Increase in NR and NR-Landowner Tags!?? For the "average" guy

[henry5146]

i posted something on another chat, but , i will say it again, 6000-12000 is wrong, that is what will creat chaos and mass killing . outfitters , additional commercialization(if thats possible) some guy from new york comes here, pays 3500 dollars doesnt give 2 shyts what he kills, 120- still bigger than anydeer he gets in ny. wrong- take the people (nr landowners- people that are here for big deer and big deer only and make them pay 1500 - 2000 for a tag, they will do it, they are paying lawyers , etc.. most not all , have the money. make it a minimum 120, 160 acres whatever , they are already in iowa, already killing deer everyyear,, maybe they are claiming residency, maybe party hunting. whatever, most nr landowners are not hunting state ground, they are hunting their ground, now the state takes all that money and buys up land for us, 10000 nr landowners *1000 dollars is 10 million dollars, that would have been enough to buy the 8000 acre dejo ranch in wayne county. You cant assume that just because people can get tags that landowners will sell. many of the farmers that let me hunt werent selling when realtors were promising $3k an acre 2 years ago. so why will theys ell or lease now . my point is that if director lande wants to pick up revenue, we should consider not letting every joe blow into our state . i am just looking for aletrnatives to what seems like a battle that is tougher and tougher to win

 

[I-state_hunters]

People that own land now should be worried. When a outfitter leases the 40 acres of crop ground next to yours. He will have the farmer leave a few acres of crop and over the course of the 3 gun seasons kill most of the 120"+ deer in the area year after year. With the hunters using your timber as a bullet stop.

I am going to be dumb enough to ask for your facts here...

 

[kbnelson3]

I am going to be dumb enough to ask for your facts here...

Ditto.

6,000 non-residents is a drop in the bucket compared to resident hunters. Just speaking generally, i bet there's more small bucks killed by resident hunters during big drives during the gun seasons than any amount of little ones that get shot by non-residents. The only people that are depleting the resources are residents being greedy and shooting 2 or 3 mature bucks every year in addition to all of the bucks that get shot after they drop their antlers. Do you really think non-residents make much of an impact compared to early youth muzzleloader/early muzzleloader/gun 1 &2/late muzzleloader?

Residents also need to police their own members more effectively. You know why we severely restrict access on our farms to family and close family friends? We can't trust the average hunter to be on our property and follow the rules, whether its shooting immature bucks or using screw-in tree steps or littering or hunting sheds without permission. Non-resident landowners would be more open to letting residents hunt their land when they're not if they knew they could bring in quality people that are on the same page.

I'd like to see the IBA actually bring facts into the argument. instead of claiming residents will be squeezed out and hunting quality will decrease, back that up with some facts. Show how this will actually happen. Right now, the facts show that more and more land is being turned over to non-residents through generational land turnover, not to mention non-residents taking advantage of Iowa's low taxes to invest in recreational property. As more and more non-residents own land in the state, something will have to be done. Instead of burying your heads in the sand, why not realize the inevitable and find the best way to accommodate larger numbers of non-resident hunters while maintaining or improving opportunities for resident hunters?

Lastly, where's the outrage towards the outfitters, many of whom are from Iowa? Why don't you blame your fellow Iowans for reducing your hunting opportunities? Or even go after the DNR about giving out so many governor's tags or turning a blind eye to the fact guys like the Drury's bend/break the rules to get resident tags every year? I'm so sick of this going after the average non-resident landowners because Iowans, partially through their DNR, have extremely hyped up the hunting in their state to the point outfitters control the southern 1/3 of the state.

 

[cedar creek]

Ditto.

6,000 non-residents is a drop in the bucket compared to resident hunters. Just speaking generally, i bet there's more small bucks killed by resident hunters during big drives during the gun seasons than any amount of little ones that get shot by non-residents. The only people that are depleting the resources are residents being greedy and shooting 2 or 3 mature bucks every year in addition to all of the bucks that get shot after they drop their antlers. Do you really think non-residents make much of an impact compared to early youth muzzleloader/early muzzleloader/gun 1 &2/late muzzleloader?

Residents also need to police their own members more effectively. You know why we severely restrict access on our farms to family and close family friends? We can't trust the average hunter to be on our property and follow the rules, whether its shooting immature bucks or using screw-in tree steps or littering or hunting sheds without permission. Non-resident landowners would be more open to letting residents hunt their land when they're not if they knew they could bring in quality people that are on the same page.

I'd like to see the IBA actually bring facts into the argument. instead of claiming residents will be squeezed out and hunting quality will decrease, back that up with some facts. Show how this will actually happen. Right now, the facts show that more and more land is being turned over to non-residents through generational land turnover, not to mention non-residents taking advantage of Iowa's low taxes to invest in recreational property. As more and more non-residents own land in the state, something will have to be done. Instead of burying your heads in the sand, why not realize the inevitable and find the best way to accommodate larger numbers of non-resident hunters while maintaining or improving opportunities for resident hunters?

Lastly, where's the outrage towards the outfitters, many of whom are from Iowa? Why don't you blame your fellow Iowans for reducing your hunting opportunities? Or even go after the DNR about giving out so many governor's tags or turning a blind eye to the fact guys like the Drury's bend/break the rules to get resident tags every year? I'm so sick of this going after the average non-resident landowners because Iowans, partially through their DNR, have extremely hyped up the hunting in their state to the point outfitters control the southern 1/3 of the state.

I don't care how many nr landowners there are in the state of Iowa. And i don't care if you do or don't let residents hunt, as long as the quotas and regulations stay where they are. As long as the regulations for nr's stay as they are; there shouldn't be a large impact on the Iowa deer herd. Lets leave it that way. I also don't care for outfitters, but at least you can pay for an opportunity to hunt with an outfitter. You really don't have any good arguments here. Just another nr landowner who wants the regulations changed so you can enjoy the resources as if you lived in Iowa!