assumptions on the percentage of total fertilized 
acres in the region attributable to nutrition research. 
An evaluation of biometrics research estimated a 
benefit-cost ratio of 16.3:1 for a recently developed 
growth and yield model for oaks in New England 
(Chang 1986). Similarly, investments in container- 
ized forest tree seedling research were found to 
provide annual internal rates of return ranging from 
37 to 111 percent, depending on the price differen- 
tial between bare-root and containerized seedlings 
(Westgate 1986). 
In the only econometric study trying to measure 
timber supply shifts (increases in timber supplies) 
related to forestry research, Newman (1986a un- 
publ.) found aggregate productivity increases at an 
annual rate of one-half to 1 percent for the entire 
region. If the benefits of these shifts were attributed 
to forest research, the resulting returns on research 
investments could range from $1.2 million to $12 
million per year (Newman 1986b unpubl.). Newman 
noted that data were available for only the last few 
decades, and forest management impacts could 
take longer to affect inventory levels. 
Education and Technology Transfer 
The results of forest research programs are dis- 
seminated by many sources, including the Forest 
Service, State extension personnel, State forestry 
agencies, universities, professional and trade asso- 
Ciations, and private forestry consultants. Many re- 
cent studies have been performed evaluating some 
of these kinds of technical assistance. 
Cooperative Forestry Assistance 
Federal efforts to provide forestry assistance to 
private landowners were initiated by Gifford Pinchot 
when he was chief of the Forest Service and contin- 
ued on a modest basis for three decades (Robbins 
1985). Cooperative efforts between the Federal 
Government and the States have officially provided 
technical, on-the-ground forestry assistance to for- 
est landowners since 1937. The Cooperative Farm 
Forestry Act of 1937 (Norris-Doxey Act) first estab- 
lished a program of Federal funding for technical 
assistance to farm woodland owners, which was 
actually provided by State-employed foresters. 
Though the legislation authorized an annual Feder- 
al appropriation of $2.5 million, the first appropria- 
tion actually received was for $300,000 in fiscal year 
1940 (Dana and Fairfax 1980). The 1950 Coopera- 
tive Forest Management Act superseded the 1937 
law and broadened the clientele served to include 
nonfarm private forest landowners, harvesters, and 
primary processors (Skok and Gregersen 1975). 
This was the first comprehensive program to pro- 
vide substantial technical assistance to nonindustri- 
al private landowners. Under the programs, Federal 
funds allocated to the States must be matched by 
State funds. 
Program Components--in 1978, the Cooperative 
Forestry Assistance Act consolidated all previous 
cooperative legislation, authorizing the Secretary of 
Agriculture to provide financial and technical assis- 
tance to each State forester to produce seeds and 
seedlings; perform non-Federal forest planning; 
protect and improve watersheds; and provide tech- 
nical and financial forestry assistance to private for- 
est landowners, vendors, operators, wood 
processors, and public agencies. As such, the au- 
thority for management assistance under the Coop- 
erative Forest Management program was super- 
seded by the 1978 law, which is referred to as 
Private Forestry Assistance in some States and as 
Rural Forestry Assistance in others. 
The programs provide direct, on-the-ground 
technical assistance to help private landowners 
manage their forests for multiple outputs. Funds 
from Federal and State Governments support State 
service foresters, who perform the field work. Cur- 
rently every State in the Nation has private forestry 
assistance programs. However, large budget cuts 
have been made in several State forestry budgets, 
and Federal appropriations for State and Private 
Forestry in the USDA Forest Service are declining. 
Extension and service foresters also help dissemi- 
nate to private landowners current timber prices 
that are published in Timber Mart-South and other 
sources. Some States have now instituted a fee 
system for forest-management assistance. 
Program Efficiency--Several recent studies have 
examined the effectiveness of the provision of tech- 
nical assistance. Boyd (1983, 1984) used regres- 
sion to estimate the effects of various types of 
forestry assistance on timber production. In gener- 
al, Boyd found that forestry incentive programs (FIP) 
did encourage investments in growing timber, 
though somewhat less than one might expect from 
a profit-maximization criterion alone. He found that 
FIP did not contribute to owners harvesting timber 
63 
