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

The Future of Iowa Hunting - Rumors Flying

S

String_Gun_Shooter

New Member
I have been hearing some rumors lately regarding what the State of Iowa is considering for non-resident hunters.

First of all it started here on iowawhitetail.com. I was not aware that now Governor elect Branstad is going to increase the number of NR tags by at least 2,000. The only reason is to generate more revenue for the State. Thanks to a few of you that were paying attention to the details, you made us aware of his plans.

Iowa is a unique State due to it's draw system. I'm afraid that this is the first of many steps to allow licenses to be purchased over-the-counter. If this happens, it will destroy the prestige that Iowa is known for.

Here are the following rumors that I am hearing from several outdoorsmen from here in Iowa as well as surrounding States.

1) Any NR that owns land here in Iowa would be able to purchase a license and not be required to apply.
- Current NR landowners are working with lobbiests to make this happen.

2) The maximum any hunter NR hunter would have to wait to be drawn would be 2 years. Basically they would get a license every other year.

3) NR's can purchase a Late Season Muzzleloader license over-the counter.

I feel that if we want to protect the future of hunting, we need to approach our representatives and have them hear us too.

For you NR hunters reading this, I am not opposed to having you here in the State, just not all at once. I have several friends that apply each year and want the opportunity to hunt as well. 6 years ago I was one of you. I was frustrated that I did not get drawn for a tag so I did something about it. I decided to move my family so I could have the opportunity to hunt.

Please give me your feedback. In the end I want this to be a positive for all. I am willing to get together with some of you to come up with some solutuins that we can present to the DNR and our legislators to help generate revenue as well as keep the draw system in place.

Thanks for your support!
 
Can't say that i am happy to see any of them happen......


I think its fine just the way that it is....but im not a NR
 
I dont understand...If they want to increase income why dont they just up the price of the NR tag. I know damn well they would still pay it. Hell if it came down to it I would pay an extra dollar on all my resident tags if it ment they would not raise the number of NR tags. Their are more options they can look at they just dont want to look at them.
 
As a NR I think that the allotment is a tad bit stingy but I can live with it. The price of the current NR tags are as high as they need to go. The joke of the current system is the doe tags for NR shotgun hunters ($355). I hunt a farm that all the landowner asks is that we shoot does every year. Well when we only get bow tags every three to 4 years it can get a little expensive ($500 total trip) in off years just to come down to take care of his herd problems. We dont party hunt with anyone so we come down strictly to shoot our 3 does and leave which usually only take a few hours in past years. I can see paying the hunting license and maybe $25 for each antlerless tag but what they now charge is gouging plain and simple.

If this change takes effect you had better hold tight to every piece of ground that you can hunt because the money will enter the game and thats when people get shut out. The quality of the herd will not suffer at all and will probably get better because people from out of state donot come to iowa to shoot basket rack 1 1/2 olds.
 
NR

A lot of it is rumors I am sure, some of the proposed items may pass who knows, I'll live with current rules as a NR. I've said all along every other year tag for NR landowners, but we'll see I am sure 2,000 extra tags if passed could still mean a 3 year wait.
 
I disagree with the statement that NR don't come here to shoot 1 1/2 old bucks.I have a friend thats a taxidermist and just the other day he had 2 guys from Florida bring in bucks.Neither of them would go 120'' but they were bigger than any they see in Florida.
I just hope that if they DO add 2000 tags to the NR allocation they figure a way to spread them out across the state.I would bet there is about 5 or 6 counties that take the brunt of the 2000.
If I look into the future of Iowa deer hunting I can see it being like Kansas.Almost 100% draw and a lot of land being bought up by 20 nr guys and having a "hunting club".At least some of them will draw every year.
20 years ago Iowa was the top whitetail state in the country.I just saw a show on the Outdoor Channel the other day "Top 10 Whitetail Destinations" Iowa ranked 10th.
It ain't as good today as it was yesterday and won't be as good tomorrow as it is today.
I shouldn't complain though.I got to hunt when the hunting was great.When you could expect to see 150"+ bucks everytime you took a stand.This year I doubt I have seen A 150'' buck all season (in places I could get access).
 
Just because our new Gov. wants something doesn't mean it will happen. If you think changes to non res rules are a bad idea contact your Senator & House Reps.
When the next legislative session gets close, you will be kept up to date.
 
WNC Shedhead said:
As a NR I think that the allotment is a tad bit stingy but I can live with it. The price of the current NR tags are as high as they need to go. The joke of the current system is the doe tags for NR shotgun hunters ($355). I hunt a farm that all the landowner asks is that we shoot does every year. Well when we only get bow tags every three to 4 years it can get a little expensive ($500 total trip) in off years just to come down to take care of his herd problems. We dont party hunt with anyone so we come down strictly to shoot our 3 does and leave which usually only take a few hours in past years. I can see paying the hunting license and maybe $25 for each antlerless tag but what they now charge is gouging plain and simple.

If this change takes effect you had better hold tight to every piece of ground that you can hunt because the money will enter the game and thats when people get shut out. The quality of the herd will not suffer at all and will probably get better because people from out of state donot come to iowa to shoot basket rack 1 1/2 olds.
Click to expand...
I'd don't agree with that I own some ground that is surrounded by public ground I know of 4 possibly 5 bucks that were most likely 2.5yr olds that were shot in one week all by NRs. I not knocking them for shooting them I just don't think it helps the quality of the herd.
 
Helping the quality of the heard doesn't just mean killing mature bucks, it also means controlling the doe population. 98% of NR's come to Iowa to harvest bucks not does. I see the deer populations rising with smaller bucks. Oh yeah and a lot less land to hunt. :moon::thrwrck:
 
As a NR hoping to come back to IA to hunt next year, I can honestly say I can live with the way things are now and I don't agree with the legislation rumors. But then I grew up there and went to school with a few of you on here and I'm extremely biased towards my home state. A state should always favor its resident hunters and I like to think I'm open minded enough to look at it from IA residents' views, especially since I have some of the same gripes here in AZ. Although, Iowa is FAR from unique with its draw system. For NRs complaining that it takes 2-3 years to draw that coveted archery tag in Iowa, keep this in mind: as a resident of AZ, it will take me 6-8 years to get my archery elk tag (bull tag) for one of the "normal-quality" units. I have a friend that took 16 years to get an archery tag for one of our "trophy" units. EVERYTHING out here (elk, deer, turkey, javelina, bighorn, bear) is through the lottery system, with bonus points (not ture preference points as Iowa has) issued when you're not drawn. Yes I was spoiled growing up in Iowa knowing I was going to hunt every year. AZ changed its regs and prices a few years ago and it doesn't favor NRs in any way. As I said, a state should ALWAYS favor its resident hunters, but I still here of a great deal of NRs coming in and taking 340-400" bulls and giant deer (Coue's whitetail and muleys). While I didn't really like the price increase for IA NR hunting a year or so ago, its not unreasonable (yet) and I'm still willing to take my chances. For the residents that want to make it as tough as possible for NRs (and I know that's generally not the case), all I ask is that you consider the opposite perspective. We have to deal with NRs coming into western states for trophy bulls, muleys, and whitetail throwing money around and using their guides, often bumping hard-working residents out of good hunting areas. I also tend to think that several of the residents' opinions above and in other posts are very valid.
 
As a NR hunter to Iowa I like the system the way it is, Atleast when I do get a tag I know there is a good chance of getting a good buck. For all that say just increase the price of tags for more money, that is not going to put any money into the communitys we hunt, just the DNR. My two brothers and I spent the last week in southern Iowa, and I would say we spent close to $1600 in just hotel, food and gas, so more tags would bring in more money to local business. But like I said I want it to stay the same. Just my 2 cents,
 
AZHunter, The problem is the purchasing and locking up of land, given the opportunity that NR can get a tag every year (or a land owner tag). Arizona may be the exeption, but other western states targeted for elk, I cant see this ever being the problem with vast areas of public land access. I believe even today it would be easier for myself to find a good piece of land out west to hunt than it is in Iowa.
Archery95, I was raised in a family of bowhunters, that were raised in a family of bow hunters, that were raised in a family of bow hunters. Ive never heard of a that time period when you could go out and see a 150+ buck nearly every time out, Ive been hunting myself for 18 years and would say the last couple years have produced the best quality deer than I can ever remember. That may be a terratorial thing or based on different farms however.
And for those of you that say why not just increase the tag and liscense fee to cover new revenue, Im pretty sure there looking at it at as a whole. Being that if they raised NR tag fees by 100$ there looking a couple million exta in revenue (give or take, I dont know the exact number of NR tags sold every year) But give out 2000 extra tags and you have 2000 more hunters visiting our state each year that spend the money on the tag plus hotel, food, gas, outfitters, exc. exc. Say an average NR hunt in Iowa cost 2K for everything, that already 4 million. double what raising the tag fee would be.
I say let them do it, but put a law into effect that taxes NR land owners a rediculous property tax for those of which just buy up land for the sole purpose of hunting almost to the point of deterrance.
 
Although I agree with most of what Archery95 posted, I do not agree with Iowa being better in the past than it is today. I've been hunting SW Iowa for 30+ years and have never seen the amount of large antlered bucks as in the past decade. My father who is 64 yrs old and been hunting since 1960 says the same thing. All those years and it took him til 2001 to take his biggest, a 181 NTypical. As far as Outdoors Best Top 10 Whitetail destinations goes I was pleasantly surprised to see Iowa ranked 10th. But if thats a true ranking then why is it all the NR hunters want to come to Iowa and not the 9 higher ranked states, hell their fees are much lower they should think about going to those states and save their money!
 
I think the price honestly is a bit outrageous. I don't see why anyone would pay $300-$500 to shoot a deer in Iowa. It's just a white tail. I've yet to kill (or even see) for that matter a 175" monster that everyone talks about. We can't choose what size deer anyone shoots, if it's legal- I have no problem with that.

There's a lot of animals I'd rather take for that kind of $. I'm stressed out that our tags are now $28.50 each. In the scheme of things, it's a very minor cost, but it's about the only thing increasing in price in an economy where everything else is less expensive.
 
Antlerfreak-I agree wholeheartedly and forgot to recognize that in my rambling (I got myself lost and then hit "post"). I actually had a good point in there somewhere, but obviously lost most of it! AZ is no different than western states. We are 70% or more public land. Its easy for me to side with IA residents as a NR because I grew up there and have access to farms that I know won't charge me and that value the family ties we've had over the almight dollar any day and I can stay at my mom's, further minimizing expenses. I definitely recognize that while spoiled by growing up with private land to hunt in Iowa, I'm definitely blessed with TONS of public land I can hunt when I get drawn or I decide to get my over-the-counter archery deer tags (forgot to mention that one above, too).
 
If Iowa had more public land, we would have less issue with the land getting bought up. It used to be a lot easier (by easier I mean no $ needed) to acquire permission to hunt a private farm. Now, most of it is leased out. The commercialization of hunting didn't help anything, when people think 150" deer only live on private farms. I just wish a larger portion of our license fees went to acquiring more land for us to hunt.

With that said- I have it pretty good here where I'm at. I'm only about 10 miles from over 13,500 acres of public land. But there's a lot of counties that hardly have any. I love hunting public land, doesn't bother me at all. Just wish we had more of it.
 
I would rather see an increase in price of resident any-sex tags than an increase in price or number of NR tags alloted. I would have no issue paying $35 dollars for a buck tag and in the end, with the amount of resident any-sex tags sold, wouldn't that bring just about as much money in? I realize it wouldn't do much good for local business because I know NR's help that a lot. BUT, if there is a NR tag increase and our hunting goes downhill (like has happened in Illiniois) as a result, that money going from NR's to local business will eventually disappear, leaving us right back where we are at now, only with worse hunting. Kind of an, "Iowan's helping Iowa," philosophy, I guess.
 
How many NR tags are allowed now? Have to keep in mind there are about 50,000 bow hunters in Iowa (at least according to license sales numbers).
 
I agree with DannyBoy. Increasing the number of NR tags will help out the small towns and such financially but probably for just a few years until the hunting is not any better than anywhere else then it will be back how it was. Allowing 2000 extra tags and allowing NR who own land in Iowa to get an over the counter tag will just open the eyes to an extra 2000 guys out there to buy their own little chunk of land or lease it. This just hurts Resident Hunters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom