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

What's IA hunters feelings?

Bakes

Bakes

Member
Hey guys,
I was wondering how the hunters of Iowa felt about people that owned land in Iowa but not living in the state of Iowa having to apply for a nonresident licence?
I am coming down shed hunting
smile.gif
and to look at a 240 acre parcel of supposibly great hunting land this weekend and I'm a little reluctant to buy it just due to this law. I would also like to get a Conservation Officiers opinion on it.

Anyway congrats to I.B.A. for having Ted Nugent speak, he is an absolutly wonderful speaker and if you have the oppotunity to see him please do.
Thanks, Nonres.
 
Nonres

I think I have to aggree with the current law. I don't think that just because you own a little land here that you should be entitled to a resident license. Part of the problem is that what would keep any nonresident from buying 5 or 10 acres and claiming a resident license. I just don't think that is right because other than a little bit of property tax that person does nothing for our state, and would have the right to hunt not only on his 5 acres but all over the state. Then he would feel justified in leasing the 600 acres arround him and having his uncle or brother buy another 5 acres and do the same thing. The term resident inplies living in the state and paying sales tax and income tax and road tax and so on. This is not a slam of nonresidents and if you bought 240 acres you might not fit some of my prejudicies, but once the flood gates are opened they are really hard to close again. Here in SE Iowa we are already starting to feel the pinch for hunting ground and I'm just selfish enough to not want to see those gates opened any futher.
 
Nonres

If I had enough "SPARE" money to buy 240 acres of ground in another state strickly for hunting,.....hummmm......I would spend it on hunting trips all over the North American Continent.... Let's see (High Average Iowa Timber = $ 1000.00 x 240 Acres = $ 240,000.00 . Wow! At $10,000 a lavish hunting trip that would be 24 Big Game Hunts. I don't think I would spend that kind of money to hunt an Iowa Whitetail once a year.

Ghost
 
I would have to agree with the others, i think that buying that much land to hunt on once in awhile is not worth it. On another note i think that it would be a good idea if say maybe you were to build a house on that land some day. I too believe it is a good law that they have right now. Part of me wants to say that you should have to be a resident of Iowa to buy land in Iowa. I just think that Iowa is already tight for available land. Im not trying to bash heads with anyone here so please dont take it that way.
 
Ghost Walker,

Twenty years later and after your 24 big game hunts what do you have to show for it. Maybe 15 big game heads on the wall and an empty bank account. Actually a negative bank account after you get all those monsters you shot mounted. Sounds like good money management to me.
confused.gif


Twenty years later I will still own 240 acres in Iowa that will now be worth (hopefully) over $300,000 and if I manage it properly some big bucks on my property and my wall.
grin.gif


Nonres
 
I have a hard time understanding how land that someone owns can not be hunted by the individual that owns it. I am not saying they could hunt anywhere else...... JUST the land that they own. I have a hard time believing that this would hold up in the court of law if seriously contested.

As for the idea that one would need to be a resident to purchase land..... that sounds closer to communism that Capitalism....

I am totally against individuals or groups buying up large plots of land and selling hunts to others.... but if someone wants to purchase land and use it for their own enjoyment to deny them that opportunity is criminal.
confused.gif
 
This might sound selfish, but I say tough cookies. If you don't live here then you are a non-resident and should be charged as such.
By the way, if Ted Nugent acts in person anything like he does on TV then I would pass on seeing him speak.

Bob
 
Hello bowmaker,

I would agree with what you are saying if ANY landowner could hunt with the same priviledges as a resedent. But, I would like to see Iowa set up the same way as Kansas. There, if you own 80 acres or more you can buy a non-resident landowner tag for $50 (wich is about $20 higher than residents), and then you are only allowed to hunt your own property. I own 500 acres in Iowa and am not complaining about having to go through the drawing (after all, I knew before I bought) but it would be nice to be able to hunt my own property every year. Just my 2 cents worth.
 
You can only be a resident in one state. Pick one and live with the consequences and bonuses of your decision. I agree with the law. I chose to live in Iowa and now am very willing to pay $400 for an Arizona elk tag. But I have only gotten drawn once in 9 years of applying.
 
The problem with the Wisconsin idea is that there are alot of 300 to 1500 acre farms owned by non-residents. They would get split up into 100 acre plots, with the landowner, his wife, his son, his cousin, his dog all owning one plot.

You could probably do a deed transfer for $30 and transfer the ownership of every plot every year to whoever wanted to hunt it that year. It could go out to the highest bidder every year.
 
Only drawing once in nine years would be okay if you were simply putting in for tags and contributing nothing else. However, that's not comparing apples to apples.

You don't own the land you are trying to hunt in Arizona, you are not contributing your hard earned dollars to improve the elk habitat (especially in years you don't draw) and most importantly unless you own land out there your not paying property taxes each year. You don't have a vested interest in the state other than going out there when you draw a tag to hunt elk.

On the other hand most non-resident landowners are constantly trying to improve their property for wildlife through food plots and tree plantings. They are stewards of the land even though they are not able to hunt their own property each year. This habtat improvement benefits ALL hunter in Iowa.

Of the several dozen non-resident landowners I personally know, none would be willing to tranfer tittle each year. They all bought their little piece of heaven for the enjoyment of themselves and their direct family. Most would just like the oppurtunity to hunt their own place each year, nothing more.

Rut
 
a kansas non resident land owner bow tag and gun tag is good only for your land.
 
Hello wanab.c.,

I think you have your info a little mixed up. The "resident" landowners can apply for an archery tag that they can transfer to a non-res that is good for the entire state but "non-resident" landowners can only purchase a "hunt your own land" permit that means exactly that. It is the only way a non-res landowner can be guaranteed a tag every year without entering the lottery.
 
nonres, if i was to buy 240 acres in Michigan could i hunt on a resident tag?
 
Cornfed,
i think that i stated that point clearly in my first post, as i said before, i think that it is a great idea for that person to purchase land if he/she thinks they will some day build or use it for their own enjoyment, however to go along with what you said, i think that it would be wrong for them to lease the lands for hunting purposes, Set aside is where that comes in.
 
This is a subject with many angles to it IMO. Personally, I don't like seeing hunting develop into a sport where only the rich can afford to hunt a buck. ( I suppose that is a pun.) I have read comments on this site and heard other discussion elsewhere that seems to suggest that the landowner(s) can hunt the desirables(bucks) and the rabble can come in and hunt the less desirable(does). Whether residents or NR's buy the land, this stratification is what is happening right now and it shouldn't be a shock to folks that not everyone is happy about it.

On one hand you could say that this is the free market system at work though, money talks and the best of whatever it is goes to the high bidder, in this case it is prime deer habitat in a region that is friendly to growing mature animals.

Another viewpoint would be to say that Iowa hunters/voters could organize and pursue legislation that let's us gun hunt during the rut. This would lead to a harvest of many more bucks, most of the 1 1/2 year old variety. ( We would only be matching up with surrounding states with many more deer and vast amounts of deer habitat by doing this BTW.) Then the "quality" of the buck hunting would be on par with other states and folks would not have a reason to come here and buy land.

I am OK with the notion with "pay for play", whether I have to buy my way in or pay for a lease, etc. But I don't like being in competition with hunters from other states, where the wages paid are often quite a bit higher than rural Iowa areas, who can't manage their own herds and then come to Iowa where there has been a different, better approach taken on a macro level. ( This is certainly not to say that everyone in Iowa pursues QDM strategies, but plenty do and the overall approach to seasons, bag limits, etc, does produce big bucks way beyond what many other states do.)

Maybe we native Iowan deer hunters are a selfish lot, but then so are South Dakota pheasant and waterfowl hunters, Arkansas duck hunters, Arizona elk hunters, etc. I have heard very similar viewpoints from some of these folks too concerning non-residents coming to their state and hunting "their" game.

All that said, I say no to non-resident land owners being guaranteed a tag. Don't buy the land and then complain about the situation that you knew about ahead of time. Guaranteed non-resident tags would only exacerbate the situation and there would be fewer "common" Iowans able to afford to hunt their own state. If we all spent as much time properly managing the deer herds in our respective states as we do arguing what rights non-residents should have in Iowa, we would all be better off.

As far as taxes paid and rights owed... what is happening in several areas is that folks are buying land and then putting it into forest reserve, thereby removing the property from the tax roles. So much for the concept of the altruistic land buyer supporting the local economy, etc.
 
I just spent the last fifteen minutes writing a reply to this res vs nonres hunting license issue and then I decided not to post it. The issue has been brought up alot over the past several years. I guess I am tired of hunter vs hunter. I say let them hunt there own ground! If they don't some res trespasser will. If property values go up then so be it. That's life and the american way! If they kill a monster buck I am happy for them. It's there ground!!!! They bought and paid for it and should be able to enjoy it. If they buy up more ground and I lose my hunting spots, ok!
I may hate loosing it but that's how the cookie crumbles. There is alot of adversity and trials in a person's life. If you lose your hunting spot and all the monster bucks in Iowa disappear because a bunch of nonres killed them all and you can't handle that then you don't know what adversity is. Maybe I am just having a bad day and sounding off!!! Someone give me a non selfish reason as to why we really should not let nonres hunt there own ground and it has viable commen sense reasoning behind it and I will read and respond. Just venting!! Yeah I had a bad day!
That' life. Just curious but what are the qualifications to be considered a common Iowan. If I have alot of money can I still be considered a common Iowan or due I have to be at a certain income level.
 
smile.gif
Nonres

Your absolutley correct from a money management standpoint. That why I bought 125 acres when I was 23 years old, along with the fact that my children and I can enjoy hunting it the rest of our lives. I didn't mean to sound like you were Nonres with tons of cash looking for an opportunity to hunt Iowa whitetails. That said, good luck with your land purchase.
kaboom_spawn.gif
 
I think that non-resident landowners paying a higher price for a landowner tag is ok... but, to deny them the priviledge to hunt their own land is wrong! I will bet most non-resident landowners are trespassed on repeatedly each year. That would really burn me to know that someone is hunting my land illegally and I am denied the priviledge to hunt it.
flaming.gif
Do they pay less taxes on their land for not residing in Iowa?..... go figure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom