The spam filter installed on this site is currently unavailable. Per site policy, we are unable to accept new submissions until that problem is resolved. Please try resubmitting the form in a couple of minutes.

Reply to comment

If they've already spent half a million on security

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on September 13, 2013 - 4:51am.

Wouldn't it have been more cost effective to remove the land from the Managed Forests Program and maintain it as private? They would only have to pay $477k in back taxes, plus be taxed going forward - it seems like it would take quite some time for this to outweigh the ongoing costs of the security company, but I don't know the tax rate vs the run rate for the security contractors to compare them.

Anyway, it sounds like the land shouldn't be in the managed forests program anyway, if they don't want anyone to have access to it and they plan to remove large swaths of the forest itself in order to do their pit mining.

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options