Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 26.03 (2026)
Harvest of raw forest products
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
26.03(1g)(1g) Prohibition; delinquent taxes. No person may harvest any raw forest products, or direct the harvest of any raw forest products, from any land for which taxes are delinquent.
26.03(1m)(a)1.1. Unless otherwise authorized to do so by the county, no person may harvest any raw forest products, or direct the harvesting of any raw forest products, from any land until 14 days after the clerk of the county in which the land is located is notified of the person’s proposal to harvest. The person shall notify the county clerk each year and may do so in any manner acceptable to the county. Each time the person notifies the county, the person shall describe the land upon which the harvesting will occur by quarter-quarter section, government lot or fractional lot, unless the county requires a different method for describing the land. Notification under this subdivision expires on the December 31 immediately following the notification, and no person may harvest, or direct the harvesting of, any additional raw forest products from the land until further notification that complies with this subdivision is provided to the county.
26.03(1m)(a)2.2. Upon receipt of notifications under subd. 1., the county clerk shall provide notice to the town chairperson of each town in which the land from which raw forest products will be harvested is located and to the county treasurer. The county treasurer shall determine whether the county holds a tax certificate or tax deeds to any of the land involved. If the county holds a tax certificate, the county treasurer shall take action to collect the unpaid taxes represented by county-owned tax certificates or to prevent the harvesting of raw forest products from the land. If the county holds a tax deed, the county treasurer shall take action to prevent the harvesting of raw forest products from the land.
26.03(1m)(b)(b) Paragraph (a) 1. does not apply to a person harvesting raw forest products on public lands, as defined in s. 70.13 (7), 2021 stats., to a person harvesting raw forest products for fuel wood for his or her home consumption, to a person harvesting for the purpose of clearing the land for agricultural use or to a person harvesting from the person’s own land, any of the following:
26.03(1r)(a)(a) No purchaser of Indian reservation land or land to be placed upon the tax roll for the first time may harvest any raw forest products, or direct the harvesting of any raw forest products, from the land without first recording the instrument by which title to the land was acquired in the office of the register of deeds for the county in which the land is located.
26.03(1r)(b)(b) Paragraph (a) does not apply to a person harvesting raw forest products for fuel wood for his or her home consumption.
26.03(1v)(1v) Exceptions. This section does not apply to the harvesting of raw forest products for the purpose of establishing or maintaining a railroad track or structure, a pipeline, or a utility right-of-way by any of the following:
26.03(1v)(g)(g) A corporation licensed to do business in this state that is engaged in the business of transporting natural gas, petroleum products, water, or sewage through pipelines.
26.03(2)(a)(a) Whoever violates sub. (1g), or a rule promulgated under sub. (1g), shall forfeit not less than $500 nor more than $10,000.
26.03(2)(b)(b) Whoever violates sub. (1m) or (1r), or a rule promulgated under sub. (1m) or (1r), shall forfeit not more than $100.
26.03 HistoryHistory: 1975 c. 365; 1977 c. 224; 1983 a. 422, 424; 1989 a. 56 s. 258; 1999 a. 190; 2005 a. 423; 2017 a. 136; 2023 a. 12.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 1983–1994 · leading case: Wimes v. Eaton Corp., 573 F. Supp. 331 (E.D. Wis. 1983).
Wimes v. Eaton Corp., 573 F. Supp. 331 (E.D. Wis. 1983). “Moore, Moore’s Federal Practice § 26.03[2] at 26-82 (2d ed. 1983). To revive that instrument today in the wake of some 50 years of practice under a regime of prescribed rules and statutory provisions might thus appear anomalous.”
Leon's Frozen Custard, Inc. v. Leon Corp., 513 N.W.2d 636 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “THOMAS MCCARTHY, MCCARTHY ON TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION § 26.03, at 26-14 to 26-15 (3d ed. 1992).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.