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

License Fee Increase Poll

Critter

Critter

Life Member
As most of you have probably noticed lately there seems to be an increase in discussion regarding the future of non-resident tag allotments, and the lack of funding the IADNR seems to have. I thought this might be a good time throw this poll out and see what the general feeling towards the issue is. There is no closing date on this poll, and you may choose only one. As always, your replys and opinions are appreciated.
CRITR
 
part of the reason the DNR faces a constant budget crunch, is because their budget is set by the legislature. if we had a self supported DNR (funded by a 1/8% tax, similar to MO) then the legslature couldn't divert funds away from the DNR. if the DNR was self supported, by a similar tax, license fees for everybody, should decrease
 
I would be more than happy to pay a increase, heck - I put $50.00 in gas in the ole hoyt bus every week. If you want things to stay the way there are now, then we as residents are going to need to step up to the plate.
 
I personally would like more real info as to how the DNRs budget is set and exactly where the revenue created by increases would go. If it is a case of US supporting THEM I have a real problem with that. I am sorry if I sound ignorant but I really do not know the structure of finances with the DNR and would like to. I think the local option sale tax in Polk County is a great example of something voters pasted because most believed it would be painless, extremely helpful and then the school systems go on reckless spending rampages because it's easy. ?????? Does the money stay where it belongs or can it be a form of a tax increase to help with other state wide budget issues that the legislators deem more important?
 
I was told that the money taken from fines does not go to the DNR but it goes to the county in which the fine was assesed. Does anyone know if that is true? I would think that raising the tag only a few dollars and giving a doe with your any sex tag would help. It would most likely result in more does being shot, and generate more money for the DNR. I too would like to know a little more about the DNR's budget before making a decision.
 
Who sets the cost of a license anyway? Is it suggested by the DNR and voted on by the legislature? How do they come up with the price? Eleven dollars for a doe tag is an unusual number, why not ten or even 15? I'm just wondering, I'm not saying the price needs to be lower or higher, just why an odd number like 11? The only time I like 11 is on the comeout roll or if I have a 10 dollar yo or whirl.

The 'Bonker
 
Does anyone know how many resident landowner tags the DNR issues every year? I'm a NR but my resident neighbor, and his wife each get a deer and turkey tag. Total cost for the 4 tags is $4.00! Don't you guys have a problem with this? Sure seems like the DNR could raise the price of these tags.


Tim
 
I agree that if we are to consider an increase in the price of resident any-sex tags, that we ought to also increase the price of resident landowner tags... $1/tag is basically giving them away. I don't think $5-10/tag would be out of line.
 
I think you have some good questions about the DNR budget. If we raise these license fees, what do we get, more habitat (I doubt it), more wildlife studies, check stations, more DNR officers?

Perhaps we would be better off asking that the habitat fee be doubled rather than raising the license fees.

Yooo....11! Now that is a good number sometimes, isn't it!
 
Critr- your poll is asking 2 different questions, we need a couple seperate polls for the questions asked. It would be great if the budget and fees issues were explained somewhere, I'm not sure about that either. Even so, I'd support higher tag fees for turkey and deer, I'd support higher habitat fees, & I'd pay more for a landowners tag but that is going to be a hard sell. More NR tags are coming (I think) so I'd like to see IBA support some sort of compromise. I'm another guy though that thinks the market should decide costs of NR tags. I thought this was a republican site.
crazy.gif
 
I am a resident and I won't complain about an increase if the DNR has to spend the new money on new public hunting & fishing lands. (and I do not mean drain existing funding 1st). I feel we need more public recreational land in this state.

IaCraig
 
T-ROY is right. The root of the entire problem is the politicians are calling the shots for wildlife. The hunters in Iowa need the DNR in charge of the wildlife resources. Until that happens, there will be no improvement and no accountability for how your money is spent. Further, you do need more public land. You deserve more and should demand it. Property taxes are as high on my Iowa land as they are on my land here in NC. My Iowa land is worth $1300 /acre and my NC land is worth $80,000 / acre on the open market and the taxes are about the same..... Some of our counties here in NC.are almost 70% public....your legislature is really screwing you over on this one. You deserve much better.
Just my opinion....
180B&C
 
Bonker- I believe the reason for the odd dollar amounts ($11, $26, $1 landowner, etc), is that Wal-mart or whoever the vendor is gets the extra $1 for processing costs. The DNR gets $10, $25, or $0 for a landowner.

Personally I dont have a problem paying more for resident tags as long as some of that money goes to increased enforcement of game laws. Its rediculous that the C.O.'s have to cover up to two counties each. Its impossible for them to do it very effectively and says alot for them that they do as well as they do with so little manpower.
By comparison, the average rural county has about 10 deputy sheriffs, 3-5 state troopers, and a dozen or so city police officers. How often do you get caught speeding? No wonder poachers get away with so much. While we are demanding things, I think we should demand better protection of our public resources.

More public ground would be nice too, and should acompany any increase in NR tags as the two seem to be a related issue.
 
I often wonder why the DNR or state legislature does not raise license and tag fees for non-resident hunters. Heck, the cost is double and triple, if not more, to go to other states, including those surrounding Iowa. I am not entirely against raising the cost for residents, but I do feel that we pay enough as it is now.
 
There was a letter printed in the Sunday Iowa City Press Citizen/Des Moines Register where a person said out of state family members had their non-resident applications/checks returned. I got the impression that the author of the letter (a resident of Iowa) was of the opinion that we should sell as many NR tags as we can to balance the state budget. I also gathered the author was in education, which has seen cuts. Maybe they were hoping to get money from the sale of NR tags. Opinions vary with perspective.

The Press Citizen had an editorial last week where they supported bow hunting in Iowa City to complement sharp shooting. They went on to state that the money raised selling bow tags could go to deer contraceptive research. I'm not sure if the DNR is going to let them keep the proceeds from selling deer tags. Seems like everyone has their own idea on who should get the money and how it is spent. My vote is to have go to the DNR.
 
Releasehunter, you better check your math. A non resident archery license is $100.00 dollars to shoot four deer in CT. I pay $320.00 for an either sex tag in Iowa. These monies are probably going into the general fund...Not just the DNR. I don't think they should add more tags nor raise the price for non-residents. The more money they ask for will send some folks to outfitters taking away more land from the residents thru leasing. They should allow some of this money for purchasing land and expand public ground. I would buy a doe tag if they were not expensive.
 
Releasehunter I would also challenge you to look at Missouri's pricing. A nonresident archery tag is $120. That includes 2 deer (there is no up charge on the archery deer tag just the gun tag and one of the two deer can be a buck) and 2 turkey . You can also buy additional doe tags for $7 (same price as residents). You can buy as many of the doe permits as you want provided you have the nonresident archery permit. So with that said you can buy enough tags to shoot 19 deer and two turkeys in Missouri for the same price as nonresidents pay for a single doe tag in Iowa. Now before everyone jumps down my throat I don't have a problem and am not complaining about the price of Iowa tags. Being from your neighboring state of Missouri I just wanted to make sure we are properly represented (which is why I responded instead of Rackaddict).
grin.gif
 
Releasehunter- MD- nonresident tag $126.50 includes 2 buck tags and 10 doe tags, plus your rifle season tags are included in that price, WVA-nonresident tag $168, includes a buck and doe archery tag, and also includes your rifle tag. I'm not saying that Iowa is charging too much for nonresident anysex tag, but don't hike it up any more. But....I think the doe tags are a little on the salty side. Just my 2 cents, not trying to sling mud.
grin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom