Table 3.10—Area of timberland, by ownership and forest management type in the South, selected years 1952-85, with projections 
to 2030'—Continued 
Thousand acres 
Year Projections 
Ownership and 
forest management type 1952 1962 1970 1977 1985 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 
Total other private 
Pine plantations 850 3,740 5,616 5,843 6,568 8,832 14,002 16,686 17,922 18,540 
Natural pine 51,283 44,943 37,217 31,988 =. 26,718 25,284 20,404 17,708 16,381 15,818 
Mixed pine—hardwoods 19,643 = 19,927 20,220 19,780 — 18,087 16,918 16,033. 15,607 —‘:15,071 14,711 
Upland hardwoods 43,866 48,764 49,188 49,200 49,730 47,841 46,243 45,542 44,878 44,164 
Bottomland hardwoods 27,064 26,497 23,033 21,859 20,782 20,375 19,672 19,137 18,682 18,233 
Total 142,706 143,871 135,274 128,670 121,885 119,249 116,353 114,679 112,935 111,467 
Total, all ownerships 
Pine plantations 1,846 7,587 12,144 15,423 20,884 26,309 38,417 44,194 46,943 48,458 
Natural pine 71,987 64,908 56,692 49,240 40,966 38,068 29,594 25,602 23,917 23,235 
Mixed pine—hardwoods 27,088 27,501 29,185 28,845 26,908 24,789 22,670 21,911 21,315 20,883 
Upland hardwoods 55,382 61,102 61,559 62,145 63,214 60,984 58,321 56,873 55,770 54,796 
Bottomland hardwoods 36,747 35,953 31,732 = 30,861 = 30,192 29,858 28,644 27,648 26,848 26,156 
Total 193,050 197,051 191,312 186,514 182,164 180,006 177,641 176,227 174,793 173,527 
' Data for 1952 and 1962 are as of December 31. Data for 1970, 1977, 1985, and the projection years are as of January 1. 
* Includes timberland leased or under management contracts to forest industry from other owners for periods of one forest rotation or longer. 
Timberland under cutting contracts is not included. 
* Data for these other private ownerships are not available for the years 1952, 1962, and 1970. 
Note: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. 
Projected Changes in Timberland Area—Many of the 
forces that have caused the recent changes in area of timber- 
land will surely continue to influence changes in the future. 
Thus, in making projections of area changes, it has been as- 
sumed that determinants such as population, income, agri- 
cultural productivity, agriculture exports, and prices of 
agricultural crops and timber products would continue to 
influence land-use changes (Alig 1985). 
The projections of timberland area change for the South 
were derived from a regional econometric analysis of his- 
torical relationships among major land uses and key vari- 
ables discussed above (Alig 1986). Area projections by 
State were developed by using State-specific values for the 
independent variable(s) in the regional land-use equations. 
Land areas for all major uses were projected simultaneously, 
with constraints imposed to assure that the sum of all uses 
equaled total land area. 
For each of the key variables, assumptions about future 
trends were made. The assumptions on population and in- 
come are shown in table 3.2 in the preceding section on ba- 
sic assumptions. Assumptions pertaining to the future rate 
of change in agricultural productivity and associated land in- 
comes were derived from the Soil Conservation Service’s 
114 
analysis ‘‘1980 Appraisal: Soil, Water and Related Re- 
sources in the United States’? (USDA Soil Conservation Ser- 
vice 1982). Crop yields were assumed to increase by 1.1 
percent annually up to 2000 and then slow down somewhat. 
Real product prices for agricultural products are assumed to 
remain essentially constant over the projection period. Tim- 
ber product prices rise in line with the base projections in 
this study. It was also assumed that there would be slow 
increases in the export of agricultural products. 
Modeling area changes in timberland for this study pro- 
ceeded in two stages. In the first stage, area changes for 
private forest ownerships were projected as part of the si- 
multaneous projection of all land uses. Projections of pub- 
lic forest area were external to the model and were based on 
the expert opinions of Forest Service personnel involved in 
the management and acquisition of public lands in the South. 
In the second stage of the area modeling, area changes were 
projected for forest management types by ownership. Area 
changes for forest management types reflect influences of 
both natural successional forces and land management ac- 
tivities or disturbances (Alig and Wyant 1985). Projections 
of area changes by management types are also important 
because they reflect differences in management practices 
