BARRELVILLE, Md. (AP)- The state of Maryland says it is seeking to buy nearly 1,400 forested mountain acres in Allegany County for use as a public hunting ground.
The Department of General Services is negotiating with the Frazee Land Company on a price for the parcel.
Department of Natural Resources officials say they've been trying for a year to obtain the land.
GO HERE to read more from WBOC.
While the state lays off 200 workers and cuts $40,000,000.00+ more from the budget, can someone please tell me why on God's Green Earth the state is willing to pony up the money to buy hunting land?
18 comments:
Here are some possible answers. Pick the one you like best:
1. It is from some other pot of money, so it doesn't really affect the laying off of workers.
2. It's a great deal, so we need to move on it now, regardless of the economy. Do not look at the three year old comps, submitted by the current owner's appraisal company.
3. If we don't buy it right now, it will become a nuclear waste dumping site. That's bad. Very bad.
4. To preserve our way of life, we must preserve our rural character by purchasing this land. The 75,687 acres of parkland (source: garretchamber.com) that we have is not enough.
5. Of the 75,687 acres of parks, none contain deer that we can hunt.
6. Somebody in the state government has an interest in the Frazee land company, and we take care of our own.
7. Our tax base is too large, enabling a government that is way too large. The only way to address this issue is to buy up more land so that the state gets less tax money.
Feel free to add to the list.
Or possibly a combination of some or all of the above.
But in all seriousness another answer is that it's a parcel between or around properties already owned by the state and it's been in the State's Natural Resource Plan for awhile.
While we think and act for today, we do need to look forward to tomorrow and beyond.
If you look into it the land they buy is probably owned by a relative or lawmaker friend.
Probaby falls under Project Open Space.
Will they build handicapped stands like Delaware has?
Please governor stop spending our money on needless projects such as land. Purchase land later when the economy is better.
It is probably so after they buy it. They can stop hunting on that property. It is hard to hunt when they come around and take your guns away.
land purchase is a great plan as long as the tree huggers and anti hunters don't screw things up
The people who own this land once owned the land whereupon the Fire Palace now sinks.
This money is from tax on sporting ammunition through the Pittman Roberts act. We have the money in a fund, and it is for no other reason than to buy land like this. Can you say "Taxation WITH Representation"? I paid my money to this fund to buy hunting land, and if you want to spend it in any other way, I kill you.
A Sportsman
Well said 6:54, I too have contributed ALOT (ask my wife) to the Pittman Roberts fund. This is EXACTLY what this money should be used for. And what better time to do it, when the prices are low. Just dont do another Chesapeake Forest lands deal and keep 1/2 of it for private hunt clubs. Open it all up. BTW, for you animal rights people, it isn't just for hunting, it is open for anyone to walk through. I would just advise not to do it between September and January, and especially during the rut.
So McCain won't have to go to Africa to hunt next time!
Every acre owned by the state generates no tax revenue no matter how they paid for it. Land should be privately owned. The state ownes 10's of thousands of acres now, how much more do they want. Soon there will be none left for the private sector. There will be no need for hunting land anyway because Obama is going to take your guns away.
If State owned land was owned privately than it would be on tax role and the state could collect taxes on the parcels, than the budgets would not have to be cut so much.
dont forget the state bought land from smith foster furnace corp. north of the old furnace for only 14.4 million earlier this year.
Do you morons talking about the tax roles realize that most of this land purchased is not the most suitable land for development? Much of it wetlands? Do you morons know that these properties that are set up in tree farm situations generate next to nothing in taxes, because it is agricultural? I am all for the money that I have paid into a fund for wildlife conservation going towards buying land to conserve wildlife.
anonymous 9:17, prove it or STFU.
Joe, Just take a quick peek at the DNR website and look at where the vast majority of the public hunting lands are located. Nanticoke, Deal Island Marsh, Pocomoke Forest etc. I have hunted on many of these properties, and would be suprised if much if any could ever be developed. There may be a few parcels that could be developed. The majority of these lands were aquired through the Chesapeake Forest Lands Deal. They were set up as Tree Farms. A relative of mine owns a 50 acre parcel of property that is labeled as a "Tree Farm", he has to pay 30 bucks a year for some state guy to ride by and say "yep, them trees" and his property taxes are about $75. I think you would find it interesting how much money hunting brings to our area. People come down here and stay at hotels, go out to eat, go to stores, etc. etc. Bottom line, the money that buys that land is paid for through a fund FOR THAT PURPOSE, and also ensures that there will be someplace left for wildlife in the future. I really dont see an argument here.
You said prove it: (the tax rate is hypothetical)
Assume that a 100 acre parcel of land has a market value of $3,000 per acre. The total value of the parcel would be $300,000 (100 x $3,000). The same 100 acre parcel receiving the agricultural use assessment based on a value of $300 per acre would be $30,000 (100 x $300). The taxes using a combined tax rate of $1.132 per $100 of assessment would be $339 [($30,000 ÷ 100) x $1.132] under the agricultural use assessment and $3,396 [($300,000 ÷ 100) x $1.132] under the market value assessment – a difference of $3,057 or $30.57 per acre.
This illustration demonstrates the importance of the agricultural use assessment in terms of its tax savings. However, it must be emphasized that the savings decrease significantly as the market value of the land decreases. If, for example, the land were only worth $1,000 per acre rather than $3,000, the total taxes for the 100 acres would be $1,132 [(100,000 ÷ 100) x $1.132] and the tax savings would be $793 or $7.93 per acre. The closer the market value comes to $300, the less the tax savings.
(The above can be confirmed on the SDAT website)
Much of the lands in the Chesapeake forest land deal is not worth $1000 per acre. Its only real use would be for timber or hunting. To confirm that, here is a link to these forests so you can judge for yourself the value or worthiness of these properties.
http://www.dnr.maryland.gov/forests/chesapeakeforests/directions.html
While I am not stating that in other regions of the state, where there is not the amount of wetlands that are here on the shore, that there could be parcels suitable for other uses, the bulk of these lands are here on the shore and it is important to have these resources available throughout the state.
Post a Comment