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

Say No to Senate File 278

BugleMIn

BugleMIn

New Member
The Senate Natural resources Committee passed a file (278) to increase hunting license fees.

The hunting license fee increase is acceptable.

What this bill also does is raise the non-resident deer tags to 10,000, which is acceptable as well. But it goes one step further and allows every non-resident(N/R) landowner a deer tag. The N/R landowner tags will not be counted toward the 10,000 N/R tags.

Basically this is going to 1. create a land rush for cheap ground by non-residents.

2. Turn Iowa into a pay-to-hunt state. Iowa does not have enough public land to support its hunters. We will be looking at a situation like Texas and South Dakota before long if this measure goes through. In Texas you have to join a hunt club to hunt, your club owns the land. In South Dakota it is common to pay trespass fees of $100 per day to hunt pheasants.

There were two bills in the Natural Resource Comittee being considered, one was very similar to this except it did not have the N/R landowner provision. That is the file we need.

We need to stop Senate File 278 in its tracks.
 
The guaranteed license for nonresident landowners would be for a doe only. For them to get a buck tag they still have to draw. This is the way i read it anyway.
 
Having sat on the Natural Resources Commission I have a feeling BugleMIn is correct with the push to 10,000 NR hunters. As far as the pref-point system in place the move will continue for leased hunting. There has been talk for years to make Iowa more accomadating for NR hunters who own land/ a farm in Iowa.

Sitting where I am the 100,000 animals we have harvested a year for the past 4 years has made the whitetail deer few and far between in West Central Iowa. We are losing CRP acres, 1 million acres in Iowa the past 2 years went back into crop production, and you can ask the Admin. of the Wildlife Division ( Iowa DNR ) and habitat is crucial for all wildlife to flourish.

I feel the biological reasoning for all of this Bill has been thrown out the window. It's politics as usual and the only way to voice your concerns is to contact your Representative.

Here is a link, IowaHouseNaturalResourcesCommittee

Hopefully the guys at the IBA Banquet are discussing this issue as we speak.

Respectfully,

Anthony L. Hough, Founder - iowawhitetail.com

[This message has been edited by TLH (edited 03-12-2001).]
 
i would like to know how many of you own property and pay taxes on any large tracts of property. as being a nonresident and land owner i feel i should be able to hunt on my own property all seasons that are available to any one else.if you are worried about where you are going to hunt,buy your own property
 
I doubt that ensuring that a NR landowner can get a doe tag every year and a buck tag every two or three years (via preference points) is going to create a land rush!
It seems like a fair and equitable way to deal with the NR landowner situation without creating unreasonable pressure on resident hunters.
PLK
 
Here is the paragragh in question. It says the DNR will issue a "deer hunting license", not a antlerless tag.

NEW PARAGRAPH. e. Upon application pursuant to rules
5 5 established by the department and payment of a nonresident
5 6 deer hunting license fee, the department shall issue a deer
5 7 hunting license to the nonresident owner or owners of a farm
5 8 unit. In addition to the application and payment of the
5 9 license fee, the nonresident owner or owners of a farm unit
5 10 shall prepare and adhere to a deer population management plan
5 11 approved pursuant to rules of the department. The primary
5 12 objective of a deer population management plan is to manage
5 13 deer populations to minimize damage to agricultural crops on
5 14 adjacent land. The deer hunting license issued shall be valid
5 15 only on the farm unit for which the applicant qualifies
5 16 pursuant to this subsection and shall be equivalent to the
5 17 least restrictive license issued under section 481A.38. The
5 18 nonresident deer hunting licenses issued pursuant to this
5 19 paragraph shall be in addition to the number of nonresident
5 20 hunting licenses authorized pursuant to section 483A.8.

If you don't believe me you have never talked to realtors in southern Iowa. I have family from out of state that I know will buy some land, if this comes law. He is guaranteed a buck tag!

It was voted on in the Senate and passed on March 8. It goes to the House now.
 
Grunter, I have to disagree with you on this one. I am very lucky that a family member, close friend and I purchased a small tract of timber a few years past because we saw this coming. There are alot of young men and women getting in to the sport of bow hunting that can't afford to buy or lease land. This bill would make it that much harder for them to get permisssion to hunt if the land starts selling to non-residents. Also this will be a perfect time for a land broker to step in start buying ground chopping it into 40 acre tracts. This is all about money. If they can't get enough here they will just bring it in from out of state.
 
I can't speak for other area's,but in SE Iowa most of the prime hunting land has already been bought by RESIDENT hunters or out of state land investors that don't allow hunting. Which make the whole issue a moot point around here.
PLK
 
Bowdude,i agree partially with you about the big money people coming in and buying ground up and messing things up really bad.But i am not in that position,I bought 100 acres just for me to hunt on and I would like to be able to hunt every year.especially bowhunt and maybe muzzle loader hunt on. If I dont get to hunt I will still be making payments and paying taxes on ground I cant even use,and hunting is what I really bought it for.
 
Bugle Man I am from out of state and I agree with you. Read the wrighting on the wall.Just look at north west Ill. The magic triangle is almost all leased up or you pay to hunt. If this passes bend over because it,s is coming!!! Why doesen,t any body sign there names to the replies???
 
Illinois has the quality of deer that Iowa has AND Illinois has had NR Landowner Tags for many years. They only issue around 500 of these tags each year. I would not consider that a 'rush' on land.

We better be concerned about the Iowa population growth and the non-hunter purchasing ground. That is what is eating up all of the hunting ground.

Senate file 278 is a good bill which should be passed.

Jim,

I beleive you mean the 'Golden Triangle'. It is in East Central Illinois.
 
Forgot to tell you this.

The DNR is backing this bill so there must be some 'sound biological reasoning' behind it.
 
While attending IBA Spring Banquet, the DNR & the IBA seemed to support the Senate version of this bill as opposed to the House version.

The Senate version provides more money across the board Resident& Non Resident fee increases. Which the DNR is asking for support on as there has not been any increses for 10 years.

The IBA & DNR seem to oppose the extra antlerless tags for landowners due to deer mangement concerns.

The IBA opposes any increase in the total non resident tag numbers without requiring pay to hunt lands to file game mangement plans with the DNR.

The IBA & DNR seem to generally support the increases in fees and NR tag numbers with some adjustments that will help protect the resident hunters from forced pay to hunt or hunt public ground progression. And keep non agricultural landownership from creating problems for adjacent agricultural areas.

This is my interpretation.

Also FYI, the legislators are getting a lot of (only) negative feedback about the new harvest reporting process through ELSI from hunters that don't feel we need it. It looks like if hunters that support it do not contact their legislators in support of harvest reporting that the value of it may be lost. The DNR asks for support on the harvest reporting as it currently is laid out.

Also be aware of HF 321 - Requiring Lease Outfitters to register and be regulated by the DNR. The IBA supports this also.

[This message has been edited by BW (edited 03-12-2001).]

[This message has been edited by BW (edited 03-12-2001).]

[This message has been edited by BW (edited 03-12-2001).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BugleMIn:
The Senate Natural resources Committee passed a file (278) to increase hunting license fees.

The hunting license fee increase is acceptable.

What this bill also does is raise the non-resident deer tags to 10,000, which is acceptable as well. But it goes one step further and allows every non-resident(N/R) landowner a deer tag. The N/R landowner tags will not be counted toward the 10,000 N/R tags.

Basically this is going to 1. create a land rush for cheap ground by non-residents.

2. Turn Iowa into a pay-to-hunt state. Iowa does not have enough public land to support its hunters. We will be looking at a situation like Texas and South Dakota before long if this measure goes through. In Texas you have to join a hunt club to hunt, your club owns the land. In South Dakota it is common to pay trespass fees of $100 per day to hunt pheasants.

There were two bills in the Natural Resource Comittee being considered, one was very similar to this except it did not have the N/R landowner provision. That is the file we need.

We need to stop Senate File 278 in its tracks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In regards to South Dakota tresspass fees, many are now $150 - $175 per day and up. Also there are a fair amount of pheasant hunting operations that are owned by out of state residents. You can't hunt the renowned southeast area of South Dakota unless you are family or are willing to pay big bucks to hunt. The idea of just buying your own land to hunt on is out of reach for the majority of hunters out there. It's hard to justify $1800 to $2000 per acre for land and then hundreds of dollars a year for property taxes to hunt. I hope you're able to keep politics out of hunting, the almighty dollar can do wonders to screw up hunting.
 
this reply is to antlers,do you think just because you are a resident,you want to stop all non-resident land owners from getting deer tags? But you can go into missouri and buy archery tags and gun tags for all seasons.missouri has very liberal tag system and it has not turned into what you are saying is going to happen in iowa.let everyone enjoy hunting,if anything they aught to limit draw tags and let property owners have tags so they can enjoy some of their envestment back.
 
Grunter, how are we residents of Iowa supposed to be able to enjoy hunting in are own state when nr's buy all the land they can find. I agree with bowdude, most people can,t afford to buy land. What happens when the next generation of possable hunters are forced to give up hunting because they have know where to go or don't have the money to pay leasing fees. Who will loose then?
 
I got an E-Mail from my state senator today, I had written to him just to get his take on this whole matter. He says he voted against this file. He did not agree with raising licence fee across the board. He also does not like the idea of raising rates because this will keep the DNR with plenty of cash for the next six years. He thinks they should become more accountable for themselves a little more often. He thinks certain provisions should be taken into account for land owners, but he does think it will create some of the problems I stated in an earlier post. Well I feel for guys who own land here. But I'm sure you checked into licence regulations before you purchased property. I also E-mailed my State Representative but she has not gotten back to me yet. But I will keep you posted. Good Hunting, Tim Shaw (bowdude)
 
I'm a non-resident land owner (military). It seems to me that I'll be paying a non-resident fee and then getting an additional deer tag. I've been paying taxes on a farm now for 5 years and have only made it back to hunt once. What part of this is unreasonable? Prior to this file, I was treated the same as an out-of-stater that showed up, took game and left. I'm happy with it!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BugleMIn:
The Senate Natural resources Committee passed a file (278) to increase hunting license fees.

The hunting license fee increase is acceptable.

What this bill also does is raise the non-resident deer tags to 10,000, which is acceptable as well. But it goes one step further and allows every non-resident(N/R) landowner a deer tag. The N/R landowner tags will not be counted toward the 10,000 N/R tags.

Basically this is going to 1. create a land rush for cheap ground by non-residents.

2. Turn Iowa into a pay-to-hunt state. Iowa does not have enough public land to support its hunters. We will be looking at a situation like Texas and South Dakota before long if this measure goes through. In Texas you have to join a hunt club to hunt, your club owns the land. In South Dakota it is common to pay trespass fees of $100 per day to hunt pheasants.

There were two bills in the Natural Resource Comittee being considered, one was very similar to this except it did not have the N/R landowner provision. That is the file we need.

We need to stop Senate File 278 in its tracks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom