One statement that is driving me crazy is "hunting in IA" or "that ain't IA"
Take a deep breath and open your eyes and realize that there is more to life than Iowa. Just because you have access to unlimited land does not mean the rest of us are so fortunate. I found this article and thought that it summed up some very good points.

start of quote

"Probably most important, bowhunters can make themselves at home near suburban areas. Since most deer killed by archers are taken at 10 to 30 yards, bowhunters can and do hunt in places where guns simply aren’t practical. The fringe timber surrounding a suburban reservoir can host a number of bowhunters in places where even a single rifle wouldn’t be advisable.
As a result of such compatibility, plus the surge in suburban deer populations, bowhunters are knocking on doors that once were considered inviolate to any means of taking other than binoculars or camera. The backlash from the anti-hunting groups has been heated, and should grow even more intense as urban swell invades even more wildlife habitat on the cusp of our burgeoning cities.
It probably didn’t soothe any anti-bowhunters’ hard feelings towards their adversaries when the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service recently signed an agreement with leaders from archery organizations, promising to increase hunting opportunities on federal refuges and lauding bowhunters’ support of conservation measures.
As it stands, bowhunters have access to 308 refuges, and under the agreement will also be allowed on others deemed compatible. The Fish & Wildlife Service also vowed to help earmark Pittman-Robertson funds derived from taxes on sporting goods for additional archery-related programs.
Bowhunters are capable of determining their own destiny if they continue to stay organized and work with political and trade association allies. Along the way, it will remain imperative that they demand and abide by the dictates of good science, good ethics and self-policing.
In the past, it has been the bowhunters themselves who have been quick to condemn equipment innovations that present an unfair advantage and violate the basic principles of archery. Nor have they hesitated to censure dilettantes who display a lack of skill necessary to ensure a humane, fair harvest.
However, this could change as additional opportunities for bowhunting open up and bowhunter ranks swell more rapidly than self-policing can scrutinize. If this happens, the anti-bowhunting factions will be watching. They don’t want bowhunters in parks and refuges … in fact, they don’t want them at all.
No matter how they spin it, the HSUS and the Fund for Animals will never stop working to condemn and curtail archery hunting. They believe it is biologically wrong and culturally obscene. With their numbers growing just as fast, or maybe faster, than newly recruited bowhunters, the conflict promises to be a well-financed donnybrook—a clash of wills with the outcome hinging not only on political favor, but also on whose public image eventually captures the hearts and minds of the public at large."


end of quote


so just think about the future opportunities and don't respond with "we ain't got no state parks in IOWA"