OPPORTUNITIES FOR INCREASING TIMBER SUPPLIES 



97 



measures to encourage more intensive forestry on 

 private lands, including general forest protection 

 from fire and other destructive agents, public 

 technical assistance and educational efforts, pub- 

 lic cost-sharing of forestry practices on private 

 lands, leasing of forest land by forest industries, 

 pooling arrangements for management of small 

 forest holdings, use of consultants, and legislative 

 controls on timber cutting practices and forest 

 protection. 



In view of the attitudes of forest owners re- 

 vealed by various studies, it is not surprising that 

 only a small portion of nonindustrial private 

 owners with a small part of the private forest land 

 have participated in these assistance programs of 

 Federal, State, and private agencies. It was esti- 

 mated as of 1970, for example, that only a quarter 

 of the several million farm and miscellaneous 

 private owners have sought marketing advice or 

 other technical services. 



Where owners have invested in forestry prac- 

 tices such as planting or stand improvement, 

 financial standing and size of forest holdings 

 have been most generally correlated with adoption 

 of such practices. People with higher incomes 

 appear more willing to make long-term invest- 

 ments as well as better able to take advantage of 

 cost-sharing or technical assistance programs. 

 Investors in timber production also tend to 

 include people classed as "innovators" and owners 

 with better than average knowledge of forestry. 

 Such factors as occupation, length of tenure, 

 age of owner, distance to residence from forest 

 property, or method of acquiring property were 

 not found to be strongly related to adoption of 

 forestry measures. 



The population of nonindustrial private owners 

 also is constantly changing in terms of individuals, 

 types of owners, and size of holdings. Thus in 

 the southern States, forest land owned by farmers 

 dropped from 48 percent of the total forest area 

 in 1952 to 34 percent in 1970. In the same period 

 the proportion of forest land held by a variety 

 of miscellaneous owners rose from 27 percent to 39 

 percent of the total. 



A very rough classification of the 296 million 

 acres of the Nation's commercial timberland in 

 farm and miscellaneous private ownerships, based 

 upon interpretation of several ownership studies, 

 suggests a breakdown about as follows: 



a. Perhaps 5 percent of the land in these 

 ownerships is intensively managed on a 

 continuing basis. Tree crops are grown for 

 harvesting and manufacture, with owners 

 using all or most practices considered prac- 

 ticable. Most lands leased to industry fall 

 in this category. This group is estimated to 

 vary from as little as 2 percent of the total 

 acreage of these ownerships in the North to 

 as much as 8 percent in the South. 



b. About a third of the farm and miscellaneous 

 owners have some interest in forestry and 

 manage their lands under extensive forestry 

 practices that are usually unplanned or 

 accomplished at random. This category 

 includes most lands under long-term cutting 

 contracts. This group varies from as little 

 as 20 percent in the North to an estimated 

 45 percent in the South. 



c. Owners of nearly half of these holdings 

 display no interest in intensified forestry 

 practices. From time to time owners sell 

 timber grown by nature. 



d. Possibly 15 percent of these ownerships are 

 held by owners essentially for nontimber 

 purposes. This includes land held for specu- 

 lation as well as land held for recreation or 

 other nontimber values. 



Most forest owners have appeared to be more 

 interested in simply obtaining periodic income 

 from selling timber than in making forest manage- 

 ment investments to increase future growth and re- 

 turns. Participants in the Federal-State cooperative 

 forest, management programs, for example, reported 

 a 40 percent increase in area of forest land har- 

 vested during the period 1960 to 1970, but both 

 timber stand improvement and planting activity 

 on such ownerships decreased during this period. 



A general conclusion reached in these investi- 

 gations is that most forest owners do not consider 

 timber growing investments to be sufficiently 

 profitable to take priority over other investment 

 or consumption opportunities. Many holdings 

 are too small for efficient timber production. 

 Also, in some cases, woodland owners must 

 devote what time and money they have to obtain- 

 ing other sources of income. 



Increases in prices of timber could change this 

 picture somewhat and lead to more investment 

 in intensified management practices. New infor- 

 mation on timber growing opportunities and 

 more assistance also may be necessary to change 

 landowner attitudes and willingness to invest in 

 timber production. 



Bringing additional owners into forestry pro- 

 grams would undoubtedly involve increasing 

 expenditures per person assisted as programs 

 reach less interested owners. But without such 

 public and/or private action to persuade and 

 assist forest owners intensify timber management, 

 most holders of nonindustrial private lands cannot 

 be expected to recognize and act upon opportu- 

 nities for more intensive use of their timber 

 resources. 



Indifference of forest owners to management 

 opportunities, and anticipated diminishing returns 

 in expanding programs of "persuasion" thus 

 suggests that all opportunities for timber manage- 



