Non resident hunters hunting Iowa every year - an argument that needs clarity!

[@cityofrefugeportage9504]

Iowa just got rid of party hunting for bucks during gun season. Out of state hunters will only be able to shoot, does unless they have a valid buck tag in their name.

[@perryrusso3764]

I agree totally…first fix your own state and leave deer hunting states like Iowa alone….#happy to draw a tag every 5yrs🦌

[@Raised-Right]

Ha wish our greedy politicians would limit Illinois non resident tags. Keep iowa great skip.

[@Iowa_Whitetail]

100%!!!!! I watched that state get ruined in 5 years. Every gate I drove past in Schuyler & Fulton had a NR group there. Residents got thrown out in a matter of years. It’s all pay to play. It’s all leased up. It’s all $ & greed. The residents & the herd were the huge losers in Illinois. Could be the greatest state in nation. Very simple: limit NR tags & 1 buck limit.

[@100acrewoodsman]

Great comment. Illinois was ruined as soon as non-resident archery tags became over-the-counter. So many resident hunters I know lost all the ground they used to hunt and now the public land is over-crowded. Illinois had it right about 15 years ago before they changed the non-resident rules. Why? I'm personally an Illinois landowner and I feel really bad for the guys who either can't afford to lease or buy land to get into hunting. Incredibly sad. We would be the best state in the nation if we limited non-residents to a lottery draw like Iowa does.

[@Raised-Right]

​@Iowa_Whitetail yep, I live in Schuyler and am very fortunate that my folks, uncles and grandparents scooped up a bunch of ground in Brown during the early 90's. We're fortunate but I've seen all these small town bow shops close down because the locals pushed out from hunting, and there is not enough state ground either.

[@colby0082]

Wish we could get it to a draw in Kentucky so bad

[@MrWhiltetail]

When people complain about not being able to hunt they are typically talking about bow hunting during bow season for mature bucks. And guess what happens while a NR landowner is making payments and paying taxes waiting years to get enough points to draw? RESIDENTS trespass on the property they paid A LOT of money for and then shoot bucks off their property. A person can't simply fix the game regulations of their state. Not to mention the additional years it would take for bucks to grow up. That's why they buy land in a state that has proper regulations & mindsets. The ignorance is yours Skip. I'm tired of Iowans hating on NR deer hunters. Even when they preface it with they don't hate us. They hate us. I understand you want to have at 10-20 times better hunting than most people will ever be able to experiance in a state like Michigan which has millions of acres of public land with almost all little bucks, but the negativity toward "outsiders" from most IA res deer hunters gets pretty old. I have met a lot of really great people in Iowa. They are everywhere, but when I meet a resident deer hunter. Especially a bow hunter, many (certainly not all) is often hostile. I don't think you should change your laws for some more rich people but the amount of irritation that has been coming out of Iowa directed at NR's for at least 20 years now is not cool & is unmatched by anywhere else in the country that I have come across.

[@markilijanic5797]

Party hunting that is generally only for the 2 firearms seasons. There general no doe tags left for muzzy to party hunt on so that is also not a correct statement. As for limiting of tags to nonresident so that land is more available for residences that is a joke. The Iowa laws aren’t helping that. My hunting group own and lease thousands of acres in Iowa and we party hunt most years and bow hunt when we draw. Guess who isn’t on that ground? Iowa residents…. In addition take a guess as how well the herd is managed on our ground? I can tell you it isn’t because again we aren’t given the tools to harvest the proper number of does or bucks to ensure herd health. So in general Iowa loses twice. There has to be a comprise between the current laws and what is best for the deer and the economy of the state and nonresidents. If there is not something done at some point the almighty dollar is going to win and then we all lose.

[@Iowa_Whitetail]

ML hunting is a tag u can draw every year or every other at worst depending on zone. No party hunting ML. Can bow hunt it. The state u come from…. Has more deer and more cover than iowa. We have

[@markilijanic5797]

Look man I am just pointing out the facts. Sorry if you don’t like them. - The whitetail deer is the most sought after game animal in the world - Iowa’s reputation for big deer is also known around the world - People with more resources then those in Iowa are going to keep buying and leasing ground in Iowa - Your state creates the opportunity (party hunts, governors tags, etc., etc.) These are facts.. Sorry, but limiting bow hunting isn’t to stop out of state interest in hunting there or buying land there. And as non-residents we do contribute greatly to your overall economy. Property taxes and the increase of property values on which then higher taxes are established are just one example. Not to mention the income that is spent when we are there to work on our land and hunt. My comments are related to the main issue that you and other residents try to stand on, which is that if the laws where changed that less land and hunting rights would be available for residents. AND my comment is still the same. Limited tags isn’t going to change that. My recommendation is to find a way where everyone wins. Figure a way for the DNR to make more money off non-residents so they can go and buy more ground for state land for locals. Charge me $xx thousand for a bow tag as a non-resident of xx number of acres and use the money for the state. At the end of the day the deer on my ground aren’t going to be hunted by a local anyways so why do you care? Tax me for bow tag put some cash into a land bank for Iowa DNR. Regardless I am going to party hunt my land during gun season anyway and still kill the same buck. Why not make some money and still allow me just one buck. Let me give you a real life example. This honestly is a real story. A few years back a piece of ground came up for sale that butted up to one of our farms and also butted up to state ground. The land owner contacted us and asked if we were interested. He also told me the DNR was interested in the ground in an effort to expand their foot print. We ended up buying that ground for below market value because the DNR would not come to the table and bid against us. And trust me we really didn’t the ground at the time. So you tell me to fix my state, trust me you guys have some ground to make up as well. I am just suggesting to look at it from a different angle so everyone can win. Like I said at the end of the day I am killing the same buck it just depends on if it is with party hunting or a bow depending on the draw and we am still looking to expand our ground each year. Each year there are more and more bills that written to try and change the laws and trust me some of them are just plain stupid. I don’t want to see the hunting ruined in Iowa but there has to be a compromise somewhere before some stupid bill gets thru and everyone loses. The almighty dollar is find a way at some point and then we all might be sorry. At the end of the day we all want the same thing which is awesome hunting and memories with family members and friends. I just think there is better way to do it..

[@Iowa_Whitetail]

@@markilijanic5797 good reply. I agree with some & disagree with some. Well thought out. 1) iowa has problems in its regulations. Like any state. We are still, BY FAR, the best managed state in the country. I’ve hunted a dozen other states & most the others are absolute train wrecks. Why those folks are fleeing to come here. We are working to fix our problem regs. I “wish” other states were doing the same thing 2) iowa cannot take on more NR hunters. We allow 6,000 & that’s more than we should be taking. There’s not a compromise there. Residents are hemorrhaging access & by definition…. When that is occurring at a huge level - the state is not going to do things to incentivize more NR pressure, tags & demand. This isn’t me talking- this is the DNR, legislator & citizens of iowa. I love the NR’s. I used to be one…. 3) I don’t love the NR’s that are trying to change our regulations for their own interests. I am involved with almost all of the Iowa based conservation & regulatory groups & meet with many of the legislators in house/senate…. My concern & Theirs…. Fixing the issues the RESIDENTS & VOTERS are facing. Access being one huge one. Too many tags, promotion of our state, etc are some others. 4) agree that 99% of us want the same thing (special interests being that 1%) …. Great hunting, experiences & memories. The serious hunters consider: sustainability, making things better, a BIOLOGICALLY BALANCED DEER HERD, smart regulation choices that impact the casual hunter, long term ramifications of regulations, etc. Here’s the FACT: Wisconsin, MN, MO, IL, IN, MI & a few others have insanely larger swaths of premium cover with optimal fertility. Larger deer herds on top of that. Iowa is approaching 7% timber & getting less when grain prices are high. All of those states could trounce Iowa for results. MN used to be #1 30 years ago until they liberalized their regs. There’s zero reason iowa needs to be a bullseye for every serious hunter around the Midwest. Literally, shifting gun seasons 14 days & going to 1 buck would make most of those states way better than iowa. If ONE state will fix its regulations so it’s not destroyed every year- that alone would take a large amount of pressure off of iowa.

[@MrWhiltetail]

@@Iowa_Whitetail Where nearly all our public land is in Michigan you are lucky to find more than 1" of poor top soil before hitting plain old yellow sand. 2"-3" if your in a good area. The farm country is different but that is 99% private. We have cover but it's poor habitat at deer level. Public land bucks typically go 90-110 pounds except in the antler restriction zones and in the U.P. where they need bigger bodies to survive but racks suffer, but the DNR not only did the APR's wrong where they have them but there isn't support within the DNR for it so they have been going back to anything with a 3" antler is legal. It's better than ever here but even the worst IA county blows away our typical public land. Michigan having "optimal fertility" where the vast majority of public land hunting occurs is a joke. The 20% or so of southern Michigan where most of the farmland is belongs with the states you mentioned, but not everywhere else and we are not covered in "premium" cover. It's mostly low quality browse and there is often very little browse.