Additional Trends/Isuues Comments

These comments are taken directly from the survey.
These comments do not reflect the opinion of the DNR.

Comment #: 1
Farm program subsidies encourage retirement of ag land. Forestry should be more proactive about getting these acres stocked. Also, there is a need to tie forestry and major NGO's like Ruffed Grouse Society and NWTf, QDM(Whitetails Unlimited etc. together. Based on what I've seen, foresters do much more for forest wildlife than WM has. Overall WM and Forestry need to get on the same page. WM has to move past its grass and pheasant brain lock and get some timber planted and work with the related wildlife opportunities. )

Comment #: 2
Farm program subsidies encourage retirement of ag land. Forestry should be more proactive about getting these acres stocked. Also, there is a need to tie forestry and major NGO's like Ruffed Grouse Society and NWTf, QDM (Whitetails Unlimited etc. together. Based on what I've seen, foresters do much more for forest wildlife than WM has. Overall WM and Forestry need to get on the same page. WM has to move past its grass and pheasant brain lock and get some timber planted and work with the related wildlife opportunities. )

Comment #: 3
THE DEER HERD!!! The effect of the large, artificially maintained deer herd in Wisconsin needs to be addressed. Their large numbers have made it virtually impossible to regenerate many different species of forest trees (primarily oak, hemlock, white cedar, and white birch---but also white pine). The two main culprits are the extent of year-round feeding by more and more of the public and the lack of access for hunting on most private lands (where the feeding occurs). The composition of our forests is changing. Many important native species are failing to regenerate. As the existing stands of these trees mature and die there is not, or will not be, anything to replace them. We are in danger of losing these important components of our native forests.

Comment #: 4
This has nothing to do with trends or issues. This survey, if it goes out to the public like this, won't make forestry look very good. This should have been proofed - way too many spelling errors, i.e. fifire and nave (above). Also you expect people to go back through and list the top ten issues, hell I'm not even going to do that and I am in forestry. To me all these issues are important.

Comment #: 5
Not an issue - just a comment about this survey. Many, many of these issues, in the narrative under the topic, were extremely leading and tended to funnel someone's thinking into a pre-determined (or hoped for?!) response. This is very dangerous and unprofessional. Please identify possible issues and trends and leave the social commentary out. Is this available to the general public - and used by them?? It would be interesting to know this answer.

Comment #: 6
The improved quantity and quality of Wisconsins forest resource is reflected in the return of many native wildlife species including turkey, timber wolf, fisher and marten.

Comment #: 7
Improving relations with partners is essential to the success of Wisconsin Forests. The State is a very small player when it comes to a land holder. Our strength is in our relations with our partners. We are invited guest for the most part. Discussion is needed concerning building these relations both financially and with assistance.

Comment #: 8
Forestry education of the population centers is the key in determining whether or not forestry will be around in the future. These are the people that influence politicians and policy makers. I believe this should be our number 1 priority. The education efforts should be done by current or newly appointed DNR staff and not left up to teachers in the school system. This way we can assure our message gets accross in the manner in which it is intended.

Comment #: 9
1. Ownership trend towards more small parcels is affecting the way wood is procured and harvested. For example, difficulty is acquiring wood from many small owners, smaller harvest size, smaller equipment, private contracting of logging crews by mills.
2. Technology transfer from the forestry research phase to applied forest management. USFS used to have a much larger role in this area.
3. Landscape level forest planning - several items addressed part of this larger issue.

Comment #: 10
Be cautious of the trend set by the USFS to set aside wise forest management for political reasons, or in order to please an uneducated, more urban population that wants to "have their cake and eat it too". +++ Stick with the forest management principles that continue to be true and continue to work.

Comment #: 11
Taxation of forested lands.
Wisconsin's forest tax law program - MFL acreage expanding.
Role of forests in protecting Wisconsin water quality.
Production of planting stock for reforestation.
Certification of foresters and logging contractors.
Road restrictions on hauling forest products.
Improvements in timber harvesting technology.
Timber theft and timber trespass laws.
Change in stumpage prices; increasing value of standing timber.
Market forces external to Wisconsin that influence statewide demand for forest products.

Comment #: 12
Only once in this survey was the use as trees as buffers for clean water mentioned (although clearing lots around lake fronts was also mentioned). Forested wetlands and forested buffer zones along lakes and rivers are significant in their ability to ensure the integrity of water quality in lakes and rivers, as well as our groundwater. We need to promote leaving forested zones along the lakefronts and riverways both through regulation (just as we have done for wetlands) and through education. Wooded zones = good water quality.

Comment #: 13
Private land purchase by public institutions in most cases effectively taking land out of agricultural/timber production.
Certification and/or licensure of foresters.
Forest management being taken out of the hands of foresters on public lands (primarily National Forests so far).
Native American hunting/gathering rights.
Cultural artifacts inventory, management and protection on forested and/or public land (i.e. indian mounds, archeological sites, pioneer homesteads, etc.)

Comment #: 14
E7 -- The partners in the foresry community need to speak with one voice in Wisconsin. There are now many voices with duplicative efforts with competing educational themes and services. Each partner must realize it's strengths and weaknesses as they fill their most productive role in the whole forestry picture. The plan should address who forfills these vital roles and how to best accomplish them. The future of sustainabe forestry in Wisconsin depends on everyone working together and doing their part.

Comment #: 15
Forest Roads and access management in public and private forests

Comment #: 16
Concerns about deer browsing and the resulting elimination or reduction of some species in the next generation.
the way this survey is structured presentling issues and agrreing or not agreeing is ackward, I gave up answerting as I thought only parts of the statements were important or had to be qualified to agree or disagree with.

Comment #: 17
Though it was mentioned, I would emphasize it's importance that in our world economy industrial forest ownership is at great risk of disappearing. If land values continue to increase, large industrial landowners will liquidate their holdings for the short term profits, placing more harvest pressures on public lands and reducing recreation opportunities to the extreme. This will also have an extensive environmental impact by further fragmenting ecosystems, increasing species endangerment and extinctions and drastically reducing biodiversity.
Though not directly mentioned ATV and deer baiting are privatizing recreation on public forests. Both should be managed in such a way to prevent such privatization. ATV's should be limited to approved trails in areas where environmental impact is minimal, transcressors should be severely penalized, and deer baiting should be banned on public lands.

Comment #: 18
They were covered previously, but my biggest concerns are:
1. The transition to "urban" absentee landowners who do not understand natural processes and have become too far removed from nature to understand why forest management is healthy and many of the associated benefits of such management. Times have changed greatly from the time when timber harvesting and hunting and "living with the land" were common practice and universally accepted.
2. The loss of "early-successional" ecosystems at an alarming rate. I feel this is mostly caused by propoganda from the liberal "environmentalists" (if you can call them that) which lobby against clearcutting. Again, they present "misinformation" and treat regeneration harvesting,the same as clearing land for agriculture and development, which is obviously totally untrue and misleading.

Comment #: 19
The assessment focuses on the structural aspects of ecological issues. It is imperative that the plan strives for functional solutions.
Our citizens have strong cultural ties to forests that are not simply economic- or recreation-based. Thes ties need to be identified and the relative values should be explored. We don't know why or what our citizens value in WI forests, and learning the why/what should be part of any plan for the future. Criteria IV in Appendix 3 of the Assessment should be the basis of any future work.

Comment #: 20
Single use management, to the exclusion of timber production.

Comment #: 21
I found the first two sections extremely interesting and informative in fact I've kept a digital copy for future professional reference. Good Job !!! But this document completely lacks describing the land-water relationship of our forests and completely misses one of the most important values both economic and environmental. Where is the watershed? I did not find watershed mentioned once in the entire body of the document. Where is the water cycle? From third grade on we are taught the value of the forest in the water cycle and it is not mentioned once in this document. The hydrology section of the plan needs a lot of work. Why not give a example or two of the way that forested land increases watershed health and describe how management of the forest on a watershed basis in concert with both public and private landowners can go a very long way in sustaining the healthy watershed and protect the valuable aquatic resources that lie downstream. What about the role of the forest in soil building and the value of Large woody cover in streams.
It concerns me that we have organized the department and the publics way of thinking about the landscape on the basin level yet this document completely ignores that approach. Forest management plays a huge role in the water cycle and is one of the most important issues for the present and future. The more we spread out and build roads, homes in the watershed the more valuable that the public and private forested land becomes to ecosystem health.

Comment #: 22
WATER is missing from the Assessment Report. Three vague paragraphs on page 64 do not adequately convey the information on the relationships between forests and watershed health, that the public needs to know. A great deal of information is know about how land use and forest cover types affect the hydrology of a watershed. As the report does mention, the demographics of the landowners and stakeholders is changing. Often these people organize around the local waterbody or watershed. These people and organizations need to understand the relationship between the water and the forest within their watershed. This education and understanding is critical for their local support in forest management and correct use of BMPs.

Comment #: 23
WATER is missing from the Assessment Report. Three vague paragraphs on page 64 do not adequately convey the information on the relationships between forests and watershed health, that the public needs to know. A great deal of information is know about how land use and forest cover types affect the hydrology of a watershed. As the report does mention, the demographics of the landowners and stakeholders is changing. Often these people organize around the local waterbody or watershed. These people and organizations need to understand the relationship between the water and the forest within their watershed. This education and understanding is critical for their local support in forest management and correct use of BMPs.

Comment #: 24
Note statements for various trends/issues by each item; everything listed is of concern/so you are getting people to read this and think more broadly - OK

Comment #: 25
1. Wisconsin's and the U.S. Forest Service's dislike for campers needs to be turned around! I can remember when the Wis. hunting regulations used to state: "Camping is allowed and encouraged on all public hunting and fishing grounds." Likewise, the Chequamegan Forest brochures used to say "Camping is allowed anywhere in the National Forest." 2. State Foresters need to recognize that private landowners often have priorities other than timber production (wildlife, recreation, etc.), and the State Forestry people should recognize and encourage this (many State Foresters still discourage it!)

Comment #: 26
1. Clear cutting next to streams and rivers causes great harm to our waters. While I am in favor of clear cutting in general, I feel that there is a great deal of abuse which causes erosion and degradation to our waters. This needs to be monitored more closely and regulated area by area. 2. Small parcels of wooded land that is being purchased by private parties need to be appraised individually to identify the concerns that are unique to each parcel. There is no way you can come to a plan that would address these as a whole. As the baby boomers start to retire and cash in their 401-K Plans, we will see these small parcels being purchased in record numbers! This is a great opportunity to work with these new landowners to ensure the health and best use of these lands. I envision a new department within the DNR to work with these small parcel landowners. A great portion of these new privately owned parcels of wooded land have possibly been neglected for a long period of time. This is a perfect opportunity to help these parcels be once again productive.

Comment #: 27
This is a great summary of the forest issues. It seems redundant to ask each question - a forest plan is all inclusive. Just do it - it's important.

Comment #: 28
How about exotic insects?

Comment #: 29
Clear cutting and the planting of pines - bad for habitat in long run and doesn't support wildlife in long run esp. deer.

Comment #: 30
In the Southern Kettle Moraine, forest visitors/users expect a higher quality of logging road remediation. Erosion controls and reestablishment of vegetation needs to be addressed. Unless monies are set aside for this . . . the forest users will wage a holy war on logging practices on the forest.

Comment #: 31
- Practices inconsistent with sound forestry being conducted by "cooperating foresters." - High grading. - The public's lack of understanding of how a forester can help the put landowner manage.

Comment #: 32
Public awareness of need for management plans.

Comment #: 33
Control purple loose-strife (can lead to cattail destruction)

Comment #: 34
Home C and industrial use of wood for fuel needs to be controlled.

Comment #: 35
I am concerned about clear cutting and how its use can damage, yes sometimes it should be used, but with care. I am concerned about public use of land, motor vehicles that tear up the land and damage forest items such as trees, plant growth (endangered) and disturb wildlife. It is my believe that if we can control the deer herd, somehow we can control the forest, even with urban sprawl. I think the last thing on your mind are the exotic species, the damage it can do and the speed of it. I believe I spilled enough of my thinking; sorry if I offend anyone. Thank you.

Comment #: 36
- The removal of large tracts of oaks (all species) needs to be stopped. - More effective ways of recycling to save resources need to be high priority. - Too much time and $ is spent on the global warming issue. These $'s could be better spent on real life forest issue instead of lining the pockets of individuals claiming to do research in this area.

Comment #: 37
New highway construction is very wasteful. Highways should be widened, not rerouted, as is the case with Highway 57 in Brown, Kewaunee and Door Co. Highway 57 is being rerouted through old stand forests. How much more wasteful can the D.O.T. be? It is time for the Governor of our state, the D.N.R. and all forestry people to do something to stop this wasteful practice of the D.O.T. to our beautiful foresters.

Comment #: 38
Impact an out of control deer herd is having on our forest resource.

Comment #: 39
I cannot think of any other trends or issues that have not been addressed. I believe that this is a very thorough assessment of our forests. As someone with a Wildlife Management degree, I believe that ecosystem management is the best approach. It will be a challenge, but I am happy to contribute to this survey.

Comment #: 40
Many of the issues that I disagree with are because I don't like the idea of more "regulations" over my tree farm operation.

Comment #: 41
I own property in SW Bayfield County. I also have been "going" up there for over 35 years. 1 - Large blocks of land become smaller blocks of land when trees are harvested. Although many commenters are likely upset with this, I'm more concerned about access issues. Logging roads used to be seeded down and access limited to foot travel. Now ATV's and 4x4's turn them into rutted slop holes. It creates a mess and recreational conflict. There are plenty of opportunities for 4x4's and ATV's. Tote roads should have limited access restricted to foot travel only. Counties need to be more diligent and restrictive. 2 - Oak/Jack Pine communities. A good deal of this occurs on private lands so it is likely outside of this process. It does also occur on county lands. Tremendous amounts of lands are cut and instead of providing a return to Oak/Jack Pine (which would occur naturally), they are planted to Red Pines. You lose diversity and gain boredom. Huge tracts of sterile patterned Red Pine forests. (Drive Hwy. 27 north of CTH Y in Bayfield Co. on your way to Brule). Jack Pine/Oak forest communities are unique. It is shameful to see them become sterile Red Pine plantations.

Comment #: 42
Education about all these issues. How will it be done and a goal for it.

Comment #: 43
Loggers need to be regulated and licensed. The amount of abuse in logging is staggering and will stop the private landowner from managing for timber.

Comment #: 44
I have owned and managed a 160-acre tree farm in northern Wisconsin for over 30 years. I am in the Tree Farm system and have a management plan. Here are some observations and opinions that I have that may be relevant. RE: C3 and C4 - These are my most important points and are related. Education/Assistance - Private landowners are not "forestry" people and must rely on others for advice and education. I feel the State should be much more active in programs like the American Tree Farm program and needs more Forestry employees that can go on-site and spend some time walking private lands and talking with the owners. They need lots of hands-on guidance to prevent them from making mistakes that will take generations to correct. I had the assistance of a State Forester when I did my management plan and he was invaluable. They also need Forestry personnel to assist them with marking and planning tree harvests. (see below). Logger Regulation - I have had several tree harvests by several different private loggers and logging companies and have come away with the strong feeling that the State needs to investigate and then regulate this portion of the industry. This has to be done if they expect private landowners to allow the harvest and management of their forests. There are a million horror stories of stolen timber, short payments or no payment at all, damaged and worthless residuals, cutting of unmarked trees and on and on. I have experienced much of this and I feel that I have been as careful as I can be to protect myself. An acquaintance in Iron County contracted for a thinning cut and the logger cut only the best and biggest trees, totally rutted up and ruined his roads and then disappeared without paying him for 160 acres of trees. This kind of story has scared many landowners into never managing their woodlots and there are so many of these stories. I don't necessarily favor State regulation but logging is so foreign to landowners that we don't even know if we are being robbed. Any industry with that big an "advantage" over the consumer needs to be regulated and licensed. The temptations are too great and the possibility of punishment or even detection is too slight. The standards for logging should be much higher than just owning a pick-up and a chainsaw. RE: A7 - It is our responsibility to protect all species. RE: A8, D4 & E2 - This is very important and here in Minocqua we just had our first invasion of the Asian Ladybird Beatles to remind us. It is obvious, but I feel we need to really mobilize when one of these exotics is identified. The only chance to stop them seems to be to get them right away. In our area we have lakes with just a scattered few Purple Loostrife plants growing on the shoreline. At this point they could be quickly hand pulled to control them but in another few years it will be too late to handle it easily and cheaply. Other states are starting to regulate what animals and plants can be imported and inspect imported products for possible hitchhikers. RE: A11 & C9 - I am angry that there is virtually nowhere I can go to see Wisconsin forest as it used to be - that there are only tiny tracts or single trees left to represent the vast virgin forest. The State seems to see trees with "logger's eyes" and we have to get away from the thinking that if a tree dies of old age it is wasted timber. Not all trees need to be commodities. Somewhere we need to provide some sizable tree refuges where trees and their entire related ecosystems can be protected from harvest so that people in the future can enjoy what I cannot. RE: A14 - The use of fire as a tool is a great idea and I would use it myself but it's too scary and the potential for disaster and liability too great. I would love to ( and should) burn my marshlands occasionally and I'd use it to kill understory and Balsams. This is another area where the State needs to provide knowledgeable people and equipment if the private landowner is going to play along. RE: C1 - I think that the opportunity offered by the sale of the PCA lands in the Minocqua area was only partially realized. I think the State should get all the big blocks of land that it can possibly get. These kind of chances only come around once. When the public gets it and starts dividing, it is too late. (see below) RE: C2 & D2 - I sell real estate and I can tell you that this trend is huge. Every deer hunter wants his own land so he can build his tree condo and throw out a big bait pile. The demand is so much greater than the land available. In addition, "acreage" used to mean 40 acres or more but now the public is willing to purchase hunting "acreage" of only 5 or 10 acres. This makes land development very possible and profitable. In our area big parcels were selling for $1,000 an acre or less just two years ago and now we have high ground 40's listed up to $120,000. The PCA lands that fell into private ownership are being parceled into small chunks that are coming on the market now. RE: C5 - Again I think the State needs to tie up any big parcels of land that become available. These are once-in-a-lifetime opportunities. RE: C7 - Decision makers need to give weight to aesthetics as well as economics. And the aesthetics may have more economic weight than we think. Birdwatchers and hikers need to rent rooms and eat. RE: C10 - There needs to be areas where these people can play, just as there needs to be areas where we can hike and bike in peace. The snowmobiles are firmly entrenched, organized and regulated. They are using the public lands at a time of year where there is little competition. The four-wheelers, off-roaders and dirt bikers are not so fortunate and will never get the acceptance and freedom that the snowmobiles have. In addition, the wheeled vehicles can do terrific damage. I believe they will have to settle for specific areas and perhaps even specific seasons.

Comment #: 45
Laws must be changed so owners of large tracts of land cannot keep hunters off the lands. The animals they are protecting are not owned by the owners of the land. The protected animals cost the surround people much money and the forest damage can be great.

Comment #: 46
We have to protect most all tree species - especially oak and walnut. By doing this we will also be benefiting wildlife.

Comment #: 47
The over-harvesting of woodlands in west-central Wisconsin, is now and will be a concern for this areas oak population. These areas are not regenerating the ways they should be and are changing into soft wood stands, such as maple, etc. . . Gone also will be land values (those assoc. with timber value). Urban sprawl is what keeps these values up. Incorrect harvesting techniques and over-harvesting are what is going to hurt this area the most. As for forestry assistance, some of this state's foresters fall short of the goals that you suggest. I recently left the woodland tax program along with approx. 20+ other landowners in this area, due to lack of cooperation and understanding of what these landowners want and desire. (Clear-Cutting) is not a true forestry plan, especially for private landowners!

Comment #: 48
Trail systems require more law enforcement help to save the damage being done by four-wheel and snowmobiling. Ecological impact by misuse is out of hand! Many motorized users have no feelings for what they doing to plants and other related habitat. Let's increase our educational programs and put teeth in your enforcement instead of watching muddy four-wheeler and trucks rutting up the forest. Many loggers are using poor forestry harvest methods, also. The forest product and how fast they can remove it is their only factor. Encourage more cooperative hunting opportunities of private tracks of land to help manage out of control deer problem.

Comment #: 49
- The introduction of land management of turkey in Wisconsin will finish off the loss of our oak forests. - County, state and federal land foresters are rotated from area to area so often they seldom see or have to answer for their practices. - Maple and basswood stands are desirable and valuable - clear cut practices and heavy deer ? will end its existence. - Modern (1990-2000) logging machines and practices are having a serious negative effect on our forests future. = Soil compaction. = Wide roads and soil displacement threatens future tree growth. = Large cleared landings 1-2 acres are left on nearly all timber sales on public lands. = Most timber sales are offered in sizes that only the large wasteful operators can complete on time. Thus the large machines and destructive practices.

Comment #: 50
Property rights of landowners. Managing forests for maximum timber production. Why are there two strongly agree lines, and no strongly disagree line.

Comment #: 51
Many of the issues need to be monitored rather than managed. Education used more than coercion mechanism for cooperative plans with landowners.

Comment #: 52
To better achieve the goal of more usable forests - the trend of canopy increase is a good one. However, to manage against exotics and disease biodiversity of species is most pragmatic. We must not attempt to plant large areas of single species tree farms. This is especially true for root-linked species such as oak, or white pine, which is vulnerable to "rust!" I thank you for develoing this method to involve people who will be most interested in improving the management of forests. It is these forests which contribute to causing Wisconsin to be the most beautiful state in the lower 48.

Comment #: 53
Extra snowmobile trails, ATV trails, and uses of this type are not to my way of thinking, desirable. Sorry - the land and its preservation is more desirable and important. Just because someone buys an ATV, the state is not responsible for providing trails, access ways, etc. for these people. I own rural land and I do not, will not, provide trails. These trails harm the land - go out in the spring and look at what damage these trails do to the land. Erosion, destruction of topsoil - look at it - is this desirable???!!! No!!! Sorry - as I said - just because someone spends $5,000 to buy an ATV or snowmobile - or, God forbid - a motorcycle does not mean we should provide a trail for them to use. Look at what damage is done to the landscape!!!

Comment #: 54
1 - Wisconsin forests should be managed for biodiversity and for the benefit of animal species that live there. Human asthetics must take a back seat. 2 - The loss of shade intolerant tree species should be reversed. They provide food and protection from predators in their early stages of growth. 3 - Motorized vehicle use should be regulated and restricted in some areas. 4 - Wildlife and forest biologists should be given more authority in forest management decisions.

Comment #: 55
1. More research in inset control. 2. Thousands of acres now growing worthless trees-should be planted in walnut, oak, etc. 3. Encourage farmers to set aside and plant trees to avoid the warming of the planet. 4. Less bookwork for the forestry-more help for the tree farmer. 5. Research in eradicating obnoxious trees such as box elder, wheeping willow, etc. 6. Educational programs so that the youths will better understand the value of trees.

Comment #: 56
I'm encouraged by the steps the State of Wisconsin is taking to preserve, protect and manage its forest. However, I hope the state does not leave out the small landowner when decisions are made. Most of the forest land in this state, in my opinion, is owned by the small landowner. I hope, also the State of Wisconsin does not mandate policies that would put undue burden on small landowners to comply. I do feel, however, that many of our small tracts of land need educated management to reap their full potential as many are not now being managed properly, if at all. Thank you for allowing me, a small landowner, to participate in this survey.

Comment #: 57
If we don't fix the exotic species problems, we won't have to worry about any of the rest of the issues!!! Look at how the composition has changed in the last 100 years due to foreign pests. What percent of the standing trees used to be chestnuts, elms, etc. And the newer pests are worse than the old. You need to be all over this issue. Don't worry about the economics and other issues that the markets should solve - go deal with the real threats!!

Comment #: 58
After the deer season, there were just as many tracks as before. I had some clear cut and want it back in oak which deer like. Too many people have no trespassing signs around me and won't kill does. Another issue is the four-wheelers have no respect for property of others; don't stay on trails. Make available kinds of seedling at cost which the state wants in areas they want them.

Comment #: 59
The most important issue for forest owners is loss of control their property to outside interests. Nothing, either ecological or economic should hamper a landowner's decision-making.

Comment #: 60
1 - If there is to be more "MFL," we need more assistance in the future. 2 - The planting of oak is a "real" long-term investment. Aspen is short term; some economic justification for planting oaks. 3 - The impact of deer, turkey, etc. in tree planting. 4 - We know what we've got; how do we improve it?

Comment #: 61
Availability to help owners evaluate their goals and forests.

Comment #: 62
Just a note on my own experience: I have planted approx. 50,000 trees over the past 20 years or so on my farm. Probably approx. 10,000 will be the total after thinning, etc. Approx. 10,000 walnut Approx. 20,000 oak (red) Approx. 20,000+ white pine I've been blessed in that Rudy Nigl(?) got me started in a bigger way with trees and has been most helpful in pruning many of my walnuts the past few years. In conclusion, a most interesting survey and nothing but the best.

Comment #: 63
Somehow we have fallen way short in educating the public on forestry facts. With decreasing acreage in aspen forests, huntable wildlife habitat will suffer. In our national forests in 20 years, we will be hiring people force account(?) to cut aspen simply to maintain the species. That's sad! Where else in the U.S.A. can we maintain the aspen species.

Comment #: 64
Oak wilt seems to be a growing problem in Wisconsin.

Comment #: 65
1 - Trend is for County and State ownership, taking it (forest) out of the tax roll. Also raising the value of the land when they pay 1,000/acre. 2 - Study the impact of high taxes on forest land and its impact on good forestry practices. Cannot afford to manage and replant.

Comment #: 66
State owned forests and private owned forest are two distinct areas. Don't take away any right of private owner to the benefit of public use.

Comment #: 67
I believe local foresters have a better control of the county forest. The state has more pressure from environmental groups. One thing that should be addressed is the bikers and hikers should be providing revenue for these trails on all government owned land. All motorized vehicles have to be registered except dirt bikes and they should be. The fees could be used develop may new trail and the upkeep all the ones now in use.

Comment #: 68
Eliminate deer feeding! In the north, deer are eating all the ? in hardwoods due to feeding. Than don't die in bad winters anymore.

Comment #: 69
There may be more area removed from timber production by landowenrs who are opposed to cutting trees than indicated in the DNR survey. This is just a point that should be considered in determining the future potential of available forest products.

Comment #: 70
The local community has little to say about problems. Strangers are more vocal, but don't know subject or problems. Practical help not readily available. Taxes for woodland too high. Ways to improve forests.

Comment #: 71
Is there a possibility to implement a program where landowners have an opportunity to evaluate work done by loggers, forest managers or forest equipment? It would help a prospective forest owner needing to hire someone or buy something from making a bad choice.

Comment #: 72
Federal, State and County forests need access - good raods for harvest - hunting - fire control - or just a drive! Harvest is good (harvest the first lets you grow the second). Harvest controls fires. The public forest are for everyone. Gore and his tree huggers have a one-sided view and definitely not qualified to be listened to. If they know forestry they would not talk as they do! I am 62 yrs. old and have timber land. I have some to cut for the second time. Thanks

Comment #: 73
Public access to large forest areas has become unexplainably restricted. Much public ire here! E.g. extensive birming of forest roads excluding public ingress is wrong. It also hinders fire control access to these areas. DNR gates and birms smack of exclusion philosophy! (A misprint on check list boxees for each item - you have "agree strongly" twice)

Comment #: 74
Lack of educational efforts to inform students of forestry benefits - harvesting is not bad . . . Should strive to inform young students. Forest management should not be sacrificed for the sake of recreation. The two can co-exist. Do not follow trend of USFS in promoting non-forestry uses of public land.

Comment #: 75
Cost of harvesting eats up possible profits - needed for reforestation and investment and living expenses. Somebody goofed on the choices.

Comment #: 76
I believe a long hard look needs to be taken with the runaway taxes, especially swamps, marshes, wetlands, flood plains and unproductive areas.

Comment #: 77
One trend in my area (Northwestern WI) is the dramatic increase in the price of land recently--doubling or more in 1-2 years. This could have the effect of large parcels being broken up and sold for high profits. I'm sure this can only be harmful in the long run to the integrity of the forested areas in my area of fairly large tracts of land. I never intend on selling my woodland, and so far my nearest neighbors aren't contemplating selling, but I'm sure many landowners will be breaking up their tracts when "wild 40's" starting selling in the $60,000 range. And that is starting to happen.

Comment #: 78
I would like to see selective cutting on all DNR and state land instead of wasting these resources. I would like to see ATV's allowed on snowmobile trails on state land.

Comment #: 79
Trends and issues should have an action statement so I know what I'm strongly agreeing with, such as in A3. "Reintroduce the American Elm, Chestnut with disease resistance strains. Encourage management practices that favor the reproduction of Jack Pine and the Oak Savannah ecosystems." Stating a fact and asking to agree or disagree still doesn't change the fact. If everyone disagrees with forest fragmentation doesn't make it go away.

Comment #: 80
How much did it cost to produce "Wisconsin forests" at the Millennium? It seems to me this could be a final publication. Is there some type of cost/benefit being run? Also, it is great to address these controversial issues/trends on paper, but if nothing done, what is the point? You can plan away, but tactics need to be carried throughout in the field to see any type of change to address these issues.

Comment #: 81
My brothers and I own 320 acres in Monroe County. It is getting to the point where taxes on the land are starting to kill me since I retired. I have talked with them about selling some land for a housing development to get money to pay the taxes. The land value keeps going up because area farmers are selling off lots for houses and there is housing all around us. Right now, all our land is woods. The land was purchased in 1970 for $42.50 per acre, and now it's worth $1,500.00 per acre. We could make a lot of money by selling, but want to keep it as woodland for our kids, but can we afford to do that with the amount of taxes we pay? Our land is used by lots of area people for walking, horseback riding, snow shoeing, hunting, and firewood from downed trees. With us living in Madison and only using the land about 15-20 days a year, it's hard to pay the amount of taxes I (we) do. Another possibility is to get Governor Thompson to do something for woodland owners like he did for farmers; or get the state to step in at no cost to us to manage the land for timber harvest. Thanks for letting me sound off.

Comment #: 82
Town zoning ordinances and their impact on forest land.

Comment #: 83
It seems like many areas clear cut are planted back with all red pine where once hardwood or aspen grew. Well, is this good forest management? I don't agree. Also, we have large number of basswood growth with no or limited markets for the pulp or small log which is very wasteful when harvested. In my business, cedar products I see cull wood cut and tried to be marketed that should have been left for seed trees and also four minimum size and larger used as harvest specs where we in the business use basically the whole tree two or three minimum size to as large as they grow - poor forestry tactics for this specie.

Comment #: 84
Deer over-population and deer browse (Bayfield County, near Lake Superior): lack of natural predators for population balance. Statewide, there were a record number of deer/vehicle collisions in the year 2000, killing more than 10,000 deer and 6 people. That is more than just a nuisance issue. It is a public safety and forest use issue, and it directly affects my many attempts to plant pine seedlings.

Comment #: 85
If the State is going to be involved in management, smaller landowners will have to be assisted in some way other than cost sharing and education. For instance, there are many landowners with management plans with 80 or 100 acres. Part of the plan includes selected harvesting, but it is not cost effective for loggers to go in for marked trees. 80-100 acres are too small. The individual landowners do not have the expertise nor equipment to harvest. Then it is how to transport the huge logs. Yet harvesting and releasing crop trees is important to the management plan. This is a small problem on such a large scale, but it does need some thinking about.

Comment #: 86
1 - Better tax breaks or incentives for carrying out a management plan. 2 - Timber marketing co-ops. 3 - Fragmentation - small parcels - less attractive timber sales - less reward for managing forests. 4 - Liability issues - grant greater immunity from liability to enhance attractiveness of woodland ownership, leasing of hunting rights.

Comment #: 87
One of the most critical issues that needs to be identified is the issue of environmental education. From my many years of experiences (30+), I believe that much of the currently taught Environmental Education, especially at the elementary and middle school levels, is actually prejudicial against almost all forestry including sustainable forestry. Many rainforest curriculum basically teach that cutting any trees for human use is wrong and protesting against any harvest is the goal and proper thing to do. This type of biased curriculum and teaching needs to be actively countered with forestry curriculum that uses many great examples of sound long-term sustainable ecologically sensitive forestry. Local examples need to be seen by the children and teachers with the forester, landowner and harvester explaining the benefits of the harvest. Currently, especially in the Madison area, we have many environmental extremists whose thinking is based on some emotional beliefs that are not based on science or fact. The press loves to stir these people up on any issue just to sell a few more papers. We certainly need to work on the media as well as teach children that being good stewards of our resources includes sound forestry practices. Another critical issue that needs to be addressed is the bias against most forestry by the Bureau of Endangered Resources on nearly all the state natural areas. There are areas that I'm aware of that were extremely well managed by the previous landowner for sustainable old growth and when the Bureau of Endangered Resources took control of the property they would never allow another tree to be planted or harvested. Some of these old landowners and families are turning over in their graves. When one looks at the thousands of acres in this state's "natural areas" with millions of dollars of timber either rotting away or becoming a greater fire hazard it seems a monstrous waste. When there are great examples of old growth management that also preserves biodiversity as the Collins Almanor forest and the Anderson-Tully forests and many others, it's hard to imagine the rationale for their policies and practices. In addition when acquiring new state natural areas that have had a past history of sound forestry it again is a stretch to figure out why long range sustainable harvests would not be desirable. Indeed many more properties could be protected from development if flexible arrangements could be made with the landowners to return some revenue over the years. I would be happy to discuss more ideas on this critical issue if you would like to call me.

Comment #: 88
I don't think trails to provide recreational access to our forests for ATVs and snowmobiles has been addressed adequately. There are a lot of these machines being sold so the sport is growing and resorts and other tourist industries are trying to cash in on this. But they need interconnecting trails to do this. Trails will have a minimal impact on forests and a major economic impact on tourist areas. Trails through state forest will provide stable riding areas not subject to disruption by developers. Hikers and bikers can go almost anywhere but ATVs and snowmobiles need their own marked trails. There aren't enough right now, especially for ATVs.

Comment #: 89
I believe that our intrusion into state forests has greatly diminished any sense of "wilderness". I don't mean that our presence has destroyed things, but rather the marks that we leave in the forests have. I am in favor of eliminating logging roads, hiking trails, use of 4 wheelers, and elevated huting stands from state forest land. I have first hand experience with the above mentioned items in the Brule and Flambeau state forests. They have seriously destroyed a place in the Brule Forest that I have enjoyed for many years. It makes me sick to my stomach!

Comment #: 90
-Need more focus on the production (timber) decline expected on the National Forests. -More focus on the "economics" and financial benefits provided by Wisconsin's forests to the state economy. Ie forest industry based jobs. Need to remember Wisconsin continues to be the nation's #1 pulp and paper producing state. This survey should have focused more on the threat many of these other uses will have on the economy if current trends continue.

Comment #: 91
MFL should allow private land owners more acreage to protect from public use. 80 acres is not enough. My suggestion is 160 acres.

Comment #: 92
If this survey is to be used to further erode private ownership then I strongly disagree. If the survey is used to better manage the forest on a voluntary basis. Through advise by the DNR then I strongly agree. I have heard many times from landowners who feel private property rights have been reduced to a mere role of becoming a tenant of the land with the express right, of which few rights remain, is to pay an annual sum of money for this right of tenancy called real estate taxes.

Comment #: 93
Property taxes on woodlands (which the state now calls recreation land) have caused many farmers to again pasture their woodland. This land is then called pasture land which classifies it into farmland which is taxed at a lower rate. If this trend continues, many more wood lots will be pastured in the future.

Comment #: 94
On the issue of clear cutting. Why cut next to the road looks like heck. Should be back in the woods. Why clear cut everything. Should be cut here and there not swatch. It would be if fisable to take out undisirable trees and brush so more sunshine would reach forest floor. When you clear cut the first trees to come up would be poplars then you have a bamboo curtain, its good for the deer (grows) the tree you want to grow, won't. Should have yourth or groups plant trees you want. I suppose poplars would be for pulp for papers products. As of now there is a glut of paper products!! To me, to see clear cuts, like looking at windfalls, it's an eye sore any way you look at it.

Comment #: 95
1. People are concerned about the rate of change in forested ecosystems. The plan should address how various actions or inaction will affect the rate of change of forests. 2. The development of support facilities and facilities themselves (trails, ski areas) to accommodate more and more users threatens the "natural" or "wild"ness of forests and parks. The plan should address at what point to say no to more development (public forests). 3. Public forests should not be zoned or allocated to single uses. Multiple uses must be balance so all people can use and enjoy public forests. 4. Forestry practices including clearcutting are only tools used to accomplish an objective. The forest plan should focus on objectves and forest conditions appropriate for the future. 5. Steps we take today may enhance or restrict future options. Plan proposals should be assessed in terms of future flexibility. 6. Additional resources are needed to manage large public forest pruchases. New purchase proposals hsould have a commitment for management and the necessary resources tied to the acquisition proposal.

Comment #: 96
A-7- These forests have been here a long time, are increasing, and if managed will be a healthy resource indifinately. A-14- we should not become ? With controlled burns to mimic the indian ways. B-2 - the curtailment of any meaningful production on federal lands will have a negative impact on the development of Maple-Basswood forests to its full potential and probably will lead to the spread of pests to surrounding forest areas. C-10 - Motorized recreation has to be addressed - limited to DESIGNATED trails stiff penalties for leaving trails and causing damage - plus techniques for implementing these violations of property vaules and degredation C10

Comment #: 97
There is too much emphasis on using the forest for resource extraction. The forests provide us with clean air, clean water etc. that we cannot put a price tag on. Also, forests have beauty that does not have a price tag. Those are more important than how many products we can extract out of our forests we should try to extract as little as possible from our forests. Alternative products such as Hemp should be encouraged along with more recycling and reusing of forest products.

Comment #: 98
The DNR has long had a history of regulation and "over" regulation for Wisconsin's water resources and wetlands. I firmly believe that the same attention and to some extent regulation governing woodland use needs to apply as well. One of the biggest challenges faced by woodland owners in the southeast ist that owners are taxed at very high rates for wooded tracts. This makes it difficult for them to keep it and not sell it for development. Further incentives need to be provided the them at the state level for maintaining wooded tracts.

Comment #: 99
C4 C7 Balance is essential C10 Snowmobiles with cooperation of DNR have done the job on trail ?. The manufacturer should put more back into the system. Snowmobiles do NOT cause EROSION noise is not problem. ATV/Dirt Bikes should be confined to a specific area as they cause major erosion and noise polution

Comment #: 100
Recreation is becoming more of a problem with private owners. Some activities are acceptable such as non-motorized biking, hiking, hunting, and fishing. Snowmobiles are alright is they stay on the trails but unfortunately most of the rest stops on the trails are bars that contribute to the large no. of accidents and death. Un-acceptable uses are off road vehicles that damage the environment and increase management costs to landowners.

Comment #: 101
I had some problem determining if the questionnarie was asking whether the issue identified was considered important to me or whether I felt the issue was one a forestry plan should address. In some cases, I felt an issue was important, but did not feel the forestry program was an appropriate vehicle for dealing with it. In others, an issue may not have been of highest priority, but would have been but addressed by a forestry program.

Comment #: 102
December 19, 2000 Those of you who developed this survey instrument are to be commended for its detail and insight into the forest lands' demands of the future. In general, I believe that public forest lands of Wisconsin have been well manged for multiple uses, some of the public lands need to be set aside as old growth areas for comparative studies. In the majority of other forest lands managed harvest should continue for the well being of the forest crops, the economy and enjoyment of the public. I hope that caution and great restraint will be applied to all areas when access by motorized vehicles is considered. New road construction required to complete tree harvesting should be the responsibility of the contractors including the costs they incur! Taxpayers' money should not be used to develop these roads. At the completion of a logging job the roads should be closed by gating. There is strong power play going on by groups representing motorized vehicle interests. We have experienced the effects of liberal or lack of control of snowmobile access. Today we have many irresponsible snowmobile users operating far off of the designated trails. No one anticipated the extent to which the pressure on public lands would evolve. Therefore, only limited access by motorized vehicles should be permitted on a trial area for a trial period during which environmental evaluations can be conducted. With resources being stressed by an expanding population of users necessary law enforcement will have to be increased as well. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this survey.

Comment #: 103
A1. Wisconsin's forest are aging and forest succession is occurring. Yes, I would agree that this trend/issue should be addressed in a statewide forest plan. However, I do not believe that a 50 - 100 year old forest is really very old, as I believe is implied by the use of the word "aging". I understand that a sugar maple-basswood forest of 50-100 years might be on the young side of middle age, and it would need to be "mature" (150-300 years old) for some time before all the dynamics of a "mature" forest are taking place. Although birch-aspen forest acres may be decreasing, I do not believe it should be the "job" of the public forests to take up the slack (maintain recreation acres, I.e., grouse habitat) of the private forests when prvate forests are cleared and developed. I also don't believe that the State of Wisconsin should be comparing today's forests with the forests of 30-60 years ago which expressed which produced unnaturally high populations ( and expectations) of ruffed grouse. I also believe that wider use of prescribed burning would create higher quality birch-aspen acres. I would challenge state to increase the acres of white cedar, yellow birch, and eastern hemlock, these stands are few and far between compared to presettlement acreage, and especially white cedar - where today are the stands of upland white cedar - what is the secret to regenerating white cedar? A3. Some species aredeclining. Prescribed fire is severely under utilized as a mangement tool in this state. I also suggest that the "jack pine forest type" historically was a few acres compared to other forest types, and it is more of an artifical cummnity created by a lack of historical fire. A4. There is limited oak regeneration is southern Wisconsin. I agree, unfortunately too many WDNR foresters still don't understand that when you harvest the mature oaks out of a stand in southern Wisconsin, the elm-ash-soft maple, and honeysuckle-buckthorn will grow faster and shade out any oak regeneration unless a prescribed burning regime is enacted. This mentality is similar to putting in a lawn: grading the site, planting the seed, but never coming back to mow it or control the weeds. A5. Information about biodiversity is scarce. Frankly I am APPALLED that this is implied! Perhaps you should walk across the hall and listen (with the intent to understand, not with the intent to reply) the staff in the Bureau of Endangered Resources. Having worked for this Bureau in the past on State Forest Master Planning I KNOW the information is out there - Forestry NEEDS to be genuine and look for it! - We DO HAVE a very good understanding of the diversity of Wisconsin's plants! - The impacts of forest succession on biodiversity is VERY WELL understood, I would suggest getting some diversity of knowledge on your Guidance Team and Staff Team! - The role of reserves, buffers and corridors my need further study to "clarify" some aspects of some relationships, however there are volumes of information that can be implemented at this time. A6. It is a challenge to make scientific information relevant to decision-making. I think a more appropriate restatement would be: It is a challenge to make decisions scientifically based rather than made politically by untrained, uneducated, non-professionals. A7. The list of threatened and endangered species is growing. Only 67 T/E? I guess it depends upon YOUR definition of forest, and if you include T/E aquatic species found in waterways within the forests. A14. Control of fire affects forest composition. I would also suggest that control/lack of fire is a major contributor to the loss of, and lack of regeneration of oak woodlands throughout the state. C#. Priavte forestry assistance needed. You are assuming, in this issue, that WDNR foresters are more knowledgeable/ethical than the loggers - I disagree - it really depends upon the individual. C5. Less forested land is accessible for public use. I agree, however would should not be inclinded to "open" lands to ATV's that are currently non-motorized, and should pursue additional acres of non-motorized use. Where today in Wisconsin can you go and not hear an engine? Noise is an identified form of pollution, causes stress, and areas where a person can find "solitude" have been proven to be valuable for our mental, and spiritual health. C8. Clearcutting and even-age management techniques are controversial. I believe clearcutting has a place - in the pine barrens, and should probably incorporate larger blocks of land to simulate large scale fires and create habitat for sharptail grouse and grassland songbirds. Getting acceptance to these cuttings will require an education effort - based on science. If the Bureau of Wildlife can successfully do it, first with doe seasons, and now "T-zones", Forestry should be able to do it with clearcutting in the pine barrens, and prescribed burning. C10. Motorized recreation is becoming more popular. If Catapillar created a "recreational bulldozer", would the state feel obligate to create places for me to recreate with my bulldozer? Or pave the hiking trails so I can rollerblade on them? Just because the public has been "marketed" does not mean we should support the market!

Comment #: 104
This is an excellent listing of forest questions and every ONE is important. I feel decreasing the fragmentation of our rural landscape is essential (this includes forest) land use management means that we have to make over all plans for development and NOT allow anyone to put a house anywhere or do anything they wish to a forest or wildlife habitat. I know rules and guidelines go against the ideas of "freedom" but if we don't act now there will be no Wisconsin countryside (or US) left for the next generations yet to come. Shomehow we have to work together.

Comment #: 105
Help foresters protect their (ours) holding by taking tax pressures off our holdings so we don't have to sell off smaller plots to keep some of what we have and sell to developers, PLEASE!! Let the people that want green coradoors pay for them and not just complain how they should see it on our lands. IE the more green ,diverse, native the great the benefits.

Comment #: 106
My wife and I own 8 acres in the Highland State Forest on Irving Lake, 3 miles north of Star Lake, Vilas County. This property has been in the family since 1923. We disturb the forest as little as possible.

Comment #: 107
Please lets stop fragmentation, urban sprawl and developers before it is too late. Let's save this great, beautiful state for future generations of animals and plants as well as humans to enjoy. Thank you for allowing me and my wife to participate in this survey and "putting our two cents worth" in. PS Lets all work together to help preserve our wild areas.

Comment #: 108
Timberland I.e. certified tree farms should enjoy same tax advantage as other farmland. As they now stand, they are not economically viable. This is supported by tree farm tax returns!

Comment #: 109
Taxes on woodland besides forest management must be addressed. This is the No. 1 issues. 40's are being taxed from $150.00 to 300.00 to $600 to $700 each. So splits and development are occurring. This is the No 1 issue lower taxes on those acres as other WI farm land has been lowered (taxes). D1200 acres of woodland Put some people on this committee that have sawdust on their feet.

Comment #: 110
State should quit buying forest land and taking them off tax roll, ther is plenty of rec. areas and if there is a demand I'm sure there are plenty of money men who will take care of it as a private business. The person's who own forest land will take good care of there investment without more laws and restrictions.

Comment #: 111
The excessive deer population has totally eliminated reproduction of white cedar and almost totally eliminated reproduction of white pine. The consequences of eliminating these two major species ecologically from northern Wisconsin forests should certainly be addressed. The deer problem is underestimated economically too. Wisconsin partially compensates for crop damage due to deer, but no one compensates landowners for the agricultural and forest crops such as oats or with pine which are lost because we no longer plant them because we know they will be devoured completely by deer!

Comment #: 112
Put Eastern Hemlock and Northern White Cedar on the "Endangered" list! "Keep Wisconsin Green"

Comment #: 113
A provision to educate small, rural and urban timberland owners on the importance in sustainable harvest management of their woodlots, environmental benefits, wildlife benefits, tax benefits etc., would greatly advance the improvement of forests throu out the state. PS This was an excellent survey and I hope your efforts are rewarded many times over the planning that went into this project.

Comment #: 114
The largest problem I see in the timber industry are the crooked loggers. One pulp cutter in our area cheated everyone he cut for and the law enforcement people did nothing. Timber is money why should it be called a civil rather than a criminal act. The burden falls on the victim. Then they hurry and declare bankruptcy before they can be brought into court. It seems like they are given ample time to hide their assets. People should be educated to use private foresters. They protect you in other ways as well as give you an estimate. Of course there's a few of them crooked as well.

Comment #: 115
I am a tax payer 72 years old on 80 acres of forest land in Burnett County (I live in Sauk County) I have owned the land since 1962. A forest fire completely destroyed the forest in April 1980. I had planted 60,000 + trees on the property before the fire. After the fire I completely replanted the 80 acres to Norway pine. It's doing well now! Over 60,000 trees again! Problem: 1. The DNR does not protect tax paying property owners. We pay the salary for what benefit to property owners? Specifically: ATV's are not allowed on state forest in Burnett Coutny - So ATV's travel over my forest land. The DNR officals say go to the sheriffs office. YA - the sheriff says call me when someone is on your land running around with ATV's. The DNR visits the property regularly - why can't private forest owners have the same protection as government land under the trespass law? I have the land posted private property. It doesn't mean a thing to government officials as far as I see it. Private forest need to be pretected as well as county, state and federal forests. Help is needed in this one!!! NOTE: I put up barriers - trespassers tear them down! Or go right around them as they please.! DNR should enforce trespassing on private forests! The public does not pay my taxes! NOTE: I am especially grateful to the DNR foresters over the years for the assistance in the forest management! A tax payer benefit - yes!

Comment #: 116
C14 Public opinion about forest management is being formed through the news media by inadequate information and inappropriate information. There is strong need for citizens to form their own opinion on forest management through educational outreach in schools and the news media by supplying accurate scientific information about forestry.

Comment #: 117
Closing down (Primary) FEDERAL ROADS Also secondary roads by dirt piles, and rocks and removing road entrances SUCHS everyone who pays taxes should be able to use all the roads and trails in our Federal FOREST Why are these trails and roads being CLOSED? To keep people out of the forest?

Comment #: 118
All the issues are important and impact each other in many cases. It is difficult to select the top ten and say with certainty that these are the top ten. As you say it is opinion.

Comment #: 119
Increasing number of animals species (deer, geese) in urban areas that are degrading local ecosystems. I have 240 acres of forest land that I'm managing for multiple use and sustainable forest products. The rapidly escalating real estate taxes are a great detriment to this management. I have multiple real estate agents encouraging me to subdivide this land as it is worth multiple times as recreation land than it is as a sustainable forest.

Comment #: 120
If possible, a forester should be involved to properly handle harvesting of timber. Taxes I have planted over $10,000 red pine through a SIP program. When the tax man came around he raised my property taxes. I then asked him was I better off leaving it in a brown open old grassy field. His answer, Yes! SAD! Taxes were raised! If anyone would look into this before planting trees, I bet they wouldn't. But if I told him they were for Christmas trees, he wouldn't raise my taxes. I wanted them for growth; future generations.

Comment #: 121
Regarding your "Survey on Forestry Trends and Issues". I can only guess from the tone and execution of this document that the Forestry Bureau is in DEEP denial. As the best example of this, is the Freudian slip I found in your multiple choice answer which include - Strongly agree, -Agree, Not sure, -Disagree, and Strongly agree (AGAIN). Perhaps you could have just subsituted -Obviously You Are Smarter Than I AM - for the second Strongly Agree. Worse than this is the substitue of shoddy environmental dogma for real trends in your "assessment". I have tried to e fair and answer your questions as honestly as possible (writing in "Strongly disagree" where necessary). Here are the items I disagreed with and why: A6-There is less mystery about how a forests functions and what species will thrive in various habitats and management schemes than there is reluctance to face the real issues of forest management today. GIS IS NOT going to solve all our forest management rpoblems. At best it produces pretty pictures with little, if any, understanding of what they mean. If is eating up manpower and money faster than a major war and in the end, we are losing. A7-The list of threatened and endangered species is growing ONLY because of the artifact of which you made passing reference, ie., "--largely due to our increasing knowledge about a wider variety of species and their habitat needs." Here are some facts a) no one has ever demonstrated that ANY species has become extinct because of forest management b) the early list of threatened and endangered species in the US largely consisted of charismatic megafauna that had been temporarily expatriated due to a combination of real or perceived serious conflicts with agriculture and hunting interest plus active eradication by state and federal agencies c) recent lists of TES species include previously poorly sampled species that to this day are difficult to sample and most likely achieved this status independently of any activity of mankind. This is the honest to goodness truth and any honest biologist will tell you the same thing. A9-My complaint here is the total disregard for the tall grass prairie which is the ONLY ecosystem which has been systematically destroyed in your state (and others). I doubt that many of the other examples you gave are truly threatened, including riparian forests which are being protected by most government land management agencies today and even along the big rivers, repeated flooding and a general movement away from rural areas is preserving many of these treasures. This whole "survey" has the tone of "people pollution" to it where mankind is some kind of evil incompatible with a healthy environment. I personally don't think we are. A10-Disturbance patterns MAY be cumulative, ie. Natural disturbance added to man-made disturbance, but in your own example you cite the non-disturbance of fire control which presumably would be balanced by the undefined "human disturbance". Several million years ago a big rock hit the Yucatan peninsula and caused a "disturbance" that they probably would have heard in the cloistered halls of Madison. Seems like life found a way to deal with that. Let's get off this disturbing "disturbance" voodoo doll until someone can say definitively that forest management as practiced for the last 50 years is causing reall stresses on ecosystems, ie., stress that could result in permanent damage to the biological communities that comprise them. Until then, I will continue to support professional forest management as it is being practiced in the Lake States. A12- Some people have disingenuously used HIGHLY disrupted ecosystems, (which ironically include extinct tall grass prairies near savannah woodlands) to PROVE that forest fragmentation is a significant problem in the Northwoods where forest were, are, and always will be the dominate vegetation. Shame on them. And shame on you for perpetuating this widely recognized myth. A13- I agree, but what is your point? Do you have the SISU to start a significant prescribed burn program in Northern Wisconsin. No, I didn't think so, so quit bragging about the great strides that have been made in controlling forest fires over the last 70 years. A14- See A13, above. B1- We are now to question 15 and DEER have been mentioned one time (A9. "Hemlock relicts (sp) are declining due to deer damage") HEMLOCK RELICS! The entire ecosystem is being changed by the herbivory of deer. Did you ever notice how common leather wood is on good soils? It's not the soils alone, it is the fact that leather wood is poisonous to deer and they won't eat it. Basically what we have now in our forests is "what deer don't want to eat". Last spring, the legendary Wisconsin DNR deer researcher, Keith McCaffery, spoke at an aspen management workshop in Hurley, Wisconsin. His opening words were "There are an obscene number of deer in Wisconsin at this time." He went on to explain that deer had exceeded the capacity of their habitat to produce deer of individual quality simply because there were too many of them and they consumed so much no single deer was fully nourised. In 2000, Wisconsin bravely tried to implement a heavier harvest of antlerless deer. While WI hunters killed 584,000 deer (of over 1.6 million) only 67,000 were antlerless deer were killed during the T-zone seasons (antlerless only), and about 16,000 during the regular gun season. Archery hunters killed about 75,000 deer, but how many of those were antlerless I don't know. Say half were, that would bring the total antlerless kill to about 120, 000, or about 20% of the total kill and about 15% of the original number of does (800,000). This is NOT enough to significantly reduce the number of deer and shows that Wisconsin remains essentially a bucks-only state by tradition. You can blame the timber industry if you want for declining forests and ecosystems but clearly Wisconsin hunters bear most of the responsibility. At this point I grew weary of struggling through this document. Truisms, unsubstantiated trends and public demands, self fulfilling propheceis (clearcutting and even-age management are controversial)---I struggled through to the end and answered all the questions, but I am not going to debate any more. Two final observations---John Olson, whose name appears on this document is a skilled and knowledgeable biologist. Did he file a disseting opinion of this report? The picture of a "fisher" on page 9 is a well known picture of a pine marten. Good luck. It's a real world out there.

Comment #: 122
I am a member of the Forestry State program here in the DNR Wausau Office. If you go for help, there is one person to get info. from. He is great, but cannot cover all of Marathon. If you plan on doing a good job management in forestry, get help. They should be go in the wood plot helping members in managing the plot. My plot was not looked at in 15 years. I go to the office - they or him are booked out for years. If you want to do something, manage what you already have.

Comment #: 123
Keep the state tree farms so we can get cheap, high quality trees to plant. Those guys do a great job!

Comment #: 124
The idea of closing all of the small town dumps has been a bad one. Since that happened, we get more junk dumped on our property; old tires, drain oil, garbage, etc. It should not cost a homeowner to use a county landfill. That's one reason our forest lands are becoming dumps. Also, we are charged $2.50 per pound to get rid of toxic waste, oil, paint, etc. People won't pay $2.50 and consequently dump it in the woods.

Comment #: 125
-Continuation of DNR nurseries important. -Diversify forestry programs such as forest crop law. Address issues and resources other than forestry. Involve other agencies and bureaus within the DNR. Encourage management and restoration/establishment of wetlands/prairie/unique features etc. Offer different levels and incentives to landowner for public access (perhaps land is open for all activities except during gun deer season etc.) Offer additional "bonus" tags for deer hunting to landowners involve in program. - Increase funding for land acquisition. Allow DNR to make exceptions for purchase of lands outside of "project boundaries".

Comment #: 126
C10 - Motorized recreationists put their money in their machine so they have less to spend and less time to spend it because they are on the trail half the time. The year I turned 65 they stopped having a free fishing license. I don't spend thousands of dollars up north now because of it. It isn't that I can't afford it (a license). The only time I fish now is on the free day. I'll fish for an hour then go eat, shop for a few hrs. then eat some more. An older person spends more time bumming than fishing. If you think snowmobilers spend a lot of money fishermen spend much more.

Comment #: 127
My biggest concern is the acres of forest land that is being destroyed because of urban sprawl, property taxes on forest land and crop land is so high and due to the bad farm economy, many farmers are selling off their forest land for house building sites. The MFL tax law is a help, but if a landowner closes it for hunting, he has to pay extra in traxes, and this is not right. So, many hunters come out to hunt on farmers' woods, that it is becoming an increasing problem due to damage, risk to cattle, etc. I also am very concerned about the damage motorized "toys" these people have on the forests. I have seen a lot of damage due to three-wheelers, snowmobiles, and trail bikes. I also have had a lot of problems with trash being dumped in my woods.

Comment #: 128
The issue of wildlife effect on forest is not addressed in this report.

Comment #: 129
1. Use of a floristic quality index system (e.g. Swink & Wilhelm 1994) to assist in developing preservation and management decisions and goal setting. 2. Identifying certain forests that will be managed for old growth - natural succession. (Not ones that are ALREADY old growth) 3. Increase in shrubs affects health of trees. Many shrubs are exotic, but some are native. This problem is also tied to fire suppression -already identified.

Comment #: 130
Ecological and economic impacts on forests caused by herbivory as a result of over-abundant deer populations. Potential links with the rate of spread of exotic vegetation to changing populations of deer and other forest wildlife species. The ABSENCE of fire and intensive fire suppression efforts are major factors effecting species composition especially in fire-dependent vegetation communities. The absense of fire as a NATURAL disturbance may also be setting the stage for future negative ecological and economic impacts when uncontrolled fires occur. Decades of fire suppression has allowed debri/litter build-up which will result in hotter (more damaging) fires that are harder to control.

Comment #: 131
This has been a most interesting mental exercise. I fully realize that on a different day, in a different frame of mind, my answer might change radically. Assume for a moment that someone, or some group (very much smarter than I am) could envision the "ideal" forest situation for Wisconsin: number of acres, size of plots, mix of trees and other vegetation, ownership, end purposes etc. Would "we" have the legal right and the fortitude to establish and maintain this situation? Industry exists by making profit the "bottom line". Could this be controlled? Is global warming a foregone conclusion? I just heard the other day that a 5 degree increase in over-all temperature - which seems to be a clear possibility - would doom all pine in Wisconsin because there wuld not be a long enough dormant period for those trees to continue to exist. - and we cannot legislate global temperature for Wisconsin alone. Did you see the semi-serious recommendation recently that all industrial nations should pay Brazil for the air cleansing done by its rain forest? That would be a good example of "Green" accounting on a glbal scale. But do you honestly see that concept ever being accepted?

Comment #: 132
We are now in northern Wis being threatened by a power line from Duluth to Weston that if built will destroy many acres of forestry. If things like this continue we will not have any forest to manage for future generations

Comment #: 133
Some forests should just be left alone period. Our growth and natural progression creates an abundant diverse and healthy woods. It may also prove to be a bank of Bio wealth for the future, leave a lot be fore it's own sake.

Comment #: 134
As an owner of 96 acres that is currently under Managed Forest Law, I believe that there should be more interaction and contact between landowners and foresters. This would help landowners learn about the different programs that are available for their property, such as wetland/marsh preservation and tree replanting. Also, we have very strong negative views about the proposal by the Deer 2000 Committee about letting the public hunt private property in order to reduce the deer herd. It was just a few years ago that you could not get a doe permit! Both my husband and I hunt both archery and rifle seasons, and every year we have people trespassing on our posted property.

Comment #: 135
Very difficult survey to fill out: All these issues should be addressed but that doesn't mean I would want them implemented. For example: C10 = I am against motorized recreational vehicles except on their own private lands or trails but that doesn't mean the issue shouldn't be addressed in the statewide forest plan - hopefully unfavorably.

Comment #: 136
Use of ATVs and four-wheeled vehicles should be policed to stay on trails designated.

Comment #: 137
Preserve the state nurseries. Promote more tree planting on abandoned farm lands. Preserve and expand MFL. Expand education program on good forest management for new owners of forest lands.

Comment #: 138
"Address" should not be construed to mean controlled by Govt. "Address" should mean to be studied and considered. 12/17/00 Demand for forest products is increasing and thistrend will continue. More people are purchasing forest land, nady do not understand need for forest management assistance is much needed by these people as well as those who have a good knowledge of the forests. Less forest land is available for public use nad policy of the state should be to keep as much forest land as possible open for the public. This includes our National Forests. Clear cutting is a good management policy in many cases and needs to be used and also needs to be explained to the public. We also need to shield clearcuts from public view as much as possible. Public forests are Public FORESTS not Natioanl Parks and should not be off limits to the public except in rare cases. Motorized recreation is seldom harmful to the forest and should not be discouraged in most cases. Warming of the Earth is a fact. The ice age was only 10,000 years age. The effect of humans on the process is widly assumed but not proven. Volcanoes have a much greater impact on the atmosphere than any human activity. Threatened species need to be protected. The public should pay for this. In no case should the rights of a landowner by restricted without compensation. If we as a group can not protect ? These species, than no individual should be expected to bear the financial burden.

Comment #: 139
I have filled out this survey the best I can - I may not have understood all the issues Our forest lands are very important in Wis. And a very renewable resource if managed correctly. The concern I have is, that in developing a statewide forestry plan, new lawas are a possibility. Laws don't always have the desired effect. Education and incentives for prper and sound forest management is a much better route. I would be quite disappointed if my efforts in filling this out led to more laws in how I manage my forest land and how I regenerate public access to it.

Comment #: 140
12/15/00 I believe that your survey has touched on about all of the trends that are affecting our forests today. I would like to make several comments on what I believe should be done to stop the rape of our forest lands in the future. 1. We need legislation to stop logging contractors from taking advantage of land owners. Before a timber sale all cuts should be approved by a forester that is non partisan. Our forest lands are being raped at an alarming rate. 2. I am very concerned about the decline of oak in our forests. Oak is probably the most important species to sustain wildlife populations from small game to deer and bear. Without the oak we will see drastic reductions in wildlife populations. 3. Urban sprawl is also a very alarming trend. At the current rate we are allowing development we will not have any wild spaces left in the southern half of the state in the next 20 years if something drastic is not done to stop this trend NOW. 4. Clear cutting is the only effective way to regenerate some species and foresters must not let public opinon affect good forest management.

Comment #: 141
Thank you for sending me the summary of the "Wisconsin Forests at the Millennium" report. I found the information to very intersting and, as you can tell from my responses, your trend observations are non-controversial. I live in LaCrosse and I manage two deciduous plantatons. I started planting trees 25 years ago and have continue to very active in deciduous reforestation. As you are aware, we have only bee planting deciduous trees for the past 30 years, and our American experience and knowledge is lacking. It is my understanding that our State Nurseries are now selling more deciduous seedlings than conifer seedlings. This is a truly amzing trend considering the fact that 30 years ago, one could only procure black walnut seedling. Oaks were not even grown in the nurseries. I believe that one trend that should be carefully monitored is DECIDUOUS REFORESTATION. It is obvious that much time, effort and money is being spent on planting deciduous trees without any assessment of the success of the programs. The Forestry Bureau should dispatch a research team to look at the prgress of deciduous plantings in Wisconsin over the past 30 years and give a report on their success or failure. Were the trees properly planted on the correct sites? Were they managed and, if so, did the management result in better quality trees? What appears to be the most desirable spacing and do mixed plantings grow better than monoculture plantings? What management variables appear to contribute to success? I would like to express my appreciation to my County foresters who have done such an outstanding job over the years assisting my father and me in our reforestation activities. Much of Wisconsin's success is directly related to our outstanding DNR forestry program. This is certainly important to the private landowner who needs to be guided and educated regarding forest management. Good Job!!!

Comment #: 142
There is an economic issue have to do with the cost of growing a tree to some merchantable size (I.e. pulp, saw log, veneer log, etc.). A part of the growing cost is the land, planting, taxes, harvesting, etc. And the land tax is of concern where the land value is set as recreational as compared to agricultural.

Comment #: 143
I'd like to see more attn given to the private forestland owner. More professional and financial encouragement to manage their private forestlands and also wildlife enhancement. I am a private owner of 120 acres of forestland in Chippewa County. I am a certified tree farm and I try very hard to manage my forestland to achieve a quality forest and also to enhance this land for wildlife. I have planted over 5,000 white spruce, aspen and ash to make my forestland the best it can be. The first 2,000 seedlings I received a fair percentage of cost sharing from the state. Since then (4 years ago) I have planted 3,200 seedlings out of my pocket with money I did not have. I have been denied twice for wildlife enhancement help. As you know, there are many costs associated with maintenance of a tree farm. I have applied every year now for the LITTLE financial assistance available to achieve my goal of a quality forestland, I keep hearing, "Sorry there is no money try again next year." Willife and forest management go hand in hand in my opinion but with the increase of taxes and other costs of forest/wildlife management, I will not be able to achieve my goals of my property. By the way, my taxes tripled on my forestland proerpty just this last year. If the State of Wisconsin is really serious about PRIVATE forestland/wildlife enhancement and management, the private forestland owner needs financial help to offset these management costs. As you know 9 million acres of private forestland, with little to none for financial assistance much of this survey relates to private forestland ownership. Where is our help?

Comment #: 144
RE: Over development on Lakes - it is quite clear to me (observed '39 to '97 in Burnett County) that lakeshore development is causing many problems for lakes and surrounding forest lands. There should be some controls over large block development. RESULT: The resources have had negative effects. Theses adverse effects are easy to see. It is also easy to see what will happen with over development

Comment #: 145
Issues have been well put - controls today will pay big in future - we must consdier the fundamental issues first, air & water, & balance the other issues according to needs of recreation, wildlife, lumber, rural & urban, etc. State plan should be done with an absence of politics (if possible) and a presence of objectivity for today & tomorrow with provision for reassessment every 5 years. The alternative is a consequence such as Mexico's etc. and the urban prawl that consumes all in its path.

Comment #: 146
A good forestry program where discussed and trees not wanted in a block should be more sonsidered than just somebody going in and cutting and leaving a mess. I think the foresters of Wisconsin are doing an excellent job of forest harvesting and management.

Comment #: 147
something must be done real soon about the use value assement law. It is encouraging us farmers to go back to grazing cattle in the woods or to sell the high taxed woodlot parcels even though these actions may seem to be irrational to nonfarmers. The managed farm program needs to have bigger carrots and bigger sticks. We should seek federal monies to help us manage forests for carbon sequestration in addtion to the traditional uses. The ability to close non contiguous enrolled tracts should be provided and also increase the amount that can be closed. Many farmers do not want to sell off the woodlots but the current economics are forcing them to. Now is the time to offer programs with some substance to them to bring these lands into the managed forest program. Aggressively work with the UW to make landowners aware of the potential of forestry co-ops. Assst in getting some started. I think they hold great potential in getting landowners to see the economic value of maintaining quality woodlots and with this many of the values society places on forests will follow.

Comment #: 148
Estate taxes are very hard on heirs hwen they want to maintain the forest of their elders. They are forced to sell to developers to pay the estate taxes.

Comment #: 149
Taxes on timber and wetlands. I have some timber and wetlands and have been practicing good forest management for over 50 yrs. My tree farm is No. 14 Wis. Taxes on these lands have been gong up every year - for years - wet lands -timberland all the same. I may have to cut timber (clear-cut) and sell land to get rid of taxes. Better relationship between public and DNR people. See attached letter. I am not the only one to get this treatment. Thank you. Davy MEMO FROM KIRSTEN HELD, DNR Division of Forestry - DATED JUNE 20, 1994 "I've finally completed the interviewing process for the video on forest history the DNR Division of Forestry is producing. I wanted to drop you a line to give you a progress report and to convey my sincere thanks for your willingness to be interviewed for this project. My first priority has been to get the tapes of the interviews into the hands of the UW student who is writing the first draft of the video. Since his funding ends on July 1, I'll be taking over from his first draft. A number of you have requested a copy of the interview we did with you. I'll be able to send the tapes out to get copies made during the first week of July and will then be happy to share them with you." (Nothing) "The videographer says I need a "photo release" from each of you. Would you please complete the enclosed form and return it to me so we have permission to use clips from your interview in our video? Thank you for your assistance with this video project. I thoroughly enjoyed each of the interviews and know we're going to have a good finished product, thanks to your help. If you think of any further information that I should consider as we work on the writing and editing for the video, please contact me." Letter sent asking why 3-16-96 No Answer

Comment #: 150
The only consumptive use identified was for wood fiber, logs, etc. - no where do I often consumptive uses be ? Identified - I.e. fish and game by anglers and hunters - you burried it under the term "recreation". You need to develop an interst in consumptive use by hunters and include that demand - weather it be for deer, turke, grouse, woodduck, fur beavers, etc. - don't hid consumptive taking of game - get it out in the open and up front.

Comment #: 151
I feel that people of the Menomonee Indian Reservation don't know about what's going on in our forest. I believe the Menomonee Indian Reservation Forest was and may be still one of the best forest stands east of the Mississippi. But I see a lot of clear cuts and shelter woods on the reservation, and a lot of the logs going off the reservation. I know that the reservation is a sovereign nation, but it is still part of Wisconsin's forests right?

Comment #: 152
For whatever my thoughts and opinions are worth here are a few comments from an old farmer, landowner, sawmill owner, logger and conservative person. After the 1930's our home farm was a shambles. 14 open washouts, no trees wildlife consisted of a few striped gophers - 2 dumps on the banks of the yellow river - large areas of mullen weeds and red sorrel. Today this is totally unrecognizable and this has happened thousands of times across our state. We are many times better off today. I give much of this credit to our local DNR and their programs. In Barron County we have several excellent DNR people to work with. If only we can educate the new landowners to work with our foresters! Give our foresters more help! They are overworked and underpaid. The programs they have today are sufficient and excellent, but they must be put into effect. WE ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK, lets not get derailed! Thank you.

Comment #: 153
I'm particularly concerned about the apparent over-whelming influence the gawking public has had on the forest service decision to stop clear-cutting or even age management techniques. In the absence of forest fires, the benefits of clear-cutting are widely published and well known to those interested in a properly managed forest that provide for all the creatures that live in that forest. Why doesn't the DNR refute these uneducated people and make a case for this harvest procedure?

Comment #: 154
Provide oak seedlings either free or minimal cost to private landowners willing to plant them to increase oak forest type.

Comment #: 155
Dear DNR, Your questions comments are very complicated! I'm not sure my answers at this time are very helpful. We need a lot of forests to help clean up the air, lakes and maintain a balance of the atmosphere. If this is what you wish, I'm for it.

Comment #: 156
Invasive species such as buckthorn, garlic mustard, etc. are taking over the understory(?) of our woodlands. The chemical control products (such as carbon(?) 4) are very expensive. Some financial help in purchase of these herbicides should be allowed for the landowner.

Comment #: 157
Many wetlands that border forest areas are being sold to private developers - see photo bottom of page 16 on assessment - Nov. 2000. Allowing boardwalks through marshes impacts on plant life, wildlife, etc. The DNR in the Conover, WI, area, has failed to aggressively protect this habitat. Taylor Investment Corp. and its subsidiary Four Seasons Realty is buying up such lands in Canover, Land O Lakes, etc. with NO concern about the impact.

Comment #: 158
Incentives for developing private forests.

Comment #: 159
It seems to me that the "explanation" accompanying a number of these topics contains considerable bias in the language choice. "Should be addressed" is about as nebulous as one can get. Who interprets what it means?

Comment #: 160
Conversion of "Managed Forest Act" parcels back to the regular tax roles is a common occurrence when land is sold to new owners. Sometimes it is due to ignorance of the benefits of the program, but sometimes it is due to the restrictions placed on them. One needless restriction or perceived restriction is the inability to shift excluded acres within a MFL parcel to a different location. These excluded acres are generally not surveyed and are only located on a map. A new owner may want to select a different site for building than the former owner. By not allowing the swap of a couple of acres within the parcel, the entire parcel may be withdrawn from the program. I think the DNR should conduct a benefit/risk analysis of this policy.

Comment #: 161
I believe steps should be taken to assure that the 500 square miles recently acquired by when it bought Consolidated Papers will not be fragmented. If possible, public access should be retained. Easements allowing sustainable timber harvests but preventing development may have to be purchased.

Comment #: 162
Biodiversity and multiuse forest's are what has to be fore the good of the environment and people.

Comment #: 163
I know it is being addressed in other venues but the issue of excess deer numbers deserves mention here. Statewide I believe that to be the greatest single factor in scarcity either regionwide or locally of reproduction sizes of ash, oak, yell birch, hemlock and white cedar.

Comment #: 164
As a woodland owner in southwest Wisconsin, where many of the top ten issues that I selected are relevant, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to comment. Some trends or issues (ALL CAPS) not yet identified are as follows: HIGHER PROPERTY TAXES are an increasing concern to woodland owners who may not make any money from their forests for years at a time; With the number of forest landowners increasing , so too is the need for state-funded programs to EDUCATE THE OWNER about numerous aspects of forestland ownership; As development in wooded lands increases, so too will the need for better EROSION CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY PRACTICES in those areas; LIMITED REGENERATION OF QUALITY HARDWOOS, not jut limited to oak regeneration in southern WI (which I agree is a significant trend), will become more of trend if owners do not properly manage their hardwood forests; The INCREASING DEER POPULATION will effect native plant propagation in general and - more specifically - timely, quality hardwood regeneration; The timber industry is HARVESTING SMALLER DIAMETER QUALITY HARDWOODS than it did several years ago. This type of logging, means, among many things, that disturbance activity will occur more frequently in a particular woodlot over a given period of time. Many of these trends, like some that you've identified, are interrelated. For example: With higher property taxes, landowners will need to generate more income form their land, so they'll harvest trees at a younger age. In so doing, they'll decrease the number of quality seed sources needed for regeneration and increase erosion control and water quality problems in the more frequently disturbed logging sites. Once again, thank you for the opportunity to comment; I look forward to seeing the final product.

Comment #: 165
Cost of raw wood products (stumpage) is increasing, however the price of products (lumber) is remaining the same. The availability of stumpage from National Forest will be drastically reduced or eliminated. Putting a further strain on other forest in the state and further increasing the cost of raw wood products. Any reduction in timber supply in Wisconsin will have a drastic result on Wisconsin's timber dependent industry.

Comment #: 166
Mention was made of agricultural land conversion to forests. This process takes many decades and often results in poor and undesirable stocking. The Wisd. Forestry program should become active in the encouragement of planting abandoned farm land. There's a hundreds of thousands of acres in this status with no attempt to return them to precolumbian forests. Many of these farms become public property through FHA & FSA loan foreclosures. If ecological landscapes were zoned for forest restoration or continued agriculture, these forclosed lands could be returned to their highest use. All reparian zones should be zoned for forest restoration through public forum. Wisc. Could be made much more ecologically resilient with a well reasoned land use plan.

Comment #: 167
After completing half the survey, I stopped. Perhaps I am missing the point of the survey, but it seems to me all of the issues you have identified warrant SERIOUS consideration in a statewide forestry plan. As a layman, I do not have sufficient information to make a judgement as to the importance of each in a comprehensive plan. The inter-relationships are significant. Our fram includes 187 acres of woodlands; some of which is under intense management, while other portions are left in a natural state. The trade-off decisions are made between the economics of the farming operation, wood lot management for gain, and best forestry practices. Are these not the same inter-related issues you must address? Our forests will always be under pressure from population expansion. Your plan must address the balance of these interest - none of the identified issues in this survey should be ignored.

Comment #: 168
Re-introduction of wild turkeys has been a huge success. How about the elk? Are the reproducing at a satisfactory rate? These and other new species have to be watched very closely for disease. Do we have moose in Wis?

Comment #: 169
Private property tax advantage plans. I participated in the Woodland Tax Law plan. I thought that was a good plan while it existed. I will not participate in the Forestland plan. It is too restrictive. A better plan is needed in this fast changing world. Don't let the big wood (forest) using companies dictate the plan for their benefit. Years ago a DNR forester recommended to planting of pine trees which I feel was, looking back, for the benefit of the local paper companies and not for my benefit. I believe I would have been better off with another species. Unfortunately, at the time, I didn't realize the ties between the DNR, & the local paper companies.

Comment #: 170
1. Taxiation of forest land not enrolled in a forest tax program will likely be key role in deciding a particular forests future. 2. Forest mgt information from state foresters is restricted to small woodland owners!! 3. Foreign ownership of Wis pulp mills may have a tremendous impack on uses of Wis forest land. 4. The forest mill tax needs to be used to provide more direct forest mgt and marketing information to private woodland owners.

Comment #: 171
* designating more forest land as state natural areas. * how to regenerate white pine, hemlock, yellow birch forests in northern WI. Deer density may need to be (down pointing arrow) in large blocks of forest. * more emphasis on linkages between large blocks of forests in state & put ownership, including crossing our state boundaries. * management for boreal forest communities. * planting of trees in the wrong places, such as on grassland communities in southwestern WI. CRP lands in this spot should not be planted to trees. Likewise, landowners shouldn't be given advise or money to plant trees in these areas. Too many prairie vemnants have been planted to pine -(not evena tree species normally found in this part of the state) * fire control needs to be more active in prescribed burning on state land, and in presenting burn workshops for state DNR staff.

Comment #: 172
I believe all the issues listed are of equal importance at this time and must be addressed. All must be considered a part of the whole.

Comment #: 173
Forest management affects wildlife.

Comment #: 174
Why is it that time they clear cut and take a long time to replant___it is always PINE TREES--Don't they ever plant oak-birch or try to bring back trees that the state has lost. A1

Comment #: 175
If all these trends and issues are addressed in a statewide forest plan, it will be a necessary niracle!

Comment #: 176
In 1980 the DNR state advised me to plant sugar maples in my nearly perfect 10 acre oak savannah. I was ignorant and did it, now very much to my current regret. You need to stop recommending the planting of non locally native species & start educating the citizens better! You also recommended pine where prairie should more property be restored, and you need to work better with grasslands generally. (Written under top ten issues: Why do you fail to mention prairie and native grasslands? )

Comment #: 177
Non-point pollution. As the demands for forest use and forest products increase, so does the demands for controlling pollution. Non-point pollution legislation could cause many tree farmers to let the forests go without management, which would create even larger problems. Legislation needs to take all aspects of cause and effect into consideration.

Comment #: 178
Some of the laws on wetlands way hinder healthier forest edge, especially in poplar. ?

Comment #: 179
1. Box Elder trees or a weed of new woodlands. 2. Oak wilt. 3. Chemicals that are used on Christmas tree plantations - getting into water table.

Comment #: 180
We need a sustained forest that can be used for recration to. Also maybe polutant indisdries should pay forest landowner for helping to clean this up.

Comment #: 181
A1. We should be concerned with losing our early successional forests to maple-basswood forests. Birch and aspen provide multiple benefits from wildlife habitat to raw materials for various wood using industry. Although our forests are aging, this doesn't mean we shouldn't perform sound forest management to ensure a healthy aspen/birch component in the forests. A4. Losing the oak-hickory component of the forest would be a great loss. This forest type provides numerable benefits and efforts should be made to maintain this cover type. A13 & A14. Fire is a good forest management tool for multiple reasons. Suppressing all fires, in particular in fire-dependent ecosystems prohibits that system for naturally regenerating. Fire should be used as a tool for sound forest management decisions to ensure that type, (ie. Oak, jack pine, wildlife areas (Ackley Wildlife Area). B1, B2, B3 & B4. Living in an area with a lot of public land, I see various user groups within the forests from hunters, hikers, bikers, sightseeing and consumptive users of the forest products. More people are using t he forest for recreational opportunities, there is an increased demand for forest products and yet the general public wants less forest management on public lands. The USFS is a testimony to the affects of the public not wanting any trees cut, as there allowable cuts have not changed but their offered acreages for timber sales has diminished dramatically. Forest management and recreational opportunities can co-exist, hand in hand. Logging roads are used for hunter trails in the fall, X-C ski trails in winter and mountain biking trails in spring/summer. The public needs to be better educated about all the benefits of the forest and how proper sound forest management increases the value of the forest for consumptive and non-consumptive users. C1 & C2. Mosinee Paper, Consolidated Papers, Four-States Timber Venture (Packaging Corporation of America) Ort Lumber Company are just a few of the mills that have been selling off their lands over the past few years to private holdings. These sell-offs pose multiple long-term problems. The majority of these lands were Forest Crop Law and open to the public for hiking, biking and hunting. Now in private hands, a lot of the lands are removed from FCL and posted. There is an increased pressure on the remaining public or open lands for the same uses. These company lands were also managed for forest products and removing them poses the potential that they may never be managed again in private hands. Loss of forest products to the various mills. The mills still need the raw materials to produce the products that are in demand every day, so more pressure on public lands that are managed or more intense cutting on lands not under the supervision of a forester where cutting is permitted. Lack of management also refers to lack of good wildlife habitat. C4 & C5. These two are somewhat tied to the previous questions. Case in point, I live in an area where (formerly Tigerton Lumber Company) now Ort Lumber Co. has lands. The properties were open to the public via Forest Crop Law. Tigerton has managed the lands beautifully for the past several decades providing hiking trails, good deer and grouse hunting opportunities. Ort bout the land, high-graded it, and sold off to private lands where it is now posted and will not provide forest products. These lands were heavily used in the fall for hunting and berry picking, but no more. These users are now required to go to other public-open areas for recreating. Also, many farms in the area were 100-500 acres, now they have been broken down to 1-40 acre holdings. Many of these farms logged their lands in the winter, are now just sanctuaries. Loss of future forest products. C7. Forest management and non-consumptive uses of the forests can co-exist. The amount of revenue a forest generates supplements the lack of revenue generated from recreation. Hiking/hunter trails are also logging roads. The vast majority of the trails on the public lands that I hunt, were put in by loggers for their timber sales. I did not pay for the road I bird hunt on, the logger did. Proper forest management PROVIDES recreational opportunities. C8.. Clearcutting and Even-age management techniques ARE NOT WRONG. These are sound techniques to manage land. We can't have aspen or birch or oak without them. Yes, a 40-acres clearcut of aspen is unsightly during the firs 0-3 or 4 years, and then the sprouts are so thick the vast majority of people don't even realize it was cut. Land managers can alter the harvest layout to soften the visual impact, yet still achieve the desired silvicultural prescription. Land managers should not shy away from performing clearcuts because the public views them as unsightly. The public needs to be better educated to the benefits of clearcuts and other even-age techniques. (I personally don't think open-heart surgery is very pretty, but I sure know how beneficial it is to the patient.) C13. The United States has some of the most stringent environmental laws in the world in regards to forest management (probably only second to the Scandinavian countries and Germany). If the public doesn't want trees harvested here, the forest products WILL come from someplace or have to find an economical alternative. How many more strip mines would need to be made to extract the raw material to make steel/iron to replace a 2 x 4 board?? How many more oil fields would have to be opened to make more plastic to replace cardboard boxes??? Oil fields and strip mines run out of raw materials and are not replaced. Forests continue to grow. SUMMARY: For the most part, all of the questions asked in the survey should be addressed in the statewide forest plan. They are important questions that should be answered. There is a wide misconception by the general public that cutting trees are wrong. Sound forest management is continuing procedure to provide a host of benefits to consumptive and non-consumptive users of the forest, as well as to those that never step foot in the forest. Education is the best tool we have to attempt and let the public know how the forests work, the ramifications of not managing (loss of wood products, hunting, recreation and wildlife management).
.

Comment #: 182
Given the diversity of soil, topography, and forest compostiion in Wisconsin, the following issues; A1 thru A4, A7 thru A11, A13, A14, B1, C1, C8, C12 cannot be adaquatly addressed in a statewide plan. Local conditions must be considered. Wisconsin is a diverse landscape. We have not addressed interelation of forest, farm, wetlands, and wildlife. Fluctuating water table, for example. Blurs the line between forest and wetland. Other specifics along these lines include. Ditching of Wetlands Pasturing of Forests Beaver Activity

Comment #: 183
Increase in supply of stumpage reducing the real value of stumpage to the landowner - thereby reducing the ability to make investments in forest management.

Comment #: 184
Motorized vehicles should be limited in forested areas. They are a great disturbance to wildlife (both animal life and plant life). People need to enjoy nature on foot.

Comment #: 185
As a retired biologist, I urge you to address issues relating to biodiversity, but do not do so at the expense of landowner rights.

Comment #: 186
We are a consumer society who feel the world exists to entertain us. We are approaching our forests with that attitude. We will use it all up. Here in Minnesota where we live, there is a 3000 acre tract of state forest. Horse back riders have demanded and the DNR has given in and now that small pacel of land has 43 miles of trail bulldozed through it. (Zumbro Bottoms Unit) (Wabasha County). As a scoiety we have lost our touch. Quiet will soon be a precious commodity. We must avoid the day when all we have left is thousands of deer, aspen forests and 1000's of miles of motorized trails. The Branierd Lakes area of Central Minnesota already has traffic jams on weekends. More roads are not needed, or new trails. We need older trees, fewer deer. When it comes to human demands and impacts on forest land - less is more. Could I please be sent 2 copies of Wisconsin Forests at the Millenium and the Survey on Forest Trends issues.

Comment #: 187
The land in general should be considered in this plan. The forest is a large part but wetlands and grasslands are being taken into public possession. More CRP. And forest land needs to be given tax breaks to open up to more control to do something good for nature and woods. A lot of recreation dollars are going to North and South Dakota and Iowa because of the acreage they have open to hunting and recreation.

Comment #: 188
1. Threats to property rights continue to increase as society chooses on impose the costs of new initiatives/laws/regulations on the landowner rather than being borne by society as a whole. 2. Private landowner assistance to satisfy current laws and regulations (ie. A water crossing) is totally inadequate. 3. Forest users lax about asking permission when using private land.

Comment #: 189
Utilization of the Internet to increase knowledge and share information about Forestry for many of the trends identified here.

Comment #: 190
Well managed forests can provide all the benefits that the preservatoin movement uses to advance various set-asides such as wilderness, roadless areas, old growth, LADD areas & on & on & on. If we do not manage our forest then Mother Nature will as shown with the wildfires in the Western U.S.. The result of the set-aside movement will be die back, disease, windfall & resultant wildfire. People need to realize that we can not preserve our forest resource. We must be in a position to protect through scientific management.

Comment #: 191
Anthropocentric orientation. This survey focuses on the human species for the most part. We share the forests with many other species, and these need to be taken into account in forestry planning.

Comment #: 192
AH-NIN GENE - My name is I been employed with the Mille Lacs Band DNR for almost two (2) years now. I have been in the Wildlife Department for the most part of my job. For the past few months I have been introduced to Forestry. I am planning to go to school in Forestry. As for the Mille Lacs Band has no forester. As for your survey on trends and issues I have read and completed your survey on the best of my behalf. I look forward to be working with you on behalf of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe.

Comment #: 193
I do not recall an inkling of surveying for historic sites, no mention of watershed preservation, wetlands preservation.

Comment #: 194
REAL ESTATE TAXES: Our total tax bill for 306 acres in Vernon and LaCrosse counties in 1999 was $3,442.97. Our bill for 2000 is $7,123.67. This is a tree farm where we have tried for 32 years to follow the best management practices. No changes were made to our buildings during this tax period. Almost all of this increase is due to re-evaluation of woodland due to reduction on 3 grades of cropland and pastureland including pastured woodland. Using last years mil rate of .038644324, our taxes on pasture and pastured woodland became $5.41/acres. One woodland protected from domestic animals it was $31.69/acre. I also understand that if you turn control of your woodland over to the Government (DNR) it would be less than $2/acre. It is absolutely no wonder that assessors are telling their victims to turn the cattle back into their woodland or "put a lane in and sell it off". I grew up at the feet of Aldo Leopold and Dr. Warren Chase when the CCC's came to Coon Valley, Wisconsin in the 30's to help the landowners use best management on their land. Dr. Chase managed the forest nursery on our family form. Aldo Leopold made a blueprint for W.L. Mgmt on our farm (which I still cherish). Both men were close friends of my father. Dr. Chase latter headed Natural Resource at the Univ of Michigan. My wife and I established a tree farm beginning in 1968 and appreciate the best advice available without giving up the opportunity to make the FINAL decisions on management. This is why we haven't turned it over to the DNR just to gain tax advantages. Our late friend George Vukelick gave us a copy of his book NORTH COUNTRY NOTEBOOKS after spending many hours on our tree farm and "for Burt and Janise - Thank you for being true stewards of the land. If everyone took care the way you do, we'd be up to here in Paradise - not to mention high clover! All best - George Vukelick" We appreciated his kind words and friendship BUT it doesn't pay the taxes which defeat the hope of getting our farm to the next generation! Please contact me if our farm or experience in tree farming, negative DNR factors and impacts of use - value could serve you in any way. Perhaps you would also explain the lasting value of this survey and also why the DNR hasn't provided evident help regarding tax issues.

Comment #: 195
Clear cutting and timber harvesting should not be allowed in the Brule River - state forest.

Comment #: 196
Death Tax needs to be abolished - Managed forests for the public good cannot be passed down to the next generation in spite of their association and training on the land and forest.

Comment #: 197
I believe that undeveloped forest land may some day be Wisconsin's greatest asset. Clean water is essential and our forests can help keep this available. Altho motorized recreational vehicles are an asset to the local economy I am strongly opposed to adding furhterfacilities for their use I would support more "green" recreational facilities. I do not think that the public in general understands that the forest crop and needs to be managed and used as would another crop

Comment #: 198
1. I am a private land owner. 2. When you say in the survey, " a state-wide forest plan", you are creating the impression that all forestland is owned by the State. 3. I believe that you should have two categories, one for State-owned land, or Federal and another for private owned land. And then show the public by example, the States good forestry practics. 4. Many of the Trends, or issues you are asking about could have more than one answer, how can a person answer that? It leads m e to believe that you will take part of the issue and apply it to my answer. In other words you can get the answer you want. A3 - Don't forget to include American Beech and Eastern Hemlock in this issue. A4 - Oak-hickory acerage don't mean a thing, it's the condition of the forest on those acres. If you have a 40 of oak & hickory and you clear cut it, you will have some oak and hickory reseed and sprout from the stumps, but do you still have a oak-hickery 40? Probably. But it isn't worth anything as a forest. In my area, (near the Navarino Wildlife Area) the oak has, in my opinion, decrerased. The DNR is really setting a great example of respecting and improving our State-wide oak population by authorizing the clear-cutting of over 1,200 acres in the past 15 years, on the State land. The DNR has their own standard for managing forestland. Their game managers can have oak stands clear-cut to promote aspen and get away with it by saying they are doing it for grouse and woodcock. A9 - Hemlock relicts. We have about 65 acres of forest land on our 80 acres. When we bought the 80, in 1966, there were only two hemlock trees in the woods. About 12 years ago I discovered a small hemlock that was so browsed by animals that it was the shape and size of a bowling ball. My wife and I built a protective fence around it and today it is over 20 feet tall. Since, I have discovered two more youn hemlocks and I'm protecting them also. Man can do two things to help the decline of hemlocks - 1. Reduce the cutting of them. 2. Protect young trees until they are safe from browsing deer, rabbits and porcupines. C6 - I agree that many people from different segments of our society voice their opinion about some issues. But the DNR does not have to listen to these people. In the case of the Navarino Wildlife Area, they do not want me to attend their master plan hearings because I want to bring a display showing some of the clear-cutting that they have been authorizing. Over 1,200 acres have been clear-cut in the past 15 years. Most of this clear-cutting has been areas with a healthy stand of red and white oak trees. C8 - This is an issue that I am deeply concerned about. This issue (C8) is so long, there are a couple of different statements in it. How do I answer it? I checked "strongly agree," to the fact that clear-cutting will always be an issue of conflict because it gives logging a dirty, wasteful image. A 10 year old kid could manage some of the parcels of land in some counties. On some county land they clear-cut a piece every so many years, anyone could manage that. All you got is mostly aspen. The DNR is in the process of converting good red and white oak stands into aspen in the Navarino Wildlife Area in Shawano county. They say that they are managing for wildlife. The feel aspen are more important than oaks. They want grouse and woocock. (The local farmers can fatten up the wildlife for winter, with their corn crops). As a closing comment, in the "Wisconsin Forests at the Millennium" it is stated that there are about 9.8 billion trees in Wisconsin, (in 1996). Making a statement like this does not build any kind of trust, or respect between the DNR and people like me. First of all who wants to know how many trees are in Wisconsin? It's unreasonable to ask that question and it's foolish to try to answer it. The DNR has to get away from stuff like this. In one of the "Wisconsin Natural Resources" magazines they even estimated how many squirrels there were in Wisconsin. By now you should have learned from the deer counts that it makes you look unprofessional. Don't fall for that, it's not important how many trees there are in the State of Wisconsin, you can never get that correct. Constructively Submitted, John J. Mutter, Jr.

Comment #: 199
I found many many of the questions ambiguous. Anyone who has any opinon on the issues addressed would agree that a statewide forest plan should discuss all that is brought up here. Some things mentioned we can do nothing about weather being a prime example. Other issues, no matter which side a person agrees with, can be discussed for an unlimited time with no concensus ever being achieved.

Comment #: 200
Closer monitoring of private logging companys as well as guidence for private landowners on how to protect themselves from logging problems and the importance of filling out a thorough logging contract.

Comment #: 201
Federal-State-County and Town's all have enough land to manage now and if managed right would provide public use for many years to come.

Comment #: 202
Values and virtues of forest land need to be told to public to educate them and politicians to ensure sound environmental policy

Comment #: 203
This is long, extremely complex thorough survey devised by someone with a loke mind that wants public imput as long as its num to the issues or strongly agrees or strongly agrees. It is doubtful that very many will reply since ti is obvious that DNR forestry staff wish to write their own statewide plan covering these issues, exponding these trends and pretending to be objective in the tug of war that is taking place over landuse and management. What they should do instead is apply their principles of resource management on their own lands in their own way and let their example by the guiding light embodied in results, as it is anyway at this point. Then it should lobby to create more state forests at every opportunity like the Turtle Flambeau and Kickappoo projects or parts of them no matter how small, no matter where. Its relationship with county and other public forests should be to let them define their own role while following the examples before them. Private forestry, well the state should either staff up and provide full service to the landowners or get out of the business all together.

Comment #: 204
The issue of public control of private land use is of particular concern to me. If a private party owns a parcel of land, pays taxes on the land; the land then shold be able to be develop for use.

Comment #: 205
I think all the issues/trends presented in this survey are important and so inter-related that it's nearly impossible to rank or prioritize.

Comment #: 206
A5* & A6 have to be considered the most important as information must be based on facts through solid scientific research. It is important that the public is able to have access to this info and that this info is put in understandalbe terms. You have a very difficult and challenging task. I look forward to seeing the process, the draft and the final results. Thanks for the opportunity to be part of the initial process.

Comment #: 207
We don't want government involved in our private woods! It is my land and I should be able to do as I please. The gov't should not own any land. Sell it to the private sector so they can pay taxes on it. The Founding Fathers never dreamed of government owning so much land. (or having a say about Private Forests).

Comment #: 208
- Emphasis on people management and awareness.
Comment #: 209
It seems to me that the clearcutting of Wisconsin Forests OAK TREES on state owned land has been and is a priority with the DNR. I hae personally witnessed this in the "Navarino Wildlife Area" over the past several years. I have also witnessed over the past several years the destruction of natural roadside habitat and trees of all types due to road construction. All trees are part of Wisconsin Forests that benefit plants, animals, air and water quality. The loss of trees, plants and animals effect the environment; which can cause health problems and pollution (air and water). We should protect what is here for future generations to see and enjoy, instead of destroying it. I personally believe these are trends or issues to be dealt with for enivironmentaly sound Wisconsin Forests. Thank you, Olson Please send me a copy of the complete assessment report.

Comment #: 210
1. Challenge of co-ordinating planning of public forests under separate jurisdictions. How best to work with county and federal forests to secure common goals, such as avoidance of fragmentation. 2. As forests are increasingly fragmented, invaded by exotics, etc, what is the proper role for wide-spread restoration efforts?

Comment #: 211
Lots of land could be put in forestry which once was farmed. Like to see little more help with the cost of plants on some these devested acers.

Comment #: 212
Two issues that are listed need more attention, one issue being the exaggerated threat of major forest fires in the state. Using your numbers and ave of 1,528 separate firest burned 2,658 acres in a past four year period (annually). This computs to 1.7 acre per fire. Knowing F.P.'s modus operandi, I will estimate over half of all the acres burned was pure grassland. About 1/3 will be RR right of way burn, which is all brush anyway. The net area burned, of any consequence, computes to about 800 acres of swamp fires, marsh fires, plantations, etc. The hardwood forest is made of asbestos. (The Menominee Forest (hardwood type) had 9.9 acres burned in 27 years.) However, October and April can be a problem depending on rainfall. What to do with the other 10 months of the year? People? Equipment? Buildings? The other issue is C3 (private forestry asst). Fred Wilson attempted in the 50's to get that program off the ground, Roman Koenings tried even harder, no real quantitative success, the 9 million acres of private forest lands continue to lack any firm, or intensive forest management. Yet that segment of forest land supplies the bulk of high grade saw timber to the market place. I realize there is no easy solution to this problem, but the New Forest Mgt Tax Proposal, which attempts to encourage woodlot owners for the longterm shoots itself in the foot with required paperwork that is unbelievable! PS My comments in this survey should be construed as constructive, I feel my 49 years in this business should lend some credence to them.

Comment #: 213
We would hate to see any more restrictions placed on what property-owners can do or use on their own property.

Comment #: 214
WATERWAY BUFFER FORESTS Forests that border Wisconsin's Lakes and Rivers are some of the most important tracts thatwe have yet they are frequently abused land developers have been enroaching on the public domain for many years - all too often the local government will turn a blind eye. The reason for this scenario lies in the desire to increase the evaluations of the land in order to increase tax revenues. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is the end result. The thousands of acres of water that the public actually owns are being degraded by private interest factions all too often. My hat off to buffer land owners who voluntarily maintain a buffer forest. The State of Wisconsin does have a buffer mandate - but local zoning variance degrade this. Buffer forests are being fragmented! That state should enforce a minimum lot size that can not be fragmented through the zoning variance system - example: State mandates nothing smaller than a 300' lot for a dwelling - not 2 houses on 2 150' lots. My rivers should not look like main-street USA Forest buffer tracts can be increased and less fragmentation could occur. Old growth continuos tracts would be benificial for many reasons: - Enchance flora and fauna along waterways-especially species low in number - To protect water quality and preserve that land-water-air eco-system - To protect the natural beauty and aeshetics along tag public domain - To protect historical landmarks that could be lost - a high percentage of historical spots are located along our waterways - copper culture sites, fur trade sites, old pinery camps, burial sites etc. Continuous tracts of forest buffer would help preserve this. Wisconsin officials cannot locate and zone out all of these sites - if they could then we would not have experienced such a loss to the bulldozer. The fact that individual counties do not have a histrical trust system to inventory and preserve sites is another subject - still, buffer forests can be regulated with history in mind - it would put more teeth into it. The Forestry Bureau and Auspices should work hand in hand with the State Historical Society, why? Because the W.H.S. can preserve what they want - and the forest bureau can do what they want - namely - curtail forest fragmentation along the borders of the public domain. Forest fragmentation can be better addressed by increasing the number of officials against it -work with the WHS. The 1999-2000 Biennial Budget - Act 9 often refered to as "smart growth" addresses problems of forest fragmentation plus historical degrading all due to urban sprawl. (Wisconsin Preservation News - Spring 2000 Vol. XXIV No. 2) I hope that this letter may be a welcome addition to the enclosed "Survey on Forestry Trends and Issues" that I was glad to receive and process back. Thank you for the survey Sincerely

Comment #: 215
In my opinion, all the issues identified here are valid for statewide planning.

Comment #: 216
Dear Sirs, I feel that Wisconsin's forests are ageing and should be managed by trained foresters working with landowners and the state. Clear-cutting isn't "pretty" at first, but it is a very effective forest management tool and creates biodiversity in the forest. The wood can be utilized for pulp, lumber etc. The re-growth aspen provides important habitat for many species of animals and birds. There are fewer early succession aspen-birch forests now than 20 years ago. The coninued decline in aspen forests will hurt the long-term habitat for deer, grouse and woodcock. As more blocks of industrial forest pass in to private ownership, clear-cutting as a management tool decreases. This will hurt Wisconsin's recreational use in the long run. Rmember, it is not a sin to cut a tree! I'd hate to see Wisconsin's forestry plan decided by the general public, who know nothing about the woods. I'm glad you see the need for a forest plan, as trends will not rpovide what is needed for the wildlife of Wisconsin. Thank you

Comment #: 217
The DNR forestry dept. is in the 1890 to 1920 years of forestry. If you disagree then we have status quo and you can stop reading any further. Now that you want to read more read on. 1. The DNR forestry dept is 100 years behind the forestry dept in Germany and other countries. It is also 40 to 50 years behind California and Wash in forestry. 2. The application for seed trees is obsolete and at least 35 years old. 3. The nurseries are back in the 1950 era and do not meet the needs of the current landowners (ie. Not enough red oaks are grown, etc.) 4. The education of the foresters is very poor. My forester didn't know where white spruce are grown. The disease specialist should have a PHD and be more informed. I find out the problems with my trees from my fellow landowners. The forester should know grade and scale of trees. One DNR forester did not know that a large cherry tree on his property was a veneer log and could not determine its board feet. My forester set up a clear cut on my neighbors hilly area and promptly destroyed the are for future growth. 5. The foresters should be licensed and bonded such engineers, attorneys, realators, etc. Call California for information on licensing their foresters. 6. Overharvesting of quality trees such as hardwoods in southwest Wisconsin has caused the degeneration of quality new growth. This can be prevented by not harvesting the seed trees, proper management etc. 7. The DNR forestry should have started biodiversity years ago. 8. Some foests should be off limits to timber removal and these old growth trees are an excellent source of high quality genetic seeds for growing new trees. 9. The loggers should be licensed by the DNR and bonded and should meet certain qualification so that when the logging is completed it does not destroy the land for future growth of trees. 10. The DNR forestry should put pressure on the federal government to ban certain trees, wood products, etc that contain bugs, larvae, etc from importing onto the United States. 11. The demand for wood and wood products are increasing and if Wisconsin wants to be a supplier major changes have to take place otherwise Wisconsin will not be able to supply the high quality of wood that is needed. 12. I would be willing to show on a field trip good and poor practices of forestry management, logging, etc. 13. I am a forester and logger.

Comment #: 218
1. Please include in discussions of whether to allow a new activity in state forests the track record of that activity in other state or national locations. For example, before adding ATV trails to our state forests please do a comprehensive study of ATV activities in other state and national forests and report the results. I have read many times about ATV abuses in national forests and on other lands. Let us learn from other people's experiences. 2. The issue of safety should be considered in the debate of whether an activity should be included in our state forests. For examply, I am concerned that a significant number of ATVs will collide with other ATVs and pedestrians in our very busy state foressts if ATV trails are allowe. For example, ATV enthusiasts have proposed in the NHAL Master Planning Process to convert the Highland/Legion Trail to an ATV trail. This trail runs near three camping areas in the NHAL. (The NHAL has over 2,000,000 visitors a year.) If the Highland/Legion Trail were converted to an ATV trail, I think it would be a very dangerous situation for the nearby campers, especially the children. 3. The issue of historical use of properties should be included in master planning of forestlands. For example, those familiar with the NHAL know that snowmobiling has an historical presence there and is considered untouchable as far as decreasing the number of trails is concerned. Why doesn't hiking, bird watch, bicycling, canoeing, and enjoying peace and quiet get treated with such reverence? A second example involves the NHAL Highland/Legion Trail. Historically the Highland/Legion Trail has been used primarily as a hiking trail in the summer. This trail passes by fourteen 100% owned state lakes of which seven of them are designated as wilderness lakes or lakes with walk-in trails only. ATV traffic would significantly alter the historical atmosphere of this trail and the surrounding lake areas. 4. Also, please consider whether the environment is conducive to a recreational activity before it is allowed in an area. For example, the "soil" in the northern fourth of t he Highland/Legion Trail in the NHAL is almost entirely sand. I can not ride my bicycle through the area and I can not imagine that most ATVs could get through it either. Further suth, the trail becomes very wet during much of the spring and summer seasons. I think many aTVs would get stuck in the mud in parts of this remote area. 5. Please consider huw much money the DNR has to spend when looking at new functions. I support the DNR receiving more tax dollars.

Comment #: 219
An increased use of firewood for heating purposes. Making it more available after logging or wood slabs.

Comment #: 220
1 - Vandalism - I had someone dump much trash on one of my fire lanes!

Comment #: 221
People have to be told bluntlly, that as they continue to overpopulate, we all lose some of our individual freedoms. The crunch is on! Land owners of parcels larger than just homesites need to have representatives in this project because they are the ones trying to preserve the natural environment.

Comment #: 222
Limit use of ATV's and 4 wheel drive vehicles "Buffer Zone."

Comment #: 223
Support for roadless areas.

Comment #: 224
1. (Refers to C2, C3, C4) A strong education and tax incentive programs may be the only means of insuring educated and responsible land stewardship among these new landowner holdings. 2. Another issue to explore is alternative management methods which may meet goals of biodiversity while continuing to create productive forest land and forest products. I'm refering to thinking about "outside the box" beyond current forestry management practices. The European Dowerveldt system or others should be explored and initiated. 3. Alternatives or methods of controlling urban sprawl must be addressed. 4. Management of native wildlife species must be kept in a balance, not promoted to the detriment of other resources eg. Whitetail deer politics and impacts on forest cover plant species. 5. Tax issues, inflated tax base due to changes in ownership and development by wealthy landowners must be addressed so rural landowners, farmers and woodland owners can afford to keep and maintain their properties, even small parcels, in a rural forested condition. 6. Education, education, education. Woodland owners must be assisted and educated in land stewardship, its responsibilities and rewards. 7. More effort is needed to bring all woodland owners (all size parcels) into the resource management scheme while remaining sensitive to owners' interests and management goals eg. Wildlife, aesthetics, or unique forest products. * A comprehensive management plan should address ALL issues to some extent. Although the most pressing issues should be given priority attention in a given plan, the rest cannot be ignored.

Comment #: 225
My concern regarding public forest lands within local (county, towns) governement area's are that that entity should have a larger or more voice in decision making issue concerning management within their borders. I see owners of now public lands (State-Federal) lands are not upholding their end of the agreements originaly made with local entitites.

Comment #: 226
It seems your list is a good summary of the spectrum of forestry challenges. I currently live in Germany and particularly admire the efforts to recycle, full use of forest products and recycling of products seem to be the best way to use the entire wealth of the land.

Comment #: 227
1. The public's growing perception that the DNR, County Forest Administrators, and most so-called academic or other forest "professionals" are biased toward and disproportionately influenced by the forest products industry's viewpoints and requests. 2. The growing science linking health forest ecosystems with healthy aquatic ecosystems (lakes, rivers, groundwater recharge, ephemeral ponds, seeps, springs, hydrologic regimes, etc.). 3. The growing recognition of forests' cultural uses and values, including Native Americans' treaty usufructory rights in the ceded territories. 4. The trend toward less State level influence and sovereignty on many forest related subjects, including free trade, global warming, imported exotic species, green marketing/certification programs, etc. 5. The trend toward greater corporate consolidation and political influence due to increasing campaign contributions and the dependence of most elected officials and serious candidates on those contributions.

Comment #: 228
Education should always be a top priority in any plan.

Comment #: 229
Trends in real estate sales, the fragmenting of forest lands is decreasing the base of supply to our forestry industry. As a while only the land that stays in large enough parcels will benefit the logging industry. With the trend that the public dictates the manner in which private landowners may use their land or not use it. Some form of compensation package must be developed to keep forested lands. If private "tree farms" benefit society as a whole - the society should help pay for this bvenefit. This could be on a buffer zone, for clear cutting, waterways, pollutioin control, etc., if it benefits then we should be willing to pay for it. Keep invasive exotic species and when we have methods to control or balance it! The spreading human population probably has more to do with all your problems, then any one thing. Use incentives to keep larger family tree farms in tact (estate taxes) etc. Keep State Nursery Programs - growing seedlings and transplants. Thanks.

Comment #: 230
More attention to E3 Issues: reclaim chemically sprayed lawns and replant native shrubs, vines, trees and wildflowers.

Comment #: 231
I am bothered by housing development into rural/forest areas and by people not using responsible methods of land use. I hope the people who are in a position to make decisions about the future of our forest lands will do so with the future in mind and not totally economics. I do worry that there is too much development into areas where animals live. It is a difficult issue - I hope those in charge will think long and hard about their decisions.

Comment #: 232
Forest tax issues - use value, harvest - inheritence Increase WI nursery stock capacity - I've never found what I need.

Comment #: 233
This is difficult for me to address. I agree you should monitor the situation and as information is gathered it should be reported back to citizens. Your continuous use of the word "lan" concerns me. Considering that most forested land in state is privately owned, do you intend to "plan" with land owners how to best manage their forested land as you have in the pst or this the 1st step in what could become "regulatory"? Keep up the good work and thanks for asking my opinion.

Comment #: 234
In Vilas county several song bird species are in dangerous decline or have isappeared. Use available information resources to protect habitat for nest building. I try to encourgae bat population (yes I know they are not "birds"), but have had minimal support from DNR locally. The mechanization of the Northwoods is of great concern to me. After 20 years of retirement in Boulder Junction, the landscape has been altered substantially. This may not be the forum for specific projects, but I want to mention my concern about the Manitowish reiver north of Hwy M. This used to be home to a diverse colony of birds and animals representative of species common to our area. Mostly they have all disappeared, herons, swallows, ducks, loons, otter, beaver and others. Consider establishing a wildlife corridor in this area and preserve the remaining habitat. Also it also the locale of the ONLY waterside boat house (?) the entire length of the river from M to the culvert at Rush Lake.

Comment #: 235
Whatever the outcome of your management plan, it MUST be a balance of economic and environmental choices to be widely accepted.

Comment #: 236
Trend of DNR buying up private land and removing it from local tax rolls. This is NOT charter of DNR. Money should be ued to educate private landowners on better uses of their property.

Comment #: 237
Large development is in my backyard. When developmentt occurs, it seems they can do anything such as fill in wetlands, bury flowing artesian wells and remove whole watersheds. A farmer is limited in many ractices, even timber harvest. A township has not control over its boundaries when located next to a village or city and my land is within territorial zoning. Annexation takes place all the time and large tracts of land are lost from forest and field at a great rate. Once gone it is gone forever. We need very strong incentives for people to keep land the way God made it.

Comment #: 238
Tax benefits, both income tax and property tax, should be looked into to help out private landowners for the best management of their forest land. The present Managed Forest Law could be improved also.

Comment #: 239
1) Collaboration needed with federal agency and counties and municipality owned forest plans. Does this trend and issue survey only affect state owned forests?

Comment #: 240
1) Hiring of county foresters to help out private landowners. 2) Less capital gains taxes on wood cut for small landowners. 3) Tax breaks for handing down woodlands to sons or/and daughters after owner dies.

Comment #: 241
A forest management plan for public forests is a good idea, but including privately owned forest land is not acceptable to me. I want to be able to manage my forest land as I want to and have successfully done for 50 years.

Comment #: 242
Stick to an biological assessment of the State's rural forests and what needs to be done to maintain its health. Don't waste money on urban "forests". Don't waste money on artificial and costly prairies and savannahs or regeneation programs.

Comment #: 243
B5 - Value as wildlife habitat as well as other non timber values should be included in green accounting.

Comment #: 244
Someone(s) worked long at developing this survey. But: 1. Too much detail associated with your statements 2. Did you error in omitting "strongly disagree"? 3. As a landowner, I am not concerned with "global warming etc" issues. 4. My major concern is to have a forester available to solve/answer my questions. 5. The financial reward of growing timber are very critical - the one who "plants" is not likely to harvest lumber. This status effects how much I can spend for all inputs - a real problem. For example, after 30 yrs, I had to thin my stand of pines as per "forestry plan". The price of pulp was so low (5.50/cord) that I received less money for removal of about 8-10,000 trees than it cost me to remove ONE diseased soft maple in my backyard here in the city. 6. If I "ran" the forestry prog of WI, I would CLOSELY work with all area woodland assn owner groups - build them into active groups - they are likely to want/need forestry guides.

Comment #: 245
I think the state does a poor job in maintaining the forest in central WI. If most farmer used their land as bad as the state forest makes use of the trees as a resource, most farmer would be out of business. Don't cry to me that you need more money. Use the trees as a farmer uses his crop. Trees are a crop and new growth will replace it. Some new planting will have to be made. Use the resource you have for your buget.

Comment #: 246
A Wisconsin statewide forest plan must recognize Native American traditional uses and values of forests. Many forest products, such as berries, nuts, maple sugar, wild rice in forest lakes, birchbark, princess pine, pine bows, balsam, fish and game, and medicinal plants have cultural value as food, medicine, spiritual use, or all three. The spiritual well-being of Native people is dependent upon healthy, ecologically divers forests. The statewide forest plan must accommodate Native American hunting, fishing, and gathering needs.
Comment #: 247
Additional Thoughts 1. Although the current assessment indicates that forest quality is generally improving, I have seen many instances of disturbing "management model" that you have not addressed. It now seems to be a fairly common practice for a logger to buy a parcel of timberland, strip out all the timber of even slight commercial value, then sell the parcel to hunters. This is a sound economic model since the logger makes a profit and the hunter gets a good piece of hunting land, but it is a lousy way to manage forests. I have seen many parcels where all that is left is brush and low quality trees (deformed, diseased or undesirable species) of various sizes. I can't even imagine how long it would take such a forest to again attain a decent quality. Clearcuts would be preferable because at least there would be a chance for natural regeneration of quality trees, but a clear-cut parcel would be harder to sell to the hunter. 2. Fragmentation: Perhaps there is a way to create "local forest management organizations" and encourage small forest owners to join them. These organizations would attempt to manage fragmented forest as a whole. The small owner would gain from improved management of his own land and the neighboring land. On his own, it is very difficult for the small owner to educate himself, not to mention contracting with foresters, loggers, biologists, etc. Presumably, the proceeds from timber sales could pay for the management work and maybe even return some cash to the owner. The forest would still be fragmented by roads and homesites, but improved management could ameliorate some of the negatives. 3. Fire Danger: I am not sure if this is a problem in Wisconsin yet, but the trend towards designating increased amounts of "Wilderness" land in the National Forests may lead to increased potential for catastrophic fires in the future. Personally, I love wilderness, but we must be aware of the hazards and perhaps come up with a plan that allows for modes management of these areas to lessen the fire danger.

Comment #: 248
One trend that I see in my area is more forested land being purchased by individuals or groups for hunting purposes. Those individuals or groups then post their land and do not allow any other hunters on their property. This also includes farmers who "rent" their land to hunters from outside the "area" and do not let anyone else hunt on their land. This has impacted the recreation use of these lands as well. It also impacts the control of some of the specific hunting seasons. I do feel that if you want to be able to reduce the "deer" population, hunters have to be able to get onto the land. This "fragmentation" of land has put more pressure on lands that are open to public hunting. However, these lands can support only a given number per acre. These lands are decreasing in size with more hunters. I do feel this is an issue that has to be addressed statewide. **Also, I do feel that there should be some kind of a rating system (have no idea what) to rate the kind of job loggers do when harvesting our timber. I feel that this would help when we put our trust of these people with our lands. Type of mess they leave - trees left scarred up? Etc.

Comment #: 249
Migratory bird corridors, especially in the urban forests. SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS

Comment #: 250
I expect, don't want to, will be forced to sell as WI taxes on land with no return for 30-40 years is not proper. Pay when timber is sold should be fair, not all the itme. My 200 acerrs and summer home in Burnett Co. WI where I hand planted 71 thousand norway pine ten years ago

Comment #: 251
1. Property taxes on woodland are too high and getting worse(!) and should be based on an agricultural use assessment rather than on market value. These high taxess are forcing some farmers to sell off parcels - thereby causing some of the problems you're concerned about, ie, "fragmentation", urban sprawl and development, etc. Other farmers are starting to pasture their woodlands thereby paying the lower property tax rate. 2. DNR foresters should get more involved in the various "sustainable woods coops" springing up in WI and thereby lend their expertise to the formulation and implementation of the woodland owners management plan, coop management and function, marketing of value - added products etc. 3. P.S. I was very disappointed by the fact that no where in your "assessment" or survey did you mention the farmers deep concern regarding the ever rising property taxes on his woodland - nor did you mention anything about the various "sustainable woods coops" that have been developing in WI! Are we really in touch!?

Comment #: 252
1. Potential EPA restrictions on logging presents significant problems for any state-wide management plan.

Comment #: 253
Many of these issues have resulted in our mobility to effectively manage our federal forest for timber production. Incompatability of uses has in resources resulted in "no management", resulting in temendous loses of timber in 200 to fire. Seriously need to consider the value of recreation deer, grouse hunting, fishing etc to monitor red pine and or jack pine forest at the county leve. Low prices for timber and no financial benefit to counties maybe offset by recreational dollars where good fish and wildlife management is the goal.

Comment #: 254
I have heard it said that those who make the rules and laws governing landowners are NOT themselves owners of land! Perhaps criteria needs to be implemented to assure landowners of proper representation by landowners! TRUST is an important essential for a partnership to succeed! In order for the MFL program to succeed landowners need to feel they can trust the DNR to honor MFL commitments without changes being made after the petition is signed. Landowners happy with MFL agreements are the best source of promoting the program! We are in touch with fellow landowners regularly and our enthusiasm is contagious! Hope you will carefully consider all returned surveys and comments! Ours came from 36 years ownership and involvement of our 400 acre woodland! We are under 25 and 50 year MFL contracts! We'd be very happy to participate in future planning with t he DNR on these matters! We are very pleased with our DNR forester and the many with whom we've had contact with concerning our land! Lets help a good program become a great program!

Comment #: 255
Howdy folks: Seems to me a very thorugh job has been done indentifying issues and trends . . Except that one, which to me, underlies nd drives all the rest (altho you've approached it with that trend of increased consumption/demand). . . That of the GROWTH OF HUMAN POPULATION . . . At the global scale and nationally, especially. Ironically, you probably think this issue is "beyond the scope" of this plan - perhaps - but I've been asked to join in numerous natural resource plans and the fialue to address this key issue results for me in an almost unbearable sense of frustration and futility - so at best, my work with you will be secondary and superficial to me - for until the growth of human population is addressed and reversed all other work is almost certain to be over-ridden and pre-empted. Perhaps the best I can hope fore with plans like this it that they'll result in greater pressure to consserve, reduce onsumption and recycle and that humanity will "get the picture" FINALLY - Now some other lesser points: 1. The term "sustainability" - it must be poorly (narrowly or with little regard to species other than human . . Or without regard to quality of all life) defined - a rising population of 6 bil humans is far above the number at which quality life for all species can be maintained - we loose species daily - we spend our natural capital - even MOST HUMANS on earth live and die in deprivation and squalor! To me, the use of the term "sustainability" is an OUTRAGE! Its just another smoke screen enabling us to circumvent the ONLY issue . . .our population increase - 2. Humanity has attempted to maintain its OWN quality of life as its prime aim for eons by "managing" the ecosystem and OTHER species - altho, it may appear successful (unless you look deep and into the future) I think we've largely fail - we've generated MORE humanity - not a better human life - the time is long overdue for us to engage in the only form of management that offers any hope and in which we've any right to engage. . . That is self management. . . .management of the human species. In appreciation:

Comment #: 256
1. Conversion of abandoned and marginal farm land to production of fast growing tree crops, such a hybrid poplars and willows, should be encouraged. 2. We should be actively studying the possibility of alternative fibre crops, such as hemp. Some of these may be much more productive than tree crops. Economic assistance to mills to affect a change-over to different processing machinery may be needed. Both of these could take considerable pressure off public lands, or at least help to meet increased demand, thereby allowing more acreage to be devoted to biodiversity and other non-extractive uses.

Comment #: 257
Forest restoration has become a poor investment for landowner tree planting cost per acre of trees $100 Gov $50 Owner $50 = $100 Cost of land per acre $250 per acre (very low) = $250 Interest at 6% on land and trees = $1910.30 Total per acre 30 years = $2260.30 tree planting and land Property assessed at $450 per acre Taxess are $10 per acre after 30 years compouned at 8% = $1324.1 Combined cost per acre 30 years = $3584.4 40 acres x 40 cost per 40 acre $143,376 Spruce stumpage afte 30 years may equal 7 cords per acre - value at $20 per cord = $140 $140 x 40 = Value + $5600 All my time and expense not figured in. This has been a poor investment I will never see the benefit. At present method of taxation no private individual can affort to grow trees as a crop. Taxes far exceed the value of tree growth. Pine is better, all land is not useful to plant pine. Private tree planting in this area has come nearly to a standstill. In past 40 years we planted over 250,000 trees. Now we do not know what to do. We know we can not afford to keep it. Tree planting and land

Comment #: 258
My forest land is adjacent to many acres of state owned forest land that is very poorly managed - in fact it is mismanaged. An example is the amount of "buckthorn" or "European buckthorn" on state land causing me to not be able to control it on my land. Also no attempt to try to control or slow "oak wilt" is a detriment to the entire area. The State of Wisconsin should PRACTICE WHAT THEY PREACH.

Comment #: 259
1. The cost of owning forest land (I.e. real estate taxes). You are loosing forest management stewardship as parcels can not be handed down to next generations. Who will follow three on established forest practices? Some forestry practices take more than a life-time. They take for-ever! 2. Give back to the private owners the control of their forest lands. Remove government regulations and tell the special interest groups (I.e. Green Peace, Sierra Club, etc) that this land is under private ownership and they HAVE NO SAY. 3. 25 years ago I was willed a parcel of land. I asked my aging DNR foreester if there was any way of easing the financial burden of owning forest land as a wife and four childrent would come first. He had no answer. In the year 2000, I asked my young DNR forester the same question as it is getting close to the time to will this forest land on. He had no answer. After 25 years, I don't know if I should pass this financial burden on to my children. 4. If you are going to do a survey and have a "strongly agree" choice, you should also have a "strongly disagree" option. Shame on you for sending this out!

Comment #: 260
Trend - to listen equally with all the environment nuts in the planning process. They may never use the forests, but have a lot to say. Users such as hikers, loggers and etc should be given more weight in the planning process. Local government and people should be given more importance in the process. There probably should be more user fees to help pay for all the demands on the forests. Example loggers pay a users free, stumpage and they are nearly the only ones who pay. Other uses also have value and should be charged. For instance if a group such as the wilderness people want more wilderness they should be sold those rites providing they compete with the values of other uses. Let them put their money where their mouth is. Local people, industry and government should be considered stronger than some one who is hundreds of miles away. Forest management and practices should be given more weight in considerations. Laws should be passed to limit litigation for every little thing. Good sound forest practices should be exercised from literature. A further thought - we are always worried that people are buying potential woodlands and converting it to other uses. Or they buy wooded land and don't know what to do with it. Can you imagine how we might change that by having enough DNR foresters so that everytime a piece of land with a potential for forest land is bought there would be an automatic forest management plan presented to the new landowner. He could follow it ignore it, but he would have a professional opinion about how to manage his land. In most cases that is more than he has now. Also all land that is enrolled in the MFL or other forest tax programs is enjoying a reduction in tops or in some cases that is a temporary holding arrangement without paying the regular higher tax. Maybe these programs should be modified so that the state and or the counties have the right of first refusal if these lands are offered for sale. Chat would maybe help to preserve those lands for forestry and other public uses.

Comment #: 261
Greetings - I believe that none of the issues and trends addressed should be addressed in a statewide forest plan. Certainly such a plan would impose unecessary restrictions and regulations on the private forest land owners. Most noticeably on the farmer. Farm woodlands are treated as a crop and should be taxed as other cropland, not as recreational land. I and other farmers I know sell their hardwood logs when it's the most profitable like for veneer. Other species like aspen, white birch, balsam and hemlock should be cut in their prime as they deteriorate as they get older. Yes, I have been in the logging business for over 62 years including the year 2000. A certified tree farmer for over 50 years and definitely know, as in this case, what I am writing about. Please, no more regulations for the private forest land owner.

Comment #: 262
A9 - open areas or barrens should be increased in the north for biodiversity, fire breaks and disease, insect separation. Bring back elk, sharptail grouse, etc. Where hemlock forests have openings and surrogate (?) the young trees are thriving. C8- Fire should be more widely used as a management tool. C10 - Four wheelers can be the most disrupting of all uses of the forest and should be strictly controlled.

Comment #: 263
To be fair, because of the many users of our natural resources and the many interests they represent I found it impossible to pick any top ten issues. As a woodland resident I feel all the issue represented in this booklet need to be evaluated and studied.

Comment #: 264
Special Note: All approved projects that stem from this survey should have cost estimates for each weighted against benefits.

Comment #: 265
RE: C2 The increase in owner #'s in regard to forests may simply be due to the fact that there is a limit on the # of acres within a township that can be owned by the same owner(s) and be under the managed forest program (allowing property tax savings). We may want to increase that # from 80 acres up to, say, 300 acres(?).

Comment #: 266
Land use planning is very important. Here in Columbia County, Marcellon Twp we have a 35 acre requirement to build a house in the country. Some real estate people want to change this to 5 acres, as the more parcels, the more business for them. Also more houses, the more property taxes seem to go up. Property taxes go up faster than the rate of inflation. If property taxes are not kept in control landowners will want (need) to sell parcels of land. Thus more fragmentation.

Comment #: 267
Note: Unless you can explain the phrase "should be addressed in a statewide forest plan", you can't expect us to agree or disagree unfortunately such a plan could call for more cutting/logging or less protection of biodiversity etc; forestry is not viewed as a positive in this state unless you are a logger or related business. All of these issues/trends are important. The bottom line for me is protection, less logging less fragmentation, no more clear-cutting.

Comment #: 268
I firmly believe in free enterprise so, I do not see fragmentation as any threat. I see global warming as a natural accuring event. This earth has warmed and cooled many times in its history. The global market is very important as communication and education make us one.

Comment #: 269
This is an excellent survey - can all be accomplished with current state funding. E are all for an increased % of State GRPs going to this aspect of our DNR or associated agencies. We need a groundwater and surface water trend/use study/questionaire of this type. Wisconsin has a wealth of freshwater to enhance and protect. If we sell it, w must gain revenue from it.

Comment #: 270
S 1. State laws that tax the disposal of tires and microwave ovens simply means the public disposes them on other people land (ie managed forest land)2. No real enforcement of laws protecting managed forest lands from public abuse - see DNR printing 2450-1120 pp9 3. Extended deer hunting season: decreasing the herd is a good idea but the extended season restricts the use of the forest to others for longer periods 4. Discuss federal forest land preserve plan

Comment #: 271
It is practically impossible, for sure uneconomical, to try to start a new stand of desireable hardwoods like oak or walnut as long as there are as many deer as we have now. As long as the deer management people mismanage and they will always have their way, forests will only regenerate thru natural processes. We hardly need to study this or a lot of the other stuff in this survey. We have enough people in Madison leeching off the rest of state. Let the free market handle most these issues. Some specific issues like diesease can be justified for indicision in a statewide forest plan!

Comment #: 272
Include Hunting and Trapping under recreation. These activities involve close to 1 m. people every year. State purchase of large industrial forests as they come up for sale. Clear cutting is needed.

Comment #: 273
1. Forestland being leased for recreation (hunting). Land is managed for deer. 2. DNR regulations are not working in some areas. Example: T hunts in Western Wisconsin. Most public areas are hunted heavily with an overkill, where many private areas are posed (no trespassing). People living and farming near the posted land complain about deer population, but the DNR can't control the problem. People are micro-managing their property and the deer on them. As land gets more expensive. 3. Forestland grazing. In southern Monroe and Vernon Counties around Cashton, Ontairo, LaFarge and Westby, more Amish are buying farms. In areas, where most land is owned by Amish, deer, turkeys, and some other types of wildlife are rare. Most people living in these areas claim the Amish hunt year-round. In many cases, this might be true, but grazing the foestland is probably worse. Many pasture horses, which loos to be worse on the forest than cattle. Many of the mistakes were made years ago, are being brought back to these woods and farms. Mistakes like grazing forests, wetlands, streambanks, countour farming practices not followed, etc.

Comment #: 274
Transition from mixed specie forest to re-dpine plantations (sterile). This reduces wildlife habitat.

Comment #: 275
The conservatives are now starting to put the libs back in their holes. Leaders in the forestry community better be getting their balls back

Comment #: 276
Educate the landowners before the logger destroys his forest. Provide enough personnel to get rid of the backlog of work so the foresters can assist the landowner quickly, so they don't loose patients and make bad decisions.

Comment #: 277
There is a need to restrict all motorized vehicles, eg snowmobiles and dirtbikes, to designated trails. Their unregulated use is adversely affecting wildlife habitat. Air and water quality, soil consrevation, and wilderness conditions. They are an intrusion on all who enjoy peace and quite in the forest.

Comment #: 278
As urbanization races across this state I believe a plan to protect and expand/block in our current federal, state, county, tribal forests as well as natural areas and public hunting lands is required. Urban encroachment needs to be controlled near these public lands. I am not against having a cabin in the woods, (I have one) that is part of many WI citizens dreams, but I am against the ever increasing subdivision of land. Do we have zoning such as farmland preservation, ie must have 40 acres to build, or do we have zoning that specifies division of land. Example if you own 160 ac and you want to divide are you allowed 2-3 one to two acre splits that are clustered with the remaining 154 or so acres no longer subdividable. Something must be done. Our big woods (?) is declining if we do not plan the urban southeast will engulf this state. Better zoning, stricter land subdivision laws, *block in and expand current public areas and more greenspace in metro/soon to be metro areas are needed. * By blocking in I mean vigorously pursueing land purchasing in and surrounding public areas.

Comment #: 279
I think your/our managed forest law or land program is great and favors keeping forst forest. Urban sprawl and development of forest/farm land is a major threat to our rural areas. We are quite lucky to have the forests we do here. Please work to preserve them.

Comment #: 280
Forest/woodland and utilization of wood is very important to me and always has been. I began planting trees when I was six years old and in the 4-H club, in 1938, near Juneau Wis. I now live in the middle of a 33 acre woods which I have been managing and shaping since 1972 and can't think of any place I would rater be or anything else that I would rather be doing. Quite naturally, planning or interference with that way of life concerns me. I believe most woodland dwellers have similar interests. Forestland can not be all things to all people so we must do some planning. We can't have our woods and have wood products without cutting trees. Those acres that are planted in Christmas trees, for example, probably would be left barren if people didn't plant tree there and the managers of those tree farms must be allowed to harvest the trees. After all, that awful looking landscape will look beautiful once again when the new crop of trees are growing. There are a lot of very narrow-minded people who can't seem to understand that. Of the plant and animal life on earth, we humans seem to have been put in charge, perhaps by default. Anyway, it makes good sense to me that we should be doing the planning instead of leaving everything to chance and "natural" development as some people seem to think should take place. Some people think that our environment should be put back the way it was before man arrived on earth and not disturbed because we are intruders and not a part the natural environment. I strongly disagree with those ideas. We humans are just as much a part of the earth as any tree or stone or plant or animal and for whatever reason, we were given brains and means to manage, alter, and care for the environment. What benefits us, in the long run, benefits the rest of life on earth as well and if we find that we have made harmful changes, then we are responsible for correcting those mistakes if we can or we will all suffer the consequences. To prevent mistakes and please as many people as possible, there has to be planning. It has been discovered that there are hundreds of large, straight, fine walnut trees in my woods unlike just about anywhere else on earth. I am the proud caretaker of these trees and have made them available as a seed orchard to those interested; the International Walnut Council of which I am a board member, the Hardwood Tree Improvement and Regeneration Center (recently created at Purdue University) and our state walnut council chapter has plans to collect and deliver seeds to the Wisconsin nursery at Boscobel starting next October 20th, assuming that Mother Nature cooperates and produces yet another bumper crop in 2001. It is time we start improving the quality of hardwood trees instead of continually cutting and removing the best growing stock and leaving behind the worst for future stock, as we presently do.

Comment #: 281
Yes, I have a issue, noting your thanks to me, for honoring my opinion on this survey, I wish to thank you all envolved in this very interesting report. It is never too late to learn. Obviously, many hours of patience to update Wisconsin's citizens, I'm very impressed! It is beyond thank you I say this. Very sincerely yours,

Comment #: 282
Forests are truly renewal and sustainable crop. Europe has shown the way to manage forest lands. The ideal way to log is selective harvest using horses to remove logs. The use of deadfalls and slashings should provide heat. Forest crop lands need zoning protection and tax relief. Forest about the high-faluting college mentality book learning use less research as outlined in this text. I realize the accepted way to promote a political agenda is to "Dazzle them with Bull Shit!" Your mission should be to insure steadly increasing forest acreage and harvesting thru the use of sensible direction, incentives and land use planning involving a bare minimum or no bureaucratic involvement.

Comment #: 283
Large areas of wetlands in the forested areas have a very limited use under current wetland laws. Wetland areas should be classified/valued at a much lower valuation rate for tax purposes.

Comment #: 284
I am not an informed as I feel I'd like or should be to complete this survey - but I do own a lot of forest land and have been creating a larger track of forest/swamp land for forest and wildlife mgmt, recreational use. (Not in "managed forest crop land" program). I also have some acreage in the "managed" program and find the DNR helpful in maintaining the urban forest since it is our neighborhood's buffer to the power plant.

Comment #: 285
Many of the items mentioned here really needed to be addressed through more education. Perhaps more specific educational goals and cirriculum should be made mandatory in our schools. B7 refres to recycling. We are doing a fair job of recyling paper and wood products. I feel we have a long way to go in recycling plastics.

Comment #: 286
Impact of an expanded deer herd on forest regeneration particularly with regard to oaks.

Comment #: 287
1. Wildlife habitat destruction by contined forest land fragmentation 2. Lack of management by most private forest landowners 3. Character change of "north" from rural forestland to "suberbia" 4. The loss of forest land due to development is no different than the loss of "armland" which has been somewhat addressed by the state. Some sort of tax relief could be provided to forest landowners so that the decision to sub-divide is not hteir only choice as they get older.

Comment #: 288
TREND - Education/Youth development in understanding forest based resources. Teach students/adults of the importance of forest usage, trends toward management and preservation.

Comment #: 289
If forest management is not addressed in regards to sustainable yield w/ a statewide plan we may miss the opportunity to ever manage for anything but old growth characteristics due to the native and direction of environmental advocacy groups. Forest management integrated w/ resource management is what made our public forests what they are today. IF we stay ahead of the environmental movement "by addressing issues of integrated resource management in a statewide forest plan" we may be able to educate the public on valued management of our public resources and continue to provide the excellent resources we have today.

Comment #: 290
1. Work should be done to find best trees for seed (such as was done for farm crops) 2. More work needs to be done on tree disease (oak wilt, butternut canker, chestnut blight, dutch elm blight) There is evidence to suggest trrace minerals, etc will help. Humnrates Gypsum, Ricyk(?) Calcium Lime, Copper Sulfate should be tested. The problem is in the soil not the tree.

Comment #: 291
1. Foresters and loggers need to be license and bonded. 2. Continuing education to the extent of 16 technical credit hours should be required every two years before consulting and DNR foresters would have their license renewed. 3. Require all consulting and DNR foresters to be proficient in scaling and grading of timber before issuing license. 4. Prohibit the use of "MIXED HARDWOOD" terminology from Forestry harvest contracts. Specify individual species (common and scientific) to be CUT and specify individual species to be SAVED. 5. Increase hardwood tree seedling production at the state nurseries. 6. Identify and promote genetic superior trees for seed production for use at the state nurseries. 7. Oak regeneration education needed by Foresters and landowners. 8. Wooded corridors should be addressed to enhance the traversing of wildlife from one woodland parcel to another. 9. Encourage OLD GROWTH by amending the Forest Crop Laws to eliminate any penalty connected with the standing timber at the expiration of the contract. 10. Encourage the identification and protection of historic, archeogical, and rare plant communities. 11. Emphasize the saving of 5-6 genetically superior seed trees per acre at harvest time.

Comment #: 292
How prevalent is elm in the elm-oak-soft maple and maple basswood types. I thought elm was pretty much eliminated by the dutch elm disease?

Comment #: 293
What landowners really need and want is to be asisted with the management of their woodland and their resources on that woodland. But it seem that landowners have fewer and fewer property rights - even when they have planted trees on their land with their own hands, they are not told they must manage the "state" resouce! I realy believe that too much state ownership in real estate will ultimately put power in the hands of the government and with complete disregard for the citizen landowner, hunter and sportsman needs and concerns

Comment #: 294
The trend that the public thinks cutting any tree down hurts the environment. It is starting in grade school where teacher's are telling their kids that to save the environment they must protect the trees.

Comment #: 295
I think all the important issues have been identified and covered.

Comment #: 296
The many trends that you have enumerated make it clear that there are competing interest to be balanced. To do this with intelligence it is necessary to increase knowledge and information where they are missing. But when current trends are destructive, lead to nonsustainability of healthy forest, or in other ways project a doubtful future - steps should be taken to safeguard that future.

Comment #: 297
These are all fine Statements and Questions and need to be Addressed. But (Don't) exclude the Land Owner in Making Your Decision. They have a right to be included in all the Decision making Concerning their Trees and Land.

Comment #: 298
C8 I don't believe clear cutting should be allowed.

Comment #: 299
I have 240 acres of woods and plantation (Red Pine) under the Managed Forest Law. This property is located on the Yellow River in Wood County near the Juneau County line. I have a 2/3 interest in 18 acres on the High Ledge in southern Brown Co. This is also under the Managed Forest Law. I want to grow trees for future generations. The 240 acres has been in our family since the 1920's. The 18 acres has been in our family since 1868.

Comment #: 300
How forests affect the increase and decrease of specific wildlife species. How forests help prevent erosion by limiting rapid water runoff. The importance of the forest in the ecology of the trout stream.

Comment #: 301
More tax breaks for land owners to keep large acers of woodlands away from the developer. More education of existing programs that are now available (M.F.L.).

Comment #: 302
Taxes should be structured to encourage planting of variety of species rather than the present system of almost requiring premature cutting of trees to meet the ever increasing property tax burden.

Comment #: 303
Relative to clear cutting: It seems these operations should at least make an attempt to clean up after they slaughter the landscape. Why can't they replant, or perhaps youth groups and local interests could do so. We who live here have to look at this mess for several years, before nature can begin! PJR Costs? Cheaper now then later. I've heard all the reasons for leaving debris, etc. - small game, etc., but those are excuses for the clear cutters, not valid reasons. Thanks for this survey.

Comment #: 304
1. planned development of the small towns. 2. Control development - without plans. 3. Subdivison of forest areas must be controlled. 4. Deer damage to regenerated forests.

Comment #: 305
- Large, continous tracts of land must be protected for the dispersal and movements of major prey species in Wisconsin. - Wilderness areas in Wisconsin are few and far between. Establishment of such areas fosters growth of Eco-tourism, protection of old growth forests, and protection of water quality.

Comment #: 306
A exstremely important issue not addressed in this survey is that of estate taxes. Under the current tax law my son and daughter will be forced to sell to the highest bidder My 251 acre tree farm a 125 acres of my farm consists of maintained hardwood and planted conifers. All of this reforesting that I have done will be for not, because of the trends described in this survey. My children will be forced to brake up this valley parcel it off and pay the oppressive taxes forced by the gtoverment. Our elected officials must come to the aid of the forest, and help the family tree farm.

Comment #: 307
- World population increases causes tremendous pressures on existing and future resources. - American consumption habits equating to glutenous behavior i.e. trophy homes luxury cars etc. - Major chemical consumption - The need to reduce significantly mercury and the "toxic 9" chemicals which cause cancer and othe human health concerns. - Sensitive area protection needed to protect diversity of species. - Need for landscape scale level planning to tie in larger "ecosystem" requirements for land health.

Comment #: 308
There is a perception that some forest and wildlife managers are too busy and inaccessable. This puts the smaller acerage forest landowner, ones who mostly need advice, at a loss. I have personally seen some forestry "disasters" in lack of forestry knowledge. I personally have been unable to obtain fish management advice and have given up the thought of implementing a fish habitat improvement project. (Oconto County). Has anyone at the state DNR level ever polled landowners with 10 or more acres to determine: a) Do they know forestry advice is available, b) Whether they have asked and received help, c) If they feel professional help would help them manage their forests d) If they believe contacting DNR obligates them to manditory practices. Land fragmentation make these important issues!

Comment #: 309
I believe issue "A6" is an important and perhaps under rated issue. (Using sound forestry data/knowledge in decision making). We've listed to many people speak strongly with their opinions of our forestry/environmental policies. These same persons have no education or hands-on experience with forestry matters. Yet their opinions are solid formed by media coverage/opinion that doesn't directly apply to Wisdconsin forests. Clear cutting for oak regeneration or even-age management is one exampole of practice the public has little understanding for. Our trained foresters and bioligists need to play a larger role in forestry decision making. (Not general public opinion). I am also very concerned about forest fragmenetaion and urban sprawl. I would like to see these trends slowed. I believe motorized vehicle use on public lands should be more limited. Public hunting access on forestry lands should be increased and protected.

Comment #: 310
Forestry practices in or near riparian zones seems to me to be a stand alone issue that is not covered. Management goals for riparian zones need to be carefully constructed after goals are identified and a good deal of effort needs to be devoted to effective partnerships. Forestry practicies have great potential for positive and negative results in riparian areas.

Comment #: 311
Whatever the final plan contains, it is very important with all due consideration of private ownership. That private woodland owners be valued and credited for sustaining much of the forest resources throughout Wisconsin. Government cannot and should not plan to own "everything". With well designed and delivered information/education programs and forest mgt techincal assistance services. Private owners can and will be the key to meeting the goals of a statewide plan. One other important issue relating to private forest or woodland ownership is that of the programs and incentives available to enable the landowner to sustain that forested acreage. No doubt the plan would address programs like the MFL, however, they need to be emphasized - especially for the benefit of our legislators.

Comment #: 312
Hope you will include the issue of restoration - for boreal forests, mixed pine/fir/hardwood forests etc (ie restoration to pre-settlement forest types) General Comments: 1. Wish this wasan't sent during a busy Christmas and New Year holiday - it requires time and thought. 2. The issues stated give both the general public, and in particular the urban public very short shigt(?). Why alienate people unnecessarily? 3. Are these issues about all WI forested lands? What influence or what kind of decisions will affect the private landowners or any non-public state lands in project plans?

Comment #: 313
I think owners of forest land should be compensated more for using their land for transmission lines. I have a tree farm of 80 acres and a four lane highway and a power transmition line both go through it. It takes up twenty plus acres that I can't use for forestry practices. The price they pay is not enough for the damage they do to your land.

Comment #: 314
C11 - Preserve trails for silent sports' enthusiasts.

Comment #: 315
A1, A5, B8 A lot of questions are referencing biodiversity and structure and function of ecosystems. But increasing utilization, in particular chipping, can be detrimental to biodiversity and structure and function. Whole tree chipping greatly affects nutrient recycling, soil fertility, coarse woody debris, mycarrhizae(?), wildlife habitat, humus layer, seed source, soil distrubance and many more that research may have yet to discover. Not to mention accountability problems with billing because of mixed species and different weights per species. Some of the questions contradict themselves, esp the above mentioned three, and wondering how they will be addressed.

Comment #: 316
The growth of a tree is a long term process, the span of which may be multi gene rational and involve several owners. Because of this and the increased urbanization, it makes sense that some sort of responsibilties be required of forest owenrs. This should be a uniform statewide mandated program to ensure protection of our valuable resource. Much has been made of private landowner rights but as much attention should be made to the responsibilities of forest ownership. Simply stated, if you want to own a forest, you should be required to care for it for successive generations. This would be accomplished with a statewide umbrella policy.

Comment #: 317
I would like to emphasize the importance of education opportunities for private forest owners - the consultation from DNR foresters is important and should be maintained - perhaps promoted more and increased in staff. Many of the new woodland owners want to incorporate sound management techniques but in many cases knowledge is limited. Organizations such as WWOA provide important information - the state should maintain a strong partnership with them. I would also encourage the DNR to broaden the purchase of uniques and rare forest land to insure their protection into the future. I would be willing to participate in a broader discussion if a need exists.

Comment #: 318
1. I disagree that B8 is taking place. In Western Wisconsin, loggers only take the sawlog and leave thousands of oak tops in the woods. If there is truly a shortage of wood fiber in Wisconsin, why isn't more of the tree utilized. 2. Timber theft is a growing problem. Loggers should be licensed to do business in Wisonsin. Currently many commercial fisherman, clammers, and other transient professions advertise themselves as loggers every winter. Many landowners are robbed by these people in timber sales.

Comment #: 319
Just thoughts, you may have them covered. Impact of deer management on forest composition. Restoration of declining tree species pw, cedar, BY, Hemlock.

Comment #: 320
Under the Managed Forest crop law, I think more emphases should be put on allowing landonwer to manage for wildlife rather than solely timber/monetary return for himself and state/Township/county.

Comment #: 321
1.) Information on incentives for re-forestation. That is, converting additional marginal farmland into forests or upgraded existing forested land through various plantings and other practices. 2.) Limit development (new homes) in forested areas. Focus on planned development - cluster type and include lots of green space.

Comment #: 322
Nice Job - You covered a lot! We need to better understand the workings (A5) (A6) of the forest and then develop a plan that deals with the rapidly increasing demand on wooded parcels for recreational (A12) and residentual (A12) users. A model multiple use plan (B4) needs to be developed that will educate the public about the workings of the forest. Could you please send me another copy of this - I teach Natural Resources and could use it in my classes.

Comment #: 323
- Reforestation - Afforestation - Plantation Establishment (Aestetics) - Riparian Forests - State and Federal Cost-Share Programs
Comment #: 324
A well done report and survey. It will also serve as a concise source of information for talks, reference, etc. The only issue that comes to mind to add I think could be significant and is not included here realtes to the whitetail deer factor in tree, especially oak, regeneration. I suspect that it has been considered and perhaps is not a big enough problem - yet. But I know, especially in some areas (southwest WI), it is an appreciable problem.

Comment #: 325
Along with foest land it should be considered that taxes are greatly increased for potential forestry. Even after complete destruction by storms taxes are increased because of the future values. I feel some may have 2nd thoughts about forestry with this expansion trend.

Comment #: 326
High deer populations make regeneration of Red Oak, white pine and even red pine a very hit and miss proposition. We need to sharply reduce the deer herd by region on a rotating basis.

Comment #: 327
more multiple use is essential - less concern about production and more on other uses and values. Need incentives for landowners to protect good forest mgmt. Production as well as recreation uses. Need incentives to halt urban sprawl (development). Tax relief similar to ag tax system is needed - tax as forest lands not ??? for development.

Comment #: 328
How do we get people to manage their land? How do we get them to ask foresters rather than just sell to cutter. I gained 50% in $ by using a forester.

Comment #: 329
This forest plan is like opening Pandora's box. This plan will cost the tax payer's millions of dollars. Over the years government has bought up thousands of acre's of land and then still at it today and I disagree! Everytime land is taken off the tax roll the adjoining landowner pays the tax. The WI Farm Bureau has all ways maintained government land should pay the same local taxes as private owners and I agree. It's time the free loaders start paying their way. I have owned at one time 280 acres of timber land and payed taxes on all of it with out any government program and when I sold 200 acre's, the buyer could not believe it was logged. As far as managing timber land, the best is to leave alon, it will grow by itself. When you start employing hundreds of people the timber don't grow as fast as employment eats it up.

Comment #: 330
HUNTING For many forest landowners, both absentee and otherwise, a very significant interaction they have with their neighbors involves the questions surrounding huting. I am referring to no mention of hunting in any of this survey. Generally is hunting beneficial or not in its interaction with other uses of the forest? What about persons who own forest land primarily for occasional hunting? DEER With one to two million deer living in Wisconsin forests, the sgnificance of this should be addressed. I found one brief mention in A-9, but I think deer are a major issue, whether as a danger to newly planted trees or natural oak regeneration, or as a resource which brings thousands of hunters to visit the forest. I don't understand why you think this survey will help you with your priorities. We think all the issues and trends you identified (and more) should be addressed. Why would you even think that some of these topics should be ignored? Even if this survey were to tell you that some of these topics are not of great interest to some survey recipients, would you then ignore those topics? Indeed research may indicate that some of the topics which least grab the public interest may in fact have a greater impact on the long range health and development of Wisconsin forests than identified public attention grabbers.

Comment #: 331
Every winter, snowmobilers completely disregard their legal trails and make their own, over the hiking trails (desprite orange "barriers") down private roads and especially Cty. Hwy. M from Hwy 51 to Boulder Jct. We live 2 1/2 miels from the nearest snowmo trail, but many times riders have come into our yard despit a sign that states "private road, no exit." The fumes, litter and destruction of plant life should not have to be tolerated. Wouldn't battery operated (electric) engines be nece. Also, this year we encourntered two hunters trespassing through a neighboring property which is posted. They had seen the signs, but were "taking a short cut". Apparently they have their own definition. (I realize my second paragraph doesn't really pertain to the Forestry Dept., just frustrated by so many who totally disregard rules) AK *Not Audrae and PA Kulas Nor Audrae and Paul

Comment #: 332
I am especially concerned about the current "no-cut" trend nationally. The Sierra Club, Wilderness Soc and others are will on the way to shutting down the USFS. And I believe this push, if successful, will be the transferred to all public forests. Somehow, the USFS has allowed things to deteriorate to the point that the impact studies needed for common operaton weigh 5# a pices and are expensive. I don't know what can be done, but these groups have even convinced our leaders and media about it (no-cut). Maybe a national program aba "Smoky Bear, would be of use if all agencies cooperate. It now would take a real effort. I think we should nail this one down before we work on surrounding details - or public forestry, as we know it, may go down the drain. Thanks for letting me answer your survey! I see no conflict between recreation forest users and intelligent considerate forest management practices, involving harvests. N. Highlands SF looks pretty good, but some campsites look overrun.

Comment #: 333
I would like to follow up on C3, the need for private forestry assistance. I am a farmer and own 130 acres of woodland. I am a member of the American Tree Farm System, Wisconsin Woodland Owners Association, and the American Forestry Associaton. I have worked with a DNR forester and a private forest consultant. I am able and willing to take a pruning saw or chainsaw to the woods to do TSI hwoever I need the assistance of a forester to "mark" trees. The DNR forester used to do this for me until the law was changed so he was for the most part unable to do this. The Farm Service Agency has sign up periods for SIP however funds are not available. The alternative is hiring a private forest consultant which of course costs money, sometimes lots of money. These costs turn a lot of landowners away from seeking assistance. Consultants are not perfect and sometimes make poor recommendations. A tour of my woodlot would give you an example. In other words if you want forest landowners to manage their woodlots provide them with some help with out making them pay huge amounts of money for that help or asking them to jump through hoops to get it.

Comment #: 334
Restoring and maintain the ecological integrit of our state forests is of primary importance. Without it we will not have sustainable forests to meet the myread uses. Ecological integrity (including native biodiversity, from genetic through ecosystem level, of all organisms; ecological functions; natural disturbance regimes; sizes and ages of forests based on the natural range of variation) must come first, before economic, social, or any other concerns. It is the foundation for a sustainable forest.

Comment #: 335
Attention Item E3 Page 16 - There should be much more emphasis put on the value of broad leafed trees as reagrd to the effect they have on cleansing the air. Encourage landowners to plan more of these species with good incentive advantages offered to those landowners who cooperate. Comment - Please introduce and promote a sort of pasture CRP program sort of like the Riparian Buffer program. There is a lot of marginal quality permanent pastureland that could be eliminated from grazing and then planted to trees if landowners were given the proper incentives. Some farmers run beef cattle on land that should not be grazed (steep, or gullied, or wooded, etc.) just because the land isn't good for anything else. Compensate them enough so they don't have to aubse it (causing erosion). Cost sharing on tree planting and tree maintenance (spraying, clipping of weeds, hand-work) to promote new planting survival is very necessary. Thank you.

Comment #: 336
I. Logging roads are becoming larger and more distructive on public land. This results in fragmentation. Natural contours and soil erosion should be given greater emphisis. II. Fire should be use to regenerate Oak, Jack Pine forests in Northern Wis. III. Private landowners should be given more assistance in harvest of timbers and forest regeneration. IV. Old growth segments of imature forests should be allowed to mature in all public land areas. These should be limited in size so as to not not severly impact forest utilization.

Comment #: 337
Obviously many of your trends and issues overlap. The challenge is to focus on a limited number and I believe a pursit of public policy alternatives at the local and state levels must be sought after. Educated guidelines, reflecting social and economic values must be equated and balanced against the longterm forest and ecological values. Is money and consumption of natural lands and forests (waters) the direction we wish to go in the 21st century? A trend is a direction a culture moves toward - you can't change it, but you may be able to bend it a little either way - for the good or the bad! The trend movement of urban peoples into rural and forest areas, seeking new life styles and values, will surely continue and even accelerate! A prosperous society must spend its money! The state needs a longterm comprehensive forest plan and also plans in other development areas to provide atleast a guide to the direction our Wisconsin culture wants to proceed!

Comment #: 338
Property tax reduction programs - all programs whould be open to public hunting. This would decrease fragmentation decrease absentee owners The issue of use value assesment and pastured woodlands must be addressed. What affects have CRP had on the increase in forest land - would cutting the program have an affect on land coming back out of forestry? * The plan should outline education programs that could reverse negative trends.

Comment #: 339
Need more coordination with other state agencies such fish and wildlife, navigable water way issues, etc. Lumber companies created dams in rivers to handle movement of logs during the 1920's and earlier. Some of these "dams" are causing oxbows to cut into forested shore line areas. If you attempt to protect your forested shoreline and "plug up" the oxbow you are told you are interfering with navigable water - yet the depth of the river has become so shallow that a row boat cannot navigate it during August, the river cutting into forested areas has caused many trees to fall into the river (south fork of the Flambeau). There is no one person a landowner can contact for assistance when dealing with a problem that overlaps into several state agencies.

Comment #: 340
You have not touched on property tax breaks for maintaining large tracts of forest land. The forest crop and managed forest law are not a solution for everybody. The tradeoff of lower taxes for unlimited access is not for me. We open our trails to hiking, biking, skiing, snowshoeing and we enjoy the people that use them. I am a hunter myself but I need to control who is on the property hunting because of safety reasons. Farmers under Farm Preservation do not have restrictions so why must tree farmers have restrictions. You have stated in your survey why forest land is so valuable to people and nothing is being done to preserve it. All the studies and surveys really don't do much to help us that are dedicated to stewardship and proper management.

Comment #: 341
Recreation is not a gift of society. It has to be paid and preserved. Society has to learn to pay for its desires. IE Belong to a church you like Use fee paid for all public and private lands Private owner gets prop tax/+/or income tax benefits. We should have a separate Dept of Forestry and not be part of DNR! Being a tree and crop farmer, spend 2-4 weeks annually controling invasive species, maintaining soil and trying to culture the freeloaders in our society!

Comment #: 342
Deer damage and it's effect on our forest resources, particularly vescular plants. We must manage the deer herd to goal levels! Gaurantee each landowner of a doe permit; each year until the area is at or below goal levels. Property rights, the right to manage my forest. Do we need a right to harvest law? The plan for the state should include support for the right to harvest. I keep reading about all the laws that are being passed to limit forest management activities (by the environmentalists) in other states. We can'nt let them take hold in Wisconsin. Landowner education is the key to keeping and properly managing our non industrial forest acreage. I believe the DNR can and should do more in terms of educating these landowners. If they were exposed to the types of professionals I have dealt with in my area, they would welcome proper management. In other words, I have have very positive experiences with the DNR forestry dept. in my area. However, it's the absentee urban landowenr who bought land for recreation and only gets out there for hunting, etc that could use much more interaction with the DNR and or other forestry professionals, private consulting etc. These people need to be reched! Increase the number of and advertising for seminars, information mailings, etc. Let every absentee landowner get in the mail notification of the next forestry related class at the local tech school, seminar, etc. If you can get these people to these sessions and classes it will go along way towards gauranteeing the future of Wisconsins forests.

Comment #: 343
Fragmentation of lands for building sites, or interfaceing long driveways, big lawns, cats and dogs roaming lands killing and chasing wildlife. Urban sprawl, the firve acre building sites. The canopy of trees is important for cooling and retension of water for the springs and creeks. Please help stop the KILLING of the land (forestland, prairies, waterways & agricultural land) they don't make any more of it. We have to contend with growth, so can we grow and not sprawl. Can we grow in a more comprehensible way, more land-sensitive, the future of our forest is finding that way.

Comment #: 344
As I read through these staements of need and purpose I notice the following: Assumptions are made without what I would consider sound information. Ex. Lack of roads promotes good forest management - not so. Forest management people should be able to prioritize or help sort and apply reliable data in order to prioritize. I don't see much effort here. Promoting and educating the public on good urban forestry practices can fill the need for more "green" as much as anything I know.

Comment #: 345
I think the continuing increase in deer population for at least the past 20 years is not good for the longterm welfare of Wisconsin Forests. I am somewhat incouraged by the recent trend to harvest more does and increase in number of the deer that may be taken by each licensed hunter. Also, I am of the opinion that more and more woodland is being protected from pasturing by livestock and I like that.

Comment #: 346
Checker boarding of forest and how that effects bird habitat and nesting success.

Comment #: 347
The statewide forestry plan should address public land and programs that could assist landowners if they choose to participate. No program or dicum for provate land use should be forced on the private landowner. Similarly, the public forested land should be managed for all purposes and uses. The environmentalists should only be represented to the extent of their majority - not because they are more vocal than others. The state forestry plan should address the concerns of hunters, fisherman, snowmobilers and users of ATVs to the maximum extent possible. Closing up our forests is not an option that should be addressed in this plan.

Comment #: 348
Any management of privately owned forest land should not be forced or mandatory but supportive. I have foresters help me manage my property but should not be forced to do so. Education and infomration should be utilized to accomplish forest management.

Comment #: 349
Most of the statements are too long winded and you lose the main point of the paragraph.

Comment #: 350
Nothing has been said about predatory loggers or timber buyers. Landowners either have irrational fear or blind faith. How about incentives to use a forester in timber sales? Economics promote "high grading" and large harvests. With smaller and smaller holdings the pressure is towards non sustainable management. I'm a CPA and even I can't understant the tax laws regarding timber management.

Comment #: 351
Forests are a renewable resource and all issues need to relate to that fact. Accordingly, my comments are as follows: A1/A3 - Forest succession - need to upgrade management practices for regeneration of aspen-birch, which will recreate meaninful wildlife habitat. A5 - Need to develop management practices for forest succession species that create wildlife habitats and merchantable timber. A7/A8 - Need to increase knowledge regarding relationship of regeneration and sustainable forestry practices to protection and revival of endangered and threatened plant and wildlife species. A12 - Need to promote forestry practices which alternate 40 acre blocks of aspen of various age from cutover to mature trees for wildlife habitat (e.g. Professor Gilliam in Minnesota developed such a plan for ruffed grouse and other species). B4 - Forests should be managed for their primary purpose, production of merchantable timber and continuous reercation of wildlife habitat. Old forests and wilderness ares should be very minimal because they don't provide merchantable timber or wildlife habitat. Roadways and trails should be maintained throughout the forest for non-vehicular public use and forest management.

Comment #: 352
Suggestive questions should ? positive responses i/w ? by your questions. I'll ? but it is not my ideas - strictly yours - ? but what are suggestions ? improve ? - i.e. ? for improvements - "?"

Comment #: 353
1- Profit or loss effects many small forest owners ability to manage their forested acres. 2- Too many urban people dectate or try to dictate on what is done in Private Forests. 3- Too few people have any realistic knowledge of what is necessary to manage a forest properly for all (plant animal/wildlife). They have never worked or sweat or spent time in the real world. 4- Passing forested land that may have been in a family for many years, from one generation to the next can be very difficult due to complications of our conferatory(?) tax laws due to the death of an owner or owners many forested parcils must be sold or broken into smaller parcels just to pay the taxes (estate). More must be done to educate the public as to what good forestry practices are.

Comment #: 354
Please note - I checked every issue with "strongly agree" it should be considered. Forests, forestry, economics, world use of forests/wood, are all interrelated and very complex

Comment #: 355
Overall whitetail effect on forest regeneration - Forestry needs to continue to keep this on their adgenda. This affects regeneration in a number of species throughout the state. While I noticed mention of hemlock in this publication there are many other species of concern. Species that I consider to be of most concern are hemlock, cedar, and red oak.

Comment #: 356
Add results of SFI progress available from SFI State Implementation Comm..

Comment #: 357
In my opinion, many of trends and issues described in this survey would not be changed much, if at all, by a statewide forest plan. Therefore, I suggest that an initial plan be develped for allocation of resources and time to concentrate on those trends and issues which can be impacted favorably the most, and limit expenditure of resources on those trends/issues that can not be changed. Also, I think the plan should be "positive oriented" to encourage stake-owners to be motivated towards favorable changes of the issues, rather than "negtive oriented" where the inclination install more rules, regulations, and laws to restrict and control the people involved. For instance, providing cost-sharing funds to control exotic, alien species multi-floral rose, autumn olive, etc is better than passing a law that says a landowner must control these "undeisrables" at his cost. A BIG TREND/ISSUE. . . .not discussed and a serious problem and the main reason for no aok regeneration is the OVER POPULATION of DEER!

Comment #: 358
More use of genetically superior trees for timber production from the state nureseries. Also production needs to be increased with more CRP acres being signed up also Riparian Buffer and the new CREP program.

Comment #: 359
It would reassure me if there were strict laws and guidelines at per harvesting trees to insure re-growth and nourishment for forest soil. It is my understanding that in other countries (France) the cutter must have a permit; must plant 3 trees for each 1 taken; must reduce unwanted branches to compostable size. The American attitude of taking the tenderloin and leaving the carcass is irresponsible greed. Seems though that government bureaucrats are uninspired and cowardly in voicing such a simple forthright position.

Comment #: 360
I believe the Duluth to Weston powerline should be prohibited. It will be very detrimental to the environment. This type of power should be replaced by environmental friendly power such as natural gas fired power plants built in the areas of power need. To save our trees, prevent acid ran and all the other environmental issues that coal fired plant cause.

Comment #: 361
A3 - The interduction of foreign pathogens is serious. A12 - Very hot issue along the Twin-Cities (Western WI border) The new bridge @ Stillwater will affect us! Ther farmer's usually have no choice but to sell out due to low prices. And, some (most) people have "no" land ethic. B2 - To eliminate death/estate tax - LOWER WI STATE REAL ESTATE TAX and make it so a landowner can make a profit or worthwhile to manage.

Comment #: 362
Because forest tree development is slow - so many people I talk with feel anything they do with their forested land will never benefit them. More education/marketing and communication about any and all forestry work must be a priority. Rural land management must become socially open practice. It is hard to find help now and very limited of help is offered. No follow up or encouragement in the early years of mangement turn a lot of people off.

Comment #: 363
We do not own any Forestry property Lake Wausau Granite Co. is no longer in business as of 4/1/97 - property was sold to: Anderson Bros & Johnson Co., Wausau, WI Please change your records.

Comment #: 364
We need more ATV trails in this state. The non-industrial private forest forest land owners need more help from the DNR and the state of Wisc. with grants of money to build ponds and other forest activities, like trees older than 1 year for tree planting from the DNR.

Comment #: 365
More of an effort needs to be made to strengthen and promote more state-private linkages for private forest land management using information and education resources. DNR was fine publications re forst management but I don't think most preople are aware of their availability or inclined to use the information. Public interest needs stimulation. Pick the targets and get the PR working.

Comment #: 366
The general public is less educated about forests than 25 years ago. Forest education is a high priority need in schools and media.

Comment #: 367
I think your survey has covered these issues very well. I have nothing to add or subtract except for what will our future hold for us from the wide use of herbicides that are changing the ecosystem. I have seen in my lifetime the oak trees not regenerating in my area (Northern Pierce County) in past years when the winters were colder, namely the 30's and 40's and possible 50's. But as we have developed milder winters in recent eyars and I see a lot of new growth (under the crown in the forests) of oak trees. Like you say Maplie is still predominate in regrowth along with basswood. As far as clear cutting and selective cutting, they both have their place, depending on wht is involved. My biggest concern is the wide use of insecticides and herbicides. It is killing off many insects, etc angle worms are completely gone in some fields that are sprayed with herbicide every year once or more. Wild fruit for the last three to four years is almost none existant. The bees and insects that pollinate the blossome (which still come every year) are not here to do their job. I would like to see more hardwoods trees planted than generally just red pine. I know the hardwoods trees take a lot more tender loving care until they get a few yars growth on them. You just can not stick them in the ground and forget about them.

Comment #: 368
Social: Forest closure to vehicular traffic of any type has nothing to do with our constitution or bill of rights. It is about preserving our forests and wilderness areas for generations to come. This and other social issues and trends must be resolved in favor of our forests and wilderness areas. However, this does not mean that these areas may not have silvicultural practices applied to make these productive forests. Logging is minimal invasion, when properly practiced leaves no scars.

Comment #: 369
When the "use value assessment of farmland law" was initially discussed in the Wisconsin legislature did the Division of Forestry issue a position statement on it? OR, did the Bureau assume that anyone who doesn't like the end result of the new way to assess physical resources, can simply put their woodlands under the MFL? Today in SW Wisconsin if you have woodland that is heavily grazed, it will be classified as pasture and, as such, the local assessor will put a value on it of $150.00 per acre. If however, the assessor considers the same area as woodland, then the assessment is 650.00/acre (incidentally, that figure is also the same value given to the top category of cropland). The end result is that woodland taxation has doubled or tripled in most countries of SW . For the past 50 years foresters in southern WI have encouraged landowners to remove the cows from the woods and NOT "high grade" the resource. The effect of "full use value assessment" will be to reverse many decades of progress in the wise use of our woodlands and revert back to complete exploration and diminishing of the resource. I would like to see the Division of Forestry tak an aggressive position on this important issue and formally address it in the statewide forest plan for Wisconsin.

Comment #: 370
More tax releif for people that practic good forest management. Carbon dioxide is remove more from younger healthy trees then from OLD (nursing home) trees.

Comment #: 371
The roles that various government agencies play in the management of Wisconsin's forests should be explored. Federal State County For example: Environmentally destructive forest management practices that the federal and state forest management agencies have abandoned are still being used by country forestry departments. An example is broadcast spraying of herbicides to kill deciduous trees to release planted pines. YET county forest management is heavily subsidized by the state (management "loans", state forsters, etc.). Should state funding be used to fund environmental destructive practices that the state itself has abandoned? Federal forest management is more enlightened that the state which is more enlightened than the counties.

Comment #: 372
I am assessor for Town of Frambeau in Price Co. A large track of land approx 160 A sold for 425,000 and was going to be developed another fellow purchased it so it would not be developed and paid 510,800 now feel's he should not beassessed at full value he is aware of the MFL but because of the limit he can't protect from hunting is reluctant to get on the program I hear of this quite often. This should be reviewed as taxes are one of the main reason's for the dividing of the forest land's it now costs's an owner about 20 to 25 dollars an acre to own forest lands.

Comment #: 373
Education programs reaching all citizens to explain the need and urgency of land and forest management programs.

Comment #: 374
Convincing increasing numbers of absentee landowners on proper compromise of management techniques so as to manage for wildlife as well as forest production. Many are willing to provide labor as well as resources if properly directed i.e. - a joint forest - game management plan.

Comment #: 375
Know - Think I've been confused by many of these issues. Realize they describe problems but feel the state is politically pressured to move in certain directions that may not be beneficial to the general state population. And tend to tilt toward rewards for certain private groups. For example, nursery owners - no more state trees for tree farmers? Buy from a nursery? At prohibitive costs?

Comment #: 376
*I did not see any direct or specific mention of the need for forestry education as it relates to the issues mentioned. I think that forestry education plays a major role in resolving forest issues. People need to be educated before they will take appropriate behaviors. - I would like to see some specific mention be made regarding Wisconsin school forests. The research shows that they are not be properly managed as well as their under utilization by school districts.

Comment #: 377
*Additional state funding should be made available for: Professional staffing for assistance to landowners in forestry management. Timber harvest and sales, all phases of forestry development, trails, etc. *Impact of wildlife on forest management (deer, for example), turkeys, grouse, etc. *Growing or pending conflicts between landowners and public regarding ATV's, snowmobiles, tresspass, access, etc. including safety, liability issues. *Guidelines for landowners on easement issues regarding snowmobile club trails, ATV trails, hiking and camping, other recreation by the public. *Growing or impending issues regarding condemnation of lands by municipalities for public parks, ball fields, schools, industrialization. Urban growth and habitat destruction.

Comment #: 378
I found the survey ambiguous and the lack of proofreading of the response selections very damaging to your results. I'm not sure the survey can be considered valid. The red sheet will not even be discovered by some of your respondents because it's not attached to the survey itself and falls to the bottom of the envelope. I discovered mine by accident when I was preparing to use the envelope for something else. Concerning the issues; when I say I "strongly agree" I intend that to mean that this is a significant issue that must be addressed, but you have no clue of my position on the issue. You should be looking for that. I have strong feelings, for example, on sacrificing recreation if need be fore the sake of preservation, but my response choices do not provide an opportunity to show that. Yes, I know, you have room for comments, but good surveys incorporate opinions into response choices for usable, valid results. I appreciate and support your efforts, however! I'm a retired teacher. I own 200 acres, some managed forest, some CRP, some prairie for Karner Blue butterflies, some wetland preserve, some tamarack/cedar swamp. Let me know if I can be of any use/help. Obviously, these issues are VERY important to me! KDP

Comment #: 379
Mention historic, history a lot yet never once refered to white/red pine. Deer and oak regeneration. Turkeys and oak regen. They sure scratch it up a lot! Results in more maple, especially soft (red). The predomince of Red Maple in our future forests.

Comment #: 380
The top issue for me is deer control and the population should be less then a quarter of its current level. My forest is abut 400 acres southeast of Rhinelander. I have no regeneration of white cedar or eastern hemlock. I have never seen a yew or mountain ash in a northern Wisconsin forest. I hear "diversity" - OK - to get diversity the deer population has to be drastically reduced. But this will not be accomplished by the DNR which needs the funds from deer hunting. When a DNR person preaches to me - I thik of this. He or she wouldn't have a job without deer hunting - they're not going to risk their job by advocating drastic reduction of the deer herd. Even Aldo Leopold couldn't get it done. The problem's still here - isn't it?

Comment #: 381
Promote the use of tree crops such as hybrid poplar on maginal farm land now planted to row crops such as corn and soybeans.

Comment #: 382
Abolish clubs like the Seirra Club do not allow these rich hipocritts to turn ou country to a communist type enviroment. Find better ways to spend our tax dollars than throwing it away at a state wide plan.

Comment #: 383
Taxes -
With our current "Use" tax, a landowner can pasture cattle in woodlands and call it pasture, in order to pay a lower tax. The cattle have a negative impact on the woodlands by causing erosion, compaction, the introduction of noxious weed seeds through supplimental feeds, fencing, etc...
If a landowner acts as a good steward and removes the cattle and fences, eradicates the noxious weeds and repairs the erosion, they are taxed at a higher rate.
What is wrong with this picture?

Comment #: 384
Forest biodiversity in part depends on the soils and the many organisms that dwell there. Not very glamorous, but critical. This should be mentioned even though the gaps in our knowledge about these organisms is probably the greatest.
The following top ten are not in order of importance. Some of them are interrelated (see #10 with e1/e3 below). Many of the topics are interrelated and judging one more important than the other is more a shade of gray rather than black/white.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.

Comment #: 385
Wisconsinites have a need to be educated about their forests, forest products, and impacts that their uses have on forests and wildlife. Not just schoolkids, but also adults.

Comment #: 386
I think that more resources need to be focused on prevention and eradication of forest diseases, oak wilt, white pine blister rust, certain beetles, etc. Also invading species, such as autumn olive and wild rose need to be controlled before they take over our open areas.

Comment #: 387
I. The small (40 acres or less) private, non-industrial forest landowner is not receiving adequate forest management advice, either because the acreage is too small, or because the condition (stocking density) or species/product composition is of low market value. II. There is a dearth of honest, qualified logging contractors, able and necessary to implement forest management prescriptions.

Comment #: 388
*Taxation of forest land and its relation to other property taxes, especially if 'use value' taxation for ag land continues. The potential for many farmers to turn cattle into the woods in order to claim 'use value' rates for 'forest land' could undo decades of stewardship. How does MFL fit into this? *State forest nurseries and their continued value for regenerating certain kinds of land. Pressure to 'privatize' nursery production by closing one or more state nurseries could dramatically reduce forest regeneration activities, esp. on county and industry lands. What's the plan for the nurseries and related programs? *Current efforts to 'educate' NIPF owners reach less than 25% of private owners. New arrangements with private sector organizations as well as local governments are needed so that new landowners receive timely information about MFL, etc. *?-ownership coordination among NIPF owners is needed as parcels become more fragmented and neighbors are disconnected - landscape scale management might only be possible on large tracts of public land - *The mill (or mil) tax - how stable is this funding source? How can Forestry keep other 'raiding' to a minimum? Will the mill tax become a general DNR 'cookie jar'? *More investment in research needed (e.g. alternative silvicultural practices), not just more PR on 'old growth' -

Comment #: 389
See comments to individual topics. Thank you for the opportunity to comment! - Tom

Comment #: 390
I found myself wanting to discuss the trend/issue (and answer accordingly), so my answers probably don't give you the measure you want. - Sorry How about the damage deer browsing does to tree regeneration?

Comment #: 391
Identification and agreement and disagreement with issues does not indicate support or non-support on one side or the other. That's why I had to comment on each question, which makes it take way too long for me to fill out this survey. The DNR keeps sending me these kinds of agree-disagree issues surveys, and they are a trend I wish the DNR would do away with. Whatever you do with the results of this, please do not say respondents felt this way or that way about a particular issue, unless you are referring only to comments. Please do not use the statewide forest plan to squelch efforts to plan and manage each state forests in ways that recognize each forest's unique attributes and circumstances.

Comment #: 392
As a landowner, the trend I see with the D.N.R. is that it is too intrusive. There is already too many D.N.R. Agents Dictating absolute control over private Lands. Yes, with more people on Public lands and Forests there is a need for more public Land management. It is my experience with my own private Land that I can say my land is managed better than most Public land. The D.N.R. should and does use education to help the private sector manage their land. Unfortunately, I have seen all to often where the Wis. D.N.R. is the absolute Dictator on Private Land. When I read through this survey I became very worried about the doors some Bureaucrats want to open to get complete control over my property.

Comment #: 393
Forgive me for being somewhat uncertain as to how you arrived a the format for your questions - I see these trends as being statements of quantifiable fact. In that light I agree with all of them. Should you suggest that we introduce legislation to socially engineer alternatives I may disagree. Overall, I found the format awkward. Free market incentives could alter some of the trends and I'll list a few that come to mind below. 1. Follow Canada's lead in allowing cultivation of industrial hemp. The supply of high, consistent, quality fiber thereby produced would take some pressure off our woodlands to be managed so intensively and perhaps allow for more old growth etc. 2. Several Western States have programs in place providing private landowners with long term leases allowing for public hunting on their properties. Done responsibly this probably is more effective than 100,000's of T-Zone tags for controlling the deer herd. 3. Take a hard look at our states law of "eminent domanin". I've spent the last 20 years of my life building a viable maple syrup producing operation. Wisconsin Public Service is now on the verge of pre-empting it with a 345 KW transmission line from Duluth - West on - For myself and thousands of other Northern Wisconsin landowners this is corporate nazism, ordained by a 4-term governor.

Comment #: 394
I am a tree FARM. I manage my land and trees for the future, yet I am not taxed as a FARM. As the tax rate increases I have more of a reason to sell off small oparts of my land for development thus causing forest fragmentation. I see farmers in the area getting much lower tax rates and then selling their land for development at about the same price I could what's the diffence between them and myself.

Comment #: 395
Just to comment on the issue or trend concerning C2 and C3. I see a tremendous increase of small parcel land-forest ownership. Much of this urban sprawl land is not carefully managed, but could be. Presently with only 16% of private Wisconsin forest enrolled in the Managed Forest Law, there is great potential to ease urban sprawl, create public access, reduce fragmentation, manage for sustained yield and Green Certification and much more; if these lands were to be a part of the MFL. It appears that DNR Forestry does not actively pursue landowners to enroll in the MFL, as their workload is such that they cannot adequately process what normally is entered each year. DNR foresters do give time to the MFL entries, but other non-MFL landowners receive a very small amount of help with forest management. Get forestry out in the field working with people on the land. Change job descriptions so trained foresters can provide management help. Let technicians fight fires. Wisconsin forest management also needs an infusion of professional help (Foresters) to deal with the upcoming issues and trends for the future.
WEB
Comment #: 396
With increasing land values, many of our local public forests (County) are being looked at for development. There seems to be an increasing number of County Board members, from Counties owning forests, who wish to see these lands back in private ownership. It is important for the role and benefits of these lands to be better explained.

Comment #: 397
Farmers, many of whom could benefit handsomely by sustainable management of forests, particularly southern hardwoods, need to be given much more attention to help them manage for long-term income and sustainability.

Comment #: 398
Rising property values, continuous re-assessments, and exploding property taxes will eventually force forest landowners in Northern Wisconsin to sell out to development interests. Private forest landowners, particularly those who put state approved and certified forest management plans in place, should receive a more liberal, expanded right to put their lands under the Forest Crop Laws or the Managed Forest Laws without the requirement that they open up their land to the public for public hunting and recreation.

Comment #: 399
1. More research is needed on the differences in values and beliefs of landowners and why some will undertake management and others will not. Also, what would influence their decision to change. Presumably, the interests of absentee landowners from urban environments will be different than their farmer predecessors. Oftentimes, farmers saw the woods as the savings account they could dip into to send a kid to college or pay the bills if milk or corn prices were too low. It is possible that the new landowners coming from an urban environment are motivated by different values and beliefs. Some purchase land for hunting or recreation. Others might have purchased for an investment. However, how to influence their future management decision needs to be researched. Most modern companies will not make a significant marketing decision without knowing what their customers need and want. DNR should do the same, rather than supposing they know the answer.
2. There are many long-term trends in forestry that need to be better understood. For instance, if forestry is changing, how does the change compare to a previous state? Might this state be less or more desirable? How is it measured? Are there new metrics that are needed? Are these changes expressed on a larger scale (landscape) or longer time fram than DNR is used to focusing on? Might the best measure be something other than a direct forest output like board feet or cords? Might these changes be used to gauge the rate and direction of past and future change? Some research in the SE part of the United States indicates that land use changes over 60 years ago continue to show influence on streams. And clearly, the lakes and streams of the state still show influence of glacial (or lack of glacial) activity over 14,000 years ago. What is ultimately being asked is the bounds of ecological resiliency and what are the outer limits of change? Mangagement attempts to maintain constancy or average conditions and to limit change to some steady state, but nature will try to undo that and to initiate change.
3. While fires have some value in management, laws and liability practically preclude private individuals from using it as a tool. The limitations of fire control laws need to be examined so private individuals can have some sense of their liability and potential legal problems if they decide to undertake fire management. As recent problems with government conducted controlled burns point out, no amount of preparedness and resources can prevent some problems from occuring. Private individuals do not have that kind of help available. Without some legal and liability relief, the ecological problems presented by a lack of fire will continue.

Comment #: 400
Preservation of rare forest species into designated wilderness areas on a state level.

Comment #: 401
What about Private Property Rights. I know of people who are not interested in managing their land in any way that may attract threatened or endandered species of wildlife for fear of the DNR or some federal agency taking virtual control of their land for the management of that species.
I know of land owners who think that they cannot "walk" on thier own propety because of a letter they received from the DNR stating that their was an endangered species nest on the neighbors property, and that the area around that nest needs to be protected.
This issue needs to be addressed.

Comment #: 402
I think urban sprawl is a big problem-especially at the "erosion" it has on different ecological areas.
I'd also like to see prairies and savanahs (sp?) treated with the same level of concern as forests. Any long-term plan for the state should include areas set aside for big prairie preserves.

Comment #: 403
Attenuation of pollutants
Pyschological importance of forests and green space
Energy savings in urban landscapes
Wildlife in urban landscapes
Sacred values
Education

Comment #: 404
there are many aspects that go into a plan of this magnitude, i have worked as an LTE for 5 summers now, in fisheries and have learned time and time again you cant please everyone. a balance to the best to our ability is the key.

Comment #: 405
I have a general comment.
I believe that private forest land should not be taxed if the owner follows a "preferred" plan that is part of a state plan. The land/owner should accrue credit towards TSI, regeneration, or other worthy goals for every year that the plan is followed. The credit could stay with the land and would enhance the value if sold. When forest 'owners' (stewards) are rewarded for the benefit they give society, they will work in unison and fight the fragmentation that is taking place.
This plan will need to be phased in.
I am unable to finish this at this time and will resume at another time.

Comment #: 406
Aspen should be maintained and increased if possible. It should be micromanaged in lots as small as 40 acres. Aspen should be clearcut at 10-20 year intervals in accordance with forest management for grouse and whitetail deer. Aspen at different stages of growth is very important to all wildlife. The importance of Aspen is not mentioned in the survey.

Comment #: 407
Goverment buying private land and excluding people from using the land.

Comment #: 408
I want to know why the DNR feels it necessary to even get the public's input on most of these issues. Most of them seem to be very important issues that need to be addressed in a plan. The fact that this page even needs to be in existance is quite amazing to me. The DNR needs to use some common sense before putting pages up on the internet.

Comment #: 409
The long term ecological and economic damage of a deer herd three times carrying capacity. In some areas even pine are not regenerating.

Comment #: 410
I think that one major issue is the development of power lines and roads that are currently being considered. Yes, they are
and important part of the state and to the people, but I feel that these issues will only help to increase the amount of
fragmentation of the forests and limit species diversity. There are many more to meet, but these two would only help to make things
worse in the future.

Comment #: 411
pesticide use
introductions/reintroductions like elk
water quality in relation to your BMP's

Comment #: 412
I believe that even when accepted practices of forestry managemnt are being observed, "buffer zones" should be left to protect our water, river, roads, wildlife, asthetics and other resources from the degrading effects of wind, runoff and other natural or man made occurances

Comment #: 413
I think one important trend
that needs to be considered is the environmental literacy of the gen public. The public is exposed to more environmental education now than in the past. There must be a sincere effort to make sure that appropriate forestry eduacation is part of the environmental education effort now being established in our schools etc..

Comment #: 414
I began my answers on a previous date but was unable to finish until today. The web page master should allow for that option in the future.
I would be interested in working to help resolve these issues. If there are further opportunities I would be interested to hear about them.

Comment #: 415
I think the survey was pretty complete. The real question is not if these issues should be addressed at the State level, but if they should be address at the national or international level. Keep in mind that the management is finally done tree by tree.

Comment #: 416
1. Tax credits or reductions for implementing sustainable foresty measures.
2. Spend more money on advertisements and available literature
addressed to the general public on the awareness of
sustainable Forestry.

Comment #: 417
I believe that the main problem that is leading to all of these other problems is simply the very rapid increase in popultation. Something must be done to manage the human population. That in turn will cause less people to pollute and strip the earth of its resources. We will always have problems if the world just keeps growing. Another roblem is the fact that us Americans are to greedy and want more and more. Being moderately secure is not enough. Being wealthy is what everyone wants and that helps lead to many of the problems. Money rules the world. That is and will always be the hardest thing to fight.

Comment #: 418
Not much was mentioned about wetland protection or native animal/fauna interacton.
An interesting example of that is the management of the deer herd for the sake of
hunting and the income generated therein and the impact of the herd on plant
communities, such as cedar swamps. Cedar swamps are a favorite deer yard in
northern areas and their impact on cedar seedlings have literally stopped regenerations
of cedar communites. The introduction of elk in the state, which I personally do
not have a problem with, does, however, warrent close examination for the possibility
of similar problems as the herd grows. I know from personal observation that the
elk herd in Michigan (from which ours came) has very heavy local impact on forest
communities, particularly on the forbe layers. There may well be more interactions
worth including that I'm not aware of, particularly in the southern part of Wisconsin.

Comment #: 419
Any Forest Plan needs to ensure that our state forests continue to produce wood for use by Wisconsin's Forest Products Industry. It is one of the few industrys in Northern Wisconsin (where most of the state's forest exist) that provides a decent wage. Otherwise, Northern Wisconsin will be nothing more than a play ground for those in the South.

Comment #: 420
I think you missed the following important forest related issues or trends:
The public's growing lack of trust in government's willingness or ability to solve problems given the undue influence of corporate interests and their excessive campaign contributions
The connection between healthy forests and healthy aquatic systems, such as watersheds, drinking water, fisheries, groundwater recharge, natural run-off or hydrologic patterns, etc.
The public trust doctrine, including that while people may own private forest lands they do not own the water running through it nor the wildlife living on it.
The need to address cultural uses, tribal sovereignty, and treaty rights in the ceded territories.
The reality that political fragmentation can be as serious as habitat fragmentation in terms of conflicting policies and actions within and among government agencies. The DNR is rife with such internal conflicts.
We must learn to manage at a larger, landscape scale and unprecedented levels of coordination, cooperation, and good faith collaboration will be necessary to accomplish that.

Comment #: 421
I think you missed the following important forest related issues or trends:
The public's growing lack of trust in government's willingness or ability to solve problems given the undue influence of corporate interests and their excessive campaign contributions
The connection between healthy forests and healthy aquatic systems, such as watersheds, drinking water, fisheries, groundwater recharge, natural run-off or hydrologic patterns, etc.
The public trust doctrine, including that while people may own private forest lands they do not own the water running through it nor the wildlife living on it.
The need to address cultural uses, tribal sovereignty, and treaty rights in the ceded territories.
The reality that political fragmentation can be as serious as habitat fragmentation in terms of conflicting policies and actions within and among government agencies. The DNR is rife with such internal conflicts.
We must learn to manage at a larger, landscape scale and unprecedented levels of coordination, cooperation, and good faith collaboration will be necessary to accomplish that.

Comment #: 422
One issue I may have missed. The condition of existing stands. A lot of public money goes towards Reforestation/Afforestation, and has for many years. Should a greater percentage go toward taking care of existing stands (tsi)?

Comment #: 423
I am a user of the state lands for recreation and am becomming increasingly concerned about the waste of good timber resources because of a lack of active management. A particular example is the Goose Lake Hunting area where very large Oak, Hickory and Cherry trees are going to waste because they are dying, tipping over and rotting. The large trees are dominating the woodlots and not allowing the smaller trees to grow. There is a significant dollar value of resources going to waste at the same time that there is increasing demand globally for oak, hickory and cherry woods. Properly management would provide the state with much appreciated revenue and would result in a much heathier forest. The state should be at the forefront of forest land management and use of its own timber resources before expecting private owners to "do the right things".

Comment #: 424
large tracts of land owned by lumber company and leased by hunt clubs.

Comment #: 425
Very extensive and inclusive. Glad I don't have to write the report! This will be an important tool for the citizens of Wisconsin and beyond. Best of luck.

Comment #: 426
In light of our recurrent energy predicament, impacts to our forests such as Arrowhead-Weston transmission line and the pressure to increase the use of wood for heating are worrisome.
Where are we in regards to acid rain affects on our forests?
T impact of land trust and conservation groups on forests.
[similar items are grouped below and there was no ranking from high to low import]

Comment #: 427
DNR's credibility in being able to rise above political pressure by special corporate interests must be faced.
DNR must give greater respect to and address cultural uses of forests, and the rights of Native Americans including in northern Wisconsin's ceded territories.
DNR must do a better job of explaining the nexus between good forestry and healthy watersheds and clean water systems. The DNR must likewise concede that bad forest practices cause polluted water supplies, damaged aquatic ecosystems, and degraded public trust resources. In many ways, this new statewide forest plan will be a de facto statewide water quality plan.
DNR must help people understand the legal balance between private and public rights. The trees on private land belong to the owner, but the water flowing over and under that land, and the fish and wildlife living there, belong to the public. So what an owner does with his or her trees can affect, positively or negatively, the public's resources. Many issues boil down to this fundamental point, but it often gets overlooked.

Comment #: 428
1. Consider not only the trees but the lakes, streams, swamps, critters and all vegitation. Protect our pristeen lakes, etc, as well as the marketable portion of the woods.
2. You fail to address one of the greatest threats to logging: Many tobacco companies, looking for a substitute for the dying tobacco market, will grow industrial hemp for the paper industry. Hemp makes good paper, cheap and fast to grow and harvest. Several paper plants have now converted to hemp. Watch this as it takes over the pulp market and changes our northern economy!
3. Economic goals and develoment, as important as they are must never diminish the natural beauty of our forests and lakes.
4. We need to limit human impact, especially the devistation caused by ATVs. We need a plan to give ATVs and future rec vehicles a space without disturbing the forests.

Comment #: 429
STOP THE RIDICULOUS PRACTICE OF ALLOWING ATVs TO GO WHERE EVER THEY WANT IN THE FORESTS. THESE MACHINES SHOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED ON PRIVATE LAND AND IN ATV PARKS, EXCEPT MAYBE FOR SOME LIMITED USE BY LOGGERS AND HUNTERS. THEY SHOULD NOT BE USED AS RECREATIONAL JOY RIDING, HOT RODDING MACHINES ON PUBLIC LAND BECAUSE THAT DIMINISHES THE EXPERIENCE FOR OTHERS.
1. Consider not only the trees but the lakes, streams, swamps, critters and all vegitation. Protect our pristeen lakes, etc, as well as the marketable portion of the woods.
2. You fail to address one of the greatest threats to logging: Many tobacco companies, looking for a substitute for the dying tobacco market, will grow industrial hemp for the paper industry. Hemp makes good paper, cheap and fast to grow and harvest. Several paper plants have now converted to hemp. Watch this as it takes over the pulp market and changes our northern economy!
3. Economic goals and develoment, as important as they are must never diminish the natural beauty of our forests and lakes.

Comment #: 430
Increase private/public landtrusts/DNR ownership of forest lands in WI.

Comment #: 431
My family actively participates in a variety of outdoor activities, including camping, canoeing, biking, cross county skiing, snowshoeing,hunting and fishing. My brother in law is a trapper. We purchase state park stickers, hunting & fishing licenses and trail passes. We have visited many state parks in our quest to have our State Park passbook stamped. We are strong supporters of the Wisconsins state parks and forest.
One issue that your survey did not mention however is the impact the current state park camping reservation system may have on forest fragmentation. State park and forest campgrounds are approaching 100% reservable with fewer and fewer sites being non reservable. As my family and friends have become more frustrated by the necessity to make campground reservations eleven months in advance we are seriously considering purchasing recreational land. The impact on our forest of the DNR's own policies should also be studied and included in this state forestry plan.

Comment #: 432
y family actively participates in a variety of outdoor activities, including camping, canoeing, biking, cross county skiing, snowshoeing,hunting and fishing. My brother in law is a trapper. We purchase state park stickers, hunting & fishing licenses and trail passes. We have visited many state parks in our quest to have our State Park passbook stamped. We are strong supporters of the Wisconsins state parks and forest.
One issue that your survey did not mention however is the impact the current state park camping reservation system may have on forest fragmentation. State park and forest campgrounds are approaching 100% reservable with fewer and fewer sites being non reservable. As my family and friends have become more frustrated by the necessity to make campground reservations eleven months in advance we are seriously considering purchasing recreational land. The impact on our forest of the DNR's own policies should also be studied and included in this state forestry plan.

Comment #: 433
Partnering with other state or federal government agencies that might help educate and redirect the efforts of saw mill, or other forest dependant industries, into new areas of employment if the focus of our southern forests shifts to pulp instead of saw logs.

Comment #: 434
The poor design of this survey is bespoken by the impossibility
for me (or any thinking person) to DISAGREE with ANY of the
items.
All the issues are important, but the wording of the paragraphs
could stand to be less labored and jargon-heavy.

Comment #: 435
The deer population in urban areas is not being addressed. They are distroying our yards and are a road hazard. Their are no provision to control there herd size. The population is already out of control and growing.
I am apposed to government control, but realalize some is necessary. Citizens should be making the decissions not government.
All federal forest should be turned over to the state. Local people know best.

Comment #: 436
I agree that we need to keep expanding our forest lands to keep up with the recreational needs of a growing population. We also need to increase the the amount of out door recreation areas, Camping areas, motorized & non-motorized multi use trails, etc. in these forest lands and increase conservation control to keep up with the increasing needs of the tax paying American people.

Comment #: 437
snowmobile trail widths need to be increased which will increase safety. the forests need to stay open to snowmobilers.

Last Revised: Monday July 30 2007

Additional Trends/Isuues Comments

These comments are taken directly from the survey. These comments do not reflect the opinion of the DNR.

These comments are taken directly from the survey.
These comments do not reflect the opinion of the DNR.