Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A Survey of Forestry Extension Clientele in South Carolina, USA

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Small-scale Forestry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The U.S. South contains nearly one-third of the nation’s forests and 40% of its productive timberland. This makes the southern U.S. an important part of the wood supply chain. In South Carolina, family forests cover 55% of the 13 million acres of forestland, and contribute significantly to the annual timber harvest volume. However, not all family forest owners are engaged in forest management activities. To better understand the needs and behaviors of family forest owners that are actively engaged in forest management an online survey was developed and sent to family forest owners that actively seek the help of extension agents. Results of a latent-class analysis of survey responses showed that there are three distinct groups of family forest owners that engage with extension agents: hands-on timber managers, hands-off timber managers, and multiple-use land managers. These groups differ in their utilization of help from a consulting forester and their ways of selecting timber harvesting contractors for forest management activities. Eighty-eight percent of respondents reported that their major goal of a thinning was to maximize future revenues. When asked about the expected outcome of a cleat-cut, 69% expected all trees to be removed, whereas the rest expected outcomes similar to selection, seed-tree, or commercial clear-cuts. Overall, this survey provides initial information to better focus outreach and extension efforts, but also highlights how family forest owners engage in their timber harvest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Butler BJ (2008) Family forest owners of the United States, 2006. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Butler BJ, Leatherberry EC (2004) America’s family forest owners. J For 102:4–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler BJ, Hewes JH, Dickinson BJ et al (2015) Family forest ownerships of the United States, 2013: tabular results from the USDA Forest Service, National Woodland Owner Survey. Dep Agric For Serv North Res Stn 114:638–647

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler BJ, Hewes JH, Dickinson BJ et al (2016) USDA Forest Service National Woodland Owner Survey. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Newtown Square

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrozzino-Lyon AL, McMullin SL, Parkhurst JA (2013) Mail and Web-based survey administration: a case study with recreational users of Virginia’s Wildlife Management Areas. Hum Dimens Wildl 18:219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2013.761298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhubhain AN, Cobanova R, Karppinen H et al (2007) The values and objectives of private forest owners and their influence on forestry behaviour: the implications for entrepreneurship. Small-scale For 6:347–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-007-9030-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison B, Newman DH, Macheski G (1997) The Georgia Public and its forest: attitudes and knowledge regarding forest resource use. https://www.bugwood.org/factsheets/98-029.html. Accessed 12 Jan 2018

  • Joshi O, Mehmood SR (2011) Factors affecting nonindustrial private forest landowners’ willingness to supply woody biomass for bioenergy. Biomass Bioenerg 35:186–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.08.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendra A, Hull RB (2005) Motivations and behaviors of new forest owners in Virginia. For Sci 51:142–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanal PN, Grebner DL, Munn IA et al (2017) Typology of nonindustrial private forest landowners and forestry behavior: implications for forest carbon sequestration in the southern US. Small-scale For. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-017-9363-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluender RA, Walkingstick TL (2000) Rethinking how nonindustrial landowners view their lands. South J Appl For 24:150–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Londo AJ (2004) An assessment of Mississippi’s nonindustrial private forest landowners knowledge of forestry BMP’s. Water Air Soil Pollut Focus 4:235–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar I, Teeter L, Butler B (2008) Characterizing family forest owners: a cluster analysis approach. For Sci 54:176–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Munn IA, Franklin EC (1995) Do consultants really generate higher timber prices? The Consultant Magazine 26–29

  • Nyland RD (2002) Silviculture: concepts and applications, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Oswalt SN, Smith WB, Miles PD, Pugh SA (2014) Forest resources of the United States, 2012: a technical document supporting the Forest Service 2015 update of the RPA Assessment. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Washington Office, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sabin G (2012) Compliance and implementation monitoring of forestry best management practices in South Carolina 2011–2012. South Carolina Forestry Commission, Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilling EB (2016) Symposium on Forestry Best Management Practice (BMP) effectiveness in the Eastern United States. J For 114:7–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver EJ, Leahy JE, Weiskittel AR et al (2015) An evidence-based review of timber harvesting behavior among private woodland owners. J For 113:490–499. https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.14-089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith DM (1986) The practice of silviculture, 8th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • South Carolina Forestry Commission (2015) State of SC’s forests by the numbers: 2015. South Carolina Forestry Commission, Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  • South Carolina SFI Implementation Comittee (2011) A landowner’s guide to forestry in South Carolina. South Carolina SFI Implementation Comittee, Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  • Southern Group of State Foresters—Water Resources Committee (2012) Implementation of Forestry Best Management Practices: 2012 southern region report

  • Thompson DW, Hansen EN (2012) Factors affecting the attitudes of nonindustrial private forest landowners regarding carbon sequestration and trading. J For 110:129–137. https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.11-010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian N, Poudyal NC, Hodges DG et al (2015) Understanding the factors influencing nonindustrial private forest landowner interest in supplying ecosystem services in Cumberland Plateau, Tennessee. Forests 6:3985–4000. https://doi.org/10.3390/f6113985

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Austin Harris for his help with creating the online survey, Dr. Shari Rodriguez for her help with data analysis, and Dr. Puskar Khanal for comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Funding was provided by College of Agriculture, Forestry and Life Sciences, Clemson University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Hiesl.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hiesl, P. A Survey of Forestry Extension Clientele in South Carolina, USA. Small-scale Forestry 17, 309–321 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-018-9389-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-018-9389-2

Keywords

Navigation