• Dear User,

    We had issues in getting your old password work with the new version of the software, henceforth kindly Reset Your Password here

    You won't be able to login with your old password

    If you do not receive the Password reset request within a few minutes, please check your Junk / Spam E-mail folder just in case the email got delivered there instead of your inbox. If so, select Not Junk, which will allow future messages to get through.

    If you still need assistance, email [email protected]

    We appreciate your patience and understanding on this matter.

Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Hunterra - Custom Hunting Property Maps

"FREE" DEER TAGS

G

Guest

Guest
All fixed, your welcome.

logo.jpg
 

scout

New Member
Farmers have a depredation program in place to address the problem of crop damage. I like to see it used as intended rather than cheapen the act of hunting deer by passing out free tags as gifts to farmers who would just as soon see the deer go away. If land owners should be given a free tag, for what ever logic you attempt to apply, then it should'nt be tied to the act of hunting deer. They should be allowed kill it how ever and when ever and do what ever they like with its remains. (as long at it was a humane kill)
If the State has a use for my $25.00 they also have a good place to spend a land owners $25.00
The money did'nt buy me a deer so why do people think that land owners have "paid" for a deer tag buy planting crops?
I have seem time and again the wanton way the free land owner tags get filled. It's a black cloud over Iowa. I hate to think what percent of these tags result in an illegal kill. Until people change the way they view them nothing will change. Putting an equal dollar value no all tags is a good start. Check stations should be close behind. I see land owners tags issued to old guys who never leave the farm yard and to guys who have not shot a gun in years. Yet that tag gets filled! "Hank can't get out much anymore" They offer as logic. The whole program is a wash. How many land owners hand over thier free tag to "the gang" every year when they show up do a drive. Attitudes won't change, policy can. All it take is alot of strong will.

[This message has been edited by scout (edited 08-31-2000).]
 
B

brian

Guest
I think the land owner should have to buy a tag just like the rest of us, but then what do I know, I am from California. It's a conservation thing, money needed for the future of hunting.
brian

[This message has been edited by brian (edited 08-31-2000).]
 

Iowa1

New Member
There is a huge amount of abuse in landowner tags. I have a friend that buys tags for every season he can get and takes every landowner tag he can get, He jokes that he hunts year round. He's out there every season! And mostly he's hunting around food plots on his farm. Why can a guy get a free deer tag to shoot a buck over a food plot? Not he's trying to get deer depradation permits too!

If Landowner tags are intended to reduce the deer population on specific farms, then they should be required to shoot a doe.

I think we should do away with the free landowner tags and stick with depradation permits only where the landowner can prove damage. I know this is entrenched in our rural culture, and it will be hard to change, but the abuse is rampant and the time to start the change is the sooner the better.
 
R

rescuebill

Guest
Most land owner tags I'm aware of are not used on the intended property! Iowa1 had a good reply.

As far as changing anything about the land owner tags....lets see...state gov in Iowa.....hummmm..75% farmers (maybe). It would be an uphill battle to say the least.
 
M

maddog

Guest
If your going to tackle the free tags you might as well tackle party hunting. Many similarities and they seem to go hand in hand. I agree with Iowa1 that the solution is the crop damage permit program. I think the check stations are needed.
Interestingly though, I as a nonresident landowner/farmer can not shoot the excess does off my property. Here I am at risk for the crops and I have to have residents shoot the does. I would gladly donate the meat to a designated charity or church and check every deer (doe) with the local CO. Iowa as a state is way behind on the issue of property owners rights. Alas, another subject for another day.
 

150 Class

Moderator
I know plenty of landowners who use it properly and they should be entitled to have it. They give more to the wildlife than most hunters ever will be able to. A farmer can lose thousands of dollars/year in crop damage. I think that Iowa should do what other states do and allow free licenses per amount of land owned or operated. Such as 25-400 acres gets 1 free tag, 400-1000 acres gets 2, each additional 1000 acres gets another. I know that the land owner tags do get abused and used wrong quite a bit. A 200+" buck was shot last October in Scott County with an early season muzzleloader, land owner tag. Problem was, the guy wasn't on his land. He wasn't the tenant either. This person got caught and the DNR is now the proud owner of the deer. The Iowa DNR did their job in this case. I know there are many abuses of this tag. But eliminating these tags is not the answer. Law enforcement is. Check stations would help. Just my opinion.
 

scout

New Member
We have the crop depredation program. Is'nt that the prescribed method of addressing crop damage? As for farming providing food for deer and other wild live, well, that's a given. With or without a deer herd farmers will plant the corn! It's no doubt that the deer benefit greatly from farming. Where is the logic in the free tag?
As for party hunting being a comparative issue, the big difference is other hunters can legally shoot another guys deer when party hunting. I wish it would be changed to require each person fill his tag. It's not, so I don't condem people for what they legally do.
 

150 Class

Moderator
Its legal to get a land owners tag so I will not condem the person who uses it legally. Sure, there is a flaw in the program since many tags are used illegally. The farm depradation program has its flaws as well. Such as the farmer who has crop damage and gets the tags. Then goes out gun hunting in November during the rut and trophy hunts a few big bucks. If he truly wanted to reduce his crop damage, he would go out as early as the tag allowed and shoot mature does. I cannot condem him either, because the law allows him to do it.
 

scout

New Member
Could'nt agree with you more. It's hard to expect everyone to do whats right when so many assume that if an act is legal it is also right. Thats why regulations are so long winded. They need to be, some even more than they are. I think we found two!
 
G

Guest

Guest
We have a DNR Officer on this Conference Board all the time. I am sure he will be responding either on this board or privately by e-mail.

Stay Tuned,

Forumlogo.jpg
 
B

Blind Sow

Guest
BigGuy

Personally I can't fathom a conservation officer not leaping on the information that you discribe. I know that every officer I work with in southwest Iowa would love to give that "hunter" his wish of seeing his name in print though not as he envisioned.

In every instance that I'm aware of (again here in sw IA) the type of claim that individual made of the landowner being tight with the CO is someone enlarging their self-importance to anyone who will listen.

I would still report the information you have to either of the two COs in your area. If you still don't feel comfortable with that, you may e-mail me with the information and I'll do what I can from here.

Doug Clayton
 

scout

New Member
A couple years ago I was told a "big buck" story a few times by a few people. Problem was it never added up to a legal kill in any of the tales. The deer was tagged with a landowner tag. I relayed the tale to our local Warden, who interviewed the persons involved and issued citations as the situation dictated. The Conservation Officer in this area is very professional. I think he is the norm, by far, and not the exception.

[This message has been edited by scout (edited 09-16-2000).]
 

About this Discussion

Top Bottom