Iowa DNR Biologist Conversation

[BenA]

For sure. I just wish other states would do something to actually improve the age structure instead of the continual "race to the bottom" of these liberal, all inclusive regulations.
Two years ago MN became a crossbow for all state. Next year during the gun season, areas in the southern portion(predominantly the best trophy hunting area) of the state that uses to be shotgun only are now going to rifle. The gun season opens as early as Nov 4!!! Imagine sitting on stand with a rifle for 9 days during the entire peak rut!! How much easier can it get??!?

Imagine sitting on stand with a rifle for months like in Louisiana and some other states in the south. Deer are a lot less visible down here though. I don't disagree with you about regulations being needed to correct age structures. I just don't like the bickering it causes between hunters about who gets to hunt with what weapon, when, and I can't hunt on land I own. I think we have the technology to regulate the harvest the way it needs to be accounting for population and age structure without the "opportunity" regulations.

 

[cbw]

Why is it that such a large percentage of Iowa bucks taken are yearlings.

Most deer/bucks are taken during our short gun season. Most gun hunters are meat hunters. You either have a 4 day season or an 8 day season. If you let one pass, not likely to get another. Throw in deer drives where brown is down and a lot f yearlings drop.

Would be completely different if the gun season was in the rut.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hillrunner]

Add bait…now you have ky. 21 day gun season in the rut. Modern rifles. Crossbows all archery season with bait. Season opens first Saturday in September where every yahoo from the southeast wants to come kill a velvet buck and 99% of the bucks are whacked over a bait pile. So for all the bad Minnesota has coming, ky says hold my beer.

I don't understand why state agencies struggle with the concept that rarity gives something value. The easier you make it the less appealing it will ultimately become.
All these free for all, everybody gets a trophy attitudes are not retaining the next generation of hunters because they aren't going to feel any satisfaction. When something is hard to do, the feeling of accomplishment is far greater. That's something they'll come back for.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

I don't understand why state agencies struggle with the concept that rarity gives something value. The easier you make it the less appealing it will ultimately become.
All these free for all, everybody gets a trophy attitudes are not retaining the next generation of hunters because they aren't going to feel any satisfaction. When something is hard to do, the feeling of accomplishment is far greater. That's something they'll come back for.

i wonder who is more profitable as a game agency. Iowa or Kentucky? Anyone and their cousin can hunt here for deer and turkey. The nonresident prices keep creeping up. Iowa is very restrictive and lets in very little nonresidents so they don’t get much revenue from them. I have to believe it’s all about the dollar for 99% of these agencies but I could be wrong

 

[hillrunner]

i wonder who is more profitable as a game agency. Iowa or Kentucky? Anyone and their cousin can hunt here for deer and turkey. The nonresident prices keep creeping up. Iowa is very restrictive and lets in very little nonresidents so they don’t get much revenue from them. I have to believe it’s all about the dollar for 99% of these agencies but I could be wrong

I wouldn't have a clue. I do know that a lot of people move to Iowa for deer hunting. These are motivated people that are assets to the state. Deer hunting is the reason I haven't moved myself and my business a couple miles across the border into South Dakota. Quality deer have a real impact on this state that can't be measured by license sales alone.

 

[BenA]

i wonder who is more profitable as a game agency. Iowa or Kentucky? Anyone and their cousin can hunt here for deer and turkey. The nonresident prices keep creeping up. Iowa is very restrictive and lets in very little nonresidents so they don’t get much revenue from them. I have to believe it’s all about the dollar for 99% of these agencies but I could be wrong

From the interweb:

"Iowa's hunting and fishing license revenues for the 2020 fiscal year brought in $37.4 million"

"Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife's Restricted Fish and Game Fund received $33,565,298.55 from hunting and fishing licenses in Fiscal Year 2020"

Do Iowa landowners have to buy a license to hunt on their own land?

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

So people are willing to pay for exclusivity. Other game agencies should wake up. Another thing is it’s probably easier managing a smaller number of participants than the opposite.
So to recap, you can make more money, people can a higher quality experience, and manage less opinions…how is there a downside

 

[BenA]

So people are willing to pay for exclusivity. Other game agencies should wake up. Another thing is it’s probably easier managing a smaller number of participants than the opposite.
So to recap, you can make more money, people can a higher quality experience, and manage less opinions…how is there a downside

I think close to half, if not more now of KDFWR bills are paid by non-residents. But, KY lets resident landowners hunt on their own property without a license. Considering 95% of KY is privately owned, that could be a significant amount of revenue if they started to charge for those landowner tags. I don't think that's going to go over well at all in the legislature though.

 

[hillrunner]

From the interweb:

"Iowa's hunting and fishing license revenues for the 2020 fiscal year brought in $37.4 million"

"Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife's Restricted Fish and Game Fund received $33,565,298.55 from hunting and fishing licenses in Fiscal Year 2020"

Do Iowa landowners have to buy a license to hunt on their own land?

We can get 1 any sex tag and 1 doe tag for$2 each. All other tags are full price. We also need to buy a hunting license. Most land owners buy more tags.
Personally I think we should pay full price for all tags.

 

[SwampCat]

I wasn't talking about gross harvest numbers, those numbers aren't relative state to state in a discussion like this, IMO.

I am not talking about gross harvest numbers either. I am talking about percentage of the overall herd. Iowa and Missouri both have a buck harvest of about 10/11% of the overall deer population in their respective states. Iowa is not leaving a much greater percentage of bucks alive at the end of the season than is Missouri. I could see a difference if say, Iowa had a buck harvest of 5% of the overall deer population and Missouri had a buck harvest of 10% of the overall population. Then you could say Iowa is leaving a lot more bucks in the woods, percentage wise than is MO - but that is not the case.

Now, if we were talking gross numbers, MO leaves a ton more bucks in the woods at the end of season than does Iowa - because they have three times as many deer to begin with.

 

[T-Max]

If it were all about maximum revenue then they should only sell NR tags, right?

 

[Brian662]

Add bait…now you have ky. 21 day gun season in the rut. Modern rifles. Crossbows all archery season with bait. Season opens first Saturday in September where every yahoo from the southeast wants to come kill a velvet buck and 99% of the bucks are whacked over a bait pile. So for all the bad Minnesota has coming, ky says hold my beer.

Agreed and that stinks for you guys. I just don't understand why states like MN continue to want to make it easier, through legislation, to ensure every hunter fills their buck tag.

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

My opinion: If MN would have 1 gun season (starting after WI closes) and all other states would leave their season/regulations the same as the are currently, within 3 years MN would be the best mature Buck hunting in the country.

I think it could happen as aging DNR staff retires and younger people start making decisions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SwampCat]

Imagine sitting on stand with a rifle for months like in Louisiana and some other states in the south. Deer are a lot less visible down here though. I don't disagree with you about regulations being needed to correct age structures. I just don't like the bickering it causes between hunters about who gets to hunt with what weapon, when, and I can't hunt on land I own. I think we have the technology to regulate the harvest the way it needs to be accounting for population and age structure without the "opportunity" regulations.

I agree 100%. A lot of these southern states have an almost anything goes because the cover is so thick. On my 400 acres, I have two places we can see 400 yards - one place in a 20 acre pasture and an 8 acre food plot. Most of the rest of my ground maximum visibility is maybe 60 yards. I have probably 100 acres you cant see three feet. My cousin, who lives in NW MO, came to my place one time and the first thing he said was “How do you guys ever see a deer to shoot it in all this cover?”

Hunters in the midwest and northern states cannot think of the southern states as far as deer hunting goes in the same way they think of their states. If we didnt allow baiting, crossbows, dog running, rifles, rut hunting, etc - we wouldnt be able to kill enough deer. We still dont kill anymore percentage of the herd than Iowa - or missouri. The guy in the podcast talks about how little cover there is in Iowa - he would be talking about how much there is in the south.

If we werent able to use all those hunting methods, we would be hitting deer with our cars left and right. There was a period of time in the 1990’s when we had more deer. One of my family Members hit a deer seven yrs in a row - I accounted for three of them. That gets old. Insurance sent me a letter saying if we had one more comprehensive claim in the next year they were going to cancel


Now all that said, the last year or two I have seen our g&f adding more hunting opportunity without cutting somewhere else - which ups the harvest percentage and lowers deer density. I feel this is largely related to cwd and efforts to lower the deer density.

 

[SwampCat]

My opinion: If MN would have 1 gun season (starting after WI closes) and all other states would leave their season/regulations the same as the are currently, within 3 years MN would be the best mature Buck hunting in the country.

I think it could happen as aging DNR staff retires and younger people start making decisions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The younger people who are going to be making the decisions probably gonna be some bunny hugger PETA member

 

[Brian662]

My opinion: If MN would have 1 gun season (starting after WI closes) and all other states would leave their season/regulations the same as the are currently, within 3 years MN would be the best mature Buck hunting in the country.

I think it could happen as aging DNR staff retires and younger people start making decisions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Color me skeptical. You've got my vote for MN deer czar though!

I've said this before, when driving through SE MN to bow hunt my place in SW WI, the public land parking spots are full of WI and Iowa vehicles who buy NR license (in MN)to hunt the rut with a gun. Those same parking areas are empty during archery season.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

The next cohort or dnr guys is an interesting topic. Hadn’t given that much thought. What does that look like? On one hand you have the social media generation that has showcased big deer but you also have the instant gratification, lack of effort/failure mindset that is rampant in that generation too. I don’t know what that leads to honestly

 

[SwampCat]

Most deer/bucks are taken during our short gun season. Most gun hunters are meat hunters. You either have a 4 day season or an 8 day season. If you let one pass, not likely to get another. Throw in deer drives where brown is down and a lot f yearlings drop.

Would be completely different if the gun season was in the rut.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are bucks really that scarce that people fear only seeing one buck of any kind in a four or eight day season?

 

[jsasker007]

Around here you will be lucky to see anything after the orange army is running around after the first weekend. If it lands during a good rut then you never know but it's usually just catching a glimpse of a buck chasing a doe. There's never any deer just lingering for several minutes waiting for the hunter to decide if that's a "shooter" or not, you've got about half a second to get 'em in your sights and shoot or they're gone. That's during rifle season, archery is a whole different ball game.

 

[SwampCat]

I was already wondering about the great deer hunting in Iowa - after reading all these comments, I wonder even more. It sounds like the restrictive seasons are more due to a low deer population to begin with, and lack of decent deer cover - than to produce a bunch of big bucks for everyone to enjoy. Probably like most places - the guys with acreage dedicated to mature buck management are the ones reaping the benefits due to their management philosophy, and less about a state managing to make it a mature buck mecca. It sounds to me like the average guy hunting with a firearm is most likely stuck with shooting a 1.5 year old buck.

I know this OPINION will not be popular, but to me, the allure of Iowa is the nutrition and genetics that produce bigger bucks compared to the same aged bucks in other states. All other things remaining the same - season structure, habitat structure, resident and non-resident license structure, deer population/density - how great of a deer state would Iowa be if their ground was not consistently able to grow those big bucks - if their average 5.5 year old buck scored 120”?