NR tags exceed $500

[KSQ2]

I first saw this was taking place on archerytalk; seems like the price is getting a little out of hand, but that's what happens when EVERYONE and their dog, and cat, and horse wants to hunt in the great state of Iowa. I do agree with some other posters that this will bring another rise in tag cost in other states as well. Iowa will have no problem selling out as usual, and LOTS of average joes will still be coming. I truly believe the only thing that will keep the average fellas out is tags in excess of $1000, which is probably a future possibility barring economic collapse. I'm still jealous that Kansas won't treat their residents with the same respect Iowa does.

 

[Bill G]

Tmfrmh, I agree with your point and SaskGuy seems to be of the same opinion. This increase will indeed price out some guys (including me) and introduce another level of NRs that will eventually change the face of Iowa deer hunting. They have more $$ in their pocket and will demand only the best hunting areas and quality of animals. They will be the ones that hire outfitters, lease land and purchase large tracts for personal use only. Doe numbers will increase, Ins companies will demand more liberal seasons and more NR access, resident access will be out the window. This thread could go on forever just like your battle to keep Iowa trophy deer hunting intact will surely do. In the end talk will walk and money will win every time. Good luck and keep up the battle.
By the way, as previously mentioned in one one of these replies, I'm not rich but do very well in my career but MY common financial sense tells me it's time to stay on my side of the line instead of stepping over like I've done for the past 7 years of hunting Iowa. I'll miss the hunting, the conversations and joking around, the few beers and great tasting tenderlions that were the most important part of every trip! The occasional big rack was great but...get the idea guys?

 

[180class]

Man, I would love to see NR tags exceed $1,000!

 

[Rackaddict]

I think the thing that I found most disturbing about the price change was the move to a $50.00 preference point. Some residents may not know how the system works since you don't have to use it to buy your tags. Like most things, there are non refundable administrative fees attached. In this case, to the tune of $15.00. Now they automatically keep another $50.00 for a P/P. An automatic loss of $65.00 just for applying.

Now let's say it takes three years to get drawn $65.00 x 3 = $195.00 PLUS the cost of a tag (I paid $530.00), now you're up to $725.00 for a tag. This is if no more price changes and there is supposed to be a $30.00 hunting license increase at any time.

That's the thought process behind only wealthy being able to hunt and they are going to lease and buy your hunting land for themselves. Outfitters are drooling on themselves with the potential.

 

[sureshot]

Bill, I'm sorry you will no longer be able to afford to come here to hunt. I think if you want it bad enough you will find a way though. Anyways, hunting here in Iowa, espescially in the areas I hunt, has been drastically changing for the past ten years. Just my honest opinion, but I really don't feel this price increase is going to do anything in terms of changing what is already occurring at a rapid rate. As mentioned earlier, the NR tag allocations and residency requirements are the key element to save what quality hunting locations us Iowans have left.

I'm not trying to offend you, nor argue with you, just have a differing opinion. Residents who have lived and hunted in Iowa the past ten years have seen the changes firsthand. You can hypothesize all you want, and maybe the outcome you predict will occur, but I don't think its going to just because of a $200 increase in the cost of a tag that is usually only allotted once every three years. An Iowa deer tag has been hyped up to a hot commodity, and everyone wants one. I know if I ever move out of the state, which is a possibility in the near future, I will apply for a tag every year (and i'm not rich by any means).

As for the pricing of the doe tags, I agree that its over the top. I don't understand how the DNR can place the cost of antlerless tags so high, and still expect does to be harvested. It's not going to happen. In many areas of the state that have high deer numbers, there are high amounts of NR landowners. The DNR can raise the qouta as high as they want, but does will not be harvested when the cost of a doe tag exceeds $300.

I understand your frustration, but us residents feel it too, not in the price of a tag, but in finding a quality place to hunt. The world of hunting is changing, and to put it bluntly, it sucks.

 

[droptine37]

You have one side that is looking out for their best interest and you have another side that is doing the same thing. The thing that I can take from this is that the state of Iowa made a decision that benefits its residents. That is exactly what a state level government should do and it always amazes me that this doesn't happen more. Do I feel bad that people who have family in Iowa or live just across the state line have to pay over $500 to hunt a deer?.......yes but this form of deer management that Iowa has had in place has done nothing but prove that limited NR access coupled with timely seasons can and will produce the healthiest deer herd possible. All you have to do is look at states like Illinois that once had the best deer herd in the country and see what happens when you open up the flood gates! Land prices are through the roof and the health and quality of the deer herd has really diminished, especially in areas that are controlled by Outfitters and NR landowners. The one problem I do have with some of the points and counterpoints that have been made is the assumption that people with money are somehow bad people. I know that with the economic times of late that the media and such has started this idea that the people that have done well for themselves are somehow always selfish, disrespectful people who only care about themselves and the money they make. I personally believe this couldn't be farther from the truth. People are people! Of the 5000 NR's that will hunt Iowa next year, you will have a certain percentage that are the nicest people you have ever met, another percentage will be the biggest jerks you have ever met. This has nothing to do with the amount of money these peopel make or have. I find it funny that here in America if you are successful in your career that somehow that automatically makes you a bad person or greedy. A little off topic but I felt compelled to voice my opinion.

 

[SaskGuy]

I understand your frustration, but us residents feel it too, not in the price of a tag, but in finding a quality place to hunt. The world of hunting is changing, and to put it bluntly, it sucks

I still feel that this situation could indeed worsen. Slowly weeded out may be the DIY public ground guy. Pretty good thread so far, it's been civil. If I wanted to hunt Alberta, and it would cost me $500 for a tag, I could forget about it. That reason makes me think there are likely indeed alot of guys being priced out.

 

[deeraddict]

Sofakingfast 1,
Well said! For those Iowans out there that can't see or think past their own special interest, the current economic situtation can be compared to what this increase in tags will do to you. Individuals and large corps in this country had become so greedy and were so focused on ripping anyone and everyone to their last dollar that finally it backfired. Just look and the jobless figures, lost homes, failed banks, etc. This increase in NR tags will cause more lost revenue for residents and businesses in Iowa than you'll ever know! Yes the DNR will show more money collected but guess who will really take it on the chin. As previously stated, the residents and small businesses in Iowa and they, my friend, are the backbone of your great state. And, guess who is next in line for an increase, you are!
I've been coming to Iowa for the past 7 years, drawing an anysex tag or buying a doetag and have spent countless thousands of dollars in local restaurants, hotels, small mom and pop stores, sporting goods stores, gas stations, etc.
Well, no-more because I'll not be coming to Iowa this year and likely never to hunt again. You finally priced the avg guy out of your state. Bring a smile to some of you guys...I'll bet but you know this will cause a loss of revenue for a lot of folks that really have to scratch out a living in your state. Enjoy the big bucks in your state but you are NOT the only state with them!

First off I am not a NR hater, but do you really believe that these bussinesses thrive from the couple of weeks non resident hunters are in the state??? If that is what keeps them going they must be in bad shape to begin with. I would bet that it is the residents that keep these small bussinesses going, while we are here year round.

 

[dominator]

I hunted in Iowa because I have a good bunch of friends over there who like to have a good time hunting. No bitching about big bucks or people who are leasing land around them. They have others things to worry about instead of a dang deer. Pretty pathetic I live 7 miles from where I hunt in Iowa and cant hunt anymore because of greedy crybabies.

move - its only 7 miles.

 

[nacho2770]

Man, I would love to see NR tags exceed $1,000!

Don't you guys realize you could raise the price to $1,000 and you will still have the same number of NR hunters in Iowa....They will all just be rich doctors and Lawyers who will make the Outfitters in Iowa a lot of business...That means the outfitters will be able to lease and buy up more land and keep residents out of it...

Don't you see...this is the beginning of the end of hunting in Iowa for residents as well..


I was going to apply for my first NR Iowa tag this year to come down and hunt with THA4 since he comes up here to ND each fall to hunt with me... There is no way in heck I am paying $550 to shoot a deer... It is a deer people they are everywere...I may not shoot a booner in ND, but I refuse to pay that much money to shoot a whitetail deer.. It is just stupid plain and simple...Don't you think PETA likes the idea of raising license fees?? I bet they wish licenses cost $50,000 so no one would buy them......The whole idea behind this is stupid....

 

[bowman]

Negativity breeds negativity. That is what happened to this post. Some were cool with thier comments, some weren't. That led us in the wrong direction. Amazingly, as a resident, I can see both sides. First of all, it was out of any resident's or non-resident's control. I remember when Colorado raised their Elk tags from where it had been at $250 and in a few short years it was over $500. I was miffed at first, but eventually realized that it simply meant that the average guy (me) would have to make the trip every 3-4 years instead of every year like I had been. Maybe that was the goal of the Colorado DOW. I don't know.

I went back to Colorado last year. I saved, worked every bit of overtime that I could sign up for, and I made it work. To be honest, it made it better. The planning, dreaming, and scheming were almost as fun as the hunt itself. I know that the price of the Iowa NR tag is high, but it is still do-able if it is something that you really want.

On the other hand, Saskguy and some others brought up an interesting point. If the average guy only applies every so often or quits all together, this opens the door for the rich boys, less names in the hat for the draw. Could it be that this could increase the amount of leasing, buying, and protecting of land? After all, if the tags come easier for the rich folks, there is more incentive to buy or lease. Only time will tell. Either way, it is out of the control of both residents and non-residents, so let's keep it positive folks! We're all here because we like to hunt big Iowa bucks, the site is called Iowawhitetail!!!

 

[SaskGuy]

Don't you guys realize you could raise the price to $1,000 and you will still have the same number of NR hunters in Iowa....They will all just be rich doctors and Lawyers who will make the Outfitters in Iowa a lot of business...That means the outfitters will be able to lease and buy up more land and keep residents out of it...

Don't you see...this is the beginning of the end of hunting in Iowa for residents as well..

Nacho...I guess you nailed what I was kind of in a roundabout way trying to say. Sometimes one must look past the forest to see the trees.

We're all here because we like to hunt big Iowa bucks, the site is called Iowawhitetail!!!

Does this make my point, as someone from out of country invalid? I hope I'm reading too much into the quoted text.

 

[Shoot2Kill]

I think the thing that I found most disturbing about the price change was the move to a $50.00 preference point. Some residents may not know how the system works since you don't have to use it to buy your tags. Like most things, there are non refundable administrative fees attached. In this case, to the tune of $15.00. Now they automatically keep another $50.00 for a P/P. An automatic loss of $65.00 just for applying.

Now let's say it takes three years to get drawn $65.00 x 3 = $195.00 PLUS the cost of a tag (I paid $530.00), now you're up to $725.00 for a tag. This is if no more price changes and there is supposed to be a $30.00 hunting license increase at any time.

That's the thought process behind only wealthy being able to hunt and they are going to lease and buy your hunting land for themselves. Outfitters are drooling on themselves with the potential.

Can't believe this wasn't brought up before this - yes, the tag is not just a one time $544. Adding in those preference point dollars makes the idea of shooting ONE deer for over $700 a little insane IMO.

Lets say you walk into a guys basement and there is a 9 foot brown bear rug on the wall and a 168" buck, which do you think gets more attention from other outdoorsman when they see the 2 side by side? Which one is considered more of a "trophy" in your opinion? Some may say the bear, some die hard deer hunters may say the buck, who knows. It now costs more to hunt a whitetail buck in Iowa (an animal that is considered a nuscience throughout most of the country) than it does a coastal brown bear in AK (the only place you can hunt them) as far as tag fees go. Actually, the NR deer license in IA is now more than any NR license for ANY animal in AK. Maybe you don't see why I feel it's strange, it's hard to grasp exactly why I feel that way......but it just seems weird that it costs more to hunt something in one state that you can find all over the country vs an animal that can only be hunted in one place in this country. (Yes, I know about the "quality" of IA bucks, but 9 out of 10 NR hunters are most likely going to shoot somthing that is not considered "jaw dropping") just like they can do in any other state. I can't put my finger on it, but it just seems odd in the big scheme of things.

If tags go up any more over the next few years, it will run out the average joe no matter how much he wants it.

 

[letemgrow]

I won't be buying a tag now....even though I am sitting on 2 preference points. I can spend the 550 on my farm in MO and get a lot of stuff accomplished. Although, I will not see the calber of bucks I would across the line in IA.

 

[DWilk]

I would rather shoot a 168" buck than a brown bear. No offense to you Shoot2Kill....

I don't see the increase as a big deal. How much will outfitters benefit? They don't get the money from the tags.... Do you think they are going to get more hunters outfitting now that the price went up? ... like it was a problem getting guys to buy their hunts before the tag increase?

And yes, Shoot2Kill... it does seem odd that people revere Iowa as the land of unlimited giant whitetails. Most non-residents don't have a clue about big bucks... they just watch so and so on the Outdoor channel screaming about how great Iowa is and all of sudden we are better than every other state. They come from 7 miles across the border to shoot a big buck when the habitat is the exact same as their own state. Big bucks don't know what state they live in.

In my opinion, the buck tag should be expensive... the doe tags not. After all, that is why 99.9% of non-residents come here to hunt. The only problem is the yahoos that hunt bucks on their doe tags, hence the increase in doe tag. I think we should make bucks tags expensive and put restrictions on outfitting and leasing. Problem solved.

 

[BrewCrew]

On this one, I am going to actually take the middle-ground. I think the prices are a bit rediculous BUT I don't think it's a make or break for MOST hunters of any class (ones with any bit of personal budgeting and discipline). I also don't think it's fair-game to start comparing to other states because Iowa is not equal. If you see Iowa as the best state (maybe you won't admit it but...) you'll come up with the money. (I can think of only ONE person who can't do it because they do not have any discipline with $, budgeting, saving and have maxed out credit cards because they like too many goodies).

I can't think of very many guys that would be happy to spend almost as much money as the tag price for a mount of a big buck they killed. This is coming from a guy who was a poor college kid who managed to hunt all over when I was in college with my buddies. Again- I see both sides to this (and agree the price is getting a bit rediculous) BUT I don't think this is some major deal breaking, economy wrecking action, it's not that big of deal to be honest in my opinion.

:way: Well said. The price for a doe is a bit steep but that may be the breaking ground that will keep NR's from buying up ground considering they will not be able manage it most likely....

As for being born on third and hitting a triple. I am not really sure what that means as I am pretty sure I was born from a second base, have gotten on second enough to know the aroma, could only get on third with some slick moves, and hit a few homeruns from the bed of my pickup.. :grin:

Being from West V with not too many big deers from over there. I am going to milk my residency in this great state as long as I can. Go CLONES!

 

[letemgrow]

Can't believe this wasn't brought up before this - yes, the tag is not just a one time $544. Adding in those preference point dollars makes the idea of shooting ONE deer for over $700 a little insane IMO.

Lets say you walk into a guys basement and there is a 9 foot brown bear rug on the wall and a 168" buck, which do you think gets more attention from other outdoorsman when they see the 2 side by side? Which one is considered more of a "trophy" in your opinion? Some may say the bear, some die hard deer hunters may say the buck, who knows. It now costs more to hunt a whitetail buck in Iowa (an animal that is considered a nuscience throughout most of the country) than it does a coastal brown bear in AK (the only place you can hunt them) as far as tag fees go. Actually, the NR deer license in IA is now more than any NR license for ANY animal in AK. Maybe you don't see why I feel it's strange, it's hard to grasp exactly why I feel that way......but it just seems weird that it costs more to hunt something in one state that you can find all over the country vs an animal that can only be hunted in one place in this country. (Yes, I know about the "quality" of IA bucks, but 9 out of 10 NR hunters are most likely going to shoot somthing that is not considered "jaw dropping") just like they can do in any other state. I can't put my finger on it, but it just seems odd in the big scheme of things.

If tags go up any more over the next few years, it will run out the average joe no matter how much he wants it.

Not many states have the quality that IA has, I can see why they charge it....people will still pay it cause the caliber of bucks in IA is far greater than what they have in their home states.

If I was in the position in IA, I would do away with the "celebrity" tags and just sell them outright for 2 g's a piece on a first come first serve basis. IA does not need anymore advertising so make the big names pay to play instead of getting it free.

 

[sureshot]

For those of you who feel to be Nostradamus* in this post, i'm going to turn the tables and give you my prediction of what could've been, and the reason why right now i'm smiling behind my computer desk.

It has nothing to do with being a NR hater, because i'm not. The NR's I have met over the past few years are top-notch guys just trying to take home a big buck. Yes, many have bought ground in this state, but they worked hard for it, and they KNEW the laws before they bought the ground and never complained. Anyways, back to what could've been......

I think there are a few options the DNR had in this issue. Some individuals were hoping to see the amount of NR tags allotted double from 3,000 to 6,000. This would've been a nightmare for all of us. Not only would residents be shutout of quality farms all across the state, but our deer herd would start to resemble that of Illinois and Kansas. I know many of you who are complaining about the pricing in this post would rather see this happen, but in all honesty, you're hunting experiences would decline. For those of you who were public land hunters, good luck finding a great spot. And IMO $500 would seem cheap to what most of you would have to pay if this occurred. If this happened, you would most likely be forced to LEASE (more money), buy your own farm (more money), or go through an outfitter (even more money).

I honestly feel that our buck tags are worth $500.00. Look how much we all pay every year on gadgets to hunt whitetails? Many of us purchase treestands that cost over $175.00. Camo suits worth $200+. Blinds that are $300. Then there are those of us who run cameras all summer, multiple cameras worth $200.00 a piece. Some of us hunt these "nuisance animals" with bows that are worth over $1,000.00 when it's all said and done! I could go on all day with this. Sit back and think how much you spend a year on hunting equipment.....

Maybe you'd rather see the 6,000 tags occur instead of the price increase, but I personally think this is the better move.

I think it was one or the other that was going to happen. If the other would've happened I woud be the one complaining right now....and most of you NR's would be the ones smiling.

 

[Shoot2Kill]

For those of you who feel to be Nostradamus* in this post, i'm going to turn the tables and give you my prediction of what could've been, and the reason why right now i'm smiling behind my computer desk.

It has nothing to do with being a NR hater, because i'm not. The NR's I have met over the past few years are top-notch guys just trying to take home a big buck. Yes, many have bought ground in this state, but they worked hard for it, and they KNEW the laws before they bought the ground and never complained. Anyways, back to what could've been......

I think there are a few options the DNR had in this issue. Some individuals were hoping to see the amount of NR tags allotted double from 3,000 to 6,000. This would've been a nightmare for all of us. Not only would residents be shutout of quality farms all across the state, but our deer herd would start to resemble that of Illinois and Kansas. I know many of you who are complaining about the pricing in this post would rather see this happen, but in all honesty, you're hunting experiences would decline. For those of you who were public land hunters, good luck finding a great spot. And IMO $500 would seem cheap to what most of you would have to pay if this occurred. If this happened, you would most likely be forced to LEASE (more money), buy your own farm (more money), or go through an outfitter (even more money).

I honestly feel that our buck tags are worth $500.00. Look how much we all pay every year on gadgets to hunt whitetails? Many of us purchase treestands that cost over $175.00. Camo suits worth $200+. Blinds that are $300. Then there are those of us who run cameras all summer, multiple cameras worth $200.00 a piece. Some of us hunt these "nuisance animals" with bows that are worth over $1,000.00 when it's all said and done! I could go on all day with this. Sit back and think how much you spend a year on hunting equipment.....

Maybe you'd rather see the 6,000 tags occur instead of the price increase, but I personally think this is the better move.

I think it was one or the other that was going to happen. If the other would've happened I woud be the one complaining right now....and most of you NR's would be the ones smiling.

Just playing devils advocate -

I'd be smiling if the resident at least footed a fraction of the bill.

Prior license fees were $388.50 for an either sex tag, this is an increase in $156. Take that times 3000 and the state gains $468,000. (not counting doe tags since most agree here that very few will sell but there will still be some gain there). Lets say 250,000 resident hunters buy a general hunting license this year (likely more) - if they paid $1.87 more the state would make the same. If I remember right the governor voted against any resident tag increases because of the economy....if they are gaining less than a half a million by raising the NR any sex tags, why not just raise the resident fees only $2 and and get the same? Why not charge $5 more and more than double what they are getting from the NR? Would $2 or $5 stop anyone? What else has not had a price increase in the last however many years it's been since the IA resident had a fee increase? Nothing. The increases should fall solely on the NR? Kudos to the groups that fought for the IA resident this year and won, but it can't last forever can it?

 

[DWilk]

From what I understood, the resident increase was just put on delay for a year. They are still going to raise the prices.