nemohunter
Member
I keep reading about the poor insurance companies having to pay deer damage claims on automobiles, it's the same argument in MO and many other states right now, trying to keep everyone happy, my question for auto insurance guys is this, If every deer in the Midwest was dead would my insurance rates go down? I'm pretty sure the answer would be no.
hoosierhunter
Active Member
Your right the answer is no. The actuaries would develop formulas re-weighting other areas.
hoosierhunter
Active Member
I know. For some the real money making years of crop insurance were from 2006-2011. It didn't matter if you had record yields, it would still pay out.......
Yes, they would go down and do go down when compaines experience good loss years. Even with a less extreme example of just lowering the deer population, the rates are less likely to increase. Insurance rates must be approved by the state insurance commissioners office and an increase must be warranted based on claims experience and profitability.
nemohunter
Member
I've yet to see rates go down and the herd has been declining for years.
The drought the past few years made it very clear to me that the conditions of the crops along the edge had more to do with trees then deer. It was obvious to me the larger the trees the further into the field the roots took the moisture from underneath. As far as crop insurance I would bet that the past 3 years had to be record claims as for dollar amount. Most crop insurance is revenue based so it pays the most in years with the highest spring prices . I also would agree that deer damage is a real problem for farmers in my area even with the lower deer densities. If I had to choose between the summer depredation tags or the January antler less not sure which I would rather see end first.
I am a broker of ag insurance products and own farm ground. I have also been involved with federal crop insurance. I have never hunted in AK, not sure where you get your information. I have however fished there. I would recommend it to anyone that gets the chance. I have hunted in many states and have never once ridiculed a NR for hunting in Iowa. I have never even discouraged it. Like I said, I have let NR's hunt on my own properties for free. Some were personal friends, some just aquaintances. No way in heck will I give you their names here. That's a childish question on your part.
The only issue I have ever had with NR's are the ones that break laws to hunt here on a resident license or fuss about wanting special privilieges because they bought ground here. And, the only problem I have ever had with that is the fact that countless acres of prime hunting ground would be removed from access to the state of Iowa's resident hunters. Thats it, period. Just because you feel like you should get special rules as a NRLO and I dont agree with that in no way constitues me "busting your balls". It would hurt our state and the hunters that live here. It would not even hurt me, but it would hurt a lot of my friends and neighbors. Most NRLO's that I know agree with me and point to our neighboring states for prime examples of why we should keep our current regulations in place. As you can see, I have no selfish reason or agenda. Only fighting for what I think is right for Iowa and it's residents.
Daver
PMA Member
FWIW, I carry auto insurance on over 30 vehicles and I have had price drops two times in the last 5 or 6 years. This was primarily due to good "loss experience". In other words, we had fewer claims over a long enough period of time that it factored into lower premiums.
Thanks for proving my point. My rates also went down, but I knew the conspiracy theorists would never believe it.
letemgrow
PMA Member
I've seen way more damage to corn fields from coons as opposed to deer. One entire field was rode down one summer on a creek bottom corn field. Treed so many coons there it was ridiculous. It was coons for the most part and either the beavers cleaned up the mess for the coons, or made some of their own on their slides in the creek.
Coons are just baby bears and we all know what damage a bears does
Trees along the field edges are huge nutrients/moisture suckers for crops. I pulled out another acre of "crop" since the trees were stunting the growth so bad on the crops. Turned that into a native wildflower/weed patch and sure enough, doe was raising a fawn there in that acre patch with timbered ditches on both sides....out in the middle of the ag field. Funny how that works.
hoosierhunter
Active Member
Daver
I'm guessing your talking a commercial fleet(not sure what type if business) which is a different animal than personal auto insurance.
FYI personal insurance rates are driven by your credit score and claims history more than anything else.
Your rates decreasing had zero to do with the deer herd. It's about type of business, 3 & 5 year loss ratio and risk management among other things.
Btw, your performance on other lines(work comp, property, general liability) also dramatically affected your rates if the same carrier handles multiple lines.
My reference to real crop damage was based on plots planted for food plots and electric. Fenced. These were 5 strands in 2 rows but it didn't exclude coons. The areas inside the plots were a near perfect stand and did real well. The areas outside were spotty with the outer 20 feet not having any grain at all. I do agree that deer get the most blame when other factors may be at play.
Did you really say that the lack of deer claims had ZERO to do with his rates? I gotta know, were you able to type that without smiling, or did you really convince yourself that it was true? Are deer claims dollars different from other claims dollars? Do they come from a different bottom line? Any chance that the fact that the company paid out millions less in deer claims in those years have any bearing at all in a rate decrease? Take off the deer colored glasses and at least debate with some level of realism.
AIRASSAULT
PMA Member
We need a sub - forum titled 'master debaters'
Daver
PMA Member
You are right, I was referring to a commercial fleet. I can only tell you what my insurance agent told me...that with fewer claims and virtually non-existant loss ratios that translated to lower premiums. FWIW, and you can't make this stuff up...3 of the 5 "moving" accidents that any of my employees were involved in were deer hits. They were in 2008, 09 and 10. This was over about a 5 or 6 year period. The other 2 accidents were 0 fault on our employee, someone hit them after either running a red light or a stop sign.
It is also true, like you refernced, that all of my other policies have had very low loss ratios. So I am sure that played a part too. But it is intriguing that all of the moving accidents that we were responsible were deer hits AND all during the time where the deer herd was still high.
By the way J.W., the fact that you took the time to learn things about me that have never been posted here is not only flattering, but really pretty creepy of you. Borderline stalking. What's next? You gonna show up at my front door and yell BOO! Or, will I just find you sitting in one of my stands next Fall?
You want to take it to a personal level because I don't support your push for NRLO's to get tags? Do I threaten you? What gives J.W., is that just the law enforcement side of you wanting to be in control?
No. Just knew I would find the hypocrit that you are in other public posts you made on other forums. Not very difficult to learn about a simpleton like yourself. Also I didn't volunteer my profession you volunteered yours as in ag and insurance. Take it how you wish or don't post on public forums, D.F. If you want to make this personal you picked the right person. Everything posted came from you or other hunting sites you posted on.
Last edited:
Not one thing hypocritical about who or what I am. I hunt other states. I encourage others to come hunt here. I will not ever support taking away resources form our residents. Period. So where is the hypocrisy?