Grays Harbor VS Weyco
- Thread starter slowp
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
I'm no fan of Weyco but I agree with what they're proposing. It's their ground and they have a right to limit access to it.
Hunters and other recreational users do not have a "right" to use private lands in any way that suits them.
Hunters and other recreational users do not have a "right" to use private lands in any way that suits them.
RiverLogger
ArboristSite Operative
My home is surrounded by Weyco property. Used to be Longview Fibre until around the first of this year. Fibre was great to me giving me wood permits for free and letting me clean up any blowdown. The local tree farm manager here told me the access will probably go the way of pay-to-play soon. Too bad because my wife and I always enjoy taking our son and dog for walks on their land. Not interested in paying to walk on their land. I would say 75% of the private land in my surrounding area is now Weyco land that will not be available for general "free" recreation. I completely understand Weycos thinking, I just think it's too bad for the common man that doesn't have the extra income to pay their fees. I have another year to worry about it because I drew both my deer and elk tags on the eastside this year.
oregon steel
ArboristSite Lurker
What part of Eastern Oregon did you draw, a lot of the old Boise Cascade, now Hancock, land will be closed to vehicle travel from the first day of archery to the last day of turkey. Good deal if they stop there. No timber or ranch property could make it without the property tax breaks, it would all be logged and sold.
RiverLogger
ArboristSite Operative
I drew a Murderers Creek elk tag and a Fossil deer tag. We hunt NF land in Murderers Creek and a friends ranch in Fossil. I know I did a backpacking trip into the Eagle Caps a couple years ago and had to detour due to Hancock closing their land due to fire danger. Hancock, here in the coast range has been walk-in only for YEARS. Doesn't break my heart as it's pretty easy to get away from people with little effort.
RiverLogger
ArboristSite Operative
I often wonder how long it will be before people start retaliating and doing really bad things. Beyond dumping and 4-wheeling. Like fires or destroying trees on a major level. I wouldn't put it past some of the "entitled" people to due stupid things like this, especially with a couple man-cans of Busch Light under their belts.
Most of the private timber land around here has been closed off for years now, mostly due to meth labs and garbage dumping, vandalism wasn't much of a problem, although people still seem to think cutting trees down with a shotgun on private ground is just plain ok and accepted.
DNR ground has been largely shut off for much the same reasons.
And now the FS is talking of road closures due to budget constraints... (ass hats)
DNR ground has been largely shut off for much the same reasons.
And now the FS is talking of road closures due to budget constraints... (ass hats)
OlympicYJ
ArboristSite Guru
Yeah it's been an interesting dynamic. Folks I work with didn't think it'd pass. I have mixed feelings about it myself.
So frustrating. Back in the day, private and public landowners alike understood that allowing access to their land was good publicity and allowed firewooders in to clear roads for free. Then the EPA made hazardous waste disposal expensive and all of a sudden dumping became a major liability. Note that I'm not blaming the EPA for the dumpers' activities, but rather for the expense if disposal that drove them to dump in forest land rather than just putting it out with their household trash. Nowadays, no landowner can afford that disposal and locking things up is the only sensible thing to do. As usual, a few bad apples have spoiled things for the rest of us. On the property where I work, there are very few fences, and, as a result, there's a lot of dumping. I hear tell that it's on the order of a million bucks a year to dispose of everything. Pretty sure we could afford a fence for a year or two of that, but...
I like the compromise that the timber company in my back yard has. Walking, bike riding or horse riding is OK. Motorized? No. It's hard to carry a refrigerator on a horse, bike, or back. Hunting is OK too with the same restrictions. They do shut it down when fire danger gets high. The Forest Service put up some cameras and got some folks using the Watch Mountain unofficial appliance dump.
Lewis County does offer one free load at the dumping station per year and sometimes has days where tires and appliances are allowed at a discount.
It seems like hunting would be a desirable activity--deer, elk, and bears munch and vandalize
trees.
Lewis County does offer one free load at the dumping station per year and sometimes has days where tires and appliances are allowed at a discount.
It seems like hunting would be a desirable activity--deer, elk, and bears munch and vandalize
trees.
RiverLogger
ArboristSite Operative
I like the compromise that the timber company in my back yard has. Walking, bike riding or horse riding is OK. Motorized? No. It's hard to carry a refrigerator on a horse, bike, or back. Hunting is OK too with the same restrictions. They do shut it down when fire danger gets high. The Forest Service put up some cameras and got some folks using the Watch Mountain unofficial appliance dump.
Lewis County does offer one free load at the dumping station per year and sometimes has days where tires and appliances are allowed at a discount.
It seems like hunting would be a desirable activity--deer, elk, and bears munch and vandalize
Glad to hear they got some people on camera. I have often wondered why they don't use these more in situations of "popular" dump sites. I got a bowhunter on a trail cam on Weyco property last year when the woods were closed due to fire danger. I guess he figured the sign was for everyone except him? Blatant abuse of the resources and the rules is the main reason all the gates started closing in the 90's. A friend of the family owns thousand and thousands of acres here and was one of the first to close gates and only allow walk-in because of the vandalism. Stealing fuel, joyriding in logging equipment, and breaking windows seems to be popular. Again usually associated with a few Busch Lights or Rainier tall boys.
Humptulips
ArboristSite Guru
Typical comment from someone who doesn't understand what is at stake.If the hunters don't like it they can buy their own land. Commie bastards!
Mr. HE
The timber companies get a huge tax break for among other things "recreational space". So why should the public basically subsidize WEYCO et al if there is not some benefit in return for those tax breaks? For those that don't know most "forestland" in GH County is assessed at $150/acre. Forestlands assessed value is set by law instead of Fair Market Value and Sportsmen have been Timber companies biggest supporters because of the access they used to enjoy.
This is going to come back to bite WEYCO et al big time IMO.
And if anyone thinks this is about dumping and vandalism you're barking up the wrong tree. They could have locked all the gates and allowed walk in access. No, this is about double dipping. They want their tax break for recreational space and charge for it at the same time.
I see three likely scenarios to this in the end.
1. The pay to access goes away and is replaced with free walk in access and pay to drive in.
2. Timber owners get a tiered tax rate. Higher for pay to access and lower for free access.
3. Timberlands get closed to everyone and WEYCO et al lose their SFI certification because it requires recreation.
Really I think the first two are likely and the third not so much.
One thing for sure they have burned a lot of goodwill with this. Remember all the WEYCO commercials about how good of stewards of the land they are. They just wasted that. Between outsourcing all their jobs, pay to access and all the spraying it almost seems like they are trying to make enemies.
I think this is far from over and will likely have to be settled by the Legislature.
You don't see any threats to subdivide their land and sell it for second homes (formerly called cabins)? That would take it out of timber production.
This is a rock-solid point. I'd like very much to see this come up in court so there's a legal precedent for how this is handled legally. Surely the state doesn't appreciate losing tax revenue?
That's pretty much how a REIT works. It's not a threat; it's business as usual. However, they'll not sell a lot of land in places where folks won't buy or build. Market will drive that. Of course, the demographics might change a bit in the not-too-distant future.
Humptulips
ArboristSite Guru
There is worry about that but for most of the forestland I don't think it will happen. There are costs to develop land for housing and the farther you get back in the woods the higher it is. Like madhatte said they are doing it anyway where there is money to be made so I don't see much change.
Also you might consider what might happen to land values if someone like WEYCO were to throw a couple million acres of land on the market. They would take a big loss and that is not what a REIT is all about. It's all about the dollar so I predict they will do what makes them the most money.
Humptulips
ArboristSite Guru
I think WEYCO et al are on rock solid legal ground now. That doesn't mean the laws can't be changed. That is what I mean by I think they are making a huge mistake. They actually have a pretty good thing going. and this could throw a monkey wrench in everything. I'm sure you know there are a lot of people who don't like logging. We don't need to increase that number. They could end up losing more then just their tax status in the long run.
Can't say that I have any love for Weyco any more (grew up in a Weyco family and have worked for them in several capacities in my career); they are not the same company they were 30 years ago. I still have friends in the company but fewer every year as they move on to brighter prospects.
RiverLogger
ArboristSite Operative
You know there is just something about being a good neighbor. I wouldn't consider charging access fees being a good neighbor. On the other hand I also know that if I owned a huge amount of property I may very well lock out all but friends and family. I have been told by my local Weyco tree farm manager that they had way less problem with dumping and vandalism when the property was completely open to public travel. I do believe this is the way of the future and it sucks.
As I understand it, dumping was sort of tolerated back in the day because it didn't incur any immediate costs on the landowner. Now, of course, landowners are liable for the disposal of hazardous materials, so car batteries, refrigerators, etc. all cost them money up front, which is what prompted the expense of gates and security. This is a hidden cost of environmental compliance.
Similar threads
