OneCam
Well-Known Member
”What do you see as being the positive/negative effects to Iowa deer hunting and the Iowa deer herd by increasing the NR deer license quota?”
That is a very good question. There are many potential impacts to Iowa’s deer resource from increasing the quota for nonresidents and the posts above have already done a good job of recognizing these impacts. Increased quotas will mean an increased incentive for nonresidents to buy more land. It will also mean an increased incentive for leasing to accommodate these extra nonresidents. However it also means that some former Iowans, our friends and family members, will get the opportunity to come back and hunt with us on a more regular basis.
From a deer management perspective the problem with increasing the number of nonresidents is not the number of deer nonresidents shoot, it is the number they don’t shoot (but that would have been shot if the ownership hadn’t changed). Some (most?) of these areas have the potential to become deer refuges. And yes this does complicate deer management. I would add however that some of the worst deer refuges I know of within the state are owned by residents. Conversely you have seen that some nonresidents do a good job of managing deer populations on their land (See OrionWhitetails post).
I believe the key to OrionWhitetails success is that they believe and practice the principles of QDM. I also believe their achievement wasn’t accomplished solely by using nonresidents hunters, it was a mix of resident and nonresident hunters sharing the land and the resource. For deer management to work in the future this sharing will need to become more common. It will take some time and trust but I think it can and will happen.
The people management perspective is the more difficult issue. Increased nonresident quotas will mean some hunters will lose access to property that they are currently hunting. I have empathy for these hunters since it has happened to me as well. These hunters are faced with the unpleasant task of finding a new place to hunt. As I mentioned in an earlier post I have already found a negative relationship between the number of nonresident hunters and the number of resident hunters in a county. This trend will only get worse if we increase the nonresident quota without changing how many zones we use to distribute nonresident hunting pressure. In my opinion we already need to spread out the pressure from nonresidents. If the nonresident quota is increased it only makes it more important that to change to county sized zones for nonresidents.
But an increase in the number of nonresidents is not the only reason people lose access to places to hunt. Loss of habitat and continued urbanization are also reducing the opportunities for hunters to find places to hunt. Any program to mitigate the impact of increased human pressure will require increased revenues. These revenues will be needed to acquire more public land for wildlife based recreation. Another option that needs to be looked into is a program to lease private land to provide access for public use. This has been done in some neighboring states with some success. There are some problems as well and these will have to be worked out for any program to be successful.
Will the revenue from nonresident deer hunters be enough to totally solve this problem? In my opinion not by itself. It might be a good start. But Iowa’s people and Iowa’s natural resources require and deserve more. In my opinion we NEED a dedicated funding source for these programs. It is not fair or feasible for hunters and anglers to foot the total bill. We NEED a dedicated funding source to provide Iowa’s people the quality of outdoor recreation they deserve. We only have to look to the south to see one example of how a dedicated funding source could be implemented and utilized. It will take a grass roots effort to make it happen. Will it start here? Will it start with you?
by WJS
That is a very good question. There are many potential impacts to Iowa’s deer resource from increasing the quota for nonresidents and the posts above have already done a good job of recognizing these impacts. Increased quotas will mean an increased incentive for nonresidents to buy more land. It will also mean an increased incentive for leasing to accommodate these extra nonresidents. However it also means that some former Iowans, our friends and family members, will get the opportunity to come back and hunt with us on a more regular basis.
From a deer management perspective the problem with increasing the number of nonresidents is not the number of deer nonresidents shoot, it is the number they don’t shoot (but that would have been shot if the ownership hadn’t changed). Some (most?) of these areas have the potential to become deer refuges. And yes this does complicate deer management. I would add however that some of the worst deer refuges I know of within the state are owned by residents. Conversely you have seen that some nonresidents do a good job of managing deer populations on their land (See OrionWhitetails post).
I believe the key to OrionWhitetails success is that they believe and practice the principles of QDM. I also believe their achievement wasn’t accomplished solely by using nonresidents hunters, it was a mix of resident and nonresident hunters sharing the land and the resource. For deer management to work in the future this sharing will need to become more common. It will take some time and trust but I think it can and will happen.
The people management perspective is the more difficult issue. Increased nonresident quotas will mean some hunters will lose access to property that they are currently hunting. I have empathy for these hunters since it has happened to me as well. These hunters are faced with the unpleasant task of finding a new place to hunt. As I mentioned in an earlier post I have already found a negative relationship between the number of nonresident hunters and the number of resident hunters in a county. This trend will only get worse if we increase the nonresident quota without changing how many zones we use to distribute nonresident hunting pressure. In my opinion we already need to spread out the pressure from nonresidents. If the nonresident quota is increased it only makes it more important that to change to county sized zones for nonresidents.
But an increase in the number of nonresidents is not the only reason people lose access to places to hunt. Loss of habitat and continued urbanization are also reducing the opportunities for hunters to find places to hunt. Any program to mitigate the impact of increased human pressure will require increased revenues. These revenues will be needed to acquire more public land for wildlife based recreation. Another option that needs to be looked into is a program to lease private land to provide access for public use. This has been done in some neighboring states with some success. There are some problems as well and these will have to be worked out for any program to be successful.
Will the revenue from nonresident deer hunters be enough to totally solve this problem? In my opinion not by itself. It might be a good start. But Iowa’s people and Iowa’s natural resources require and deserve more. In my opinion we NEED a dedicated funding source for these programs. It is not fair or feasible for hunters and anglers to foot the total bill. We NEED a dedicated funding source to provide Iowa’s people the quality of outdoor recreation they deserve. We only have to look to the south to see one example of how a dedicated funding source could be implemented and utilized. It will take a grass roots effort to make it happen. Will it start here? Will it start with you?
by WJS