North Carolina landowner responsiveness to forestry incentives

The large number of nonindustrial private forest landowners in North Carolina are critical to sustaining the flow of forest products and amenities to regional, national, and international consumers. Understanding landowner's motivations and likelihood of participating in forestry incentives was the intent of the survey research conducted in the fall of 1996. Nine counties were included in the sample frame—three per physiographic region with one from each demographic subgroup: rural, urban interface, and urban. Landowners preferred income and ad valorem tax relief to cost share, education and technical assistance incentives. Coastal plain and rural landowners consistently expressed the highest likelihood to participate in forestry incentives. Mountain and urban landowners were significantly less likely to participate in forestry, educational and technical incentives than other regional subgroups. Piedmont and urban interface landowners were intermediate in their likelihood to participate in forestry incentives between the other regional and sub-regional groupings. The percentage of respondents having a written forest management varied significantly with reason for owning forestland. Landowners with land investment or timber objectives were more than twice as likely to have forest management plans. Conversely, landowners who had residential, and farm or domestic use objectives and were significantly less likely to have a forest management plan. Landowners were asked to identify the reasons that discourage management in an effort to define strategies for reaching the majority of passive forest landowners. Key obstacles to management included small tract size or multiple locations of tracts; not knowing where to start; forestry not a personal priority; and the unsightliness of a harvested area. A logit analysis of landowner use of forestry cost share programs revealed positive relationships to forest acres, awareness of financial assistance, rural and urban-interface holdings in the coastal plain and piedmont, and landowners in the real estate, finance or insurance occupation group. Recommendations on best methods to target key landowner groups based on the survey results are identified and discussed.