Man shot one up by Indian Lake a few years back.
What does Illinois and Iowa do?
That's a load of BS!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!
I'm talking about non resident landowners having to draw a tag to hunt land they paid for.I don't see a problem with party hunting. Some day I might be too old to put a good shot on something ht still able to make the trip. I'd love for my kids to be able to proxy for me.
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.
That's a load of BS!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?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.
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.
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.
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?
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)?
Jesse and I have us a spot picked outI 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
Hell we might even get filmed on a popular show if we ever hunt it.I don't know what you're talking about... lmao