[WSBARP] is timberland 'agricultural' for purposes of 6i1.24?

[Koons, Warren]

I don't think there is a definitive answer to whether standing timber is a crop for purposes of RCW 61.24.030, but many institutional lenders routinely use deeds of trust to secure liens on WA timberlands.  Conceptually, the long-term nature of timber harvest cycles renders timberlands qualitatively different from ag lands that grow annual/seasonal crops, so with timberland owners there isn't really a need to protect their rights in a crop that might be harvested during a post-foreclosure redemption period, thus non-judicial foreclosure of a deed of trust should be permissible.

~ Warren

Warren Koons | Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
777 108th Avenue NE, Suite 2300 | Bellevue, WA 98004
Tel: (425) 646-6117 | Fax: (425) 646-6199
Email: warrenkoons at dwt.com<mailto:warrenkoons at dwt.com> | Website: www.dwt.com<http://www.dwt.com/>

Anchorage | Bellevue | Los Angeles | New York | Portland | San Francisco | Seattle | Shanghai | Washington, D.C.
"Ability, integrity, service."  --John Davis

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of James Mullins
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 9:47 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] is timberland 'agricultural' for puposes of 6i1.24?




I'm coming late into this conversation due to other more pressing matters.

I had the same question in my mind a few years ago when handling a D/T foreclosure on some timber land for a client.  Is standing timber which could be harvested a "crop?"  I couldn't find any precedent on the issue and none of my go-to colleagues had an answer.  The client decided to go non-judicial after we discussed the risk/benefit analysis of guessing wrong on this topic.  But because the timber was valuable, we decided the err on the side of caution and did an Article 9 security interest foreclosure process at the same time as the D/T foreclosure process.  This added a lot of cost which didn't make the client happy.

Did anyone have any thoughts on your post?  I didn't see any.  It seems this issue must have come up before.  There is a lot of timberland around the Northwest.

James D. Mullins
Mullins Law Firm, PLLC
105 West Evergreen Blvd., Suite 200
Vancouver, WA 98660

Vancouver (360) 693-5883
Portland (503) 285-4103
Fax (360) 693-1777

E-mail -- jmullins at mullins-law.com<mailto:jmullins at mullins-law.com>
Website - www.mullins-law.com<http://www.mullins-law.com/>

===========================================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  The information contained in this e-mail communication and any attached documentation belongs to Mullins Law Firm, PLLC, and may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure and is intended only for the use of the designated recipient (s). If the reader or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by return e-mail and promptly delete the original electronic e-mail communication and any attached documentation.  Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of any attorney-client or work-product privilege.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Consistent with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, if this communication or any attachment contains any tax advice, the advice is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties.
=================================================================================

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Roger Hawkes
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:42 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv
Subject: [WSBARP] is timberland 'agricultural' for puposes of 6i1.24?

Just a wild thought; if forest is being grown as a crop, would the 61.24 exclusion of 'agricultural' land apply? Has that been ruled on?

Roger Hawkes, WSBA # 5173
19909 Ballinger Way NE
Shoreline, WA 98155
www.hawkeslawfirm.com<http://www.hawkeslawfirm.com>
206 367 5000
Fax is 206 367 4005

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150423/f0248cc0/attachment.html>