Division of Forestry Strategic Direction
Statewide Forest Strategy 2010
Statewide Forest Assessment 2010
Forest Sustainability Framework
Statewide Forest Plan 2004
C3. Issue: Private forestry assistance is needed.
Comment #: 1
Private foresters are not trusted and too expensive for the small landowner. This is another area when public employees are best.
Comment #: 2
Same as C2
Comment #: 3
I personally know private landowners who have contacted foresters before logging. The forester allowed these landowners to log huge trees on a hillside near a river - causing barrenous erosion. So where does the buck stop?
Comment #: 4
During the last 30+ years, I have seen the input and value of the county foresters drop from extremely valuable (Jerry Lapidahis) era to a definite negative value in Vernon County under Jim Dalton and Adrian Hagen. This can easily be attributed to trying to remain the end decision marker rather than join state programs.
Comment #: 5
We need help!
Comment #: 6
Reduce fire control efforts a bit and use this time/effort towards working with private landowners.
Comment #: 7
"With over nine million acres of forest land, the management of these non-industrial private lands are critical to ensuring the sustainability of Wisconsin's forests" - this same statement (6 million acres) was made by Stan Welsh in the late fifties. Mother Nature continues to help us out!
Comment #: 8
Meaning that any timber harvesting could not commence, with a prefessional foresters inspection, paid by the landowner.
Comment #: 9
DNR policy on what their foresters can do has them hamstrung anyhow. Professional assistance can take many forms get out of your box
Comment #: 10
These people need to be educated and made aware of the consequences of not managing their land properly.
Comment #: 11
State should provide assistance if asked for.
Comment #: 12
Landowners have to be willing to pay for these services. NO MORE FREE LUNCH!
Comment #: 13
I will need his help in 5-10 yrs.
Comment #: 14
More county foresters
Comment #: 15
DNR foresters are still the best resource for most small tree farmers - keep up the good work.
Comment #: 16
Perhaps a better accounting system.
Comment #: 17
DNR foresters should play a more active role as years past!
Comment #: 18
DNR foresters are most usually the first source of information - and so very understaffed! DNR needs to rpomot itself - helpful and trustworthy - and then have the QUALIFIED personnel to handle the job! NO SMALL MATTER!
Comment #: 19
Landowners should get proffessional guidance, though not necessarily from government employees/agencies, but from private sector
Comment #: 20
I utilize DNR forester guidance and think it's great and should be expanded . . . My concern is the suddle transition from guidance to regulatory controls.
Comment #: 21
This is why we should be hiring at the least 100 more foresters. Then we can demonstrate the importance of forest management and get this on the right track.
Comment #: 22
Cost consideration in younger stands due prohibit owners from properly managing stands.
Comment #: 23
ours is a managed forest- we used both a private consulting forester and DNR forester - we need more state employee as foresters, game managers, ecologists waredens and paid well to remain!!
Comment #: 24
this will happen
Comment #: 25
It's a good way of helping a landowner improve his lot and protect them from corrupt loggers
Comment #: 26
Common sense surprises most ?
Comment #: 27
(". . . becoming more difficult to provide professional forest management guidance to these landowners. . .") - Why? If the forester is available why doesn't the state find them (why should we have to hire a private forester.
Comment #: 28
Landowners need more help on how to manage the land.
Comment #: 29
More education of persons owning forestland/lots etc must be done so that they learn to manage this land/resource.
Comment #: 30
What I've seen of professional forest management - it is not necessary or shabby at best
Comment #: 31
Keep getting the word out and also encourage more funding for forest mgt in state gov't and private consultants.
Comment #: 32
Need more education.
Comment #: 33
Tax breaks for allowing management of wooded land.
Comment #: 34
I feel it is very important to help landowner who want assistance. A good way of doing education as well.
Comment #: 35
Most of these folks don't want "forest mang" the want a place to hunt recreate and whatever "put in a wildlife pond".
Comment #: 36
not enough consultants - train associate advisors - and work with industry to increase forest
Comment #: 37
This seems to be a problem separate from the plan. Here more foresters and consider charging a modest fee for their services.
Comment #: 38
The public and private foresters we have used have all been knowledgeable and earned their pay.
Comment #: 39
Financial grants to rpivate land owners to hire pvt forest consultants? DNR forsters do not have the time or sincerity in many situations.
Comment #: 40
Service has declined. There is strong need to beef up this important service.
Comment #: 41
I agree with the above statement. More information must be distributed to landowners on the availability of information about the benefits of consulting foresters and how the cost is worth it.
Comment #: 42
Professional assistance for harves is available - assistance and incentive to manage non-merchantable thinnings, weedings and planting, herbicide appl, regeneration cuts, pruning, etc is the serious need.
Comment #: 43
*Require loggers to be DNR certified - provide $ for same *Require sales contracts be forester approved - provide $ for same
Comment #: 44
Provide incentives and resouces of professionals. Put this info in every real estate office and zoning ordinance (?).
Comment #: 45
I had a Pro Forester in 97, and was not at all satisfied with the outcome. I think he and the logger really screwed me good!
Comment #: 46
Your 20% figure is how there are a lot of quality loggers (forest managers) that have ability and experience to do good sound forst management. There are a lot of book learned young forestors that have a misconception on forest management.
Comment #: 47
More people but we can't stop development without removing people.
Comment #: 48
A large percentage of loggers have a very bad reputation and well deserved!! They will "sucker" some poor sap farmer - high grade his land, pay him. Loggers should be state licensed.
Comment #: 49
Private assistance should be available but not mandatory
Comment #: 50
I have found the DNR to be exteremely helpful in private forest management. However I think a massive information and education effort will be needed to reach most private forest owners. What is the impact on forest land of properties being put into land trusts?
Comment #: 51
They also need to pay part of the cost in providing this service
Comment #: 52
This is a critical issue
Comment #: 53
The MFL program needs to be "re-vamped" to allow DNR foresters (and technicians) to give advice to these people rather then trying to get people who are only interested in a tax break (MFL) on hunting land to comply with their plans.
Comment #: 54
The DNR foresters should be available to assist small woodland owners. Management plans, timber sales, and general advice. The small woolot owner can not afford a consultant!!
Comment #: 55
Education of all citizens, including the younger generations, to the need and urgency of proper use and utilization programs must be an important part of the overall forest program
Comment #: 56
Because of excessive charges made by private consulting foresters State DNR should provide assistance.
Comment #: 57
What is the role of the basin educators connected with UW-Extension?
Comment #: 58
This is key to the whole forest issue.
Comment #: 59
I currently work with county forester, industry forester and consulting forester - all needed.
Comment #: 60
Too many landowners just take the fast dollar, they don't look for the best price nor do they give any thought to what is best for the forest's future.
Comment #: 61
Caution! It is my experience that private foresters promote economic forest use rather than social or environmental use.
Comment #: 62
You consulting forestry program has helped. I still do like the idea of still havong an experienced DNR Foresters that is available for advise - at least.
Comment #: 63
Landowners need guidance in selecting types of cuts and to ensure that they are done properly.
Comment #: 64
It certainly is - but the DNR has continued to devote too much time to technical assistance for very small owners when it should devote more time to education and stewardship -
Comment #: 65
This is where the bulk of forest products should come from.
Comment #: 66
The DNR needs to be finding ways to cooperate better with private Foresters. The "cooperating" Forester concept is good, but more needs to be done. The DNR has such a huge advantage over private Foresters because of the resources available to them. These resources need to be "shared" more with the cooperating Foresters.
Comment #: 67
My comment for this is the same as C1, and provide landowners with options to manage for biodiversity, water quality and aesthetics.
Comment #: 68
There already are too many State agents telling me what I cannot do on my land!!!
Comment #: 69
Especially with regard to remaining old growth trees - white and Norway Pine and ever more scarce Hemlock and Cedar swamps should be given protection - even if a Forest Crop situation needs to be implemented and do it.
Comment #: 70
Increase the number of DNR Foresters.
Comment #: 71
More info directed towards private land owners on the economic value of good mgt. Periodic mailings.
Comment #: 72
But who pays for all the little green trucks ?? Several other disciplines get involved, etc.
Comment #: 73
If there is a need for services (consultation), why isn't the demand being met?
Comment #: 74
Need more staff to address public in general.
Comment #: 75
DNR and University Extension will need to do land use field days by a county-by-county basis, to show what can be done for timber and wildlife management.
Comment #: 76
This will certainly be critical as the means must control the results.
Comment #: 77
Somehow we have to weed out the "predator" type timber harvesters that screw the ill informed.
Comment #: 78
And tax relief as with farmers - "Tree Farmer"
Comment #: 79
20% seems low. There is a large number of forest landowners who do a good job.
Comment #: 80
Use of the local DNR Forester rather rip off managers
Comment #: 81
Keep government out.
Comment #: 82
Let's buy more campaign hats and khaki outfits; then find people to fill them. It doesn't take butterflies(?) to make good forest management. We've had good inspiring forests in the past.
Comment #: 83
State Foresters have been only marginal assistance to me with timber sales - they often are way off (on timber sales).
Comment #: 84
DNR reorganization farce in some counties less landowner availability.
Comment #: 85
Provide educational opportunities for these land-owners so they can make better decisions
Comment #: 86
I'm not in favor of the MFL, too restrictive and penalizing when it comes to harvesting & hunting and selling of property. Seiminars and workshop days are important for educating landowners also articles in papers.
Comment #: 87
If a private forest owners are going to log it should be done in the most sustainable way possible. This would include no clear cutting. There should be no private industrial forests.
Comment #: 88
Not all people are dummies! Anyone buying forest land, at todays prices, I'm sure they will seek professional advice, if they inted to do any harvesting
Comment #: 89
Our county foresters are readily available to assist.
Comment #: 90
Landowners are smart and can handle it
Comment #: 91
Who is doing estimating?
Comment #: 92
This seems like a key issue in responding to some of the other major changes. Getting infor to the 80% not necessary it would be an important step. Incentive to use the information is also worth consideration.
Comment #: 93
There should be more help from the County level than paid professionals. Especially when one is enrolled in managed forest.
Comment #: 94
NOT at taxpayer expense
Comment #: 95
Do we offer any reward for the forest land that is kept?
Comment #: 96
We need our foresters to help preserve our trees for new generations.
Comment #: 97
I have seen several sales in our area. The land was left in horrible condition *State registration and training for timber cutting industry must be mandatory*
Comment #: 98
As an owner of managed forest land, there should be more contact between the DNR and landowner as to what programs for replanting are available, and also personal visits on the affected property.
Comment #: 99
Providing assistance for sound forest management to landowners will return high dividends in the future
Comment #: 100
With assistance you lose control. Two have a nursery and two don't want any help.
Comment #: 101
The DNR should broaden its information services to educate the increasing numbers of forest land owners.
Comment #: 102
We need to increase the ranks of DNR foresters to at least initiate forest management plans and smaller harvests because owners trust thme more than private sector.
Comment #: 103
I question your 20% figure. In my opinion its more like 50%.
Comment #: 104
I tried a small sale w/o a forester bad choice! My next activity includes a forester.
Comment #: 105
Let private forest ? Take over and forget/reduce public employees in DNR and UW Extension gus us ? Bull.
Comment #: 106
Tree farming system of America
Comment #: 107
Education in regards to the increase in income resulting from the various sales outlets should result in an increase in smaller acreage landowner cooperation.
Comment #: 108
There is enough management assistance available if the forest owner will seek it out.
Comment #: 109
They need help managing
Comment #: 110
It's important to manage all forest lands in a planned professional manner.
Comment #: 111
With fragmentation of managed forest it will be increasingly important to provide assistance to maintain the integrity of the management and the forest.
Comment #: 112
There is a large acreage if individual private forest land receiving no management. Attention is needed whre short-lived species like aspen will convert into undesirable forest habitat.
Comment #: 113
Just assist-don't plan for it again.
Comment #: 114
perhaps the biggest issue
Comment #: 115
Need more DNR foresters in the field.
Comment #: 116
Hire more private lands foresters!!! We need to reach more people, help and educate!!
Comment #: 117
Agree, however some don't want to have and shouldn't be forced to have assistance. If they want to cut it all, they paid for it - let them!
Comment #: 118
Is the assistance requested for real forest management concerns or for a tax break and close the area for someones private hunting grounds. Productivity levels and the MFL program should be re-evaluated.
Comment #: 119
Education is also needed.
Comment #: 120
A whole sector of private foresters can be "schooled" in Wisconsin's forest sustainability principles and guidance - this could be a requirement/certification required for foresters working within the state.
Comment #: 121
A plan to have all partners in the forestry community fulfill their unique role in foresty assistance is essential to addressing this critical issue adequately. Forest Industry, WI Division of Forestry, WWOA, Forest Productivity Council, County Forest Assn., UWEX, Timber Producers, WI Urban Foresty Council, WFREA, etc. etc. must come together in planning to address this issue. Unfortunately, these different forestry organizations often duplicate services rather than work together on a common goal. Each organization cannot do it all, but must do what their best suited for to promote the whole sustainable foresty effort.
Comment #: 122
more people are becoming interested in acting as a steward to the land
Comment #: 123
However, if public assistance is provided, strings need to be attached that will bring a public benefit back to the that public, especially in the area of recreation.
Comment #: 124
I believe within five years; we, as state foresters, will be so overwhelmed with private forestry workload, that unless major changes take place, or system will literally collapse. Specifically, with increasing property taxes, our Managed Forest Law system has become flooded with new applications, many of which have no desire to practice good forest management - only a way to reduce taxes.
Comment #: 125
Trend of increasing forest acres makes this issue counter-intuitive from an ecological perspective.
Comment #: 126
Lets get those 23 foresters we need and hire the replacement foresters for the retired and transfered foresters. This will help our forest land owners.
Comment #: 127
As a private landowner, I agree
Comment #: 128
the state should take more responsibility in training and licensing consulting foresters.
Comment #: 129
Landowners need technical advice on managing the unique resources on their land. Bilogists are more suited to do this as they have a broader knowledge of natural resources. After a biolgists has determined the unique values of a tract, a DNR forester could be invited in based on the biologists recomendation.
Comment #: 130
DNR forestry should be encouraging the use of foresters more - not necessarily through the DNR or at least quickly through a DNR forester. Otherwise, DNR foresters will not be able to handle the workload.
Comment #: 131
Education, financial assistance, tax breaks.
Comment #: 132
there is info i believe of programs to help private landowners, if not enough there could be more made available if people were interested, education and encouraging programs to private owners is important
Comment #: 133
Educating these landowners of the effects a properly planned out harvest can have on their land as well as surrounding forested land can have a great impact on structure and diversity.
Comment #: 134
Educating these landowners of the effects a properly planned out harvest can have on their land as well as surrounding forested land can have a great impact on structure and diversity.
Comment #: 135
DEPENDS ON IF THE ASSISTANCE IS A HELPING HAND OR A UNWANTED INTRUSION BY A GOVERNMENT BODY.
Comment #: 136
Not only for the landowners, but for the people who try to take advantage of them and rape their property.
Comment #: 137
I think this is a serious thing that needs to be considered. To help the private landowners manage their lands is one of the reasons I decided to become involved in forestry.
Comment #: 138
We lack a vision of what the landscape of Wisconsin should look like. Thus we lots of good people and good programs that don't add up to a consistent public policy. Public policy should first focus on what we leave in the forest rather than what we take and who we manage the land for- ourselves or future gerenations.
Comment #: 139
It should be made easily accessable to the public, this information.
Comment #: 140
RC&D, WWOA, Tree Farm, Wisconsin Forest Productivity Council, Governor's Council on Forestry, University Extension and many others are working on this. It is probably not a foreat plan issue.
Comment #: 141
Assistance and education
Comment #: 142
Most land owners don't know that assistance is avalable.
Comment #: 143
Standarized plans can be applied in zones. An owner could be given a couple options within the zone. Technicians could help implement. Small scale loggers could be certified. There are plenty of chainsaws sitting in garages. The Game of Logging is poised ready to train the next generation.
Comment #: 144
Keep working on it...
Comment #: 145
There needs to be more "how to" information reaching the individual forest owners. How to trim, how to set up "den trees" and how to decrease fire danger are just a couple.
Comment #: 146
Foresters don't always agree, and owners often disregard professional foresters opinions anyway (aft er they have paid for it too)
Comment #: 147
We need more Foresters,when you need one you cant find one, they don't even return my phone calls here in fondulac cty. although, Terry Trap of Langlade cty is an exception.
Comment #: 148
This should also be a priority, especially where forest land borders lakes and rivers.
Comment #: 149
Not enpugh people are educated about the problems that face us today. To many people think that they will be gone by the time we have major problems.
Comment #: 150
I definately agree but with the caveat
that assistance is presented in the context
of taking the owners needs into consideration.
A good education program tied to this assistance
would be very valuable in presenting options
and different ways of thinking about
the responsibility of forest stewardship.
I had an analysis of my forest done by
a state representative (DNR) and found
little opportunity to voice my concerns
and desires in her report (clear cut and
manage for aspen is not my most popular
management practice!)
Comment #: 151
I concur that this assistance is needed. But it must be balanced and ecologically enlightened. There are too many DNR foresters who are out of touch with modern science as well as newer public attitudes. People need help to maintain healthy forest ecosystems. People do not want taxpayer-funded shills for the forest products industry.
Comment #: 152
I concur that this assistance is needed. But it must be balanced and ecologically enlightened. There are too many DNR foresters who are out of touch with modern science as well as newer public attitudes. People need help to maintain healthy forest ecosystems. People do not want taxpayer-funded shills for the forest products industry.
Comment #: 153
You answered my "hard sell" comment for C2.
Comment #: 154
However, the education of private landowners has many limitations. Only those with a predisposition toward environmental protection will listen. The rest won't act unless it affects their pocketbooks.
Comment #: 155
More jobs in forest management guidance seems to be the DEMAND.
Comment #: 156
Depends on whether this "guidance" comes with a requirement to cut.
Comment #: 157
An informed, aware, and ethically oriented citizenry (and particularly landowners) is necessary for good stewardship.
Comment #: 158
WDNR's recent agreement with an out-of-state firm to assist providing services should help.
Comment #: 159
I agree, but see reply above to C2. This assistance must be progressive, fair, and environmentally responsible. Otherwise it looks like the DNR foresters are merely adjuncts to the forest products industry.
Comment #: 160
Just because people have their "own" land and have money doesnt mean that just their land should be taken care of, if anything the other land should be tended to more because it doesnt have people to look after it.
Comment #: 161
I think people do need assistance because many don't have the knowledge to make godd decisions on their own.
Comment #: 162
Should be available but not mandatory.
Comment #: 163
This is very important!
Comment #: 164
Only if ecological consulting is provided by the state
as well as conventional forestry advice.
Comment #: 165
people need to learn how to control their lands and know how to care for it
Comment #: 166
We need people to become more knowledgable about forests.
Comment #: 167
Provide education on the options of preserving forests without harvesting as well as managing them for harvest.
Comment #: 168
This combines with the two preceding issues. Looks like there is much room for change here. Is increased education useful here? New legislation? New incentives? New staffing in government agencies? Maybe the forest plan can identify the need and enumerate some possibilities?
Comment #: 169
Professional assistance to private landowners must include information on the entire resources, including rare species and systems, not just forestry practices.
Comment #: 170
These small land owners need to have adequate education to make informed decisions about not only the economic value of their forest resource but also its value to the forest environment.
Comment #: 171
Why should I or you be tellig a individual what they can do with their property, we can only make suggestions
Comment #: 172
Why should I or you be tellig a individual what they can do with their property, we can only make suggestions
Comment #: 173
Those of us lucky enough to like in Iowa County, have one, if not the best forestry management service division offered by our DNR office.
Comment #: 174
Payment should be expected for services rendered, just as user or registration fees are handled.
Last Revised: Monday July 30 2007
RSS