Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

"Friends" of IA Lobbyist Disclosure Info.

m_kat

m_kat

Member
FYI,


The "friends" of Iowa spent at least 18,000 trying to get Iowa's rules changed during this years legislative session. That didn't work to well for them:grin:... but how much will they be willing to shell out next year?

Link.
http://data.desmoinesregister.com/r...otes_orig=&sort=Pay&desc=desc&update=Sort#tbl

If that doesn't work there is a link to the article on the registers home page where you can search all of the lobbyist disclosures. Some interesting stuff.

The most interesting is that the FOI lobbyist said his client is NOT out of state. I would like to see where his checks came from!
 
Interesting information.... thanks for sharing this.... we need to keep our eyes on this group.....
 
m_kat said:
The most interesting is that the FOI lobbyist said his client is NOT out of state. I would like to see where his checks came from!
Click to expand...

Some members of this group are Iowa resident landowners who want the law changed so that it is easier for family members (children) to come back to Iowa to hunt. It wouldn't be too difficult to funnel money through these folks and using them will also strengthen their case in the eyes of legislators (rather than the nonresident landowner working to change laws in a state they don't even live in). I do have some sympathy for the Iowans who have moved out of state to find work and would like to come back to spend time with their families while hunting deer. Finding a way to facilitate this without opening the NR flood gates will be the hard part.
 
Cornfed said:
Interesting information.... thanks for sharing this.... we need to keep our eyes on this group.....
Click to expand...

some would say the same about the IBA. If what I have been hearing is true, FOI is tooling up big to finally get NR landowners some rights.

Just a though I've had the last couple weeks: NR's aren't driving up land prices at all. It's yourselves. You don't think the farmers paying $3-5k/acre are responsible for land prices sky rocketing? you're foolish then.
 
I really, really, really, really, really, really wish that Missouri would implament Iowa's DNR's regulations on whitetails. It would be the big buck meca of the US, and I would move back home in a heart beat (that is not the only reason of couse). But then again, once monster bucks start hitting the ground, there will be Friends of Missouri come in, raise a stink, and back to the old ways.

And for the comment that Nonresident landowners don't have any rights? What? You control the land HOWEVER YOU SEE FIT!!!!! Sure, there is a law stating that you can't have a buck tag every year, but other than that one law, which you knew before hand, you suddenly have not rights?

So, answer me this question. If you were awarded unlimited doe tags every year, for FREE, would that make you happy?
 
I just wish I could buy a NR tag every year for the same price as residents. It's Bs. I don't understand it. Who cares if I knew the rules before I bought land here. It's not fair. I"m a landowner and I WILL CRY UNTIL I GET MY WAY! I shouldn't be discriminated against. I mean honestly, it has nothing to do with the small bucks in my state. I don't care about that. There is no way that the regulations in my state has anything to do with the size of the bucks that walk around here. I want to change your regulations so that I have small bucks just like my state here in Pennsylvania! :thrwrck:

This is the most ridiculous argument ever! For you NR's that continue to argue this battle....get over it. For some reason you don't understand that us here in Iowa have big bucks for a reason. Manage your home states like we manage ours and you will understand why we have mature whitetails. Instead of buying ground in our state, and then in turn complaining about our ways, why dont' you manage your state like ours. Get over it. Figure your problems out. Learn from your mistakes and our positives. You should feel priviledged to be able to hunt here once every three years. :way:

Take it for what its worth!
 
Sureshot, I agree with most of your post, however, Iowa having big bucks has little to do with your management. I've seen party hunting resident groups have several yearling bucks in the back of their trucks, at $26 per tag, while the NR who just paid $400 is still waiting for a mature animal. Not to mention Iowa's early doe seasons, youth seasons, muzzleloading season, and late rifle season when shed bucks are being shot.
The primary reason Iowa has big deer is the state does not have the population base, and therefore very little hunting pressure compared to other parts of the country; giving deer the opportunity to grow older, period. PA sells 300,000 archery tags per year compared to Iowa's 30,000, PA has 1,000,000 hunters in the field for firearms season compared to Iowa's 150,000, the math is easy.
 
Jdubs said:
PA sells 300,000 archery tags per year compared to Iowa's 30,000, PA has 1,000,000 hunters in the field for firearms season compared to Iowa's 150,000, the math is easy.
Click to expand...

What is the limiting factor in PA providing a quality product for their residents? Sounds like PA needs to set a number limit on tags and go to a lotto drawing for their residents.:eek:

Also, if the PA F&G/DNR gets all this money from tag sales and can't offer a quality product, who's to blame? Them or the people buying the tags?

I'd like to see another comparison: number of acres of public hunting in PA vs Iowa. Number of acres or percentage of total acres is fine, I'm not picky. It might come down to what good is issuing tons of tags if nobody has a place to hunt?


I'd really like to rationally discuss the above points as I think they are valid. I agree that residents of any state should work to fix their own home situation instead of trying to undermine Iowa's quality (lobbying to increase tag numbers, lower tag costs or change NR regulations). JMO.
 
I forgot to mention the Iowa DNR management strategy of multiple buck tags per hunter and party hunting. If the same were implemented in other states there would be no deer. There are many factors that can be debated but again, the most influential one is Iowa has little hunting pressure. The next destination state is N. Dakota, 0 hunting pressure. Video crews and hunting personalities are there now, just like Iowa 10 years ago and presently, it's a matter of time.
Many want to make this deer management thing rocket science making a ton of money selling habitat, food plots, implements to create the former, etc. when all it comes down to is age. Fewer people = fewer hunters= older age structure result in bigger deer.
 
Last edited:
[If what I have been hearing is true, FOI is tooling up big to finally get NR landowners some rights.

/QUOTE]


Appreciate the tip, that kinda news is sure to motivate some IBA members.....
Click to expand...
 
Jdubs, I won't get too in depth here as my post would be really long. MANAGEMENT and REGULATIONS are pretty much interchangeable OR go together almost seamlessly. The REASON IA has big bucks IS the regulations, ONE of those big factors is our LATE GUN SEASON, that's just ONE REASON.
I would GUESS 90% of guys here DO NOT shoot 1&1/2 year olds. Some do but it's a minority. Those minority gun hunters are hunting December 5 SO the damage they do is far less. That's why IA has so much bigger bucks than when you cross the line to any state in any direction (yes, even IL) like MO, NE, MN, etc. The REGULATIONS AND MANAGEMENT in IA are top notch. If it were just population, etc- IA would be the same as MO, NE, etc.
Remember, only 5-7% of IA is timber, far less habitat than any other neighboring state BUT it consistently produces far far more giants. That's regulations and management at its finest. Yes, PA could do much of the same regs and still have far less hunting because of how many hunters you have, old school mindset, quality of habitat, etc. BUT the states you need to compare IA to is its neighbors: NE, MO, MN. IA blows them away every year with far less habitat and it's not even a close. :) WHY IA BLOWS THEM AWAY IS REGULATIONS AND MANAGEMENT- PERIOD.
 
Jdubs said:
I forgot to mention the Iowa DNR management strategy of multiple buck tags per hunter and party hunting. If the same were implemented in other states there would be no deer. There are many factors that can be debated but again, the most influential one is Iowa has little hunting pressure. The next destination state is N. Dakota, 0 hunting pressure. Video crews and hunting personalities are there now, just like Iowa 10 years ago and presently, it's a matter of time.
Many want to make this deer management thing rocket science making a ton of money selling habitat, food plots, implements to create the former, etc. when it comes down to age. Fewer people = fewer hunters= older age structure result in bigger deer.
Click to expand...


In your earlier post you posted some very misleading figures, deliberately so I believe, so just to clear that up. In 2007 Iowa had 334,444 hunters that purchased 389,163 licenses, but then only were able to harvest, even with the multiple buck tags, 146,214 deer of which only 52134 had any kind of antlers. They don't have the total hunters or licenses posted for the 2008 season, but with very similar numbers, I am sure, they were only able to harvest 142,194 deer and only 49,677 with horns. It just seems to me that all giant Iowa bucks that everyone lusts after are disappearing very rapidly so perhaps this stupid battle to change laws in Iowa will die along with much of the trophy potential. As this downward spiral continues I truly hope that North Dakota is the next Mecca and that they grant NR land owners multiple buck tags at low or no cost. Good luck to them!

If the IDNR strategy of multiple buck tags per hunter and party would create no deer in other state why is it so successful here that you are trying to sell your soul and integrity just to be able to get a buck tag every year with out actually moving here? :thrwrck:If our hunting pressure is so low, why is our success ratio so low (142,000 deer divided by 400,000 hunters= 35 percent success)? One last thing, unless things are really different in Penn having multiple buck tags has almost no effect on the overall deer population. In Iowa our bucks are capable of producing off spring with a multitude of does, but that may not be the case in all the other states you referred to in your statement that if other states did the same thing there would be no deer. You do realize that ever surrounding state to Iowa does harvest higher numbers of deer for what ever reasons. So in short if you really feel that your soul is only worth $3000.00 an acer then move here and buy your 2 or 3 buck tags and raise our buck harvest to 49,679 bucks this season. :eek:
 
JNRBRONC said:
number of acres of public hunting in PA vs Iowa
Click to expand...

Another I would like to see would be "huntable acres". Iowa habitat is much different than PA, with mostly prime crop ground and low quantity of forest acres. Hunters per square mile of "huntable ground" would be a better comparison than one of numbers of hunters in general.
 
here is something to keep in mind.

North Dakota will NEVER be the next "IOWA" if they maintain the same season dates....

Iowa is Iowa because the deer only have pressure during the gun seasons, which are short and sweet.

our deer get the best opportunity to spread their genetics assuring next years quality....
 
Last edited:
so, what you are saying, is iowa should keep hunter numbers limited, to keep our herd in check.

sounds great, thanks for the tip
 
I did a little digging around the net and who knows if this information is accurate but it is from the forest reserve websites. I was trying to compare the number of acres of forest land per hunter in both Pennsylvania and Iowa just out of curiosity.

I found that Pennsylvania has 9 million forested acres and from JDubs post 1million gun hunters and 300K bowhunters for 1.3 million hunters. Divide 9 million by 1.3 million and that is 6.92 acres per hunter.

Iowa is reported to have 2 million acres of forested land and from bowmakers post in 2007 there were 334,444 hunters. Do the math and you have 5.98 acres per hunter.

So if this information is true, Pennsylvania actually has less hunting pressure than Iowa. I just thought that was interesting. Again that is if these are actual hunter numbers and forested acres number. I
 
I know we all do it to a certain extend, but I have found that the PA boys who want NR landowner privileges have omitted some important info from their home state. This is an interesting tidbit I found on the PADNR site.

Landowner Antlerless Deer Licenses: (Cost for Residents: $6.70 – Cost for Nonresidents $26.70) These licenses are issued only by the County Treasurer in the county in which the applicant owns (leased land does not qualify) 50 or more contiguous (all adjoining) acres of land totally within the county of application. The applicant understands and must agree to at the time of application, that the subject 50 or more contiguous acres of land are open to public hunting and trapping and shall remain open to public hunting and trapping during the entire license year (July 1 to June 30) for which the Landowners Antlerless Deer license is issued. This license is available to both residents and nonresidents. However, the cost for nonresidents is $26.70.


It appears that if a landowner permit is issued then all of that land becomes public hunting for an entire year. Very interesting! None of the NR landowners struggling to change our laws and regulations in Iowa have mentioned that trivial fact, or did I just miss it?:rolleyes: Now if they would open their NR owned lands to public hunting for a year and all legal species and seasons, maybe that is some thing Iowans might consider. And before some one implies that I am advocating that resident landowner who receive a landowner tag must open their land to the public, I AM NOT!!! But that might be a way for the NR landowners to get some kind of concessions, and we all know that we need more public lands for hunting.;)
 
  • Deleted by N/A
Show…
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom