Farm Bureau Deer Policy

[bjkpharmd]

Got the latest issue of the Farm Bureau paper "The Spokesman" and the pull out section is the policy development pages. One of the state issue questions is "Should more non-resident deer licenses be issued?" It states that there has been unsuccessful legislation to increase the non-resident limit to 10,000 from the current 6500 any-sex and 2500 doe tags. It lists discussion questions for members as follows:
1. Do you support more non-residents hunting deer in Iowa?
2. What are some ways that non-residents can help reduce the Iowa deer herd?
3. Are you concerned about non-residents purchasing Iowa farms for hunting?
4. Would non-residents purchase iowa farms for hunting wihtout an increase on non-resident deer licenses?

Answers to these from FB members will help direct the policy development. What does everyone think?

 

[ElkHunter]

I think the FB insurance part of company would like to kill all the deer in Ia. That seems to be where most of the pressure is coming from.

 

[River1]

If Farm Bureau starts lobbying on this issue, I'll be the first one of their customers calling that stupid lizard at Geico.

I haven't received that mailing yet, thanks for the heads up.

 

[ironwood]

With that much focus on the small non resident numbers I would suggest somebody at the top of that company is having trouble getting his nonresident tags even though he owns land in Iowa. The focus should be on making additional doe tags available cheap and easy for all hunters including those out of stators that have already paid big for their first tag. Those questions just don't sound like they are geared toward reducing deer numbers, more like how can I get my large corporate employer to help me lobby for my personal cause. We should investigate to discover who the author is and look into his background. Magnum PI may be available.

 

[ElkHunter]

Hey River,
FB was the main lobby group 3 yrs ago fighting the IBA, they thought their group would run to legislature and get everything they wanted.They ran into a big surprise just how strong and organized we were.They haven't backed off just going about in a more subtle way. They have the tree farmers, guides and outfitters behind them. I joined just to get the Spokesman.

 

[River1]

I can understand Farm Bureau wanting to reduce their collision claims, but for them to stick their nose in the NR issues is a bunch of %#$!#T, IMO.

Check out Richard Bishop's article in the new 2004 deer regulations. Good news as it's apparent we are on our way towards the DNR's management goals without any problems.

http://www.iowadnr.com/wildlife/pdfs/04deerturk.pdf

 

[DOR]

250$-300$ for a non res doe tag. Sad, sad, sad. Seems like there is not much of an interest to change that. It sucks for me, especially since I will only get the privelage of hunting IA every 1 out of 3 or 4 years.

 

[JNRBRONC]

[ QUOTE ]
I can understand Farm Bureau wanting to reduce their collision claims, but for them to stick their nose in the NR issues is a bunch of %#$!#T, IMO.



Maybe the insurance angle isn't the only one. I would guess that there are a lot of farmers who are members of Farm Bureau and who are also tired of feeding the deer with their crops. Kind of hurts the bottom line. Just a guess though.