Bristol, n.h.
The move is aimed at demonstrating the contribution that privately owned timberland makes to the state’s economic health in granting public access for snowmobiling, hunting, fishing and ATVs. Snowmobiling alone generates some $600 million in “economic activity” in the state each season, the sport’s trade group says.
“As a forest owner, I’ve been an advocate (of) open land,” Tom Thomson, an Orford tree farmer told a standing-room-only crowd of professionals in the logging and forest industries who gathered on Thursday night in the cavernous truck garage of a Bristol logging and trucking company. “But there may be a day, if this bill is not overridden, it may no longer (be open). That would be a sad day.”
In June, Sununu vetoed a bill that would have required utilities to purchase a share of their electricity from six biomass plants in the state that burn wood chips. He argued the legislation amounted to a subsidy that would lead to higher electricity bills for ratepayers while doing nothing to shore up the financial health of the plants, which are struggling to compete with lower-cost electricity produced by hydro and natural gas.
The timber and logging interests say that having the biomass plants to which they can sell wood chips from low-grade timber provides a viable and essential market that supports their businesses — and businesses that rely upon them, from equipment sellers to fuel suppliers to truck stops — as well as allows them to sustainably manage forests.
Discussion at the meeting in Bristol focused increasingly on the prospect of closing off public access to their property if the veto is not overturned in September when lawmakers return to Concord. The aim is to show the governor and pro-veto lawmakers that the state’s economy is a two-way street, landowners said.
Thomson said he wasn’t “advocating” that landowners shut off the public from their lands, but he wanted to warn that timberland owners feel they have been put into an untenable position and might resort to drastic action if the veto is not overturned.
Thomson, the son of late New Hampshire Gov. Meldrim Thomson, then held up two hand-drawn signs in front of the more than 200 attendees. On one was written the words “Tree Farm for Sale” and on the other were written the words “No Hunting or Trespassing.”
“I want the governor to know that,” Thomson said to loud applause.
The meeting, which took place at Sharp Enterprises along Route 3A, where trucks and vehicles all over the state lined both sides of the highway because there was no room on the company’s lot, was called by the New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association to urge members to lobby their representatives to overturn Sununu’s veto.
Jasen Stock, executive director of NHTOA, said economic fallout from the veto already is cascading through the industry. In less than a month, $5 million in heavy equipment sales had been canceled in the state, he said.
“We contribute $254 million annually to the state’s economy,” he said. “On a pure economics basis, these vetoes were a mistake.”
“We have a governor that doesn’t believe in subsidies,” said Bob Berti, a Rumney, N.H., forester who manages about 55,000 acres in New Hampshire for landowners. “But landowners are getting nothing for the use of their land by the public. Not one of our clients posts any of their land, and many of them keep their lands open for snowmobiling. If you’ve impacted us, you’ve impacted the (snowmobiling) industry. We’re subsidizing the state of New Hampshire.
“So if subsidies are no good, maybe it’s time to reconsider subsidies and shut our lands down,” Berti said. “Don’t tell us you don’t believe in a subsidy when we subsidize you.”
Landowners said posting their land would send a strong signal to Concord.
“If this doesn’t get overturned, I know 12 to 15 people who are going to shut their trails down,” said Lee Hillsgrove, an Alton, N.H., logger and trucker who owns 700 acres in Alton, Allenstown and Epsom. “I’m going to shut my trails down, even it means taking the land out of (current) use.”
Owners who have land enrolled in the current use program, which lowers tax assessments for tracts of land that are maintained for agriculture or forestry, are not forbidden from posting their land, NHTIO’s Stock said. But he said that if owners want to take advantage of an additional 10 percent discount on their property assessment, they must allow public access.
Hillsgrove’s sentiment was echoed by Jeff Eames, owner of Fort Mountain Cos., a timber harvester and land manager who owns 1,000 acres in the Allenstown, Epsom and Pembroke that have 2 miles of trails. Eames delivers about 45,000 tons of wood chips annually from lands he manages to the biomass plants. He also supplies chips for a heating system at Kearsarge Regional Middle School.
“You don’t even have to close all the trails down,” he said. “You just close down the arteries. It’s like a road. If you remove the bridge, you can’t use it.”
“What private landowners give the snowmobilers is a subsidy,” Eames said. “And we don’t even get a Christmas card.”
Caught in the middle are snowmobilers, who have enjoyed access across private property in the northern New England states for generations, a privilege rooted in the region’s hunting and outdoors culture that has long permitted sportsmen access to private property unless “no trespassing” signs are specifically posted by the owners.
It’s a prospect to which they don’t look forward.
“The New Hampshire Snowmobile Association is aware of the ongoing debate relative to SB 365. As an association, we have always had strong working relationships with private property owners … ,” Dan Gould, executive director of the NHSA, said in an email. “Certainly, the loss of access to private land for trails would create challenges for our sport in NH.”
Although the biomass bill that Sununu vetoed had broad bipartisan support in both chambers of the Legislature — the Senate passed it, 17-4, and the House passed it, 225-108 — that does not ensure an override, said Shaun Lagueux, a Bristol consulting forester and president of the NHTOA. A veto override requires a two-thirds majority of those voting.
Lawmakers on the fence will be weighing what effect their vote might have on committee assignments and their future relations with the governor’s office.
“It’s one thing to vote against a bill. It’s another thing to vote against a veto,” Lagueux said.
John Lippman can be reached at jlippman@vnews.com.
