As I understand it, services wont be impacted, so this is really just trimming the fat. Your local foresters are still available.
That's just one step closer to letting Iowa become the next state that used to be good hunting. No thanks. I'd rather significantly increase our fees we pay as residents before opening up tags.A lot of license money gets sent back (all that $$$ could be used to pay for these services).
That's just one step closer to letting Iowa become the next state that used to be good hunting. No thanks. I'd rather significantly increase our fees we pay as residents before opening up tags.
Yes if you added a lot of tags... but say 1000 tags at 550/each. Drop in the bucket.Wouldn't you also agree that not sending money back would contribute to the demise of why people send their money in in the first place? It's a double edge sword.
$2 lolI would pay 35 bucks for my deer tags if I could see more public land boughten. Won't happen in my part of the state though . Aren't land owner tags 1 dollar ? Be an easy increase to 10 if you ask me .
I applaud the idea of smaller government always. The Dnr foresters did help fill a niche,but I believe the private sector can do it more efficiently. I have dealt with some over the years and can't say that I would miss them being gone. They seem to have a very arrogant approach to how they felt MY land should be treated. Conflict with them has caused me to avoid any projects that the state forester has to be involved with.
I also do not believe in posting anonymously when speaking of someone's livelihood
Steve Hanson.
As a non resident I'd rather them keep the NR tag quotas the same and double the cost of it, a lot of guys would drop out of the system which would reduce the amount points it would take to draw a tag, but I still believe there's enough serious guys to still sell out thus doubling the income without effecting any of the current management practices.