Division of Forestry Strategic Direction
Statewide Forest Strategy 2010
Statewide Forest Assessment 2010
Forest Sustainability Framework
Statewide Forest Plan 2004
D3. Issue: Absentee landowners affect urban canopy.
Comment #: 1
Is a boxelder tree growing out of a crack in an abandoned asphalt parking lot considered part of the canopy? On the other hand I've seen some squalid neighborhoods where the landscapers still show up every week to trim the bushes and mow the grass.
Comment #: 2
So what? Not everything needs to be logged or managed!
Comment #: 3
The goals and ambition of absentee landowners can have a positive effect also.
Comment #: 4
Education.
Comment #: 5
See D2, for my comments re: realtors and their activities.
Comment #: 6
Same as D2
Comment #: 7
Is this true?
Comment #: 8
Absentee owners are perhaps accomplishing some good without cost to the taxpayer - let them be
Comment #: 9
The only canopy these people are concerned with is the roof over their house.
Comment #: 10
In an ideal world! Communities might benefit from information on how to deal with this issue.
Comment #: 11
I am now an absentee land owner but I continue to manage the property to sustain and add to thee area of forested land. I know of others that are doing this also.
Comment #: 12
There is also accelerated development in these areas which targets the remaining green spaces specifically. They call it non-urbanism, but its not, its business as usual.
Comment #: 13
Perhaps this is an issue where the DNR could work with Arbor Day-type organizations.
Comment #: 14
We know! We have rental properties in urban areas! Again, EDUCATION with INCENTIVES to participate along with CONSEQUENCES for non-compliance could prove to be valuable to us!
Comment #: 15
tax incentive for maintaing vegetation (trees) in urban areas
Comment #: 16
Seems more appropriate for case by case then statewide
Comment #: 17
Rental properties promote slums. Take a drive in any metro city or a city as small as Watertown. It is obvious where rentals dominate the neighborhood.
Comment #: 18
I am not sure this statement is true. Many absentee owners treat forst land very well (I am not an absentee owner).
Comment #: 19
(". . . trees and other vegetation are not managed and not replaced as they die.") Your assuming that this is true and I don't know where your coming from or where you are going but it seems many statements in this proposal are based on assumptions.
Comment #: 20
My tree farm structure has been planned and documented by forest crop - I am absente landowner.
Comment #: 21
Minor detail
Comment #: 22
Education ie encourage MFL's.
Comment #: 23
Do owners have responsibility?
Comment #: 24
Is it possible for absentee landowners and renters to be stewards?
Comment #: 25
Must require management
Comment #: 26
I'm not sure of this
Comment #: 27
Shoulnd't be part of state forest planning. Other branches of DNR or social services should address this problem and seek advice from state foresters. Perhaps state nurseries can provide free trees
Comment #: 28
I think this has to be a relatively large community problem.
Comment #: 29
Ture!
Comment #: 30
Focus on what education can be done.
Comment #: 31
I agree
Comment #: 32
I don't see this as a statewide forest problem.
Comment #: 33
See C2
Comment #: 34
Private land is not within the scope of a state forest plan
Comment #: 35
I don't see this is significantly true but most absentee owners have their own agendas which may be different than ours (the natives)
Comment #: 36
Local government!
Comment #: 37
A landowner who owns his property should be able to do what he wants (unless he is in Forest Crop)
Comment #: 38
Agree, but repeat that although I am an absentee landowner, I have planted 10,000 trees and continue to plant almost every year, although not in great quantity now.
Comment #: 39
Local decisions
Comment #: 40
Not true premise. I have been an absentee landowner rural for at least 30 years and have done more stewardship than anyone else on my lake. If this whole discipline is this casually worded, I'm sorry I've answered! Well, I'm not urban but getting very close to it. 100' lots on our lake.
Comment #: 41
Tax absentee landowners.
Comment #: 42
I have been an absentee landowner for decades. I have a management plan and I follow it. I prune my pines, red and white, and had a timber stand improvement cut last year. I have never planted an exotic - unless you count Norway Spruce. That includes exotic flowers and shrubs.
Comment #: 43
Some form of management should be manditory as it is in Europe.
Comment #: 44
I'm an absentee owner and I take better care of my land now then I did when I lived there!
Comment #: 45
I do not feel there is less ocncern; as there is lack of education or examples to show them.
Comment #: 46
Looks like more regulation to me - urban trees have costs as well as benefits - and most city councils have higher priorities.
Comment #: 47
We have to make urban areas more desirable places to live. This will take pressure off rural lands.
Comment #: 48
This is a city problem, though DNR can help.
Comment #: 49
As a former "absentee landowner" I don't believe absentee landownership is an issue related to lack of management. The State does nothing to benefit out-of-state landowners, for example, so they have no motivation to participate with the state.
Comment #: 50
Add trees and pervious surfaces to concrete neighborhoods and parking lots.
Comment #: 51
Again, I think this problem may be outside of the core work of the department.
Comment #: 52
Some people feel trees are messy and a burden - they only like open areas and lawn to manicure - make cheap trees available and planting/care available.
Comment #: 53
A problem for individual communities.
Comment #: 54
I agree with the issue, but comment is too negative. I feel some absentee landowners benefit land stewardship better than private landowners. Try not to stereotype them into one group.
Comment #: 55
These areas require management now before it's too late!
Comment #: 56
There needs to be more state input in this area.
Comment #: 57
Fry bigger fish.
Comment #: 58
WS. Don't want absentee landowners?
Comment #: 59
See above.
Comment #: 60
They watch their investments closely.
Comment #: 61
Detracts from larger statewide issues. This should be addressed but the question is urban redevelopment, not just tree planting.
Comment #: 62
Out-of-state landowners should be taxed higher.
Comment #: 63
Cities and towns must address this issue.
Comment #: 64
Tax incentives for green property.
Comment #: 65
absentee's thin out the dead ones and plant more disable tree's
Comment #: 66
5
Comment #: 67
Absentee landowning hsould be abolished
Comment #: 68
absentee owners should be taxed at a higher rate
Comment #: 69
Yes!
Comment #: 70
These areas can be considered "old growth" forests and leave the professional foresters manage the public forests.
Comment #: 71
TAX INCENTIVES PLEASE!
Comment #: 72
I'm an absentee landowner in the Highland State Forest. I am very intersted in maintaing the quality of the forest. I have my own small effort at trying to bring back the pine trees. This seem to be suceeding over the past 30 to 40 years.
Comment #: 73
You show lack of understanding in this comparison. Most "absentee" landowners that I know are dedicated to forest management.
Comment #: 74
This is a city or country problem.
Comment #: 75
"rental properties" - limit with correct zoning close to forests.
Comment #: 76
Huh? Now I know you are doing drugs.
Comment #: 77
Require more landowners to maintain areas in ? condition.
Comment #: 78
Focus on red forests - not urban canopy
Comment #: 79
I don't think urban forests should be addressed in the stae plan. Let the cities deal with this problem.
Comment #: 80
Government needs to create incentives for handling this problem.
Comment #: 81
"There is less concern" - No!
Comment #: 82
Mandatory education upon purchase sure it's radical - so what!
Comment #: 83
Here you go again spending my tax $ on private land concerns - stick with planning for your public lands - absentee landowners are the North's property tax relief program - they pay full taxes and demand for services.
Comment #: 84
Support the Tree Farm System and assess the land that is growing and cultivating trees as farming to give farmers an incentive to grow and cultivate trees for harvest.
Comment #: 85
The increase in the deer herd can be blamed on absentee landlords and our "No Trespass Laws." Hunters are afraid to enter unposted land and have no idea who to contact to ask permission to hunt.
Comment #: 86
But a tough one to solve - they own the land but do not manage it.
Comment #: 87
Most absentee owners are good.
Comment #: 88
Maybe the property taxes need to be decreased.
Comment #: 89
I question this statement.
Comment #: 90
MFL is their last great escape.
Comment #: 91
Strong urban forestry programs should direct this more.
Comment #: 92
What a biased statement this is, hammering rental properties??!!
Comment #: 93
I believe you have this backwards. The absentee landowners of rural areas live in the urban enviorment.
Comment #: 94
If a forest is not left alone, how is it going to become an old forest? Is this a viable issue? We seem to have a fair amount of absentee participation around here.
Comment #: 95
Don't dump on absentee owners.
Comment #: 96
This is another one of those guidance to local officials issues. It seems local authorities have the ability to require trees removed and they could use the same authority to have trees replaced.
Comment #: 97
an ultimate cause of this could be that capitalism has some flaws in that we are not willing to address due to to fear and ignorance
Comment #: 98
The importance of this issue to a statewide forestry plan eludes me. At best, the urban canopy was a sparse monoculture anyway. It's ecological and economic value had to be minimal. I think there are much more important issues to address than this.
Comment #: 99
Financial incentives for shade trees.
Comment #: 100
TOO FAR REACHING FOR YOUR AUTHORITY.
Comment #: 101
Is important but not in this context.
Comment #: 102
As a long time renter it is frustrating to us when we want to do what we can to help with replanting etc, and yet can't because either there are no programs to help with the cost or the owners know nothing about it, and aren't willing to do anything. Give them an incentive.
Comment #: 103
Again, a local problem solved only by locals.
Comment #: 104
Different laws and such could be established to prevent this from occuring.
Comment #: 105
Appleton has an ordinance that requires a green edge for every business. The state could adopt something similar.
Comment #: 106
Spread the wealth, instill pride in low income peoples, give them a sense of belonging...
Comment #: 107
I care a lot about my forest even though I live 150 miles away. We do replace trees and even experiment with new strains to see how well they survive the climate. We try to minimize exotics and provide habitat for wildlife. I do agree that we are pretty conservative when it comes to timber harvest.
Comment #: 108
This is a new problem to me. To what
extent (ie, what percentage) is this a
problem? It doesn't sound that serious
or possibly extent to me?
Comment #: 109
Local issue again.
Comment #: 110
This has such an effect on energy use and is an important topic that very few people are addressing; the loss of trees on private property in the cities; this should be solved with city building and property maintenance codes - just like electric and plumbing.
Comment #: 111
This has such an effect on energy use and is an important topic that very few people are addressing; the loss of trees on private property in the cities; this should be solved with city building and property maintenance codes - just like electric and plumbing.
Comment #: 112
This has such an effect on energy use and is an important topic that very few people are addressing; the loss of trees on private property in the cities; this should be solved with city building and property maintenance codes - just like electric and plumbing.
Comment #: 113
I makes our choices as urban foresters all the more important. But even the decisions and practices of the urban land owner and on-site dweller are not sound. Even the landscapers that make recommendations to those home owners often do so without a conscience of the environmental impacts they are making.
Comment #: 114
Seems like a local issue that could be handled by individual urban areas.
Comment #: 115
They are ruining the canopy, which is not good for the plants.
Comment #: 116
They don't realize their responsibility to take care of their part of the forest, so in turn, that part is damaged.
Comment #: 117
But what can really be done about this?
Comment #: 118
Let the communities deal with this.
Comment #: 119
Areas with lower average income should be addressed to insure the retention of a viable urban forest in these owner neglected areas. These are the types of areas that may most directly benefit from the urban forest in reduction in noise, heat, and some studies show decreased tendencies toward violence in forested urban areas.
Comment #: 120
Renters can't just plant trees on rental property - its typically not allowed. The landlord or owner of the property, be it in upscale or lower socioeconomic areas, needs to be responsible for this. Cities/towns could provide incentives to do this.
Comment #: 121
Although we do not fit the description!
Comment #: 122
larger assessments on absentee or out-of-state land owners may be a way to address this?
Comment #: 123
It is also strongly affected by zoning classification and the high prices for urban land. Developers will look to maximize their return on expensive parcels by placing as many units on their property as the law will allow. However, this can reduce sprawl caused by low density developments.
Last Revised: Monday July 30 2007
RSS