They continue to impress me

[Howboutthemdawgs]

How many NR doe tags are they going to sell at $300 a pop when that's the only deer you can tag? Talk about pricing people out of hunting and limiting access? Better lower the NR doe tag to $20 if you want populations in check.

This regulation change is BS.


Ultimately if they did away with party hunting you could easily wash it away saying they felt it was being abused. But to strictly target NR party hunting is laughable and I agree with Windlooker on the other site, there is no way this is just cleaning up a clerical error.

I wonder if this won’t unindented consequences. I don’t think the NR landowners will take this laying down and some have deeepp pockets. I could see this resulting in more nonresident tags which talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. Or even a class action suit of some kind, granted I’m just spitballing, no idea how that works. With that said it’s not like the residents are to blame, they didn’t even get a chance to voice their opinion anyway.

 

[Turkish]

Pretty sure prior to 12 hours ago, no one knew it was a loophole

huh? I’ve heard people describe it as such for years.

 

[bwoods11]

How many NR doe tags are they going to sell at $300 a pop when that's the only deer you can tag? Talk about pricing people out of hunting and limiting access? Better lower the NR doe tag to $20 if you want populations in check.

This regulation change is BS.


Ultimately if they did away with party hunting you could easily wash it away saying they felt it was being abused. But to strictly target NR party hunting is laughable and I agree with Windlooker on the other site, there is no way this is just cleaning up a clerical error.

You are so spot on. The DNR will now lose revenue. EHD is also a problem that gets worse when you have high populations of deer . They call the farms Non Resident doe factories.

This should have been a topic of discussion at DNR meetings with a tweek to the regs… implemented the following year or 2026 ?

Brian you hit the key points—spot on !!

 

[Mortenson]

Iowa should ban party hunting and allow nonresident landowner tags. Seems simple.

 

[Hoytvectrix]

How long would a non-resident landowner have to wait before getting a buck tag for archery and/or firearm? Does this rule change effectively mean NRLO can now only hunt a buck on their property every ____ years?

 

[S.T.Fanatic]

Minnesota will use Iowa as an experiment. They will implement it next as another way to purchase more property. Mark my words!!

 

[bwoods11]

How long would a non-resident landowner have to wait before getting a buck tag for archery and/or firearm? Does this rule change effectively mean NRLO can now only hunt a buck on their property every ____ years?

Yes 3 to 5 years. Archery can be up to 6 years . Obviously too long. Ridiculous.

Iowa is good hunting, but it’s not worth a 5 year wait as a landowner.

 

[Hoytvectrix]

Iowa should ban party hunting and allow nonresident landowner tags. Seems simple.

Unless that is what they are trying to discourage...

It sounds like this is more of cleaning up language in policy and removing loopholes for people. If I was a non-resident landowner I would be furious. Missouri could up and do something like this and I would almost certainly sell my farm - even with having multiple family members in the area.

 

[homerj]

Seems like a rule I'd be in favor of if I was an IA resident landowner and mature buck hunter.

That said, pretty tough pill to swallow for NR owners

 

[bwoods11]

Ironically I asked the DNR big game guy if he hunts out of state. He said yes I do for turkeys .

I said do you want that state to restrict your access, he said “No”. I also asked if he’d pay $353 to shoot a hen turkey . Referring to the Iowa cost to buy a doe tag .

He said “No” & said then you see why I’m pissed off !

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Unfortunately the CO has no saying in the rules he just enforces them. Better ask a legislator if they are going to start pulling out “nonresident” workers from iowas pig industry which is the largest in the country. Selectively enforcing rules is anti democratic.

 

[bwoods11]

It’s heating up a bit on the Iowawhitetail site…

We posted a video of a Drury Brothers round table discussion on Nonresident/Resident party hunting.

The DNR clearly states it’s legal to party hunt in this video (3 times) ! Plus it states Party hunting was enacted by the legislature…which would mean it would have to be revoked by the legislature. Not the DNR .

Feel free to comment guys… even if you are not an Iowa landowner.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

It’s heating up a bit on the Iowawhitetail site…

We posted a video of a Drury Brothers round table discussion on Nonresident/Resident party hunting.

The DNR clearly states it’s legal to party hunt in this video (3 times) ! Plus it states Party hunting was enacted by the legislature…which would mean it would have to be revoked by the legislature. Not the DNR .

Feel free to comment guys… even if you are not an Iowa landowner.

It’s my interpretation that the law change was brought about because of action from the governor? If that’s the case the dnr didn’t change the law, they are just now responsible for enforcing a new (or clarified) law. Is that correct? I’m not saying it’s right or maybe even legal to do to nonresidents. Especially considering they (nr landowners) don’t have a voice in the matter.

My issue goes to the landowner cause. I don’t think the hunter who comes up and hunts on a lease, public, with permission or with an outfitter has much of a leg to stand on. They are minimally invested. The landowner in a lot of cases pays more in taxes by a substantial margin than the “average” citizen. Additionally they were mislead on making an investment in that state.

 

[bwoods11]

It would depend on the accuracy of the statement made on the Drury video . The DNR employee Suchy (who has since passed away) claims the legislation passed the law .

I’m pretty sure you have to get legislation then to change the law ? I’m not 100% sure. I’m guessing it’s not gonna change now .

It looks like they will lose 500-700k in revenue. So if they have to fire some staff .. tough shit I guess ?

 

[SwampCat]

It would depend on the accuracy of the statement made on the Drury video . The DNR employee Suchy (who has since passed away) claims the legislation passed the law .

I’m pretty sure you have to get legislation then to change the law ? I’m not 100% sure. I’m guessing it’s not gonna change now .

It looks like they will lose 500-700k in revenue. So if they have to fire some staff .. tough shit I guess ?

Probably just charge residents $5 more and break even. Residents probably be willing to pay to keep out the oosers

 

[Tree Spud]

Sounds like some big resident land owners, probably farmers, have the ear of the top state officials. No party hunting and 3-5 years to draw a tag? You have effectively eliminated deer hunting for non resident landowners.

Sounds like the resident big land owners are tired of non rez's shooting "their" deer. This could lead to some real unintended consequences. This may be also to drive land prices down on non-rez properties. Reducing deer hunting opportunities for non rez land owners thus reducing the value of the land.

I don't know what it is like in Iowa, but deer hunting brings in a ton of revenue to small communities in Wisconsin. During gun hunting, the bars/restaurants are full. Gas stations, grocery stores, liquor stores, hardware stores, and sport shops are all busy. If the state would lose and estimated $700k in license fees, they will lose many times that in tourism $$ and taxes.

Pretty sure that non-resident land owners would have standing and could show they are harmed parties. Raising non rez fees is one thing, but nearly eliminating hunting privilege's is a huge issue. Likely a lawsuit is going to be filed.

 

[Turkish]

Sounds like some big resident land owners, probably farmers, have the ear of the top state officials. No party hunting and 3-5 years to draw a tag? You have effectively eliminated deer hunting for non resident landowners.

Sounds like the resident big land owners are tired of non rez's shooting "their" deer. This could lead to some real unintended consequences. This may be also to drive land prices down on non-rez properties.

I don't know what it is like in Iowa, but deer hunting brings in a ton of revenue to small communities in Wisconsin. During gun hunting, the bars/restaurants are full. Gas stations, grocery stores, liquor stores, hardware stores, and sport shops are all busy. If the state would lose and estimated $700k in license fees, they will lose many times that in tourism $$ and taxes.

Pretty sure that non-resident land owners would have standing and could show they are harmed parties. Raising non rez fees is one thing, but nearly eliminating hunting privilege's is a huge issue. Likely a lawsuit is going to be filed.

I can’t prove that these two things are mutually exclusive, but I’m very confident that The majority of those pushing either side think there’s a choice to be made for continued quality vs being inviting to oosers.

 

[Tree Spud]

I can’t prove that these two things are mutually exclusive, but I’m very confident that The majority of those pushing either side think there’s a choice to be made for continued quality vs being inviting to oosers.

You don't manage quality by eliminating non-rez hunters access. Some of the worse quality management types are the local brown is down or if it's got horns, shoot it crowd. Non rez land owners tend to take quality mgmt much more seriously as they have invested in high priced real estate specially for big buck opportunities.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

You don't manage quality by eliminating non-rez hunters access. Some of the worse quality management types are the local brown is down or if it's got horns, shoot it crowd. Non rez land owners tend to take quality mgmt much more seriously as they have invested in high priced real estate specially for big buck opportunities.

not to mention the majority of party hunting with locals revolves around deer drives. Not exactly the pinnacle of quality management tactics.

 

[Turkish]

You don't manage quality by eliminating non-rez hunters access. Some of the worse quality management types are the local brown is down or if it's got horns, shoot it crowd. Non rez land owners tend to take quality mgmt much more seriously as they have invested in high priced real estate specially for big buck opportunities.

I agree. I’m just saying that some of the folks calling the shots do not agree. That’s the debate.