SN:   After reading your report in JOF I wanted you to discuss major changes facing the forestry professional in the future.  I would suggest readers pick up a copy of the latest JOF and read your article.  Thanks for doing this with me.

Lester DeCoster:   Thanks for having me.

SN:   A major U.S. Forest Service study called "Private Forest-land Owners of the United States" indicates that America's forests are "fragmenting" at a substantial rate. Why will this reduction of forest tract size and the increase in numbers of owners effect how future US forestry is practiced?

Lester DeCoster:  American forests are parcelizing/fragmenting at rates a bit above American population growth. We will generate about 2.3 million more forest ownerships by 2010 than would be expected from general population growth if present trends continue. This varies by area. Coastal and developing areas are fragmenting faster than more rural settings. And some states with slow population growth (like Maine) are fragmenting more slowly than rapidly growing southern states.

The trend toward more owners with smaller tracts, combined with other events drives all kinds of changes. Numbers of owners with tracts above 100 acres appears to be growing little if any and the amount of land they control has been shrinking. Middle size tracts (100-499 acres) are shrinking the most. Serving the growing numbers of owners of less than 100 acres each will require strong marketing of techniques designed to enhance a desire for personal green space or serve a public need that has a price. There will be a drive toward more aesthetic forestry in some cases. In highly urbanized, high tax areas, tax reduction may be a prime motivator for doing a forestry plan. New York City is paying owners around the city’s water reservoirs to keep land undeveloped. The value of forests as water cyclers could create an active market for water-enhancing forest practices if landowners start to receive payment for these benefits.

SN:   What it seems to me you are saying is that wood buyers can't count on buying the timber account as easily because of increasing non-timber demands.   Do you see major problems for wood procurement if the trend continues?

Lester DeCoster:  Wood procurement is likely to be pinched by the parcelizing trend. A little more than a million acres has been moving from larger tracts into parcels of less than 100 acres each year. This is equivalent to subdividing all the forest of Maine down into parcels of 1 to 99 acres every 15 years. That’s bound to affect wood supply. The industry’s response to this (and other trends) has varied from importing wood pulp from South America, to moving toward fiber farming using agricultural methods, to sustainable forestry programs, pushing for improved practices on their own lands and other private lands. While all of these things deal with wood supply, none of them are especially effective at reaching the owners of smaller tracts. The invisible hand of present wood markets may not reach small ownerships, but tax reduction programs and payments for values such as water can reach them if the approaches are well marketed.

SN:  You suggest that "traditional" approaches and technologies must change as parcel sizes get smaller. This leads me to believe that you have some hope for forestry's future. What should be those new approaches and technologies?

Lester DeCoster: Anyone who deals with trees over the long haul is an optimist. You have to believe that your work will yield benefits of some kind in the future. There’s a lot of new small equipment that could be adapted to smaller lots. I’m seeing more materials published about forest aesthetics, and there are encouraging efforts such as the one mentioned above— actually paying owners for values produced by their forest, such as water cycling. If we can add some market drivers that go beyond wood, we can advance forestry much more broadly across the spectrum of parcel sizes.

SN:  What do you see as a major deterrent to the future encouragement of forestry and good management practices?

Lester DeCoster:  Taxes. Our present tax system is generally a discouragement to holding land and investing in good practices. It is public policy to overtax and under-serve owners of large pieces of undeveloped land while over-serving and under-taxing owners of smaller developed parcels. We need to build some effective forest-care motivators into tax policies. I’ve proposed a few changes which have, thus far, gone nowhere (but, I haven’t really marketed these approaches either).

The change in approach that has been resisted the most is utilizing marketing and public relations expertise to reach different segments of landowner audiences. Forestry programs have tended to have enough willing takers to soak up the available resources, so there has been resistance to spending money and effort on "frivolous" things like PR and market research. Foresters understand the need for detailed, on the ground research (by appropriately trained experts) regarding a particular forest before they make a forestry recommendation, but they are resistant to the idea that effective PR and marketing requires on the ground research (by appropriately trained experts) regarding a particular audience.

Steve Nix:  Thanks Lester DeCoster.  More next week...

 Changing Forests, Changing Foresters - Part II     > Part III