SF610, new number old bill, cost of youth deer and turkey tags

Discussion in 'Legislative Forum' started by Fishbonker, Apr 3, 2019.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    The Padded Room
    This bill was given yet another number and was reintroduced yesterday. Nothing has changed in the bill, it started out as a Natural Resources and Environment bill then it became and still is a Ways and Means bill which keeps it alive until the end of the session. So why a new number? I wish I understood this process better.

    If you want to do some head scratching and a lot of clicking, start by clicking here: https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/billTracking/billHistory?billName=SF 610&ga=88 it is a history of this bill complete with versions, dates, journal entries, everything this bill has been through.

    Last year, or maybe the year before, the legislature approved floating tags for youth in both turkey and deer seasons. If they didn't fill the tags in the youth season they were good for all of the remaining seasons. Now, just for turkey, for the youth, we are increasing the length of the youth season to 9 days. 9 potentially very cold days. I just don't get it. Will these nine days get more youth afield with their families? They already have the following 6 weeks or so to hunt with potentially better weather. I'm actually OK with this part of the bill but I just have to ask myself why the extension? What is the end game? Look at youth deer season, last year's youth season was 15 days long. Great, all for it. If this turkey season extension is to try and make the deer and turkey youth seasons the same the sponsors are a few days (6) short on the turkey end. Again, let me reiterate, I'm OK with the 9 day extension, I'm trying to understand the premise of the bill.

    The cost of the licenses will be cut in half. The cheaper price of the license is projected to sell more youth licenses/tags for both turkey and deer but not enough to make up the difference. This reduction in price comes at a cost to the FWTF. So the conundrum is this, sure we are bringing more youth into hunting but killing the department responsible for maintaining hunting in Iowa.

    There is another part of this bill that is not getting the attention it deserves. Here is a copy and paste of the section:

    Youth wild turkey hunting season shall last for the nine consecutive days, including two full weekends, immediately prior to the first turkey season established by the department by rule. The department may reduce the length of the youth wild turkey hunting season only after it makes a report available to the public on the department’s internet site stating the biological reason such a reduction is necessary and only after it eliminates all other wild turkey hunting seasons.

    On a casual read it doesn't mean much but what this section is doing is setting the stage for further micromanagement of the DNR by the legislature. For years and years we have been beating the drum of let biology guide the conservation of wildlife, this bill says that but then it tells the DNR which seasons they must close first. Think about this for a moment, remember the old days when the bottom two tiers of counties had late bazooka doe only season? The bazooka manufactures want to keep their sales up so they get the legislature to put a section in a bill that the bazooka season is the last one to be closed if for biological reasons we need to slow down the killing of deer. I know, I know, I'm using an absurd example to illustrate my point.

    It makes me wonder if the reason for the entire bill is aimed at the section above. Re-read the newly numbered bill here: https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=SF%20610&ga=88

    In my opinion, wrapped in the flag of youth this bill takes money away from the FWTF and micromanages the DNR. The original bill's sponsor has a track record of trying to undermine the DNR. Why else would it go from a "wildlife" bill to a "money" bill?
  2. AdBot Guest Advertisement

  3. Hawk32

    Hawk32 Active Member

    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    My 2 cents. Admittedly there's a little bit of pucker factor buying all my tags and now my kids tags as well.. BUT the way I see it I'm spending that $28 for the opportunity to spend some very quality time with my kids. Time that is just simply unmeasurable. I could be spending that money on a ticket to adventure land, or a movie, or a water park, etc, etc. It's all the same and I'd spend that money whether it's $28 or $128. I'll spend $28 dollars on a tag vs $60 on a video game any day.
  4. mplane72

    mplane72 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    I can't really see the current cost of a tag being a real barrier to entry. I would rather all other licenses and tags went up and youth stayed the same.
    Fishbonker, hillrunner and Rjack like this.
  5. Tim Hull

    Tim Hull PMA Member

    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    If they get 9 days, plus can hunt any other season I don't see a problem with charging $28. I know I have a tough time getting my daughter out with all of her activities and I don't like spending $28 to hunt just one or two days but if they could hunt til they filled the tag it would be awesome.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice