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

Opinions wanted! SF2127

DOR

DOR

Life Member
SF 2127, NONRESIDENT DEER LICENSES . Requires a nonresident deer hunter to purchase two antlerless licenses with the purchase of an antlered or any sex license and to take two antlerless deer before taking any other deer. Reduces the cost of an antlerless license to $50. Increases the number of non-resident licenses to 12,000. SNRC

As an NR IBA member I find this to be a little over the top! It would be refreshing if we could make it through one session with no changes. For the most part what IA already has seems to be working fine as far as I am concerned. /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif
 
An Iowa friend of mine, allegedly connected, says this doesn't have a chance. The big hurdle is how to put the doe check in place before issuing the anysex tag. And then of course who and how is the anysex tag issued.
 
May sound good to someone on paper but without enforcement (i.e check stations) it seems like a waste of time. I agree DOR, it appears to be a little much.
 
In addition to making it a pain in the arse to try to hunt Iowa for a NR this year, it will likely be the foot in the door to double the tags and pull the rug out next year...eliminating the ridiculous 2 doe requirement and leaving just 12000 any sex tags in 2009.

Careful what you wish for here IA residents. I like being able to hunt in solidarity when in IA (even if it is 1 in 3 years)....this bill probably will not end well for residents if my hunch is right.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Careful what you wish for here IA residents. </div></div>

I don't think many of us residents are wishing for anything of this sort.

even if they weren't trying to DOUBLE the NR anysex rags in this bill it's still dumb.

the 2 doe NR earn a buck might sound good on paper but come on there's a limit to the lengths we force NR's to. Not only do we have no way to enforce this when a NR comes to Iowa for 4 days you can't expect them to shoot 2 does first. That's crazy.

Not to mention the fact that there are many counties that don't need ANY higher deer harvest. The legislature and FB and the media can't seem to understand that.

I'm tired of the legislature trying to sell Iowa deer hunters down the river while hoping NR hunters are somehow just the deer management silver bullet they think we need.

Pure stupidity.
 
Glad you see that, but I am just surprised we haven't seen more of a hubbub about this piece of legislation! YOur thought process mirrors mine!
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am just surprised we haven't seen more of a hubbub about this piece of legislation! </div></div>


There are somewhere around 20 stupid deer bills so far this year, it's hard to keep up!!
 
Again, from my contact the legislators like the concept but the application and enforcement of the licensing is being discussed.
 
We should all embrace the idea of check stations as another option to get a better count on the deer harvest.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Again, from my contact the legislators like the concept but the application and enforcement of the licensing is being discussed.
</div></div>

Sounds like those legislators need to be informed that the 2 does being shot won't make a pile of beans with all the land that will go off limits and into hunting sanctuaries.
 
This is total ridiculous who in there right mind would want to come and have to shoot to does before they can get a buck tag. Most NR's have limited time to hunt.Who would like to bow hunt a area and have to kill 2 deer in that area and then try for a buck all in a week good luck.6000 tags is enough if the DNR needs the money double the price of the tags.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom