state forest nursery i have heard that eliminating the ... · state forest nursery - please do not...

Suggestions to the Program Elimination Commission Part 2

Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsState Forest NurseryI have heard that eliminating the State Nursery in Ames is one option for "saving" money. I believe that in the long run it will costthe state money.

Keep the State Nursery facility in its present location in Ames. There IS the one-time benefit that the state can realize by selling their valuable property near Hwy 30 in Ames. But after that we lose the sales tax income (estimated at $60,000 to $80,000 annually) and the income tax income of the employees who depend on that facility (estimated at 64,000 hours). That is ANNUAL income that we would be losing in order to gain a single payment for the sale of the facility. What's more, there are probably close to 50 businesses that depend on those conservation plantings for their income. More income tax lost. It does not cost the state a dime to run the nursery. It is self-supporting. We are already at the bottom of all the states in the union for conservation expenses. Let's not make it even harder to support what little conservation we have going right now by eliminating one of the most successful tools Iowa has.

State Forest Nursery is providing important products and services to Iowans. It pays its own way - including charging sales tax! Commercial nurseries can not and will not produce the seedlings in the quantity needed - landowners need this service - especially in light of the upcoming farm bill.

Do not sell the State Forest Nursery - instead hold it up as efficiency in government!

Retaining the SFN will insure availability of quality tree seedlings at reasonable price to augment and compliment the sales of private nurseries.

I have heard that the State Forest Nursery may be eliminated.

I believe that the State Forest Nursery should not be eliminated. The continuing benefit of having reasonably priced trees and shrubs for conservation use with no money spent from the general fund.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsState Forest Nursery - Please DO NOT eliminate the State Forest Nursery! This is a wonderful high quality, low cost source for trees and shrubs for all Iowans. Many of us can not afford to purchase larger, more expensive seedlings from private sources. I have used Sate Nursery seed stock many times, and plan to do so again in the future. Please ensure the State Forest Nursery is retained for all Iowans to make use of!

Please DO NOT eliminate the State Forest Nursery! Again, many of us can not afford to purchase larger, more expensive seedlings from private sources. I have used Sate Nursery seed stock many times, and plan to do so again in the future.

I've heard there's discussion to eliminate the State Nursery at Ames. From what I know the nursery is self-supporting so it doesn't cost the taxpayers anything to run it. Surely the tremendous number of conservation plantings that are raised there could not be replaced anywhere else in the state. Where would the DNR get trees (and the money to pay for them) for reforestation? It seems closing it would have a big cost to conservation with no savings to anyone.

I would propose giving the DNR free reign to run the nursery as profitably as they have in the past.

The benefit is trees.. cheap trees for conservation plantings all over the state.

The comission is considering the elimination of the state nursery. That nursery costs the state nothing and provides enormous benefits to the residents, farmers and environment of the state of Iowa. It is one of the few ways that government benefits the people without costing a cent of taxes.

It would be the height of foolishness to eliminate one of the few government programs with benefits and no costs for the short term return of the sale of a couple of nuseries.

Keep the nursery. Fire the politicians and state employees who thought up the idea to sell the nursery and save the taxes represented in their salaries on a long term basis.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsProposed sale of the State Forest Nursery in Ames.

Continue to support the State Forest Nursery. By providing native seed source trees and shrubs, the State Nursery is one that cannot be replaced by the private sector. They will not go the extra step to collect and grow native seed source plants. As the most altered state in the nation, I think we owe it to ourselves to become a model for conservation and restoration practices. The State Forest Nursery provides an avenue for private and federal land holders to more quickly and effectively restore woodlands in Iowa. The demand for conservation trees and shrubs because of the 2002 Farm Bill will increase to 10-15 million seedlings annually; Let's stay on top of the ball rather than falling off.To sum it up: Selling the Ames nursery facility would be bad for natural resource conservation in Iowa and make little economic sense.Thank you for your consideration.

Proposed sale of the State Forest Nursery in Ames.

Do not sell the nursery; leave management of nursery as is. I, like many people in the state of Iowa, live on an acreage. Over the past 7 years I have planted approximately 7000 trees on my acreage, on which the vast majority have come from the State Forest Nursery. I have also bought many trees from private nurseries. In general, the trees from the SFN are in better shape and have better survival rates than those I have acquired from private vendors. Also, the SFN sells their trees at a price substantially below comparable trees sold by private vendors. This price difference is significant enough that I feel confident in saying that I would not have been able to do the reforestations I have done without the SFN.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsSale of State Forest Nursery I propose the state continues the services of the State Foerst

Nursery. I work for a County Conservation Board that helps landowners plant trees for conservation plantings. These low-cost, quality trees are a valuable part of establishing habitat in our state.

More tree plantings in Iowa thanks to the new Farm Bill.�Native trees are more resistant to disease and insects.�Keeping local jobs.�The sale of this nursery would be a huge loss for habitat and conservation in Iowa.

Elimination of the State Forest Nursery will not save the General Fund, it will only be detrimental to it. The State Forest Nursery does not use any General Fund money. It is required to be self-sustaining. It is NOT a cost factor in the State budget, but COULD be a way for the State to regain some of its budget deficit. It has the capability, with its proficient management, to generate revenue that could be contributing to the REAP Fund and General Fund annually. This could prevent a tax increase! As a taxpayer, I would be very impressed to see the State trying to help themselves out of their own budget problems, and not expect the taxpayer to do it. There is an enormous demand for seedlings throughout the State. This demand is continuing to increase yearly. Private nurseries cannot meet the present demand and the elimination of the State Forest Nursery will only send the conservation minded consumer out of the state looking for seedlings.

Take a good long look at the seedling sales potential, before selling our assets to a one-time flat-fee revenue. Eliminating the State Forest Nursery would be very short sighted.The State of Iowa could take this situation and turn it into a very patriotic campaign that I think the majority of Iowa citizens would support. Not only does the State Forest Nursery supply seedlings for conserving our environment, it offers expert assistance, education, and it contributes to the State's General Fund. It is out there making our state enviromentally better without using General Fund money. These are a great advantages to every person in the State of Iowa.

Generates Sales Tax income to the State.�Eliminates a potential tax increase.�Iowa can redeem its budget from its own resources.�Supplies affordable seedlings for Iowa's conservation.�Generates jobs for the local communities.�Provides landowners with conservation education and assistance.

(Cont.) Since sales tax is applied to ALL seedling sales, the State of Iowa would be loosing this income. In turn, the neighboring states would be gaining from our lost sales. This does not make any sense!


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsA Program Elimination Commission was established by the legislative special session in May, 2002 and is considering the sale of the State Forest Nursery located in Ames. The role of the State Forest Nursery (SFN) is to provide a consistent supply of quality and low-cost tree and shrub nursery stock from native seed sources to support forestry, wildlife and conservation programs on public and private lands in Iowa, Operating since the mid 1930's, the SFN possesses two facilities to grow and distribute between 3-5 million conservation trees and shrub seedlings to approximately 2,800 Iowa landowners who in turn reforest 6,000 to 8,000 acres annually.These conservation trees are 1-3 year old bareroot trees and shrubs (6"-24" in size) grown from native seed sources, and are sold in minimum quantities of 500+ plants, They can only be used for conservation purposes of reforestation, soil erosion control, wildlife habitat and water quality protection, They can not be used for farmstead windbreaks, shade or ornamental purposes to avoid conflicts with private nurseries and garden centers.

Look for another source for your budget cuts....one that is NOT currently self-sustaining financially and that is not working to improve the environment.

The current benefits outlined above will continue to be realized and no negative impacts (financial or environmental) will result.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_Benefits(Cont.) Since the 1980's the SFN (Iowa Code 455A.13) has operated at the cost of production. No general fund revenue is used in seedlings production including the employment of 9 Full Time Employees and 60-100 seasonal and inmate staff, and in addition, the SFN collects $.05/conifer and $.10/hardwood and places it in the Forestry Enhancement fund (Iowa Code 456A.21) to employ 5 enhancement foresters to provide no cost technical assistance.The State of Iowa maintains a forest nursery which proivdes a valuable service to the people of Iowa. It not only provides nursery stock to enhance Iowa reforestation but provides employment. The operation pays for itself so is not a tax burden.

The forest nursery should be allowed to continue operation for the welfare of the people of Iowa.

The nursery provides stock which can not be obtained elsewhere in the large quantity needed and provides it at a price which encourages reforestation. It provides for these needs as well as employment at no cost to the tax payers of the state.

The consideration of not maintaining the state nursery.

I believe the state should continue to maintain the state nursery. As a farm owner, I have gotten thousands of trees and shrubs from our nursery. As a Boy Scout leader, we have also gotten thousands of trees from the state nursery for community and habitat planting. This is a very valuable resource for the citizens of the state of Iowa. Iowa needs to maintain state ownership of the nursery and continue to sell stock to the citizens of Iowa at the low cost which they have done for the past years.

The people of Iowa would continue to be able to provide soil erosion control, wildlife habitat, and beautification of areas for a low economic cost. This is important for our state.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsAs a 20+ year employee of county conservation boards and as a current land owner in Jackson County of 80 acres, I am making the following opinion. Cuts in the forestry program including elimination of the State Forest Nursery, would impact my ability to reforest and gain technical support in a timely manner. These cuts and reduction in timely assistance would negitively impact many landowners who want to participate in the 2002 farm bill. This would be felt first in the tech support as most of the paperwork in regards to windbreaks and shelterbelts are time sensitive. And secondly, the 2002 farm bill is going to create a large demand for trees and shrubs that will far exceed the supplies in Iowa. If landowners are forced to go outside of Iowa for materials, not only are we spending our money outside of Iowa, but increasing the likelyhood of bringing in disease or pests from other regions of the US.

Leave the Iowa State Forest Nursery as it is and help Iowan's plant trees and shrubs now and in the future.

Healthier environment and habitat for wildlife. Happier people because they see wildlife and plants, instead of erosion and desolation.To contact me if needed: [email protected]

Cont.) The loss of jobs and revenue to the state as well as taxes collected and general sales are not worth it. The current nursery does not cost the tax payers a dime. So to elimimate the nursery will not save the state any money as there is no money spent on the nursery. It is self-supporting. Please do not sell the Ames nursery facility. It provides a necessary service without costing taxpayers anything. If the reason for doing it is to get money, this is a poor way to do so.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsOperation of the State Forest Nursery. I represent over 11,000 Iowa state members of the National Wild Turkey Federation. We have been working, through one of several programs, with the nursery to help make available trees to our members who want to enhance or initiate plantings on their property. As Iowa has less than 1/3 of the original forest acres historically found in this state, we have placed a great importance on educating and helping individuals put back some of those forested acres. Without the state nursery, supply of seedlings will greatly outweigh the demand causing prices to increase and projects to go unfinished. The projects we help cost-share have benefited local private nurseries and entrepreneurs who are developing businesses based on forestry plantings and timber stand improvements on private lands. These projects will be jeopordized without adequate seedling availability. In addition, the new farm bill is anticipated to increase demand for seedlings, widening the gap between the supply of these trees and demand.

Our membership proposes that the State Forest Nursery is allowed to continue operation. As it is not currently funded by the general fund, there is no savings to be had by changing it's status. This is supposed to be the objective of this inquiry. Allowing the nursery to operate and consequently work with the local nurseries will develop a better relationship between the public and private sectors and insure sufficient quantities of seedlings be available for future timber improvement. The state nursery does not sell for ornamental plantings which is and should be the bulk of private nurseries business. It is important that the technical advice that goes hand in hand with state nursery sales to private indiviuals be continued. It is important to our group, NWTF, as well as other such conservation groups in this state that we continue to move forward in integrating quality habitat improvement projects into the landscape. This is important to the present and future progress of this state.

We as an organization plan to continue to subsidize timber projects in this state. There is a growing number of landowners who have purchased properties recognizing the values of the quality of lifethat goes with a sound natural setting. However, we will not help subsidize projects which may involve the use of questionable stock brought in from out-of-state to fill an unnecessarily created void. We also wantto maintain the solid interactions we have seen between the professionals, at the state nursery, not only at the time of sales but on the follow ups to a project. We have made use of stock from the private nurseries, but feel their is a need for the long-term input of the state professionals who know the historical and projected goals for timber management statewide. We feel the state nursery has simply improved the quality of stock available in this state and has done so at a price taht is affordable.

(Cont.) While some of this supply will be met by private nurseries, we are concerned that increased demand, without the state nursery, would force more sales going to out-of-state sellers. This does not help Iowa and has the potential of bringing in unwanted/unknown trees which are not of native stock and run the risk of disease/pest infestation as well as less vigorous stock.

(Cont.) This is especially true for large tree plantings which is typically what the state nursery deals with. We anticipate spending tens 0f thousands of dollars to subsidize reforestation projects affecting hundreds of acres over the next few years. It will only happen with the quality help of the State Forest Nursery.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsDear Committee Members - I understand that you are considering elimination of the State Forest Nursery. I would like to encourage you to RETAIN this nursery as a feature of our state government that nurtures our state's economy and provides valuable, irreplaceable services to our natural environment (in addition to not using any tax dollars for its present support). I am involved in natural area restoration efforts and am linked to many in the state who share this activity. Seeds and nursery stock are desparately needed for such restorations - which serve purposes such as enhancing water quality and stabailizing soils. The State Forest Nursery, and Regional Forester program supported by the nursery sales, encourage plantings that then lead to further purchases of seed / stock from private nurseries, thus stimulating our state's economy. (I have heard from many that the private nurseries cannot keep up with the demand for nursery stock - they need the State Nursery too! And with the new Farm Bill, the demand for stock will go even higher - we simply won't have enoughto meet the demand without the Nursery.)


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsAnother point - Our regional forester (Mark Vitosh) would be lost without sales form the State Forest Nursery program (which pays his salary). This would be a major setback for Johnson and surrounding counties - where Mark has made a MAJOR impact on encouraging wise plantings and forestry programs. Thus I encourage you NOT to cut this program. Thanks much for your consideration - Connie Mutel, 2345 Sugar Bottom Rd, Solon IA 52333I would strongly oppose the loss of the State Forest Nursery in Ames. With all the new money available to the State of Iowa through the new farm bill, it would be a real shame to loose the biggest supplier of trees and shrubs for Iowa conservation plantings. With a focus on controlling soil erosion and improving water quality, the serves provided by the State Nursery are needed more today than anytime in the states history. In Emmet county we have used State Nursery trees and shrubs because of their low cost and quality. The State Forest Nursery provides millions of trees and shrubs that could not be provided by private business. By the nursery keeping the costs low, more acres can be protected with buffer strips and conservation plantings which will help Iowa meet the goals of reducing soil erosion and improving Iowa's water quality.

Please leave the State Forest Nursery as it is. It operates at the cost of production and no general fund revenues are used in seedling production. Through its sales it contributes monies to the Forestry Enhancement Fund (Iowa Code 456A.21) to help employ several foresters to provide technical assistance to promote reforestation in Iowa.

The State Forest Nursery provides millions of low cost, high quality trees and shrubs for conservation plantings that assist Iowans in their conservation efforts including reforestation, soil erosion reduction, wildlife habitat, and water quality protection. This is not the time to reduce the capacity of Iowa to have a good source of conservation planting trees and shrubs.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsThe proposal to sell the State Nursery at Ames does not make good sense either environmentally of economically. From an environmental perspective, research at Iowa State University has demonstrated the very important role that trees can play in improving environmental quality and redressing many of the chemical runoff problems associated with agriculture. The newly passed federal Farm Bill recognizes this and has greatly increased the amount of funding allocated to the use of trees as environmental buffers. The demand for seedlings in Iowa currently exceeds supply even when private nurserys are factored into the equation. Elimination of the Ames nursery will only worsen this shortfall. Even if a new nursery were to be establihed it would be several years before it could come into full production. Economically there would be a one time gain of approximately 3 million dollars.

Remove the Nursery at Ames from further consideration of elimination. The one-time gain its sale would create would in reality be a significant loss to conservation and environmental quality improvements in the State of Iowa.

(Cont.) Considering that the current investment in the facility is on the order of 5 to 6 million, this would seem a rather short sighted gain. Since the nursery is also operated on a cost recovery basis its elimination creates no savings for the general fund and in fact it will reduce revenues since sales tax is collected on all sales.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsSelling the Ames nursery will have little if any economic impact because the nursery uses no general funds to operate. This facility pays its own way and provides annual sales taxes of about $80,000 per year. The sale will eliminate 12-15 FTE's and nearly 100 seasonal jobs which in turn will reduce employment taxes received by the legislature. The cost of trees/shrubs will climb and also impact conservation initiatives. There appears to be no economic value for selling the nursery. As you sell state assets, sell those that cost the general budget, selling an asset that pays its way and generates income makes liitle sense. There would be nothing to gain in the budget by selling the nursery since it costs you nothing to operate and makes you money!!

Maintain the nursery and review the revenue generation features of the nursery as a business and improve it. The improvements will generate more state tax revenue for the long term.

Benefits ....steady and long term tax revenue vs a one time influx of money from a one time sale which will cost us each and every year due to lost tax revenue and jobs.

State Forest Nursery currently grows 3-5 million conservation trees and strubs.

This program should not be eliminated; private industry could not keep up with demand.

better quality, less costly supply of conservation trees & shrubs

State Forest Nursery provides conservation tree and shrub seedlings to Iowans at reasonable cost to them and no cost to the State General Fund.

Maintain the State Forest Nursery system. It provides Iowans with a source of native trees and shrubs for conservation (not landscaping). These are plants that are essential to meeting the needs of Iowa landowners to conserve soil and improve water quality. The only benefit to the general fund would be a short-term, one-time benefit from from selling valuable state assets. No long term benefits would be realized.

Retaining the State Forest Nursery system will assure Iowans of a continued supply of native trees and shrubs necessary to meet conservation needs.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsI am writing in support of continuing the State Forestry Nursery in Ames, Iowa. As an agricultural banker here in Dallas county for over 26 years, I saw great benefit for farmers wanting to plant longer term conservation plantings on their marginal ground with State Forestry purchased trees. Many of these large plantings would not have taken place if the only tree stock available was too expensive or of out of state origin. I am now in the tree business as co-owner of ValleyViewTree Farm and still feel the same way. The State Forestry Nursery does not compete with Iowa producers (of which there are very few who sell the small seedlings) and continues to be a benefit to the landowner, the public and the wildlife. It appears to me that since the State Forestry Nursery does not use general tax funds in it's operation but does collect sales tax that goes into the state treasury, its sale would be purely an asset sale by the state of Iowa.

Leave the State Forest Nursery in Ames, Iowa intact. More trees and wildlife for our children and grandchildren to look in wonder upon.

(Cont.) This asset sale would in the end severely affect the conservation initiative in Iowa that sorely needs the states support. The CRP program along with trees from the State Forest Nursery has provided a much needed improvement to the landscape of Iowa. As more and more land in Iowa has gone under the plow and now is often going under the cement of urban encroachment it is even more important that we continue to do all we can to encourage the planting of trees.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsDo not sell public assests. It concerns me that the state nursery is listed as an option for sale.

It is my understanding our nursery is self sustaining. The benefits trees and shrubs provide (erosion contol, wildlife habitat) should be incentive enough to keep it off the chopping block. The states future needs for erosion control, and reforestation will only be met if the cost is not prohibitive to land owners. The cost of trees in the brochure I receive have to be the best bargain in our state (maybe the US). I can't see the price going down or staying steady with privatization. I believe the state should hold onto all the land we own. If the state has land that is being mismanaged, then make a management change. Selling land isn't going to result in annual tax saving (we surely don't charge ourselves tax on land the state owns). I understand selling the land to private citizens will generate tax revenue, but we no longer have the assets.

(Cont.) I know the commission has a tough job, but as the commission looks at all the programs I hope only the unsuccessful programs are cut. If the commission has to cut, please eliminate programs that are specific to small geographical locations, not state wide programs. I would rather my taxes go up 1 or 2% then to lose state owned property, or successful, self sustaining programs, like our state nursery.

I own a 120 acre tree farm in Guthrie County, Iowa. I have used the State Forest Nursery and found it to be very economical, efficient, and effective for me. I am sure I would not have ordered and planted trees in an open area on my tree farm if the trees had not been available from the State Forest Nursery.

Please do not recomend the sale of the State Forest Nursery. It would be a great disservice to the private woodland owners of Iowa.

The private woodland owners of Iowa will continue to have an economical source for quality trees and shrubs. Additonal acres will be planted and others will be reforested if trees remain available from the State Forest Nursery. Planting large numbers of trees is a risky proposition, so economical plant stock is necessary to make it a reasonable risk.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsState Nursery Elimination program. I would like to complain about the consideration of selling the State Nursery in Ames and putting up a shopping center or apartment buildings! It makes little economic sense to sell the nursery only to move it elsewhere and have to tear down the Fire Station and move it also.... We live on the street by the state nursery and moved there for the beautiful pine trees in the State Nursery. Our property values will be de-valued and our neighborhood ruined in my opinion. I'm sure property developers and apartment owners can find land elsewhere.Anne [email protected]

Find land elsewhere for property/Ames development. Leave the STate Nursery as is. It is a place many people come to walk dogs, jog and enjoy the few trees Ames has left!

Selling the Ames nursery facility would be bad for natural resource cnoservation in Iowa and make little economic sense.

State Nursery in Ames Elimination -- I think it would be a GREAT mistake to eliminate or sell the State Nursery in Ames. We moved to the land by the State Nursery to enjoy the beautiful trees and nature and take walks/jog and enjoy the State Nursery. It makes no economic sense to build more apartment buildings when 1/2 in this town stand empty! If Ames needs more shopping -- there is land available that would not destroy our neighborhood and a beautiful landmark of Ames!

Find different land for any proposed development and leave the State Nursery as is.

A wonderful place for families to come and jog/walk and enjoy nature and is a benefit to the State in providing shrubs and trees.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsProposed State Nursery EliminationI believe you should not even be considering elimination of the State Nursery -- it is a wonderful landmark of Ames and is a service to the Ames community. My family moved to the Southdale area to enjoy what little is left of the Iowa Countryside mainly the wonderful trees and shrubs and nature that is in the State Nursery. It will hurt our property values in Southdale and the enjoyment we have of our neighborhood. It makes no economic sense either.

Leave the State Nursery intact in south Ames. Many people enjoy coming to the State Nursery to jog/ look at nature/birds and the deer and walk their dogs. It benefits the State by providing a service and needn't be moved.

State Nursery in Ames elimination. I think it is horrendous that you are even considering eliminating or selling the State Nursery in Ames!!! It is a beautiful place that many families go to enjoy nature and jog not to mention what it will do to the South Ames neighborhood!

Leave the State Nursery as is -- find another place to build your apartments and shopping centers!!!!

Please do not eliminate the state nursery. There are limitless benefits at almost no cost. It would be a strictly political move. iowa does not have time nor energy for that kind of self destruction. We are already losing population, small towns...why add the environment to the list.

Keep the state nursery. Enhance it! The major pork corporations could use a public image boost. Perhaps they could commit to support. Iowa roadbuilders are required to enhance the roadways they construct. What is a corollary that could be used in this situation?

Added value to property. Clean air, soil and water enhanced by control of soil erosion and natural wind breaks. Beautiful land increases the tourist industry. Hunting, biking, cross country skiing, etc depend on landscape! It seems the pork industry's large farms are here to stay. They will be followed by other large agricultural industries. Trees will be a major factor in defending our environment , water soil, and air, from the effects of these industries.

The Iowa State Forest Nursey is being considered for sale via the Program Elmination Commission.

Do not sell the State Forest Nursey. It makes little economic sense, it will be bad for natural resource conservation, create a shortage of tree and shrub seedlings and result in out-of-state purchases. Private nurseries cannot met the demand. It will mean higher prices for Iowans and no savings to the general fund.

Lower prices, meeting Iowa demand with Iowa products, retaining Iowa technical support within IDNR, at no direct cost to Iowa tax payers since, the State Nursey is self supporting from fees charges on the sale of seedlings.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsState Forest Nursery closure; tremendously bad idea. The money goes out of state, we lose jobs ( in my case, to out of state foresters who can bring stock with them), and conservation efforts suffer another setback.

The Nursery has been poorly run in the past, but is doing better; it needs still to improve, but is performing a very useful function. If legislature is still bent on it's demise for the usual political reasons, then start a phaseout that will allow the private nurseries in the state to take up the slack while still providing us with product.

This would allow for eventual privatization without a gap. It would also allow for natural attrition to take the slack of the affected jobs in the DNR with the exception of the state forester positions; these would have to be funded from other sources. I think that this is still not the way to go; I think oversight of the current situation and communication with the private nurseries to coordinate and take advantage of cooperation in planning and planting would be the most beneficial.

Sale of State Forest Nursery I am not in favor of the sale of the Forest Nursery especially in these hard economic times. The Nursery supplies our state with a valuable resource for the continued stewardship of our beautiful land. Please remember that Iowa in the Kiowa language means The Beautiful Land. Without an economical alternative for the purchase of tress and shrubs from the State Nursery farmers and landowners will have to turn to out of state sources at higher prices. I am sure the surrounding states would be more than happy to receive orders from Iowans so that the dollars spent will land in their state vs. Iowa. The worst thing that could happen is that conservation plantings would not take place resulting in continued contamination of our watershed by run off as well as increased erosion of our most valuable resource our soil. Iowa has a hearitage of protecting our natural resources and reforestation has been a critical part of this effort. The State Forest Nursery has made it economically feasible for us to do this and it would be a crime to discontinue its service and that of the professional foresters consevation plans.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_Benefits(Cont.) Privatization of the Nursery does not help Iowans it only can hurt as cost of nursery stock will go up assuming the buyer can run the facility and not close forcing everyone out of state. The fact that informational and support services to those looking to do conservation projects will deminish can not be measured in dollars. The loss of one project due to lack of support is unimaginable if we truly believe we are stewards of the land for future generations. I will not go into financial details but my undrestanding is that the Nursery is not a cost center for the State so we gain no financial advantage in cutting it we actually will be net losers by cutting off its revenue stream. Thus I recommend we keep the State Forest Nursery and treat it as a valuable resource not something to be cut down.

Elimination of the State Forest Nursery in Ames

PLEASE don't eliminate the State Forest Nursery in Ames. It is clear that private nurseries are influencing this proposal. You would be doing a dis-service to conservation and natural resources and to the public good if you eliminated the program. This is yet another short-sighted move to eliminate conservation programs in this state. With a pathetic and embarassing state conservaton budget of less than one penny on every tax dollar, this is a pathetic move to tear the scraps out of the mouth of a starving dog! Elimination is only going to take away jobs from Ames and surrounding communities and eliminate a tax-generating program.

The SFN helps meet demand for tree and shrub stock that the private nurseries can meet. There is no net tax drain by the nursery, because it is self-sufficient. The SFN generates $60,000 to $80,000 in annual sales tax revenue. The SFN meets the demands of 6000-8000 acres of conservation projects.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsState Forest Nursery Conservation and habitat preservation and restoration are central to

maintaining a viable natural environment in Iowa, a state that has too little of such habitat. Those measures that can be done at little or no cost to the taxpayers must be encouraged. The State Forest Nursery uses only materials native to, and therefore adapted to, Iowa, to maintain and increase natural diversity. Private nurseries are not capable at this point, or in the foreseeable future, of producing seedling stock or cuttings from native material sufficient to supply the demand within the state. I feel that it would be irresponsible, especially to future generations, to eliminate the State Forest Nursery to help solve what is a short-term problem.

I have advised many undergraduate students during my tenure with Iowa State University. It is not employment or salary alone that is responsible for the exodus of our young educated people. A perception exists that Iowa is a state run by old business and farm people, with little concern for the environment, for their own immediate economic concerns. To eliminate this program would be one more example to support this perception. Also, among naturalists and hunters, and I am both, there has seemed to be too little concern for improving habitat and natural diversity. Maintenance of a strong reforestation potential should, again in the long term, improve the environment and the perceptions of the people who live in or are considering living in Iowa.

Eliminatoin of the State Nursery and purchasing from private nurseries is similar to the assumption we are saving money by using private consultants to do other state work. We spend 40-50% more when we use consultants to do state work. I saw an article that said the sale would achieve 1.5 million dollars. I believe purchasing from private nurseries would eat up that small amount of savings in less than a year or two. I don't think it makes good sense to sell something we can do at a lower cost with not much investment. I think the bottom line is that developer's in Ames are pushing this issue more than the state. This is not a good reason to sell.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsFrom what I've read, and what I know about the nursery operations I don't understand how the elimination of the nursery would save any money for Iowa's General Fund. Obviously the sale of the land would be a one time increase in general funds. However, to sale and relocate the nursery would appear to be a wash in terms of funds received versus money spent. One facet of that option would be the time delay, disruption of current services. Since the nursery is self-supporting I cannot understand how any funds would be saved? This issue has been raised in the past, and I feel now as I did before - the nursery provides a valuable service, not only to the DNR and landowners, but to all folks in Iowa. The nursery provide good quality, native stocks for planting in Iowa. From the fact sheets I've read, private concerns could not begin to provide the materials necessary to meet demands - particularly true with the passage of recent bills concerning agriculture and conservation efforts.

The sale of the nursery has been raised in the past. I feel now as I did then - the nursery provides a valuable service, not only to the DNR and landowners, but to everyone in Iowa. The nursery provide good quality, native stocks for planting in Iowa. From the fact sheets I've read, private concerns could not begin to provide the materials necessary to meet demands - particularly true with the passage of recent bills concerning agriculture and conservation efforts. While I agree that any program should be reviewed I also believe the nursery continues to fill a vital role in conservation efforts in this state.

As I understand the charge of the nursery, plant materials can only be used for reforestation, soil erosion control, water quality protection and wildlife habitat. In addition material purchased from the facility can not be used for landscaping, and so forth that private business is far better equipped to handle.

(Cont.) As I understand the charge of the nursery, plant materials can only be used for reforestation, soil erosion control, water quality protection and wildlife habitat. In addition material purchased from the facility can not be used for landscaping, and so forth that private business is far better equipped to handle.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsWhile I agree that any program should be reviewed I do believe the nursery continues to fill a vital role in conservation efforts in this state.

I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY OPION ON THE STATE FOREST NURSERY. I BELIEVE WE NEED TO KEEP THIS NURSERY IN PLACE IN ORDER TO KEEP UP WITH THE DEMAND FOR ACREAGE BEING PLANTED TO TREES IN OUR STATE. SELLING THE AMES FACILITY WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT TO OUR STATE.BOB SCHWARM, BETTENDORF, IOWAEMAIL [email protected]

The commision is currently looking into selling the State nursery.

I oppose the sale of the State Forest Nursery due to a number of reassons. 1. It provides income back to the State instead of costing us anything. 2. The income helps pay for extra district foresters to help landowners such as myself with forest management plans. 3. The private nurseries in the state cannot supply the huge quantities of seedlings needed for areas we are replanting.

I would suggest that the commision not sell the nursery as it provides many benefits to forest owners such as myself.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsI understand the State Forest Nursery (SFN) is under consideration for elimination. I would be disappointed if our leaders in their wisdom chose to do away with this program that is self-sustaining and provides true benefit to the state of Iowa. The State Forest Nursery is not an expense to the state of Iowa. It pays for itself from the sale of seedlings. Also, the state of Iowa benefits from the nursery because a surcharge in each seedling has been able to pay for the employment of 5 additional foresters in the state, who are instrumental in helping woodland owners do a good job of conservation and forestry management. The sale of the 90 acres in Ames where the nursery currently is located only benefits the Iowa treasury fiscally if the state plans to pocket the money and not provide a state nursery at all. That would be an irresponsible idea for the forestry efforts in Iowa. With the conservation opportunities in the new Farm Bill forestry and woodland management is getting funding and will need the infrastructure to support it.

Do not eliminate the SFN, a program that agricultural and conservation-minded Iowans depend on, that pays its own way, and that benefits Iowa not just today, but for future generations. Improving the Iowa environment is a priority of the great majority of Iowans. What might be a program we could responsibly eliminate, a program that would recover money to the state of Iowa? Please consider the elimination of the one weekend in August every year that is supposedly for the benefit of parents in their effort to purchase new clothes and supplies for their school age chidren. If poor people can't afford clothing for their school age children, the 5% parents save in sales tax is not going to make much of a difference for them. I question whether that weekend of tax-free shopping finds much, if any, "new business" for Iowa stores who sell chidren's clothing and school supplies. The sales tax issue is no big deal to parents of school children. The amount of money the state of Iowa loses on that weekend is around $3,000,000.

It would "find" a large chunk of money, around $3,000,000, for the state coffers with few Iowans objecting or even noticing that the tax-free weekend is gone.

(Cont.) The current commercial nurseries, though they are good sources of seedlings, cannot supply our state with the millions of native seedlings we currently need. It is beyond their physical capabilities. Native seedlings are critical is a woodland planting is expected to succeed. Seedlings shipped in from Pennsylvania, Missouri, etc, are not going to do well in the Iowa environment. The State Forest Nursery understands this and provides native seedlings, in healthy condition, that are going to do well in Iowa.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsConcerning the proposed sale of the state forest nursery.I am the President of our local chapter of the National Wild Turkey Federation and also a member of the Iowa State Board of Directors for the NWTF. Our organization has raised and spent $915,401.00 since 1987 on habitat aquisition and enhancement. The state forest nursery has played a key role in these projects and it would do much harm to our efforts in the future if this facility were closed.

Do not sell this nursery as it is a wonderful ASSET to people in our state. ALL people benefit from the conservation resouce that the nursery provides. It is not a fiscal drain on our budget, on the contrary, it makes sense to keep this facility open as NO general funds are used in its operation.

This facility benefits ALL people in Iowa whether they are involved in active conservation programs or not. Clean water and air are a MUST not a WANT.

The State Forest Nursery does not use any general fund tax dollars. The nursery is totally self-sufficient and also funds 5 additional field foresters at no cost for Iowa's landowners. Selling the nursery would be catastrophic to Iowa's conservation practices because of the huge seedling shortage that would result.

Selling the nursery is not a general fund money saver. In fact it would put over 30 private forestry companies in jeopardy because of lack of seedling stock. Selling the nusery would also cause the loss of approximately $80,000/year of sales tax revenue.

Keep the nursery and protect Iowa's conservation interests!

The possibility of eliminating the state forest nursery

I do not feel that the elimination of this program will result in a reduction of general fund expenditures. A comprehensive study of the nursery will prove that the nursery is a self funding entity that creates funding for 5 additional full time employees that are used state wide as foresters. It produces and maintains Iowa specific genetic material. It insures that Iowa will be able to meet obligations of plant material quantities need for federal programs. Thes quantities can not be met by private industry in Iowa. The nursery also provides over $80000 in state sales tax. Finally, the nursery reverts any additional funds collected to the general fund.

The State will maintain 5 district foresters, maintain Iowa genetic material in tree plantings, and have a fund producing program not a fund draining program. Loss of the program costs the state money it does not save money.

State Forest Nursery Please do not close the State Forest Nursery. To cut off this supply of trees and shrubs would send the wrong message to Iowans about the continuing need for more tree planting and reforestation.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsSelling the State Forest Nursery in Ames has been proposed as a cost saving measure.

From a control standpoint,as long as the State and Federal Governments financially support forest conservation, I believe it makes sense for government to be involved in key elements of forest conservation. This would apply to the nursery in Ames, particularly since as I understand it the nursery operates at no net cost. Thus sale would result in some relatively small one time revenue at a cost of lost control over a key element of forest conservation.

State Forest Nursery (SFN), I can not believe that you are actually considering eliminating the SFN. This is a program that since the 1980's (Iowa Code 455A.13)has operated at the cost of production. I have been involved in conservation and reforestation for 25 years and continue to use plants from the SFN. I believe that if not for the inexpensive plants the SFN provided many of my customers would have chosen another use for the land that they reforested.I know that in some instances the SFN was out of the stock we needed and we were required to look elsewhere. Some of the time we purchased material within the state but more often than not we would purchase out of state. The main reason for purchasing out of state was the cost of plant material. I believe that by eliminating the SFN you will seriously hamper the reforestation efforts that have taken place over the last several years. Remember, not all land is suitable for development or agriculture. Forests have a place in this ecosystem and we need to provide the means to accomplish reforestation. Ibelieve the SFN provides this means.

Cut any program that uses general funds. The SFN does not use general tax funds so eliminating this program would not result in an annual tax saving.

Continued improvement of Iowa's ecosystem.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsPlease keep the State Forest Nursery in Ames. Elimination of this state service will have NO effect on the state's budget. The State Nursery is completely self-sufficient.

NO TAX DOLLARS FROM THE STATE'S GENERAL FUND SUPPORT THIS FACILITY! The 2002 Farm Bill passed by the US Legislature will increase the demand for conservation shrub and tree seedlings. Without the State Nursery, private nurseries will not be able to meet demand. This means that consumers will either buy stock from outside Iowa or cancel their plans to plant trees and shrubs. Iowa is last in the nation on dollars spent in conservation. Eliminating the Nursery, a major source of conservation stock, would be devastating to Iowa. Eliminating the State Nursery would actually hurt the state's revenue. It would impact the viability of up to 50 private forestry contractors who do conservation plantings on private land. This could cost the state up to $3.5 million annually in lost revenue. It would result in the loss of $60,000 to $80,000 in annual sales tax revenue collected from the lost seedling sales. Overall, eliminating the State Forest Nursery would NOT reduce general tax fund expenses and makes little economic sense for Iowa.

The state nursery is a self supporting state program. The sale of trees to be planted in Iowa pays for material costs, employees salaries both full and part time plus additional forestry personal. This is without any cost to the general fund. The issue appears to have been brought up because private nurseries consider the state forestry nursery to be competition. Both the state nursery and the private nurseries are unable to keep up with tree demand now. The new federal farm conservation program will encourage even more tree planting. I have personal planted four acres of trees from the Iowa forestry nursery over 25 years ago. I can assure you I would not have planted the four acres in trees without the availablility of low cost trees.

Do not sell the Iowa State Forestry Nursery - it is not receiving any funding from the general fund. The sale of state nursery land valued at $3.3 million is a small one time saving. The private nurseries will not timely replace the state nursery tree supply. Iowa will lose the benefit of the federal farm conservation program without the trees. Selling the state nursery is short sighted - planting trees is looking to a brighter Iowa future.

The Iowa State Forestry Nursery could charge a little more to support even more Iowa Forestry personal - rather than paying the salaries from the general fund. Not having the trees to plant to fulfill federal farm conservation program will cost the state revenue. The state will benefit in the future when trees are sold. The Iowa State Forestry Nursery is an Iowa State Asset worth keeping.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsThe Program Elinination Commission can assist our state government in evaluation of Cost vs Benefit, and cosideration of steps for fiscal responsibility. As Vice Chm. of the 1979 GEC, working with Gov. Ray, the work of the Iowa Conservation Commission and the Iowa Natural Resources Council in matters of land resouce protection and restoration, forests, game habitat,and water resources were a concern of mine. A later reorganization to form the present Department of Natural Resources has added governmental structurebut grass-roots input is more difficult. Tree plantings in a comprehensive environmental plan, compatible with agriculture and our water resources must be encouraged.

The residents of our state, especially our farmers, rely upon the District Forestors, augmented by the State Forest Nursery and the Extension Service to produce working solutions suitable for the soils in their locale. Just as we need native seed-stock for plantings, we need sources which work. We need help in control of invasive, foreign species. This should all fit into a State Water Plan, and its application will result most efficiently through education, rather than legislation. It should optimize solutions within the federal Farm Program. We need to retain the State Forest Nursery within a comprehensive environmental solution. (Use of inmate labor may not be cost effecive if total cost is considered.)

The State Forest Nursery is performing a service which will not be provided by private industry. It is a part of a necessary function of state government. Replanting of acreage in Southern Iowa, work on shelter belts and stream bank erosion throughout Iowa, and replantings of hardwoods and certain wetlands are facilitated by its operation, far beyond the direct cost of its operation.

Tax paying citizen. Keep the State Forest Nursery located in Ames. A consistent supply of quality and low-cost tree and shrub nursery stock from native seed sources to support forestry, wildlife and conservation programs on public and private lands in Iowa.

Proposed elimination of the State Forest Nursery.

Please reconsider the closing of this facility. I understand that no general tax funds are used in the nursery operation, so its closure or sale would not result in an annual tax saving.

The State Forest Nursery has been an important resource for providing stock for natural areas restoration. I fear that if the nursery is closed, more out-of-state stock will be brought in, potentially with very different "genotypes" that will be introduced into Iowa's native populations. Similarly, exotic pests could be introduced, causing major problems to our native trees and shrubs.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsThe State Forest Nursery is under consideration for elimination.

This is an unbelievably short sighted and stupid idea. There are no tax funds used in running the Nursery, so no benefits there will be gained by its elimination. Many local jobs would be eliminated. This would increase the possibility of diseased or non-hardy stock coming in from other states. In summary, selling the State Forest Nursery would be bad environmental policy, and it does not make economic sense either. Please do not support its sale!

Jobs would be saved, sales taxes on sold stock would continue to roll in, and sound environmental advice and plantings would contine.

Referring to the proposal to sell the State Forest Nursery located in Ames

Do not sell the Ames nursery facility. Natural resource conservation in Iowa would benefit by keeping this facility in operation.

possible elimination of the state forest nursery in Ames

Please do not eliminate the state forest nursery! Costs would be prohibitive for landowners to improve the habitat on private lands. We need our state to be involved in a cost-effective way in increasing habitat.

Ongoing and improved habitat for our state, which is sorely lacking in forested areas. We need to increase, not decrease our resources!

Although I can see the need to look for programs that require a sunset or elimination, the proposed closing of the State Nursery in Ames would adversely affect the needs and requirements of the new Farm Bill conservation practices and would not be a cost-0saving to the people of Iowa. If the Nursery is closed then the dollars for purchasing larges lots of native flora would go out of State to private nurseries that would exclude the collection of sales tax on the goods.

Do not close the State Nursery in Ames; I would propose that the Nursery be enhanced to meet the anticipated growth in native planting under the new Farm Bill

The State Nursery could provide the native flora for Iowa and the research required for effective planting and seeding of the plants across Iowa.

The State Forest Nursery and Iowa's private nurseries combined will not be able to meet the projected demand for seedling trees and shrubs for wildlife and soil conservation work expected with the new federal farm bill.

The State Forest Nursery plays a critical roll in meeting demand at an affordable price for bulk seedlings for conservation plantings. Do not cut the State Forest Nursery. To do so will damage conservation efforts state wide by inducing delays and increasing costs to landowners.

1. Better availability of native trees and shrubs�2. Better able to meet an anticipated peak in demand caused by new federal farm programs�3. Retains recent public investments in SFN infrastructure and improvements


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsThe elimination of the State Forest Nursery located in Ames.Closing for the purpose of saving 2% of the general fund.

It is understandable that maybe this 2% is necessary at this present moment, but look at the long term effects. The benefits of salvaging the State Forest Nursery outweigh the the savings of only 2% of the general fund. Closing this comes with loss of employment, shortage in conservation trees and shrubs and loss of $60,000-80,000 in annual sales tax revenue collected and so forth.

State Forest Nursery operates without general fund support, employs 9 full-time and 60-100 part time employees to benefit the Iowa economy. State Forest nursery provides seedlings in amounts of 500+, not competing with private nurseries.

No Change Eliminating the State Forest Nursery would not save any general Fund money, would eliminate several jobs, and would eliminate thousands of dollars of income tax provided through the sale of the seedlings.

Consideration of the elimination of the State Forest Nursery.

Leave the State Forest Nursery as it currently is, as it is not operated with funds from the General Fund, and is self supporting.

Aside from meeting the plant stock needs for reforestation(which the private nurseries are and will continue to be unable to meet), they support a dozen state employees jobs, numerous inmates recieve training in nursery jobs, and the sales tax currently paid on those sales would remain in the state instead of going out of state to purchase plant materials that are not of local ecotype. Simply, stated, why would you want to eliminate a program that pays for itself?

Consideration of the sale of the State Forest Nursery.

Do not sell. Iowa needs more trees. This program seems to produce income to cover it's operating expenses. A one time sale of property wouldn’t cover the costs of replacing this type of facility let alone the "business down time" there would be with rebuilding the program. Thank you for your consideration of my opinion I know others share it.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsThere are no general tax funds used in the SFN operation so sale of the SFN would not result in an annual tax saving. POINTS TO PONDER ABOUT THE STATE FOREST NURSERY The role of the State Forest Nursery (SFN) is to provide a consistent supply of quality and low-cost tree and shrub nursery stock from native seed sources to support forestry, wildlife and conservation programs on public and private lands in Iowa, Operating since the mid 1930's, the SFN possesses two facilities to grow and distribute between 3-5 million conservation trees and shrub seedlings to approximately 2,800 Iowa landowners who in turn reforest 6,000 to 8,000 acres annually, These conservation trees are 1-3 year old bareroot trees and shrubs (6"-24" in size) grown from native seed sources, and are sold in minimum quantities of 500+ plants, They can only be used for conservation purposes of reforestation, soil erosion control, wildlife habitat and water quality protection, They can not be used for farmstead windbreaks, shade or ornamental purposes to avoid conflicts with private nurseries andgarden centers.

Selling the Ames nursery facility would be bad for natural resource conservation in Iowa and make little economic sense. DO NOT SELL the Ames Nursery DNR.

Keep Iowa's natural resouces strong and keep jobs in Iowa and save our environment for us and future generations. Please READ THE FACTS before making or passing judgements that can not be corrected.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_Benefits(Cont.) Since the 1980's the SFN (Iowa Code 455A.13) has operated at the cost of production. No general fund revenue is used in seedlings production including the employment of 9 Full Time Employees and 60-100 seasonal and inmate staff, and In addition, the SFN collects $.05/conifer and $.10/hardwood and places it in the Forestry Enhancement fund (Iowa Code 456A.21) to employ 5 enhancement foresters to provide no cost technical assistance to promote reforestation. Loss of the State Forest Nursery Would cause a shortage in conservation trees and shrubs in Iowa resulting in the delay or elimination of 6,000 to 8,000 acres of needed conservation plantings annually, Would increase the costs of conservation seedlings to Iowans up to 25%+, Would eliminate 14 FTE (9 FTE at the SFN and 5 FTE Enhancement Foresters) and the loss of 60-100 seasonal jobs for locals and inmates.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsPOINTS TO PONDER ABOUT THE STATE FOREST NURSERY The role of the State Forest Nursery (SFN) is to provide a consistent supply of quality and low-cost tree and shrub nursery stock from native seed sources to support forestry, wildlife and conservation programs on public and private lands in Iowa. Operating since the mid 1930's, the SFN possesses two facilities to grow and distribute between 3-5 million conservation trees and shrub seedlings to approximately 2,800 Iowa landowners who in turn reforest 6,000 to 8,000 acres annually, These conservation trees are 1-3 year old bareroot trees and shrubs (6"-24" in size) grown from native seed sources, and are sold in minimum quantities of 500+ plants, They can only be used for conservation purposes of reforestation, soil erosion control, wildlife habitat and water quality protection, They can not be used for farmstead windbreaks, shade or ornamental purposes to avoid conflicts with private nurseries and garden centers, Since the 1980's the SFN (Iowa Code 455A.13) has operated at the cost of production.

Conclusion - Selling the Ames nursery facility would be bad for natural resource conservation in Iowa and make little economic sense.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_Benefits(Cont.) No general fund revenue is used in seedlings production including the employment of 9 Full Time Employees and 60-100 seasonal and inmate staff, and in addition, the SFN collects $.05/conifer and $.10/hardwood and places it in the Forestry Enhancement fund (Iowa Code 456A.21) to employ 5 enhancement foresters to provide no cost technical assistance to promote reforestation. Recent Findings: Three recent meetings with the private nurseries in Iowa have determined that: The demand for conservation trees and shrubs because of the 2002 Farm Bill will increase to 10-15 million seedlings annually.Current SFN capacity of 5 million and up to 3 million from the private Iowa nurseries. Private nurseries could increase to 4.5 million in 3 years (2/3 sold in Iowa) but will still leave a shortage of supply. Result is delayed or cancelled plantings and more out of state purchases.

Selling the Ames nursery facility would be dreadful for natural resource conservation in Iowa and would make little economic sense. Firstly, it would cause a shortage in conservation trees and shrubs in Iowa. This would negatively result in the delay or elimination of numerous acres of needed conservation plantings annually. Secondly, it would increase the costs of conservation seedlings to Iowans. By selling the Ames nursery facility, numerous seasonal jobs would also drastically decrease. Don't you feel, we already have a large enough decrease in seasonal jobs (as well as full time jobs) overall? Next, it would result in the loss of annual sales tax revenue that is collected (not very much). By selling the nursery, it would also increase the chances of out of state nursery stock coming into Iowa that may not be hardy,and may possess invasive pests/diseases that could negatively alter the impact of native ecosystems. Selling of the Ames nursery,would NOT reduce general tax fund expenses because no general funds are used in nursery operation.

Benefits of selling it, NONE!!! Benefits of NOT selling it...numerous!!


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsIt seems the State Nursery does not cost the state anything to run, but closing it would cost the state moeny. We would lose out on the money it brings in and we would have to buy our seedlings/trees from other places. These people have their jobs and do a good job at it. We are lucky to have it and I think you should look elsewhere to try to save a buck!

State Forest Nursery I am a co-owner of One-Stop Forestry, Inc. which is located in Postville, IA. Our buisness is annually one of the largest seedling customers of the Nursery. We order from the State Nursery for a number of reasons; 1. The quality of the seedlings are on a level with other nurseries. It does a landowner little good to plant a tree or shrub seedling if it will not surivive. 2. The competitive pricing of DNR stock allows a landowner the advantage of planting a higher number of seedlings per acre. With tree plantings the more the better. 3. The State Nursery is extremely accomodating with regards to shipping. They see to it that our order is delivered as soon as planting conditions are favorable. Plus their packing and bagging techniques require much less cooler space than the bulky boxes typical of private nursery orders.

(Cont.) Despite our large orders with DNR One-Stop Also annually utilizes private nursery stock for certain species. Closing the state nursery would be a severe blow to our state's reforestation efforts. It is not uncommon for all local nurseries to run out of some of the more popular species. Without the DNR's production Iowa landowners would likely have to settle for less desirable or potentially valuable species. With anticipated increases in demand thanks to a number of forestry incentives in the new farm bill the demand for seedlings will substantially increase. The State Nursery costs the Iowa taxpayers nothing. It supports itself and a number of extremely valuable field employees who probably generate quite a bit of buisness for private nurseries.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_Benefits(Cont.) It is also my understanding that the larger private nurseries have little intention of expanding to dramatically increase their production capabilities. We will never turn Iowa into Minnesota or Wisconsin in terms of forest cover. But at this time when we have the opportunity to reforest acres that should never have been farmed don't limit this potential by closing the Ames nusery.

Potential sale of State Forest Nursery on Duff Ave. in Ames, Iowa.

Could it be leased (as the land for the brand new firestation) as a park by the City of Ames to be used as a community gathering area.

Neighborhood cooperation, goodwill being spread for state government. Passing of the responsibilities of upkeep and expenses transferred to the local community. It would have to be specified that it remain a park and NOT be developed as the area in question is already SATURATED with multifamily dwellings.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsRegarding the State Forest Nursery in Ames: I am an Iowa citizen and a resident of Ames for the past 22 years. I am in full support for the continued operation of the state nursery in Ames by the Iowa DNR. With all the facts available about the supply and demand of/for nursery stock, the nursery being self-supporting and funding several forestry positions, and that a sale of the nursery would do little,if anything to help the General Fund, I am both disappointed and embarassed for the State of Iowa that this issue is even being brought to the table. I am aware that the City of Ames was given a small portion of the nursery for a firestation. The City of Ames government officials, Chamber of Commerce, and developers appreciated the firestation tract so much that NOW they want the rest of the nursery for themselves for development. A recent Ames study regarding the supply/demand for commercial land showed that Ames has enough land available for commercial development at least until the year 2030.

You need help with the GENERAL FUND. One simple suggestion...consolidate/merge several of the public school districts (k-12). We have about 60% of the General Fund tied up in education. It's high time that our elected officials show the fortitude and move these small districts in with another district to both save money and for the best interest of the younger Iowan.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_Benefits(Cont.) The nursery is as much for the people of Waukon, Washington, Spencer etc. as it is for the city of Ames. This is a decision for the entire people of Iowa, and Not for the greedy few in Ames. My grandfather and father have both purchased stock from the State Nursery for their farm in Audubon County. And farmers will continue to need a good quality/dependable supply of nursery stock, especially now with the new Farm Bill. So, please keep the forest nursery in centrally located Ames, Iowa. Thank you. P.S. I will be taking my impressions of the past legislative session to the ballot box on November 5th.

State Forest Nursery provides a cost-effective method to promote trees as a conservation practice. It is a much needed service, that costs nothing from the general fund, it is self-sustaining from tree/shrub sales.

Keep the State Forest Nursery, as the IPEC has suggested. No dollars would be saved, therefore nothing would be gained by selling the facility.

Reduce Middle Management

Middle Management that is inefficent & a drain on the establishment.

Look at the employees, talk to their co-workers & find out who contributes and who doesn't. It doesn't have anything to do with seniority - I know of many people that have been with the state for 20+ years and are no longer a viable part of the company. Either they won't change with the times or they "rest on their laurels" and are kept because of past accomplishments. They may have done a good job in the past - but the state shouldn't have to carry them the rest of their lives. Too many middle managers pass-on their work but accept all the praise when the project is done. Not good for moral. But, if you want the remaining employees to do more - you need to compensate them. I have found that people are usually happy to help out - but you need to show your appreciation - & a slap on the back & a "Good Job" doesn't cut it.

More production with less cost & less extra baggage. I work in a place that has senior people managing 2 people - what's with that? It would improve moral tremendously, too.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsPlace Low-risk Offenders in Treatment

I work in a substance abuse program as a manager. We have strong working relationships with corrections programs. Currently corrections deals with substantial numbers of low risk, OWI first offense and other substance abuse related misdemeanors. Corrections officers salaries range from about $37,000 start to around $56,000 max. Substance abuse counselors average salaries are less than $30,000, starting around $24,000.

I believe substance abuse programs can handle many of the low risk offenders much more economically than corrections programs. Corrections states that well over half of their clients are primary substance abusers. Each District has correctional halfway houses. Substance abuse could run halfway houses for less.

Quality supervision and substance abuse monitoring at significantly reduced costs. There are also numerous states that have redirected dollars to substance abuse for low risk offenders and are saving large sums of general renenue dollars. ie: California, Nevada and most recently Washington State.

Consider Revising the 85% Mandatory SentencingWe have a son in prison at Ft.Dodge under the mandatory sentencing of 10 years for armed robbery. He had no previous violent criminal behavior and no one was hurt in this crime. We accept his guilt and support incarceration but feel it is excessive and does not allow for rehabilitation as we do not know that he is receiving counseling until he is close to being released.

We suggest that mandatory sentencing be reviewed again and revised to give inmates a chance to reduce their sentences more than 15% based on behaviors and goal setting as determined by the correctional system, not the judicial system. Please consider a recomendation to revamp the mandatory sentencing laws.

1. Reduction in inmate population.2. Improved inmate motivation to work, study and change behaviors while in prison.3. Increases inmates chances of success after release and reduces recidivism.4. Allows for judicial discretion in taking into account all circumstances of a crime when sentencing.Thank you for your consideration.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsThis is a follow up comment to a previous message regarding our son and his 85% mandatory sentencing. We have reviewed the sentencing enhancements table and see a great disparity between eligible parole for acts of terrorism, child endangerment, 3rd degree sexual abuse, 3rd degree kidnapping compared to 2nd degree armed robbery. We do not fully understand the severity of these actions but are dismayed that our son must serve at least 85% or 8 1/2 years while others under the other sentences may be out in 4 years. Can you ask someone to explain that to your commission and to us?

Again, we ask for a change in the mandatory sentencing laws for Class C felonies as listed under option 4.

As previously stated, reduced inmate population more emphasis on inmate responsibility for reducing their sentence by meeting goals set forth by the correctional system, and, of course, less time away from their families. Thank you.

Iowa Tuition GrantIowa Tuition Grant I believe you should not get rid of the Iowa tuition grant. I speak not

only for myself but for many Iowa students who rely on this grant to help in their college funding. If you look at the facts that Iowa has going for them, many kids who stay in state to attend school get jobs after school and stay in state but if there is no icentive to stay in state why would a person stay in state to when there is no reward. Think about what you will be loosing if you cut this grant. Personally I will be greatly affected by this. I will have to rethink if I can continue my education at my liberal arts school of Loras college. I think it would be in your best interest if you continue the grant program. Thank you for your time.

Consider Reducing the duplicative programs at Regent instutions and consolidation community colleges


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsI just became aware of this site or I would have submitted earlier. thanks for allowing input.Number 1: 3 regents institutions, 25 private colleges.The state of Iowa does not need three public colleges providing essentially the same curriculum, and does not need to drain the budget with tuition grants for 25 private colleges.Number 2: Whether we still need 15 community colleges is debateable, but at the very least do we still need 15 individual administrative units administering each ind. college.

1. Why not have each universtiy specialize, i.e., UNI - education degrees, UI - Law, medicine, and ISU - engineering and agriculture. By dividing up the majors each could emphasize them more and funds would not be wasted on each providing the same. This is not a big enough state to do so. Whether one agrees with providing tax dollars to private colleges is an important issue, but at the very least we need to question whether or not it is feasible to give it to so many during the lean years.2. Again, regardless of increased enrollment this state is not big enough to support 15 CC. Why not encourage them to begin some reorganization of smaller colleges much in the way, as I am told, that area education agencies are now doing.

To hard to answer, but there would have to be sufficient savings to make it worthwhile to look at.

Allow Purchasing off State contract if it can save agencies moneyState agencies are required to order commercial airline tickets through "Shorts Travel Agency". Today I found that we could purchase a ticket on-line for $229. The best that Shorts could do was $370 and that cost probably doesn't cover the additional fee that we must pay to Shorts.

Allow state agencies to purchase airline ticket online when they can do so at a reduced cost.

Saving the cost of the ticket, the extra fee that we pay Shorts and the reduced staff time to purchase on-line directly and not use "Short's on-line system".

Retain the Alcoholic Beverage Wholesale ProgramAlcoholic Beverage Division It's not broke, don't fix it. I have been doing business with the

Department for 30 years. If you privatize it, I will be forced out of business and out- of-state Companies will take over.

NONE: When the State gave up the wine distribution the lobbiest said that prices would go down and the State would make more money on the taxes. The State made less, & the prices went up. Rural Iowa will get poor service and higher prices.

Department of Revenue and Finance


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_BenefitsIowa State Revenue is putting people on the streets, and driving hard working, tax paying, law abidind citizens out of the state. It is hard to imagine that a government lets this go on. My case is simple. Myself and my wife have paid our share of taxes since we moved here in late 1996. Iowa Revenue says we didn't pay a penny. Iowa Revenue has now taken allof our money, and at the end of Oct., we will be evicted from our apt., since we no longer have the money to pay rent. We have proven that we paid taxes for every year that they questioned with the exception of 2. The years in question are 1995-2000. Getting copies of my W-2's from my past employers are holding up the remaining 2 years, but they refuse to accept this. Why are they allowed to do this. If I don't get help from someone on this issue, I will take this issue public, and expose the corrupted collection practices that are ignored, and allowed to go on in this state. Our case at Iowa Revenue is being controled by [name] .(not sure of the spelling).

1. Eliminate Iowa Revenue collections, and impliment a flat tax that is gaurenteed to come out of every working persons paycheck. It's so simple, it's stupid. The current tax collection system is the worst case of fraud, waste, and abuse I have ever seen.2. Fire, and prosecute [name] at Iowa revenue collections for fraud waste and abuse, and anyone else in that office that has collaborated with [name] . Who knows how many people she has effected.3. Launch a full investigation into the collection practices of Iowa Revenue. Hold them accountable.If you don't want to, i'm sure the O'riely factor would be happy to.

1. Thousands of honest, hard working people will not be terrorized by Iowa revenue. 2. The state gets their cut, without ruining lives, and we as people can go on with our life, and be able to work, and buy food. 3. The state will not have to waste time and effort collecting money that is not theirs, just to return it years later to the people they stole it from. Talk about spining your wheels!4.Everything you collect from the paychecks is free and clear. No running down people that didn't pay, because they have allready paid.


Current_Situation Proposed_Solution Anticipated_Benefits(Cont.)We found it very disturbing that every lawyer and accountant we spoke to about this matter knew of her and her reputation for being uncompromising and forcing families out into the street to maintain her quotas. Her reputation for collecting money no matter what, pleases her supervisors, because it's the numbers that count, and not the people that pay their salaries. I spoke to [name] supervisor about the insults that [name] continually threw at me, and all she could tell me was to not take it personal. they have put a hold on our vehicle tags, tried to take all $7.00 in our bank account, garnished 100 percent of My wife's paycheck, and still to this day continues to steal our hard earned money. I haven't worked since January because of a back injury, and I am going through vocational rehab as I write this. Myself, and my wife are both USAF veterans, and the way we have been treated as people is appalling. Thanks to Iowa revenue, our credit is ruined.

state forest nursery i have heard that eliminating the ... · state forest nursery - please do not...

Documents