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

[pianoman9701]

Unfortunately the animals don't know which is "their" land or which is "ours". Wildlife belongs to everyone, regardless of whose land it's on. Sick animals can travel and infect healthy animals. That's how Hair Loss Syndrome got spread. I would hope that if they closed it off completely the WDFW would then not allow them to manage their problem animals without DFW supervision and/or hunters. To take care of elk and bears, they'd need to allow hunters on the land.

[Blacktail Sniper]

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

I think it would go the same route as bears and hounds...the timber companies will still be able to get them removed via depredation/damage permits because someone will always be willing to do it...just ask any hound hunter in the loop since the ban went into effect. They gladly do the timber companies bidding since it is the only way they can work their dogs and they love killing bear, because if they don't kill, they don't get used.

And/or it will be like the recent elk cull a few months ago (there was  thread on here about it), where "professional sharp shooters" were employed to remove problem animals at night.  Either way, be it by "professional sharp shooters" or privileged, select "hunters," there will always be plenty of volunteers who will gladly step up to protect timber company resources and happily remove animals that pose problems just because they can.

[PolarBear]

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

They have been talking about shutting the woods down for all the public for years.  It would not surprise me if they got pissed off enough to actually do it.  Sierra Pacific has zero trespassing on a lot of their timber land, why not Weyco? 

[fireweed]

DRAFT   DRAFT     DRAFT
An Ordinance terminating the Current Use Timber Land program and declaring land previously designated in the Timber Land program to be Designated Forest Land, and prescribing minimum timber management plan requirements.
WHEREAS Chapter 137, Laws of 2014 allows a county legislative authority to merge its Current Use Timber Land classification into its Designated Forest Land (DFL) program, thereby terminating the Current Use Timber Land classification; and
WHEREAS Chapter 137, Laws of 2014 further reduces the acreage requirement for DFL classification from 20 to 5 acres, and provides the county flexibility to regulate a Timber Management Plan; and
WHEREAS since the 1971 Forest Tax Law, Chapter 84.22 RCW, designed to ensure that taxes will not destroy economic incentives for growing timber on private timber lands, imposes a severance tax on timber after a harvest as a tax against the timber, not against the land, use of Designated Forest Land for commercial fee-based recreation is not an incidental use of such land, and a revision to the County’s DFL program should be made to maintain the spirit of the law, which is to use the land for harvesting timber; and
WHEREAS the DFL program should be modified to prohibit commercial recreation fees for access on Designated Forest Land, and require each Timber Management Plan contain a statement by the landowner that no commercial recreational use of the property will occur and acknowledging that such use is prohibited under the DFL classification, and that such use will result in violation of their Forest Management Plan and removal of property from the DFL program; and
WHEREAS it is in the best interest of the County to merge its Current Use Timber Land classification into its DFL program, and terminate the Current Use Timber Land classification as provided by Chapter 137, Laws of 2014,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY:
Section 1. Purpose. This Ordinance is intended to merge the Grays Harbor County Current Use Timber Land classification into its Designated Forest Land program, terminating the Current Use Timber Land classification, and to prohibit commercial recreation fees for access to land classified in the Designated Forest Land program.
Ordinance No. _______ Page 2 of 3
Section 2. Definitions. This Ordinance utilizes existing commonly used definitions contained in Chapter 84.33 RCW as currently in force, or as hereafter may be amended, and as supplemented in this section. For purposes of this ordinance, a “Timber Management Plan” shall include, in addition to the elements provided in RCW 84.33.035 (21), a statement that access to the forest land is not subject to any commercial recreation fee or charge and that the owner is aware that requiring payment of a fee or charge to access the forest land will violate the terms of the Forest Management Plan and result in removal of the forest land from the Designated Forest Land program. For purposes of this Ordinance, "commercial recreation" means activity access for which a fee is charged, including but not limited to hiking, fishing, hunting, horseback riding, jogging, berry picking, mushroom picking, or floral salal picking for amusement, entertainment or recreation.
Section 3. Termination of Timber Land Classification. The Current Use Timber Land classification is hereby terminated.
Section 3.01 Merger With Designated Forest Land. Land that has been classified as Current Use Timber Land within the county is deemed to be Designated Forest Land under the provisions of RCW 84.33.130(1) and is no longer considered to be classified Current Use Timber Land for the purposes of Chapter 84.34 RCW.
Section 3.02 Previous Agreements Terminated. Any agreement prepared by the Assessor when an application was approved classifying land as Current Use Timber Land is terminated and no longer in effect. The Assessor must notify the Washington Department of Revenue after taking action under this section.
Section 3.03 Commercial Recreation Fees Prohibited. Fee-based commercial recreation is deemed to not constitute an incidental use of Designated Forest Land, and no owner shall charge or require payment of a commercial recreation fee for access to Designated Forest Land. Violation of this section shall result in removal of forest land from the Designated Forest Land Program under Chapter 84.33 RCW.
Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this ordinance.

[fireweed]

Don't think this is the best or right answer, but at least they are trying.  More of a political move, I think, to show that they are serious about this issue.  A better place to look at these tax classifications is at the state level.  Counties are dictated to by the state.  They are pretty powerless on their own, and have to look for wiggle room and some sort of control over their own county where they can find it. 
If it is adopted, it might not pass constitutional muster, but it could get someone at Weyco's attention. 
Therefore, I vote yes!

[snarkybull]

thanks for finding that, fireweed!

[Alan K]

I could see them shutting down all public access in a heart beat.  Then maybe they'll bring back the 'fringe benefit' of recreational access for employees that the permits did away with.   

[fireweed]

Timber companies cannot cut off all public recreation and still meet the SFI (sustainable Forestry Initiative certification) standard.  Yes, I know SFI is meaningless and wishy-washy, but it still requires a participant to "provide recreational opportunities for the public."
 They can limit, lease, restrict, use fees, and still be SFI, but they are already doing all that now.  The only thing left is to cut off public recreation entirely, which SFI says they can't do. 

[Alan K]

Maybe 'restrict' public access to members of employee's families. 

[kisfish]

tagging

[bigtex]

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

We may be sitting here in a year saying "I wish I could access Weyco lands." Paying a fee for access is better than no access at all. Many don't like change, but sometimes you need to roll with it. 

[pianoman9701]

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

We may be sitting here in a year saying "I wish I could access Weyco lands." Paying a fee for access is better than no access at all. Many don't like change, but sometimes you need to roll with it. 

And there are many who can't afford the change. People are already paying for access by paying the taxes that WEYCO doesn't on those lands and now WEYCO wants to charge them and keep the tax breaks. And if they do pay the fee, they have a really good chance of killing a sick animal.

[Pacific]

Unfortunately, simple economics come into play...just like the $15 min. wage in Seatac....any extra expense, whether it be taxes, wages, or the cost of cleaning up after the slobs and extra maintenance on their roads, will be passed on to the consumer eventually....higher prices on lumber, paper, etc.

As has been said before, the actions of a small percentage of the people ruin the opportunity for the rest of us.

I, for one, just refuse to buy the permit/permits......

[Curly]

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

We may be sitting here in a year saying "I wish I could access Weyco lands." Paying a fee for access is better than no access at all. Many don't like change, but sometimes you need to roll with it. 

And there are many who can't afford the change. People are already paying for access by paying the taxes that WEYCO doesn't on those lands and now WEYCO wants to charge them and keep the tax breaks. And if they do pay the fee, they have a really good chance of killing a sick animal.

 

Yeah, we may be wishing for access to their timberlands in the future, but that is not a reason to sit back on our hands and not try to do the right thing.  At least Grays Harbor County is going to be discussing the issue.  I'm glad they are.

I hope Fireweed will go to the meeting or at least send them a letter.  He sure has a good handle on the issues with access and taxes.

[Special T]

Well since much of the state land and private land is checkerboarded the state could push back if they wanted. Is a private timber Co wants to block access that affects public land, the state could block the private company as well.

I am not excited about Private companies and their practices but I am really upset at our inability to access public lands that we are locked out of.