Division of Forestry Strategic Direction
Statewide Forest Strategy 2010
Statewide Forest Assessment 2010
Forest Sustainability Framework
Statewide Forest Plan 2004
B7. Trend: Recycling is increasing.
Comment #: 1
I don't understand the connection please provide more information.
Comment #: 2
The problem is getting a recycled grocery bag that will last until you get the groceries in the house.
Comment #: 3
Warehouses in Wisconsin Rapids are filled to capacity with paper held in storage, and yet we continue paper production. Start laws that a company can't purchase more paper unless they recycle. As a nation we don't care about recycling, only production and economics. Our forests suffer (and ultimately humans as well) beause we are uneducated about recycling.
Comment #: 4
Net volume has continued to rise though, so an increase in percentages is not necessarily adequate to reduce waste associated issues such as transport and disposal.
Comment #: 5
"production has also increased significantly" - no, bad!
Comment #: 6
Laws should be made where almost all packaging must me recycable
Comment #: 7
Won't be significant
Comment #: 8
With more recycling and alternate products, less timber will have to be cut.
Comment #: 9
I not sure the state should get too involved in what should be a private sector business.
Comment #: 10
Recycling should be increasing at a greater rate.
Comment #: 11
Doesn't apply
Comment #: 12
Forest plan is not best place to do this
Comment #: 13
Recycle!!
Comment #: 14
Stick to trees!
Comment #: 15
Very important.
Comment #: 16
Again - why would the DNR need to address this issue when movement is already in the right direction?
Comment #: 17
Education of "Joe Blow average" and family can have a significant impact on waste - as can substantial increases in "waste management" fees that "JBA" must pay to get rid of his wasteful consuming!
Comment #: 18
Need to do more recycling even if it does cost more
Comment #: 19
A good example of something we do right, tell the preservationist.
Comment #: 20
let economics drive recycling - need more sites to take oil and other hazardous waste
Comment #: 21
Limit on home size would reduce wood usage.
Comment #: 22
More recycling is needed. Good start.
Comment #: 23
Ways should be considered to push the % of recycled waste even higher. Not just forest products, but other resources are at stake here.
Comment #: 24
This has more to do with waste management than forestry. I do not want to see forestry monies spent on this issue.
Comment #: 25
The market is not closing the circle to eliminate waste because of regulation, subsidies, and tax structure that penalizes innovation and investment rather that pollution and depletion of resources.
Comment #: 26
Include a mitigating impact in B2.
Comment #: 27
but you also have to look at the cost of recycling
Comment #: 28
This may effect demand somewhat but practically speaking it would not seem to be a significant factor, for sometime anyway. Worth mentioning, but how much more?
Comment #: 29
It costs more to recycle than to use virgin pulp and you only can recycle twice and it lose's its fibert strength. Federal low dictates 30% recycling by this year I believe.
Comment #: 30
as info
Comment #: 31
Doesn't this relate back to the demand issue (B2)? If use of recycled materials increases, perhaps some of the demand will be satisfied. In any case, mgmt of state forests should not be based on demand or markets, but should be based on ecology.
Comment #: 32
How much of our paper is actually being recycled? We have an established recycling program, but no one can assure me that the paper does not still end up in the land fill.
Comment #: 33
In order to have sustainable forestry, there must be markets. The pulp stumpage market is already less than the property tax - $5.00/cord x c cds/ac/yr = $12 - tax is $20/ac. Will more recycling merely suppress the market even further?
Comment #: 34
Get all more schools and businesses to require and recycle paper.
Comment #: 35
Yeah! I'm a recycler but the public can do this better.
Comment #: 36
We must find more ways to utilize the waste we generate
Comment #: 37
Recycling of metals, and plastics is also important.
Comment #: 38
Recycling of paper and wood products should be required - also manufactures using paper and wood products must be required to use these recycled products.
Comment #: 39
A wood fiber can be used @ 7 items: 1) High grade paper 2) Magazine 3) Writing 4) Newsprint 5) Card board 6) Liner(?) board 7) OSB Board. More recycle=less landfill.
Comment #: 40
This program needs to be increased even more. The Federal gov't needs to get more invovled either by using tax dollars or other incentives. Currently they waste millions of dollars on way less important projects.
Comment #: 41
Strongly incourage recycling!
Comment #: 42
You know the effect of recycling program is working when the demand is greater than the supply.
Comment #: 43
Recycling growth barely keeps pace with population growth. As long as we keep adding people, we'll continue to cut trees -
Comment #: 44
30% recycling is an inflated figure. Most states do not recycle, especially paper. Recycling should be at least 50-70%. Japan is doing this. The USA is shamingly wasteful.
Comment #: 45
We need to continue to encourage and increase our recycling efforts. Recycled paper and wood products takes some pressure off the increasing demands for wood products.
Comment #: 46
Tax non-recycled paper to make it more expensive (green tax).
Comment #: 47
B7 - Your last sentence does not make sense. Nonetheless, less waste is a good thing.
Comment #: 48
This, again is mainly fueled by private ind. Since, whever a buck can be made to utilize a byproduct that was rejected as waste - it will be.
Comment #: 49
Waste nothing
Comment #: 50
Encourage it.
Comment #: 51
If all trees harvested in WI were used here and we didn't import or export products it would be an issue that you could quantify. It's not, so don't spend time and money trying to integrate this issue into forest management. B2 is the issue/trend to be concerned with.
Comment #: 52
Do you want to promote recycling? If address in plan, I think it should try to promote more of it.
Comment #: 53
But recycling will not eliminate or dramatically ? the demand for wood fiber.
Comment #: 54
But most people are not interested in recycling of wood products or other. We have too much money to care!!!
Comment #: 55
Free market will determine this. There are other more important issues for our trained forest professionals. Resources are aslways limited. Priorities must be identified and areas of less or(?) importance must be studied only to the depth to classify their influence.
Comment #: 56
We are terribly wasteful of paper products as a nation. It's no wonder that our landfills are constantly overflowing and need more space for unnecessary garbage. Recycling of yard wastes should also be encouraged.
Comment #: 57
If recycling pays for itself it is ok. If I have to subsidize it I am less inclined to support it.
Comment #: 58
Somehow we must fight industry to do more with recycling.
Comment #: 59
Waste production of what?
Comment #: 60
High on priority list of concerns!
Comment #: 61
Important issue but the forest plan is not the forum to address it.
Comment #: 62
Absolutely, I love to use paper if it will subsidize cutting of low grade wood in TSI, but the real issue here is waste management and landfill.
Comment #: 63
There is a lot more we can do. For example, where I live most (with the exception of a few of us) rural people burn all their garbage - not just paper, but plastics. There is state mandated recycling, but townships can choose not to follow. They should not have the choice and require all to recycle and ban burn barrels!
Comment #: 64
More recycling can and should be done.
Comment #: 65
Recycling should be increased. Government should set standards for more. We are only doing a shadow of what can be done
Comment #: 66
We, in our small Wisconsin communities recycle, but 9 million people in Chicago don't. That is ridiculous.
Comment #: 67
Waste not want not
Comment #: 68
Continue recycling, as this has created another whole industry in itself.
Comment #: 69
There is still a need for raw materials. Recycling centerrs must be made more available. Things that can be returned for recycling in bigger cities will not be accepted for recycling in more rural areas.
Comment #: 70
Everything must be recycled or not allowed to be built in near future.
Comment #: 71
In Sheboygan, they put the recycling in the dump with garbage.
Comment #: 72
Recycling is great way to help our landfills and resources, hopefully it wil continue to increase
Comment #: 73
How does this affect forest management?
Comment #: 74
We are quickly resolving saturation for supply/demand
Comment #: 75
This is good but question its importance in a forest plan.
Comment #: 76
Recycle everything; no more throw away society. What we waste as a nation, other nations use.
Comment #: 77
As a responsible society both to ourselves and future generations we need to recycle whenever it is economically feasible.
Comment #: 78
We ought to recycle everything. Yeh - I'm an advocate for this - nothing should be manufactured unless it can be reused.
Comment #: 79
This is a non-issue. It's a fact. The paper industry in particular is reaching the point where they will be unable to increase the percentage of recycled material in many products. This could depress (already depressed) markets further. I don't think this needs to be addressed in a statewide FOREST plan.
Comment #: 80
More needed.
Comment #: 81
This trend has no real affect on management of the foest, and would only serve as a reason to reduce timber production.
Comment #: 82
GREAT!! But it's still not enough because our population continues to grow too
Comment #: 83
Relevant only as it changes projected demand for paper & wood products
Comment #: 84
Recycling should be encouraged and with the computer industry paper recycling is important with all the excessive paper being used and thrown out.
Comment #: 85
Same comment as before: Recycling is good, but get rid of this foolish notion of saving trees. Plantations still need thinned, aspen should still be harvested for wildlife needs and to easily regenerate the stand, low grade hardwood PULPWOOD should still be cleaned out of woodlots, and wood fiber can still only be recycled a few times before it washes out of the mix. Recycling is good, but for the right reasons.
Comment #: 86
Recycling needs to continue to grow, there is no excuse not to. The economy can support the jobs recycling rather than destroying new lumber and making waste.
Comment #: 87
Let's get WI more involved
Comment #: 88
It is necessary that recycling and conservation be maximized! Waste is a travesty against the inherent beauty of our forests!
Comment #: 89
Combine with B8.
Comment #: 90
If B2 is tru, this is irrelevant to forest managers. It may be critical to forest product manufacturerers, but forest managers just need to know how the "bottom line" regarding demands.
Comment #: 91
It is always good to encourage recycling and the production and use of recyclable products.
Comment #: 92
We will actually accomplish something when packaging is controled to minimal standards.
Comment #: 93
There is a viewpoint that recycling will replace the need for raw forest products. This is not entirely true. Fiber can be reused a limited amount of times.
Comment #: 94
May be significant impact on the economic evaluation
Comment #: 95
I think we should support continued and increasing recycling, it is an excellent option for helping to preserve our environment. I am not sure how it fits in to a forest plan.
Comment #: 96
we are probably near a practical limit of paper recycling - other wood recycling and re-use is being adequately dealt with in other venues
Comment #: 97
Its helpful, but this shouldn't change anything.
Comment #: 98
Its helpful, but this shouldn't change anything.
Comment #: 99
There is still a looooonnnnng way to go before we begin recycling adequate amound of wood products. Keep encouraging this trend.
Comment #: 100
recycling is the answer to the future.
Comment #: 101
More recycling can only be a good thing
Comment #: 102
I really fail to see the value of this for a state-wide forestry plan. If the implication is that recycling is going to change demand for forest products, why hasn't it already? Computers were supposed to change demand for paper, but they haven't. In fact they have increased it. I think demand has more to do with economic conditions (interest rates, housing demand, disposable income) than it does with recycling.
Comment #: 103
Steps taken to reduce the reliance on our forests as a source of forest products will lessen the conflicts that develop between different users of the forests by reducing the need to harvest larger portions of our forests to meet the increasing demands for forest products.
Comment #: 104
Educate people on the value of what has already been done. Reward the sacrifices that people have made and encourage more participation.
Comment #: 105
it has to be adressed, without recycling we would be losing alot more trees out there i think
Comment #: 106
We need to promote conservation, recycling, and less personal waste output.
Comment #: 107
We need to promote conservation, recycling, and less personal waste output.
Comment #: 108
Keep encouraging recycling, of course...but better yet, encourage reduction of usage of resources. What is being done about the recycled carbon paper that produces PCB's that is being dumped into the fox river?
Comment #: 109
Keep it up.
Comment #: 110
Another plan, but not possible in the realm of forest planning
Comment #: 111
Wahoo!
Comment #: 112
Not even questionale we need to keep on top of this trend-and - work it into management strategies.
Comment #: 113
Should always be a priority regardless of the type of industry.
Comment #: 114
Well of course our waste is increasing, people for one don't all care for or about recycling nor does the whole state even participate in recycling. As an example my school recycles, but the janitor don't. If you know what i mean, and i have seen this first handE!!!
Comment #: 115
I'm guessing our consumption increased over the same time period, so recycling still has a lot of room to take effect.
Comment #: 116
Developing collection and delivery of recyclables to industries that can re-process them requires a uniform set of proceedures so everyone knows what to recycle and what the product will be.
Comment #: 117
Isn't the waste more significant than the use of virgin fiber. And consumption is more important then recycling. It doesn't make any difference if the paper cup is made out of recycled fiber if I'm not using one.
Comment #: 118
This will help reduce the need to manage forests strictly for timber production and will enable more of a multiple-use concept to be implemented.
Comment #: 119
The promotion of paper recycling would be great. I believe that many people recycle aluminum, glass, etc. But not enough people recycle paper.
Comment #: 120
But this would seem to be the arena of
other facets of state government. Would
not expect it to be pursued as aggressively
as other issues.
Comment #: 121
Finding markets for these recyclable materials
should be addressed. Recycling is Wisconsin has
faltered (continued public funding), but how can
the forest plan address this.
Comment #: 122
Recycling should occur even if the government has to subsidize the effort due to market ineffeciencies.
Comment #: 123
Again it is critical to reduce our demand for forest products.
Comment #: 124
But focus on facilitating the market for recycled materials.
Comment #: 125
Support for comprehensive statewide recycling should continue, and even be increased. But we have a long way to go. Our society remains the most obscenely wasteful on the planet.
Comment #: 126
I think you've already got your hands full without taking on this one, other than perhaps a short section in your Plan that encourages/supports increased recycling and the arguments for it.
Comment #: 127
Why ask us our opinion, it's common f'n sense.
Comment #: 128
I think that it is a positive thing that recycling is increasing. The more people who realize that recycling is necessary, the more resources we will save.
Comment #: 129
The more we recycle, the less materials of the forest we use, which benefits everybody.
Comment #: 130
Unclear as to how we would use this fact to specifically manage a forest stand-Other than to say it is happening, it should increase in an environmentally sound way, and it may cause a decrease in demand for certain forest products.
Comment #: 131
mention it in the context of reduced demand
for forest products.
Comment #: 132
We needd to recycle as much as possible. We have very limited resources and we need to use them to the fullest.
Comment #: 133
We needd to recycle as much as possible. We have very limited resources and we need to use them to the fullest.
Comment #: 134
This is good because a lot more people need to start to recycle.
Comment #: 135
and it should
Comment #: 136
This is a good thing!
Comment #: 137
More people should recycle.
Comment #: 138
Support increased recycling and products made with recycled materials.
Comment #: 139
Recycling is important but not in a forest plan.
Comment #: 140
This issue should be noted for an educational purpose however increased demand for products still exists.
Comment #: 141
we need to recycle spend our money there instead of on this rediculous plan, to make recycling a benefit instead of an expense
Comment #: 142
we need to recycle spend our money there instead of on this rediculous plan, to make recycling a benefit instead of an expense
Comment #: 143
This should factor into the plan only in as much as it affects harvest projections.
Comment #: 144
Alot more products that could be recycled would help everyone. I know for a fact alot of people don't recycle - it should become mandatory.
Comment #: 145
has the demand for pulp reflected these trends. Why can't more of
our paper products contain post consumer recycled fiber.
Last Revised: Monday July 30 2007
RSS