More Focus on Smaller-Tract Forest Owners (2020) 

Private individuals and families are stewards for the largest percentage of our American forests. These family forest owners influence some of America’s most important economic and environmental resources, such as our supply of timber, wildlife habitat, clean water, and even job opportunities in rural and small communities. 

A significant challenge for American forestry management has been how to contact, inform and motivate many smaller-tract forest owners regarding increased stewardship responsibilities. Last month, I introduced this topic, along with sharing some comments on mixed-stand forestry options. I’ll try to discuss more of this challenge for improved forestry management practices.   

The academic literature on forestry management has recognized the long trend toward increasing numbers of American smaller-tract forest owners.  The term “forest parcelization” has been used to describe this trend, and the descriptor “forest fragmentation” has been applied to explain the impacts of parcelization.      

The definition of a small-tract forest owner varies.  Some researchers and professionals view these land owners as having ten or fewer acres, while others refer to small-tract owners as those with less than 50 acres, less than 100 acres, less than 500 acres, or even more acres. The lack of more consistent definitions means that the term has been often used to lump together land owners with very different characteristics, interests, concerns, and goals.  Smaller-tract landowners in the Deep South often share at least a few common concerns, including trespassing, timber theft, and garbage dumping, with much larger tract owners, but many differences in their objectives and perspectives exist.      

Ownership tract size has been shown to be one of the key factors associated with forestry management choices.  A very small percentage of smaller-track owners have written forest management plans or have engaged in active forest management practices.   

National and regional forestry research in recent decades has provided considerable information about the characteristics and viewpoints of different forest owner subgroups. Yet more specific and important information about forest owner subgroups, especially smaller-tract owners, needs to be obtained from state and county/parish records and surveys.  This seems particularly true for determining better ways to contact and inform forest owners concerning available management options, including available technical forestry assistance as well as cost-sharing and tax incentives. Typical incentives of cost-share payments, technical forestry advice and assistance, and favorable property and other taxing policies tend to motivate larger-tract owners much more than smaller-tract owners.  This is the case, particularly, for non-resident or absentee forest owners with smaller tracts of land, many of whom do not participate in hunting or recreational activities on their land.  

Increased reforestation in the South has been associated with federal and state cost-sharing programs. Yet according to the Southern Forest Resource Assessment Report in 2013, Southern forest owners generally do not take advantage of free government forestry assistance and financial incentives programs. For example, the report claimed that less than 2% of all Southern forest owners receive technical assistance each year from their state forestry agencies. Smaller-tract owners, in particular appear to “think that management activities are too costly or complicated, or view forestry program assistance as being focused mostly on timber production and harvest-related objectives.”     

Traditionally federal and state incentives, especially cost-share programs, did emphasize timber production.  Cost-sharing and other government assistance programs have changed over time, though, to embrace broader values and goals for land owners, such as support for wildlife, recreation, water quality, forest sustainability, and aesthetics.   

Federal and state forestry programs serve many influential stakeholder groups other than land owners, including timber and forest products companies, professional foresters, and forest products consumers. Government officials and programs aren’t necessarily that attuned to surveying, understanding, and effectively serving all stakeholder groups or niches equitably.  More demanding stakeholders draw greater attention and responses. Funding limitations, competing demands for their time and energies elsewhere, and communication challenges exist for governmental services actually being provided to many smaller-tract forest owners.         

The interests of many forest land owners are promoted by forestry and land owners organizations.  Among these are American Forests (previously the American Forests Association started in 1875), the Forest Landowners Association (since 1941), the American Forest Foundation (also since 1941) and the National Woodland Owners Association (since 1983). Beyond timber production and economic interests of their land owner members, various conservation and sustainability programs are touted and services are provided by these organizations.  Just one example is the American Forest Foundation’s new web-based tool called WoodsCamp. This mapping tool streamlines the process of matching landowners having contrasting interests and goals with appropriate conservation programs and opportunities. Offered currently in Alabama and several other states, the program and tool should be available soon in other Southern states.  The extent to which smaller-tract owners are aware of these and other forestry services or might actually respond can be questioned though.   

Conservation and reforestation information, technical services, and cost-sharing and other incentives are certainly available for forest landowners.  My interviews with state forestry professionals indicate, though, that previous efforts to inform and assist smaller-tract forest landowners have seemed to produce very limited responses.    

Joshi, Grebner, Munn, and Grala in a 2015 article in the International Journal of Forestry Research discuss part of this communication challenge.  They conclude that many elderly landowners with smaller tracts of forest land and having a low level of income and less formal education are less likely to respond to or undertake forest management initiatives.  They suggest that certain small tract owners require special attention from government-sponsored outreach and education programs. Other researchers have viewed minorities and females, as well as those with relatively low levels of interest in their forest holdings, less trust in the government, and less clear land titles as special challenges also. 

The difficulties of reaching, informing, and possibly motivating smaller-tract forest owners seem easier to understand than to confront meaningfully and possibly solve.  Potential approaches to address these challenges need more active exploration, pursuit, and evaluation.   

Trends such the deaths of more forest owners from the “baby boomer” generation in the near future could lead to increased forest parcelization. Other trends, including decreases in the number of pine and hardwood sawmills, resulting in higher transportation costs for timber harvesting, as well as climate change and pest-related problems, complicate decisions made by all forest owners.  Outreach and information programs for smaller-tract forest owners appear to be worth renewed and special attention from federal and state forestry officials, as well as from landowner associations and cooperatives.