Private forest-land owners of the northern United States, 1994 /

Birch, Thomas W.

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.69933

Cited by 27 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Family forest owners do not necessarily agree that proper forest management is the same on both public and private forest lands. Knowledge of family forest owners, especially concerning forestry incentives and technical assistance, has been identified as a factor impacting forest management [66][67][68][69]73,[91][92][93][94]354,358,359].…”

Section: Owner Attitudes Values and Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The earliest research focused on timber production foregone due to lack of owner knowledge, insufficient capital, inefficient tract size, or a simple lack of interest [13][14][15][37][38][39][40][41][66][67][68][69]. Consistently, income, education, and ownership objectives were correlated with forest management intensity, harvest and reforestation activities, and the use of cost-share assistance [1,13,14,66,123,301,406,418].…”

Section: Private Forest Management Planning and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Taxonomic Review of Classical and Current Literature on the Perennial American Family Forest Problem

Straka

2011

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:One of the fundamental issues in American forest policy has been the small forest ownership problem. Early in the twentieth century, it was called the farm forestry problem, later, the nonindustrial private forest problem, and today, the family forest problem. Family forest owners are thought to manage their lands in a suboptimal manner resulting in low forest productivity relative to other ownership groups. This can lead to future timber supply problems. The exact nature of the problem, especially its social and economic basis, was a common subject of early forestry research studies. This article includes many of the major nonindustrial private forest or family forest studies, from early to current, and classifies them both by themes used by other authors and categories that relate to major research areas in the current literature. A major focus of this literature deals with promoting management on family forest holdings and possible land management incentives and disincentives. Natural trends in family forest ownership, like parcelization, also impact upon forest management opportunities. By developing a taxonomy that classifies these studies by research objective, methodology, owner motivation, and problem definition, this article serves to organize the family forest literature in a manner that provides a temporal framework for better understanding the historical motivation for and development of family forest research in the United States.

show abstract

Section: Owner Attitudes Values and Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Private Forest Management Planning and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taxonomic Review of Classical and Current Literature on the Perennial American Family Forest Problem

Straka

2011

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…9). During the period 1991-2006, the number of owners and acreage in family forest holdings of fewer than 50 acres have increased by 10 and 6 percent , respectively, while the number of owners and acreage in holdings of 50 acres and larger have decreased (Birch 1996, Butler 2008. The primary reasons for owning forest land are related to the forest land being part of a home site, privacy, aesthetics, nature protection, and family legacy (Fig.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ohio's Forests 2011

Widmann¹,

Randall²,

Butler³

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, stands with greater vertical stratification, which can be obtained by trees of different diameters (i.e., size diversity), provide more habitat for species with particular habitat niches (MacArthur and MacArthur 1961, Ambuel and Temple 1983, Hunter 1990. Thus, species diversity should also be an important management goal for the many owners who rank "recreation" and "aesthetic enjoyment" as primary reason for owning timberland (Roberts et al 1986, Birch 1994.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic and ecological effects of diameter-limit and BDq management regimes: simulation results for northern hardwoods

Buongiorno¹,

Kolbe²,

Vasievich³

2000

Silva Fenn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The long-term financial and ecological effects of diameter-limit regimes and basal-areadiameter-q-ratio (BDq) regimes were compared by simulation in the case of northern hardwood forests. Varying the cutting cycle between 10 and 20 years had little effect on returns or stand structure. A 28-cm diameter-limit cut gave the highest production and financial returns, and the highest species diversity, but considerably lower size diversity. A 38-cm diameter-limit cut and a heavy BDq selection harvest gave high returns, while maintaining high levels of diversity. On lands of equal site quality, Michigan's stands were more productive than Wisconsin's. The results suggest that it is possible to manage northern hardwood stands sustainably with diameter-limit cuts, combined with removal of poorly performing understory trees. Adjusting the diameter limit gave rise to stands similar in productivity and structure to those obtained by BDq cutting regimes. Given their simplicity of implementation and monitoring, more attention should be given to diameter-limit cutting regimes, with attendant stand improvement measures, as a practical means for uneven-aged management of northern hardwoods.

show abstract

Private forest-land owners of the northern United States, 1994 /

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

Taxonomic Review of Classical and Current Literature on the Perennial American Family Forest Problem

Taxonomic Review of Classical and Current Literature on the Perennial American Family Forest Problem

Ohio's Forests 2011

Economic and ecological effects of diameter-limit and BDq management regimes: simulation results for northern hardwoods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About