Organized Boycott of Elk tag purchase due to private timber access permits

[pianoman9701]

It's not a revenue thing. WFW region 5 is learning more about this as we speak. Some of us have joined a sportsman club that help WEYCO steward their property by maintaining gates, reporting violators, and doing things like trash details. These kind of groups can be beneficial for these large private landowners and visa versa. I and others have been saying all along that we have needed to establish WEYCO's motivations for what they're doing. I believe we've done that and it's to curb vandalism/property damage and abuse of privileges, as well as possibly liability.

We've also been saying for some time that boycotting elk tags or licenses would have no effect on WEYCO or anyone else, with the small possibility of the DFW being affected. That would only happen if the boycott were big and statewide. I think a boycott for this is looking dumber and dumber.

[frostman]

I agree with that. I will be looking at WFW more closely. I would like to come to the meeting but it is WAY out my hood. I do not agree with boycott. I WILL be hunting elk this year.....somewhere.

The biggest challenge facing the hunting community is not having a STRONG AND UNIFIED voice. I hope that your efforts can be focused and productive. Make sure to stay on point here.

My point is that I have noticed a lot of guys who think they can just pay up $150 and get a permit. Also, how many guys in eastside areas or guys that hunt NF areas that think this will not have an impact on them. Think again, fellas.

Another item to consider - How much private timberland that is gated that ultimately accesses either NF or DNR lands? These should be public access corridors.

[AKBowman]

Am still surprised that some hunters would want this boycott because private land owners charge access fees to hunt their lands and even more surprised that a proposed solution is to punish those timberland companies and owners that do so by demanding the legislature be approached to have their property taxes increased.

As hunters, we grudgingly pay money to the state for licenses fees and permits so the WDFW can manage wildlife; we pay money for guns, ammo, bows and arrows; we pay money for specialized clothing and footwear; we pay money for specialized camping and cooking gear; we pay money for tents, cots and sleeping bags; we pay money for specialized motor vehicles (4-wheelers, pick-ups, SUV's) and even trailers; we pay money for food and fuel; we pay money for processing and packaging meat if we are lucky enough to kill and elk or deer; we pay money for taxidermy; we even may pay money for guides, pack horses and the like; and yet, we somehow come up with the notion that if we have to pay a landowner or timber company a fee to access their private land that helps offset costs they incur to take care of that land, well that is just off limits, way out of line and patently unfair and un-American. If you look at it, do annual or season long access fees and permits like Weyco's or Hancock's really cost most hunters more than a good pair of hunting boots? Probably not, so why all the angst and anger?

And back to Weyco, according to their 2012 annual report and 10K filing (yes, its on line for all to read), they actually lost $27mm in 2012 for various land management initiatives, including recreational activities, land and hunting permits, grazing rights, firewood sales and other misc. related activities. So much for the notion that hunting and access fees are a gold mine for timber companies and private land owners and a way to stick it to hunters. With assets of $12 billion and annual US revenues of $5 billion, Weyco's idea to charge for hunting and access fees to the Vail, Pe Ell and St. Helens tree farms won't generate enough for tip money, let alone lunch money.

And lastly, why the push and plea for increased property taxes? Timberland owners, large and small, are really farmers...its just that it takes 40 - 50 years for their crops to rotate and generate revenues, rather than most dirt farmers whose crops can be rotated and sold to generate revenues every year. Timberland owners pay lower annual property taxes to offset the fact that their land set aside for growing trees generates no cash flow for a long period of time and then at the time of harvest 40 - 50 years later, they pay an extra excise tax to help make up for this property tax deferment.

Think about it...do we really want to prohibit any private landowner's right to restrict or limit the public's access to their lands for hunting and other recreational purposes ? If we own 6 acres, 60 acres, 600 acres or 6 million acres, none of us wants unfettered and unrestricted public access to our private property, even to those hunters who feel they have a "right" to hunt wildlife wherever they want and wherever it is...for free!

No offense intended but I think you should go back and re read the thread. The problem that a lot of us have with the current situation is that the timber companies take advantage of a public tax subsidy and are now charging for access. Private company double dipping at the expense of the public (not just hunters but all of the public). It's not OK. No one is arguing that every private landowner has to provide free public access but every private land owner who has part of their taxes subsidized to provide public access should provide access or not be able to benefit from the tax break.

I agree with Pianoman a boycott against WDFW is not looking smart at this point but  don't let Weyco pull the wool over your eyes,doubling dipping at the expense of the public is not OK. Cutting off access to public lands is not OK.

Pianoman - have you guys had a chance to meet with Weyco to ask them what their intentions or goals are behind the access fees?

[pianoman9701]

Am still surprised that some hunters would want this boycott because private land owners charge access fees to hunt their lands and even more surprised that a proposed solution is to punish those timberland companies and owners that do so by demanding the legislature be approached to have their property taxes increased.

As hunters, we grudgingly pay money to the state for licenses fees and permits so the WDFW can manage wildlife; we pay money for guns, ammo, bows and arrows; we pay money for specialized clothing and footwear; we pay money for specialized camping and cooking gear; we pay money for tents, cots and sleeping bags; we pay money for specialized motor vehicles (4-wheelers, pick-ups, SUV's) and even trailers; we pay money for food and fuel; we pay money for processing and packaging meat if we are lucky enough to kill and elk or deer; we pay money for taxidermy; we even may pay money for guides, pack horses and the like; and yet, we somehow come up with the notion that if we have to pay a landowner or timber company a fee to access their private land that helps offset costs they incur to take care of that land, well that is just off limits, way out of line and patently unfair and un-American. If you look at it, do annual or season long access fees and permits like Weyco's or Hancock's really cost most hunters more than a good pair of hunting boots? Probably not, so why all the angst and anger?

And back to Weyco, according to their 2012 annual report and 10K filing (yes, its on line for all to read), they actually lost $27mm in 2012 for various land management initiatives, including recreational activities, land and hunting permits, grazing rights, firewood sales and other misc. related activities. So much for the notion that hunting and access fees are a gold mine for timber companies and private land owners and a way to stick it to hunters. With assets of $12 billion and annual US revenues of $5 billion, Weyco's idea to charge for hunting and access fees to the Vail, Pe Ell and St. Helens tree farms won't generate enough for tip money, let alone lunch money.

And lastly, why the push and plea for increased property taxes? Timberland owners, large and small, are really farmers...its just that it takes 40 - 50 years for their crops to rotate and generate revenues, rather than most dirt farmers whose crops can be rotated and sold to generate revenues every year. Timberland owners pay lower annual property taxes to offset the fact that their land set aside for growing trees generates no cash flow for a long period of time and then at the time of harvest 40 - 50 years later, they pay an extra excise tax to help make up for this property tax deferment.

Think about it...do we really want to prohibit any private landowner's right to restrict or limit the public's access to their lands for hunting and other recreational purposes ? If we own 6 acres, 60 acres, 600 acres or 6 million acres, none of us wants unfettered and unrestricted public access to our private property, even to those hunters who feel they have a "right" to hunt wildlife wherever they want and wherever it is...for free!

No offense intended but I think you should go back and re read the thread. The problem that a lot of us have with the current situation is that the timber companies take advantage of a public tax subsidy and are now charging for access. Private company double dipping at the expense of the public (not just hunters but all of the public). It's not OK. No one is arguing that every private landowner has to provide free public access but every private land owner who has part of their taxes subsidized to provide public access should provide access or not be able to benefit from the tax break.

I agree with Pianoman a boycott against WDFW is not looking smart at this point but  don't let Weyco pull the wool over your eyes,doubling dipping at the expense of the public is not OK. Cutting off access to public lands is not OK.

Pianoman - have you guys had a chance to meet with Weyco to ask them what their intentions or goals are behind the access fees?

Our chapter President has scheduled one meeting already. We've had very positive response from WEYCO regarding their land and access to it. Indeed, vandalism and littering/dumping are two major reasons they've decided to go pay-to-play. We've contacted a local sportsman's group (in fact, a couple of us have joined the group) who already has a relationship with WEYCO and helps them steward their land. In return for the cooperation, people who volunteer their time have unlimited access. Our emphasis in Reg 5 WFW is to find out other areas where WEYCO is having problems where we have members, and possibly set up similar programs of stewardship and cooperation. This could well become a statewide effort for WFW if it works locally in Reg 5.

I would encourage any of you who don't currently belong to WFW to sign up. It's free if you don't want to cough up $30. The link is at the top of the page on the right side. The stronger WFW becomes, the more effective we'll be on having an influence with and gaining the trust of private landowners who are afraid to allow unfettered access to their valuable property and assets.

[AKBowman]

Littering and garbage dumping doesn't sound like a legit excuse when the gates are closed and have been closed to motorized public access. It make much more sense that they are trying to get the most money out of each acre of land they have like any good business would. Providing free unlimited access to those that volunteer is a nice gesture but IMO it's a small part of the bigger picture, it's OK for now but not a permanent solution. As others have stated no one is packing or biking in their garbage to dump it on private timber lands so I can't see the reason for pay to play being garbage dumping.

It would be nice to hear them admit it is for improvement of their bottom line.

[pianoman9701]

Littering and garbage dumping doesn't sound like a legit excuse when the gates are closed and have been closed to motorized public access. It make much more sense that they are trying to get the most money out of each acre of land they have like any good business would. Providing free unlimited access to those that volunteer is a nice gesture but IMO it's a small part of the bigger picture, it's OK for now but not a permanent solution. As others have stated no one is packing or biking in their garbage to dump it on private timber lands so I can't see the reason for pay to play being garbage dumping.

It would be nice to hear them admit it is for improvement of their bottom line.

Given that I have personal experience with a group that's been granted full access to their property because of the volunteer work they perform for WEYCO, I'd have to disagree with your assessment somewhat. Although there may be a financial motivator in there, there is also room for discussion with them to allow free access to volunteers who help protect their assets. Gates and locks are broken all the time. Someone on a dirt bike can also easily get around gates. There are people who've actually staged public races and events on their land without their permission. Their machinery gets shot up. I've seen dumping sites behind broken locked gates. Some of this is from hunters, some from environmental wackos, some from tweekers, some from jerks who don't want to pay the $25 to dump their fridge at the local transfer station.

[pianoman9701]

AKB, Although the end result may be a positive number for their bottom line, I now believe it's the vandalism and destruction of assets which prompted them to start restricting access in the first place. This is an important point and the volunteerism from those who use the property shows WEYCO that people want to invest in the company's success to share in the benefits. So, you can oppose the company for charging, or you can choose to try and partner with them to achieve common goals. To me, it's a no-brainer. It's going to be a lot easier to work within the system for mutual benefit than it is to try and force them to your will through legislative process.

As far as the original idea of this thread, I can see no benefit to anyone by boycotting license or tag sales.

[AKBowman]

AKB, Although the end result may be a positive number for their bottom line, I now believe it's the vandalism and destruction of assets which prompted them to start restricting access in the first place. This is an important point and the volunteerism from those who use the property shows WEYCO that people want to invest in the company's success to share in the benefits. So, you can oppose the company for charging, or you can choose to try and partner with them to achieve common goals. To me, it's a no-brainer. It's going to be a lot easier to work within the system for mutual benefit than it is to try and force them to your will through legislative process.

As far as the original idea of this thread, I can see no benefit to anyone by boycotting license or tag sales.

As far as the original idea of this thread I would agree that there is no benefit to boycotting license or tag sales, a lot of good points have been made since this thread started.

I want to make one thing clear, I don't oppose them for charging access fees, I oppose them for doubling dipping or taking advantage of the system as it is set up. I am under the belief that we should work with them and help patrol and clean the lands. That being said I am also under the belief that they will continue to take advantage of the system and free dollars out of the publics taxes until the system changes.

Acceptable Options;
1. Don't take the tax subsidy but charge fees for access
2. Take advantage of the tax subsidy but don't charge fees for access

Unacceptable Options;
1. Accept tax subsidy in lieu of public access AND charge fees for public access

No matter the result I do agree we need to work with them but accepting free access for those who volunteer is not a final solution IMO.

[Prohunter270]

AKBowman, your a fool!!! I have a 5,000 acre ranch I charge an access fee on, go you want to raise my taxes also!!! Plenty of elk on public land and if not pay for access!!! It's there land and can do what they want with it!!!

[_TONY_]

AKBowman, your a fool!!! I have a 5,000 acre ranch I charge an access fee on, go you want to raise my taxes also!!! Plenty of elk on public land and if not pay for access!!! It's there land and can do what they want with it!!!

Do you get a tax discount for allowing public access to your ranch?

[Prohunter270]

Tony, know I don't. It's ran like a business. Wish I did!