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

Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from 6,00

"Well you can bash me if you wish but
I have talked to "The Hood" and if you listen to some of his view points they are actually pretty sensable. He just looks at both sides of the fence and not just one side.

Take the time to know the guy and he is opinionated just like everyone on here but when you take jabs at a guys demeaner(Spelling) that is going a little far."

Why would you want to take the time to get to know someone when you could just bash them or kick their a$$!
grin.gif
Just kidding...holy cow has this thread gone off of the deep end!
 
I can understand the passion on both sides of the fence, but if you examine the issue historically, by that I mean the manner in which an influx of hunters was handled by other states(TX, IL,etc.) I think Hood is correct in the "money" will eventually win out.
Powerful lobbies, ie. real estate, insurance, with deep pockets are no match for small groups worried about two months of hunting.
It is a shame but nothing stays the same, and an alternate plan is always a good idea.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I can tell you it was worth it because NOBODY ELSE IS DOING IT!

[/ QUOTE ]

Iowa1 is right, very few take the time to address the sportsman issues. The Iowa Bowhunters is the exception!

The IBA is IT! Your measly $20.00 a year works more than you'll ever know. You can waste time argueing on the internet or you can get yourself a membership and spend your time a little more productive with the IBA. I've done both, I'd recommend the later.
grin.gif
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

[ QUOTE ]
I can understand the passion on both sides of the fence, but if you examine the issue historically, by that I mean the manner in which an influx of hunters was handled by other states(TX, IL,etc.) I think Hood is correct in the "money" will eventually win out.
Powerful lobbies, ie. real estate, insurance, with deep pockets are no match for small groups worried about two months of hunting.
It is a shame but nothing stays the same, and an alternate plan is always a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't have to end up this way. There are way more of us (resident AND non-resident hunters who believe in maintaining the status quo) than there are of them (deep pocket outfitters). Our State Legislators ultimately have to listen to us, their constituents, since only we have the power to keep them in office, or to send them packing. Special interest lobbyists are losing a lot of ground and politicians at every level are being kicked to the curb because of all the scandals in Washington as of late. You can bet that our State Reps are well aware of this trend.

Please join the IBA and help Save Our Sport.
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

Lets assume the worst case scenario, the dnr isues 3000 more tags, makes 9000. I am a nonresident landowner in Iowa, this sycks, i dont want to see 3000 new yorkers running around and I am from New York - (Sorry, wish i lived in the great state of Iowa)nothing makes me happier then to be able to tell people who want to come to my farm-"sorry, you missed the draw" as I walk off laughing thinking it wont be 2 years before i hear from that guy again. but back to business, so the government wants make money, and we want to protect that 6.5 year old pig thats been eluding us all. So what are the options, well like I said assume the worst, increse in tags, why cant the state make it earn a buck, so you raise the license another 100 makes like 500k = 450k, every county has a local watering hole, caseys o better yet a cooler for the homeless and you show your doe and you get a buck tag. lets take an outfitter, guy comes t0 iowa 5 day hunt, takes him 2 days to shoot a doe, leaves him 3 days to shoot a deer, not alot of time, i saw this in wisconsin, guys literally went home empty handed because they didnt shoot a doe nd this was in Buffalo County , The main point is this, It may be inevitable this happens, at some point, if it does, what restrictions could be in placed on the nr hunter and the outfitters that tke them in, make it so that guys say"I dont want to pay 500 to have to shoot a doe, of course people will still come, but many will not and many will fail to shoot doe, evetyone wins. just rambling but....
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

I think Avidhunter hit the nail on the head. We as R's and NR's have to protect the status quo. The IBA has done a great job over the past several years and to ensure the IBA gets stronger maybe a mass solicitation of NR's on this site is an idea. I believe most NR's are happy to come every couple years so why not make the IBA more effective with out of state support. Just thinkin out loud??? Any thoughts?
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

That's what I thought!? Well Avid so much for R's and NR's coming together. Good Luck.
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

Sorry to be talking about KS again, but everything I see you guys debating and talking about is exactly what we've gone through the last decade or so down here. The encouraging news is, much to my surprise, the Dept. listened to the res. and many non-res. this time around. They're sending a set of proposals to the legislature this spring that actually make a little sense. Now we have to get on the phones a call the our representatives and tell them to support the proposals. Many of you who hunt KS will be happy to know that those dumb Transferrable Tags will be on the chopping block and the non-res. draw will be fair once again! There will be quite a commotion in Topeka I'm sure... The main advice I'd give you is to know that more than likely it's just a handfull of rep.s in your capital trying to push this through; most, with your input, will stand by you residents!
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

Gee Back40 slow down a little.
Really don't like the whole R's against NR's it accomplishes nothing except pi**ing everyone off.

I get many more emails from NR's wanting the tag allotment and drawing to stay the same.They would like to keep the deer herd quaility as is and hunt every other year.

Some NR's use outfitters or have leases, but many have friends and family they hunt with. I have friends from NY and they would much rather hunt every other year than have a watered down deer herd or worse no place to hunt.

I get lots of emails from Ill. bowhunters who say fight like he** to keep what you have, most feel as if their DNR sold them out for the $'s

The last group that email me think they should be able to hunt Ia. every year no matter what. Used to try to reason with them, but that just made them madder and made me get better virus software.
grin.gif


The NR landowner are the most adament, many or most of them knew what the law was before to bought and would like to change said law after the fact.
confused.gif


If the answers were easy the problem would have been fixed a long time ago.
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

I sincerely believe that if we allowed non-resident landowners to hunt every year that the situation would actually become much worse than simply increasing the number of non-resident tags; worse even than a substantial increase in non-resident tags, and here's why:

If non-resident landowners were able to purchase annual tags, it would quickly become the golden loophole, and would only further stratify the haves and the have-nots, which would now include the average non-resident hunter that cannot afford to buy 300 acres of recreation land. Simply owning land to gain yearly access would open up wide a backdoor and undermine the very purpose of having a tag allocation in the first place. Outfitters would herald the measure as a complete victory, and could then list every relative/friend they have as a "co-owner" in order to purchase as many tags as they have customers.

