Welcome to TheOhioOutdoors
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Login or sign up today!
Login / Join

Non resident land owners hunt for free?

#43
What does Illinois and Iowa do?
If you are a non-resident land owner in Iowa, you still have to enter the non-resident drawing to even get an any-sex tag. So therefore some landowners may not draw a tag to hunt their land for several years. Unless you know the loop holes, like getting a doe tag (different allotment) and having a willing Iowa resident who will party hunt with you during one of the shotgun seasons and allow you to fill their any-sex tag.
 

Bigslam51

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
25,490
1,561
114
Stark County
#44
If you are a non-resident land owner in Iowa, you still have to enter the non-resident drawing to even get an any-sex tag. So therefore some landowners may not draw a tag to hunt their land for several years. Unless you know the loop holes, like getting a doe tag (different allotment) and having a willing Iowa resident who will party hunt with you during one of the shotgun seasons and allow you to fill their any-sex tag.
That's a load of BS!
 
1,915
71
33
#47
I agree cutting a program that recruits new hunters isn't a good idea. If that is done and fewer or no new hunters come into the hunting area, then only older hunters are hunting and we are getting older and fewer.
Agree and Disagree, Typcially family members get children into hunting/fishing, with simple supply and demand I would gladly pay twice as much to have less hunters in the woods lol. I do see your point, but I truly think hunting in Ohio is as popular as ever, other states that maybe a different question and I think that has little to nothing to do with hunters ed or outreach programs.
 

MK111

Senior Member
Supporting Member
6,564
0
0
SW Ohio
#49
Agree and Disagree, Typcially family members get children into hunting/fishing, with simple supply and demand I would gladly pay twice as much to have less hunters in the woods lol. I do see your point, but I truly think hunting in Ohio is as popular as ever, other states that maybe a different question and I think that has little to nothing to do with hunters ed or outreach programs.
The records show a nationwide 10% drop in hunter numbers in a 10 year period 1996-2006. That a trend that will only continue.
In in practice the ones that quit and large number of their family members will not go into hunting. Then in the future those non hunters family members will not go into hunting and the trend just keeps getting larger every 10 year period.
To pay double for less hunters is almost the European idea of only the rich and famous being able to hunt. That's a bad idea.
 
1,915
71
33
#50
The records show a nationwide 10% drop in hunter numbers in a 10 year period 1996-2006. That a trend that will only continue.
In in practice the ones that quit and large number of their family members will not go into hunting. Then in the future those non hunters family members will not go into hunting and the trend just keeps getting larger every 10 year period.
To pay double for less hunters is almost the European idea of only the rich and famous being able to hunt. That's a bad idea.
We are already at a European idea, Ohio wants to copy Texas's model and they pay big money to rent a dove field for a day. Reason people quit hunting is its to aggravating and difficult to even successfully hunt small game. These federal funds, alliances should focus on creating more habitat, not more hunters, to quote field of dreams "If you biuld it, they will come". With the way we lose habitat I welcome and hope for less hunters, so my boys and I won't have to possibly compete as hard for land to be able to hunt. I do see your side of the coin and agree with what you say, I just think we are way past that point and I now focus on my and my family/friends hunting enjoyment.
 
Last edited:

giles

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
15,223
3,002
108
Lost
#51
We are already at a European idea, Ohio wants to copy Texas's model and they pay big money to rent a dove field for a day. Reason people quit hunting is its to aggravating and difficult to even successfully hunt small game. These federal funds, alliances should focus on creating more habitat, not more hunters, to quote filed of dreams "If you biuld it, they will come". With the way we lose habitat I welcome and hope for less hunters, so my boys and I won't have to possibly compete as hard for land to be able to hunt. I do see your side of the coin and agree with what you say, I just think we are way past that point and I now focus on my and my family/friends hunting enjoyment.
Rich mans sport....I do like Texas's use any implement though.
 
1,915
71
33
#52
If you are a non-resident land owner in Iowa, you still have to enter the non-resident drawing to even get an any-sex tag. So therefore some landowners may not draw a tag to hunt their land for several years. Unless you know the loop holes, like getting a doe tag (different allotment) and having a willing Iowa resident who will party hunt with you during one of the shotgun seasons and allow you to fill their any-sex tag.
How difficult is it for an Iowa resident that makes $20 an hour to access to decent hunting ground in Iowa (lease or permission) ? and how good is the state land there (decent chances, hunter in every stand, etc)?
 

reo

Junior Member
485
0
25
N.E. Ohio
#53
Cutting a program that helps recruit new hunters isn't a smart move in my opinion. Most of it is paid for through grants and Federal funding anyway. Much of the coursework can now be completed online too, so that cuts down on some costs.
My theory is that if there is ample game to hunt there will be new hunters getting into the game. Hunters, especially new hunters will quit hunting if they see little or nothing.
 

jagermeister

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
14,352
763
106
Ohio
#54
My theory is that if there is ample game to hunt there will be new hunters getting into the game. Hunters, especially new hunters will quit hunting if they see little or nothing.
15 years ago I would have agreed with you. But today, the power and attraction of technology is too great. Kids, even some parents, are doing less outside than ever before. I don't think a deer or turkey or grouse behind every tree would be enough to get these tech-crazed lethargic bums off their rear ends. Take fishing, for example. There's great fishing opportunities all across Ohio. Lake Erie in particular is abiut as good as it's ever been right now. Yet, are we seeing a boost in new fishing licenses?
 

bowhunter1023

Administrator
Staff member
Site Admin
40,226
1,833
162
Appalachia
#55
We are already at a European idea, Ohio wants to copy Texas's model and they pay big money to rent a dove field for a day. Reason people quit hunting is its to aggravating and difficult to even successfully hunt small game. These federal funds, alliances should focus on creating more habitat, not more hunters, to quote field of dreams "If you biuld it, they will come". With the way we lose habitat I welcome and hope for less hunters, so my boys and I won't have to possibly compete as hard for land to be able to hunt. I do see your side of the coin and agree with what you say, I just think we are way past that point and I now focus on my and my family/friends hunting enjoyment.
Lot of truth in this statement. Well said John.

Yea. You're a few weeks behind. I don't really like it, but I don't really see it being a huge issue. I wish they would have implemented a minimum acreage stipulation to that legislation.
If there were a minimum acreage requirement to this, I'd support it. As written, I am not a fan. I do feel if you own ENOUGH land and pay ENOUGH taxes, you should get this benefit, especially if I do just by owning and living on 2.5 acres. If you own 100 acres and pay 100 acres worth of taxes, you should get to enjoy the FULL benefit of that land without additional costs simply because you sleep outside an arbitrary boundary.

Now the aspect of this I don't like plays in to John's statement. With the trend from friends and family, to leasing and big $, vacant, rural land has exploded in value in the last 15 years. A lot of this is attributed to to the shale boom and a rise in the housing market, but even outside the shale window, prices have inflated and leasing is a large part of that. Land once "useless" from a hunting lease standpoint, was enjoyed by family and friends. Now, the almighty dollar has ran thousands of resident hunters off land they once hunted. Pockets deep enough to purchase/lease large tracts of vacant land often reside out of state. I can think of a couple "stubborn" hunters I know very well that refused to lease and lost ground as a result. They weren't alone in that either. You stick to your value and principles, but lose to others with no skin in that game. There are several "ugly" aspects to this entire scenario, this being one of them. That said, to the victor goes the spoils and being a capitalist, I say you should get to fully enjoy the spoils without unnecessary intrusion from government...
 

bowhunter1023

Administrator
Staff member
Site Admin
40,226
1,833
162
Appalachia
#56
15 years ago I would have agreed with you. But today, the power and attraction of technology is too great. Kids, even some parents, are doing less outside than ever before. I don't think a deer or turkey or grouse behind every tree would be enough to get these tech-crazed lethargic bums off their rear ends. Take fishing, for example. There's great fishing opportunities all across Ohio. Lake Erie in particular is abiut as good as it's ever been right now. Yet, are we seeing a boost in new fishing licenses?
Well said Jim. New hunter recruitment is as important, but also as difficult, as it has ever been. At least in my perspective. I would add this: I don't think we need MORE hunters. I value quality over quantity...
 
#57
How difficult is it for an Iowa resident that makes $20 an hour to access to decent hunting ground in Iowa (lease or permission) ? and how good is the state land there (decent chances, hunter in every stand, etc)?
I think getting access as a resident depends more on who you know versus how much you make (unless you have enough to buy your own of course). I know lots of folks who don't make a whole lot of money but hunt great ground. Pretty much all about connections instead of salary.
As for state land, it is limited. Especially in certain parts of the state. If I was a non-resident, I would avoid state ground totally during Iowa's 4 guns seasons (crowded), but would focus on it during the rut with a bow. Smaller public spots could also be better as they tend to get overlooked, and may be surrounded by managed ground.
 

Bigslam51

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
25,490
1,561
114
Stark County
#58
I think getting access as a resident depends more on who you know versus how much you make (unless you have enough to buy your own of course). I know lots of folks who don't make a whole lot of money but hunt great ground. Pretty much all about connections instead of salary.
As for state land, it is limited. Especially in certain parts of the state. If I was a non-resident, I would avoid state ground totally during Iowa's 4 guns seasons (crowded), but would focus on it during the rut with a bow. Smaller public spots could also be better as they tend to get overlooked, and may be surrounded by managed ground.
Jesse and I have us a spot picked out😂😂