Special Areas requests for water

[blackjack]

...cowman...there are three different distinctions in property...may some that knows for sure can tell us more ...
...deeded land
...cultivation lease
...pasture lease
I will say that people that have leases in the special areas have had incentives by government to deed the land...some have took advantages to deed while others have not...could be economical or management decisions since it was up to the farmer whether not to deed or not...

...between the deeded and lease the taxes are around 80 cents an acre...

I own land in Clearwater county with the land being basically half cultivatable and the rest pasture...the taxes work out to be around a dollar an acre...no building...

...have one quarter with buildings in Red Deer county ...now thats a different story when it comes to tax...

...as for being a ex native of the special areas the reason our family moved was for farm management purposes...it was a decision in that it is alot easier to move the cattle to the feed source than it was to haul the feed to the cattle...
...I'm not going to deny there are some ranches out there in the special areas with huge gas and oil revenues...but there is some here in the west country also...

... finally I will add...on a 20 mile stretch of road where I lived there was 6 families ...now there is 2 ...one family that has always lived there and one that moved into the area in the 80's...these people recently bought land in Saskatchewan for ranching purposes...

[blackjack]

blackjack I don't know whether you are referring to how the land is assessed for tax purposes or not, but if so, farmland is assessed on productivity vs market value. Farmsteads are assessed on the house and three acre site, then a portion of the farmland assessment can be deducted from the house and three acre site assessment up to a maximum.

It is interesting to learn how assessments are done, particularly in the area of farmland. Aerial photographs are used to identify non farmable land, creeks, coulees, etc.

Soil classification is another tool used by assessors, hence the higher taxes in Red Deer County where the soil is productive for agriculture.


Don't know if this helps or not.

[blackjack]

Have to make a slight amendment to my post about Special Areas governance.
The Chairperson and Special areas Board are appointed by Cabinet. The chair is appointed the other members of the board are appointed after being nominated by the Special Areas Advisory Council, they are elected every three years in the regular municipal elections.
They have an Agricultural Service Board as well, and are involved in all aspects of administering provincial legislation such as the Weed Act, Pest Act etc.

Former Minister of Agriculture Shirley McLellan is from New Brigdon which is in the Special Areas.

[blackjack]

emrald1... thanks for the reply...alot of people on the west side of province seem to think the east don't pay much land tax...as you pointed out the land is valued by its production...as in the case with the special areas production can be very limited to soil type and climate... so taxes in years when the special areas receive rain might seem low... but on the other hand there is more dry years than wet...

[blackjack]

...could be wrong but I think Shirley worked at the Cereal Auction Mart...I don't remember if she worked for the Reimer's or Cyril Curran...some central Albertans might know Curran as he was in Red Deer for a while...

[cakadu]

Blackjack, with the stretch of road that you speak of - where the families went from 6 to 2, that is part of the negative correlation between ag development and rural development. As people acquire more land, the development goes down because there is less necessity for banks, doctors, stores etc.

So, if there are some 2 million hectares and only 20,000 of those are anticipated to be irrigated, to allow for expansion of confined feeding operations, the feed would by and large have to be trucked in. There is your dilemma - easier to move the cattle to feed than the other way around. Ask the folks around Picture Butte how they like the B-trains coming and going 24 hours a day, not to mention what it does to the infrastructure like roads, bridges etc.

I really question whether this proposed diversion will work out to be a case of "if you build it they will come." I understand that the recreational activities around the Sheerness reservoir are substantial, but the area cannot do it with recreational dwellers alone, that are at home during the majority of the year.

[cakadu]

Linda, in my discussions with elected officials from the areas that are initiating discussions on the water diversion, it didn't seem as though they were proposing this to gain feedlots and other confined feeding operations. It was to have ample water to sustain the agricultural industry that is already there and to attract some sort of commerce to the area so they can keep some of their younger folks there and keep schools open etc.

As far as traffic around Picture Butte...come to the oil patch and I'll show you traffic ! Approximately 8500 vehicles a day travel on the stretch of highway that I have to drive on whenever I go to town for my mail, a large number of those vehicles are logging trucks, Btrains hauling sulfur, tank trucks pulling pups, service rigs and all their associated vehicles which can include up to a dozen large trucks, and the top speed is around 80 km. In addition to this there are school busses and the agricultural industry vehicles hauling cattle, hay etc. The highways here take a beating all year every year, and the rural roads are usually rougher than heck.

[cakadu]

Emrald, your point about wanting to help what is already there is well taken. I was looking at cowman's idea of starting up feedlots etc. out there as there is so much open space.

If the land is taxed at low rates because of it's poor agricultural capability and/or capacity, then shouldn't it be looked at from that standpoint? By that I mean if it isn't all that productive, then why keep trying to force it to do what it so obviously is incapable of doing?

[cakadu]

Linda its capability hasn't even been determined due to the lack of water. As I have said before, there are many areas in the south eastern part of the province that would be a wasteland if it were not for irrigation. If you haven't had the opportunity to tour those area it is something to consider . I have been on soils tours arranged by the University of Alberta, on Agricultural Service Board Tours etc., and was amazed at the difference between irrigated and non-irrigated land. With the pressure for development on the better quality agricultural lands in the province it seems as though moving the water to the poorer quality lands will at least provide some opportunities for growth in agriculture as time goes on.

[cropduster]

And you guys haven`t even touched on who really owns the land and true incentives to develop it!!Reread my first post ,check your geography and numbers...this will be an interesting development!That`s why some of us are looking for a visionary rather than just a representative!!

[cropduster]

cropduster, isn't there a lot of deeded land in Special Areas and also in the County of Paintearth ? I am aware that there are a lot of grazing leases and that is where a lot of the outcry came from during the time that Tom Thurber was reviewing the Grazing Lease legislation.
The Advisory Council is elected by the citizens of Special Areas but you are correct in indicating that they only act as an advisory to the Special Areas Board that are appointed by Cabinet.
It is a very interesting form of municipal government compared to the traditional MD's and Counties.

[cropduster]

Em,of the 6 million acres it is roughly 1/3 each of crown ,tax recovery and deeded.The 60 million nest egg referred to above is/was generated by residents re-buying the deeds to some of the TR land.But now what to do with the money.One interpretation of the act says the TR land interest is to be `vested in the area`but amazingly the funds are held `safely` in Edmonton.The bureaucrats are careful not to let the citizenry get too much power and that`s where this whole project may run aground.

[cropduster]

I am sure that the $50 million would go along way toward any water initiative for the area, which would mean less out of the rest of the taxpayers pockets, IF the project ever does gain approval.

[cropduster]

Apparently a environmental lobby group is pressuring the government to do an Environmental Impact Study on the proposed water diversion. It will be interesting to see if it becomes a political issue or an environmental one before the decision is finally made.

[cakadu]

Yes, it was announced yesterday that the Alberta Wildnerness Association is asking for an EIA. The proponents of the project are saying that it will turn the desert into an oasis with unlimited development potential.

With a price tag of just under $200 million, we had better make pretty sure that this is going to have some chance for success and at the same time cause minimal harm to the environment and biodiversity .