sign in sign up
<<
Home , Forest management

Chapter 14: Intensive Timber Management Practices 327 Chapter 14:

What are the status Intensive Timber and trends of management practices Management Practices in the South?

Jacek P. Siry Department of , North Carolina State University

production potential of changes Growth-and-yield analysis was Key Findings accordingly. Planting genetically the first step in the evaluation of the

improved stock and applying fertilizer impact of forest investment on forest TIMBER ■ Forest management in the South and herbicide will increase growth, conditions and productivity. Capital has intensified over the past two yield and long-run timber supply. budgeting analysis, which discounts the decades, and this trend is expected This chapter assesses the status of cash flow of investments, was used to to continue. forest management in the South. It develop financial indicators such as net ■ describes both the types and extent present values (NPVs), expectation Intensive planted pine technology of silvicultural treatments in the region. values (SEVs), and internal rates of nearly doubles growth-and-yield It also analyzes costs and returns from return (IRRs). These measures were rates and offers superior investment intensive management practices. used to determine whether intensive returns compared to more traditional forest management generates attractive management composed only of site returns. This step was supplemented preparation and planting. Methods with results of surveys of forest owners. ■ Planted pine management Forest industry (FI), timberland intensity is expected to continue Applied approaches included management organizations (TIMOS), to grow as forest industry and statistical data analysis, growth- and nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) timberland management organizations and-yield analysis, capital budgeting owners were asked about their current increase investment on their . analysis, and literature review. The and future management approaches. ■ Hardwood forests are managed first step in assessing the status and Results permitted inferences about less intensively in natural stands. trends of forest management practices likely future management intensities in the South involved analysis of forest and their impact on forest conditions ■ Intensive management is difficult inventory statistics. Effects of particular and productivity. and more expensive on smaller tracts; management practices on increasing fragmentation of forests productivity were estimated from a in the South will exert downward forest industry survey, which served Data Sources pressure on management intensity. as a baseline for the development ■ Forestry incentives programs have of planted pine growth-and-yield Reports from USDA Forest Service supported planting, management tables. The survey’s results were and Analysis (FIA) planning, and improvement of forest used to develop five planted pine units, State forestry organizations, management practices, substantially management-intensity classes. literature, industry associations, increasing planted pine area, timber Management treatments included and research cooperatives were the production returns, and environ- site preparation, planting of genetically primary data sources for the analysis. mental benefits. improved seedlings, applications of Two most recent rounds of FIA fertilizer and herbicide, and . surveys (with the exception of Introduction The TAUYIELD model was used to Kentucky, where only 1988 FIA evaluate effects of these management survey data were available) were treatments on growth and yield. used to determine the status and Timber harvests in the South have TAUYIELD is a stand-level growth- trends of specific forest management taken advantage of a substantial and-yield model for unthinned and practices that can be observed and accumulation of forest-growing stock thinned loblolly pine recorded on sample plots. For all States, and considerable investment in timber (Amateis and others 1995). The model except Kentucky, the latest FIA survey growing over the past four decades. estimates number of , average measurement year is in the 1990s. As some forest owners adopt more height, basal area, and volume by The earlier of the FIA surveys were intensive forest management, the diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) class. conducted between 1982 and 1989. 328 Southern Forest Assessment

Average measurement years for the in both site preparation and burning In particular, the North Carolina latest and earlier rounds of the FIA categories. This situation raises some State Forest Nutrition Cooperative surveys are 1993 and 1986, concerns with double counting in site (2000) provided information about respectively. preparation and burning categories and fertilizer application. Forest owner Management practices represented the confusion of prescribed burning surveys by the Southern Forest by FIA data include , with . In Kentucky, burning Assessment Consortium partial cutting, thinning, timber stand disturbance was recorded without (SOFAC) and the American Forest improvement (TSI), site preparation, notation of purpose, and no thinning, and Paper Association (AF&PA) burning, planting, and natural regen- timber stand improvement, or site provided information about manage- eration. Because there were some preparation information was noted. ment intensities on FI, TIMOS, and differences between the Southeast Finally, adjustments had to be made NIPF timberlands (Moffat and others region (Florida, Georgia, North in developing Southwide planting and 1998, Siry 1998, Siry and Cubbage Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia) natural regeneration estimates. In the 2001, Siry and others 2001). and the South-Central region Southeast, FIA recorded information The surveys and literature review (Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, about planting, , and provided information on multiple- Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, natural regeneration. The same use intentions and outcomes, “no Tennessee, Texas) and between information was not available for active management” approaches, particular States in defining manage- the South Central. Planting and and forestry incentives programs. ment practices and data collection natural regeneration rates there were Where possible, information was standards, some adjustments had to developed using stand origin and age provided by ownership group. FIA TIMBER be made to develop Southwide forest variables. This approach yielded only data provided information for management practices categories. approximate results because FIA used public (PB), forest industry (FI, In the Southeast, partial cutting, regression results to assign stand ages includes company and leased land), seed-tree cutting, and salvage cutting to sample plots that originally were miscellaneous corporate (MC), and categories were merged into one in a mixed-age category. These NIPF owner groups. SOFAC and partial cutting category that corre- problems and assumptions indicate AF&PA surveys provided information sponds to the South Central’s partial that the results based on FIA data for FI, TIMOS, and NIPF owners. cutting category. Similarly, in the South are only moderately accurate. Central, thinning, commercial thinning, Since FIA data provide no infor- Results and precommercial thinning categories mation about the use of genetically were merged into one thinning category improved stock, fertilizer and that corresponds to the Southeast’s herbicide application, or uneven- Forest management in the South has thinning category. aged , other information intensified over the past two decades. Practices associated with intensive In the Southeast prescribed burning sources had to be used. These data sources include industry associations, forest management are used more was classified, depending on purpose, frequently and on larger areas than as site preparation or other prescribed research cooperatives reports, and forest owner surveys. ever before. These practices include burning, whereas in the South clearcutting, partial cutting, TSI, Central burning could be included Table 14.1—Current status and trends in annual use of forest management practices by forest type based on FIA data

Forest management type

Change Planted Natural Upland Bottomland Not between Treatment pine pine Oak-pine hardwood hardwood stocked Total FIA surveys

------Thousand acres per year ------Percent

Clearcut 435.1 188.4 347.4 778.4 266.9 6.4 2,022.7 9.5 Partial cut 344.4 577.2 663.2 1,322.3 395.8 6.2 3,309.2 12.4 Thinning 308.2 179.8 97.6 46.7 10.5 0 642.8 2.5 TSI 285.1 362.7 163.2 116.5 12.4 1.5 941.5 74.4 Site prep. 709.0 66.4 195.7 179.5 28.8 3.4 1,182.7 1.0 Burning 667.7 761.2 409.2 392.1 53.5 4.8 2,288.5 -3.5 Planting 1,237.1 NA 226.0 165.7 12.4 2.0 1,643.3 25.2 Natural regen. NA 300.2 319.1 815.7 242.9 23.5 1,701.5 18.0

TSI = timber stand improvement. Chapter 14: Intensive Timber Management Practices 329 planting and natural regeneration, and larger hardwood component are TSI operations are carried out on chemical applications. Thinning and classified as oak-pine. If this indeed about 940,000 acres annually. This area site preparation experienced smaller is the case, then planted pine clearcut has increased by about 74 percent increases, while burning became less area would be similar to upland hard- between the FIA surveys. The largest common. Intensified planted pine . Clearcutting is most common increases also occurred on FI and MC management nearly doubles yields on NIPF land, which accounts for 57 land. Natural pine forests account for compared to traditional management percent of harvested area. This result 39 percent of TSI land, and planted approaches. While it is more expensive is an expected result because NIPF pine forests account for 30 percent. than traditional management, capital owners hold the majority of timberland Nearly 1.2 million acres are site- budgeting analysis indicates that in the region. Acreage of clearcutting prepared annually. About 60 percent intensive management generates has grown by nearly 10 percent over of site preparation is for pine planting. superior returns. Compared with the period covered by the FIA surveys, Much of the rest is for natural regen- planted pine, hardwood forests are or a 1.4-percent annual increase from eration of pine. FI land accounts for managed less intensively in natural 1986 to 1993. While clearcutting 54 percent of site-prepared area. While stands. Their management intensity increased on PB, NIPF, and MC land, it site-prepared area has been relatively is expected to increase moderately. actually decreased on FI land. The total stable, there were some changes Attractive planted pine returns and annual clearcut area amounts to only among ownership groups. MC stated future forest management about 1 percent of timberland area in owners increased site-prepared area intentions indicate that forest the region. This result indicates that by 56 percent, while PB and FI management intensity in the South management is relatively extensive in owners decreased their acreages will continue to grow. the South’s timberland. Partial cutting of site preparation. TIMBER is much more widespread, occurring Trends in Use of Specific on about 3.3 million acres annually. Burning is the only management Forest Management It has increased by 12 percent over the practice that became less common. period between the two FIA surveys. Currently, it occurs on nearly 2.3 Practices million acres annually, primarily on Tables 14.1 and 14.2 show FIA results Approximately 640,000 acres are FI and NIPF land. The total number regarding current annual use and trends thinned annually. This practice is most of burned acres has decreased by nearly in use of forest management practices, often used in pine plantations and on 4 percent. Burning is most frequent including clearcutting, partial cutting, FI land, which account for 48 percent in natural and planted pine stands. of the total thinned area. Considering thinning, TSI, site preparation, burning, Annually, 1.6 million acres are planting, and natural regeneration. the size of FI timberland area, this result indicates relatively high thinning planted, both for and Clearcutting occurs on about 2 intensity. The total thinned area afforestation. Planting rates have million acres annually. Upland increased by nearly 3 percent between increased by 25 percent between hardwood accounts for 38 percent the FIA surveys. The largest increases the FIA surveys or about 3.6 percent of harvested land and is followed by in thinning area of up to 74 percent per year. Pines dominate 75 percent planted pine with 22 percent. The area occurred on FI and MC land. Thinning of planted land. In addition, planted of clearcut planted pine is probably intensity decreased on PB land. pines occur in oak-pine stands in higher as planted pine stands with a which hardwoods make up over half of the stocking. Between the surveys, Table 14.2—Current status and trends in annual use of forest management NIPF owners and MC owners have practices by owner based on FIA data increased planting rates by 85 and 68 percent, respectively. Natural Ownership regeneration is practiced on nearly Non- Change 1.7 million acres annually. Between Forest Misc. industrial between FIA surveys, naturally regenerated Treatment Public industry corporate private Total FIA surveys area increased by 18 percent. Nearly 1.6 million acres of planted ------Thousand acres per year------Percent pine were fertilized in 1999 (North Carolina State Forest Nutrition Cooperative 2000). The increase from Clearcut 90.9 578.4 207.3 1,146.1 2,022.7 9.5 1990 is nearly 800 percent. Nearly Partial cut 156.7 847.6 293.6 2,011.4 3,309.2 12.4 10 million acres were fertilized in the Thinning 52.0 306.0 65.9 219.0 642.8 2.5 South since 1969. This area is estimated TSI 189.5 382.0 65.1 304.9 941.5 74.4 to exceed the sum of forest fertilization in the rest of the World taken together. Site prep. 66.0 633.6 104.6 378.6 1,182.7 1.0 While the exact distribution of fertilized Burning 440.8 833.7 195.6 818.4 2,288.5 -3.5 land among forest owner groups is Planting 70.2 696.3 131.9 744.8 1,643.3 25.2 not available, the Forest Nutrition Natural regen. 89.4 264.2 152.1 1,195.7 1,701.5 18.0 Cooperative data indicate that fertilization is primarily the domain TSI = timber stand improvement. of FI and TIMOS. Fertilization will likely become even more popular 330 Southern Forest Resource Assessment

in the future as new, more intensive to some extent from classifying planted is quite complex, and many uneven- silvicultural systems are introduced. pine stands with a larger hardwood aged forests probably were not Assuming that we have about 34 component as oak-pine. Hardwood established intentionally. Some FI million acres of planted pine that forests are managed primarily in natural firms practice two-aged and uneven- will be fertilized at least twice during stands. They account for most forest aged silviculture in hardwood forests. the rotation, fertilized area could at land that is harvested and naturally least double from today’s levels. regenerated, which is conditioned Effects of Various Forest Data on herbicide application were on their extensive cover in the region. Management Intensities not available, but some inferences FIA results indicate that areas of on Productivity clearcutting, partial cutting, TSI, can be made about the area on which Five management intensity classes it is practiced. Results of forest owner planting, and natural regeneration increased moderately, while thinning, (MICs) were developed to estimate surveys, discussed in the following potential pine growth and yield on FI sections, indicate that herbicide is site preparation, and burning became less popular between the surveys. land (Siry 1998, Siry and others 2001). applied together with fertilizer in MICs range from traditional planted higher management regimes. These FI and MC holdings are managed pine management, consisting only of results, coupled with planted pine most intensively, and intensity of site preparation and planting, to more area estimates and the assumption management has increased markedly. intensive approaches involving planting of a 25-year rotation length, indicate Management intensity of NIPF land is of genetically improved growing stock, that herbicide might be applied on also increasing, but to a lesser extent. fertilizer application, and herbicide about 2.0 million acres annually. Management intensity on PB land,

TIMBER application to control competing Overall, rapid increases in harvest the smallest ownership category in vegetation. MICs assumptions for rates, planting and natural regeneration, the South, appears to be changing as unthinned and thinned stands are TSI, and chemical applications indicate well. Clearcutting, TSI, planting, and summarized in tables 14.3 and 14.4. burning have increased. Partial cutting, increasingly intensive management Genetically improved stock was of southern forests. Intensive forest thinning, site preparation, and natural regeneration have decreased. assumed to increase volume by 14 management is practiced primarily percent at the culmination of mean in pine plantations, which account Changes in stand structure (even- annual increment (Siry 1998, Siry and for most planting, site preparation, aged, two-aged, and uneven-aged) others 2001). This increase corresponds fertilizer application, and thinning. management are difficult to determine to a 5-foot (SI) increase on Naturally regenerated forest types due to the lack of data. About 34 medium sites (SI 60). The impact of are managed less intensively than pine million acres of planted stands are in 200 pounds of nitrogen and 25 pounds plantations. Thinning, TSI, and burning planted pine or oak-pine forest types. of phosphorus fertilizer was modeled are most common in natural pine, These stands are managed in even- by increasing yield by 400 cubic followed by oak-pine. Between the FIA aged systems. With few exceptions, feet during the 5-year period after surveys, oak-pine stands experienced the remaining stands were regenerated treatment. The impact of competing substantial increases in clearcutting (40 naturally. Depending on natural growth vegetation control on yield was percent), partial cutting (48 percent), conditions, types of cutting, and other modeled by increasing SI by 5 feet TSI (102 percent), site preparation disturbances, they may represent any for MIC 4 and 7 feet for MIC 5. (118 percent), and burning (29 of three age structures. Implementation percent). These increases may result of uneven-aged management systems

Table 14.3—Southwide unthinned management scenariosa

MIC1 MIC2 MIC3 MIC4 MIC5 Treatment/MIC traditional low medium high very high

First generation N/A Increase yield Increase yield Increase yield Increase yield genetics by 14% at by 14% at by 14% at by 14% at CMAI CMAI CMAI CMAI CMAI

Fertilization (N and P) N/A N/A Age 15 Age 15 Low: age 10, 15 Med.: age 8, 13 High: age 5, 10 Competing vegetation control N/A N/A N/A Increase SI by Increase SI by 5 ft 7 ft

SI = site index; MIC = management intensity class; CMAI = culmination of mean annual increments. a Planting density = 600 trees per acre; medium sites (SI = 60). Chapter 14: Intensive Timber Management Practices 331

Table 14.4—Southeast and South-Central thinned management scenariosa

MIC1 MIC2 MIC3 MIC4 MIC5 Treatment/MIC traditional low medium high very high

First generation genetics N/A Increase yield Increase yield Increase yield Increase yield by 14% at by 14% at by 14% at by 14% at CMAI CMAI CMAI CMAI

Fertilization (N and P) N/A N/A At time of At time of At time of thinning thinning thinning Competing vegetation control N/A N/A N/A Increase SI by Increase SI by 5 ft 7 ft Thinning regime: Southeast All sites: 1 All sites: 1 All sites: 1 All sites: 1 Low: 1 thinning; thinning thinning thinning thinning Med., High: 2

TIMBER Thinning regime: South Central Low: 1 thin; Low: 1 thin; Low: 1 thin; Low: 1 thin; All sites: 2 Med., High: Med., High: Med., High: Med., High: thinnings 2 thinnings 2 thinnings 2 thinnings 2 thinnings

SI = site index; MIC = management intensity class; CMAI = culmination of mean annual increments. a Planting density = 600 trees per acre; medium sites (SI = 60).

In thinned stands, the impact of and 14.3. Yields in unthinned stands nearly 3,900 cubic feet per acre for MIC genetically improved growing stock vary at age 25 from about 2,700 cubic 5. The difference of about 1,500 cubic and competing vegetation control feet per acre for MIC 1 to nearly 4,600 feet per acre indicates that MIC 5 has was modeled in the same way as in cubic feet per acre for MIC 5. The the potential to produce 65 percent unthinned stands. Fertilizer application difference of about 1,900 cubic feet per more volume that MIC 1 in thinned was assumed to take place at the time acre indicates that MIC 5 has the stands. More intensively managed of thinning. Thinning had to remove potential to produce almost 70 percent stands were thinned earlier. The most at least 450 cubic feet per acre of wood more volume that MIC 1. In unthinned pronounced yield increases resulted volume, which roughly corresponds to stands, the largest increase in yield from competing vegetation control about 600 cubic feet per acre of gross comes from controlling competing and fertilizer application. Fertilizing volume (wood and bark). This volume vegetation. That treatment increases permitted earlier second thinning was assumed to be the minimum yields by 600 cubic feet per acre for or increased volume in the thinning. for economically feasible thinning. MIC 4 and 750 cubic feet per acre for Thinning reduced total volume Furthermore, thinning could not MIC 5 at age 25. Genetic improvement production throughout the rotations, reduce the basal area of residual stands increases yield by nearly 420 cubic feet because accelerated basal area growth of below 80 square feet per acre, ensuring per acre at age 25. Finally, as explicitly residual stands did not compensate for that sufficient growing stock remained. assumed, fertilization increased yield the loss of productive capacity removed For multiple thinnings, a 5-year time by 400 cubic feet per acre. in the thinning. The volume reduction lag between thinning was specified Yields in thinned stands vary at age ranged from 7 to 15 percent or from to capture the full response from 25 from about 1,900 cubic feet per 230 cubic feet per acre to nearly 700 fertilizer. These thinning assumptions acre for MIC 1 to 2,600 cubic feet cubic feet per acre when compared with reflect management objectives to per acre for MIC 5. Thinning removals unthinned stands in the MICs at age provide intermediate cash flows and for a single treatment range from nearly 25. Thinning also shifted the diameter increase production of higher quality 500 cubic feet per acre to 800 cubic feet distribution to the right, implying that sawtimber. Single thinning was per acre. Thinnings produce primarily thinned stands grow less timber, but assumed to prevail in the Southeast. , with the exception of MIC that its quality and value are higher. In the South-Central region, multiple 5, where 35 percent of wood volume While the share of sawtimber in total thinnings occurred in most cases. produced by the second thinning is volume in unthinned stands ranges Examples of planted pine yields by sawtimber. Total yield (thinnings plus from 32 to 48 percent at age 25, in MICs and thinning regimes on medium yield at age 25) ranges from about thinned stands it ranges from 45 to sites are presented in figures 14.1, 14.2, 2,400 cubic feet per acre for MIC 1 to 76 percent. 332 Southern Forest Resource Assessment

MIC 1MIC 2 MIC 3 Table 14.5 compares unthinned 5 MIC 4 MIC 5 planted pine yields by MIC on medium sites with empirical yields used by the Subregional Timber Supply (SRTS) 4 model (Abt and others 2000) and the 1993 Resources Planning Act (RPA), and yields recorded in the 1997 FIA 3 survey of Georgia. SRTS yields rely exclusively on empirical values developed directly from FIA data, 2 while RPA yields rely on FIA data as well as on yield curves developed during past RPA assessments. This

Cubic feet per acre (thousand) 1 analysis of the planted southern pine growth and yield indicates 0 that projected plantations yields are 10 15 20 25 30 35 much higher than historical FIA data. Age (year) Increases range from 15 percent (for MIC 1) to 94 percent (for MIC 5) above Figure 14.1—Planted pine yields, Southwide, unthinned. MIC is management intensity class. current SRTS empirical data for average TIMBER sites at age 25. Projected yields are also greater than those used in the last MIC 1MIC 2 MIC 3 MIC 4 MIC 5 RPA modeling efforts. Furthermore, 5 projected yields, with the exception of the youngest age class, are consistently higher than yields from 4 the most recent FIA Georgia survey. In summary, intensified management 3 of planted pine provides substantial opportunities for increasing timber growth, yield, and quality. Fertilizer 2 increases yield by 400 cubic feet per acre per treatment; genetic improve- ment increases yield by nearly 420

Cubic feet per acre (thousand) 1 cubic feet per acre; and competing vegetation control increases yield by up to 750 cubic feet per acre. These 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 treatments applied together have the Age (year) potential to exceed traditional yields (MIC 1) by 70 percent, and SRTS- Figure 14.2—Planted pine yields, Southeast region, thinned. FIA and the last RPA yields by MIC is management intensity class. nearly 100 percent. Information about effects of various MIC 1MIC 2 MIC 3 management intensities on natural 5 MIC 4 MIC 5 forests productivity is limited. FIA- based empirical yields developed for the SRTS model indicate that average 4 annual growth rates for natural pine across all sites can be as high as 86 cubic feet per acre, followed by oak- 3 pine (54), upland hardwood (47), and bottomland hardwood (44) (Abt and others 2001, Siry and others 2 1999). These results also indicate that FI natural pine yields can be nearly 1 20 percent higher than NIPF yields. Cubic feet per acre (thousand) The estimated average annual growth rates in natural stands are lower than 0 those of planted pine stands, which 10 15 20 25 30 35 range from approximately 109 cubic Age (year) feet per acre (MIC 1) to 183 cubic feet per acre (MIC 5). Figure 14.3—Planted pine yields, South-Central region, thinned. MIC is management intensity class. Chapter 14: Intensive Timber Management Practices 333

Table 14.5—Comparison of TAUYIELD projected growth and yield data for acre, and the use of genetically improved seedlings raises this cost unthinned MICs with FIA data and modeling assumptions. Merchantable a to $75 per acre. Fertilization costs wood volume (cubic feet per acre to a 4 in. diameter outside bark top) $50 per acre per treatment. Tax and administration expenses are $8 per acre Stand age annually. Assumed costs of herbicide application for MIC 4 are $50 per acre. The costs of the two herbicide MIC 10 15 20 25 30 treatments in MIC 5 are (1) weed control treatment at year zero for $35 Cubic feet per acre per acre, and (2) woody plant control treatment at year three for $50 per MIC 1: traditional 309 1,121 2,004 2,716 3,158 acre. There are only three revenue MIC 2: genetics 396 1,353 2,355 3,135 3,605 categories, two timber and one non- MIC 3: MIC2+F 396 1,353 2,637 3,433 3,912 timber. Thinnings primarily produce pulpwood; and the final harvest MIC 4: MIC3+H 518 1,670 3,139 4,033 4,502 nd produces pulpwood and sawtimber, MIC 5: MIC4 +2 F&H 641 2,170 3,645 4,587 5,057 which generate $25 per cord and $350 SRTS-FIA 568 1,138 1,708 2,361 3,013 per thousand board feet, respectively. 1993 RPA 310 1,136 1,892 2,382 2,824 Hunting leases are assumed to generate

1997 FIA Georgia survey 420 912 1,540 1,969 2,625 $3 per acre annually. TIMBER Basic financial measures commonly MIC = management intensity class; F = fertilization; H = herbicide application. used in forestry—NPVs, SEVs, and IRRs a TAUYIELD assumes SI 60 at base age 25 and planting density is 600 trees per acre; for unthinned and thinned scenarios— SRTS-FIA, 1993 RPA, and 1997 FIA Georgia survey data are average for all sites. are presented in table 14.6. These financial measures were calculated using a 6-percent real discount rate. In comparison with pine manage- treatments include intensive site ment, hardwood management in the preparation, plantation of genetically In addition, a 1-percent annual timber South has been neglected. The range advanced seedlings, complete price appreciation was factored in. Financial results were developed for of active management approaches competing vegetation control, and varies, but managed stands rarely high-intensity fertilization. Genetic rotations determined by SEV criterion. achieve growth rates that are much improvement increases yields by In unthinned scenarios, NPVs vary higher than those in unmanaged up to 25 percent per rotation. from $440 per acre for MIC 1 to $990 per acre for MIC 5. Similar relation- natural stands (Robison and others Hardwood plantation establishment 1998). Research results indicate in many cases has been difficult and ships apply to SEVs, which vary from $532 per acre for MIC 1 to $1,249 that treatments including herbicide expensive. Earlier plantations had per acre for MIC 5. Real IRRs for the application, fertilization, enrichment growth rates similar to natural planting, and thinning have the hardwood stands, with the exception MICs vary from nearly 10 to 12 percent. These criteria indicate potential to substantially increase of cottonwood plantations along that intensified forest management hardwood stand productivity the Mississippi River (Robison and (Groninger and others 1998; Lockaby others 1998). Progress in genetic generates positive and apparently attractive financial returns. and others 1997; Meadows and Goelz improvement, propagation, and 1999a, 1999b; North Carolina State silviculture appears critical for In thinned scenarios, NPVs vary Hardwood Research Cooperative 2001). hardwood plantations to increase from $411 per acre for MIC 1 to $1,082 The area of hardwood plantations the production of high-quality for MIC 5. Similarly, SEVs vary from is very small. It is estimated that there and uniform wood. Hybrid poplar $504 per acre for MIC 1 to $1,411 are about 200,000 acres of hardwood plantations in the South already for MIC 5. Real IRRs among the MICs plantations in the South (Dvorak and can grow substantially more timber vary from nearly 10 to 13 percent. others 1998). FI owns about 60,000 than natural hardwood stands A comparison of the performance acres of hardwood plantation (Goetzl, (Alig and others 2000). of unthinned and thinned scenarios A. March 23, 1998. AF&PA southern indicates that IRRs for thinned forest management intensity survey. Quality of Forest scenarios are the same as or higher Data summary and survey results. Investments than IRRs for unthinned scenarios. Unpublished report. On file with: Intensive management can greatly IRRs reach the highest level of 13 American Forest and Pulpwood increase pine growth and yield, but the percent in the MIC 5 thinned scenario. Association, Washington, DC). In use will depend on financial returns. However, NPVs and SEVs for scenarios addition, the industry established Six management-cost categories were with one thinning are lower than for about 12,000 acres of hardwood included in the analysis based on a unthinned scenarios. Only multiple plantations with short rotation forest industry survey (Siry and others thinning scenarios for MIC 3 to intensive silviculture (SRIS). These 2001). On average, it is assumed that MIC 5 generate higher returns than plantations are managed on up to site preparation costs $140 per acre. corresponding unthinned scenarios. 12-year rotations. Management Seedlings and planting cost $70 per Among all thinned and unthinned 334 Southern Forest Resource Assessment

scenarios and management intensity classes, MIC 5, the most intensive Table 14.6—Summary of financial analysis of loblolly pine by MIC for multiple thinning scenario, generates medium sites (pulpwood $25 per cord, sawtimber $350 per thousand the highest financial returns. board feet) at 6-percent real discount ratea Natural hardwood stands can be managed with profit as well. Typically, MIC Rotation Yield NPV SEV IRR such management relies on an even- aged system, clearcutting, and sorting Years Ft3/ac $/ac $/ac % harvested logs for the highest value market (Robison and others 1998). Naturally regenerated, even-aged Southwide unthinned hardwood stands were shown to generate positive rates of return SRTS-FIA 30 3,013 416 504 9.6 comparable with planted pine MIC 1 30 3,158 440 532 9.7 (Thompson 1992). Hardwood MIC 2 29 3,531 601 737 10.6 afforestation also generates positive MIC 3 28 3,763 648 806 10.9 returns. Cottonwood afforestation MIC 4 28 4,373 860 1,070 11.3 projects in the Mississippi Valley MIC 5 27 4,846 990 1,249 11.9 were profitable under most conditions (Stanturf and Portwood 1999).

TIMBER Southeast thinned Even-aged management appears well suited to intensive hardwood pulpwood production. Two-aged and multi-aged MIC 1 29 2,718 411 504 9.8 silviculture also have promise, but they MIC 2 28 2,968 550 684 10.8 are not practiced on a large scale, and MIC 3 27 3,203 615 776 11.2 conditions for uneven-aged silviculture MIC 4 27 3,640 768 966 11.4 generally are not favorable (Robison MIC 5 25 3,899 1,082 1,411 13.0 and others 1998). To obtain more information about South Central thinned current and future forest management intensities, results of current surveys MIC 1 29 2,718 411 504 9.8 of FI, TIMOS, and NIPF land in the MIC 2 28 3,429 564 702 10.9 South were compared (Moffat and MIC 3 27 3,514 782 987 12.1 others 1998, Siry 1998, Siry and MIC 4 26 3,847 1,043 1,337 12.9 Cubbage 2001, Siry and others 2001). MIC 5 25 3,899 1,082 1,411 13.0 The surveys provide information about the current and future allocation MIC = management intensity class; NPV = net present value; SEV = soil expectation value; of forest land among forest types, IRR = internal rates of return; SRTS = Subregional Timber Supply Model; FIA = Forest Inventory management intensities, and and Analysis, USDA Forest Service. conversion to planted pine. Table a Assumed 1 percent real annual timber appreciation. 14.7 summarizes these results. Planted pine management is made and none are planned. Higher During the next two decades, the described for three management intensity management consists of some share of planted pine is expected intensities: standard management, actions, such as fertilizing or thinning, to increase to about 80 percent. superior management, and high- carried out in even-aged stands. When This expansion comes primarily yield management. Standard planted pine, natural pine, and oak- at the cost of natural pine. management involves chemical or pine stands are harvested, plantations Upland hardwoods occupy about 40 mechanical site preparation followed are established on a percentage of percent of NIPF land. During the next by planting. Superior management the harvested areas. two decades, upland hardwoods’ share involves more intensive site Since the surveys used varying is expected to decrease to 35 percent. preparation, genetically improved definitions and management categories, Planted pine is expected to increase growing stock, woody plant control their results are not exactly comparable. from the current 10 to 14 percent. if needed, and mid-rotation fertilizer Assumptions had to be made about FI and TIMOS have up to 5 percent application to about 50 percent of the merging FI management-intensity of their land reserved from harvest. land. Finally, high-yield management classes into three classes common This category comprises land where adds herbicide application in the first to all surveys and owner categories timber will not be commercially and second growing seasons and and adjusting the results to common utilized or processed in the foreseeable fertilizing of half of the land at age 8. time periods. This limitation needs future due to particular landowner Custodial even-aged management to be recognized while interpreting preferences, regulatory constraints, is applied in natural pine, oak-pine, the results. or other reasons. During the next two and upland and bottomland hardwood Planted pine accounts for about decades the share of reserved FI and stands. Generally, no treatments are 65 percent of FI and TIMOS holdings. TIMOS land is expected to remain Chapter 14: Intensive Timber Management Practices 335

unchanged; the share of NIPF reserved Table14.7—Summary results of forest management surveys by ownership land is expected to roughly double to group and yearw 14 percent. The amount of nonstocked land is uniform among the three Ownership group ownerships and equals about 1 percent. The growing share of planted pine Forest Nonindustrial is accompanied by more intensive industry TIMO private management. While today FI and TIMOS manage from 40 to 56 percent Management of their planted pine in a high-yield category 2000 2020 2000 2020 2000 2020 management regime, as much as 70 percent will be so managed in 20 years. ------Percent forest land area ------NIPF planted pine is managed less intensively. Today only a quarter of Land distribution planted pine is managed in a high-yield regime, but this share is expected to increase to nearly 50 percent during Planted pine 63 81 69 81 10 14 the next two decades. Natural pine 11 2 9 3 14 10 Oak-pine 4 2 2 1 14 13 Natural pine, oak-pine, and hardwood forest types are managed Upland hardwood 6 1 3 1 40 35 TIMBER with lower intensity than planted pine. Botttomland During the next two decades, natural hardwood 12 11 9 8 14 12 pine, oak-pine, and bottomland Not stocked 1 1 3 1 1 1 hardwood management intensities are Reserved 3 2 5 5 7 15 expected to increase only moderately. Results indicate that intensive Management intensity forest management offers attractive financial returns and that planted Planted pine pine management will be increasingly Standard 14 2 6 2 11 8 important. Forest management will Superior 46 25 38 28 64 46 be characterized by more widespread High yield 40 73 56 70 25 46 planting of genetically improved Natural pine seedlings, application of herbicide and Lower 61 71 59 40 79 52 fertilizer, thinning, and clearcutting. Higher 39 29 41 60 21 48 These treatments increase timber growth and quality, which will shorten Oak-pine rotations by up to 5 years. Intensified Lower 95 95 75 73 85 76 management of natural and planted Higher 5 5 25 27 15 24 hardwood stands also has the Upland hardwood potential for attractive returns. Lower 97 89 95 82 91 86 Higher 3 11 5 18 9 14 Multiple-Use Intentions and Botttomland Outcomes on Private Land hardwood Private forests provide a wide range Lower 91 81 93 81 88 76 of uses and benefits, including timber, Higher 9 19 7 19 12 24 watershed maintenance, soil retention, range potential, habitat, and Conversion to planted pine recreation opportunities. Timber production and nontimber uses are Planted pine 78 84 32 linked in several direct and indirect Natural pine 13 12 12 ways. Timber growing may increase Oak-pine 7 4 32 some nontimber benefits, decrease Other 2 0 24 others, or replace existing uses with different ones (Rudis 1988). The multitude of management objectives TIMO = Timberland Investment Management Organization. and ways to achieve them make it difficult to determine the multiple- use intentions of private landowners. Linking multiple-use intentions and outcomes also is difficult because forests managed exclusively for a single 336 Southern Forest Resource Assessment

use, such as timber growing, still manage about 60 percent of southern harvesting, extending rotations, support a range of nontimber benefits. forest land. Their management reducing herbicide use, and limiting Industrial owners, FI and TIMOS, intentions depend on personal plantation size, while promoting manage their land primarily for objectives and financial constraints, irregular boundaries (Allen and others timber. Despite timber management’s which can be inferred from certain 1996). Some of these approaches, predominance, nontimber uses are characteristics, such as tract size, however, may decrease the efficiency recognized in forest management occupation, and income. of timber production. through best management practices. The average size of NIPF forest Still, plantations provide nontimber In the end, these industrial forests holding is quite small (Birch 1997). benefits and may even increase their produce timber while supporting a Tw o-thirds of NIPF tracts are smaller overall provision if, for example, they range of nontimber uses. than 10 acres, and three-quarters are are established on highly erodible agri- NIPF owners are much less smaller than 20 acres. Owners of these cultural land. In order to fully assess uniform in their approaches to forest small tracts control about 12 percent their impact on nontimber products management. They have multiple of forest land in the South. The small and benefits, one must consider objectives, and their actions are far size of tracts makes regular forest alternative uses, adjacent land uses, more complex than industrial owners management more difficult. Small and site-specific needs for nontimber (Conway and others 2000, Dennis tracts, for example, may be charac- benefits. Today, pine species do not 1989, Klein and others 2000, Newman terized by higher harvesting costs dominate any ecological province in and Wear 1993, Swallow and Wear (Comolli 1981). Small tracts, therefore, the South (Rudis 1998). It is unlikely are associated with lower removals and that they will ever dominate the region,

TIMBER 1993). Their management approaches range from very intensive management, planting rates (Thompson 1997, 1999; even though planted pine area is similar to FI and TIMOS, to an entire Thompson and Johnson 1996). This expected to grow because of economic disregard of forest management. NIPF forest land is also less likely to be and environmental constraints that owners who value nontimber benefits intensively managed for timber in will eventually limit their expansion. are less likely to manage their forests the presence of substantial nontimber Forest owner surveys indicate that for timber production if it reduces benefits. Major purposes of ownership approximately 66 million acres are these uses. NIPF owners may extend include a place of residence, farming, managed primarily for timber, 92 rotations if nontimber services recreation, and investment (Birch million acres are managed for a range increase with forest age and volume. 1997). For a majority of NIPF owners, of timber and nontimber uses, and 22 their forest is a part of their residence, million acres are managed primarily Certainly, timber is an important but absentee owners also are common. reason for ownership, as is improving for nontimber uses (Birch 1997, Moffat the value of land. A comparison of Progressing forest fragmentation may and others 2001, Siry 1998, Siry and industrial and nonindustrial owners have some impact on regional timber Cubbage 2001, Siry and others 2001). indicates that the behavior of both production and nontimber uses. Forests managed primarily for timber groups is consistent with profit motives Between 1978 and 1994, the number still support a range of nontimber uses. behind forest management (Newman of tracts smaller than 10 acres increased Forests managed for nontimber uses and Wear 1993). But NIPF owners by 50 percent (Birch 1997). The probably will produce less timber, capture significant nontimber benefits, number of new forest owners is but some management actions taken and their behavior differs from FI. They expected to increase, and more forest to enhance nontimber uses may produce proportionally less softwood land may be managed less for timber produce some timber. Depending than their land share would indicate. production and more for nontimber on circumstances, planted pine may uses (Sampson and DeCoster 2000). either reduce or increase the provision Nearly 45 percent of private owners Moreover, it also is possible that of nontimber benefits. In order to in the South have harvested timber on landscapes composed of many small determine net effects of increasing about 78 percent of forest land (Birch owners with diverging objectives will planted pine area on nontimber 1997). Owners of 60 percent of forest make the achievement of nontimber benefits, conditions across other forest land plan to harvest timber within 10 uses ranging from wildlife to recreation types and owner groups throughout years, and owners of only 12 percent increasingly difficult. the region must be considered. It is of southern forest land declare that apparent that the number of small they will never harvest. This outcome The shift towards more intensive management and pine plantations forest tracks will grow in the future. also indicates that private owners This trend can make management holding most timberland in the region raises concerns about nontimber uses and values. Regional impacts of these for timber and nontimber products respond to economic incentives and and uses more difficult. harvest timber at some point in time trends are hard to determine because of (Sampson and DeCoster 1997). the complexity of possible interactions. Pine plantations are criticized for low No Active Management Overall, there are about 5 million diversity, increasing herbicide use, and Land is placed in the no active forest owners in the South (Birch large even-aged stands that provide management category if no manage- 1997). While corporate owners, which fewer opportunities for recreation, ment actions, including timber include FI and TIMOS, constitute only beauty, and wildlife. These negative harvest, are taken at present; and 1 percent of all southern owners, they outcomes can, to some extent, be none are planned in the future. The manage nearly 30 percent of southern mitigated by practicing thinning, determination of the area that is not forests. Nearly 4.7 million NIPF owners prescribed burning, and partial actively managed presents similar Chapter 14: Intensive Timber Management Practices 337 problems to the estimation of increase), timber stand improvement on assistance programs for conservation multiple-use management intentions 0.3 million acres, and site preparation planting on NIPF land (U.S. and outcomes. Most forests in the on nearly 10,000 acres. The program Department of Agriculture Forest South were managed in some way in was most intensively implemented in Service 2001). the past. Results of surveys of forest the 1970s. In the 1980s and early State forestry assistance programs owners show that 10 million acres 1990s, inflation increased treatment provide numerous services, including have been removed from timber cutting costs and reduced real FIP appropria- timber marketing, firebreak construc- (Moffat and others 2001, Siry 1998, tions. The program was terminated in tion, forest management planning, Siry and Cubbage 2001, Siry and 1995. Timber supply was predicted forest seedlings sales, rental or loan others 2001). This amount is predicted to increase by 1 billion cubic feet of equipment, and literature and to increase to nearly 20 million acres each year due to the program (Gaddis educational videos (Cubbage and in the next two decades. Birch (1997) and others 1995). The program was Haynes 1988). Some States also enacted estimated that owners of about 22 characterized by retention reaching incentives programs. Expenditures million acres of forest land have no 90 percent. It generated rates of for State cooperative forestry and harvest intentions, but some other return of about 10 percent. landowner assistance programs in treatments may be applied. The Forest Stewardship Program the South amounted to nearly $52 Another evidence of forest (FSP) and the Stewardship Incentives million in fiscal year 1998 (National management activities is the extent Program (SIP) were authorized in Association of State 2001). to which owners have a written 1990 to replace FIP. FSP is operated in Forest industry firms also provide management plan. Birch (1997) cooperation with State forestry agencies technical assistance to NIPF owners

TIMBER finds that such written management and assists in enhancing and protecting (Cubbage and Haynes 1988). Assis- plans were reported by only 5 percent multiple forest values on NIPF land by tance ranges from forest regeneration of owners, but that those owners developing forest management plans to timber stand improvement and hold 40 percent of private forest land. (New and others 1997). From 1990 harvesting. These programs often Written management plans were to 1994, FSP developed 13,000 forest require that tracts be of a minimum primarily prepared for tracts larger management plans covering 2.5 million size and within a maximum distance than 5,000 acres. While the lack acres in the South. FSP cost sharing from the mill. Land management of a written management plan does amounted to $27 million. By 2000 practices are often performed for free not indicate the lack of management FSP management plans were primarily or at a reduced cost to NIPF owners. activities, it implies that some land developed and implemented for Forest industry firms that offer these is managed quite extensively. growing trees, improving wildlife programs include, for example, Georgia Given the limited evidence, it habitat, harvesting trees, and Pacific (Forest Management Assistance is concluded that about 10 million improving resources (Esseks Program), Stone Container Corporation acres of private forests in the South and Moulton 2000). About 80 (Land Owner Assistance Program), get no active management. Forest percent of prepared plans in the Louisiana-Pacific Corporation (Tree owner surveys and continued forest South were being implemented. Enterprise Program), and Rayonier fragmentation suggest that this area An FSP-approved forest management (Landowner Assistance Management will increase over the next two plan is a prerequisite for cost-share Program) (Thompson 1995). decades to about 20 million acres. support under SIP. From 1992 to Overall, the majority of forestry 1994, SIP in the South provided incentives programs have promoted Impact of Forestry nearly $9 million in support for and more intensive forest Incentives Programs 4,000 owners with nearly 0.5 million management, better marketing of acres (Gaddis and others 1995). Current and past forestry incentives forest products, improved protection The majority of funding was spent of existing resources, and enhanced programs have focused primarily on on tree planting activities. SIP providing assistance to NIPF owners in planning. They have resulted in and FIP supported tree planting on substantial increases in tree planting tree planting, management planning, nearly 0.5 million acres in the South. and improving forest management and more widespread development of practices. They have increased timber The Forest Legacy Program (FLP) forest management plans. The results production, investment returns, and is a Federal program aimed at and returns are generally satisfactory. environmental benefits. (Sampson Some critics have argued that these and DeCoster 1997). FLP was designed programs simply substitute public The Forest Incentive Program (FIP), to protect environmentally sensitive and funds for private funds that would a Federal cost-share program enacted valuable forest areas that are threatened be invested in any case. While some in 1973, was aimed at increasing timber by conversion to nonforest uses. This capital substitution is possible, forestry supply by promoting tree planting, program supports State and Federal incentives programs undoubtedly have timber stand improvement, natural efforts through direct acquisition and resulted in substantially increased regeneration, and firebreak construction conservation easements purchased inventories and future timber supplies (Gaddis and others 1995). From 1974 from NIPF owners. The Rural Forest (Gaddis and others 1995, Lee and through 1992, the program’s cost-share Management Program (RFMP) provides others 1992, New and others 1997). incentives exceeded $200 million in matching funds to State agencies to the South and funded tree planting support their technical and financial on nearly 2.5 million acres (40-percent 338 Southern Forest Resource Assessment

management. In comparison with objectives and outcomes of forest Discussion and planted pine management, intensive management in the South, especially hardwood management in the South on NIPF land. Conclusions has been neglected. Vast and available hardwood resources of lower value Timber management in the South than pine have discouraged investments Acknowledgments has changed substantially over the in intensive hardwood management. past few decades, and current trends Further, most hardwood forests belong This report involved the work indicate that change will continue. to NIPF owners, who do not generally and contributions of many people. As some forest owners adopt more support the development of industry- The USDA Forest Service FIA unit intensive forest management, the like approaches. Furthermore, with in Asheville, NC, provided assistance production potential of forests increases more than 40 commercial species in in analyzing FIA data. The growth- accordingly. Genetic improvement of southern hardwood forests, silviculture and-yield tables were developed in a trees and intensified application of there is complex. To date, active cooperative effort between personnel fertilizer, herbicide, and thinning will hardwood management has yielded in the Southern Forest Resource rapidly increase growth and yield of only small increases in natural stand Assessment Consortium, the RPA southern pines as well as shorten productivity and mixed results timber analysis staff, and forest industry rotations. These benefits have in plantations. Recent hardwood representatives with the American important implications for long- research results suggest, however, Forest and Paper Association. The term timber supply. that substantial productivity increases USDA Forest Service, forest industry,

TIMBER The South will increase softwood are possible in both natural and planted timberland management organiza- production using existing management stands. But they rely on progress in tions, the American Forest and Paper technologies. By applying known silviculture, genetic improvement, Association, and State forestry technologies on a large scale, the South and clonal forestry. While these results organizations provided data from can almost double softwood growth are promising, much effort is still forest owner surveys and assisted in rates. These higher management required to develop effective and interpreting their results. Researchers intensities are projected to be widely widely applicable hardwood technology from the Department of Forestry, North applied on FI and TIMOS land and that is comparable with southern Carolina State University, also provided even NIPF land. As a result, the South pines technology. Dwindling hard- valuable inputs. Funding for research may be able to better meet increasing wood resources and changing applied in this report was provided harvest demands than previously market conditions may provide by the USDA Forest Service, the thought. Effects depend on the the required stimuli. Southern Forest Resource Assessment number of acres devoted to intensive Consortium, and the Department management and on economic of Forestry, North Carolina feasibility of intensive management. Needs for Additional State University. The economic analysis indicates that Research intensive forest management offers attractive returns. Additional research is needed to Literature Cited These results, however, must be better assess the status and trends interpreted cautiously. It will be of forest management practices in Abt, R.; Cubbage, F.; Pacheco, G. 2000. necessary to accurately model market the South. More work also is needed Southern forest resource assessment adjustments to such changes. Higher to better assess rotation lengths and using the subregional timber supply growth rates will moderate price particular stand structures (even- (SRTS) model. Forest Products increases and thus reduce returns on aged, two-aged, and uneven-aged). Journal. 50(4): 25–33. investments in timber growing. Future Additional effort is required to better Alig, R.; Adams, D.; McCarl, B. [and supply increases could, therefore, be evaluate the impacts of increasing others]. 2000. Economic potential reduced. Furthermore, rapidly growing planted pine yields. First, planted pine of short-rotation woody crops on pine plantations can provide wood acreages and management intensities agricultural land for fiber fiber, but quality and grade questions need to be determined. Productivity production in the United States. still must be considered. Questions increases will likely moderate timber Forest Products Journal. 50(5): about quality, needs for price increases and reduce investment 67–74. , ability to make reconstituted incentives. It is necessary to accurately Allen, A.; Bernal, Y.; Moulton, R. fiber products, and other factors still model market adjustments to such 1996. Pine plantations and wildlife need to be addressed. And the technical changes. In comparison with planted in the Southeastern United States: properties of fast-grown planted pine pine, hardwood research in the South an assessment of impacts and need to be determined and milling and has been neglected. Most pressing opportunities. Inform. Tech. Rep. 3. marketing adjustments made. needs include research into productivity Washington, DC: U.S. Department of improvements in natural and planted the Interior, National Biological Finally, the results presented here stands from treatments, such as apply mostly to southern pines. At Service. 32 p. weed management, other silvicultural present, it is not really known to what operations, genetic improvement, and extent southern hardwood production clonal forestry. More research is also might be increased through intensive needed to determine multiple-use Chapter 14: Intensive Timber Management Practices 339 Amateis, R.; Radtke, P.; Burkhart, H. Groninger, J.; Stein, H.; Zedaker, New, B.; Cubbage, F.; Moulton, R. 1995. TAUYIELD: a stand growth S. [and others]. 1998. Growth 1997. The stewardship incentive and yield model for thinned and response and cost comparisons for program, 1992–1994: an unthinned loblolly pine plantations. precommercial thinning methods of accomplishment report and Rep. 92. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Appalachian oak stump sprout program review. SCEFER Work. Polytechnic Institute and State clumps. Southern Journal of Pap. 83. Research Triangle Park, University, Loblolly Pine Growth Applied Forestry. 22(1): 19–23. NC: Southern Center for Forest and Research Cooperative. 38 p. Kline, J.; Alig, R.; Johnson, R. Economics Research. 32 p. + app. Birch, T. 1997. Private forest land 2000. Fostering the production Newman, D.; Wear, D. 1993. owners of the Southern United of nontimber services among Production economics of private States. Resour. Bull. NE–138. Randor, forest owners with heterogeneous forestry: a comparison of industrial PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, objectives. Forest Science. and nonindustrial forest owners. Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 46(2): 302–311. American Journal of Agricultural Experiment Station. 195 p. Lee, K.; Kaiser, F.; Alig, R. 1992. Economics. 75: 674–684. Comolli, P. 1981. Principles and Substitution of public for private North Carolina State Forest Nutrition policy in forestry economics. Bell funding in planting southern Cooperative. 2000. Twenty-ninth Journal of Economics. 12: 300–309. pine. Southern Journal of Applied annual report. Raleigh, NC: North Conway, C.; Chapman, S.; Amacher, Forestry. 16(4): 204–208. Carolina State University. 20 p. G. [and others]. 2000. Differences Lockaby, G.; Clawson, R.; Baker, T. North Carolina State Hardwood

in nonindustrial landowner behavior 1997. Response of three hardwood Research Cooperative. 2001. TIMBER between hardwood and pine regions species to and fertilization Thirty-eighth annual report 2001. of Virginia: implications for timber on an upland site. Southern Journal Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State supply. SOFAC Rep. 19. Research of Applied Forestry. 21(3): 123–129. University. 62 p. Triangle Park, NC: Southern Forest Meadows, J.; Goelz, J. 1999a. Robison, D.; Goldfarb, B.; Li, B. Resource Assessment Consortium. Thinning in a 28-year-old water oak 1998. Advancing hardwood 49 p. plantation in north Louisiana: 7-year production forestry. PaperAge. Cubbage, F.; Haynes, R. 1988. results. In: Haywood, James D., ed. May. [Number of pages unknown]. Evaluation of the effectiveness of Proceedings of the tenth biennial Rudis, V. 1988. Nontimber values market responses to timber scarcity southern silvicultural research of Louisiana’s timberland. Resour. problems. Marketing Res. Rep. 1149. conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-30. Bull. SO–132. New Orleans: Washington, DC: U.S. Department Asheville, NC: U.S. Department U.S. Department of Agriculture, of Agriculture, Forest Service. 87 p. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Service, Southern Forest Dennis, D. 1989. An economic analysis Southern Research Station: 98–102. Experiment Station. 27 p. of harvest behavior: integrating Meadows, J.; Goelz, J. 1999b. Rudis, V. 1998. Regional forest resource forest and ownership characteristics. Third-year growth and bole assessment in ecological framework: Forest Science. 35(4): 1088–1104. quality responses to thinning in a the Southern United States. Natural Dvorak, W.; Hodge, G. 1998. Wood red oak-sweetgum stand on a minor Areas Journal. 18: 319–332. supply strategies in countries with streambottom site in west-central Alabama. In: Haywood, James D., Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L. 1997. fast-growing plantations. PaperAge. Public programs for private forestry. March. [Number of pages unknown]. ed. Proceedings of the tenth biennial southern silvicultural research Washington, DC: . Esseks, J.; Moulton, R. 2000. conference. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-30. 100 p. Evaluating the forest stewardship Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L. 2000. program through a national survey Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest fragmentation: implications of participating forest land owners. Research Station: 87–93. for sustainable private forests. DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois . 98(3): 4–8. University, Center for Govern- Moffat, S.; Cascio, A.; Sheffield, R. mental Studies. 113 p. 1998. Estimations of future forest Siry, J. 1998. Southern plantation pine management intensity on NIPF yield tables. SOFAC Rep. Research Gaddis, D.; New, B.; Cubbage, F. in the South: results of the Triangle Park, NC: Southern Forest [and others]. 1995. Accomplishments Southern State ’s survey. Resource Assessment Consortium. and economic evaluations of the SOFAC Rep. Research Triangle 5 p. + app. forestry incentives program: a review. Park, NC: Southern Forest Resource Siry, J.; Cubbage, F. 2001. A survey SCFER Work. Pap. 78. Research Assessment Consortium. 7 p. + app. Triangle Park, NC: Southeastern of timberland investment manage- Center for Forest Economics National Association of State ment organizations forestland Research. 52 p. + app. Foresters. 2001. Fiscal year 1998 management in the South. SOFAC State forestry statistics: financial Work. Pap. Research Triangle Park, resources in the State. [Database]. NC: Southern Forest Resource http://www.stateforesters.org/statistics/ Assessment Consortium. 5 p. FY98_Statistics/Financial.htm. [Date accessed: July 4, 2002]. 340 Southern Forest Resource Assessment

Siry, J.; Cubbage, F.; Abt, R. [and Thompson, M. 1997. A forested others]. 1999. Southern growth and tract-size profile of South Carolina’s yield models and analyses. SOFAC NIPF landowners. Res. Pap. SRS–2. Res. Rep. 16. Research Triangle Asheville, NC: U.S. Department Park, NC: Southern Forest Resource of Agriculture, Forest Service, Assessment Consortium. 13 p. + app. Southern Research Station. 9 p. Siry, J.; Cubbage, F.; Malmquist, A. Thompson, M. 1999. A forested tract- 2001. Potential impact of increased size profile of Florida’s NIPF management intensities on planted landowners. Res. Pap. SRS–15. pine growth and yield and timber Asheville, NC: U.S. Department supply in the South. Forest of Agriculture, Forest Service, Products Journal. 51(3): 42–48. Southern Research Station. 10 p. Stanturf, J.; Portwood, J. 1999. Thompson, M.; Johnson, T. 1996. A Economics of afforestation forested tract-size profile of Virginia’s with eastern cottonwood (Populus NIPF landowners. Res. Pap. SRS–1. deltoides) on agricultural land in Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of the Lower Mississippi Valley. In: Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Haywood, James D., ed. Proceedings Research Station. 8 p. of the tenth biennial southern Thompson, T. 1992. Risk and return

TIMBER silvicultural research conference. from investments in pine, hardwoods, Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-30. Asheville, and financial markets. Southern NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Journal of Applied Forestry. 16(1): Forest Service, Southern Research 20–24. Station: 66–72. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Swallow, S.; Wear, D. 1993. Spatial Forest Service, State and Private interactions in multiple-use forestry Forestry, Cooperative Forestry. 2001. and substitution and wealth effects Rural forest management program. for the single stand. Journal of http://www.fs.fed.us/spf/coop/ Environmental Economics and rfm.htm. [Date accessed: July]. Management. 25: 103–120. Thompson, L. 1995. Technical assistance available to CRP forest landowners. [Leaflet]. [Macon, GA]: Georgia Forestry Commission. [Not paged]. In: Wear, David N.; Greis, John G., eds. 2002. Southern forest resource assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-53. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 635 p.

The southern forest resource assessment provides a comprehensive analysis of the history, status, and likely future of forests in the Southern United States. Twenty-three chapters address questions regarding social/ economic systems, terrestrial ecosystems, water and aquatic ecosystems, forest health, and timber management; 2 additional chapters provide a background on history and fire. Each chapter surveys pertinent literature and data, assesses conditions, identifies research needs, and examines the implications for southern forests and the benefits that they provide.

Keywords: Conservation, forest , integrated assessment.

The USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or familial status (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs). Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity employer.