I am on record as being very opposed to using high power rifles for ANY deer hunting in Iowa for several reasons. First what is the necessity of using them? We currently have shotguns and slug ammo that are extremely effective at 150 yards or more and muzzle loaders at more than 200 yards, even though I am sure if we required a profecenticy test less than 30 percent of our deer hunters could score 3 out of 5 vitial zone hits under hunting conditions at that range. I am certain that that fact would not change just by using a centerfire rifle. I find it very strange that some replies have said that the terrain of Iowa is not much different that North Dakota or Kansas where rifles are allowed and are very effective, but in Iowa they are only allowed in the lower two tiers of counties, my home, where the land is nothing like ND. Why would that be? I agree with the comment about the novelty of being able to use a rifle legally, and understand that that is a factor in some of the support of rifles. When I first started deer hunting in southern Iowa only the outlaws used rifles for deer hunting but I would be willing to bet that more deer were killed with 30/30s, 30/06s, 303s, and 12 gauge OO buck than were killed with slugs then. Back then it wasn't very hard to miss a deer with your rabbit gun and a lousey slug round at 50 yards. Lots of hunters only got a chance or two per season and they wanted to be able to drop a deer at 100 yards if they saw one. I am sorry to say this, but although I never shot a deer with a rifle, I hunted with several who did back then. I don't remember anyone killing a deer with a rifle then that would be any kind of a problem shot for a good shotgun and slug combo today, but it was much different them.
Another problem that I have with this issue, is where do we stop. I believe in the slippery slope concept and can see if we allow rifles with many restrictions such as limited seasons, size and calibers, and types of rifles, that there will be a time in the future where a group will want a restriction lifted. When that is successful then another group will want a longer season or state wide access or a rifle season during November, after all Missouri does it and they have plenty of deer. If we don't start it then we don't have to fight to stop it later.
Lastly I do believe there is a safty issue involved. Some one made a comment about being able to shoot a pheasant or a coyote with a rifle why not a deer. Think about it!! There are almost 190,000 shotgun deer hunters that are all in the field for 3 weeks in December, mostly for 3 weekends in December. Many are very good responsible carefull hunters but what happens with those that aren't who, with a rifle, now have the accidential capabilities to kill another a mile away? Of the 4 hunting accidents that occured on the first weekend this year, how many would have been fatile if a rifle had been used? How many more might have been hit by some one shooting from a road 4 or 500 yards away as they steped out of the woods to shoot at the same deer the guys on the road were shooting at? Some will say that not all 190,000 deer hunters would use a rifle even if it were legal. As an answer I would ask how many deer hunters in Missouri or Wisconsin or Kansas use a shot gun and how many use rifles? I will finish with a last statement, rifles will add nothing to our deer hunting experience as to enjoyment or effiency but could certainly detract from it in a varity of ways. I will continue to speak out against rifle deer hunting in Iowa and ask that others with the same feelings make them know to the powers that control this issue.
