Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hiker47
Having said all of this, an idea. Keep tourism healthy and help NH and it's citizens to prosper. But also assist the lake shore property owners with a property tax credit for damage to property, inability to use and enjoy their property (a lrge part of the increased assesments). Think about it. YIS, Doc
|
Lakefront property owners are not assessed at a higher rate than anyone else. They pay same tax rate per $1000. Their property just happens to be ALOT more valuable because of supply and demand.
The citizens of NH own to the high water mark, the property owners do not own to the waters edge. If a waterfront property owner did not build thier dock to withstand the lake level at the historical high water mark, thats not my problem. A lake 1' above full is hardly a flood of epic proportions, nor should it qualify anyone for any sort of tax break.
Shoreline erosion is an issue, no doubt to be discussed at length. There will be some extra erosion due to the boat traffic and high water. I am sure some shoreline erosion was deemed acceptable to keep the tourist $$$. Especially when factor in the lack of winter tourism $$$ and the fiscal burden of repairing the infrastructure damage caused by the flooding.
I am sure the loons and other wildlife will do just fine. The real threat to them is not shoreline erosion, but lack of habitat. Perhaps we should tear down all of these shoreline camps & houses to restore the lake to a more natural setting? The mother loon and her little loonlings seemed to be doing fine at my dock in Paugus bay on saturday evening. I wish I had a camera to snap a pic, as it was a pretty cool sight.
Woodsy