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

DNR Layoffs

bkcrrtnps said:
Here's an idea.....restrict resident any sex tags to 2 per year regardless of whether you own ground or not then increase the number of NR bow tags by "x" amount and you get a significant increase in cash flow. Another great idea is to increase those $1 or $2 tags to $10 and increase resident tags as well. I do think keeping things efficient and lean from a business stand point is the thing to do but at some point you can't just make cuts without increasing revenue. Increasing the number of NR archery tags would also boost the local economies significantly.
Click to expand...

Alot of people have great thoughts, ideas and opinions! You have to be careful and think things out when making suggestions. It's a well known fact that increasing nr tags would increase $ for the time being. Then when you think about those nr that would want to buy land here in Iowa because they would be able to hunt......say every or every other yr, how long would it take for residents that don't have a place to hunt anymore to throw in the towel and give it up? Now the state is gonna loose revenue! JMO
 
MarkF said:
As a non resident I'd rather them keep the NR tag quotas the same and double the cost of it, a lot of guys would drop out of the system which would reduce the amount points it would take to draw a tag, but I still believe there's enough serious guys to still sell out thus doubling the income without effecting any of the current management practices.
Click to expand...


That would take the ability of the average hard working guy to hunt Iowa away.....You're not factoring in the economic impact of having more guys archery hunting. That's more hotel rooms, meals, gas, etc. Increasing tag cost only benefits the IDNR not the entire state as well as more hunters!
 
Hardwood11 said:
If it got to that point, I would just sell to a resident, $1000 for a whitetail is absurd. I have kids that want to hunt, and it would be pointless trying to work that out. South Dakota would be my destination, great deer, pheasant and turkey hunting, and I could double or triple my acres. So in a sense that would benefit the residents.
Click to expand...

I agree, he must be someone who has more $$ than the average guy and is only thinking about himself.....oh wait that's how most guys with $$ get where they are.....
 
4DABUCKS said:
Alot of people have great thoughts, ideas and opinions! You have to be careful and think things out when making suggestions. It's a well known fact that increasing nr tags would increase $ for the time being. Then when you think about those nr that would want to buy land here in Iowa because they would be able to hunt......say every or every other yr, how long would it take for residents that don't have a place to hunt anymore to throw in the towel and give it up? Now the state is gonna loose revenue! JMO
Click to expand...


There isn't that much ground for sale that this would be a significant # IMO. Guys that want to buy ground in Iowa are already doing so and they aren't buying 40 acres at $3000/acre. I hear other residents complain about the hunting all of the time or about NR yet these same guys go wound/kill numerous deer with deer drives while trespassing and breaking numerous game laws.
 
Lots of out of staters are willing to pay over $3,000 to hunt a week during the rut in the Midwest with an outfitter. I am just thankful that we have a limited amount of non-resident tags. The price of the tag is pretty reasonable in my mind. If it wasn't there wouldn't be a 3 to 4 year wait to draw a tag.
 
Tough call on how the land market would react if there were more tags, I suppose it would go up, but it is already been jumping like crazy in the past 5 years--without the tags going up.
 
Hardwood11 said:
Tough call on how the land market would react if there were more tags, I suppose it would go up, but it is already been jumping like crazy in the past 5 years--without the tags going up.[/QUOTE

Ask the residents in and @ Pike county Ill how it went for them.
I've been out west for 3 of the last 8 yrs. I knew what it was gonna cost me for an elk tag. It's something I wanted to do and made sacrifices to save $ to do so. There's some with alot of $ out there. I can assure you that they would pay the 5-7k that they sold prime ground for in Ill. With that being said I'm sure there are alot of landowners that would sell to a nr even if they had family/friends that hunted!
Click to expand...
 
As with everything else that is worth protecting. Once you open it up, what's the future hold. Right now it's a good balance, take that away and the demand goes down and the state loses again!
 
My idea is anything but selfish, it's all about protecting the resource and more NR tags would be good for the economy but horrible for deer hunting. Btw I'm not some guy with more $$ than the average guy, I'm 32 years old and work 70 hours a week so I can afforded things I want. Most people spend more than $550 dollars on beer and junk food in a year so I don't wanna here that taking away the ability for the average guy to hunt Iowa crap. If they can't afford an extra 550 then maybe they should be concerned with other things other than an out of state hunting trip.
 
MarkF said:
My idea is anything but selfish, it's all about protecting the resource and more NR tags would be good for the economy but horrible for deer hunting. Btw I'm not some guy with more $$ than the average guy, I'm 32 years old and work 70 hours a week so I can afforded things I want. Most people spend more than $550 dollars on beer and junk food in a year so I don't wanna here that taking away the ability for the average guy to hunt Iowa crap. If they can't afford an extra 550 then maybe they should be concerned with other things other than an out of state hunting trip.
Click to expand...

What works for you, might not work for others. Spending that much on a deer license is crazy. I have had a farm in Iowa since 2002. More deer have died from EHD on my farm than from hunting. Like I said, if it goes to $1000, I'll look to another state.
If you want to stay and hunt at $1000 a crack, go for it, I am just not a believer in that. Iowa is one big EHD and CWD outbreak away from having to reduce license costs. If CWD expands in NE IA--which it will-- that will hurt NR tag demand, and probably decrease land values.
 
Yeah, CWD isnt going to magically disappear. However I think taking after Minnesota with State Park passes, and a few other things I have seen them do would really help generate money here in Iowa. Living 10 minutes from Minnesota, the parks up there are night and day different compared to Iowas and how they are kept. Just one part of the conversation. Truthfully deer tags could be the last place the state looks for money IMO
 
More tags. More guns. More seasons. Etc etc. Let's just STOP. How about we protect what we have? Find other ways to increase revenue without adding to the pressure on the herd. LOTS of options.

Those citing the economic impact of more tags are underestimating the economic impact of all the people that MOVE here because of the protected resources. It seems a LOT of people on this site fall into that category. I personally know a dozen! That's a LIFETIME of taxes, money earned/spent, etc. I personally account for 4 of my family member moving here.

Want to enjoy the hunting of Iowa on a more regular basis... Move or wait in line.
 
Last edited:
IowaBowHunter1983 said:
More tags. More guns. More seasons. Etc etc. Let's just STOP. How about we protect what we have? Find other ways to increase revenue without adding to the pressure on the herd. LOTS of options.

Those citing the economic impact of more tags are underestimating the economic impact of all the people that MOVE here because of the protected resources. It seems a LOT of people on this site fall into that category. I personally know a dozen! That's a LIFETIME of taxes, money earned/spent, etc. I personally account for 4 of my family member moving here.

Want to enjoy the hunting of Iowa on a more regular basis... Move or wait in line.
Click to expand...


IMG_1290.PNG
 
Things are Changing in Iowa at a fast pace I know more residents leasing land than ever. I was involved in a recent farm sale and had 4 offers competing and they were all residents ironically the seller was a Non Res buying a larger farm.
I really don't think Iowa needs to increase the Non Res quota. If I was able to make any change to the current system I would give Non Resident landowners one permanent preference point. This wouldn't cause any great rush to buy land but would allow a slight advantage over someone with no investment in Iowa. I also think the cost of the nonresident tag could be raised without changing the demand much.
 
Maybe this is more about all hunting licenses in general than just deer hunting licenses. I'm not sure if it is access, lack of mentors, or more interest into hand held gadgets than the outdoors. I do know hunting license sales continue to decline and it isn't caused by nonresident hunters, EHD, or CWD up to this point. If we continue on this trend; there will be little interest or money to combat all of these difficulties we face with hunting in Iowa.
 
hans1 said:
Things are Changing in Iowa at a fast pace I know more residents leasing land than ever. I was involved in a recent farm sale and had 4 offers competing and they were all residents ironically the seller was a Non Res buying a larger farm.
I really don't think Iowa needs to increase the Non Res quota. If I was able to make any change to the current system I would give Non Resident landowners one permanent preference point. This wouldn't cause any great rush to buy land but would allow a slight advantage over someone with no investment in Iowa. I also think the cost of the nonresident tag could be raised without changing the demand much.
Click to expand...

I like the idea of +1 preference for landowners. We pay property taxes and income taxes on CRP/cash rent. This would help and I think it would cool down the infighting between R and NR (work together for and manage the herd appropriately.)
 
I like the idea of +1 preference for landowners. We pay property taxes and income taxes on CRP/cash rent. This would help and I think it would cool down the infighting between R and NR (work together for and manage the herd appropriately.)

Hardwood11, Today at 2:39 PM Report

Some things never change. lol

I bet you do like that idea. But, South Dakota sounds like a much better option for you. Why wait?
 
fletch920 said:
I like the idea of +1 preference for landowners. We pay property taxes and income taxes on CRP/cash rent. This would help and I think it would cool down the infighting between R and NR (work together for and manage the herd appropriately.)

Hardwood11, Today at 2:39 PM Report

Some things never change. lol

I bet you do like that idea. But, South Dakota sounds like a much better option for you. Why wait?
Click to expand...

You are back, where were you lurking??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom