magnus
PMA Member
JNR: Answer -- Yes. But, to clarify, my hope was that IA would improve the conditions underwhich nonresident landowners can obtain deer tags in the future. Nothing ever stays the same forever. It was a gamble on my part that someday the legislature will come around and recognize the reasonableness of what the NRLOs are wanting.
ElkHunter
Life Member
About 3 years ago when they took away antlerless archery tags.
I thought we were talking about guaranteed any sex tag, and you bring up the nr doe archery tag, the most abused tag ever according to the CO's.
It's a little tough to be sympathetic to individuals who purchased land knowing full well what the law was. Then to have them come back later and cry,"What an outrage this is and so completely unfair"
What's unfair is the fact you want us to change our rules to suit you. When I go to another state I go by their rules, for 11 yrs I applied for an Az elk tag. After giving several hundred dollars to state for preference points I quit applying. I didn't jump up on a soapbox and shout about unfair it was, I moved on to a different state to elk hunt.
There are states all around Ia. that offer better opportunities than this state, you made the decision to buy in Iowa.Either abide by the rules or sell.
Many will call me a jerk and an a**hole, but this has been a yearly uproar for a long long long time. After awhile you get tired of arguing about it.
I thought we were talking about guaranteed any sex tag, and you bring up the nr doe archery tag, the most abused tag ever according to the CO's.
It's a little tough to be sympathetic to individuals who purchased land knowing full well what the law was. Then to have them come back later and cry,"What an outrage this is and so completely unfair"
What's unfair is the fact you want us to change our rules to suit you. When I go to another state I go by their rules, for 11 yrs I applied for an Az elk tag. After giving several hundred dollars to state for preference points I quit applying. I didn't jump up on a soapbox and shout about unfair it was, I moved on to a different state to elk hunt.
There are states all around Ia. that offer better opportunities than this state, you made the decision to buy in Iowa.Either abide by the rules or sell.
Many will call me a jerk and an a**hole, but this has been a yearly uproar for a long long long time. After awhile you get tired of arguing about it.
Liv4Rut
Active Member
The way I see it, if you were willing to buy ground knowing full well you couldn't hunt it every year, how many are just sitting there waiting until they can hunt it every year? Without doubt non-residents would start buying ground. Honestly, I don't think I could buy ground in a state I couldn't hunt every year. I would buy where I could hunt ever year. There is just as good as hunting as Iowa elsewhere.
I can understand wanting to hunt your own ground, I don't understand trying to change the law after you buy your own ground.
I can understand wanting to hunt your own ground, I don't understand trying to change the law after you buy your own ground.
cedar creek
Banned
How many of these NR landowners belong to an agricultural site? If the NR landowner is contributing to the state of Iowa; wouldn't he be more concerned about the crops and livestock; than the deer on his land. I guess what i'm asking is there any of you who actually farm your land? Or do you receive goverment subsidies, and rent out some cropland? And if so; how does that benifit those of us who live in Iowa? I find this whole arguement ridiculous! If your not getting the benifits off the land you own in Iowa; sell it! Move on, and let someone else more appreciative own, and possibly farm the land.
risto2351
Well-Known Member
SaskGuy
Active Member
From an outsider looking in I think that is crazy too. In all honesty, as an outsider looking in again, I do see a point in regards to the argument b/w NRLO's looking for one tag as opposed to a residents 3. Then again I know how fragile everything is there in regards to how quickly the bulk of the state could be swallowed up if the bill passes. If I was personally caught in the middle of this situation I'd rather give up one or two of the three available tags before allowing the bill to pass. But then again I've always been content to reside and hunt where one either sex tag is all you get and owning 10,000 acres doesn't get you a free tag.
ElkHunter
Life Member
QUOTE]JNR: Answer -- Yes. But, to clarify, my hope was that IA would improve the conditions underwhich nonresident landowners can obtain deer tags in the future. Nothing ever stays the same forever. It was a gamble on my part that someday the legislature will come around and recognize the reasonableness of what the NRLOs are wanting.[[/QUOTE]
Magnus
Lets put the shoe on the other foot,you are the Ia. Res and I'm the NRLO. Are you going to tell other Ia. res that opening this up is a good idea. BE HONEST NOW.
Magnus
Lets put the shoe on the other foot,you are the Ia. Res and I'm the NRLO. Are you going to tell other Ia. res that opening this up is a good idea. BE HONEST NOW.
How about a little more food for thought. If the IDNR reaches their goal of 170,000 deer and our harvest drops off to 75 or 80,000 deer like in the late 1980s or early 1990s, will there be ANY NR deer licenses? I have been searching and can't come up with the year the first NR licenses were issued or how many, but I believe it was about then, so does any one know for sure? All the same arguments apply. If the harvest drops that far and the IDNR continues to sell from 300,000 to 400,00 licenses to residents, do we need to sell any NR licenses at all and if the NRLOs can no longer get licenses will they sell the land that they own or hold onto it with hopes that someone will change the laws again to allow only NR hunters at the expense of the lowly resident hunters? Will there even be a Friends of Iowa? What would happen to land prices if the 20 percent of Iowa land that is owned by NR hits the market? If the deer population is reduced to near or even below the level at which Iowa first allowed NR licenses, other than revenue, why would we need them when we didn't need them before? 
Here are my opinions on this issue for what it’s worth. From reading the other emotionally charged posts on this subject I know I am in the small minority and will most likely get slammed for saying this, but I hope that those of you that don’t agree with me can read this with an open mind & try to see where I’m coming from. At the very least, we’re all here because we love deer and deer hunting, so even if some don’t see my point, maybe we can agree to disagree.
I live in NW Iowa (Plymouth County). NW Iowa arguably has some of the best farm ground in the state, and some who live in northwestern Cherokee, Sioux & O’Brien Counties would argue it’s among the best in the nation. Admittedly, our deer hunting isn’t the caliber that it is in Southern Iowa, but I think those of you who do live in Southern Iowa would say the same things about your deer ground that those in NW Iowa are say about their farm ground.
Obviously there are no stipulations on who can or cannot buy farm ground when it comes up for sale. Nor are there stipulations on who can or cannot farm it, rent it or make money in any other way off of that ground. Residents & NR alike have equal opportunities to purchase the ground & do with it what they wish.
Land prices are at or near an all-time high in this part of the state. Within the past 2 months there have been 2 land sales within 10 miles of where I live and I am familiar with 2 in Sioux County in the same time period. The price per acre of these sales ranged from $6000-$7500/acre. None of the buyers were from out of the county where the land was sold, let alone from out of state. All of the 2nd place bidders were from within the county as well. In fact, while I’m obviously not familiar with every single land sale in NW Iowa, I haven’t heard of one single out of state buyer purchasing land that’s come up for sale and there have been quite a few land sales in the past few years that I’ve heard who the buyer was. This is at a time when there is potentially a large profit to be made from farming and if the buyer didn’t want to farm the ground themselves they can get $300-400 per acre cash rent at will.
My point here is that while there will no doubt be some out of state people coming here to buy land if something like this ever passes, I really don’t think there will be the huge ‘land rush’ from out of state buyers like some of you are predicting.
Des Moines has plenty of wealthy businessmen who are also sportsman and would, no doubt, love a place of their own to shoot a trophy deer a few hours drive away. Most would agree that the greater DM area has the greatest number of wealthy people in the state living in or around it. Why haven’t they already bought up all the ground that all the wealthy out of state hunters are going to be buying up if this passes? One obvious answer is that Iowa has a finite amount of this type of ground available and a huge share of it just isn’t available to purchase. I’m sure that there have been some of the wealthy city folk from Des Moines that have purchased some prime hunting ground at an inflated rate and by doing so have taken it away from someone else. Does it suck any less that someone who has the means to purchase the type of ground we all dream of is a resident of Iowa? What if the piece of ground that you’ve hunted for years is sold to a person down the road who doesn’t have a ton of money but has scrimped & saved for years & years to be able to purchase the land and now is telling you that you can’t hunt it because he’s saving it for himself. Does that make it hurt less? Either way, you still need to find a new place to hunt.
My point here is that, at least for the time being, we live in a Capitalist society. I know full well what it’s like to be one of the ‘have nots’, but that doesn’t mean that we should be bitter towards the ‘haves’ (as hard as that is at times). As bad as it sucks at times, that’s just the way Capitalism works and we have to take the bad along with the good.
I realize that the bill is as good as dead, but someone has said that giving NRLO’s tags would take away from other NR’s being able to hunt. If something like this would pass, why would they take the NRLO tags away from the regular NR license quota? The net amount of landowner tags would stay about the same, some would just go to residents, some would go to NR’s. To take them from the regular NR quota makes no sense to me, and I see no reason what so ever why anyone would know any different as far as the number of licenses issued is concerned.
The final point I’d like to make is, we’re not talking about giving NRLO’s a statewide any sex deer tag. We’re talking guaranteeing them tag to shoot a deer from the ground they own, pay taxes on and have most likely provided the food & habitat that put that very deer there in the first place. (Personally, I think they should be guaranteed a tag, but have to actually purchase the tag as well as an out of state hunting license, but that’s another issue all together). Chances are, that landowner has done more in terms of providing habitat and supporting the deer population than the vast majority of hunters who hunt off of private ground they don’t own (notice I said private ground; public ground is another issue again). I’m not saying that some people who hunt on ground they don’t own don’t help plant windbreaks, food plots, etc. And there is a very good chance that a lot of people on this site do that since it’s obvious that there are a lot of deer fanatics here who are totally committed to the sport & to supporting/creating habitat. But hopefully you realize that the dedication & devotion that most of you who are reading this have towards deer hunting isn’t reflected by the ‘average’ hunter, who is in the huge majority. The average hunter might do some scouting before the season, might not. He probably takes a few practice shots before the season opens, goes out on opening day to a piece of ground someone he knows lets him hunt or to a piece his buddy got him on, shoots his deer & goes back to being Joe The Working Man until next season. He might give the landowner a gift certificate to Applebee’s or a backstrap, but he sure as heck isn’t planting windbreaks or food plots. What has he actually done that directly put that deer in his freezer? Pay taxes, support the local economy? Both would be indirect things. In no way, shape or form am I saying that Average Iowan Joe doesn’t deserve to get a deer tag; he’s a resident of the state and that’s one of the great things we enjoy by being lucky enough to be able to live in such a great state. What I’m saying is that I think the person who provided the habitat for the deer they are going to be shooting off of that very piece of ground definitely does.
Again, I know I’m in the minority here, and will no doubt be called names, ridiculed & shunned, but hopefully some can see the points I’m trying to make.
I live in NW Iowa (Plymouth County). NW Iowa arguably has some of the best farm ground in the state, and some who live in northwestern Cherokee, Sioux & O’Brien Counties would argue it’s among the best in the nation. Admittedly, our deer hunting isn’t the caliber that it is in Southern Iowa, but I think those of you who do live in Southern Iowa would say the same things about your deer ground that those in NW Iowa are say about their farm ground.
Obviously there are no stipulations on who can or cannot buy farm ground when it comes up for sale. Nor are there stipulations on who can or cannot farm it, rent it or make money in any other way off of that ground. Residents & NR alike have equal opportunities to purchase the ground & do with it what they wish.
Land prices are at or near an all-time high in this part of the state. Within the past 2 months there have been 2 land sales within 10 miles of where I live and I am familiar with 2 in Sioux County in the same time period. The price per acre of these sales ranged from $6000-$7500/acre. None of the buyers were from out of the county where the land was sold, let alone from out of state. All of the 2nd place bidders were from within the county as well. In fact, while I’m obviously not familiar with every single land sale in NW Iowa, I haven’t heard of one single out of state buyer purchasing land that’s come up for sale and there have been quite a few land sales in the past few years that I’ve heard who the buyer was. This is at a time when there is potentially a large profit to be made from farming and if the buyer didn’t want to farm the ground themselves they can get $300-400 per acre cash rent at will.
My point here is that while there will no doubt be some out of state people coming here to buy land if something like this ever passes, I really don’t think there will be the huge ‘land rush’ from out of state buyers like some of you are predicting.
Des Moines has plenty of wealthy businessmen who are also sportsman and would, no doubt, love a place of their own to shoot a trophy deer a few hours drive away. Most would agree that the greater DM area has the greatest number of wealthy people in the state living in or around it. Why haven’t they already bought up all the ground that all the wealthy out of state hunters are going to be buying up if this passes? One obvious answer is that Iowa has a finite amount of this type of ground available and a huge share of it just isn’t available to purchase. I’m sure that there have been some of the wealthy city folk from Des Moines that have purchased some prime hunting ground at an inflated rate and by doing so have taken it away from someone else. Does it suck any less that someone who has the means to purchase the type of ground we all dream of is a resident of Iowa? What if the piece of ground that you’ve hunted for years is sold to a person down the road who doesn’t have a ton of money but has scrimped & saved for years & years to be able to purchase the land and now is telling you that you can’t hunt it because he’s saving it for himself. Does that make it hurt less? Either way, you still need to find a new place to hunt.
My point here is that, at least for the time being, we live in a Capitalist society. I know full well what it’s like to be one of the ‘have nots’, but that doesn’t mean that we should be bitter towards the ‘haves’ (as hard as that is at times). As bad as it sucks at times, that’s just the way Capitalism works and we have to take the bad along with the good.
I realize that the bill is as good as dead, but someone has said that giving NRLO’s tags would take away from other NR’s being able to hunt. If something like this would pass, why would they take the NRLO tags away from the regular NR license quota? The net amount of landowner tags would stay about the same, some would just go to residents, some would go to NR’s. To take them from the regular NR quota makes no sense to me, and I see no reason what so ever why anyone would know any different as far as the number of licenses issued is concerned.
The final point I’d like to make is, we’re not talking about giving NRLO’s a statewide any sex deer tag. We’re talking guaranteeing them tag to shoot a deer from the ground they own, pay taxes on and have most likely provided the food & habitat that put that very deer there in the first place. (Personally, I think they should be guaranteed a tag, but have to actually purchase the tag as well as an out of state hunting license, but that’s another issue all together). Chances are, that landowner has done more in terms of providing habitat and supporting the deer population than the vast majority of hunters who hunt off of private ground they don’t own (notice I said private ground; public ground is another issue again). I’m not saying that some people who hunt on ground they don’t own don’t help plant windbreaks, food plots, etc. And there is a very good chance that a lot of people on this site do that since it’s obvious that there are a lot of deer fanatics here who are totally committed to the sport & to supporting/creating habitat. But hopefully you realize that the dedication & devotion that most of you who are reading this have towards deer hunting isn’t reflected by the ‘average’ hunter, who is in the huge majority. The average hunter might do some scouting before the season, might not. He probably takes a few practice shots before the season opens, goes out on opening day to a piece of ground someone he knows lets him hunt or to a piece his buddy got him on, shoots his deer & goes back to being Joe The Working Man until next season. He might give the landowner a gift certificate to Applebee’s or a backstrap, but he sure as heck isn’t planting windbreaks or food plots. What has he actually done that directly put that deer in his freezer? Pay taxes, support the local economy? Both would be indirect things. In no way, shape or form am I saying that Average Iowan Joe doesn’t deserve to get a deer tag; he’s a resident of the state and that’s one of the great things we enjoy by being lucky enough to be able to live in such a great state. What I’m saying is that I think the person who provided the habitat for the deer they are going to be shooting off of that very piece of ground definitely does.
Again, I know I’m in the minority here, and will no doubt be called names, ridiculed & shunned, but hopefully some can see the points I’m trying to make.
You make some good points Dave but you need to realize that the non-residents won't be buying land in your area for 2 reasons.One reason is you mentioned $6,000-$7,000 per acre.No one will pay that for recreational land.The second reason is that I looked up the harvest report for the 4 counties you mentioned.Less than 2000 total deer reported total for all 4 combined.No one will pay those prices for land when the deer herd is as low there as I assume it is.
The ONLY people the will benifit from the bill being passed will be the non-resident landowner.How many thousands of non-residents would be looking to buy 10 or 20 acres just to be guarenteed a tag every year.It would be the worst thing to happen since the day they allowed non-residents to hunt deer.Like others I have tried to find that year but can't seem to come up with it but I can say that all the problems started then.Non residents bought thousands and thousands of acres of land...deer don't get taken off that land like they had been.The deer heard grew to the point where the DNR had to change the laws and add seasons like the Thanksgiving weekend fiasco and the late rifle antlerless (shed buck) season.If they really want to get the heard back to the way it was in the early 90's they should stop the antlerless seasons.get rid of non-resident hunting and the residents could take care of the deer herd the way they were back then.Maybe we would be able to find places to hunt again.IF this bill EVER passes the residents that aren't rich enough to own land will be down to hunting public gound ONLY.
The ONLY people the will benifit from the bill being passed will be the non-resident landowner.How many thousands of non-residents would be looking to buy 10 or 20 acres just to be guarenteed a tag every year.It would be the worst thing to happen since the day they allowed non-residents to hunt deer.Like others I have tried to find that year but can't seem to come up with it but I can say that all the problems started then.Non residents bought thousands and thousands of acres of land...deer don't get taken off that land like they had been.The deer heard grew to the point where the DNR had to change the laws and add seasons like the Thanksgiving weekend fiasco and the late rifle antlerless (shed buck) season.If they really want to get the heard back to the way it was in the early 90's they should stop the antlerless seasons.get rid of non-resident hunting and the residents could take care of the deer herd the way they were back then.Maybe we would be able to find places to hunt again.IF this bill EVER passes the residents that aren't rich enough to own land will be down to hunting public gound ONLY.
archery95-
I realize that few if any people aren't going to be purchasing recreational land in NW Iowa. My point was that much like having great deer hunting in southern Iowa, NW Iowa has great farmland, which has led to high prices, but it's not out of state people who are buying the land, even though they have the opportunity to. And this is land that people are making a living and money off of. I may not be explaining it very well, but hopefully you see my point.
As far as non-residents lining up to buy 10-20 acres of land they could hunt on....heck, I think there are 1000's of residents who would love to buy 10-20 acres of land in southern Iowa, whether they could get a landowner tag or if they had to use their paid tag....I know I would and so would all of my hunting buddies! Like I said, the reason this isn't already happening is there is a finite amount of ground available that are going to hold trophy deer and it's just not a matter of picking the spot you want to hunt & writing a check; this type of land just isn't readily available and I don't think that allowing a NR to get a guaranteed tag is going to make as much difference as some people think, especially in the long run. Again, JMHO.
I realize that few if any people aren't going to be purchasing recreational land in NW Iowa. My point was that much like having great deer hunting in southern Iowa, NW Iowa has great farmland, which has led to high prices, but it's not out of state people who are buying the land, even though they have the opportunity to. And this is land that people are making a living and money off of. I may not be explaining it very well, but hopefully you see my point.
As far as non-residents lining up to buy 10-20 acres of land they could hunt on....heck, I think there are 1000's of residents who would love to buy 10-20 acres of land in southern Iowa, whether they could get a landowner tag or if they had to use their paid tag....I know I would and so would all of my hunting buddies! Like I said, the reason this isn't already happening is there is a finite amount of ground available that are going to hold trophy deer and it's just not a matter of picking the spot you want to hunt & writing a check; this type of land just isn't readily available and I don't think that allowing a NR to get a guaranteed tag is going to make as much difference as some people think, especially in the long run. Again, JMHO.
SaskGuy...I sure "being enough" in Iowa is a lot different than being enough in Saskatchewan.A couple examples.One of the places I hunt is a 17 acre piece of timber that has crop land on 3 sides around it.There aren't many deer that actually live in it but during the rut its like an interstate with bucks traveling up and down the creek searching for does.Its not for sale at a reasonable price but I am sure some rich doctor or lawyer would pay way more than it is worth to a normal income guy than its worth if he was guaranteed an any-sex tag every year.
Example #2 There is a lake project in Appanoose county that is probably 1000 acres that is being sold off in 10,20 and 30 acres lots.A lot of it is lakefront land that people are buying to put a house and a boat dock on to use the lake but also a lot of it is being bought in 20 and 30 acre lots for deer hunting.And the hunting there is fantastic.I could see all of that being grabbed up by non-residents if something carzy happens.The association of the lake project doesn't even allow you to make money off your plot so I am not sure how they get landowner tags but I know for a fact they do.
Sooo.....20 acres is enough IMO.
Another thing I don't quite understand is the 6000 cap.If the law would happen to go through someday and we had over 6000 NRLOs...would the cap be raised or would the 6000 be first come first serve?I just think the domino effect would cause more problems than it is worth and I seriously hope it NEVER passes.
Example #2 There is a lake project in Appanoose county that is probably 1000 acres that is being sold off in 10,20 and 30 acres lots.A lot of it is lakefront land that people are buying to put a house and a boat dock on to use the lake but also a lot of it is being bought in 20 and 30 acre lots for deer hunting.And the hunting there is fantastic.I could see all of that being grabbed up by non-residents if something carzy happens.The association of the lake project doesn't even allow you to make money off your plot so I am not sure how they get landowner tags but I know for a fact they do.
Sooo.....20 acres is enough IMO.
Another thing I don't quite understand is the 6000 cap.If the law would happen to go through someday and we had over 6000 NRLOs...would the cap be raised or would the 6000 be first come first serve?I just think the domino effect would cause more problems than it is worth and I seriously hope it NEVER passes.
Iowa Dave, I have no intentions of slamming you or calling you names, but perhaps I can point out a couple of faults in your logic.
The vast majority of land that we are talking about is not in the NW part of Iowa, but rather in the SE or NE or just the South parts. These NR hunters aren't buying premium farm ground, that sells for $7,000.00 an acre, that is great for farming and might hold a few deer. They are buying the hills and ditches and some timber or brush, that is great for deer and might have a few acres that can be farmed that is $2,000.00 an acre. Of course the land in your area is being purchased by neighbors and locals with the intentions of farming it for profit. The land down here in the SE is not being purchased by these NR for the purpose of farming it for profit. Virtually all of these NR holdings are in either CRP programs or in the Forest Reserve program( no property tax or very little), so there is no real economic boost for the area economy. To perhaps prove my point, I just looked at a local shopper type paper and found an ad for Whitetail Trophy Properties Real Estate. The ad says they specialize in hunting properties and has 86 listings in this single ad. The listings range from 23 acres in Davis county that is "all timber brush and creek" for $67,500.00 to 67 acres in Warren co ""nearly all timber great hunting near Des Moines". There is not a single listing for any where in the NW of Iowa. If this bill were to have passed how many of these 86 listings do you thing would go to NR hunters? This company is licensed in Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, strangely enough almost all of the top whitetail hunting states So who do you think they are marketing to? Certainly not farmers in NW Iowa.
The next thing is the bill as proposed said that the guaranteed landowner tags would come out of the current NR quota of licenses. None of us said that. I would feel safe saying that if this bill passed now that by the fall hunting season there would be very close to 6000 NRLO tags if not more that would eat up that quota. Then because it is law, if the NRLO appellations exceeded that, then the quota number would have to be raised. This is just part of the problem. Now what happens when these NRLOs and together like FOI and say well we got those laws changed so now how about we get family members also guarantied licenses and we need to get rid of that stupid 35 percent archery tags regulation because most of really want to bow hunt or 3 months or so? I think you see where I am going with this.
Maybe all this will have little effect on Average Joe the hunter, but I just can't help but believe that it will. It is becoming harder and harder to find places to hunt and if even half of the listings in the Whitetail ad are sold to NRs that will represent thousands of acres that will for sure be off limits to Average Joe, because not many if any NRLOs are going to allow others to hunt their land when they can get tags every year. With our shrinking deer herd and current low success ratios this will either drive Average Joe to public land, which there is too little of and where deer populations are already very low, or since he is not quite as dedicated as most of us he will just drop out. So we have lost another hunter and voice and vote against the anti-hunting menace. Certainly Average Joe can loose hunting rights because another resident purchased the land but I have to believe that he would still have a better chance with resident owned land than if much of the county were owned by NRs.
I hope you don't feel blasted and that we all respect and understand that there different view points on this subject based solely on our point of perspective, and mine is in SE Iowa where NRs seem to concentrate, and that never will we all agree. However I do think there is a lot of merit in the fact that the vast majority of the passionate hunters both here and on other boards do agree that this type of legislation would be very bad for us. :way:
PS. I hope I also didn't offend anyone who might be associated with Whitetail Trophy Properties. I was just using them as anexample.
The vast majority of land that we are talking about is not in the NW part of Iowa, but rather in the SE or NE or just the South parts. These NR hunters aren't buying premium farm ground, that sells for $7,000.00 an acre, that is great for farming and might hold a few deer. They are buying the hills and ditches and some timber or brush, that is great for deer and might have a few acres that can be farmed that is $2,000.00 an acre. Of course the land in your area is being purchased by neighbors and locals with the intentions of farming it for profit. The land down here in the SE is not being purchased by these NR for the purpose of farming it for profit. Virtually all of these NR holdings are in either CRP programs or in the Forest Reserve program( no property tax or very little), so there is no real economic boost for the area economy. To perhaps prove my point, I just looked at a local shopper type paper and found an ad for Whitetail Trophy Properties Real Estate. The ad says they specialize in hunting properties and has 86 listings in this single ad. The listings range from 23 acres in Davis county that is "all timber brush and creek" for $67,500.00 to 67 acres in Warren co ""nearly all timber great hunting near Des Moines". There is not a single listing for any where in the NW of Iowa. If this bill were to have passed how many of these 86 listings do you thing would go to NR hunters? This company is licensed in Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, strangely enough almost all of the top whitetail hunting states So who do you think they are marketing to? Certainly not farmers in NW Iowa.
The next thing is the bill as proposed said that the guaranteed landowner tags would come out of the current NR quota of licenses. None of us said that. I would feel safe saying that if this bill passed now that by the fall hunting season there would be very close to 6000 NRLO tags if not more that would eat up that quota. Then because it is law, if the NRLO appellations exceeded that, then the quota number would have to be raised. This is just part of the problem. Now what happens when these NRLOs and together like FOI and say well we got those laws changed so now how about we get family members also guarantied licenses and we need to get rid of that stupid 35 percent archery tags regulation because most of really want to bow hunt or 3 months or so? I think you see where I am going with this.
Maybe all this will have little effect on Average Joe the hunter, but I just can't help but believe that it will. It is becoming harder and harder to find places to hunt and if even half of the listings in the Whitetail ad are sold to NRs that will represent thousands of acres that will for sure be off limits to Average Joe, because not many if any NRLOs are going to allow others to hunt their land when they can get tags every year. With our shrinking deer herd and current low success ratios this will either drive Average Joe to public land, which there is too little of and where deer populations are already very low, or since he is not quite as dedicated as most of us he will just drop out. So we have lost another hunter and voice and vote against the anti-hunting menace. Certainly Average Joe can loose hunting rights because another resident purchased the land but I have to believe that he would still have a better chance with resident owned land than if much of the county were owned by NRs.
I hope you don't feel blasted and that we all respect and understand that there different view points on this subject based solely on our point of perspective, and mine is in SE Iowa where NRs seem to concentrate, and that never will we all agree. However I do think there is a lot of merit in the fact that the vast majority of the passionate hunters both here and on other boards do agree that this type of legislation would be very bad for us. :way:
PS. I hope I also didn't offend anyone who might be associated with Whitetail Trophy Properties. I was just using them as anexample.
150 Class
Well-Known Member
This is a problem and concern. No bashing from me either but where you are not concerned, I am. I see floodgates getting opened. I see changes already discussed over and over and some that we probably have not thought of or could not predict. I am glad this bill is done, for now.
Hardwood11
It is going to be a good fall!
IowaDave: I enjoyed reading your post and I feel that you made some very good points!
Liv4Rut
Active Member
Iowa Dave: No hard feelings, but I feel farming and deer hunting are two things you really can't compare at all. If a nonresident buys farm ground in NW iowa, is he buying it as an investment or to farm it himself? I highly doubt anyone in their right mind would relocate all of their equipment or buy new equipment and pay $6000 - $7000 an acre just to farm it themselves. What you would have is an investor that purchased the ground to easily get the $300- $400 cash rent an acre for it. If a true Farmer bought it, he would farm it. Your just not going to see that from non residents.
Now if a non resident deer hunter buys a farm down in southern Iowa for $1500 an acre and can hunt it every year, he is gonna. Is it an investment? Yes, but that is not the sole purpose of buying the ground. This is a much different type of purchase compared to someone in NW Iowa. You would not see a non resident farmer buy a 40 acre piece in NW Iowa just to farm it, it makes no sense at all to do this.
You will see non resident deer hunters by 40 acre pieces to hunt every year. This is occurring right now and they can't even hunt it every year for bucks unless they go through the shotgun loop hole.
Now lets put the a spin on this to put it into perspective of whats out there. Would a non resident farmer / investor buy ground in NW Iowa if they knew they could only receive the profits from that farm every other year to possibly every three years? Do you think they would be more willing to purchase the farm once they could receive the profits each year? You know as well as I do, they would but I don't think you will ever see actual farmers buying farm ground to farm it. Only investors.
I just don't think you can compare farming to deer hunting though at all. By the way, there is hundreds of pieces for sale all over Iowa right now. I look at deer hunting properties a few nights a week dreaming and there is literally thousands and thousands of acres available. You can buy ground fairly cheap
The only thing holding them back from purchasing is they can't get their deer tag every year. I know folks that will jump on this right now if it were to ever pass.
I mean if you or I had the money to buy ground anywhere we would like, lets say 100 acres of prime ground that we know we can kill a booner on every year will either one of us buy that ground if we could only hunt it every other year to three years? I can't speak for you, but I surely wouldn't.
Now if I had the 200K laying around and I can hunt it every year, I would buy tomorrow. That's just me though.
Now if a non resident deer hunter buys a farm down in southern Iowa for $1500 an acre and can hunt it every year, he is gonna. Is it an investment? Yes, but that is not the sole purpose of buying the ground. This is a much different type of purchase compared to someone in NW Iowa. You would not see a non resident farmer buy a 40 acre piece in NW Iowa just to farm it, it makes no sense at all to do this.
You will see non resident deer hunters by 40 acre pieces to hunt every year. This is occurring right now and they can't even hunt it every year for bucks unless they go through the shotgun loop hole.
Now lets put the a spin on this to put it into perspective of whats out there. Would a non resident farmer / investor buy ground in NW Iowa if they knew they could only receive the profits from that farm every other year to possibly every three years? Do you think they would be more willing to purchase the farm once they could receive the profits each year? You know as well as I do, they would but I don't think you will ever see actual farmers buying farm ground to farm it. Only investors.
I just don't think you can compare farming to deer hunting though at all. By the way, there is hundreds of pieces for sale all over Iowa right now. I look at deer hunting properties a few nights a week dreaming and there is literally thousands and thousands of acres available. You can buy ground fairly cheap
The only thing holding them back from purchasing is they can't get their deer tag every year. I know folks that will jump on this right now if it were to ever pass.
I mean if you or I had the money to buy ground anywhere we would like, lets say 100 acres of prime ground that we know we can kill a booner on every year will either one of us buy that ground if we could only hunt it every other year to three years? I can't speak for you, but I surely wouldn't.
Now if I had the 200K laying around and I can hunt it every year, I would buy tomorrow. That's just me though.
Last edited: