them. Others encourage their use by subsidizing 
reforestation costs. 
Related State Legislation 
Many States outside the South that utilize volun- 
tary BMP's have also passed formal legislation that 
focuses on protecting wetlands, shoreline areas, 
and designated rivers and streams, and on control- 
ling sediment loss and erosion, stormwater runoff, 
and stream obstruction. These laws all affect 
forestry operations to some extent. 
The general water pollution control statutes of 
most non-Southern States, although not specifically 
addressed to forestry, could also be interpreted to 
be applicable to silvicultural nonpoint source pollu- 
tion. The definition of “pollution” in these laws is 
generally quite broad. To date, however, virtually 
none of this type of legislation has been directed to 
forestry operations. 
Local Regulation 
State legislation is not the end of the story. The 
forestry issue of the decade may well be the virtual 
explosion of local regulatory ordinances being 
passed by county, township, and municipal 
governments--primarily in the East, but also to some 
extent in the West. These ordinances are currently 
causing the most controversy over regulation within 
the forest communuity. They have been prompted 
primarily by concerns about logging and its effects 
on roads, water quality, wildlife, and esthetics. Fre- 
quently, local laws have been enacted in response 
to clashes between urban and rural values 
(Popovich 1984, Wolfgram 1984, Youell 1984). 
Local regulatory measures are of two kinds. The 
first specifically addresses forestry operations in a 
comprehensive and detailed way, while the second 
applies to forestry indirectly by concealment in a 
statute of much broader scope (Siegel and Cub- 
bage 1985). For example, the application of a partic- 
ular ordinance may not be evident in the legislative 
wording, but nevertheless it may be construed to 
relate to timber cutting. Many local statutes are not 
only conflicting, but also stifling to forestry and log- 
ging operations--that is, impractical and difficult for 
foresters and loggers to follow. There is evidence 
that the proliferation of such local laws in the North- 
east may prompt some States in that region to con- 
92 
sider enacting State legislation similar to the Mas- 
sachusetts Forest Practice Cutting Act. For 
example, of the 567 municipalities in New Jersey, 
about 100 have established ordinances restricting 
forest operations. 
Recent Regulatory Trends-- 
The South 
Only two Southern States--Mississippi and 
Virginia--have formal, Statewide forest-practice 
laws. Both are seed tree statutes that stipulate the 
leaving of a specified number of crop trees following 
harvest. Enforcement in Mississippi is virtually non- 
existent. The legislation in Virginia has been en- 
forced more consistently and is considered to be a 
rather successful program. Today, the law is well 
accepted by the State's forestry community. Howev- 
er, in the early years of enforcement, a number of 
small independent operators were prosecuted for 
noncompliance. The law requires that a minimum 
number of crop trees be left for 3 years following 
harvest on sites where pine or yellow poplar consti- 
tutes 10 percent or more of stocking. An alternative 
to the seed tree provision is provided under the law. 
An owner or operator may submit a regeneration 
plan for the site to the Virginia Department of 
Forestry, which must approve the plan prior to any 
cutting. Through this provision, Department 
foresters are notified of impending harvests and are 
able to provide the owner technical guidance before 
less desirable harvesting and regeneration prac- 
tices are undertaken. The benefit of this provision in 
influencing landowners was shown in a survey of 
landowners in which four out of five listed the advice 
of a professional forester as being highly or moder- 
ately important in their decision to undertake plant- 
ing operations or site preparation activities prior to 
natural regeneration (Graff and Kaiser 1986). 
Each year approximately 40,000 acres are refor- 
ested in compliance with Virginia's Seed Tree Law 
(Stare, personal communication. Current USDA 
Forest Service inventory statistics indicate that the 
acreage of pine forest type in Virginia declined by 2 
percent in the last decade (Brown 1986). This is a 
significant improvement over the two previous 
decades, during which the acreage in softwood 
species decreased by 24 percent (Knight and 
McClure 1978). Most of the improvement is reflected 
in planted acreage, which has increased by 72 per- 
cent during the last 10 years. 
