Fishbonker
Life Member
I just saw that the subcommittee will meet Monday at 1500. Time is short, make those contacts.
HSB 610 Nonresident Landowner Tags
- Thread starter Fishbonker
- Start date
-
- Tags
- None
What's the contact list????
Fishbonker
Life Member
My post from 1320 today has a list of the people on the subcommittee, links to their web pages and links to their emails. The colors of the links are beyond my control. Hover your cursor over the body of the post and the links will be highlighted.
Best to just email the subcommittee at this point? 3-4 folks or whatever it is?
I like the allow 2 residents to hunt part but absolutely impossible to enforce so I'll be emailing against.
They could add 2 non family residents allowed to hunt for the current resident landowner tags requirements & I wouldn't be mad. But still impossible/nightmare to enforce.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
They could add 2 non family residents allowed to hunt for the current resident landowner tags requirements & I wouldn't be mad. But still impossible/nightmare to enforce.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Fishbonker
Life Member
In my opinion, the three members of the sub plus your legislator. The list expands the further the bill goes.
Go!!!!! Now!!!!!!! Write in now!!! Get this to every person you know!! This bill & the outfitter bill need quick response!
Terry Baxter, [email protected]
Steven Bradley, [email protected]
Ras Tafari Smith,
[email protected]
Terry Baxter, [email protected]
Steven Bradley, [email protected]
Ras Tafari Smith,
[email protected]
ElkFever2
Member
There’s a new outfitter bill?! Please post link
That might be my bad…. I am not finding it. Was something about 500 tags to outfitters. Focus on this above as that one might have died in legislative process.
IsThisHeaven?
Active Member
Mr. Baxter and I have exchanged several emails. To summarize, the biggest issue they want this bill to address is anti-hunters buying land instead of non-resident landowners. They claim anti hunters are buying up lots of land. They also believe this will help to shoot more does (shocking).
They believe they have addressed resident hunter concerns from prior versions of this bill with the conservation and water quality provisions along with the required resident access. They believe the 10 year wait and required resident access will slow non-residents from buying up land.
I have asked about monitoring and enforcement several times but have not gotten an response to that. I have also asked what will happen in several years when they come back wanting more non-resident tags, fewer years to qualify, and to get rid of the pesky requirement to allow residents on to shoot does late season (he’s acknowledged that’s what the increased resident access amounts too). Those issues have not been responded to yet.
They believe they have addressed resident hunter concerns from prior versions of this bill with the conservation and water quality provisions along with the required resident access. They believe the 10 year wait and required resident access will slow non-residents from buying up land.
I have asked about monitoring and enforcement several times but have not gotten an response to that. I have also asked what will happen in several years when they come back wanting more non-resident tags, fewer years to qualify, and to get rid of the pesky requirement to allow residents on to shoot does late season (he’s acknowledged that’s what the increased resident access amounts too). Those issues have not been responded to yet.
Fishbonker
Life Member
Hold-over from last year. We anticipate its return and when it does, I'll post it up.
Fishbonker
Life Member
Thanks for sharing the info, but what I think means is NRs are buying land for hunting and not killing does. Not anti-hunters per se but anti-herd control. I'd like to know how they figure if land is being purchased by antis. Color me skeptical.
IsThisHeaven?
Active Member
No. He told me his biggest concern is anti-hunters buying land. Anti-herd control is on his list of concerns, but his primary concern is anti-hunters buying land and allowing no hunting. He said he has had many resident landowners upset because current nonresident tag limits limit the pool of buyers when they go to sell their land.
He said the county recorder in his county has told him lots of land is being purchased by anti-hunters. I asked for any sort of data/documentation to support that. I’m skeptical of that too. Nothing yet.
Bow_and_Arrow
Bow_and_Arrow
Hi everyone - here is what I sent in - I’m sure there are gaps or other things I should have said - but thought it may help to get others thinking and take the time to write in. It doesn’t really take that long.
Representative Baxter:
Good evening. I would ask that you reject HSB 610 that grants nonresident landowners the ability to obtain guaranteed tags. This bill is not beneficial to the State of Iowa, our deer hunting quality and especially our current residents. There are existing options for nonresident landowners to deer hunt annually and help control the population. Nonresidents wanting the ability to hunt annually are simply wanting a buck tag.
As a current landowner and resident of Iowa who lived out of state for 11 years in Missouri and Wisconsin, it’s difficult to relay in words how much better our deer hunting regulations, season structure and overall herd health/quality are as compared to our neighboring states. Iowa is seen as the nationwide destination for deer hunting and if we continue to change our regulations, we will end up like Illinois and other states who have catered to nonresidents and outfitters at the price of quality hunting. We run the risk of losing significant revenue from hunters who no longer want to hunt here if our quality is impacted.
I chose to live out of state for work and financial purposes and although I missed my family, friends and the deer hunting, it was the best decision for my immediate family. In the case of nonresident landowners, if they bought the land, they knew the laws when they purchased. In the case of those who inherited the land, within the existing regulations, there are opportunities for them to deer hunt their land. If any of the existing nonresident landowners don’t like their current situation, they can move here. IF there is one good thing that has come of COVID, it’s that employers are much more receptive to remote work. Although there are certainly many who cannot relocate, it’s more likely than ever that some will be able to move to Iowa if they want to buck hunt their land annually (which would create even greater revenue for the State of Iowa in the form of income taxes, property taxes, etc.).
This bill is simply a gateway to continued increases of nonresident landowner tags which would significantly change the landscape of land ownership in Iowa and would likely adversely impact a healthy, controlled deer population. Many nonresident landowners aren’t coming to Iowa in November to shoot does and focus on population control – they will be here to hunt for a buck and it’s very possible that our population will get out of hand. Even with the bill’s language that suggests a resident must be allowed to hunt, there is nothing that prevents under the table arrangements that greatly restricts the resident hunter.
Looking at the requirements in the bill, the enforcement would be borderline impossible. The DNR’s resources are already spread extremely thin and it’s very unlikely that the DNR or court system could actually create true accountability for the requirements set forth.
Please do not change our deer hunting regulations to support nonresidents over your constituents. Our regulations are what make Iowa the best deer hunting state in the country.
Thank you for your service, time and consideration.
Representative Baxter:
Good evening. I would ask that you reject HSB 610 that grants nonresident landowners the ability to obtain guaranteed tags. This bill is not beneficial to the State of Iowa, our deer hunting quality and especially our current residents. There are existing options for nonresident landowners to deer hunt annually and help control the population. Nonresidents wanting the ability to hunt annually are simply wanting a buck tag.
As a current landowner and resident of Iowa who lived out of state for 11 years in Missouri and Wisconsin, it’s difficult to relay in words how much better our deer hunting regulations, season structure and overall herd health/quality are as compared to our neighboring states. Iowa is seen as the nationwide destination for deer hunting and if we continue to change our regulations, we will end up like Illinois and other states who have catered to nonresidents and outfitters at the price of quality hunting. We run the risk of losing significant revenue from hunters who no longer want to hunt here if our quality is impacted.
I chose to live out of state for work and financial purposes and although I missed my family, friends and the deer hunting, it was the best decision for my immediate family. In the case of nonresident landowners, if they bought the land, they knew the laws when they purchased. In the case of those who inherited the land, within the existing regulations, there are opportunities for them to deer hunt their land. If any of the existing nonresident landowners don’t like their current situation, they can move here. IF there is one good thing that has come of COVID, it’s that employers are much more receptive to remote work. Although there are certainly many who cannot relocate, it’s more likely than ever that some will be able to move to Iowa if they want to buck hunt their land annually (which would create even greater revenue for the State of Iowa in the form of income taxes, property taxes, etc.).
This bill is simply a gateway to continued increases of nonresident landowner tags which would significantly change the landscape of land ownership in Iowa and would likely adversely impact a healthy, controlled deer population. Many nonresident landowners aren’t coming to Iowa in November to shoot does and focus on population control – they will be here to hunt for a buck and it’s very possible that our population will get out of hand. Even with the bill’s language that suggests a resident must be allowed to hunt, there is nothing that prevents under the table arrangements that greatly restricts the resident hunter.
Looking at the requirements in the bill, the enforcement would be borderline impossible. The DNR’s resources are already spread extremely thin and it’s very unlikely that the DNR or court system could actually create true accountability for the requirements set forth.
Please do not change our deer hunting regulations to support nonresidents over your constituents. Our regulations are what make Iowa the best deer hunting state in the country.
Thank you for your service, time and consideration.