Access to private hunting ground would dwindle within 5 years. Land values would skyrocket due to booming demand and fixed supply, and farmers would be hard pressed to continue to allow John E. Hunter - who's been dutifully culling the doe herd on his farm ground for years - future access, since the demand for leases is also through the roof.

The scarce and scattered public hunting areas would become swarmed with hunters, unable to afford the new elite hunting standard set in place. Of course the quality of the deer population would also inextricably suffer in light of all the new doe refuges... basically it's one heck of a downward spiral no matter how you look at it.
frown.gif
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

This is a situation begging for a simple supply-vs-demand solution.

If we got 6,000 tags and 12,000 people trying to buy them then the price is too low. Raise the price until demand is trimmed to meet the current supply.

This insures that our high quality deer herd stays strong. It prevents overcrowding of hunting locations and generates additional funds for the DNR that would otherwise be obtained through selling additional tags.

Win-Win-Win
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

[ QUOTE ]
This is a situation begging for a simple supply-vs-demand solution.

If we got 6,000 tags and 12,000 people trying to buy them then the price is too low. Raise the price until demand is trimmed to meet the current supply.

This insures that our high quality deer herd stays strong. It prevents overcrowding of hunting locations and generates additional funds for the DNR that would otherwise be obtained through selling additional tags.

Win-Win-Win

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to stay out of this whole post...generates lots of strong emotions and replys each year.

But, I have to agree with Tom's quote above.
waytogo.gif


I went to Colorado for Mule deer this year, it wasn't cheap. No different going to Colorado for Mule deer than coming to one of the best states in the nation for whitetails. The market in Iowa will obviously bear more....
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

[ QUOTE ]
This is a situation begging for a simple supply-vs-demand solution.

If we got 6,000 tags and 12,000 people trying to buy them then the price is too low. Raise the price until demand is trimmed to meet the current supply.

This insures that our high quality deer herd stays strong. It prevents overcrowding of hunting locations and generates additional funds for the DNR that would otherwise be obtained through selling additional tags.

Win-Win-Win

[/ QUOTE ]

Win Win Win for the rich. How about those of us that have to save all year to do a trip? I would rather wait a year or two to draw a tag than have to pay so much for one. It's already a LOT of money for the working man, I would hate to see the average joe get priced out of it.
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

[ QUOTE ]
This is a situation begging for a simple supply-vs-demand solution.

If we got 6,000 tags and 12,000 people trying to buy them then the price is too low. Raise the price until demand is trimmed to meet the current supply.

This insures that our high quality deer herd stays strong. It prevents overcrowding of hunting locations and generates additional funds for the DNR that would otherwise be obtained through selling additional tags.

Win-Win-Win


[/ QUOTE ]

I have made the same suggestion here and to my representatives for the last 5 years- everytime this debate comes up.

I also think that resident fees should be increased to provide adequate DNR funding to increase enforcement efforts.
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

I wholeheartedly agree with the last point made by the Pharmer. I have stated to my representatives and the INDR the past two years that I think resident any-sex license fees should be raised to generate more funds for both enforcement staff and public land acquisitions. It seems like in my area, people do whatever the he@@ they feel like doing since they know that the enforcement staff cannot possibly cover their territory adequately.
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

A Rep just replied to my email and told me, he had not heard about raising general Non-Res, numbers, but he had heard something about allowing Out-State land owners to hunt on their land. So there you have it,,from a Legislator.
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

[ QUOTE ]
A Rep just replied to my email and told me, he had not heard about raising general Non-Res, numbers, but he had heard something about allowing Out-State land owners to hunt on their land. So there you have it,,from a Legislator.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for taking the time to inquire and passing it on
waytogo.gif


The "landowner" thing is often pushed by real estate interests who know it would really boost land sales if something like that passes
smirk.gif


For all of those that rely on permission based hunting...you better take a cue from loneranger...know what's going on...join the IBA and be prepared to defend yourselves.

Fighting it out on here won't solve anything...make your voices heard to the people you put in office...
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

How many resident general deer tags are sold each year?
 
Re: Iowa bill to rise non resident deer tags from

In 05’ I hunted Iowa, great hunt. I only saw a few non-residents. In 06’ I hunted the Golden Triangle in Illinois, terrible hunt. But that’s beside the point, the place was like a circus, I’m sure the $$ was good for local economy, but I do not prescribe to every things that brings in $$ is always good.

As a NR I rather come and hunt every other year or every third year than ever go back to Illinois. I hope nothing changes in Iowa.

I agree to an extent about raising the cost to meet the demand, I for one would pay more because the quality of hunting in Iowa far exceeds my home state, however it would concern me to see guys that have moved out state that comes home to hunt on the family farm be pushed from hunting. The game management system in America is structured to keep the common person concern with game management and conservation (state-owned wildlife). Our system prevents land owner from owning the resources (like old Europe). This system allows the government to set hunting regulations to manage and conserve our wildlife for now and the future with all citizens having stake in its well being (at least in theory). If you drive prices so high that wildlife is only a commodity for the state you may very well undo the goal of our game management system. I would rather see common hunters hunt every few years than only hunters at a certain income level. If you limited the resources to guys that can afford the high end tags (every year) they will most likely be the ones that can also afford high end leases.

What ever “ya’ll” decide I plan to keep coming as long as I can afford and draw a tag. Sounds as it may be in my best interest to join the IBA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom