Hello to all-
Just wondering about awareness and sentiment out there among the hunters on this board. Last year, Rayonier began auctioning some of their timberland parcels for "recreational use". Parties of no less than two, and, I believe, up to 40, could submit a bid for exclusive recreational access for said parcels.
Many more are up for bid this year. I don't see Weyerhauser and the other major timber companies being far behind. This would close a significant amount of previously available private timberlands to hunters.
While these are privately held lands, and the owners have every right to do as they please in this regard, just as I have a right to post my property, it is certainly frustrating. Just wonder about the other thoughts and opinions.

I have mixed feelings about a situation like this. I dont hunt said location, so I am not angry.

I believe in a tough economy; a company may try to generate cash flow in this manner. Its a small amount but it is "positive money" for the land owner.

Its terrrible for people that are used to hunting that location and have to find elsewhere to hunt. This potentialy could make an overcrowding issue at other public locations.

An argument that gets brought up here a lot is the "Rich guy" and "Cannned hunts". I believe this auction land is the perfect place for canned hunt rich guy.

Just my varying 2 cents.

They must be doing it in areas where Rayonier owns all the land, and not a shared gate with GHC, GD, Weyco etc? That seems like it would be a nightmare situation if you owned one of those parcels.

What types of properties are they? I imagine that they are getting rid of the ones that have the highest infrastructure costs (i.e. bridges) because of the shift instate Forest Practice rules to get more restrictive on stream crossings etc.

How big are they and what is the average cost they are going for per acre? As just recreation, with a very limited income capabilty I can't imagine they are selling for much. It is a bummer, in that 90% of the hunting in the area (GHC) is private timber property.

Dont they get a big tax break for leaving it open to the hunters and fishermen?

DP steelhead,

You took the words right out of my mouth!!!
These companys need to be paying the same taxes as the rest of us!!! This just pisses me off!!! Our state needs to step up to the plate and tell all the timber companys that all lands will be open for FULL public use or pay the full tax like anybody els. Our tax $$$ helped allot of these guys biuld roads into allot of these timber lands for fire and recreation many years ago and now they are telling us we can't use them anymore!!!

If they were made to pay the same taxes I think our budget shortage would be a little less.

I am right on the edge of not hunting this state anymore. After hunting Idaho for 6 years I find it harder each year to buy a liscense in Wa for this very reason.

kris

These land leases are not a good thing.

Just wait until we are kept out of the public lands in August. Where will the hunters go? Most will try to go to private (Rayonier/Simpson/Etc) and now they are going to leases?

Just wait until we are not allowed to hunt in September. It will happen faster than we think.

I never could figure out killing bull elk just before breeding time...

There is getting to be more and more people out there, and less land available, something is going to have to give somewhere. I guess most of us would be better off in a random drawing than a bidding war...

To answer a couple questions so we can all be more educated-
At a recent Grays Harbor Poggie Club meeting, 19th District Representative Brian Blake, who chairs the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, was asked the question about tax breaks for timber companies who permit public access. He stated this is a myth-there is NO TAX incentive-nothing, nada.
If you want to search www.rayonierhunting.com, you can look up the available parcels, complete with map, parcel size, and google earth satellite images.
It has gone from a few sample parcels last year to a sizeable number in Grays Harbor and and a few in Pacific Counties.
Yes, it is a cash flow generator for these companies. I believe, however, a much more equitable system might be, if they must profit, to sell access stickers , who knows, $20-$50, to all parties so desiring. In any case, they ARE going to look to profit from the use of their lands, and, as I said, Weyco, Green Diamond, et al are not going to be too far behind. These companies are also tired of garbage dumping, vandalism to logging equipment, timber theft, and the like. Even if they don't make the land available for a fee, look for them to make more parcels unaccessable to motorized vehicles.

Cast this,

Are you telling us that timber companies pay the same taxes per acre as I do? for some reason I don't buy it!!!!

I have no problem with them selling their land. I don't think they should be able to keep the public from useing it for hunting and fishing or camping.

Don't quote me, but the "tax break" is probably more likely for the land being listed as 'tree farms' or some such. Nothing more then what the avereage joe would get if he had a large tract of timberland.

When i lived in wisconson. the tree farm tax break only worked if it was open to pub. I assumeit is the same hear.

[quote=dcrzfitter]Cast this,

Are you telling us that timber companies pay the same taxes per acre as I do? for some reason I don't buy it!!!!

I have no problem with them selling their land. I don't think they should be able to keep the public from useing it for hunting and fishing or camping.

No, I am not telling you that, I am quoting what Rep. Blake stated. I think riverswild probably nailed it. Corporations, or individual land owners for that matter, can and do get significant reductions in taxes based on it's USE. Timberland and agricultural lands both get rates much lower than the residential.
I bought a 5 acre parcel about 13 years ago, part of small dairy farm which was parceled and sold. As long as it was land, I got taxed at the agricultural rate. When I built a house on it, the whole thing jumped to the residential rate. Just an example of how a change in use effects the tax rate.
If timber companies don't replant after a harvest, it will cause the rate to go up. If agricultural land does not yield some form of market product (milk from dairies, corn, hay, whatever), the rate changes.
Bottom line, it's their land, to open or close as they see fit. I would just like to think there is a more equitable way to do it than the manner they have chosen, so as not to have (more) overcrowding of public lands which will, in turn, lead to shorter seasons due to overharvest, etc., etc.

It's their land and they can limit access any way they want.
After cutting timber on private holdings for 36 years I'm amazed they allow us access to hunt at all. Illegal dumping and damage by atv's alone cost timber companys a ton of money every year. Twice,in areas we were working,people drove through gates clearly marked "No motorized acess" and past " danger! Logging operations ahead" signs.One was on a atv and hit brush on the edge of the road at high speed.He ended up in a wheelchair for the rest of his life.The other was a car with a man an woman,both bodies had blood alchol levels way above drunk,drove off the road at the head of a steep draw and were killed. In both cases the timber companies were suied.The companies won and the guy on the atv was found guilty of criminal tresspass and reckless endangerment after months and thousands of dollars litigating. Thats two incidence I personely witnessed,the number of times this sort of thing happens is any bodies guess.
One upside to fee for access.If the componies have the balls,like Champion did,they can stop the wasteful slaughter of our elk and deer by the Indians on timber company land anyway.