risto2351
Well-Known Member
Ironwood,
Thank you for checking on that.
If they had no true support maybe they could have went undecided?
Hf327
Reading up on this bill. It is laughable that in a country like the USA that a landowner who pays taxes on land purchased with hard earned money is allowed to hunt only every several years. All you people crying about the non-resident who does not own land being discriminated against make me laugh. The non-resident who owns lands should be given the benefit of being able to hunt his land each year and to all you who say it is unfair what about the premium this bill places on the license fee. It's not like they can hunt all over the state.... simply on their own property! Also any decent hunter knows that someone who purchases land to hunt buys land that is usually marginal for farming just look at the desire of many hunters to purchase land with CRP contracts in place. So to all those selfish people who want to discriminate against property owners non-resident or not remember this is the United States of America not Russia.
Reading up on this bill. It is laughable that in a country like the USA that a landowner who pays taxes on land purchased with hard earned money is allowed to hunt only every several years. All you people crying about the non-resident who does not own land being discriminated against make me laugh. The non-resident who owns lands should be given the benefit of being able to hunt his land each year and to all you who say it is unfair what about the premium this bill places on the license fee. It's not like they can hunt all over the state.... simply on their own property! Also any decent hunter knows that someone who purchases land to hunt buys land that is usually marginal for farming just look at the desire of many hunters to purchase land with CRP contracts in place. So to all those selfish people who want to discriminate against property owners non-resident or not remember this is the United States of America not Russia.
deeraddict
PMA Member
Get over yourself. The NR landowners minor contribution to the state revenue base in the form of property taxes is nothing compared to all of the money residents spend in the state every year. Why are these nR buying in Iowa and not their own state where they could hunt? OH YEAH, horn porn. The rules are there and it is laughable these guys who come in and think just because they bought some ground they have a a RIGHT to change the laws of the state that are decided by the peoples of the states appointed officials. You made my point for me, your right, this is not Russia, this IS a democracy, and under these rules we the people of IOWA get to vote for our representatives, and it is becoming very clear to many of them if they want to stay in office they need to vote the way their constituants (sp) want them to. That is pretty plain and simple, if this was Russia, one jackwagon clear accros the country would be making the rules, and that would suck.
ironwood
Active Member
Selfish and narrow minded sum you up well.
Yeah typical selfish reply non-residents do contribute to local economies. And as far as landowner tags look at states with well run and managed fish and game departments like Nevada for one. Landowner tags are issued for desirable species and it has not caused Nevada hunting quality to fall apart. So please stop all the whining about the NR landowner being able to hunt on their own property. You can come to my state and many others and get a tag to hunt or fish whether you are a resident or not ,let alone own property . If people would be honest and just admit it is out of jealousy that they don't want NR to hunt on their own land at least it would be an admittance of the the underlying meaning behind all the resentment.
150 Class
Well-Known Member
I try to stay out of these but help me out here. What advantage does the Nevada non resident landowner get over other non resident hunters? Also, does Nevada have a points system for any of their big game desirable species for non residents? How about residents?
deeraddict
PMA Member
Not selfish at all. It is the rule, it has been this way for quite some time, it is supported by the voting public of this state, thats the way it is. I am going Elk hunting in 2 years. To go to many areas out west you have to have preference points to get into certain areas, I am not complaining, thats the rules and the way it is. I would like to be able to go hunt an area in Colorado with a relative of mine. Takes 4 preference points to get into that area. You aren't hearing me cry and wine that this is unfair. I have friends who own land in Montana, but they are Iowa Residents, they still follow the rules when going back there to hunt. Still pay the non resident hunting fees of $912 dollars to go home and hunt HIS own land even though they grew up on the land, and he still has to APPLY for that. I guess he should be throwing a fit and complaining about this, yet he doesn't because he knows the rules and is happy to abide by them. I don't care if a NR hunts their own land, and abides by the rules, but I am tired of hearing people jump on here and make posts about how this is unfair I can't hunt it every year Blah Blah Blah. They knew, or should have known the rules when they bought they land, get over it. The fact that they are a landowner gives them NO RIGHT to the decision of what the laws are inthe state. This is left up to the residents of the state and their appointed officials. If they want to change the laws, then I guess they need to move to Iowa so they have a right to disagree with the laws. Just my $.02 and then some.
Last edited:
Rathburn Flat Bottom
Crazed Hunter
I see some major similarities and comparisons between this and the ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION DEBATE - just similarities.....
All these folks come here, illegally (not saying NR's are illegal), set up shop illegally, should not be here, are ruining lots of things from hospitals to schools to filling jails, etc. Then, the LIBERALS out-cry.... "well, they are here, we need to change the law to make them legal, amnesty, pay a fine and become a resident, etc" - the Libs want their votes and the Repubs want cheap labor. Change the law, they are here, it's too late- let's brush aside they came here illegally, knew our laws, are destroying tons of American institutions, we had laws on the books, didn't come our legal route, etc- NOW we have groups that are trying to change the law to accommodate their needs with all sorts of other motives.
If you are against changing the laws for illegals and granting amnesty, you better not be for changing IA's laws to accommodate people who don't have IA residency and want to change Iowa's laws to suit their need & dozens of other hidden-motives I could list, when they knew the rules going into it.
All these folks come here, illegally (not saying NR's are illegal), set up shop illegally, should not be here, are ruining lots of things from hospitals to schools to filling jails, etc. Then, the LIBERALS out-cry.... "well, they are here, we need to change the law to make them legal, amnesty, pay a fine and become a resident, etc" - the Libs want their votes and the Repubs want cheap labor. Change the law, they are here, it's too late- let's brush aside they came here illegally, knew our laws, are destroying tons of American institutions, we had laws on the books, didn't come our legal route, etc- NOW we have groups that are trying to change the law to accommodate their needs with all sorts of other motives.
If you are against changing the laws for illegals and granting amnesty, you better not be for changing IA's laws to accommodate people who don't have IA residency and want to change Iowa's laws to suit their need & dozens of other hidden-motives I could list, when they knew the rules going into it.
Last edited:
Hey my point here maybe in the simplest of terms is would there be all the opposition if the bill was about allowing NR landowners to fish on their own proprerty? I doubt if it would get the attention of many of you guys. Whether or not you guys like it or not it is a matter of time before some form of this passes. The reason is simple all state coffers are getting emptier at an alarming rate. Why do you think casino gambling and lotteries are everywhere? Sooner or later Iowa like all it's neighboring states will eventually follow the money. And you guys will realize it is not the great tragedy you are making it out to be. Would you rather have any NR be able to buy tags over the counter or have quality deer management minded NR 's be able to kill one buck on their property. Keep complaining and all your nightmares will come true.
Rathburn Flat Bottom
Crazed Hunter
Yep, do everything for the $, those casinos, lottery and gambling are a real blessing to communities and towns!!! Yeah right, destroy things. Just like changing laws to accomodate your needs will have a drastic negative impact on how we manage this state now. The same management that caused you to come here. Ruin this and you'll be off to the next best thing. And state budget problems..... Yep, the whole state of IA would be out of trouble if they allowed NR's to shoot a buck every year- yep, that would end all trouble. I'm not even convinced in the long term this would be a good financial decision, even if it was, it's not all about the dollar (which this is the smallest fraction of the money-pie it's silly) like you seem to think it is- it's about the RESIDENTS of this state being able to make decisions and regulations about THEIR OWN STATE.
dedgeez
death from above
Gaspipe, I'm just curious to know what your angle is here? I think it's a safe bet that you are a NR? I'm just curious to know what your reasoning is for making your first 3 posts so controversial. I am pretty open minded when it comes to peoples opinions on hunting this state and can completely understand why a NR would want to hunt here, but.... if I can see your perspective than put yourself in a residents shoes and look at what we have. I think you will easily see why we fight so hard to keep the regulations in place that we currently have. I know a few NR landowners that are fine with only being able to "buck" hunt here every 3-4 years and they realize that the reason that they have such good success is because of the "limited" pressure we allow. They knew the rules when they purchased and they are also intelligent enough to realize that Iowa is a relatively small state that cannot hold the amount of hunters that some of the other midwestern states can. It doesn't take a Phd to figure out that if we let every Tom , Dick, and Harry come here and hunt that it would 1. Drive up the demand and price of recreational land to an obscene level 2. Reduce the quality of our buck population and 3. Make this state a haven for outfitters which I think you would agree, benefits no one. You are probably going to argue that it would not hurt the buck population and to that I say that all you have to do is go to Michigan or Pennsylvania and ask the residents what they consider a trophy. Most will tell you that a 130" is a monster and many of those folks have never even seen a buck that big. In Iowa there is about 75% odds that a 130" buck is a 3 yr old and in some cases a 2 yr old. I can honestly say that of all the guys that I know that bow hunt ( and that is a lot) that none of them would shoot a 130" class buck unless it happened to be a mature 8 point that was lacking genetically. Now on the other hand, you can go to any of the Iowa outfitters web sites and look at the average buck harvested. I guarantee you it's less than 130". The point I am trying to make is that none of us want to see this state turn into Illinois or Wisconsin where we are over run with outfitters that have a minimum antler restriction of 120 or so. I am not opposed to NR coming here and buying land, but they should know what they are getting into before they do it and be willing to play by the rules just like we do when we leave to hunt other states. All in all, Iowa is a relatively small state that has limited amounts of "deer" land, and there is a waiting line of people that would buy land here in a second if they could hunt bucks every year. You have to be smart enough to realize that we can't accomodate everyone that wants a piece of the pie, and the only fair way for everyone to have a chance is to put in for the lottery or move here. Its just that simple.
You touched on an issue so many folks don't understand- the over-shooting of 2-3 year old bucks that are 120-145 and many of the 2-3 year olds being the best genetics out there. If a very limited amount are killed, so be it BUT.... Whatever happens to this state, my biggest fear is SOMEHOW it turning into an Illinois where guys from everywhere come and they almost all have to leave with "something" and all the 2-3 year olds get destroyed. that's the exact reason I'll never go to Illinois, everyone drove to the area I hunted and everyone left with a 2-3 year old buck, many being 130-140" - it went downhill very fast and I'll never hunt there again. However that would happen and however regulations fit into that discussion- that's my biggest fear that I hope IA never becomes- some may shake their head or brush that off BUT I assure you, if we start blowing the heck outta tons of 2-3 year olds like Illionois did, many will make the same choice I did with IL and choose not to hunt there anymore cause it sucks & it did. I just hope IA maintains and keeps the amazing hunting it has.
rebbie
New Member
I agree with all that you have said! The only thing is every year I continue to see some Giants coming out of Illinios! My friend owns land in Iowa and I hunted his farm last year. He pointed out to me how he has some friends that hunt Illinois every year and continue to shoot monsters year after year! These are deer that are 160-180+ range! Like you said Illinios has been ruined with all the Outfitters, but for some reason Illinios continues to produce some Giants year after year??
I know EXACTLY why that is..... 99% of the regular ground has what I said above happen to it- vast majority of 2-3 year olds get whacked. Where you are seeing MOST the old bucks come from is the wealthy guys that have 250-2000 acre chunks or folks that hunt next to them. I know the type of land you're talking about. I've hunted 20+ different farms in Illinois, I know what the "average" farm now holds on AVERAGE. I also know there's a couple lucky areas I can get in where there are some mega-management land owners which is still luckily a good thing- no outfitting on their land and no guys showing up just to make sure they get something.
To some degree you can say this happens anywhere- SURE. BUT, i saw the average quality of Illionois go down VERY VERY fast, it has small pockets of proper management BUT for the most part- the 2-3 year olds are ravaged on MOST the farms there and it's produced an average level of hunting that I'll never go back to.
To some degree you can say this happens anywhere- SURE. BUT, i saw the average quality of Illionois go down VERY VERY fast, it has small pockets of proper management BUT for the most part- the 2-3 year olds are ravaged on MOST the farms there and it's produced an average level of hunting that I'll never go back to.
Sligh, I hope your not suggesting Iowa residents are the epitome of QDM and NR's shoot all the 2 yr olds. Come to my neck of the woods and I'll show the boys from Des Moines pull out with a trailer full of 2 yr. olds year after year. NR's should be able to hunt one buck on their property every year, especially when R's can shoot multiple bucks. Change will come, it's a matter of time.
cedar creek
Banned
As long as residents are able to keep the NRLO's from shooting what they want every year; we are the epitone of QDM! I hope you have lot's of time on your hands to wait for this predicted change.
dedgeez
death from above
Last edited:
