Discussion in 'Legislative Forum' started by Fishbonker, Feb 7, 2020.
But the difference is I’ve never wanted to post anything back to Hardwood about his posts on here.
Sent from my E6910 using Tapatalk
I see the farm bureau lobby has registered against. I figured they would and I'm happy about that. Only one for is Jim Jenson's lobbyist. If they crack and approve this it's just another sign our legislators are for sale.
You must care otherwise you wouldn't reply.
Thanks for keeping us up to date on this one Bonker.
As far as I am concerned this is the bill to keep an eye on.
TWO guaranteed NRLO buck tags would drastically change the face of deer hunting in this state, and not for the good!
Get this passed and pretty soon all those hoops will be gone, might as well go move to Pike Co Illinois. How's the resident hunting over there??
I don't think any NR would want (2) guaranteed buck tags? Personally I would like MN and Iowa go to one buck tag, think of how much better the hunting would be--one buck per person. Not sure where they came up with that idea?
One buck only and two does per 40 would work. I don’t need two buck tags.
I know as hard as they are pushing NR tags it’s probably going to happen one of these days just like crossbows during archery and high powers unfortunately . In my personal opinion if this does ever happen the minimum for acreage should be at least 160 acres. If not large acreages will be cut up into whatever the minimum acreage is and Iowa will just be another has been state where we talk about how it used to be. And access to Iowa non landowners who can still get permission to hunt these days would be completely gone.
Land was bought and sold in 80 acre parcels many moons ago for farming, right? Idk. I think that’s why 80 is the choice. I don’t know though. Had something to do with the Homestead Act.
Well I guess what I’m saying again this is just my opinion you would need to own 2 of those 80 acre parcels to get those tags. My immediate family owns quite a bit of ground and in different entities but by Iowa law only one of us is allowed to get a landowner tag every year. But if this goes through a non resident who buys an 80 would have more privileges for tags than we would.? Hmm doesn’t sound very fair that way.
I hope you're writing to reps pointing that out.
Point well taken
I’m in the same boat!! It seems like a very few NRLOs would even qualify and this wouldn’t cause a new NRLO land rush! I think these tags would cost the same as any NR tag so it would not be the same as a resident LOT.
Id drop my crp and rent. I would make more renting to a farmer. If that’s what they want so be it, but the crp thing makes no sense.
I was told it’s in there because some legislators don’t want a landowner to pay for property using federal money. 20 years ago that may have been true, however the price of rec ground has far out paced crp payments per acre. Again, I’ll rent and make more. Just stupid
Let's hope you don't have to make that decision Jdubs and this bill just dies.
Idk. I still may rent. Lol. I’m under cutting myself.
Jdubs, you could always rent it out to a “ hunting guide” operation , make good money and help cement the lack of any concern for NRLOs here
I love my NR buddies. Lots of em but we have some honest discussions on this & most of them truly do realize what would happen to Iowa if we changed the system.
To their point, I agree it’s crappy they bought here & lottery was every other year for a tag. Due to many reasons, including the massive promotion of our state on TV, etc - the wait is 2 to 4 years depending on the zone now.
To the other side..... we have 6% timber & some of the timbered counties have 20-50% NR ownership as it is and has hurt resident access to land massively. The only reason the rate isn’t 75% NR ownership or more is the tag restrictions. I know 50-100 guys who would buy land in Iowa overnight if we changed the rules. The only ground left would be resident land owners who scooped it up for hunting or a family that won’t sell (until they die, which is a steady supply as these folks are often 50-85 years old) & this will come to market little by little.
IMHO- hunting/rec ground will go up $1k/acre in 6 months. (If I cared about $ over the resource- I would love this. The opposite is true though). After 1-2 years - the demand being so much higher than supply- $2k-3k/acre increase is very possible and likely. We only have 6% timber!!!
Land will quickly go from some larger tracts (which is good for conservation, is reason we do have more quality age structure & many other reasons) to 80 acre parcels in a blink of an eye.
We will see all these “80 acre parcels” loaded with more hunters. Exactly like Illinois or countless of other examples- the pressure will have hunters taking down the premium genetic 2-3 year olds. Just a fact. The overall hunting quality & age structure will spiral down. Pressure up higher than it already is. Access for everyday resident is GONE. Wealthy big farms will not be greatly impacted.
I’d love a magic world my buddies can hunt every year. I know it means the ruination of what iowa is and why they bought here though.
There is one MAGIC SOLUTION!!!.... buy a charity auction governors tag that benefits each charity org. $7k to $13k but tax deductible. So- $4,000 to $8500 or so after write off. THAT is not a “rich man’s tag”. It’s a hard core middle class landowner. It’s the guy that has a medium size farm with $15k in income and saying “half of my income will be spent on a charity auction tag so I can hunt every year on my land & give some to charity”. Is this doable for masses? No. But for the few that “have land in Iowa and have to hunt it for a buck every year” - this is the solution. Rather see 100 more tags put in the charity tag pool over any other of this craziness.
i know several folks who buy them every other year or so. Some zones are still are every other year draw. Many NR’s party hunt shotgun season for bucks every year. I feel for the NR but I don’t want to wreck our whole state to satisfy their needs to detriment on Iowa residents and whole resource. The residents & voters of Iowa simply have more say in this. Just how it is and how it should be. I’d love to change some NR laws in many states to my benefit but I absolutely understand that their voters have a far greater say than me. I love the NR’s & R’s but I love the resource, available hunting for residents & quality of Iowa’s fragile resource far more. Respect all opinions but this is pretty black & white on how this would impact our state for folks that see the “state of our resource” everyday. Keep Iowa great. Stop messing with it.
Where are you getting the 20 to 50% NR land ownership numbers per county? Is your source so ambiguous that numbers fluctuate by 30%?
Provide the data base, I would like to take a look at my county. Thanks
Sligh1......I'd be happy with 1 tag and ,must have owned land 10 years before you get tag ,and be at least 70 years old ......or if your 60 and have owned 160 acres of land for 10 years you get 1 tag .....kinda selfish on my part 'cause I might be only one that qualifies !.
Separate names with a comma.