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

NR party hunting to be eliminated

You know what 93 every NR who used to be here left after being told to shut up. There’s two NRs left here me, until moving here recently, and Hardwood. Used to be many more. They were run off. You’re talking to the wrong guy. I was a NR now I’m a R. I’ll fight and voice my opinion as many times as I need to get it right. You complaining about skip telling everyone 100 times we have 8 % timber , leave it alone. No, because you agree a specific push. I’ll talk all I need to.
 
Let’s look at this from a different NR point of view. Say you’re John and a bowhunter or let’s even say gun hunter. You live in Arkansas. Have dreamed about hunting Iowa for years. So you start buying your points as you know it’s going to take a minimum of a year to draw. So you put the money in only to find out Jerry two towns over is going every year because he knows Don in Iowa and Don lets Jerry fill his buck tag. Kind of a shitty deal.

Now you may be thinking so what it’s one buck. Now the next year John draws his tag to shotgun hunt Iowa and he makes the trip up here, he spent time scouting in the summer and studying public piece because he doesn’t know anyone from Iowa. Saturday morning opener comes and he’s trying to find a spot but the public spots are full of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and other out of state trucks because they got doe tags but have friends that are going to let them use their buck tag.

So now John has spent his $121 on preference points, plus the $498 on his tags that he drew + license fees while, Larry, Chuck, and Dennis only paid $266.50 + license fees.

It’s kinda bull shit if you ask me. If I was a typical non resident hunter not trying to party hunt I’d be pissed about the loop hole. You’re paying the money for a law to be taken advantage of and your future hunts being degraded because of it.


Now you’ll say well the hunting won’t be degraded yada yada. But you also claim non residents aren’t going to buy the antlerless only tags anymore so how’s the DNR going to fund it.

So there’s 4,450 antlerless only tags sold to non residents. Those are county specific. Now 75% if not more if the state won’t be hunted by these tags because the county quota’s will be filled by residents and non offered. Now I’m hearing from the guys mad about this that the only reason those 4,450 tags are sold is because they can potentially shoot a buck. Because they aren’t going to sell now that the loophole is closed. So you’re telling me instead of 6000 non residents getting the chance to shoot bucks it’s almost double that because of this loophole. Tell me how that’s not affecting things.

“Well the residents would shoot them anyways”… would they though? Because to me it sounds like those residents are buying those buck tags for the non residents to fill. Because if they aren’t, why are the non residents buying the doe tags?


Now let’s look at the where is the DNR going to make up this money, well they could sell 2381 more non resident any sex tags and that would make up for those 4450 antlerless tags that “won’t be sold anymore”. By your logic that’s still 2,069 potentially less bucks being killed since those 4450 antlerless tags “are only bought to party hunt”

Or

They could just raise the price of NR any sex tags by $197.65

It’s not hard to make scenarios on where they can make that money back. The demand is there, I can see them just raising the NR prices. You guys being mad is showing how much demand there is.



I think the idea of party hunting is dumb, and I’m saying party hunting, not group hunting. There’s a difference. Party hunting is the sharing of tags. You should be required to tag your own deer. Do you have to stop hunting when you fill that tag? No, you have to stop shooting though. It’s laid out pretty obvious you can participate in the hunt if you have a tag for that season. It doesn’t say unfilled tag. That’s why a lot of people are starting to push during late season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sligh1 said:
I think anyone on here will acknowledge the poll isn’t comparable to “general public”’or casual hunters. This crowd is clearly “serious hunters”. Yet, “serious hunters” should also have a voice on any issue. A fishing reg, hunting, farming- whatever …. The serious, “full time”, “experts” or “most experienced” always carry significant weight in any debate. As they should. But I absolutely agree this poll is not, nor meant to be, scientific. ;)
Click to expand...
As I said earlier in this thread, I think this is a good move, especially party hunting with only a doe tag. You can't trap with a fishing license. This should hold true for residents also. I don't believe that it's some loophole or gray area, the law was just changed. Probably illegally but that's just my opinion, same with the loophole and gray area. I am a trophy hunter and don't claim to be a meat hunter to kill a two year old. I've ate my LO tag for 5 years. I have never party hunted...ever. I have encouraged people the understanding of passing younger bucks. Encouraged, not pushed. Serious hunters should absolutely have their voice on any issue...an equal voice. Do the most experienced party hunters carry a more significant voice than a bow hunter?

What we are doing is using a page out of the liberal playbook...never let a crisis go to to waste. We are trying to erase the history and great memories of resident party hunting for our own selfish interest. I think we called that MEMEism. Rob snuck that in on that post and tried to sell it as the majority of iowans want to get rid of party hunting all together. A form of brain washing. That toxic mindset pretty much speaks for itself. A paragraph of Robs I never could stop thinking about from the the Steve Hansen thread...

It also takes a what some people might call a high level of selfishness to grow giant deer. Limiting hunting opportunities for friends and family comes to mind. There's no way around it. No one hunts my farms unless I'm sitting with them at this point. Only way to completely eliminate trigger mistakes. Is it crappy I won't let even my dad out by himself? I can definitely understand that POV. It takes what it takes.

Not every hunter wants to be this selfish Rob. This extremism is the conflict of interest.

Sorry Skip that you picked the wrong side of the coin.
 
Reading the comments this change appears to have hit a few nerves. It only took some NR to screw things up. First, some weren't happy just buying a doe tag and hiring one resident kid for peanuts with a buck tag, they had to hire two kids with buck tags to sit in the blind, so he could kill two bucks with that doe tag. Then some would bring a buddy or two with doe tags and have two kids sit with them with buck tags. Quite frankly it's called greed. I absolutely have nothing against NR friends and family getting together for a few deer drives if it was just that and they buy a buck tag and not just a NR doe tag year after year.
 
Thinkin Rut said:
As I said earlier in this thread, I think this is a good move, especially party hunting with only a doe tag. You can't trap with a fishing license. This should hold true for residents also. I don't believe that it's some loophole or gray area, the law was just changed. Probably illegally but that's just my opinion, same with the loophole and gray area. I am a trophy hunter and don't claim to be a meat hunter to kill a two year old. I've ate my LO tag for 5 years. I have never party hunted...ever. I have encouraged people the understanding of passing younger bucks. Encouraged, not pushed. Serious hunters should absolutely have their voice on any issue...an equal voice. Do the most experienced party hunters carry a more significant voice than a bow hunter?

What we are doing is using a page out of the liberal playbook...never let a crisis go to to waste. We are trying to erase the history and great memories of resident party hunting for our own selfish interest. I think we called that MEMEism. Rob snuck that in on that post and tried to sell it as the majority of iowans want to get rid of party hunting all together. A form of brain washing. That toxic mindset pretty much speaks for itself. A paragraph of Robs I never could stop thinking about from the the Steve Hansen thread...

It also takes a what some people might call a high level of selfishness to grow giant deer. Limiting hunting opportunities for friends and family comes to mind. There's no way around it. No one hunts my farms unless I'm sitting with them at this point. Only way to completely eliminate trigger mistakes. Is it crappy I won't let even my dad out by himself? I can definitely understand that POV. It takes what it takes.

Not every hunter wants to be this selfish Rob. This extremism is the conflict of interest.

Sorry Skip that you picked the wrong side of the coin.
Click to expand...
Don’t know that I really picked a side of the coin. If the resource is a “side” - I pick that every time. When it comes JUST TO ME: I want less for ME. I want a shorter season. I probably want one of my buck tags “taken away”. I’d probably take some doe tags away from myself. So, ME- for a lot of hunters, rightfully so IMO - isn’t really about “ME”. It’s the opposite. The fact is: with a shared resource like deer - what I do or don’t want is irrelevant - REGULATIONS TRUMP ALL!

Exactly the same as “I don’t want the government to give me welfare or free $ or wipe away my college debt.” Because the world isn’t just about me and if personal desires trumped all- we would rape every resource, dollar or opportunity to take for ourselves. Deer don’t belong to me. So- it’s not just about “what can I take”. If we don’t put the resource above our own narrow interests, our resource will be RUINED. This has happened over & over & over in history. It’s happening now in various places. To some extent iowa has taken a beating due to “groups wanting this or that” where they came before or at expense of the resource.
Big picture & long term i absolutely think of the side of coin that leaves hunting better for others & the generations following us. Not worse. & in MOST cases, government spending to hunting- we are picking the wrong side of the coin. Iowa absolutely has the best model & outlook - with warts & imperfections VS any other whitetail state
 
Windlooker said:
You know what 93 every NR who used to be here left after being told to shut up. There’s two NRs left here me, until moving here recently, and Hardwood. Used to be many more. They were run off. You’re talking to the wrong guy. I was a NR now I’m a R. I’ll fight and voice my opinion as many times as I need to get it right. You complaining about skip telling everyone 100 times we have 8 % timber , leave it alone. No, because you agree a specific push. I’ll talk all I need to.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to "defend" myself because it honestly doesn't matter but assumptions are just that and you and I likely have a whole lot we agree on but I can guarantee we have different personalities and that's ok. Keep fighting your fight and I'll worry about me.
 
CurtisWalker said:
Let’s look at this from a different NR point of view. Say you’re John and a bowhunter or let’s even say gun hunter. You live in Arkansas. Have dreamed about hunting Iowa for years. So you start buying your points as you know it’s going to take a minimum of a year to draw. So you put the money in only to find out Jerry two towns over is going every year because he knows Don in Iowa and Don lets Jerry fill his buck tag. Kind of a shitty deal.

Now you may be thinking so what it’s one buck. Now the next year John draws his tag to shotgun hunt Iowa and he makes the trip up here, he spent time scouting in the summer and studying public piece because he doesn’t know anyone from Iowa. Saturday morning opener comes and he’s trying to find a spot but the public spots are full of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and other out of state trucks because they got doe tags but have friends that are going to let them use their buck tag.

So now John has spent his $121 on preference points, plus the $498 on his tags that he drew + license fees while, Larry, Chuck, and Dennis only paid $266.50 + license fees.

It’s kinda bull shit if you ask me. If I was a typical non resident hunter not trying to party hunt I’d be pissed about the loop hole. You’re paying the money for a law to be taken advantage of and your future hunts being degraded because of it.


Now you’ll say well the hunting won’t be degraded yada yada. But you also claim non residents aren’t going to buy the antlerless only tags anymore so how’s the DNR going to fund it.

So there’s 4,450 antlerless only tags sold to non residents. Those are county specific. Now 75% if not more if the state won’t be hunted by these tags because the county quota’s will be filled by residents and non offered. Now I’m hearing from the guys mad about this that the only reason those 4,450 tags are sold is because they can potentially shoot a buck. Because they aren’t going to sell now that the loophole is closed. So you’re telling me instead of 6000 non residents getting the chance to shoot bucks it’s almost double that because of this loophole. Tell me how that’s not affecting things.

“Well the residents would shoot them anyways”… would they though? Because to me it sounds like those residents are buying those buck tags for the non residents to fill. Because if they aren’t, why are the non residents buying the doe tags?


Now let’s look at the where is the DNR going to make up this money, well they could sell 2381 more non resident any sex tags and that would make up for those 4450 antlerless tags that “won’t be sold anymore”. By your logic that’s still 2,069 potentially less bucks being killed since those 4450 antlerless tags “are only bought to party hunt”

Or

They could just raise the price of NR any sex tags by $197.65

It’s not hard to make scenarios on where they can make that money back. The demand is there, I can see them just raising the NR prices. You guys being mad is showing how much demand there is.



I think the idea of party hunting is dumb, and I’m saying party hunting, not group hunting. There’s a difference. Party hunting is the sharing of tags. You should be required to tag your own deer. Do you have to stop hunting when you fill that tag? No, you have to stop shooting though. It’s laid out pretty obvious you can participate in the hunt if you have a tag for that season. It doesn’t say unfilled tag. That’s why a lot of people are starting to push during late season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Honestly Curtis (respectfully) the only ones getting screwed here are the guys that bought in Iowa knowing the rules… then the rules changed .

You’d feel the same exact way if you bought land somewhere and they changed the rules!

It’s just a fact !
 
Hardwood11 said:
Honestly Curtis (respectfully) the only ones getting screwed here are the guys that bought in Iowa knowing the rules… then the rules changed .

You’d feel the same exact way if you bought land somewhere and they changed the rules!

It’s just a fact !
Click to expand...

I’d disagree, those guys that bought land are still protected from the regs. You can still hunt that precious farm every year. Your family can still hunt every year. Doe hunt one year buck hunt the next. Might actually improve your hunting tbh

It’s the guys that come here hunting public that were getting bent over harder than the windmills in the current storms. This is a step in the right direction for NR hunters imo. Making it fair to all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I personally 100% support this bill. Would be happy to see it continue on to Residents as well.

I don't like how this law was changed, however do like the outcome of this one. (Have gotten used to being on the other side )

I'm sure the COs did not like the loop hole and it probably was getting out of hand.

If the result of the bill upsets someone it would solely be because they were used to taking advantage of the loophole. They can still do the exact same hunt they do every year, just have to shot the sex of the animal in which they bought the tag.....

I dont really see the big deal!
 
  • Deleted by CurtisWalker
Show…
trophybluf@borderlandnet. said:
Reading the comments this change appears to have hit a few nerves. It only took some NR to screw things up. First, some weren't happy just buying a doe tag and hiring one resident kid for peanuts with a buck tag, they had to hire two kids with buck tags to sit in the blind, so he could kill two bucks with that doe tag. Then some would bring a buddy or two with doe tags and have two kids sit with them with buck tags. Quite frankly it's called greed. I absolutely have nothing against NR friends and family getting together for a few deer drives if it was just that and they buy a buck tag and not just a NR doe tag year after year.
Click to expand...

It's obviously impossible to know the numbers, but I hunt in the eastern part of the state. I'm sure it happens from time to time, but every single non-resident I know that bought an antlerless tag for Gun 1 or 2 was friends or family coming over the river or home to deer hunt.

I saw memes mentioned above as well. The biggest meme I see around social media regarding this topic is that there's a bunch of rich NRLO's walking into Walmart and paying some poor unsuspecting goobers for their buck tag on the side. Multiple buck tags, even! Really?

I sort of hinted at it before, but a lot of the bad feelings about party hunting, or group hunting, or driving deer, or using a 45-70 with the same ballistics as a 12 gauge slug/muzzleloader, or etc, is simply lashing out at the fact that 90% of hunters aren't holding out for a 5 year old, 170" buck every year. "These dumb hicks are driving deer and killing all of the 3 year old bucks, they're taking away big buck opportunities for great hunters like me" is what some people are really trying to say.

Where do we draw the line on the hunt purity test? Should we make deer hunting in Iowa archery only (this is a trivial, but non-zero number of people that exist)? Should we require bucks to be captured on camera first, aged and scored by a panel of 3 judges, before we allow people to harvest them? I've said before, I'm a trophy hunter, but it's getting to the point that it's quite frankly gross to say that given how self-righteous and egotistical some people are acting.

I know everyone wants to get back to the good old days of a Booner behind every tree, but eliminating party hunting for non-residents or everyone altogether isn't going to get there. Land moving through multiple generations of owners with differing interests and values, advances in technology allowing 24/7 observation of animals, the Iowa DNR spending 20 years begging and promoting non-residents to come hunt Iowa and now converting a lot of those folks into residents who are buying up land, YouTube channels that show exactly where to hunt on already crowded public land, EHD outbreaks. The list goes on...let's not act like a couple of thousand people party hunting for 2-3 days in December is this giant step in the right direction.
 
Hardwood11 said:
Honestly Curtis (respectfully) the only ones getting screwed here are the guys that bought in Iowa knowing the rules… then the rules changed .

You’d feel the same exact way if you bought land somewhere and they changed the rules!

It’s just a fact !
Click to expand...
Regardless of anyone's opinion on party hunting and what should or shouldn't be allowed, you have to at least empathize with this position.
A person who bought land here knowing they could legally hunt a buck every year with a gun while they wait for their turn to draw an either sex tag has a legitimate reason to be upset. That's a lot bigger blow than it is for someone who just comes to hunt with a group every year.
If I put myself in those shoes, I'd be pissed too. Maybe a grandfather clause for existing landowners would make sense?
 
93, I’ve been here 21 years. I’m a bully. All NRs have been run off. Two left. Me and Hardwood. You kidding me. How long have you been here?
 
Thinkin Rut said:
As I said earlier in this thread, I think this is a good move, especially party hunting with only a doe tag. You can't trap with a fishing license. This should hold true for residents also. I don't believe that it's some loophole or gray area, the law was just changed. Probably illegally but that's just my opinion, same with the loophole and gray area. I am a trophy hunter and don't claim to be a meat hunter to kill a two year old. I've ate my LO tag for 5 years. I have never party hunted...ever. I have encouraged people the understanding of passing younger bucks. Encouraged, not pushed. Serious hunters should absolutely have their voice on any issue...an equal voice. Do the most experienced party hunters carry a more significant voice than a bow hunter?

What we are doing is using a page out of the liberal playbook...never let a crisis go to to waste. We are trying to erase the history and great memories of resident party hunting for our own selfish interest. I think we called that MEMEism. Rob snuck that in on that post and tried to sell it as the majority of iowans want to get rid of party hunting all together. A form of brain washing. That toxic mindset pretty much speaks for itself. A paragraph of Robs I never could stop thinking about from the the Steve Hansen thread...

It also takes a what some people might call a high level of selfishness to grow giant deer. Limiting hunting opportunities for friends and family comes to mind. There's no way around it. No one hunts my farms unless I'm sitting with them at this point. Only way to completely eliminate trigger mistakes. Is it crappy I won't let even my dad out by himself? I can definitely understand that POV. It takes what it takes.

Not every hunter wants to be this selfish Rob. This extremism is the conflict of interest.

Sorry Skip that you picked the wrong side of the coin.
Click to expand...
It's been my observation that this clarification/change has majority support on the platforms and pages ive looked at. From public land weekend warriors to "serious" managers. Not everyone agrees, but certainly most. Wasn't sneaking anything in or hidden agenda there. This isn't about me. It's about the future quality of the state. I want my kids to have what I had. I would support one less buck tag for everyone. I'd like season reductions. I'd like things pulled back to CONSERVE. It's the exact opposite of personal selfish desires. As for your other comments which are unrelated to this thread.... my own personal farms, yes I manage them to a high degree. What I didn't say is more people have shot bucks off my farms than me by a factor of at least 2-3x. Some of those people are on this forum. It is just gone about in a controlled and strategic manner. Thats a personal choice. That's not related to a regulations discussion in any manner and doesnt affect the populous in the hunting community. I do beleive you are taking the context of my comments in a discussion that was about what it takes to grow a giant deer and warping them into somthing else. I just wanted to clear that up a bit.

Truth be told, I am getting more enjoyment helping others achieve their hunting goals/dreams on their farms than my own personal hunting these days.
 
Last edited:
Windlooker said:
93, I’ve been here 21 years. I’m a bully. All NRs have been run off. Two left. Me and Hardwood. You kidding me. How long have you been here?
Click to expand...
I’ve been on this site for like 23 years? Maybe 24? I was in high school yet when I found it and was one of the originals- just had to do a name change back in the day. Not really sure what that has to do with the price of rice?
As far as non res- there are a ton on this site, and a ton that contribute regularly. In this topic, there are 5 or 6 still, and actually some of them are for the rule change as well.
At the end of the day, as Skip has said multiple times, this is ultimately a little thing. I think we can ALL agree, it’s maybe crappy how it is out there now but someone posted- it sounds like there may have been 2 days of meetings? So I don’t think it just “snuck” in as some are stating but might not have been widely broadcasted like some of the others. I will be done posting on this topic as there really are other things to worry about and stay prepared for.
 
newfarmer said:
I’ve been on this site for like 23 years? Maybe 24? I was in high school yet when I found it and was one of the originals- just had to do a name change back in the day. Not really sure what that has to do with the price of rice?
As far as non res- there are a ton on this site, and a ton that contribute regularly. In this topic, there are 5 or 6 still, and actually some of them are for the rule change as well.
At the end of the day, as Skip has said multiple times, this is ultimately a little thing. I think we can ALL agree, it’s maybe crappy how it is out there now but someone posted- it sounds like there may have been 2 days of meetings? So I don’t think it just “snuck” in as some are stating but might not have been widely broadcasted like some of the others. I will be done posting on this topic as there really are other things to worry about and stay prepared for.
Click to expand...

Please list one NR who has land in Iowa that is for the change ?
 
Hardwood11 said:
Please list one NR who has land in Iowa that is for the change ?
Click to expand...
My neighbor who owns 360 at my fence- he is from MN, hates party hunting. My bro in law, lives in MN, owns 120 in Iowa, hates party hunting. My classmate, lives in MN and comes back to hunt his 40 with family is excited it’s not an option. I mean- I could keep going- as far as this post, there are non residents literally saying they think the loophole being closed is smart. Really not hard to go back through and see. ‍♂️
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom