realtor. Many of you probably remember the days when it had hardly any value and it was hard to sell. I don't see it ever changing back.

 

[River1]

Do a google search for those specialized realtors and then compare the amount of rec ground forsale in other midwest states to Iowa. Everyone of those realtors I've looked at has much more ground listed in each other State than Iowa. Illinois is a vary good comparable.

I'm guessing you already own your own ground 150? If so, good for you, but like I said there's plenty of us Iowa boys who are still trying to make that happen. You can't expect any of us to like whats going on.

 

[150 Class]

Good points, but why do you think that is? Did the Realtors ruin it for those other states or did the states themselves do it? All the Realtor did was take the risk with the business opportunity. Those states made it easy for them to succeed. So other states also have more rec ground so it is difficult to compare Iowa to any of them.

I do own some land. 98% of it is tillable so 98% of it is put into row crops every year. I too want to get more recreational ground, I just won't blame any realtors for it becoming more difficult to realize that dream. It's all about supply and demand and our government, if anyone, is the one who could change that demand.

 

[cedar creek]

Good points, but why do you think that is? Did the Realtors ruin it for those other states or did the states themselves do it? All the Realtor did was take the risk with the business opportunity. Those states made it easy for them to succeed. So other states also have more rec ground so it is difficult to compare Iowa to any of them.

I do own some land. 98% of it is tillable so 98% of it is put into row crops every year. I too want to get more recreational ground, I just won't blame any realtors for it becoming more difficult to realize that dream. It's all about supply and demand and our government, if anyone, is the one who could change that demand.

I own land in Iowa too. Almost 95% of mine is recreational or timber. I've owned it for 12 years, and the value has definitely increased! Good for me. My concern is the value being driven up by the prospect of NR landowners lobbying to change the deer hunting laws so they can shoot bucks every year. Can you imagine the money NR's would be willing to pay? They have been fighting hard to change the laws now, and they don't need help from companies trying to sell big horns and big horn attractants. How many average Joe's will be able to buy land if they succede? I grew up on a farm where both my grandfather, and father were passionate hunters. Both of them told me i would see the day when you couldn't get permission to hunt a paticular farm. It didn't seem possible at the time. But that started coming true for me over 20 yrs. ago. Now i believe i can tell my grandchildren they will see a day when they will no longer be able to hunt in most of the state. Wear a kevlar vest and hunt the small amount of public land available!

 

[150 Class]

My concern is the value being driven up by the prospect of NR landowners lobbying to change the deer hunting laws so they can shoot bucks every year. Can you imagine the money NR's would be willing to pay? They have been fighting hard to change the laws now, and they don't need help from companies trying to sell big horns and big horn attractants. How many average Joe's will be able to buy land if they succede? I grew up on a farm where both my grandfather, and father were passionate hunters. Both of them told me i would see the day when you couldn't get permission to hunt a paticular farm. It didn't seem possible at the time. But that started coming true for me over 20 yrs. ago. Now i believe i can tell my grandchildren they will see a day when they will no longer be able to hunt in most of the state. Wear a kevlar vest and hunt the small amount of public land available!

I do agree with your concerns and it is nice to see that there are other landowners that see it that way. Although as landowners we may benefit with increased land values, I don't want to see it happen either. The day Mossy Oak or any other company tries to lobby for more NR tags is the day I quit business with them and will also lobby against them. Times have changed, for sure, and will continue to change. Squeaky wheels get the grease and I will continue to be very squeaky when needed.

 

[River1]

The day Mossy Oak or any other company tries to lobby for more NR tags is the day I quit business with them and will also lobby against them.

These special realtor groups have already lobbied for more Iowa NR tags. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when Mossy Oak joins the others. Frankly, from a business stand point, they'd be fools not to lobby. So, there lies my point.
A prime example is the "Friends of Iowa" group, they have board members who are these type of realtors.

Just give me a holler, I'll let ya know where the best buys on plaid and surplus camo are.:way:

 

[cedar creek]

The next hot selling camo pattern from Mossy Oak will be Iowa corn stalks.

 

[dedgeez]

Ive been kind of sitting back listening to all the points you guys are making, and each side presents a good case. First, from the NR land buying aspect, there are alot of things that can be considered. Yes, it could drive up the price of land, but shooting only one buck compared to 3 for a resident is a good thing. Yes Illinois has over the counter tags but in most places they have antler restrictions, point being most hunters in Iowa kill bucks smaller than 130 inches every year anyway, so if a NR wants to buy some land here and shoot a trophy buck every year and manage that land it may help the overall number of trophy bucks in the state. As far as losing permission to hunt land that a person may have had in the past, I guess it depends on the reason. If it is because another person is hunting it than I have no problem with being turned away. I support anyone who hunts and am glad that resource is being utilized. Its the land that gets sold and the owners want to develope it or are anti's that stings me. I moved to Iowa 3 years ago strictly for the bowhunting opportunities, and am proud to say I will die here. I love Iowa and will own land here soon. I dont care if land prices go up, hunting and management are my passion and Im not going to let NR being able to hunt here ruin what I love. I moved from a state that has everything ass backwards (Michigan), and untill a person has lived in a place like that, I dont think SOME Iowa residents or NR have any idea how phenomenal the deer hunting is here. I guess the way I see it is anyone on this site or in this state has the same resources or opportunities that any NR has, so work hard, bust your ass, and when your dream ground becomes available, buy it and have fun. Mossy Oak is just doing business and I dont think we can blame them for that. Im sure some of you own a business and if you didnt expand or sell certain products because someone complained about it, no one would survive in any business. Sorry for the long post.

 

[cedar creek]

Ive been kind of sitting back listening to all the points you guys are making, and each side presents a good case. First, from the NR land buying aspect, there are alot of things that can be considered. Yes, it could drive up the price of land, but shooting only one buck compared to 3 for a resident is a good thing. Yes Illinois has over the counter tags but in most places they have antler restrictions, point being most hunters in Iowa kill bucks smaller than 130 inches every year anyway, so if a NR wants to buy some land here and shoot a trophy buck every year and manage that land it may help the overall number of trophy bucks in the state. As far as losing permission to hunt land that a person may have had in the past, I guess it depends on the reason. If it is because another person is hunting it than I have no problem with being turned away. I support anyone who hunts and am glad that resource is being utilized. Its the land that gets sold and the owners want to develope it or are anti's that stings me. I moved to Iowa 3 years ago strictly for the bowhunting opportunities, and am proud to say I will die here. I love Iowa and will own land here soon. I dont care if land prices go up, hunting and management are my passion and Im not going to let NR being able to hunt here ruin what I love. I moved from a state that has everything ass backwards (Michigan), and untill a person has lived in a place like that, I dont think SOME Iowa residents or NR have any idea how phenomenal the deer hunting is here. I guess the way I see it is anyone on this site or in this state has the same resources or opportunities that any NR has, so work hard, bust your ass, and when your dream ground becomes available, buy it and have fun. Mossy Oak is just doing business and I dont think we can blame them for that. Im sure some of you own a business and if you didnt expand or sell certain products because someone complained about it, no one would survive in any business. Sorry for the long post.

And at what point do you think Michigan went ass backwards? And why do you think the deer hunting is phenomenal here? Because we as residents are trying to protect it! I remember in the early 70's when Michigan was one of the hot spots for trophy whitetail. I have friends that bowhunted their every chance they could get. Boone and Crocket bucks were unheard of in Iowa at that time. Hell; almost nobody even bowhunted in Iowa until the late 70's! The difference here is; Iowa doesn't have the national forest, and big timber reserves like many of the neighboring states. Right next door in Wisconsin; hunters use to go up north in northern Wisconsin for the BIG woods bucks. Is anybody old enough to remember that? Have times changed, or is it people? I don't see anybody tripping over their feet to hunt Michigan or Wisconsin now. Why do you think that is? I'm done ranting for now, but this is a sore subject for me. I grew up in the country, and remember when there was no deer. My grandfather wouldn't let you shoot a doe, because there were so few deer. You could hunt the entire season without even seeing horns. You could also hunt anywhere you wanted, because very few people even hunted deer. Now people are willing to give all of that up for the deepest pockets. If we don't protect what we have; we won't have it!

 

[dedgeez]

And at what point do you think Michigan went ass backwards? And why do you think the deer hunting is phenomenal here? Because we as residents are trying to protect it! I remember in the early 70's when Michigan was one of the hot spots for trophy whitetail. I have friends that bowhunted their every chance they could get. Boone and Crocket bucks were unheard of in Iowa at that time. Hell; almost nobody even bowhunted in Iowa until the late 70's! The difference here is; Iowa doesn't have the national forest, and big timber reserves like many of the neighboring states. Right next door in Wisconsin; hunters use to go up north in northern Wisconsin for the BIG woods bucks. Is anybody old enough to remember that? Have times changed, or is it people? I don't see anybody tripping over their feet to hunt Michigan or Wisconsin now. Why do you think that is? I'm done ranting for now, but this is a sore subject for me. I grew up in the country, and remember when there was no deer. My grandfather wouldn't let you shoot a doe, because there were so few deer. You could hunt the entire season without even seeing horns. You could also hunt anywhere you wanted, because very few people even hunted deer. Now people are willing to give all of that up for the deepest pockets. If we don't protect what we have; we won't have it!

First I guess I should explain what I think is phenomenal deer hunting. That to me is the chance at shooting a Boone and Crocket class deer every year. In Michigan, 1 of 111 hunters have a chance at a pope and young deer, and in Iowa I believe last I checked it was 1 of 23, so I would consider that phenomenal. Michigan is one of the origanal deer hunting states, so yes I dont disagree that in the 70's alot of people did come there to hunt because of the deep rooted tradition, but I disagree it was for a trophy class deer. If you check the record books, comparitively Michigan has produced very few record class deer per number of hunters. And also the big deer that do come out of Michigan rarely are from the deep woods and national forests, they are from the cropland of southern Michigan. I dont think you can compare the two states by when people hunted because that has to do with the timeline of whitetail deer inhabiting other states, Michigan just happened to be one of the originals. I am not that long in the tooth, but when I started deer hunting we werent aloud to shoot does either. I guess if you consider great deer hunting to be numbers than Michigan definately still has that, I just think Iowa has the greatest potential for big bucks. I agree with you that we need to protect it, but NR landowners are not going to hurt anything if they go buy the regs that Iowa already has in place, such as bag limits and season dates. Those if anything are what we should be lobbying to keep, not being able to gun hunt during November is a precedent that other states could learn from.

 

[Hardwood11]

demand for land

The argument that the hunting will go down hill or will be terrible in Iowa as a result of more non-resident tags is really questionable when you look at statistics. First of all, non-resident tag allocations are currently 6,000 tags. If the success rate is 50% on bucks the harvest would be 3,000 bucks. Double the tags to 12,000 and the harvest would be 6,000 (approx.)

Compare that to the resident harvest which was 47,377 bucks in 2009. The number of shed bucks shot by residents was over 2,000 bucks, If you add in button bucks it would be close to 60,000 bucks.

Non-residents shooting 10% or less of the overall harvest will result in the hunting going down hill...doesn't add up.

The 3 buck limit has far more of an impact on buck numbers and if they cut back to 1 or 2 bucks, they would save more bucks than if they raised the non-resident tag number to 12,000.

Local hunter access is another issue, I do see the local point of view on that topic, but please do not blame the possibility of more non-resident tags as the future downfall of the buck hunting in Iowa, if you do, back it up statiscally.

 

[FarmlandQDM]

The argument that the hunting will go down hill or will be terrible in Iowa as a result of more non-resident tags is really questionable when you look at statistics.
...
Local hunter access is another issue, I do see the local point of view on that topic, but please do not blame the possibility of more non-resident tags as the future downfall of the buck hunting in Iowa, if you do, back it up statiscally.

Local hunter access is the problem that over time could diminish the quality of Iowa's deer herd.

If non-resident tags increase there will be more incentive to buy Iowa hunting land. Most non-residents and many residents too are reducing hunting access when they buy a property for recreational use. The difference is most non-resident do not have the time to adequately control the population when hunter access is reduced because they come to Iowa to hunt bucks not does. Resident recreational landowners typically have more time and opportunity to devote to killing does. As the percentage of land owned by non-residents increases it is very likely the overall deer population will increase. The DNR is already under great pressure to wipe out our deer herd and about the only way to do that is to lengthen gun seasons, allow more rifle hunting or move firearms season into the rut. If our population starts to increase again, which I think it will if non-resident tags are increased, Iowa will see gun hunting during the rut and then our quality will go downhill.

 

[kbnelson3]

Local hunter access is the problem that over time could diminish the quality of Iowa's deer herd.

If non-resident tags increase there will be more incentive to buy Iowa hunting land. Most non-residents and many residents too are reducing hunting access when they buy a property for recreational use. The difference is most non-resident do not have the time to adequately control the population when hunter access is reduced because they come to Iowa to hunt bucks not does. Resident recreational landowners typically have more time and opportunity to devote to killing does. As the percentage of land owned by non-residents increases it is very likely the overall deer population will increase. The DNR is already under great pressure to wipe out our deer herd and about the only way to do that is to lengthen gun seasons, allow more rifle hunting or move firearms season into the rut. If our population starts to increase again, which I think it will if non-resident tags are increased, Iowa will see gun hunting during the rut and then our quality will go downhill.

you're assuming so many things for all of that to happen.then again, maybe a longer, or week earlier gun season would get more deer killed? some areas, especially NE Iowa, need a lot of thinning, Residents and Non-residents alike have failed in the last 5 years at getting enough deer killed, and that area has the majority of good public hunting land in iowa.

Based on the people that work for Mossy Oak in SW Wisconsin, I dont think you guys have anything to worry about. theyre not exactly hiring the cream of the crop; most land brokers are pretty well established in the local markets in their own firms.

 

[BJohnson]

Hey, KB Nelson, if your avatar indicates your true feelings for Iowa, why the heck do you care anyway ?? Just stay over in Wisky and we will manage whatever problems you think us residents have created ??

 

[Jdubs]

This argument that if more NR's buy land the deer population will go out of control due to the NR landowner not being able to have enough tag access is baseless. I've been coming to Iowa for almost a decade and I can say the local farmers do more than take care of the excess deer, year around with high powers, than is stated. I could care less, but I've spent enough time to see how things really work.

 

[cedar creek]

This argument that if more NR's buy land the deer population will go out of control due to the NR landowner not being able to have enough tag access is baseless. I've been coming to Iowa for almost a decade and I can say the local farmers do more than take care of the excess deer, year around with high powers, than is stated. I could care less, but I've spent enough time to see how things really work.

So now we're going to trash the resident farmers are we? PLEASE! Maybe your neck of the woods is near the Hatfields, but i can assure you most of the farmers i've known don't even own high power rifles. We can thank the farmers, and the DNR for a successful stocking program in the late 40's, and being selective so that our deer herd grew to the standards we have today. We have to remember it was only in 1953 that the DNR allowed a season on deer in Iowa. Even then it was antlered deer only. We have since seen the family farm change to mostly coop's and large farmers, but the farmers are still concerned with the deer herd today. Some think there are too many. Some believe the herd is too small. I guess the same can be said about nr landowners. As long as the regulations don't change; i'm sure we the hunters can keep everything in check. I don't blame a nonresident for wanting to purchase a little piece of heaven in Iowa. But if you want all the hunting benifits; move here.

 

[Jdubs]

Give me a break. I've spent enough time there to see what goes on. Noone advertises it but it goes on non-stop. I'm not trashing anyone. Everyone wants to blame the NR for poaching, driving up land prices, low deer numbers, not being able to adequately deal with deer numbers on NR owned ground, etc. etc. etc. I don't care what the farmers do or how many deer they shoot, get off the NR thing it doesn't hold water. Some NR's on here are former Iowa residents and/or have spent enough time there to see the game. Lastly, keep the NR regs the same I have two points this year hope to see you in the fall.

 

[Liv4Rut]

I do agree with Jdubs regarding farmers, however I feel it is very area specific. In southern Iowa we have ran accross and told a lot about farmers down there shooting them year round. Granted its not all farmers but a lot of the big older farmers seem to have a hatred for deer. I have not seen or heard of any farmers in the more Northern counties or eastern counties doing this. I am sure there are though. Everytime my grandpa sees a deer he always says that looks like a good spot to put out the poison. Granted he has never killed a deer in his life but its kind of comical.

I do think if the regs changed to where a nonresident was guaranteed a tag ever year that a lot of ground would get locked down in the southern and northeast counties. I know a couple good friends that are nonresidents that always say they will buy ground the day they can get a tag every year. I don't blame them. They got the money so why not. I am sure there are many others that would jump on it too. I would if I was in that position. I would buy ground right now if I didn't have that extra $1,000 per month student loan payment between my wife and I.

If the regs stay the same, I don't really have a problem with them. If they doubled the number of nonresidents there would surely be more ground bought up just because your draw odds would be better but I think as long as it is capped at 6000 we won't really see many changes from year to year.

 

[cedar creek]

Give me a break. I've spent enough time there to see what goes on. Noone advertises it but it goes on non-stop. I'm not trashing anyone. Everyone wants to blame the NR for poaching, driving up land prices, low deer numbers, not being able to adequately deal with deer numbers on NR owned ground, etc. etc. etc. I don't care what the farmers do or how many deer they shoot, get off the NR thing it doesn't hold water. Some NR's on here are former Iowa residents and/or have spent enough time there to see the game. Lastly, keep the NR regs the same I have two points this year hope to see you in the fall.

If that can be said about farmers in a portion of the state that i'm not familiar with. I guess it is ok for me to make the statement about nr's shooting bucks every year with their doe tags. That is something i see every year in my portion of the state. I might also add we see considerably more nr hunters in north eastern Iowa than most of the state. I've had many problems with nr tresspassers hunting my ground during the November doe season, and bow season in the last 5 years. Nothing like seeing a truck with out of state plates parked 1/2 mile from you land; then watch three guys with bows come out of your timber walking across a field to the truck. Takes some b_lls to drive a track of timber with no permission. With bows no less!