Abstract
As global competition increases for wood-based products, the need for more efficient supply chains becomes increasingly important. In the forest products sector, these supply chains involve individuals and firms ranging from private forestland owners with standing timber to factories producing final finished products. Long-term timber leases are one mechanism that can be used to develop access to timber supplies for companies unable or unwilling to purchase land outright for growing timber. To investigate private forest owner opinions and attitudes regarding long-term timber leases, we conducted a survey of landowners from Wetzel county, West Virginia. No long-term leases were reported by respondents, but 24% claimed they would enter a lease under certain conditions. The most frequently listed concern related to long-term timber leases was for the “loss of control”. Results of this survey are discussed in the light of forest management efforts that might be used to improve the social, financial, and environmental benefits for private forest owners.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alig R, Mills J, Butler B (2002) Private timberlands: growing demand, shrinking land base. J For 100(2):32–37
Allison PD (1999) Logistic regression using the SAS system: theory and application. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, 288pp
American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) (2006) Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. Lenexa, Kansas: AAPOR. http://www.aapor.org/uploads/standarddefs_4.pdf, Accessed January 26, 2008
Birch T, Kingsley N (1978) The forest-land owners of West Virginia. Resource Bull NE-58. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Broomall, PA, 76pp
Birch TW (1996a) Private forest-land owners of the Northern United States, 1994 Resour Bull NE-136. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PA, 293pp
Birch TW (1996b). Private forest-land owners of the United States, 1994 Resource Bull. NE-134. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PA 183pp
Bond B, Cumbo D, Johnson J et al (2005) ‘Woods-to-Goods: Creating a web-based forest industry community to promote sustainable and competitive forest-to-consumer value streams, A proposal submitted to CSREES. Blacksburg, Virginia. (On file with lead author).
Brindley C (2008) Forest economist explores trends and biz opportunities. Pallet Enterp 16:18–19
Browne M (2001) Changing ownership patterns: an overview of institutional ownership and resulting opportunities. In: Block EN, Sample VA (eds) Industrial timberland divestitures and investments: opportunities and challenges in forestland conservation. Pinchot Institute for Conservation, September, pp 8–23
Cleaves DA, O’Laughlin J (1983) Forest industry’s management assistance programs for nonindustrial private forests in Louisiana, 1980. South J Appl For 7(2):85–89
Cubbage FW, Skinner TM (1985) Industrial forest management assistance and leasing: 1983 programs and accomplishments in Georgia. South J Appl For 9(4):217–222
De Galembert B (2003) ‘Wood supply for the growing European pulp and paper industry’, a Seminar on Strategies for the Sound Use of Wood, Poiana Brasow, Romania, 24–27 March 2003, http://www.unece.org/trade/timber/docs/sem-1/papers/r4Galembert.pdf, accessed April 22, 2007
Dhubhain A, Cavanagh T (2003) Joint ventures in private forestry in Ireland. Small-Scale For 2(1):9–19
Diamond J, Chappelle DE, Edwards JD (1999) Mergers and acquisitions in the forest products industry. Forest Prod J 49(4):24–36
Dillman D (2000) Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method. Wiley, New York
Egan A (1998) From timber to forests and people: a view of non-industrial private forest research. North J Appl For 14(4):189–193
Egan A, Luloff A (2000) The exurbanization of America’s forests J For 98(3):26–30
Franklin J, Johnson K (2004) Forests face new threat: global market changes. Issues in Science and Technology, National Academy and University of Texas, Fall, 2004
Greene J (1979) The increment contract. South J Appl For 3(3):82–85
Griffith D, Widmann R (2003) Forest statistics for West Virginia: 1989 and 2000. Resource Bulletin NE-157. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Newton Square, PA, 119pp
Grushecky S, Beuhlmann U, Schuler A et al. (2006) Decline in the US furniture industry: a case study of the impacts to the hardwood lumber supply chain. Wood Fiber Sci 38(2):365–376
Grushecky ST, Wang J, McGill DW (2007) Influence of site characteristics and costs of extraction and trucking on logging residue utilization in southern West Virginia. For Prod J 57(7/8):63–67
Hagan J, Irland L, Whitman A (2005), Changing timberland ownership in the Northern Forest and implications for biodiversity, Manomet Centre for Conservation Sciences, report no. MCCS-FCP-2005-1, Brunswick, Maine
Jones S, Luloff A, Finley J (1995) Another look at NIPFs: facing our ‘myths'. J For 93(9):41–44
Kittredge D (2005) The cooperation of private forest owners on scales larger than one individual property: international examples and potential application in the United States. Forest Policy Econ 7:671–688
Kvarda E (2004) ‘Non-agriculture forest owners’ in Austria––a new type of forest ownership. Forest Policy Econ 6:459–467
Little J (2006) Timberlands in turmoil. Am Forests 111(4):34–39
Mayers J (2000) Company-community forestry partnerships: a growing phenomenon. Unasylva 200(51):33–41
McGill DW, Magill DJ, Kochenderfer J, Ford WM, Schuler T (2004). Information transfer during the timber transaction period in West Virginia, USA. In Proceedings, “Communication Strategies for Multiple Partner Involvement in Forest Extension” IUFRO forestry extension conference, Orvieto, Italy September 2004. Available online: http://www.iufro.org/download/file/842/3176/60602-orvieto04-proceedings.pdf
Porter SR, Whitcomb ME, Weitzer WH (2004) Multiple surveys of students and survey fatigue. In Porter, SR (eds) Overcoming survey research problems. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 63–73
Reedy H (2003) Feasibility assessment of afforestation for carbon sequestration (FAACS): Exploring options for aggregating and selling afforestation carbon credits from Small Landowners. Canadian Forest Service. Available at: http://www.woodlot.bc.ca/pdfs/carbon/carbon_report.pdf. Cited: November 6, 2007
Siegel W (1973) Long-term contracts for forestland and timber in the South. Southern Forest Experiment Station, New Orleans, LA, USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap., SO-87, 14pp
Siry J, Greene W, Harris T, et al (2006) Wood supply chain efficiency and fibre cost—what can we do better? Forest Prod J 56(10):4–10
Wild-Eck S, Zimmerman W (2005) Private forest and private forest owners in Switzerland: short report. Environmental Series No. 381. Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, Bern, 36pp
WV DOF (2008) Listing of forest products companies in West Virginia. Accessed 01.2008 online at: http://www.wvforestry.com/indassistance.cfm?menucall=industry
Yin R, Izlar B (2001) Supply contract and portfolio insurance—applying financial engineering to institutional timberland investment. J For 99(5):39–44
Zinn GW, Miller GW (1984) Increment contracts: southern experience and potential use in the Appalachians. J For 82:747–749
Acknowledgements
This project was funded by a subcontract from the USDA Forest Service through the Virginia Polytechnic State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. D. Nelli assisted with survey logistics and data entry. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. West Virginia University Agriculture Experiment Station Publication number 3008.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McGill, D.W., Grushecky, S.T., Moss, S. et al. Landowner Willingness to Engage in Long-Term Timber Leases in West Virginia, USA. Small-scale Forestry 7, 105–116 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-008-9044-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-008-9044-4