Historic, archived document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. ly a | i) 2.2L p Usual ome Agriculture Forest Service Private Forest-Land Owners of New York: 1980 and 1994 Resource Bulletin NE-153 Thomas W. Birch Brett J. Butler C =z 22 B 4 eS | = ee ee Aa BQ ee Men aa Go Dmin wd a re ae Po CO OL oF Se So es 28 2 so a we > eee OF -—<5 a = an a Abstract The results of a 1994 survey of forest-land ownerships in New York State are presented and compared to the results from a similar study in 1980. In 1994, there were an estimated 491,300 private forest ownerships in New York that controlled 14,367,000 acres of forest-land. This compares with 506,500 private ownerships that held 14,427,000 acres of forest land in 1980. In 1994, 85 percent of private forest-land ownerships controlled fewer than 50 acres, but 68 percent of the forest- land was controlled by ownerships with more than 50 acres. Many of these private ownerships purchased forest-land between 1980 and 1994 and owned their land because it was part of their residence, for aesthetic enjoyment or for recreational opportunities that forest lands provide. The number of white-collar and retiree owners had increased substantially between 1980 and 1994, as did the average income and amount of formal education of New York’s private forest-land owners. The Authors THOMAS W. BIRCH, forester, received B.S. and M.S. degrees from Michigan State University in 1969 and 1974, respectively. He joined the USDA Forest Service’s Northeastern Forest Experiment Station in 1974 and was a member of the Station’s Forest Inventory and Analysis Unit until his death in January 2000. BRETT J. BUTLER, research forester, received a B.S. degree from the University of Connecticut in 1995 and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. degree from Oregon State University. In 1998 he joined the Pacific Northwest Research Station and in 2000 transferred to the Northeastern Research Station’s Forest Inventory and Analysis Unit in Newtown Square, Pennsylvania. Manuscript received for publication: 24 April 2001 Published by: For additional copies: USDA FOREST SERVICE USDA Forest Service 11 CAMPUS BLVD SUITE 200 Publications Distribution NEWTOWN SQUARE PA 19073-3294 359 Main Road Delaware, OH 43015-8640 October 2001 Fax: (740)368-0152 Visit our homepage at: http:/Awww.fs.fed.us/ne Contents | FIV 7 PAE BS ccadeehecceasednodsacesorocateciaSces Susser eacS oe soSeeEEs ROO Rae ties ee eae en ee 1 | FRYERO ATEN EVO acdhanenseoacns akon ncbcucen odes uaHsscebe ce Meese Ree DEE acer se aOR eee eet ee a Re 2 STHIIGWIIGS IRE IIS on cednticesqacucbaeadoleecadon soddaeased saScee HOSE SE cuoe ce A Sac a see H Bi ete mee 2 REGTO Mal BRES tilts perenne meme enters enc eehe en rnU eRe Oat aac teh ce Pas scar wgosucaseseeoios sate ox5 3 NGIEOM Ga CK@RE STO Mme emer tere cue ese eee en ania a a chon 2 Malta aaadeeseuaveoacntors 3} alkene atmBRe ere inpeemer reer stece acct oes eee iis Red ea Sechc acealvsdaasnoundl'senaerses 3 SOU WESiMREOTO Meera terete sec eateeteee cea Ske tay o.2 Naat ten cclechsalbisdt anne egeoeaesersnes 4 SOUMeas MRO OMe cscs ees ees sea aes Meese cate asalsor inal vue esassceennandeudesessSenaetuesans 4 slivpesrOn LmiNAteIEOTESMOWINELS MIPS recess eee sxe cece eccseecuecesctseecesases sceaceneieess 4 Businessestmate@Owmilonest Wan Ge eccwes ces -c ies sc sete re tesa soccscanesdcsncsesevssavdsboanenncs 5 Iindivicdiral shilrateOwmiborestleam dsc cese sete sec oc secs eseoe cs cadassccarsenseancsvacesoees 6 Decay lipemic camera sea ree ee re ee the take ace eaten ane ehoischsc Ss cntvadec uta dant atilsdeiaasabevad'ss 6 lacerotgResiden ceva Geta Gl SIZ eves ee eae cee eses coh nalsesahtvedssesaicensedeiicssssaccsceds ass 6 OW eEs nips @ by] C@livecweareerass renee ee ce ae euanca se saiicaore Se sasisde sasedesalcdhosesecdosthiaes 7 Benehttssromy Owmilne Fores tlam dee ee cere see leer cates sh ctscasc ect soseceseseciacsessosees 7 ROLES Nala gC CIMeM tala CLIGES taser tere ee tee ne teaee cr coctere sieeesetvadecescecseeneviassedecceseseee: 8 Mamma ermmemital alam Minne paren cece te ere stescelon foes cence cata ncdacavehac) casvarearsatedessscvaseies 8 RONES UV MASSIS LAT GC irate tease acs catenins nn tar hues Osea aan seein vane nel seaussnieudneusdecesaasest 9 ROGUES ML ATV CS LC terete enna tc si esa seth Lacs dena hoc ve.asdaseeucesd.sbeusivscasanoedee §) litrmbermllanves tit SU BeMAVI OL .cece te areee eter. cencelesr ess aseres.seacsnncncalecvuasdedsoends 10 SelectiommolmircessOty Sal Ceram enc va eee eres cee ate cases asec sel al satuidusesdecSseuwes 10 iIntentionstoNMarvestaimlberimyth ey UtUney ccc es.cceesececo-eesecesnteceees-seassees se: 10 | NAGTEATTOMEL, URYSS nonncrscin acco dase tac acocone Sacecee ccs ee cee EA ae een ee 11 OMIM OMSTOMEONESthyplSSMES nee oe Nera aee Me cat arte ecNiLalaren senda caedov da Getcece 12 Bandowners and Conservation PUublicatiOMs ./0..5...4.c.22.0cs..s0csossesseesseeseestsoesoees 13 (CYOMYGIRTISIOLI, ceoccus aeecaeecadcncceotee neds uatco Reber ae s6 cbse epee oh Mee en eee 113} FACKINOW LEU SEMEIiSp enema ey camer see teen oh eet eee Nac eI ve cevcudes sates ashaedh 13} Trcera ta Tey © 1d pease ne ee eee ec eee eee tM er Sera ca ERS Ser uisncSaucead oadcostevavoedk 18} VND) DYELIVGID. Cs orsconecaac ooo cdcouopocRSee cia aaa ca ce ecuS eT Are TO eT eet eee 14 SYMUG SIM NETO. | a codesnnasapacscnoedoa nsec, aac Secs cobain SEO See ener dee ean oe eee ee 14 EStim@atl@ muRr@ Ged Uine me acetone meen cceea rate tec tat cues ecee De chem cel 14 DatarAccuracyzanqduReliab lity spaces aees cee te eee att one cee sne sates date tneencaenei hac 115) PIV ESS UT VEy ANIA S UH UITIN EN Ce atee coe nee ne ence acer ae mn wn cee RL NV UY a 16 DD Ef HONG TO fgleRIMS eee ste eee See ce saetee seen Sakae clan Seances seine sabaweuacuea sehen 28 Nit exetO Mall CSeee ee rec psec raren teen ati or ee nectec sa cas tnedel Osacva visas deat titasMeenteavotwssand devas 28 SEALE WI creche ee Bre ce emanate ae neice sales aasanattie Ga Me aaa caidee Sailcaniramaneionines 28 IRE STOVTE || connedsncentiacaoselicede tateone sonedcntlactart oaraddaa-canscetnsant Race coaander coset cnc Ree DS) Highlights ** In New York State in 1994, there were an estimated 491,300 private ownerships that controlled 14,367,000 acres of forest land in 1994. This compares with an estimated 506,500 private ownerships that held 14,427,000 acres of forest land in 1980. “* Of the 491,300 private ownerships, 85 percent owned fewer than 50 acres, these ownerships controlled 32 percent of the private forest land. ** Between 1980 and 1994, the area of forest land owned by retirees and white-collar workers increased, while the area owned by farmers and blue-collar workers decreased. In 1994, the average private forest-land owner was younger, had more formal education, and a higher household income than the average private forest-land owner in 1980. *“* Individual and joint ownerships controlled 57 percent of the State’s private forest lands, farmers controlled 25 percent, and forest industry and corporations other than forest industry each controlled 6 percent. The remaining 6 percent was held by private ownership groups such as recreational clubs and trusts. ** Six percent of the private forest-land ownerships had written management plans and they controlled 20 percent of the private forest-land. ** The most common reasons for owning private forest land were that the forest is part of an owner's residence (26 percent of the ownerships), aesthetic enjoyment (20 percent), and recreational opportunities that forest lands provide (19 percent). “* Thirty-four percent of the ownerships first acquired forest land between 1980 and 1994; these “new” owners controlled 28 percent of the private forest land. Percent of Ownerships 1-9 10-49 50-99 100-499 Ownership Size (Acres) Percent of Area 100-499 Ownership Size (Acres) 1-9 10-49 50-99 Introduction Forest resources are vital to the social and economic well-being of our society, and forest owners form the link between the general public and these resources. Good forest management requires a thorough knowledge of the resource base and the factors that affect it. For a clear understanding of the forest resource of New York State, information on the biologic and physical attributes of the forests must be related to the objectives and attitudes of forest-land owners. Previous surveys of these ownerships in New York were conducted in 1968 (Canham 1973) and 1980 (Birch 1983). In this publication we compare results from the 1994 and 1980 surveys. Included are data on the number of private forest-land ownerships, acreages by ownership groups, and descriptions of ownership objectives, expected benefits, harvest experiences, intentions to harvest, and management planning. The data for this study were obtained from questionnaires mailed to the owners of more than 2,765 privately owned forested plots that were selected systematically across the State. The sampling frame was drawn from the land itself (parcel by parcel) and the owner of record was determined for each parcel. We obtained responses from 1,062 ownerships that controlled 1,255 sample locations. The principal 500-999 500-999 1,000+ Figure 1.—Distribution of private forest ownerships in New York in 1980 and 1,000+ 1994, by size class of ownership. sampling units are termed ownerships (see Definitions of Terms in the Appendix). The results presented here have been expanded statistically from the sample to estimate population totals and averages. In addition to the definitions provided, users of this report are advised to read the discussion of the study design method and sampling errors included in the Appendix. The total area of forest land used to calculate inclusion probabilities was taken from Alerich and Drake (1995). Statewide Results In 1994, an estimated 491,300 private ownerships controlled 14,367,000 forested acres in New York. This compares with an estimated 506,500 private ownerships that controlled 14,427,000 acres of forest land in 1980 (Table 1). The distribution of ownership by size class changed in several categories between 1980 and 1994. The number of private ownerships with fewer than 10 acres of forest land totaled 251,100 (51 percent) in 1994 versus 270,200 (53 percent) in 1980. Of the total private ownerships in 1994, 85 percent held fewer than 50 acres, but controlled only 32 percent of the private forest land. However, the area in ownerships with 100 to 499 acres totaled 4,928,000 acres in 1994 compared to 4,180,000 acres in 1980 (Table 1, Fig. 1). In 1994, there were 500 ownerships with 1,000 or more acres versus 600 in 1980 (1,748,000 versus 2,616,000 acres). Lake Plain 1980: 151,200 Ownerships 2,054,000 Acres 1994: 116,000 Ownerships 2,275,000 Acres — Southwest 1980: 111,500 Ownerships 3,787,800 Acres 1994: 125,900 Ownerships 3,750,000 Acres Adirondack 1980: 91,900 Ownerships 5,061,500 Acres 1994: 75,000 Ownerships 4,899,000 Acres Southeast 1980: 151,900 Ownerships 3,523,500 Acres 1994; 174,300 Ownerships 3,443,000 Acres Figure 2.—Regions of New York used in forest ownership studies. (o) Percent of Area mM oO A Oo oO 1-9 10-49 50-99 100-499 Ownership Size (Acres) Regional Results In addition to statewide results, data in this publication are reported for each of four regions: Adirondack, Lake Plain, Southeast, and Southwest (Table 2, Fig. 2). Each region contains more than 2 million acres of forest land. - Washington, Saratoga, and Montgomery Counties were considered part of the Adirondack Region for the 1968 land owner survey (Canham 1973), but were included in the Southeast Region for the 1980 and 1994 surveys. Adirondack Region The Adirondack Region had the largest concentration of large ownerships in New York (Fig. 3) and the greatest concentration of forest-industry lands. Between 1980 500-999 1000+ Figure 3.—Distribution of private forest land in the Adirondack Region in 1980 and 1994, by size class of ownership. and 1994, the area in ownerships with more than 1,000 acres of forest land decreased from 1.9 to 1.3 million acres. During the same period, the area in ownerships with 100 to 499 acres of forest increased from 1.5 to 1.8 million acres. The number of forest ownerships with fewer than 10 acres of forest decreased; data from remeasured plots indicated that many of these properties were converted to nonforest uses, e.g., residential development. Lake Plain Region The Lake Plain Region is the least forested part of the State, though the total area of forest land in the region increased significantly between 1980 and 1994. The area Percent of Area 1-9 10-49 50-99 100-499 Ownership Size (Acres) Percent of Area 1-9 10-49 50-99 Ownership Size (Acres) 100-499 controlled by the smallest and largest size categories decreased while the area controlled by the intermediate classes increased (Fig. 4). In 1980, there were approximately 100,000 ownerships that each controlled fewer than 10 acres of forest land and collectively controlled 17 percent of the region’s private forest land. In 1994, there were an estimated 59,200 ownerships with fewer than 10 acres; these ownerships accounted for 9 percent of the private forest land. Southwest Region Private forest acreage in the Southwest Region decreased slightly between 1980 and 1994. The area of forest land controlled by owners with fewer than 10 acres and those with 100 to 499 acres increased (Fig. 5). Ownerships with fewer than 10 acres of forest land increased from 39,000 in 1980 to 64,100 in 1994. In 1980, nearly 65,000 ownerships with 10 to 99 acres controlled 55 percent of the private forest land in the region; this same group totaled 52,100 ownerships that controlled 42 percent of the private forest land in 1994. 500-999 500-999 Figure 4.—Distribution of private forest land in the Lake Plain Region 1000+ in 1980 and 1994, by size class of ownership. Figure 5.—Distribution of private forest land in the Southwest Region 1000+ in 1980 and 1994, by size class of ownership. Southeast Region The Southeast Region contains the heavily forested Catskill Preserve, the New York City watershed lands, and most of thé State’s population. Private forest acreage in this region decreased from 3,523,500 acres in 1980 to 3,443,000 acres in 1994. The Southeast Region has also had the highest proportion of private forest area in ownerships with fewer than 10 acres (Fig. 6), and the second highest percentage of area in private ownerships of more than 1,000 acres even while the acreage in this category dropped by half between 1980 and 1994. Types of Private Forest Ownerships Private timberland accounted for more than 93 percent of New York’s 15.4 million acres of timberland in 1993 (Alerich and Drake 1995). According to the 1994 ownership survey, individual (including joint) ownership was the most common private ownership type with 372,600 ownerships (76 percent). These ownerships controlled 8.2 million acres of private forest land (57 percent) (Table 3). The 87,100 farmers that Percent of Area Figure 6.—Distribution of private forest land in the Southeast Region in 1980 and 1994, by size class of ownership. 50-99 100-499 Ownership Size (Acres) 500-999 1000+ O Individual & Joint & Partnership CCorporation @ Other 100 Percent Figure 7.—Distribution of private forest ownerships in New York in 1980 and 1994, by type of ownership. owned forest land controlled 3.5 million acres or 25 percent of the State’s private forest land. Forest industry accounted for less than 1 percent of the ownerships but controlled 6 percent of the private forest land. Miscellaneous corporate and other ownerships each controlled 6 percent of the private forest land (Table 3). We also looked at forest ownership by form of the ownership: individual/joint, partnerships, corporations, clubs or associations, and other entities, e.g., trusts. Individual/joint ownerships accounted for most of the ownerships (93 percent). These owners controlled 79 percent of New York's private forest land (Table 4). Two percent of the ownerships were corporations that controlled 12 percent of the private forest land. The remaining 9 percent was controlled by partnerships, undivided estates, sports and recreation clubs, or associations. The average size of forest-land holdings differed among ownership groups. Individual/joint ownerships had a larger percentage of their collective area in the smaller size classes than other ownership types. For example, only 6 percent of the area owned by individual/joint ownerships was in holdings of 500 or more acres, while 1980 Owners 1994 Owners 1980 Acres 1994 Acres 78 percent of the corporate and 29 percent of other ownerships were in holdings exceeding 500 acres (Table 5): Between 1980 and 1994, individual/joint ownerships increased slightly in number and in the proportion of private forest land controlled (Table 6, Fig. 7). The number of corporations that owned forest land also increased but the acreage controlled by corporations decreased. Partnerships decreased in number of ownerships, but increased in the number of acres of private forest land owned. Other ownerships decreased both in number of ownerships and area of private forest land controlled from 1980 to 1994. Businesses that Own Forest Land Incorporated forest industry ownerships controlled 809,000 acres of forest land in New York and individually owned mills controlled an additional 91,000 acres (Table 7). Firms that managed their forest land primarily for timber production but do not have primary processing facilities were included as real estate businesses. These firms controlled 567,000 acres of forest land. 0 5) 10 15 20 25 30 White Collar Blue Collar Farmer Retired 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Percent of Area Sport and recreation clubs, primarily for hunting and fishing, were an important ownership component in the State. Incorporated clubs owned 183,000 acres of forest land and unincorporated clubs held an additional 448,000 acres. The remaining business-owned forest land was held by farms, industrial businesses and nonindustrial businesses, public utilities, and other corporations. Individuals that Own Forest Land In general, individual private forest-land owners in New York were younger, had more formal education, and higher household incomes than those of a decade earlier (Tables 8-10). From 1980 to 1994, there was an increase in the proportion of retired and white-collar owners (Table 11, Fig. 8). The greatest decreases were in the numbers of ownerships where the owner's primary occupation was in the blue-collar or farm sectors of the economy. Including the 1968 ownership study (Canham 1973), the three surveys show a dramatic decline in forest land owned by farmers and a similar increase for retired owners. In 1994, 28 percent of the owners were 55 to 64 years old and 24 percent were over 65. The median annual income of those responding to our survey was $30,000 to $40,000. Fifty-eight percent of the owners were educated beyond high school, while only 6 percent had less than a high school education. Nearly 30 percent of the owners reported spending their first 12 years in a city or town with a population greater than 10,000 (Table 12). Figure 8.—Distribution of individual private forest owners in New York in 1980 and 1994, by occupation. Land Tenure More than one-third of the private ownerships in New York first acquired forest land between 1980 and 1993; these “new” ownerships controlled 28 percent of the private forest land (Tables 13-15). Most of these new ownerships held fewer than 50 acres. The Adirondack and Southwest Regions had the highest concentrations of new ownerships. In the decade prior to the 1980 study, 23 percent of the State’s private forest land was held by new owners (Birch 1983). This turnover rate was lower compared with the 36 percent of ownerships held by new owners in the decade prior to the 1968 study (Canham 1973). Place of Residence and Tract Size Where owners reside in relation to their forest property and how many tracts they own are important to individuals and groups that deliver services or receive benefits from private forest lands. In 1994, an estimated 58 percent of the private forest-land owners lived or had offices on or within a mile of one of their forest tracts. These ownerships controlled 54 percent of the private forest land (Table 16). Multitract ownerships accounted for a disproportionate amount of the forest land base (Table 17). Eighty-three percent of the ownerships held a single tract of forest, controlling 54 percent of the private forest. Many of the corporate ownerships were included in the 7 percent of Land Investment Recreation Timber Production Farm/Domestic Use Part of Farm Aesthetic Enjoyment Part of Residence Other 0 5 10 15 20 Land Investment Recreation. Timber Production Farm/Domestic Use Part of Farm Aesthetic Enjoyment Part of Residence Other 0 5 10 15 Percent of Area the ownerships with three or more tracts and 28 percent of the private forest land. The number of forest-land owners in urban versus rural areas was determined by the zip code in which a respondent lived. More than 40 percent of the owners were in zip codes with no urban populations (Table 18). These owners controlled 48 percent of the private forest in New York. Twenty-two percent lived in zip codes classified as totally urban. These owners accounted for 21 percent of the private forest land. Ownership Objectives Forests produce many benefits so it is not surprising that landowners expressed diverse reasons for owning their forest land. The most common reasons reported by owners in New York were that the forest is part of the residence, aesthetic enjoyment, and recreational opportunities that forests provide (Tables 19-21, Fig. 9). Those who said they owned forest land because it is part of the residence increased from 16 percent in 1980 to 26 percent in 1994. 25 30 Figure 9.