Try Our Trails

[02Sled]

12 minutes ago, stoney said:

 

 

I don't see where the issue is, other than possibly looking to ride the area trails not on your property, without a permit.

Your example I believe is quite common now a days, folks who have grown tired of lending their land for the sport or have started to expect something in lieu of it, but there is nothing to offer given the current OFSC model....which is perhaps partially why it is leading to more closed trails on private land, plus the complete lack of respect that few in the sport do show to property owners.

 

It is your land and your right to close, I do not think anyone will argue that, it is just unfortunate that some of the trails are being closed due to the owners desire to offer the land for our use, is no longer there or they want something in return perhaps now for it or ........

 

On this topic, is there actually anything that the clubs/OFSC can and currently do give to property owners, for allowing their land to be used?

Are property owners that allow their land for sledding get a property tax break, similar to a person that allows their land to be farmed? 

 

I hope your group does not put a stop to your property use for sledders, but at the end of the day, it is your group that has the final say.

 

A tax credit is something that has come up in conversation before. The province with their well intended but ultimately disastrous Bill 100 recognized the importance of keeping the trails that Ontario has in place today. With that desire already there, an income tax credit for those who allow their land to be used is not an unreasonable stretch. It may however result in benefit inequities as varying land owners have varying income levels taxable at varying percentages.

 

So now... where is the OFSC on this? Are they lobbying the province for this? I am sure it would go a long way to happier land owners.

 

Is this something perhaps that could be considered at the municipal level instead regarding property taxes rather than at the provincial level on income taxes. Municipalities have varying rates for varying property types. i.e. Farm / Agricultural properties receive more favourable rates than others.  It is well known that snowmobilers contribute significantly to the winter prosperity of the communities where the trails are. It would be in the communities best interest to keep the trail there and the municipality to incentivise this. Perhaps the local clubs could lobby their local mayor and council that collect property taxes from landowners their trails are on.

 

[bbakernbay]

38 minutes ago, 02Sled said:

A tax credit is something that has come up in conversation before. The province with their well intended but ultimately disastrous Bill 100 recognized the importance of keeping the trails that Ontario has in place today. With that desire already there, an income tax credit for those who allow their land to be used is not an unreasonable stretch. It may however result in benefit inequities as varying land owners have varying income levels taxable at varying percentages.

 

So now... where is the OFSC on this? Are they lobbying the province for this? I am sure it would go a long way to happier land owners.

 

Is this something perhaps that could be considered at the municipal level instead regarding property taxes rather than at the provincial level on income taxes. Municipalities have varying rates for varying property types. i.e. Farm / Agricultural properties receive more favourable rates than others.  It is well known that snowmobilers contribute significantly to the winter prosperity of the communities where the trails are. It would be in the communities best interest to keep the trail there and the municipality to incentivise this. Perhaps the local clubs could lobby their local mayor and council that collect property taxes from landowners their trails are on.

 

Sorry can’t agree that municipalities should initiate the tax credit.

 

This should be a joint Federal - Provincial initiative, or at the very least a Provincial Plan.

 

Firstly, most Trails traverse various municipal boundaries and the likelihood that adjoining municipalities would all participate is unlikely.

 

Secondly, a high percentage of trails are on Crown Land.

 

 

[02Sled]

6 minutes ago, bbakernbay said:

Sorry can’t agree that municipalities should initiate the tax credit.

 

This should be a joint Federal - Provincial initiative, or at the very least a Provincial Plan.

 

Firstly, most Trails traverse various municipal boundaries and the likelihood that adjoining municipalities would all participate is unlikely.

 

Secondly, a high percentage of trails are on Crown Land.

 

 

Maybe around North Bay and farther north there are quite a few trails on crown land however further south that complexion changes dramatically.

 

The reason I suggest the municipalities is that if the provincial or federal levels aren't doing anything to incentivise the land owners it could perhaps start at the "grass roots" level being the township. It would likely be much easier to persuade a snowmobiler dependent community mayor and council to support the direct benefits the trails bring to their community.

 

You obviously wouldn't get everyone on board right away for sure. However if I use my area as an example... I know Georgian Bay Township have supported the snowmobile clubs in the past. i.e. our groomer building wouldn't have happened without the support of the township. If Georgian Bay Township were to hypothetically support a property tax break for land owners with trails and neighbouring Severn Township didn't the clubs in Severn Township and the taxpaying land owners could use Georgian Bay Township as an example and persuade Severn Township to get on board with the concept. It could snowball from there and in some heavily reliant communities it could become an election point.

 

As it is the townships across the province all vary in policies regarding a number of things. We are very fortunate to have an outstanding relationship with our municipal government. We have trails on township and district properties. Other clubs in other jurisdictions aren't as fortunate.

 

If the province sees municipal governments recognizing the benefits of snowmobile trails and them doing something about it, that may trigger action on their part.

 

The other thing to remember, Nobody can say yes or no unless you ask.

 

 

[Yukon]

21 minutes ago, 02Sled said:

Maybe around North Bay and farther north there are quite a few trails on crown land however further south that complexion changes dramatically.

 

The reason I suggest the municipalities is that if the provincial or federal levels aren't doing anything to incentivise the land owners it could perhaps start at the "grass roots" level being the township. It would likely be much easier to persuade a snowmobiler dependent community mayor and council to support the direct benefits the trails bring to their community.

 

You obviously wouldn't get everyone on board right away for sure. However if I use my area as an example... I know Georgian Bay Township have supported the snowmobile clubs in the past. i.e. our groomer building wouldn't have happened without the support of the township. If Georgian Bay Township were to hypothetically support a property tax break for land owners with trails and neighbouring Severn Township didn't the clubs in Severn Township and the taxpaying land owners could use Georgian Bay Township as an example and persuade Severn Township to get on board with the concept. It could snowball from there and in some heavily reliant communities it could become an election point.

 

As it is the townships across the province all vary in policies regarding a number of things. We are very fortunate to have an outstanding relationship with our municipal government. We have trails on township and district properties. Other clubs in other jurisdictions aren't as fortunate.

 

If the province sees municipal governments recognizing the benefits of snowmobile trails and them doing something about it, that may trigger action on their part.

 

The other thing to remember, Nobody can say yes or no unless you ask.

 

 

You might be on to something here... Wouldn't take much to speak to a member of council and see how it is received.  I know Many in your community wouldn't mind a tax break and perhaps may be more welcoming to having trails back again... Small town word gets around fast....

[stoney]

1 hour ago, 02Sled said:

A tax credit is something that has come up in conversation before. The province with their well intended but ultimately disastrous Bill 100 recognized the importance of keeping the trails that Ontario has in place today. With that desire already there, an income tax credit for those who allow their land to be used is not an unreasonable stretch. It may however result in benefit inequities as varying land owners have varying income levels taxable at varying percentages.

 

So now... where is the OFSC on this? Are they lobbying the province for this? I am sure it would go a long way to happier land owners.

 

Is this something perhaps that could be considered at the municipal level instead regarding property taxes rather than at the provincial level on income taxes. Municipalities have varying rates for varying property types. i.e. Farm / Agricultural properties receive more favourable rates than others.  It is well known that snowmobilers contribute significantly to the winter prosperity of the communities where the trails are. It would be in the communities best interest to keep the trail there and the municipality to incentivise this. Perhaps the local clubs could lobby their local mayor and council that collect property taxes from landowners their trails are on.

 

 

35 minutes ago, bbakernbay said:

Sorry can’t agree that municipalities should initiate the tax credit.

 

This should be a joint Federal - Provincial initiative, or at the very least a Provincial Plan.

 

Firstly, most Trails traverse various municipal boundaries and the likelihood that adjoining municipalities would all participate is unlikely.

 

Secondly, a high percentage of trails are on Crown Land.

 

 

It should be BOTH / ALL levels!!!

Farmers get a property tax break on their municipal taxes when the land is farmed.....depending on your region, it is a nice perk and a must have for some of the folks that own that farm property, for them to let it sit empty/not used, is too costly.

Plus provincially there should be a plan for reimbursement, the province's economy benefits HUGE from sledders....this is nothing new, simple math.

And Federally as well, once again, major sledding dollars that are put into local small communities that are not seeing a return.

The return for the revenue that sledders put into the economy should be given first to land owners willing to allow their land to be borrowed for a few months of the year and second to the OFSC. 

 

I am sure there are people within the OFSC office lobbying for this stuff, exactly what levels they lobby too, I have no idea......but I do not think one of the things that people should be "criticizing the OFSC" about.

[02Sled]

22 minutes ago, stoney said:

 

It should be BOTH / ALL levels!!!

Farmers get a property tax break on their municipal taxes when the land is farmed.....depending on your region, it is a nice perk and a must have for some of the folks that own that farm property, for them to let it sit empty/not used, is too costly.

Plus provincially there should be a plan for reimbursement, the province's economy benefits HUGE from sledders....this is nothing new, simple math.

And Federally as well, once again, major sledding dollars that are put into local small communities that are not seeing a return.

The return for the revenue that sledders put into the economy should be given first to land owners willing to allow their land to be borrowed for a few months of the year and second to the OFSC. 

 

I am sure there are people within the OFSC office lobbying for this stuff, exactly what levels they lobby too, I have no idea......but I do not think one of the things that people should be "criticizing the OFSC" about.

There are two aspects of criticism. Negative and constructive. Any organization should be open and receptive to hearing what their stakeholders / customers perceive as working well, okay and not so well. It identifies opportunities for improvement and acknowledges their successes.

 

It would perhaps be beneficial if they were lobbying the province for example to provide a tax credit for land owners for them to communicate this to the members of the OFSC clubs. I imagine it would strengthen the impact of their lobbying efforts if the snowmobilers of the province were to support that effort by reaching out to their elected MPP encouraging them to support the initiative.

[bbakernbay]

Completely agree that we should be persuing any possible way that rewards Landowners for their essential contribution to the trail system.

 

02Sled is quite correct that it is much more likely to have positive results starting with tourism and recreation supportive municipalities.  He is quite correct that this may indeed be the seed that encourages adjacent or other municipalities to get on board as well.

 

I do believe property and/or income tax credits for landowners who allow their property to host trails need financial benefits so as to encourage their continued support.

 

The senior levels of government should be the leaders in the Trail area but we will take what we can get.

 

I criticize the OFSC because they have not shown much success in anything they have tried over past 5 years, including the paid staff who had specific responsibility to lobby the Provincial government.  There have been remarkably few gains, in fact the ON government contribution to snowmobiling has deteriorated seriously in my opinion.  I can give examples but we all know them.  It could very well be they are lobbying the government but this government has ignored their efforts.

[stoney]

It's the criticism that happens but there is no confirmation to suggest what is being attempted, is potentially hitting road blocks that are not widely known.

The lobbying is a perfect example, for all we know it's happening, but the cut backs or lack of support from the various levels of government is simply not there.

I've heard other groups that usually receive grants are being clawed back for no reason, just a realignment of where money is being funneled.....tax break here, but rest assured, you are paying more for a service elsewhere....

[Viperules700]

8 hours ago, Guy JR said:

I am part of a hunt camp near Restoule where the trail runs through our property.  There are a few of us that have sleds, but none of us are trail riders.  We all sign up for the free weekend as the Family day long weekend is the only time we all head up to the camp in the winter for a little fun.  Every year I have a harder time talking the members into keeping the trail open.  I wonder how its going to go over this year when we as land owners hosting the trail, are not allowed to ride it.  I fully understand the concerns from members here and why they did not like the free weekend to fall on the long weekend.  That being said, this might be the straw that broke the camels back on allowing access to our property.  

Howdy. 

I thought restoule area is all crown land? I love riding trails thru area and we use to be a frequent visitor when Hal and his wife suzie and son Travis owned crows nest resort in town. 

That being said many locals use to ride from town back into provincial park to hunt camps located at far end of resolute lake, without permits since it is all crown land I was told and most properties they lease land from government (no one owns it).  

I thought trails thru area mostly use summer access roads around left side of resolute lake,  besides trail entrance from end of the lake?  

Thank-you for allowing access and keeping trail open for another winter. 

[Hkb82]

Well as for the topic I am glad to see the free  weekend changed from the long weekend to earlier in the season. Maybe it will increase permit sales.  Not likely. 

 

As for the land tax credits I think that would be a step in the right direction. Or at the least free trail passes. I have talked with a few land owners around me that give a lot of access to ofsc  and they get nothing in return for letting us use their property.  With that being said they also didnt seem to expect it either. Non bitched about taxes or anything like that. Kissing a little butt goes along way some times though lol. They really just want the small group of riders that do as they please and go where they want to go to stop and at the very least to clean up after yourself. 

I think the times and generations changing has something to do with loosing trails also. People are just not as they were 10-20 years ago. into the community and helping out each other. It's pretty sad but that seems to be the way I see it.  People are out for themselves these days. Kinda like holding the door for someone. It was once a thing people just did out of respect for one another.  Now better be ready to open it yourself or you will end up walking into it.  

 

[snowman]

I always thought for some reason that the landowners had received at least one free trail pass.  Not quite sure why i thought that, but i guess i would have assumed that this would be the LEAST they could have received for the HASSLE and RISK of people on their property......I would think that the OFSC may think of straightening out their priorities for fellows like Guy JR and all the other gracious land owners who allow us to ride through their personal properties.....Easy to see why private land owners would not allow OFSC onto their property if it was all one-sided....

[Crow]

I'll let someone who knows more than I about why the landowner doesn't receive a free pass. But I will say that half of the property owners I install trail pickets and signs on are not snowmobilers, just generous people.

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

12 hours ago, stoney said:

It's the criticism that happens but there is no confirmation to suggest what is being attempted, is potentially hitting road blocks that are not widely known.

The lobbying is a perfect example, for all we know it's happening, but the cut backs or lack of support from the various levels of government is simply not there.

I've heard other groups that usually receive grants are being clawed back for no reason, just a realignment of where money is being funneled.....tax break here, but rest assured, you are paying more for a service elsewhere....

I agree with what you are saying. If the OFSC is lobbying the different levels of government why don't they tell us about it ( in detail, more than just telling us they are lobbying). If permit buyers were aware of who is being lobbied by the OFSC or their representative(s) and were told where we could send emails/letters and anything else we could do to help the cause, I'm sure that a good number of us here would help out the cause however we could. 

It seems to me that if the OFSC was really serious about a lobbying effort they would be taking advantage of the ALL the assets they have to work with.

[02Sled]

2 hours ago, snowman said:

I always thought for some reason that the landowners had received at least one free trail pass.  Not quite sure why i thought that, but i guess i would have assumed that this would be the LEAST they could have received for the HASSLE and RISK of people on their property......I would think that the OFSC may think of straightening out their priorities for fellows like Guy JR and all the other gracious land owners who allow us to ride through their personal properties.....Easy to see why private land owners would not allow OFSC onto their property if it was all one-sided....

MTO owns the trail permits and they don't allow give away permits.

[manotickmike]

I STRONGLY feel that some sort of compensation is in order. 

With a total lack of patrols and law enforcement seen in my neck of the woods, it amazes me that anyone would allow access to their property. 

 

[Bigfish]

9 minutes ago, 02Sled said:

MTO owns the trail permits and they don't allow give away permits.

True,

There are also legal issues which could come into play in a risk management scenario. Even a free permit can legally be construed as payment for using the land, and puts a different slant on things if there was a accident on the land and a suit was filed. Much the same way that insurance changes when you have an accident in your car and the passengers were paying for the ride.

[stoney]

 

35 minutes ago, PISTON LAKE CRUISER said:

I agree with what you are saying. If the OFSC is lobbying the different levels of government why don't they tell us about it ( in detail, more than just telling us they are lobbying). If permit buyers were aware of who is being lobbied by the OFSC or their representative(s) and were told where we could send emails/letters and anything else we could do to help the cause, I'm sure that a good number of us here would help out the cause however we could. 

It seems to me that if the OFSC was really serious about a lobbying effort they would be taking advantage of the ALL the assets they have to work with.

There is that communication thing again, or perhaps lack there of......which is an easy target to criticize for obvious reasons. 

 

 

2 hours ago, snowman said:

I always thought for some reason that the landowners had received at least one free trail pass.  Not quite sure why i thought that, but i guess i would have assumed that this would be the LEAST they could have received for the HASSLE and RISK of people on their property......I would think that the OFSC may think of straightening out their priorities for fellows like Guy JR and all the other gracious land owners who allow us to ride through their personal properties.....Easy to see why private land owners would not allow OFSC onto their property if it was all one-sided....

 

5 minutes ago, Bigfish said:

True,

There are also legal issues which could come into play in a risk management scenario. Even a free permit can legally be construed as payment for using the land, and puts a different slant on things if there was a accident on the land and a suit was filed. Much the same way that insurance changes when you have an accident in your car and the passengers were paying for the ride.

I was going to suggest what would stop a club from donating a trail pass to the land owners in their region, even if they do not sled, they could re-gift it!

Either use the money that the clubs receives or from a fund raiser.

 

But sounds like there is a legal component in this lovely world we live in making this a potential can of worms if something were to happen.

 

I still think the best way to say thanks to anyone giving up their land would be a tax break on their property taxes, it is their land that they are taxed on, that they are also sharing with others for the good of the local economy.

[Guy JR]

14 hours ago, Viperules700 said:

Howdy. 

I thought restoule area is all crown land? I love riding trails thru area and we use to be a frequent visitor when Hal and his wife suzie and son Travis owned crows nest resort in town. 

That being said many locals use to ride from town back into provincial park to hunt camps located at far end of resolute lake, without permits since it is all crown land I was told and most properties they lease land from government (no one owns it).  

I thought trails thru area mostly use summer access roads around left side of resolute lake,  besides trail entrance from end of the lake?  

Thank-you for allowing access and keeping trail open for another winter. 

The area is mostly crown land but the trail coming into Restoule from the north east that connects Restoule and Nippissing crosses 3 private parcels before it hits the village.  In my personal situation I am a former permit buyer but with 3 young kids, the time is not there for now.  I still get use of my sled but its now mostly for hunting or taking the kids for a putt around home.  Once I get some time back I will likely be a permit buyer again.  Problem with us is most of the members are not trail riders.  Our road to our property is the trail in winter so a few of the guys keep old sleds for winter access.  I have been the only supporter to the trails in recent years and closing the trail has been discussed every year for many years now.  I was barely able to talk the guys into keeping it open this year after the Bill 100 garbage.  I also realize that we can still use the trail to access our property without a permit but the guys enjoy a bit of a trail ride once a year.  Not a chance they or myself will pay for the pass for 1 day ride once a year.

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

17 minutes ago, Guy JR said:

The area is mostly crown land but the trail coming into Restoule from the north east that connects Restoule and Nippissing crosses 3 private parcels before it hits the village.  In my personal situation I am a former permit buyer but with 3 young kids, the time is not there for now.  I still get use of my sled but its now mostly for hunting or taking the kids for a putt around home.  Once I get some time back I will likely be a permit buyer again.  Problem with us is most of the members are not trail riders.  Our road to our property is the trail in winter so a few of the guys keep old sleds for winter access.  I have been the only supporter to the trails in recent years and closing the trail has been discussed every year for many years now.  I was barely able to talk the guys into keeping it open this year after the Bill 100 garbage.  I also realize that we can still use the trail to access our property without a permit but the guys enjoy a bit of a trail ride once a year.  Not a chance they or myself will pay for the pass for 1 day ride once a year.

I know its not what you were looking for but you can by a 2 day permit online and print it off to use when you are up there. We appreciate all your help in trying to keep the trail open. It's an ongoing process for sure. Merry Christmas!

[Hkb82]

UuI also agree that tax break would be nice but I wouldn't think that will ever happen. i think it's up to the guys riding the trails to change things. Waiting for ofsc or the government to step in will be to late. Maybe drop a tims card in the mailbox of a farmer that allows ofsc to use his property. (Thanks for letting us use your land to ride) Stop by during his or hers  busy season and lend a hand. Or at the least offer. I think even just taking a min if you see them and stopping to say thanks would go along way. Hunters have been doing this for years. Helping out those that let them hunt on their land. Most farmers I don't think will take the help but sure would make them feel like we were thankful for what they do. If I was hunting on somebody property (with permission) and filled my tag you can bet I would throw some meat the farmers way.

I am going now to buy some tims cards lol. The world is all rainbows and butterflies in district 9 

[Viperules700]

5 minutes ago, Hkb82 said:

UuI also agree that tax break would be nice but I wouldn't think that will ever happen. i think it's up to the guys riding the trails to change things. Waiting for ofsc or the government to step in will be to late. Maybe drop a tims card in the mailbox of a farmer that allows ofsc to use his property. (Thanks for letting us use your land to ride) Stop by during his or hers  busy season and lend a hand. Or at the least offer. I think even just taking a min if you see them and stopping to say thanks would go along way. Hunters have been doing this for years. Helping out those that let them hunt on their land. Most farmers I don't think will take the help but sure would make them feel like we were thankful for what they do. If I was hunting on somebody property (with permission) and filled my tag you can bet I would throw some meat the farmers way.

I am going now to buy some tims cards lol. The world is all rainbows and butterflies in district 9 

Tims card is a great  idea. I am a farmer myself but no trails cross our land. 

Most farmers won't take help, because of liability issues. Something happens you are on hook, with all regulations it is a night mare. Most farmers don't mind snowmobiles, if they stay on trail and away from there buildings and drive ways etc. 

Some clubs do land owner appreciation dinners too. 

[bbakernbay]

5 hours ago, snowman said:

I always thought for some reason that the landowners had received at least one free trail pass.  Not quite sure why i thought that, but i guess i would have assumed that this would be the LEAST they could have received for the HASSLE and RISK of people on their property......I would think that the OFSC may think of straightening out their priorities for fellows like Guy JR and all the other gracious land owners who allow us to ride through their personal properties.....Easy to see why private land owners would not allow OFSC onto their property if it was all one-sided....

Some Clubs do this but it is frowned upon by OFSC, due to liability issues I recall.

 

It is an expensive thing to do for a Clubs, especially now when each Club does not get a percentage of each Permit revenue.  Our thoughts were that is was only costing us 70% of the value and we did the Early, Early Bird pricing to save a few $$ too.

 

There are some inherent problems:

 

- fairness if you don’t include every Landowner

- some owners don’t snowmobile and don’t need a Permit

- some owners want cash instead

- it gets to be a big bite out of a Club’s budget particularly now that the Club doesn’t get many $$ from Permits sold

- it is very risky to stop the program because you may piss off or lose a valuable Landowner(S)

- by giving out freebies you obviously reduce revenues by selling less permits

- it gets to be a big effort tracking Landowners and insuring the Free Trail Permit ends up in the right hands.

- some Landowners start asking for 2 or more Permits to keep them onboard

 

We previously used the OFSC Gas Cards to build goodwill for those key Landowners (although now every Landowner is key)

 

A Landowner Appreciatuin BBQ or Dinner May be a better way.

 

A provincial wide property tax credit based on Kms and % of year is needed.

[Hkb82]

I hunted almost all private land when o was in niagara. Never did a farmer want my help or anything in return other then his property be treated with respect. i would always pop tims cards in his mail box and he was always very appreciative. Never really thought about the liability issue but I bet that's why he never wanted help. He did always joke about the meat though and unfortunately I was never able to give him any. 

[02Sled]

1 hour ago, Guy JR said:

The area is mostly crown land but the trail coming into Restoule from the north east that connects Restoule and Nippissing crosses 3 private parcels before it hits the village.  In my personal situation I am a former permit buyer but with 3 young kids, the time is not there for now.  I still get use of my sled but its now mostly for hunting or taking the kids for a putt around home.  Once I get some time back I will likely be a permit buyer again.  Problem with us is most of the members are not trail riders.  Our road to our property is the trail in winter so a few of the guys keep old sleds for winter access.  I have been the only supporter to the trails in recent years and closing the trail has been discussed every year for many years now.  I was barely able to talk the guys into keeping it open this year after the Bill 100 garbage.  I also realize that we can still use the trail to access our property without a permit but the guys enjoy a bit of a trail ride once a year.  Not a chance they or myself will pay for the pass for 1 day ride once a year.

I may be reading this wrong but I believe you said the road to your property is the trail. Would that not mean that the club would stop grooming that trail / road and when you and your friends arrive in Feb find it waist deep in snow which I suspect would make your property inaccessible having the trail may be a win for you and the club

[Guy JR]

37 minutes ago, 02Sled said:

I may be reading this wrong but I believe you said the road to your property is the trail. Would that not mean that the club would stop grooming that trail / road and when you and your friends arrive in Feb find it waist deep in snow which I suspect would make your property inaccessible having the trail may be a win for you and the club

Maybe I used the word road loosely but we are truck accessible before winter.  As a guy that is off trail most of the time on a sled, I can get by quite fine without a groomed trail.