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

URGENT...

turtlshell

turtlshell

PMA Member
House File 42 has been introduced.

Find the meat and taters HERE ...basics is more turkey and deer tags for MULTIPLE OWNERS of farm units. AKA NR Landowners...This isn't good.

that should make most go EEK!!!
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Brew Crew</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Does that have anything to do with NR Landowners?? I didn't see anything about that</div></div>

Yes, doesn't matter who owns the land. Just states that the landowner would get a free tag for every sixty acres owned.
 
I guess its not clear in there.. I would still think that the state would stick to its nonresident laws on tags though, atleast for awhile. Who knows
 
The way I read it is that one landowner per 60 acres, so if 3 guys owned 180, they could each get a tag. If two guys own 180, two tags. If one guy owns 180, 1 tag.

I could be mistaken.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JNRBRONC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The way I read it is that one landowner per 60 acres, so if 3 guys owned 180, they could each get a tag. If two guys own 180, two tags. If one guy owns 180, 1 tag.

I could be mistaken. </div></div>

Yeah, that's kind of what I got out of it, but could it possibly be...

if 3 guys own 180 acres, then they each can get 3 landowner tags?, 1 per 60 acres for each of them? totaling 9 landowner tags for the piece?
 
Depending on how it reads it will be hard to pass IMO.

If the DNR is wanting extra money for the kitty giving
away a lot of free tags is not going to fill the tank. IMHO.
It will be interesting to see what happens.
 
DNR (apparently someone is reading this TODAY)-
What I would suggest is an early doe season. Something to think about: every hunter I know is tired and burnt out by late season. If you created an early do season - people would come out of the woodwork. They have not been out ALL YEAR and would be PUMPED to get out and focus on does. This would also take away some of the late season pressure that kills so many shed bucks. (more shed bucks are being killed than reported- I hear guys who leave them or don't report for many reasons including even embarrassment for shooting one PLUS too many folks are shooting "does" with rifles at 200 yards late season). *In my opinion- the late doe season with rifles is a tragedy.

Early doe season in southern tier and relaxing how many does are shot in northern part of state would be my suggestion.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">every hunter I know is tired and burnt out by late season</div></div>
I love late season. Me and my girl Betty (my Mossberg 500) can have some serious alone time in the woods together. No mosquito's ruining our picnic, and I don't sweat my butt off. /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sureshot1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Brew Crew</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Does that have anything to do with NR Landowners?? I didn't see anything about that</div></div>

Yes, doesn't matter who owns the land. Just states that the landowner would get a free tag for every sixty acres owned. </div></div>

I think you all need to understand that this is an amendment to current law:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Section 1. Section 483A.24, subsection 2, Code 2009, is
1 2 amended by adding the following new paragraph:
</div></div>

This paragraph does not chanege the elgibility requirments to purchase a landowner tag which clearly exclude NR' landowners.

I'm not for or against this rule change at this point but I thought I would point out that your only reading a portion of the law.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Iowa residents who are owners of agricultural land or tenants that farm agricultural land, or are a spouse or
child of the owner or tenant that reside with the owner or tenant, are eligible for reduced-fee deer and wild turkey hunting licenses, commonly called landowner-tenant licenses.

<span style="color: #FF0000">Owning land in Iowa does not confer residency.</span> Nonresident
landowners and tenants are not eligible for these
licenses. </div></div>
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fishbonker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Check out the list of lobbyists so far for HF 42:


Money Talks

The 'Bonker </div></div>

I can at least understand the reasons for this bill. There are many cases of family farms where perhaps a father and several sons have ownership in a large farming operation.

Why should only one of the family members have the option of getting a tag?

Now...if somewhere in all of this there is hope of changing the definition of "landowner" to include NR"s then I would certainly be against it. /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif
 
I believe Kansas and Illinois have or maybe had a system based on acres. The more acres the more tags. In Kansas with the transferable tags the tags all went to outfitters. Kansas has since done away with transferable tags. Illinois I'm not sure about.

I'm just afraid it's the nose of the camel under the tent flap in regards to a bunch of things that, in my opinion, wouldn’t be good for the herd or the hunters.

The 'Bonker
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm just afraid it's the nose of the camel under the tent flap in regards to a bunch of things that, in my opinion, wouldn’t be good for the herd or the hunters.

</div></div>

After reading the other bills...I can see the handwriting on the wall bonker... /forum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom