Poll Question #11: Should NRLO get yearly buck tags with a minimum qualifying acre
Poll Question #11: Should NRLO get yearly buck tags with a minimum qualifying acres
- Thread starter IowaBowHunter1983
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
Wanna hear the wildest “get rich quick scheme” just behind the Somalian daycare centers in MN?!?!?!?
I sell out & flip to NRLO’s getting tags. If no one beat me to death & I could get that across the finish line…. I’d make a FORTUNE!!!!! Sell all my land, crush it as land values sored to maybe $12-15k an acre QUICKLY…. The state would be ruined - residents would be destroyed …. but I’d Flee to Somalia & live like a king for the remainder of my days! There has to be something to hunt there?? Or I could join one of those Somalian pirate operations for the next adventure in life!
Think of how many aspects of society & politics people are willing to sell out the resource or other people to better themselves…. Not near as many in iowa and why we haven’t been ruined like the rest of those places. Iowa would be completely destroyed other than for the dudes that had huge tracts. Would all get segmented up. Even if some areas with big landowners got BETTER for deer- the residents would be completely cooked. DONE.
I sell out & flip to NRLO’s getting tags. If no one beat me to death & I could get that across the finish line…. I’d make a FORTUNE!!!!! Sell all my land, crush it as land values sored to maybe $12-15k an acre QUICKLY…. The state would be ruined - residents would be destroyed …. but I’d Flee to Somalia & live like a king for the remainder of my days! There has to be something to hunt there?? Or I could join one of those Somalian pirate operations for the next adventure in life!
Think of how many aspects of society & politics people are willing to sell out the resource or other people to better themselves…. Not near as many in iowa and why we haven’t been ruined like the rest of those places. Iowa would be completely destroyed other than for the dudes that had huge tracts. Would all get segmented up. Even if some areas with big landowners got BETTER for deer- the residents would be completely cooked. DONE.
100% agree.
Wi transplant
PMA Member
100pct no end of our state for quality deer hunting!
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
Daver
PMA Member
Similarly...and I have thought this thought...if this ever did happen, I would sell out, profit like a bandit, and find something else to do with the windfall as deer hunting as we have known it will cease to exist in this state. (Like, and even worse than, Illinois, IMO.) But, like you, and others, for the good of the rest of the state, I hope it never happens and I will fight it as much as I can.
But if it did...YIKES!! Only the realtors would win, IMO.
Well...and current property owners that sell.
Im in same boat. I will fight to the bitter end, but if that battle was ever lost, i'd probably be out unless I win powerball and had a mega giant farm.Similarly...and I have thought this thought...if this ever did happen, I would sell out, profit like a bandit, and find something else to do with the windfall. But, like you, and others, for the good of the rest of the state, I hope it never happens and I will fight it as much as I can.
But if it did...YIKES!! Only the realtors would win, IMO.
Falldreams
Well-Known Member
Absolutely not. That would be the end of Iowa whitetail quality in just a few short years both natural herd age structure and buck to doe ratios.
booneriverbucks
PMA Member
#1 access killer for residents... Not specifically to iowa but everywhere. 100,000ish deer hunters in Iowa vs. 10 million plus in the country. Work on your own states!
Rous14
PMA Member
NR here. Have voiced my opinion on this topic a few times here. Few thoughts on comments above. Definitely would hurt/reduce access for residents, that seems like a fair point and I’ve always agreed with it. Would drive the price of land up, fair point and I’ve always agreed w that. However….im curious as to why any of you think the quality would do anything but get better? The comments that the quality would be destroyed I don’t really get especially if there was a minimum acre amount like the 80 or 200ac poll option.
I’ve said this many times but imo most of you psychologically make no distinction between NRLO’s and non residents who come out and hunt with outfitters or on their own be it public or permission. Theres a MASSIVE difference between the two. I own and hunt in IL and I can tell you that the guys that come in from whatever state and have a week to hunt w an outfitter, probably seeing 140” deer for the first time, are definitely high grading and shooting good young bucks and hurting the quality.
The NRLO’s in IL, and I know a ton of them, are the best neighbors you could ever have if you like growing old mature bucks. They are the 1%’s that are letting 150” 3 yr olds walk every time. 95% of the residents in Iowa or any other state are killing that deer every time.
So I think there are great reasons/justification for you guys to stand on as you protect your resource but no chance the hunting gets worse w NRLO’s in IA. Thats a bad and imo a false conclusion.
Go easy on me
I’ve said this many times but imo most of you psychologically make no distinction between NRLO’s and non residents who come out and hunt with outfitters or on their own be it public or permission. Theres a MASSIVE difference between the two. I own and hunt in IL and I can tell you that the guys that come in from whatever state and have a week to hunt w an outfitter, probably seeing 140” deer for the first time, are definitely high grading and shooting good young bucks and hurting the quality.
The NRLO’s in IL, and I know a ton of them, are the best neighbors you could ever have if you like growing old mature bucks. They are the 1%’s that are letting 150” 3 yr olds walk every time. 95% of the residents in Iowa or any other state are killing that deer every time.
So I think there are great reasons/justification for you guys to stand on as you protect your resource but no chance the hunting gets worse w NRLO’s in IA. Thats a bad and imo a false conclusion.
Go easy on me
hillrunner
PMA Member
I mostly agree with you but not on 80 acres . The quality would definitely get worse as every piece that sells would get cut up into 80s for maximum price.NR here. Have voiced my opinion on this topic a few times here. Few thoughts on comments above. Definitely would hurt/reduce access for residents, that seems like a fair point and I’ve always agreed with it. Would drive the price of land up, fair point and I’ve always agreed w that. However….im curious as to why any of you think the quality would do anything but get better? The comments that the quality would be destroyed I don’t really get especially if there was a minimum acre amount like the 80 or 200ac poll option.
I’ve said this many times but imo most of you psychologically make no distinction between NRLO’s and non residents who come out and hunt with outfitters or on their own be it public or permission. Theres a MASSIVE difference between the two. I own and hunt in IL and I can tell you that the guys that come in from whatever state and have a week to hunt w an outfitter, probably seeing 140” deer for the first time, are definitely high grading and shooting good young bucks and hurting the quality.
The NRLO’s in IL, and I know a ton of them, are the best neighbors you could ever have if you like growing old mature bucks. They are the 1%’s that are letting 150” 3 yr olds walk every time. 95% of the residents in Iowa or any other state are killing that deer every time.
So I think there are great reasons/justification for you guys to stand on as you protect your resource but no chance the hunting gets worse w NRLO’s in IA. Thats a bad and imo a false conclusion.
Go easy on me
Now if you flip that and make it a much larger acreage amount like 400, I could see a benefit as pieces would get put together to make large parcels.
booneriverbucks
PMA Member
Getting buck tags here is easy.. just move here
Falldreams
Well-Known Member
Rous14
PMA Member
Yea 80 is probably too small. But then again, think of it the reverse way…..Give a bunch of the guys on here that are die hards each an 80ac parcel in a couple square mile area in Michigan and that couple square mile area will be wayyyy better then areas around it that are bigger chunks but are hunted by folks who shoot anything that moves (like most Iowa residents or any other states residents). So I’m not sure what the acreage limit should be, obviously 200 or 400 would be better than 80 but still, when you have residents in an area that are shooting the good 2 and 3yr old deer I’m just not sure that the 80ac NRLO section wouldn’t still be better. Not sure.
JNRBRONC
Well-Known Member
There was a local Christmas tree farm that the tree acres of the parcel was around 2-3 is my guess. He had major deer issues. Point I'm trying to make is that there are many alt ag uses out there that don't require much of a footprint. But I'm not naive enough to think this isn't getting abused.
I am a NRLO. I agree that allowing NR's to get tag every year isn't the correct way to go. I do believe we should start the drawing cycle with 1 preference point if we own X amount of acres. Not exactly sure what framework to use, but something along these lines. I just feel the NRLO should have a step up on NR non land owners in the drawing cycle. Again I agree that we need to keep Iowa hunting great but the law changes over the past years with allowing all the different weapons is also hurting things!
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
I’ve been vocal on tags over the years. So much has changed, I stay out of it now . My thoughts are 4 to 5 yr wait in tags if you own the land is way too much !
If it’s a 1-2 yr wait that’s not as bad . I understand the access issue .
If they would set it at 320 acres or more , I would argue it improves Iowa. However, I doubt it will ever pass !
Im in an every other yr zone , so I’m fine . You know it’s a “does it affect me” society
If it’s a 1-2 yr wait that’s not as bad . I understand the access issue .
If they would set it at 320 acres or more , I would argue it improves Iowa. However, I doubt it will ever pass !
Im in an every other yr zone , so I’m fine . You know it’s a “does it affect me” society
