Investments strategy with new administration?

[Bearsixty7]

Don't allow "appraisal creep" to rob you of the value of your property. Protest your CAD market value every year. Learn the process and it can be done effectively.

LOL! I actually had done it myself until many years ago and got very little reduction those years, since then I have a company that does it for us and they only get paid half off what they save us. Unfortunately I haven't had to pay them in the last several years as they haven't been able to convince the Tax assessor office we're an outlier to any comps around us. (We're all over assessed!)

 

[jyoutz]

Next thing you know you'll be out raking the forest floor.

In fact forest floor fuels are indeed part of the hazardous fuels that need treatment in addition to tree and brush thinning. But we use prescribed fire to rake the forest floor, not a hand rake.

 

[gsganzer]

In fact forest floor fuels are indeed part of the hazardous fuels that need treatment in addition to tree and brush thinning. But we use prescribed fire to rake the forest floor, not a hand rake.

You bring up some points, regarding fire fighting. This last August, we had a number of dry lightning fires in the TX hill country. One fire burned 5,000 acres and fire companies from all over the state showed up to fight it.

It makes me wonder though, other than protecting life, livestock and structures, would they have been better off to let it run its course? Consuming 10K, 15K or more acres? During the past few years in TX, we've had droughts and freezes that have killed off vegetation, greatly increasing the fuel load. At some point, you have to pay the piper.

 

[jyoutz]

You bring up some points, regarding fire fighting. This last August, we had a number of dry lightning fires in the TX hill country. One fire burned 5,000 acres and fire companies from all over the state showed up to fight it.

It makes me wonder though, other than protecting life, livestock and structures, would they have been better off to let it run its course? Consuming 10K, 15K or more acres? During the past few years in TX, we've had droughts and freezes that have killed off vegetation, greatly increasing the fuel load. At some point, you have to pay the piper.

It really depends on the vegetation type. For grasslands, fire is ecologically important to renew grasses and remove brush. The only reason to suppress those is to protect structures and improvements. On the other hand many of the western conifer forests in the mountains are unnaturally dense from many years of human impacts and fire suppression (intentional and unintentional fire suppression by grazing, roads, ect…). These forests aren’t ecologically adapted to high severity fires and don’t regenerate after burning. These forests were adapted to low intensity ground fires that kept them thinned out and open. These are the focus of hazardous fuels reduction efforts and restoration work: otherwise they would disappear and the landscape would convert to grass or brush.

 

[ponytug]

You bring up some points, regarding fire fighting. This last August, we had a number of dry lightning fires in the TX hill country. One fire burned 5,000 acres and fire companies from all over the state showed up to fight it.

It makes me wonder though, other than protecting life, livestock and structures, would they have been better off to let it run its course? Consuming 10K, 15K or more acres? During the past few years in TX, we've had droughts and freezes that have killed off vegetation, greatly increasing the fuel load. At some point, you have to pay the piper.

@jyoutz summed it up beautifully above.

Ideally, it could be browsed down some with deer, goats, etc., and then burned in smaller, lower intensity fires. However, controlled burns take time, the right site, labor, and the right weather conditions. The land next to us gets burned every five years or so, but some areas are off limits as being too hard to control fires in, and not worth the risk, and those areas are steadily adding fuel. Plus, I've seen the fires get beyond the target burn areas more than a few times, so we are always on high alert when they declare a controlled burn.

We practice active grazing management to reduce fuel loads here, and it does greatly limits fire intensities. We had a recent fire that put up 50-80' flames on a neighbor's hillside, and across the driveway, it was a slow moving 6-12" flame height on our side, and that was in a brushy area of our place.

I think it is one of those being as strong as the weakest link things, and it is not always obvious what the weakest link is.

All the best,

Peter

 

[gsganzer]

It really depends on the vegetation type. For grasslands, fire is ecologically important to renew grasses and remove brush. The only reason to suppress those is to protect structures and improvements. On the other hand many of the western conifer forests in the mountains are unnaturally dense from many years of human impacts and fire suppression (intentional and unintentional fire suppression by grazing, roads, ect…). These forests aren’t ecologically adapted to high severity fires and don’t regenerate after burning. These forests were adapted to low intensity ground fires that kept them thinned out and open. These are the focus of hazardous fuels reduction efforts and restoration work: otherwise they would disappear and the landscape would convert to grass or brush.

That was my line of thinking with the hill country fire, just protect the structures and don't put a whole lot more effort into it. Other than the ranchers losing fencing, which is still a big deal.

We have some other parts of TX that are extremely dense with red cedar. That stuff is like gas burning! Vegetation control around structures is a must in those areas.

 

[jyoutz]

@jyoutz summed it up beautifully above.

Ideally, it could be browsed down some with deer, goats, etc., and then burned in smaller, lower intensity fires. However, controlled burns take time, the right site, labor, and the right weather conditions. The land next to us gets burned every five years or so, but some areas are off limits as being too hard to control fires in, and not worth the risk, and those areas are steadily adding fuel. Plus, I've seen the fires get beyond the target burn areas more than a few times, so we are always on high alert when they declare a controlled burn.

We practice active grazing management to reduce fuel loads here, and it does greatly limits fire intensities. We had a recent fire that put up 50-80' flames on a neighbor's hillside, and across the driveway, it was a slow moving 6-12" flame height on our side, and that was in a brushy area of our place.

I think it is one of those being as strong as the weakest link things, and it is not always obvious what the weakest link is.

All the best,

Peter

Nice that you are locally working to manage your fuels and fire behavior. What vegetation type is your land in? Chaparral, conifer forest, oak woodlands?

 

[jyoutz]

That was my line of thinking with the hill country fire, just protect the structures and don't put a whole lot more effort into it. Other than the ranchers losing fencing, which is still a big deal.

We have some other parts of TX that are extremely dense with red cedar. That stuff is like gas burning! Vegetation control around structures is a must in those areas.

I have visited the hill country in Texas and agree.

 

[etpm]

There are more but my first single family home was the least expensive on the MLS when I bought it just before a scheduled condemnation hearing… I moved in and a week later it was like a new place and hearing cancelled.

There are plenty of livable homes way under a million…

I’ve never paid a million for a home with acreage and in good condition…

If you wanted to buy my house on 10 acres on south Whidbey Island you would need to come up with more than a million. I find this shocking.
Eric

 

[two_bit_score]

LOL! I actually had done it myself until many years ago and got very little reduction those years, since then I have a company that does it for us and they only get paid half off what they save us. Unfortunately I haven't had to pay them in the last several years as they haven't been able to convince the Tax assessor office we're an outlier to any comps around us. (We're all over assessed!)

Pardon my curiousity but when you say "they only get paid half off what they save us." What, exactly do you mean with that? Say if your house had a Market Value by the CAD (your 'Notice Value") of $500,000 and they handled your protest and the Market Value was lowered to $400,000 what would you owe them?