currently, but he did not evaluate their effects on 
future timber supplies. Boyd computed that provi- 
sion of technical assistance was more likely to in- 
crease regeneration than subsidy programs were 
(7.3 percent probability versus 5.5 percent) and that 
technical assistance was significant in increasing 
the probability of harvest (7.1 percent). 
Royer and Kaiser (1985) found that the use of 
foresters was commonly associated with southern 
pine regeneration by nonindustrial private forest 
owners. An early study of Pennsylvania State 
forestry assistance, tree planting, and timber-stand 
improvement under the Agricultural Conservation 
Program found social rates of return of about 6 per- 
cent to 10 percent on average to good sites (Manthy 
1970). 
A survey in Georgia identified the characteris- 
tics of nonindustrial private forest landowners who 
invested money in forestry improvements (Mullaney 
and Robinson 1980). Investors usually owned more 
than 100 acres of land, had greater than average 
incomes, and often were repeat users of forestry 
subsidy programs. The study concluded that sub- 
sidy programs would be ineffective in encouraging 
further investment by currently uninterested own- 
ers, despite their high use by current investors. Mul- 
laney and Robinson felt that technical assistance 
stressing low-cost management should be provid- 
ed to encourage production by lower income forest 
owners if full subsidies were not used. 
Hickman and Gehlhausen (1981) performed a 
survey in east Texas that examined the interest of 
forest landowners in different assistance programs. 
They found that providing management assistance 
for multiple use and requiring performance bonds 
from loggers were preferred program features. Ur- 
ban residents with above-average education and 
income levels expressed the most interest in 
forestry programs. 
In a study in the Georgia Piedmont, Cubbage 
evaluated the effects of providing technical forestry 
assistance to assisted and nonassisted groups of 
landowners who made timber harvests (Cubbage 
1983, Cubbage and others 1985). He found that 
harvests between the assisted and nonassisted 
landowners differed significantly. Landowners as- 
sisted by State foresters generally had less pine 
timber removed (1,135 vs. 1,485 cubic feet per 
acre), had more softwood volume left after harvest 
(810 vs. 226 cubic feet per acre), and had more pine 
seedlings (1,602 vs. 803 per acre) after harvests of 
natural stands. A pine-plantation sample was too 
small for differences to be detected, but the two 
64 
groups seemed similar. No differences in the 
amount of soil erosion or damage to the residual 
trees were detected between the assisted and 
nonassisted groups. Personal characteristics did 
not differ much between assisted and nonassisted 
landowner classes. 
Cubbage also found that harvest returns dif- 
fered significantly between owners who did and 
who did not receive forestry advice. Owners assist- 
ed by State service foresters received an average 
price of $108 per thousand board feet of timber; 
those making their own sales averaged only $66 per 
thousand board feet. A small amount of this differ- 
ence could be explained by differing product distri- 
butions, but even in the most conservative case, 
assisted landowners received stumpage prices 58 
percent greater than landowners making their sales 
without assistance. Greater returns for current sales 
and greater residual volumes also led to a greater 
total net present value per acre on lands whose 
owners received assistance ($1,563), compared to 
the nonassisted group ($940), at a real discount 
rate of 4 percent. 
Greater returns to landowners receiving assis- 
tance created large private, social, and program 
benefit-cost ratios. In fact, returns for sawtimber 
marking and harvesting assistance alone were 
enough to justify total Georgia cooperative forestry 
assistance program costs in most comparisons. 
Tax dollars that could be attributed to harvesting 
assistance exceeded costs for timber marking but 
not entire program costs. Returns to the Federal 
treasury were greater than those to the State, and 
the Federal share of program cost is less; so pay- 
backs were greatest for the Federal contribution. 
In Montana, Jackson (1983 unpubl.) performed 
an economic evaluation of the private forestry assis- 
tance program by examining records of landowners 
who made timber harvests in the State. From his 
sample, Jackson found that more timber would be 
grown on lands whose owners had received State 
assistance than on lands of nonassisted owners, 
and that assisted landowners would receive sub- 
stantially greater present values. Accordingly, as- 
sisted owners' lands would generate more State 
income taxes in the future. Seven owners receiving 
technical assistance and seven not receiving assis- 
tance were used in current stumpage price compar- 
isons. Using regression analyses to predict timber 
prices based on the empirical data, receiving tech- 
nical assistance was a significant independent vari- 
able as an interaction term with haul distance. Hold- 
ing other variables at their mean values, Jackson 
