Foi 3/2/11

[treerat]

I cannot speak for others, but in Minnesota there is no difference for whitetail deer, Resident or Non-Resident all over the counter (limits, tags, and seasons are the same)

It doesn't really matter if nobody wants to go there to hunt whitetails. Same applies for PA. Apples and oranges if you ask me...

 

[ElkHunter]

hardwood
That's not what I asked.You are now the Ia. res and I'm the Mn. res with land in Ia. Open arms?

 

[Hardwood11]

hardwood
That's not what I asked.You are now the Ia. res and I'm the Mn. res with land in Ia. Open arms?

Elkhunter:

No, not open arms. Limited access. If you go back and read my posts over the years. I have said all along, allow the NR landowner to draw a buck tag every other year. Then in the off year, allow for some landowner doe tags (archery or gun) at a reasonable price...if the county has a high deer population.

This would prevent the landowner rush and it would allow NR to manage the deer herd. It would also not increase outfitting, which I think is a major issue.

Do you think my idea is fair or unfair, I would like to hear your opinion?

 

[fishnhunt]

I am fine with it like it is, however I would like a bow tag every year. I dont think nrlo tags would affect the deer herd negatively, access may change a little for residents, which is happening anyway. My main concern is the outfitting bussines that is fueled by nr tags, this would kill the deer herd and really create a access problem for residents.I grew up in Tx so I have had to pay to hunt my entire life, there is not much quality FREE hunting anywhere in the world. This seems to be the res problem is they expect free hunting and think no nrlo tags will give that to them. If I were a res of iowa I would buy a small farm next to a nrlo big farm and enjoy great hunting since nrlo will only shoot 1 buck and I can shoot 3! But that would mean I would have to PUT UP AND SHUT UP!:thrwrck:

 

[ironwood]

This is all more like passing gas than a wind. None of the efforts have ever had a hope in passing. The only reason to not negotiate is because they have nothing and never have had anything. What they want is bad for the future of our state. It would mean loss in revenue to the DNR as the resident hunter becomes extinct. Reason and good sense has prevailed.

I do like the idea of a tag every other year for NRLO and open public hunting on their off years. That is a good compromise. Everyone wins.

Ironwood: The resident hunter becomes extinct if they increase NR tags, what? Really?

A tag every other year as long as we open our land to public hunting every other year. Ok, sounds good, we should do that in MN too. Every NR Iowa lakeshore owner in Minnesota can use his cabin one year, then the public will get to use it the next. Sounds fair. Maybe we can use his boat too.

Besides Iowa residents are using my land every year, they don't bother to ask (trespassing). Are you or your organizations doing anything about that, no you are concerned more with keeping NR out of the state.

As long as people are being ridiculous in their statements and suggestions why can't I. I do believe these are ridiculous statements I made. But if you want compromise that is as good as it would get. Keep in mind either you want private property rights or you want access to the deer natural resource. Two very different things. If you begin arguing them together as the same then I should be able to as well. You cannot eat you cake and have too.

As long as the arguments are ridiculous I really don’t see why I shouldn’t be. I truly do agree with you all that the every other year thing is a bad idea for any land owner. I really don’t know why it has not been proposed as a bill yet, as all these other bad ideas have. You really have to expect such proposals since the NRLO on slot continues year after year.

NR's get hosed on fees and I wish that could be corrected. I just dislike the piss on Iowa attitudes.

 

[ironwood]

I am fine with it like it is, however I would like a bow tag every year. I dont think nrlo tags would affect the deer herd negatively, access may change a little for residents, which is happening anyway. My main concern is the outfitting bussines that is fueled by nr tags, this would kill the deer herd and really create a access problem for residents.I grew up in Tx so I have had to pay to hunt my entire life, there is not much quality FREE hunting anywhere in the world. This seems to be the res problem is they expect free hunting and think no nrlo tags will give that to them. If I were a res of iowa I would buy a small farm next to a nrlo big farm and enjoy great hunting since nrlo will only shoot 1 buck and I can shoot 3! But that would mean I would have to PUT UP AND SHUT UP!:thrwrck:

And this is not narrow minded? You are selfish, sorry but no other way to say it. You would argue that the little change to benefit me and harm Iowa residence is inconsequential. “It is going to happen anyway” My only goal is to make sure nothing happens to accelerate the process.

 

[ElkHunter]

Hardwood
Anything that limits access or negatively affects the hunting opportunities of the res is not a good thing.Doesn't matter if it's a nrlo, leasing or outfitting.Most of the time they create problems.

Couple ideas to add to your idea.
120 acres
Bought or inherit land before 2000

Personally the system is working.Good hunting and numbers are down enough that even FB can't complain too loudly.

 

[cedar creek]

This is all more like passing gas than a wind. None of the efforts have ever had a hope in passing. The only reason to not negotiate is because they have nothing and never have had anything. What they want is bad for the future of our state. It would mean loss in revenue to the DNR as the resident hunter becomes extinct. Reason and good sense has prevailed.

I do like the idea of a tag every other year for NRLO and open public hunting on their off years. That is a good compromise. Everyone wins.

Ironwood: The resident hunter becomes extinct if they increase NR tags, what? Really?

A tag every other year as long as we open our land to public hunting every other year. Ok, sounds good, we should do that in MN too. Every NR Iowa lakeshore owner in Minnesota can use his cabin one year, then the public will get to use it the next. Sounds fair. Maybe we can use his boat too.

Besides Iowa residents are using my land every year, they don't bother to ask (trespassing). Are you or your organizations doing anything about that, no you are concerned more with keeping NR out of the state.

Are you still whining? I don't understand it. You once said you don't even hunt deer every year in Iowa. What are you trying to do? Raise the price of your property in Iowa? You're still trying to compare your lakeshore cabins to Iowa farmland? Please; i live in northern Iowa, and don't bother to go to Minnesota to fish; much less own anything in MN. If properties are so darn good in Minnesota; why did you buy land in Iowa? Speculation? You knew the regulations when you purchased. Don't like it. Sell your land, and buy your precious lakeshore property. That way everyone wins.

 

[Hardwood11]

CC

Are you still whining? I don't understand it. You once said you don't even hunt deer every year in Iowa. What are you trying to do? Raise the price of your property in Iowa? You're still trying to compare your lakeshore cabins to Iowa farmland? Please; i live in northern Iowa, and don't bother to go to Minnesota to fish; much less own anything in MN. If properties are so darn good in Minnesota; why did you buy land in Iowa? Speculation? You knew the regulations when you purchased. Don't like it. Sell your land, and buy your precious lakeshore property. That way everyone wins.

I have no interest in selling my farms in Iowa or MN, and no interest in taking financial advice from you.

If you do not see any comparisons of Iowa farmland to MN lakeshore, well then, maybe you should pick up a real estate 101 book.

I suppose you are still hunting on Uncle Bill's farm?

 

[ironwood]

Not to be to negative but you think comparing something like fishing in the land of 10,000 lakes to hunting in the land of 6% forested and 1% government owned that Iowa has, is a fair thought! that is the crazy thinking that is keeping me fired up. If Iowa had a fraction of the public resources Minnesota has this topic would be much different.

Also Minnesota is welcome to change their laws. I am sure the dollars at risk for Minnesota are much larger than the dollars our limited resource(deer) can produce. 101? Let's separate private property rights and natural resources. They are not the same. One you own and one is owed by the State in both Iowa and Minn..

 

[DuckDogs]

Hardwood
Anything that limits access or negatively affects the hunting opportunities of the res is not a good thing.Doesn't matter if it's a nrlo, leasing or outfitting.Most of the time they create problems.

Couple ideas to add to your idea.
120 acres
Bought or inherit land before 2000

Personally the system is working.Good hunting and numbers are down enough that even FB can't complain too loudly.

Interesting thought with the bought or inherited before 2000, is that an arbitrary year or some other basis for it? Is that when the NRLO boom kind of started?

 

[Jdubs]

Interesting thought with the bought or inherited before 2000, is that an arbitrary year or some other basis for it? Is that when the NRLO boom kind of started?

Of course it is. Again, a way of keeping NRLO's out of the state. Prior to 2000 the NR land owner boom had not happened. The 120 acre requirement is fine.

 

[Hardwood11]

Resource or property rights?

Not to be to negative but you think comparing something like fishing in the land of 10,000 lakes to hunting in the land of 6% forested and 1% government owned that Iowa has, is a fair thought! that is the crazy thinking that is keeping me fired up. If Iowa had a fraction of the public resources Minnesota has this topic would be much different.

Also Minnesota is welcome to change their laws. I am sure the dollars at risk for Minnesota are much larger than the dollars our limited resource(deer) can produce. 101? Let's separate private property rights and natural resources. They are not the same. One you own and one is owed by the State in both Iowa and Minn..

Ironwood: The comparison is that both lakeshore and farm land are in high demand, expensive, limited supply, even though we have 10,000 lakes, many of those so called lakes are actually ponds or sloughs.

We (MN) have a lot to lose if we limit NR, I would be against that all the way, MN is a tourist state and most in MN welcome NR (even Iowans)..

But, no I realize deer and walleye fishing are not the same, but both are resources. OK seperate them, is this a resource issue in Iowa, or a property rights issue. I don't know, what does everyone else think?

 

[turkeyriver]

It is absolutely a resource issue. NR buying lakefront property in MN doesn't restrict ANYONE from walleye fishing does it? Everyone can still fish the lake like before. Someone can fish right in front of your cabin. Buy a chunk of ground in IA to hunt and access to the deer resource is restricted isn't it? See the difference.

 

[m_kat]

Ironwood: The comparison is that both lakeshore and farm land are in high demand, expensive, limited supply, even though we have 10,000 lakes, many of those so called lakes are actually ponds or sloughs.

I don't know, what does everyone else think?

Its all about the resource.

Imagine MN only had 10 walleye lakes that would be a fair compairison of management abjectives to maintain over all quality.

MN has how many millions of acres of public hunting ground? Last I read Iowa only has about two million TOTAL acres of forested ground and only a small percentage of that is public.

Fot the PA guy still reading this thread, same for your state.


I think we should all start lobbying the WI, MN, and MO governments to push their gun seasons out of the rut and make it shotgun only.

Iowa would be a distant 4th or lower for Bonne and Crockett bucks taken in any given year.

No more outside interests pushing a bunch of bull into our regs.

 

[cedar creek]

I have no interest in selling my farms in Iowa or MN, and no interest in taking financial advice from you.

If you do not see any comparisons of Iowa farmland to MN lakeshore, well then, maybe you should pick up a real estate 101 book.

I suppose you are still hunting on Uncle Bill's farm?

How many celeberties own lakeshore land in Minnesota? I bet not near as many as The Lake Of The Ozarks. With all those lakes up there you would think somebody of importance beside Jessie Ventura would live there. I don't care about real estate 101, but i do care about hunting Uncle Bill's farm. That is what this is all about! I don't see any reason why the residents in the state of Iowa should have to knuckle under to a small percentage of nrlo's who aren't happy with the current hunting regulations. And if you can't see how that will affect hunting Uncle Bill's farm in Iowa; there is no sense in carrying on with this conversation. The good thing is you are a very small minority, and your voice isn't being heard. But the whining is getting excessive.

 

[Hardwood11]

Turkeyriver: I think you are an IBA member. IBA members are on this forum saying, "If NR tags increase, it will be impossible to buy a farm (prices will increase) or get access to farms anymore..." Correct?

You cannot see the same scenario on a lakeshore parcel? If an Iowa resident or Illinois resident buys that piece of lakeshore, Minnesotans cannot buy it or access it and it drives up the overall prices. You are a farmer correct, you don't make the real estate connection? Supply and demand, scarcity of resource?

I'm not talking about fishing in front of it.

mkat: Not sure I know how to respond to that, other than comparing all of Iowa's hunting land to 10 lakes in Minnesota is an exaggeration.

I do agree that if MN, MO and Wisconsin moved the gun season to December that they would pass Iowa as a big buck state in 5-7 years. Wisconsin would be #1 for sure! That is the key (December Gun Season)!

 

[Scott]

If I were king for the day, I would cut the NR tags in half, that would be my compromise. Iowa has no reason to bargain. Its their state and they can leave the laws the way they want. Notice I said leave. I just don't understand why the attitude? Your acting like iowa upped and changed the laws and now the nrlo is screwed. You guys were probably like a alot of non residents were five, ten years ago. Land was cheap here, the odds of drawing a tag were pretty high every year, some realator sold you on all the big bucks here and all of the loop holes to take advantage of them? Probably seemed to good to be true right? Well guess what, it was! Iowa's laws haven't changed, but demand for rec ground has and the secret of the big bucks here is out. If it were me I would just enjoy what I had or sell it and make double what I probably paid for it five years ago. Seems like a win either way.

 

[Hardwood11]

How many celeberties own lakeshore land in Minnesota? I bet not near as many as The Lake Of The Ozarks. With all those lakes up there you would think somebody of importance beside Jessie Ventura would live there. I don't care about real estate 101, but i do care about hunting Uncle Bill's farm. That is what this is all about! I don't see any reason why the residents in the state of Iowa should have to knuckle under to a small percentage of nrlo's who aren't happy with the current hunting regulations. ]

Celebs on MN lakes... Several, not including Jesse Ventura. Dozens just on the Whitefish Chain alone. Many, many millionaires on the lakes near Brainerd and on Minnetonka. Brock Lesnar lives close to my area.

I never said you should knuckle under for anyone, and my point all along is you probably will not be able to hunt Uncle Bill's farm in the future, regardless of tags, leasing or buying is probably the only option.

My voice is not being heard, because I am not calling anyone, simply trying to get you and others to realize that there are many reasons Iowa has great hunting and the #1 reason is not because it limits NR tags. December Gun Season!

It could be better yet, if you limited resident tags, got rid of the January gun season and had some tough rules on trespassing.

 

[SaskGuy]

there is not much quality FREE hunting anywhere in the world.

What a depressing thread.