grays harbor county and weyco...this should be interesting

[snarkybull]

http://www.co.grays-harbor.wa.us/gh_minutes/Minutes/agenda20140609.pdf


june 23 hearing on potential tax classification changes.

[pd]

Very happy to see this. I hope Grays Harbor hunters attend en masse.

[Curly]

Will be interesting.

-Set Hearing Date – June 23, 2014 – Ordinance merging timber land and designated forest land classifications and prescribing timber plans minimums and prohibiting certain fees

[snarkybull]

I hope Grays Harbor hunters attend en masse.

i don't think they are gonna check your address at the door
seriously, anybody who hunts in grays harbor county should show up.  you leave money here, too.

[washelkhunter]

Whatever happens in Grays could effect timberlands statewide.

[pianoman9701]

So, this is a proposal to prohibit a landowner from being able to charge certain fees to access his own land? If so, I would be against this. It's one thing to attempt through the legislature to change the tax code regarding actively logged and non-actively logged acres in light of new access fees. It's another altogether to say someone can't charge access fees to their own land. If this is the case, I wouldn't support any move like this. Please clarify this for me, Snarkybull. Thanks.

[bucklucky]

Hope this does not backfire on us. I could see weyco closing the land completely and not allowing the public on ...ever...

[bobcat]

Hope this does not backfire on us. I could see weyco closing the land completely and not allowing the public on ...ever...

[stevemiller]

So, this is a proposal to prohibit a landowner from being able to charge certain fees to access his own land? If so, I would be against this. It's one thing to attempt through the legislature to change the tax code regarding actively logged and non-actively logged acres in light of new access fees. It's another altogether to say someone can't charge access fees to their own land. If this is the case, I wouldn't support any move like this. Please clarify this for me, Snarkybull. Thanks.

I agree with your thought Pman but look at it like this,All the billionaires in the US buy up all the public land and they are anti hunters,Then how do you look at it?who owned these timber lands before they were bought?What were the conditions of these sales when they were sold?If we let this country go to the people with the most money all the time we will all lose.That doesnt just go for the timber land issue it goes for all issues that all of us user groups have.     

[snarkybull]

So, this is a proposal to prohibit a landowner from being able to charge certain fees to access his own land? If so, I would be against this. It's one thing to attempt through the legislature to change the tax code regarding actively logged and non-actively logged acres in light of new access fees. It's another altogether to say someone can't charge access fees to their own land. If this is the case, I wouldn't support any move like this. Please clarify this for me, Snarkybull. Thanks.

If I knew the details I would share.  I don't know anything you don't.   but this is where voices can be heard.

[pianoman9701]

Well, if you go, you know my opinion.

[northwesthunter84]

If I am understanding this correctly it would change the tax classification for industrial timber companies.  This would not have an effect on John or Jane Doe charging for access to the property.  Those are two different things.  I am originally from Illinois where hunting leases are common practice.  The land owner still has to claim the revenue as income.  The problem with timber companies is there tax designation is lower than John or Jane and my bet is they are not getting taxed at the same rate you or I would if we made 2.5 million a year (sample of access permit revenue).  Think about property tax for land that you intend to buy undeveloped (check county assessor office records) and compare that to the taxes that the timber companies pay.  The rates are different.  Now as far as the timber company having the right to charge for access.  It is their right, they own the land and I can't fault them for it.  It will always and forever be the golden rule that the actions of a few dictate the future for everyone and after what I have seen and heard that is part of what got us here.  Also as far as corporate tax goes as long as the money gets paid out, (bonuses, equipment, losses for example are all right-offs), then the tax rate is also lowered further.  All in all its a tax code nightmare that benefits who ever has the professionals looking for loop holes to make more money.   

[MarkyMark]

What could possibly go wrong? Gates and no access period. Then we can all hunt the Capitol Forest together.

[Blacktail Sniper]

What could possibly go wrong? Gates and no access period. Then we can all hunt the Capitol Forest together.

Sadly, that is a very real possibility...

[bowbuild]

Hope this does not backfire on us. I could see weyco closing the land completely and not allowing the public on ...ever...

If that's the case, so be it. Let the critters have their way on THEIR land, and leave OUR animals alone. It has been pointed out in the past that the game department rarely has to follow private property as to enforce the law, and I hope if they (timber companies) shut it down they actively protect our wildlife behind these gates, whether there are hunters or not!

Bowbuild