In this Issue:
Your MFL Agreement WILL BE a Contract
Department of Revenue and Forest Land Taxation Issues
Work with Key Legislators Continues
Your MFL Agreement WILL BE a Contract
In February, WAFO objected to a proposed rule which stated the DNR could change management plans without landowner agreement. Here’s what the DNR proposed:
NR 46.18 (10) AMENDING A MANAGEMENT PLAN. Owners may be required to amend their management plan under s. 77.82 (3) (f), Stats., to maintain compliance with the provisions of this chapter and subch. IV of ch. 77, Stats., when taking actions in accordance with an existing management plan may conflict with sound forestry or program requirements. The land may be withdrawn under s. 77.88 (1), Stats., if the owner does not agree to amend the plan.
WAFO recommended, and the DNR accepted, new language which makes it clear that management plans can only be changed with landowner agreement. The new language states that:
NR 46.18 (10) Amending a management plan. Owners may amend their management plan under s. 77.82 (3) (f), Stats., for reasons that include;
- Landowner requests a change that maintains the management plan’s required compliance with the provisions of this chapter and subch. VI of ch 77, Stats.
- The management plan is inaccurate or missing information.
- On the ground conditions have changed since the time of entry to the extent that the prescribed practices in the plan are no longer considered sound forestry practices
- Changes in silvicultural research and practices, including invasive species management, to the extent that the prescribed practices in the plan are no longer considered sound forestry practices.
With this new language in place, WAFO offered testimony in support of the rule at the DNR’s Natural Resources Board June meeting. On October 2nd we again offered support for the new rule before the Assembly Committee on Forestry, Parks and Outdoor Recreation.
At the hearing, WAFO thanked the DNR for their willingness to help make the MFL, once again, a more landowne-friendly program.
The DNR has also acknowledged that the MFL agreements many of us have recently signed will be modified. Changes include replacing “required” with “recommended” in several sections, adding a statement that plans can only be changed with landowner agreement, removing language that stated landowners must comply with any future “policies” the DNR may develop, and more clearly stating that certain Endangered Resources and water quality BMPs are required only if the landowner wishes to have their timber meet “certified wood” criteria.
Department of Revenue and Forest Land Taxation Issues
In a continuing effort to see that lands are fairly taxed, WAFO provided recommendations to the Department of Revenue (DoR) that would provide landowners with information on how their lands are classified and then differentially taxed. Several woodland owners who have recently withdrawn land from the MFL discovered their withdrawal penalty was much higher than expected. For example, WAFO is currently working with one landowner to get his penalty of $30,000 reduced to the $5,000 he had expected, had his assessor properly classified the land before it was withdrawn from the MFL.
In a meeting with DoR Secretary Peter Barca, WAFO was asked to provide recommendations on individuals for the Secretary-appointed Farmland Advisory Council. This statutorily authorized council is charged with making recommendations on use-value assessment of rural lands. We hope that several of the candidates we suggested will be considered. Working through this Council is a big step toward productive forest lands being treated more equitably to other agricultural croplands. We do wonder why only woods that are located on tax parcels associated with other croplands be taxed at 50% of fair market value? If our woods are being actively managed to produce timber, shouldn’t they also be taxed at 50% of fair market value?
Work with Key Legislators Continues
Keeping our legislative representatives informed of the issues that woodland owners face is a continuing effort. In addition to our work in the Capitol which includes attending meetings and providing testimony, two of our members recently hosted a forestry tour for Senator Jeff Smith, a member of the Senate Forestry Committee.
Sen. Smith spent a morning in Buffalo County with WAFO friends Mike Greenheck and Don Baloun who organized a tour for him. One highlight was showing the Senator how oaks are being re-established in a woods that had been clear cut a few years ago. When asked how the tour went, the Senator said he learned a lot and now has a new appreciation for the benefits of active forest management, as well as the many benefits “young forests” provide us.