—Distribution of private forest ownerships in New York in 1980 and 1994, by primary reason for owning forest land. Ownership objectives were relatively similar between 1980 and 1994 when examined on an acreage basis. The most significant differences were the shifts from the farm and farm/domestic use categories in 1980 to purely residential use in 1994. Another major change was a reduction in the number of ownerships and acreage owned primarily for timber production. Benefits from Owning Forest Land Benefits received in the last 10 years and benefits expected in the next 10 years are other variables used in determining ownership objectives. In the last decade, aesthetic enjoyment was cited most often as the primary benefit received (46 percent of the ownerships that controlled 35 percent of the New York’s private forest land) (Fig. 10, Table 22). Recreation was next in importance with 15 percent of the ownerships, followed by land value (8 percent), firewood production (7 percent), farm and domestic use (6 percent), other (5 percent), and income from timber (2 percent). Only 2 percent of the landowners reported income from timber as the primary benefit that they received; these owners controlled 11 percent of the forest land in the State. Land Value Increase Recreation Income from Timber Farm/Domestic Use Aesthetic nig eae rer Firewood Other No Answer 0 5 10 I AD 2 30 3s Land Value Increase Recreation Income from Timber Farm/Domestic Use Aesthetic Enjoyment Firewood Other No Answer Percent Aesthetic enjoyment also was the most important expected benefit in the next 10 years, with 45 percent of the private owners anticipating this as their primary benefit (Fig 11, Table 23). The primary differences between received and expected benefits were decreased numbers of owners anticipating farm and domestic use and increased numbers of owners expecting increases in land value and income from timber management as primary benefits in the next decade. Expected benefits among owners have changed since 1980 (Table 24). In 1980, 30 percent of private owners cited aesthetic enjoyment as the most important expected benefit. By 1994, this benefit was cited by 45 percent of the owners with an associated increase in acreage from 25 to 34 percent of the private forest land. The acreage and OOwnerships 1994 es Z 40 45 50 40 50 Figure 10.—Distribution of private ownerships in New York in 1994, by primary benefit received in the last 10 years from owning forest land. Figure 11.—Distribution of private forest ownerships in New York in 1994, by primary benefits expected in the next 10 years from owning forest land. number of ownerships expecting to receive benefits from recreational opportunities and income from timber also increased between 1980 and 1994, while those expecting to receive benefits from farm/domestic use and an increase in land value decreased. Forest Management Practices Management Planning Only 6 percent of the private forest-land ownerships in New York had written forest management plans; these ownerships controlled 20 percent of the private forest land (Table 25). State service foresters and wildlife biologists prepared 48 percent of the plans for the Fuelwood (Personal Use) Fuelwood (Sale) Sawlogs Pulpwood Other Products (Personal Use) Other Products (Sale) Christmas Trees Don't Know ae | ae | Area 60 70 80 Figure 12.—Distribution of private forest ownerships and area of private forest land owned in New York in 1994, by products harvested. Percent of Harvesters ownerships that controlled 26 percent of the private forest area (Table 26). Consulting foresters wrote plans for ownerships that held 34 percent of the forested acres with written plans. Another 11 percent of the acreage was held by owners who wrote their own plans. Industrial foresters prepared only 1 percent of the plans, but these accounted for 26 percent of the acreage covered by written plans. Other individuals who prepared plans were employees of the USDA Extension Service and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service). These employees prepared 22 percent of the plans covering 18 percent of the area covered by written plans. Forestry Assistance Nineteen percent of the private ownerships in New York sought forestry assistance, for example, information on forestry or tax incentive programs. These ownerships controlled 43 percent of the private forest land (Table 27), an increase from 1980 when only 13 percent of the owners with 38 percent of the private forest land sought assistance (Birch 1983). The ownerships that harvested timber were more likely to seek advice. Assistance with general forest management was received by 47,300 ownerships that controlled 3,460,000 acres of forest land (Table 28). Other owners received assistance with tree planting, timber sales, insects or diseases, or taxes; many owners received several types of assistance from multiple sources. When asked who they would contact for forestry assistance, 37 percent of the owners stated that they did not know, and 16 percent did not answer the question (Table 29). Together, these ownerships controlled 36 percent of the private forest land. This is a marked decrease from 1980 when 55 percent of the owners did not know where to find assistance. Forest industry and other private ownerships with more than 500 acres of forest land were the most likely to know where to find help. An estimated 8 percent of the private owners listed multiple agencies that they would contact; these ownerships controlled 19 percent of the private forest land. Nearly 45,000 ownerships identified the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Lands and Forests, as a source of forestry assistance. Products Harvested An estimated 39 percent of the private forest-land ownerships in New York harvested products from the 9.1 million acres they controlled; 42 percent of these ownerships harvested more than one product. Fuelwood for personal use was the most commonly harvested product: 77 percent of the private harvesters harvested for this purpose (Fig. 12, Table 30). In 1993, an estimated 256 million cubic feet (ft*) of wood were removed from New York timberlands; of this amount, residential fuelwood totaled 71 million ft? (Wharton and others 1998). Only 14 percent of the harvesters reported harvesting sawlogs, but these ownerships controlled 57 percent of the private forest land owned by harvesters. Forest industries were the most likely to harvest sawlogs followed by the other private ownerships with more than 500 acres. More than 90 percent of industrial roundwood production in New York was from private lands, and sawlogs was the top roundwood product (Wharton and others 1998). Pulpwood was next in importance with 54.4 million ft? harvested in New York in 1993 (Wharton and others 1998). Only 5 percent of the harvesting ownerships reported harvesting pulpwood from their forest land, but they controlled 26 percent of the forest land owned by harvesters. Forest Personal/Company Use Mature Timber Needed Money Land Clearing Timber Salvage Cultural Treatment Other No Answer Percent of Harvesters industry ownerships and other private ownerships with large acreages were the most likely to have harvested pulpwood. Timber Harvesting Behavior There was a slight decline in experience with timber harvesting in New York between 1980 and 1994. An estimated 39 percent of the 1994 ownerships who controlled 63 percent of the private forest land had harvesting experience; this compares with 45 percent of the ownerships who controlled 65 percent of the forest land in 1980 (Table 31). The reason most often given for harvesting timber was - that it was needed for the landowner’s personal/ company use (Fig. 13, Table 32). The next most common reasons for harvesting timber were that the landowners believed their timber was mature (13 percent of the harvesters) or they needed money (12 percent). The remaining harvesters did so for land clearing, timber salvage, cultural treatment, and other reasons. In 1994, 61 percent of the private ownerships in New York had not cut trees from their forest land; they controlled 37 percent of the private forest. However, 68 percent indicated that they may harvest in the future (Table 33). The most common reasons given for not harvesting were insufficient area to harvest, opposition to harvesting, or hunting grounds would be destroyed (Fig. 14, Table 34). Most of the respondents who believed they had an insufficient area to harvest owned fewer than 4 acres. On an acreage basis, the most 10 Figure 13.—Distribution of private forest ownerships and area of private forest land owned in New York in 1994, by reason for harvesting. 30 35 common reasons for not harvesting were opposition to harvesting, destruction of hunting grounds, scenery reduction, and insufficient knowledge. Many of the ownerships concerned with scenery reduction held fewer than 10 acres. This forest land was owned primarily because it was part of the residence. Owners who believed that their forest land had stands of low quality, trees that were too small, or stands with insufficient volume per acre controlled 22 percent of the area owned by nonharvesters. Selection of Trees for Sale Over half of the landowners who had harvested timber for sale were directly involved in the selection of the harvested trees or had hired a forester to select trees for harvest (Table 35). The estimated 15,000 owners that used a forester to select trees controlled 2,682,000 acres of forest land. An estimated 26,700 owners allowed the buyer to select the timber to be harvested; these owners controlled 1,750,000 acres of forest land. Owners with 50 to 500 acres of forest land were the most likely to allow the buyer to choose the trees for harvest (Table 36). Intentions to Harvest Timber in the Future Between 1980 and 1994, the proportion of ownerships intending to cut trees from their forest land in the next 10 years increased from 23 to 35 percent; the percentage of private forest held by these ownerships increased from 42 to 54 percent (Table 37). In 1994, 80 percent of the owners with more than 1,000 acres of forest land said they intend to harvest in the next 10 years; these owners controlled 90 percent of the forest area in this Oppose Harvesting Destroy Hunting Insufficient Area Scenery Reduction Insufficient Knowledge Trees Too Small/Low Quality Distrust of Loggers No Market/Prices Too Low Insufficient Volume Other No Answer 0 5 10 Percent of Nonharvesters 1000+ -ae 500-999 & 200-499 | eo Sb 2 100-199 s i-* = 50-99 5 = = 20-49 6 10-19 1-9 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Percent of Acres ownership class (Fig. 15, Table 37). Only 27 percent of the owners with fewer than 10 acres of forest land indicated that they intended to harvest in the next 10 years; they controlled 32 percent of the acreage in this size class. Recreational Uses In 1994, an estimated 61 percent of the forest-land ownerships, holding 72 percent of the private forest Hi Next 10 Years D1 Indefinite Ei Never BI No Answer Figure 14.—Distribution of private, nonharvester ownerships and area of forest land owned in New York in 1994, by reason for not harvesting. 15 20 Figure 15.—Harvesting intentions by size of private ownerships, New York, 1994. 80% 90% 100% land, permitted or participated in some form of recreational use of their land (Table 38). Recreational use by the owner, the owner's family, and/or friends occurred on 54 percent of the ownerships. Hunting, birdwatching, and hiking were the most common recreational uses, though winter sports, snowmobiling, camping, picnicking, and fishing also were common (Fig. 16, Table 39). Thirteen percent of New York's private forest ownerships permitted recreation by the public on their land (Table 40). The recreational uses for CULL ian aren See eS aT Boreal watcha m9 fags el Sesh Sas Eee Laan ee | Picnicking; (eros. ae a ee Caniping: \r ana area ese | Winter Sports. ||P 2 sarees ae eRe Snowmobiling :;|: eee Fishing: (wrasse oer eee ee Dae oe Other 25 30 Percent these lands were similar to those of the private lands used exclusively by owners and their families and friends. Virtually every forest industry ownership permitted some form of recreational use by the public on at least a portion of its land (Table 41). An estimated 38 percent of the other private ownerships with more than 500 acres permitted some form of public recreation on a portion of their land. Only 11 percent of the other private ownerships with fewer than 50 acres of forest permitted the public to use their land for recreation. An estimated 45 percent of the private forest ownerships in New York posted a portion of their land (Table 42). These signs were most commonly posted to prohibit or control access or to control hunting (Table 43). About half of the ownerships that permitted the public to use a portion of their land for recreation also posted a portion of their land. Forest industry lands had the highest proportion of posted land (92 percent) followed by other private ownerships that controlled more than 500 acres (87 percent). Opinions on Forestry Issues To gain insight into forest-land owners’ opinions regarding forestry issues, we asked respondents to indicate to what degree they agreed or disagreed with each of the following statements: 1. Protecting forests from fire, insects, and disease is a state forestry job. Management of forest land for wildlife and recreation reduces the value of the land for timber production. 12 aeore aeore Area 45 10. 11. 22, 13%, Figure 16.—Use of private forest ownerships and area of private forest land for recreational activities by owner, owner's family, or immediate circle of friends, New York, 1994. 50 Lower taxes on forested land would not influence me to keep my land forested. The trees near my house are valuable for shade and to provide wildlife cover. I’m willing to pay for help to make better management decisions on my forest land. The country is being denuded. One must do something to preserve the forest land. Owners who manage their forest land should pay lower property taxes. More facilities that can use low-grade or poor- quality wood for energy are needed. . I don’t believe in wilderness areas; I believe in some form of productivity for all forest land. It doesn’t make any difference whether I pay an annual tax on standing timber or a single tax when the timber is harvested. I purchased my forest land for investment to leave alone and sell later. To preserve the woods you have to cut periodically. We cut to maintain the natural productivity of the land. I would allow the public to use my land for recreation, including hunting, if my taxes were reduced for doing so. 14. I like the beauty of the forest the most. We must preserve, not damage it. 15. It is getting harder to find places to use for recreation; owning forest land ensures we will have a place. Owners were encouraged to circle “no opinion” if they did not know about a particular topic. Additional information, including numbers of ownerships and acres owned by statement and response, is found in Table 44. For all statements, responses covered the full range of possible answers, but distinct patterns were recognizable for some statements. Respondents most strongly agreed with the statements about trees near residences being important for shade and wildlife (Statement 4), the country is denuded and preservation is important (Statement 6), forest aesthetics are important (Statement 14), and the difficulty finding places to recreate (Statement 15). The statements that elicited the most disagreement were opposition to wilderness areas (Statement 9), allowance of public recreation given unspecified tax incentives (Statement 13), land investment/speculation as the reason for purchase (Statement 11), and wildlife and recreation management reduce timber production (Statement 2). Landowners and Conservation Publications To better understand the ways in which owners of forest land obtain information, we asked them to identify the conservation-oriented publications they receive. An estimated 54 percent of the owners received at least one conservation or natural resource-related publication (Table 45). Hunting and fishing-related magazines and those related to wildlife were extremely important to owners. Forest-related publications, such as Tree Farm News, Northern Logger, and American Forests reached only a small percentage of forest land owners. Conclusions How the forest resources of New York will be managed and used in the future depends on a complex set of interrelated factors, including the biologic characteristics of the forests and the characteristics of the individuals and groups that own them. The characteristics of the State's private forest-land ownerships are changing and vary across the four regions of New York. Parcelization— a greater number of smaller land owners—is increasing across the State but is decreasing in some regions. And changes in ownership patterns, for example, increases in the proportion of retired people and white-collar workers who own forest land, are creating new demands on New York's forest resource but also new uses and opportunities for this valuable resource. Acknowledgments This report has been a team effort, combining the work and contributions of many people, particularly the forest-land owners who completed and returned our questionnaires. Vickie Sharon was responsible for administrative and secretarial services. We thank the many individuals who gathered names and addresses and contacted owners who had not initially responded to the questionnaire, particularly state service foresters, forest inventory personnel, and members of the New York Woodland Owners Association. Earl Leatherberry, Hugh Canham, and James Beil reviewed previous drafts of this report. Literature Cited Alerich, C. L.; Drake, D. A. 1995. Forest statistics for New York, 1980 and 1993. Resour. Bull. NE- 132. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 132 Pp. Birch, T. W. 1983. The forest-land owners of New York. Resour. Bull. NE- 66. Broomall, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 80 p. Canham, H. O. 1973. Forest ownership and timber supply. Syracuse, NY: State University of New York, School of Environmental and Resource Management. 102 p. Wharton, E. H.; Martin, T. D.; Widmann, R. H. 1998. Wood removals and timber use in New York, 1993. Resour. Bull. NE-141. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 28 p. 13 14 Appendix Study Method The sampling scheme used in this study was derived from the sampling design used by the USDA Forest Service's Forest Inventory and Analysis Units. Mailing addresses were obtained by identifying forest land plots from a systematic grid of plots placed across the state. The names were obtained from a variety of sources, including tax offices, other government agencies, neighbors, or the owner. Usable addresses were obtained for more than 95 percent of the sample locations. We identified many large ownerships with multiple sample locations, and efforts were made to mail only one questionnaire to these large owners. In all, 2,765 questionnaires were mailed to owners of private forest land in New York State; 1,062 questionnaires (43 percent) were returned with useable information. These questionnaires represented 1,255 sample locations (45 percent of the private plot locations). The questionnaire (see The Survey Instrument in the Appendix) was derived from several earlier ownership studies. The mailing consisted of a questionnaire and cover letter explaining the purpose of the study. Approximately 3 weeks following the first mailing, a second questionnaire was mailed to those who had not responded along with a second letter urging their cooperation. Approximately 1 month after the final follow-up mailing, a field follow-up of nonrespondents was conducted to obtain additional questionnaires and to determine whether there was a significant difference between those who returned a questionnaire and those who did not. Questionnaires obtained by mail and follow-up were used in the same way for estimation. Local service foresters and the New York Woodland Owners Association contacted nonrespondents. Estimation Procedure The probability that a forest-land ownership was sampled depended on the rate of sampling and the acreage of forest land owned. The total acreage of forest land in private ownership in New York was obtained from the forest inventory. The area in large ownerships (ownerships with a probability of selection approaching 1) is subtracted and the large ownerships form a separate strata. The remaining forest land is divided by the number of “small acreage” sample locations represented by the remaining valid questionnaires to determine the area represented by each sample plot. Since the sampling scheme is essentially the one used for the forest inventory, there is a low probability of inclusion for ownerships with small parcels of forest land. To estimate the total number of ownerships, it is necessary to weight the number of owners in the sample. This procedure can be stated as: _hy | Nr Ai NE estimated number of private ownerships in the sampling strata Tp =acres of forest land in the sampling strata nN, = number of respondents in the sampling strata Ai = acres owned by individual respondents The summation is an unbiased estimate of the number of ownerships in the State or a region. The data were edited, processed, and compiled using FINSYS-2, a generalized computer system. The regions within the State were combined to calculate state-level statistics. The following tabulation shows the most relevant data for each region and the State of New York. Region Number of Number of Number of Number of Average no. and state private plots questionnaires respondents plots owned of acres sent by respondents __ per plot Adirondack 885 662 284 447 11,207 Lake Plain 495 49] 200 201 11,320 Southwest 730 707 301 317 11,828 Southeast 6555 630 LUT 290 11,872 New York 2,765 2,490 1,062 ASD 11,448 Data Accuracy and Reliability Not every ownership was sampled, so it is important to know the variation associated with the estimates. When judging the effectiveness of the estimation procedure, we are concerned with two important criteria: accuracy and precision. Accuracy is the correspondence between the sample result and the result from a complete count or census using the same definitions and procedures. Precision is a measure of our ability to repeat the same results and is not directly related to the true population value. We are interested primarily in the accuracy of the results, but in most instances we can only measure precision. To check the accuracy of the data, we had this report reviewed by outside experts. The response level obtained in the study also is an attempt to assure accuracy by minimizing nonresponse bias. Beyond the search for accuracy, the reliability of the estimate is given by the calculated sampling errors. Sampling errors are calculated for the estimated number of forest land ownerships and the acreage of forest land in each cell of the tables. Sampling errors are included in the tables for the most important categories. The sampling error for the number of acres of forest land in private ownership is calculated as part of the forest inventory and is designed to achieve a national standard of plus or minus 3 percent per million acres of forest land. Because this study has a much smaller sample size than the normal forest inventory, sampling errors rise rapidly for smaller areas of forest land. There is no similar standard for the estimates of forest-land ownerships. Because the ownership survey was conducted using a land-area sample, the estimates of area have smaller sampling errors than the estimates of numbers of ownerships. Estimates for the New York as a whole are the most reliable (the smallest sampling errors). The inclusion of small forest parcels (fewer than 10 acres) in the study population substantially increases the sampling error for the estimated number of owners. The sampling errors (in percent) are: Region and state Private forest-land Owners of private Owners holding forest-land 10 or more acres Adirondack 0.5 13.4 8.2 Lake Plain We22 14.0 U2 Southwest 0.8 14.4 Hail Southeast 0.9 135i “Ss New York State 0.4 real 3.8 16 The Survey Instrument NORTHEASTERN RESEARCH STATION Form Approved State FOREST SERVICE OMB No. 0596-0078 County U.S. DEPT. of AGRICULTURE Expires: 6-30-94 Plot NORTHEASTERN WOODLAND OWNERSHIP STUDY THIS SURVEY IS VOLUNTARY AND THERE ARE NO PENALTIES FOR REFUSING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. BECAUSE IT WOULD INVOLVE A TREMENDOUS COST TO TAXPAYERS WE ARE UNABLE TO CONTACT ALL WOODLAND OWNERS. THEREFORE, WE TAKE A SMALL BUT REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF WOODLANDS, ONE OF WHICH HAPPENS TO BE YOURS. SINCE YOU REPRESENT HUNDREDS OF OTHER WOODLAND OWNERS. YOUR COOPERATION IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE THE SURVEY RESULTS COMPREHENSIVE, ACCURATE, AND TIMELY. THANK YOU. Please complete the following questions. Where actual records are not available please use your best estimate. Please be assured your answers will be strictly confidential, only statistical tabulations will be published. If you do not own woodland please answer question | and return the questionnaire. 1. In what states do you own land? State Total acres Acres wooded* *Include idle fields and pastures with young trees. 2. Of your woodland in New York, how much is in each of the following areas: a. Clinton, Franklin, Jefferson, or St. Lawrence counties? Acres or percent b. Fulton, Herkimer, Lewis, or Oneida counties? Acres or percent c. Essex, Hamilton, or Warren counties? Acres or percent d. Cayuga, Erie, Genessee, Livingston, Madison, Monroe, Niagara, Onondaga, Ontario, Orleans, Oswego, Seneca, Wayne, Wyoming, or Yates counties? Acres or percent e. Allegheny, Cattaraugus, Chautaugua, or Steuben counties? Acres or percent f. Broome, Chemung, Chenango, Cortland, Delaware, Otsego, Schuyler, Tioga, or Tompkins counties? Acres or percent g. Albany, Columbia , Montgomery, Rensselear, Saratoga, Schenectady, or Washington counties? Acres or percent h. Dutchess, Greene, Nassau, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Schoharie, Suffolk, Sullivan, Ulster, or Westchester counties? Acres or percent 3. How many individual tracts or parcels of woodland do you now own? number 4. In what year did you first acquire woodland? (Whether or not you still own the first tract you acquired.) year How much woodland have you acquired in the last 15 years? acres How much woodland have you disposed of (sold or deeded to others) in the last 15 years? acres 5. In which of the following ownership categories does the major portion of you woodland holding fall? (Please check only one.) Individual (including joint husband and wife Ite and family ownerships other than family corporations) Partnership De Corporate 3), Club or association 4. Other (Please specify ) 5), 6. If your ownership is connected with a business or association, what is the nature of the organization: (Check one) Forest industry (sawmill, pulpmill, etc) Farm Industrial business (manufacturing, mineral extraction, etc.) Real estate Non-industrial business (retail, sales, service industry, etc.) Sport/recreation club or association Public utility Other (please specify. ) 7. What is the approximate road mileage from your primary residence to your nearest and farthest tract of woodland. (For businesses of organizations consider primary residence to mean nearest place of business.) Miles to the nearest tract (enter zero if you live on the tract) Miles to the farthest tract 8. Have you been approached to sell all or part of your woodland in the last five years? 1. All 2. Part 3. No Have you been approached to sell trees in the last 5 years? Faves 2. No 9. Have trees been harvested from your land, either by you personally or by someone else, during the time you have owned your woodland? Niesmle Year of the most recent harvest No 2. IF TREES HAVE NOT BEEN HARVESTED FROM YOUR LAND SKIP TO QUESTION 17 ON PAGE 5_ 18 10. During the last 15 years, in what years have trees been cut from your land either by yourself or by someone else for your personal use (i.e. fuelwood, fence posts, etc.) or for wood industry use (sawlogs, pulpwood, etc.)? Please complete the following table. Check as many as apply. Check as many as apply. ENC ae ae ee 1991-1993) Ps ia | a el i ae ee eee Ric ae ie ieee ae } 1985-1986, Ase a | 19831984 oe ee Cc es See ae ee S| [U979:1980) Ss Sa ee | [19771998 1 a ee ee 11. During the cutting, what products were harvested? (Check as many as apply.) (Check) I. Fuelwood for your own use or the use of friends Dr Other products for personal use (fence posts, lumber, etc.) 33 Fuelwood for sale 4. Sawlogs for sale Ds Pulpwood for sale 6. Posts, poles, and pilings for sale Te Christmas trees for sale 8. Other products for sale (please specify ) 9 Don’t know what products were harvested. 12. Before trees were cut from your land did you have an opportunity to visit a logging operation? le NAS 2. No After the cutting were you satisfied with the condition of the area? Yes 2. No If you sold trees were you satisfied with the price you received? Yes 2. No 13. For the harvests in the last 15 years or the most recent harvest before then, how were the trees chosen to be cut? Check as many as apply. een eee 2 3 | Other (please specify, 0 |e 14. For the harvests in the last 15 years or the most recent harvest before then, who was most responsible for determining which particular trees would be cut? (Check as many as apply.) Timber for Timber for wood own use Landowner Forester State Forester Friend or neighbor Logger or timber buyer 15. Why were trees cut from your land? (Please rank as many as apply with number one the most important reason, number two the next most important reason and so on.) Rank Il. Felt trees were mature Dr Offered a good price 3. Land clearing 4. Needed money 3); Needed wood for own use 6. Trees harvested for company use (forest industry only) 1: Salvage of trees damaged by insects, disease, fire, or weather 8. To improve wildlife habitat. If so, what species Qs To improve view or scenic quality of the area 10. To improve recreation opportunities Ie Forest improvement- thinning, weeding, cull tree removal, etc. 12. To be eligible for preferential forest land tax treatment iI), Other (please specify ) 16. Has the harvested area remained stocked with trees or been reforested? I Yes, include leaving site to reforest itself. Ds No. If yes, what practices were used to keep the area forested? (Check as many as apply.) le Left mature seed trees standing on the site. Dp Prepared seed bed using heavy machinery. 3; Controlled competing vegetation using fire or herbicide. 4. Planted seedlings or dispersed seed by hand of mechanically. S: Made sure area was stocked with younger trees prior to harvest. 6. Other reforestation method. (please specify. ie No action taken, left area to reforest itself. 8. Don’t know. 20 17. If trees have not been cut from your land, why not? (Please rank with number one the most important reason and number two the next most important reason and so on.) Rank No market or prices too low. Trees are too small Trees are of too low quality Scenery would be reduced Value of the land for recreation or hunting would be reduced Distrust of loggers Opposed to or disinterested in cutting trees Not enough volume to make harvesting worthwhile Not enough area to make harvesting worthwhile Insufficient knowledge of what trees to sell or how to sell Another reason (Please specify ) EE OWMNAA RW —_- Oy 18. Do you plan to cut trees or harvest non-wood products (maple sap, pine cones, mushrooms, etc.) from your land for personal use or for sale? Wood forown Wood for Non-wood Non-wood use sale products- own use _ products-sale In the next 10 years? Possibly at some future date? Never plan to harvest? 19. What percent, if any, of your woodland do you feel you would never cut trees from? Percent Why would you not cut trees from this land? (Please rank with number one the most important reason and number two the next most important reason and so on.) wa po =) — No market or prices too low. Trees are too small Trees are of too low quality Scenery would be reduced Value of the land for recreation or hunting would be reduced Distrust of loggers Opposed to or disinterested in cutting trees Not enough volume to make harvesting worthwhile Not enough area to make harvesting worthwhile : Insufficient knowledge of what trees to sell or how to sell : Another reason (Please specify ) HEH OWOIDAHRWHD — — Oy 20. Have you ever sought advice or assistance in managing your woodland? Ip Yies 2. No (If you answered yes above please check the kinds of help you sought) (Check as many as apply.) Il, Information about forestry De Help with tree planting 3h Forest management assistance 4. Information about wildlife ye Help in selling trees or other forest products 6. Help with insect or disease problem (Forest Health) Us Information about tax incentive programs (Real estate or income tax) 8. Information about forest recreation Y); Other, please specify. 21. What office, agency, or individual would you contact for forestry help or advice? (If you don’t know, please check “Don’t know”) (Check one) Le Private consulting forester or wildlife biologist 2 Industrial forester 3: State employee (project forester or wildlife biologist) 4. Extension Service 5 Soil Conservation Service 6 Other, please specify ) 7 Don’t Know 22. How did you become aware of the existence of technical assistance? (Check as many as apply.) Newspaper article Magazine article Radio Television State employee (project forester or wildlife biologist) Extension Service A friend or neighbor Other, please specify ) Don’t Know SOIC TON FeAl i I) 23. Is there a written forestry or wildlife management plan for your property? 1.Yes 2. No If yes, who prepared the plan. I prepared the plan Private consulting forester or wildlife biologist Industrial forester State employee (county forester or wildlife biologist) Extension Service Natural Resources Conservation Service A friend or neighbor Otheryplease specitiy we <8 eee Bias ee te) Don’t know NS) E92 SEN Ca 5S 24. What types of forestry assistance would you be willing to pay for? Please specify eee eS) 21 22 25. Why do you own woodland? (Please rank with one the most important) Rank Il, Land investment (hope to sell all or most of my woodland at a profit) De Recreation (hunting, camping, fishing, bird watching, etc.) 3, Timber production (growing timber or other forest products for sale) 4. Farm or domestic use (having the woods as a source of timber for my own use, e.g. firewood. fence posts, etc.) De Enjoyment of owning “green space” 6. Part of the farm (woodland is the untillable part of the farm and serves no useful function in the farm operation. iE Woodland is part of my residence 8. For an estate to pass on to my children 9. Other (please specify. ) 26. Which of the following do you feel were the most important benefits you derived from your woodland during the last 10 years? (Please rank these benefits in order of importance, with number one the most important) Rank 1 Increase in land value (investment) De Recreation (hunting, camping, fishing, bird watching, etc.) 3) Timber production 4. Farm or domestic use 5), Enjoyment of woods, wildlife, and “green space” 6. Firewood 7 Other (please specify ) 27. Which of the following do you feel will be the most important benefits you expect to derive from your woodland during the next 10 years? (Please rank these benefits in order of importance, with number | the most important) Rank I Increase in land value (investment) D2, Recreation (hunting, camping, fishing, bird watching, etc.) 3 Timber production 4. Farm or domestic use SF Enjoyment of woods, wildlife, and “green space” 6. Firewood Ue Other (please specify ) 28. Does your woodland contain or is it adjacent to a: (Check as many as apply.) Ihe Lake Phe Pond 3, Stream or river 4. Public road 29. Is your woodland used for recreational purposes? 1.Yes 2. No If you answered yes above indicate what activities are permitted and by whom. (Check as many as apply.) Family, friends General or employees only public Il: Il. Hiking oe 2 Picnicking or camping 3. 3 Camping 4. 4 Hunting a: 5 Fishing 6. 6 Snowmobiling or trail biking 1: 7 Winter sports 8. 8 Bird watching 9. 9 Other (please explain ) 30. Is your woodland posted? Lees 2. No If yes, why have you posted? (Check one) Ie Past abuse of the property (littering, damage to fences, etc.) Ds To protect the safety of the residents and property 3) To protect the owner from liability 4. To control hunting (I wish to know who is hunting on my land and/or when) 5: To prohibit hunting (I do not want any hunting on my land) 6. To control access (I wish to know who is on my land) U- To prohibit access (I do not want uninvited persons on my land) 8. Other, please explain ) 31. Do you or any member of your household subscribe to or receive any of the following periodicals? (Check as many as apply.) National Wildlife Ranger Rick Magazine Sports Afield Audubon Magazine Pennsylvania Game News American Forests Field and Stream Tree Farm News Northern Logger Farm Journal Any other magazine similar to those listed above (Please specify eS SS) 12 No, I don’t subscribe to any of the above magazines faa NO oN ON Ua COS ae, = 5 23 24 32. Please indicate, by circling the appropriate letter, whether you agree or disagree with each of the following statements made by other forest-land owners. If you feel you “Don’t Know,” please circle the letter E “No opinion.” A. Very strongly disagree B. Strongly disagree C. Disagree D. Slightly disagree E. No opinion F. Slightly agree G. Agree H. Strongly agree I. Very strongly agree a bl Protecting forests from fire, insects, and diseases is a state forestry job. 2 Be CBee I | Management of forest land for wildlife and recreation reduces the value of land for timber production. 3 BEER ces Lower taxes on forested land would not influence me to keep my land forested. 4 aCe lal oleae The trees near my house are valuable for shade and to provide wildlife cover. 5 Bee Ee eae I’m willing to pay for help to make better management decisions on my forest land. 6 Ae eee eae The country is being denuded. One must do something to preserve the forest land. 7 ewe cues Owners who manage their forest land should pay lower property taxes. 8 EGR eG I | More facilities that can use low grade or poor quality wood for energy are needed. 9 Bees cee I don’t believe in wilderness areas; I believe in some form of productivity for all forest land. 10 | A (Cc E| F} G| H | I | It doesn’t make any difference whether I pay an annual tax on standing timber or a single tax when the timber is harvested. 11 eG eee ena I purchased my forest land for investment to leave alone and sell later. 12 Pete ale alae To preserve the woods you have to cut periodically. We cut to maintain the natural productivity of the land. 13 ee cee I would allow the public to use my land for recreation, including hunting, if my taxes were reduced for doing so. 14 ee eae I like the beauty of the forest the most. We must preserve, not damage it. 15 It is getting harder to find places to use for recreation; BEET sib owning forest land insures we will have a place. The Freedom of Information Act provides the right of access to information collected by the government. Thus, data collected from sample locations on you forest land could be the subject of a Freedom of Information Act request. The act identifies specific exemptions that protect the individual’s right to privacy. One such exemption speaks of “Confidential Business Information”. The courts have defined “Confidential” information as that information which if disclosed would be to likely to (1) impair the government’s ability to obtain similar information in the future, or (2) harm the competitive position of the person who supplied the information. No request for this type of data has been received. To assist in answering such requests, please check which statement best describes your feeling on this issue. I am willing to have data collected from sample plots located on lands I own made available to any who may request it. I do not wish to have data collected from sample plots located on lands I won made available to other because I believe disclosure could harm my future competitive position. I do not wish to have data collected from sample plots located on lands I won made available to other because I believe disclosure could harm my future competitive position. If such disclosure were to take place, I would deny the USDA Forest Service further access to my lands for the purpose of collection of forest resource data at sample locations. Please feel free to write in any comments you have on this issue in the space below. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 30 minutes, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Agriculture, Clearance Officer, OIRM, Room 404-w, Washington, DC 20250; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (OMB# 0596-0078), Washington, DC 20503. 25 26 The following questions are asked to insure proper classification to questions |___ through 33 by categories such as age, sex and education. Please be as accurate as possible. If you need space to expand on any of your answers, use the space at the end of the questionnaire. Again, answers are strictly confidential and only statistical tabulations are published. No information that could identify you as an individual is ever published. THESE QUESTIONS DO NOT PERTAIN TO AND SHOULD NOT BE ANSWERED _ BY PARTNERSHIPS, CORPORATIONS, AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS If the woodland is owned by more than one person, the following questions should be answered for the person to whom the questionnaire is addressed. If the questionnaire is addressed to joint owners, as husband and wife, these questions should be answered by the person who makes most of the decisions. 34. During the first 12 years of the owner’s life where did he or she live most of the time? (Check one) Ie In a city with a population of 100,000 or more ide In a city with a population of 10,000 to 99,999 3). In a town with a population of fewer than 10,000 4. In a rural area 5: On a farm 35. What is the sex of the owner? 1.Male 2. Female 3. Joint ownership 36. What is the age of the owner? (Check one) ile Under 24 2 25-34 3). 35-44 4. 45-54 5 55-64 6 65 and over 37. How many years of formal education has the owner completed? (Check one) it Grade 1-8 2: Some high school (9-11) 3}. High school (12) 4. Some schooling beyond high school (13-15) 5) Undergraduate college degree (16) 6. Some graduate college work (16+) 38. What is the primary occupation of the owner? 39. What is your best estimate of the total combined income of all members of the owner’s household over 14 years of age during the last 12 months? (Please include NET income from businesses, farming, and rentals, money from jobs, pensions, dividends, interest, social security, unemployment, welfare, and workman’s compensation) (Check one) 1. Less than $10,000 D, $10,000 to $19,999 3. $20,000 to $29,999 4. $30,000 to $39.999 5. $40,000 to $49,999 6. $50,000 to $59,999 le $60,000 to $74,999 8. $75,000 to $99,999 9. Over $100,000 How many persons over age 14 are members of the owner’s household? No. 40. Which categories below most closely describe the racial or ethnic origins of the owners? (Check one) Ie NA 5 9 tS Native American, American Indian, or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander White Thank you for taking the time to fill out our questionnaire. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Would you like to be sent a copy of the results of this survey? 1.Yes 2. No Please feel free to write in any comments you have in the space below 27 Definitions of Terms Farmer-owned lands. Lands owned by farm operators, whether part of the farmstead of not. Forest industries. Corporations or individuals operating primary wood-processing plants. Forest industry lands. Lands owned by corporations or individuals operating wood-processing plants. Forest land. Land that is at least 16.7 percent stocked (contains at least 7.5 square feet of basal area) by forest trees of any size, or that formerly had such tree cover and is not currently developed for nonforest use. (Forest trees are woody plants that have a well-developed stem and usually are more than 12 feet tall at maturity.) The minimum area for classification of forest land is one acre. Ownerships. All types of legal entities having ownership interest in land, regardless of the number of people involved. It is the locus of decisionmaking, whether an individual (sole proprietor), group of individuals (partnerships, or undivided estates), or legal entity (corporation, trust, or tribe). Private timberland. All timberland other than that owned by Federal, state, or local governments or their agencies. Timberland. Forest land that is producing or capable of producing crops of industrial wood (more than 20 cubic feet/acre/year) and that is not withdrawn from timber utilization. Index to Tables Statewide 1. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by size class of ownership, New York, 1980 and 1994. 2. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by size class and geographic region, New York, 1994. 3. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by ownership class and intention to harvest, New York, 1994. 4. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by type of ownership and past harvest experience, New York, 1994. 5. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by ownership size and type of ownership, New York, 1994. 6. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by type of ownership, New York, 1980 and 1994. 28 7. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by incorporated and unincorporated businesses and past harvest experience, New York, 1994. 8. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by age class and past harvest experience, New York, 1994. 9. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by income class of owners, New York, 1994. 10. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by education of owners, New York, 1994. 11. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by owner's occupation, New York, 1980 and 1994. 12. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by early life environment of owners, New York, 1994. 13. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by date of acquisition, New York, 1980 and 1994. 14. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by date of first acquisition and type of ownership, New York, 1994. 15. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by date of first acquisition, harvest experience, and type of ownership, New York, 1994. 16. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by distance from nearest tract and geographic region, New York, 1994. 17. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by number of tracts and geographic region, New York, 1994. 18. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by percent of urban population in zip code of owner's residence or business, New York, 1994 (from 1990 population census). 19. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary reason for owning forest land, New York, 1980 and 1994. 20. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary reason for owning forest land and past harvest experience, New York, 1994. 21. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary and secondary reason for owning forest land, New York, 1994. 22. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary benefit received in the last 10 years and harvest experience, New York, 1994. 23. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary benefit expected in the next 10 years and past harvest experience, New York, 1994. 24. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary benefit expected in the future, New York, 1994. 25. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by whether a written management plan had been prepared, New York 1994. 26. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by who prepared the written management plan, New York, 1994. 27. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by harvest experience, forestry assistance, and ownership class, New York, 1994. 28. Estimated number of ownerships that have received forestry assistance and acres of forest land, by type of assistance, New York, 1994. 29. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by source of forestry assistance and ownership class, New York, 1994. 30. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by products harvested and ownership class, New York, 1994. 31. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by harvest experience, New York 1980 and 1994. 32. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by reason for harvesting and type of ownership, New York, 1994. 33. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and harvest experience, New York, 1994. 34. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by reason for not harvesting and type of ownership, New York, 1994. 35. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land that have harvested timber for sale, by individual selecting timber for sale, New York, 1994. 36. Estimated number of ownerships that have harvested timber and acres of forest land, by individual selecting timber for sale, New York, 1994. 37. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by size class and intention to harvest, New York, 1994. 38. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by availability for recreation, New York, 1994. 39. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by type of recreational use by owner, owner's family, or immediate circle of friends, New York, 1994. 40. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by type of public recreational use, New York, 1994. 41. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by availability for public recreation and ownership class, New York, 1994. 42. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by size class and whether land is posted, New York, 1994. 43. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by reason for posting, New York, 1994. 44. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by opinion question statement number and response to statement, New York, 1994. 45. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by conservation-oriented publications they receive, New York, 1994. Regional 46. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by occupation class and geographic region, New York, 1994. 47. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary reason for owning forest land and geographic region, New York, 1994. 48. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary benefit expected in the next 10 years and geographic region, New York, 1994. 49. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by reason for harvesting and geographic region, New York, 1994. 50. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by reason for not harvesting and geographic region, New York, 1994. 51. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Adirondack Region, New York, 1994. 52. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Lake Plain Region, New York, 1994. 53. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Southwest Region, New York, 1994. 54. Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Southeast Region, New York, 1994. 29 Table 1.—Estimated number of private ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by size class of ownership, New York, 1980 and 1994 1980 1994 Size class (acres Number _ Percent Number _ Percent (In ownerships) 1-9 270,200 53 251,100 Sil 10-49 171,900 34 168,600 34 50-99 38,100 8 38,200 8 100-499 24,900 5 31,700 500-999 800 W 1,200 1 1000+ 600 W 500 W Total 506,500 100 491,300 100 (In thousands of acres) 1-9 902 6 869 6 10-49 3,670 25 3,688 26 50-99 2,516 18 2,526 18 100-499 4,180 29 4,928 34 500-999 543 4 608 4 1000+ 2,616 18 1,748 12 Total 14,427 100 14,367 100 W-fewer than 50 owners or less than 0.5 percent. ‘yudo10d ¢*(— URY} SSI] 10 SIOUMO CC UL} IOM9_] - v0 60 8°0 GI ¢0 %AS v0 001 LOC'rI 001 ere 001 OSL‘E 001 SLOT 00l 668° [Or 8°0 v6 86r'€1 68 8S0°E v6 6ES € 16 650°C 66 Cr8'P OT TSA0 [B}0}qQNS 6 61 8 eri‘ G 89 € cOl 0 0 0c 1L6 +000S esl v 909 v Ivl Cc L8 I €C L SSe 6667-0001 Srl v 809 9 OCC € II t LS ¢ 17 666-00$ 69 Li 867°C 91 6rS 81 C89 Ol 8CC IC 6£0'1 66¢-007 OL LI OEr'Z Sl ves CC 918 el LOE 91 (S/L/L 661-001 9°9 8I 97S LI 696 tc £98 €C cls Cl C8S 66-0S v9 61 8EL‘7 0c vL9 61 BIZ LC v9 SI Gell, 6v-0C O11 L 0S6 6 cOt v 6S 1 vi 6I€ € 691 61-01 cali !) 698 I C8t 9 LG 6 9IC I LS 6-1 (soe JO spuesnou} uy) UL Vel vl O'rI vel %AS W/L 001 O0E 16h 001 O0E'PLI 001 006°S7ZI 001 000°9T1 001 OOI'SL [210.1 Be 60 007‘0r7Z 9¢ 00s*€9 60 008°19 es 008°9S LL OOT'8S OT J9SA0 [R}0}qQNS OLT M 00! NM AN M M 0 0 M 001 +000S 181 NM 00r NM 001 MN MN NM AN M 00€ 666-0001 8 LE M 0071 MN 00r MN 00¢ NM 00€ MN 00€ 666-00$ y9l C ara Cc 008°¢€ (G 0067 € 007'I 9 007'r 66¢-007 69 v 009°61 € 00r'r ¢ 009°9 v 00S°Z 8 001'9 661-001 O59 8 007'8E ¢ 008°8 I] 007'€1 8 00S*L Cl 00L'8 66-0S iS) 61 006'r6 I O0r'E7 IC 006°92 6l 008°07 Ge 008°€Z 6-07 ell Sl OOL*EL tl 009°7Z Ol 000°71 61 00S*rZ 61 009°r1 61-01 Tvl TS OOT'ISZ v9 008011 WS 00I'r9 LV 007'6S (SC 000°L1 671 (sdtysiauMo uy) JUSNIO g [210 JUud019 g JOquinny WUdd10 J Joquinn JUSNIO JOquINN JUd9I9N J Joquinny yseayINos JSOMYINOS UIe[ d IeT yoepuolipy SSB[D 9ZIS $661 ‘410A MAN ‘UOIsa1 J1ydess0as puke sseld azIs Aq ‘pue] 3S210} JO So19¥ PUL sdiyszsUMO Jo JIqUINU payeUsS|—7 9[qe 331 ‘ju99.10d ¢'() URY} SSO] 10 SIDUMO (IC ULY) IOMO4 - v0 LLt S/, O'S Oe YAS v0 00! LoevyI O00! ety 00 €00°7 001 091'y 001 EU [2301 aa| 9 16 v LI 6 p81 L SLC 9 Sov 1YIO 611 9 CL8 0 0 L Sel S e17 L vcs ayerodso) CE LS SSI‘8 69 86C CL Orr‘ $9 969'7 8V SILE ay eal es Sc vES'E LC 8II al| BEC 1306 9L6 8C CTC JOULE 8°97 9 $98 0 0 0 0 0 0 IT $98 AYSNpUul S104 (so19e JO spuesnoy} uy) We 0'6r in Salil 9°01 %AS Wi, 001 O0E 16h OOI 00S*LZ OI 007871 O00! 006'r91 O0I 00L‘0L1 [2101 LASS v O0SIT M NM 9 000°8 S 009°8 t 006'r SMO) ES 6 000;0I 0 0 C 008°C C OOI€ C OOl'r aye10di0> 16 Ne 009'7LE L8 006°€7 L8 OOT Whi Zz OOLZI $9 009°0O11 ESP oT call 81 OOIL8 El 009'e =¢ 00€°9 91 OOL9T =O 000°1S JOULE 90S NM 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 NM 00 Ausnpul }So10J WAS woos ejoy, (sdiysiouMo uy) JUDDIOd JOMSUB JUDDIOG ASAIN ON soAIeY dINjN WUDdIDg SUOpuy yUdINg s1e9k (| -] ssejo diys.ioumMO 1661 “AOA MIN “JSIAIVY OF UOIQUIJUL Puw sseyd diyssdUMo Aq ‘puLy jS210J JO Sa1dv PUL SdIYsAIUMO JO AIQUINU payeWIsS|—¢ o1qB 32 Table 4.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by type of ownership and past harvest experience, New York, 1994 Harvest experience Type of ownership Harvested Percent Didnotharvest Percent Total Percent SE% (In ownerships) Individual/joint 177,000 92 278,500 93 455,500 93 7.6 Partnership 8,600 5 7,300 3) 15,900 3 28.2 Corporation 4,500 2 5,700 2 10,200 2 30.7 Club/association 2,400 1 1,000 W 3,400 1] 58.4 Other 700 W 5,600 2 6,300 l 88.3 Total 193,200 100 298,100 i OO 491,300 100 Toll SE% 8.6 10.9 Toll (In thousands of acres) Individual/joint 6,807 75 4,572 87 11,379 79 2.1 Partnership 506 6 307 6 813 6 12.6 Corporation 1,454 16 302 6 1,756 12 13.6 Club/association 226 2 5) l 283 2 24.1 Other 15 1 11 W 136 1 B23 Total 9,118 100 5,249 100 14,367 100 0.4 SE% 2.4 4.2 0.4 W-Fewer than 50 owners or less than 0.5 percent. 33) v0 001 80 v6 661 8 esl v Sv v 69 LI OL Al ys) 81 v9 61 OTT L ‘ot 9 VL 001 Be 60 O'LC MN 181 M € CC MN ae (G 69 v wy) 8 L’‘9 6l ell SI lvl Is “AS U99.19g v0 LOE'rI 86r Cl Cri 909 809 86r'°C OEr'? 97S°7 SEL‘? 0S6 698 We O0€ 16r 007 0r72 001 00v 007 00171 009°61 007 8 006'6 OOLEL OOT1SZz [PIO]. 001 JUDDIO Vil 7ET I S8I‘l ISI Gell 18 lee S8l eLl all Gl Lv (so1oe JO spuvrsnoy}) Uy Ene 009°S7 007'€1 MN 001 00 007'€ 0091 00€'7 000°¢ 008 00r'7I (sdiysioumo uy) 00 66 es el a| Ol € ¢ I G I ) 110 JUdDIOg 9'El 9SL'I veLl'l £C6 8CC vOc 8LI OS v8 CC Sv CC I€ 00701 00s°9 001 001 00S 009 O0€ O0€'| 009 000°€ OOL'E uOolVeIOGIO?) ‘yuoos10d CQ UY} SSO] IO SISUMO (CC UPY] IOMO -M 001 £6 JUI9I0 LG 6LE TI 6LS°01 89 9C (EE 686'1 S617 6977 96S°7 £68 008 Me 00S*SSP 00S°07Z 009 00E'8 OOL*LI 009'rE 00€°68 006°69 000°S €Z [enprAipuy %AS [BIOL Q] JOAO [eJO}QNnS +000S 666¢-0001 666-00S 66r-007 661-001 66-0S 6b-07 61-01 671 %AS [B10 Q| JO9AO [e}0} Qqns +000S 666¢-0001 666-00S 66b-007 661-001 66-0S 6b-07 61-01 671 azis diysioumMEO P66] ‘HAO MAN] ‘drysasuMo Jo add} pu azis drysavuMmo Aq ‘puey }So10J JO Sarde pue sdiysssUMO JO AIQUINU paJBVWIS|A—s o1qQe 1, 34 Table 6.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by type of ownership, New York, 1980 and 1994 1980 1994 Type of ownership Number Percent Number Percent (In ownerships) Individual 453,700 89 455,500 93 Partnership 28,900 6 15,900 3 Corporation 9,300 D 10,200 Other 14,600 3 9,900 72 Total 506,500 100 491,300 100 (In thousands of acres) Individual 10,732 74 ES 79 79 Partnership 663 5 813 6 Corporation 2,263 16 1,756 12 Other 769 5 419 3 Total 14,427 100 14,367 100 36 Table 7.—Kstimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by incorporated and unincorporated businesses and past harvest experience, New York, 1994 Nature of business Incorporated Forest industry Farm Industrial business Real estate Non-industrial Sport/recreation club Public utility Other Total corporate Unincorporated Forest industry Farm Misc. individual Industrial business Real estate Nonindustrial business Sport/recreation club Other Total noncorporate Total SE% Incorporated Forest industry Farm Industrial business Real estate Non-industrial Sport/recreation club Public utility Other Total corporate Unincorporated Forest industry Farm Misc. individual Industrial business Real estate Nonindustrial business Sport/recreation club Other Total noncorporate Total SE% Harvested Percent ORS eS SS a eS SS 100 54,400 123,200 W 6,000 700 200 4,100 188,700 193,200 8.6 Slej-nZ-ZSa = — 809 10 49 Ik 55 91 1 12 WwW 149 1 24 W 266 3 1,454 16 91 1 2,407 27 4,209 46 17 WwW 209 2 46 1 342 4 216 2 i5555) 84 9,118 100 2.4 W- Fewer than 50 owners or less than 0.5 percent. Did not harvest Percent (In ownerships) 0 32,400 11 234,400 80 0 0 4,300 1 10,100 4 300 W 11,400 1 292,400 98 298,100 100 10.9 (In thousands of acres) 0 0 26 1 12 WwW 89 Dy 16 WwW 34 1 0 0 124 2 302 6 0 0 861 17 3,583 68 0 0 178 3) 44 1 106 2 165 8 4,937 94 5,249 100 4.2 Total 100 86,500 357,600 WwW 10,300 10,800 500 15,500 481,100 491,300 el 809 180 183 390 1,756 3,268 Ue) 387 448 381 12,472 14,367 0.4 Percent i= = Ss 420s = o = Slelu Sun Za — Nilo ga s- 2a6 SE% 26.5 50.6 71.4 47.6 98.4 52a 98.1 50.3 30.7 61.7 11.8 9.3 Le), 34 67.4 48.1 33.8 8.0 7.8 28.7 41.1 45.5 Zell Ue 25.9 70.9 18.7 13.6 41.1 5.8 33 100 19.2 41.5 24.7 19.4 2.0 0.4 Table 8.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by age class and past harvest experience, New York, 1994 Age ears Harvested Percent Didnotharvest Percent Total Percent SE% (In ownerships) Under 25 100 W 300 W 400 W 58.4 25-34 5,800 3 7,700 3 13,500 3 29.4 35-44 31,600 16 51,500 17 83,100 17 SES 45-54 26,700 14 35,300 12 62,000 13 13.9 55-64 49,500 26 88,700 30 138,200 28 16.3 65 or over 46,900 24 70,100 24 117,000 24 16.1 No answer 16,400 9 25,000 8 41,400 8 35.9 All other owners 16,200 8 19,500 6 35,700 7 22.2 Total 193,200 100 298,100 100 491,300 100 dell SE% 8.6 10.9 lal (In thousands of acres) Under 25 13 W 32 1 45 W 58.5 25-34 178 2 133 2 311 2 20.6 35-44 973 11 868 17 1,841 13 7-9 45-54 1,293 14 906 17/ 2,199 15 Wes 55-64 1,718 19 1,101 22) 2,819 20 6.3 65 or over 2,182 24 1,200 23 3,382 24 5.6 No answer 450 5 332 6 782 5 WS) All other owners PS iul 25 677 13 2,988 21 8.0 Total 9,118 100 5,249 100 14,367 100 0.4 SE% 2.4 4.2 0.4 W-Fewer than 50 owners of less than 0.5 percent. 38 Table 9.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by income class of owners, New York, 1994 Income Ownerships Acres owned dollars Number Percent SE% Thousands Percent SE% Under 10,000 14,100 3 34.4 426 3 et! 10,000-19,999 58,000 12 27.6 997 7 1S 20,000-29,999 61,400 13 30.1 1,471 10 9.1 30,000-39,999 59,800 12 19.2 1,322 9 9.5 40,000-49,999 30,300 6 22.9 1,014 7 22 50,000-59,999 25,000 5 WP) 770 5 12.7 60,000-74,999 34,500 7 M28} 877 6 11.9 75,000-99,999 40,600 8 23.8 932 7 11.5 Over 100,000 30,400 6 18.7 1,302 9 9.8 No answer 101,400 21 18.2 2,266 16 751! All other owners 35,700 7 22.2 2,988 21 8.0 Total 491,300 100 Tell 14,367 100 0.4 SE% ell 0.4 Table 10.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by education of owners, New York, 1994 Ownerships Acres owned Education Number Percent Thousands Percent Grades 1-8 4,700 1 247 2 Grades 9-12 22,500 5 691 5) High school graduate 91,900 19 2,482 17 Schooling beyond high school 118,600 24 2,482 7 Undergraduate degree 58,100 11 1,626 1] Some graduate work 110,900 23 2,997 2\ No answer 48,900 10 854 6 All other owners 35,700 7 2,988 21 Total 491,300 100 14,367 100 SE% Veil 0.4 Table 11.—Estimated number of private ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by owner's occupation, New York, 1980 and 1994 1980 1994 Owner's occupation Number Percent Number Percent (In ownerships) White collar 137,300 30 147,100 32 Blue collar 87,400 19 48,400 itt Farmer 57,500 13 25,300 6 Retired 89,200 20 159,300 35 Other 82,300 18 75,400 16 Total 453,700 100 455,500 100 (In thousands of acres) White collar 3,250 30 4,024 35 Blue collar 1,606 15 1,149 10 Farmer 1,800 17 1,081 10 Retired 2,334 22 3,471 30 Other 1,742 16 1,654 15 Total OS2 100 S79 100 40 Table 12.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by early life environment of owners, New York, 1994 Ownerships Acres owned Early life environment Number Percent Thousands Percent Large city 85,700 IK7/ 2,256 16 Small city 57,200 12 1,484 10 Town 83,100 17 1,837 13 Rural area 93,700 19 DSL] 16 Farm 88,200 18 2,629 18 No answer 47,700 10 846 6 All other owners 35,700 V 2,988 21 Total 491,300 100 14,367 100 SE% Al 0.4 Table 13.—Estimated number of private ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by date of acquisition, New York, 1980 and 1994 1980 1994 Date of acquisition Number Percent Number Percent (In ownerships) 1980-1993 - - 166,100 34 1970-1979 185,200 37 135,300 28 1960-1969 143,400 28 77,900 16 1950-1959 65,800 13 29,800 6 Prior to 1950 83,000 16 26,200 5 No answer 29,100 6 56,000 11 Total 506,500 100 491,300 100 (In thousands of acres) 1980-1993 - - 4,034 28 1970-1979 3} 3)5)3) DE: 3,054 21 1960-1969 3,514 24 2,405 17 1950-1959 2,796 20 1,169 8 Prior to 1950 4,157 29 2,561 18 No answer 607 + 1,142 8 Total 14,427 100 14,367 100 ‘Juoo1od ¢*() ULY} SSO] 10 SIDUMO ()¢ ULY} JOMOJ-\\ v0 Vl 6 ll Gis 7S 8 97C AAS v0 00! LOE VI 1v6 CL8 SS1°8 pEes€ 698 [210 L 101 8 (4A LOI CS £8S L8e el JOMSUe ON VCC If 110°1 Ol L9 09 9¢ SIL 006] 0} 40d cel ¢ £9L v6 CSI S/LCC OLI vL 6c6I-1061 IE GIl 9 68L Il L9 69€ CVE 0 6v6l-O0v6l £ Ol 8 6911 CV cll C8S OfL 0 6S61-0S61 OL LI COr'7 vLI C8 9pr'l €L9 O£ 6961-0961 09 KG vSO'E CSI /E\\ 810°C CSL cl 6L61-0L61 LS VC OOr'€ LI? OIC 19¢°7 £09 cl 6861-0861 6 €1 v peo 6£ a £9v wall 0 v661-0661 (soi9e JO spuvsnoy} Uy) VL Lee ele 16 ell 90S %AS IC OO! 00€ 16r 00S‘I1Z 000°01 009°CLE 001‘L8 00! [B10 EG Il 000°9S 007'L 006 OOE'SE 009°ZI NM JOMSUB ON v CV NM 00r'| NM OO! 00S 008 NM 0061 0} 40d £ 0f G 006°8 007C OOT ‘I 006° 00L‘Z NM 6£6I-106l L6l € 006°SI NM OO! OOI‘L 00L'8 0 6v61-O0V6l SSC 9 008°67Z OOE 000°7 008°81 00L‘8 0 6S61-0S61 VIC 9 006°LL 00S*€ OO! 00109 0071 NM 6961-0961 Cc 9l 8C OOE'SEI 000° 008 000°L01 00r'SZ 00! 6L61-O0L61 Cl 8C 009°LEI 00€'9 006‘ OOE9LI OOO! NM 6861-0861 ¢'0¢ 9 00S°87 000°@ NM 009°7Z 006'€ 0 v661-0661 (sdiysioumo uy) YTS wood |ejoy IOWIO uonelodiog [ENprAIpul 1919 JOUIL.] JSNPUI jSOIO uorpisinboe Jo 93eq 661 “A4OX MAN SdiysaauMo Jo adAj pue uoIsinbse ysay Jo aep Aq ‘puvy jsa10j JO Sarde puv sdiyszvUMo Jo JIQUINU payeUIsSy— py IqeL 41 ‘Juao1od ¢*() URY} SSd] JO SISUMO (IF URY} JOMOJ-\\ v0 T¢l TOI ov 9 %AS v0 00l LOEvI 00! LLO 00! NE 00! CLS‘ 00! L08°9 [210 TOI 8 Cri‘ Cl 6L ¢ OTT 8 £9€ 8 8s JoMsue ON VCC iL 1101 G el 6£ L68 NM 9] I $8 0061 0} JONI Cel ¢ €OL 9 vv €l 662 C 68 Si Ite 6£61-1061 Ll 9 68ZL 0 0 9 Tel € Lcl 8 Tes 6761-0161 € Ol 8 6911 iE cv ¢ €cl 9 LSC Il byl 6S61-0S61 OL LI COv‘7 6 19 Cl V8C oI SIL 0c CvE'l 6961-0961 09 IC pSO'E 9¢ €Ll L €Ll 6 9€EIT €C GES 6L61-0L61 LS VC OOr'E ce SET Il OS I¢ Lev'l CC cLv'l 6861-0861 6 €l v veo € VC C SE 6 6CV (4 €vl v661-0661 (soide JO spuesnoy} uy) IZ CLE L87¢ Cll 16 %AS TL O00! 00€ 16r 00! 00S‘61 00! 00791 00! 00S‘8L7 ~—O0! OOTLLI [PI0.L VLC IT 000°9S OV 008°L C OOE Ol 008°LZ IT 001 ‘07 JoMsue ON v Cv NM 00r'I I OO! C O0€ NM O0E NM OOL 0061 0} Oud € OE C 006°8 ¢ 000°T 14 009 I 008°1 {E 00s‘s 6f6I-1061 Lol € 006°S1 0 0 iL OOI'T I 00E7Z L 00S‘ZI 6r61-0V61 CSc 9 008°67 Ol 000°@ C 00v ¢ 009°€1 8 008°€1 6S61-0S6I VIC 9 006°LL cl 00E'Z Cl 006'1 LI OOILt cI 009°97 6961-0961 COI 8C OOESEI Ol 000° Ol 009°1 CE 000°88 SC OOL*Er 6L61-0L61 € Cl 8C 009°LEI IC 007'r OV 00S*L 8C 007'6L LC 00L*9r 6861-0861 S 0d 9 00S°87 I OOI Cl 00S‘°7 9 00r'81 v 00S*L v661-0661 (sdiysisuMo uy) %“~AS JUIDIOd [B10], yusdIa9g JOqUNN jwodog JOquINN wusdJog JoquINNY jyuddI9g JOquINN uonisinboe jo a3eq — ysoareyjoupiq = =——sépaySOAIRA SOA JOUPI «=——(ts«Cé~YSOATCE SdiysiouMo JOY}0 [[V SIOUMO [eNPIAIpUy] F661 AOA MON ‘diyssaumo jo adAj pue ‘aduatiadxa jsoArvy ‘uoKIsInboe ysa1y Jo aep Aq ‘puvyl jsa10} JO sade puv Sdiys1sUMO JO JAaqUINU pajyeUIsSy—sS] 21qe 42 v0 60 80 Gall 50 %AS v0 001 LIE tI 00 epr'e 00l OSL'€ 001 SLOT 001 668° [BIOL 101 8 Srl 8 v8C Ol SARS Cl €Lé v MCG JomMsue ON £8 tl 798" 91 ves tl 660 9 Lvl vl c89 OOT BLY} 910] S 5! Vv cS9 9 IC 9 8CC Cc LS t A OOT-1S NIT S v99 G cS v Ga| it 8rl [E Cee OS-9C v'87 C 987 t Sol I 9€ I tC Cc CCl SCM GEN 9 vrs LE [ec 9 GCC ¢ vil s) LLC SES) 6LI 8 007 1 C v8 6 Sve v 08 vl 169 SG Ce vs We He 9¢ 7£6 I TS E161 £9 €er'l OS €cr'7 | uey} Sso’] (soioe JO spuesnoy) Uy) He Vel vrl 01 vel %AS JI fe 001 00€' 16h 001 00€'rLI 001 006°SZI 001 000°911 00I OOI'SL [B10 L'87 tl 008°S9 6 006°91 81 007 EZ 81 00712 9 00S‘P JoMsSUe ON 181 SI 008°0L LI OOr'0€ Ic 001°97 ¢ 00s*S Cl 008°8 OOT UeY} 910] 16¢ v 009°0Z t 00E's LE 009°8 ( 008°1 Il, 006'r OOI-1S If v 00902 I 007 6 008° TI v 00S*r v OOT'€ 0S-97 € 8P I OOE'S t 009° MN 0O0r NM 00I MN 007 GAe)|| 69C (5 00s*91 v 00S°9 t OOI'€ t 008°€ Vv OOI€ S1-9 161 G 008°8 I O0L'I € O0r'€ I 009'1 € 001° SCG 96 8S 006°78Z c9 OOL*LOI 6t 00€6r L9 O0S*LL v9 00r'8r ] Ue} Sso’] %AS (sdiysiauMo uy) JUIIIO [RIO.L JUINIO dg Joquinny JUDIDIO JOquinny JUIINIOd JOQuINN] WIIIO JOquinny So] TU ysBaynosg JSOMYINOS Ule[ Fe] yoerpuolipy gour}siq 661 ‘N4A0A MAN ‘UOIso1 JYdess0Is puv }9e.1) JSaIvIU WO adULSIP Aq ‘pUL] }S910} JO Sa1d¥v PUB SdIYysAIUMO Jo AZQUINU paJBWIIsSy|—9] I[qQV 43 v0 60 80 GI 50 %AS v0 00! L9OE'rI 00l ere 001 OSL'E 0Ol SLTC 00 668 7 [BIOL v9 8¢ pLo€ 9¢ 9L8 CC 1€8 OC 990 9¢ 108°1 SOW IO € OL 81 €S¢°7 Lal €6S 81 999 8I 86E 6l 906 6 le vs Or8'L LS vL6'l 09 £977 c9 1v'l Sv 7617 I (sore JO spuesnoy} uy) Ie Vel vv OVI vel %AS 7 001 00€16Pr 001 O0E'PLI 00! 006°SZI 001 000°911 00l OOI'SL [BOL OVI HL OOL PE L OOL*T1 L 0076 9 007'L 6 009°9 o1OUI IO ¢ Dae Ol 00S‘6r 8 00L'rI L 000°6 vl 00791 ell 009°6 C 9°8 €8 001°LOPr 68 006°Lr1 98 OOL*LOI 08 009°%6 8L 006°8S I (sdiysiouMo uy) %*%AS JUDO [B10 |, WUsdIOg JOquINN wusdog JOquINN wusdog Joquinyy yusdJog JOquINNy $}0B.] JO yseoyInos JSOMYINOS ule] De] yorpuolipy Joquinn, P66] “N4IOX MON SUOIdo1 I1YdeAsoes puv s}dv.13 JO AaqQuinu Aq ‘pu, jSa10} JO Sa1de puL SdIYysAIUAO JO AIQUINU pajyBVWIs|— | IIqQeL 44 Table 18.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by percent of urban population in zip code of owner’s residence or business, New York, 1994 (from 1990 Census of Population) Urban population Ownerships Acres owned Persons in sample zip code in zip code (%) Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0 213,621 42 6,555,167 48 838,238 12 1-24 17,128 3 315,916 Z 102,445 l 25-49 39,790 8 1,302,184 10 441,418 6 50-74 62,402 12 1,497,166 11 881,416 2 75-99 64,733 13 1,203,626 9 1,464,338 72 \ 100 115,170 Doe 2,864,328 21 BES95 195 48 Total 512,188 100 13,689,637 100 7,123,650 100 Table 19.—Estimated number of private ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by primary reason for owning forest land, New York, 1980 and 1994 1980 1994 Reason for owning Number Percent Number Percent (In ownerships) Land investment 57,000 11 23,700 5 Recreation 53,100 1] 92,700 19 Timber production 16,900 3 1,500 W Farm and domestic use 97,600 19 49,700 10 Enjoyment of owning 75,000 15 100,500 20 Part of farm 79,600 16 46,200 9 Part of residence 82,200 16 126,500 26 Other 24,000 5 31,500 7 No answer 21,100 4 19,000 4 Total 506,500 100 491,300 100 (In thousands of acres) Land investment 1,669 12 1,326 9 Recreation 2,319 16 2,811 20 Timber production 1,917 13 1252 9 Farm and domestic use 2,467 17 1,578 11 Enjoyment of owning 1,745 12 2,228 16 Part of farm 1,579 11 1,478 10 Part of residence 1,478 10 1,851 13 Other 1,002 7 [ESS 10 No answer 251 2 328 2 Total 14,427 100 14,367 100 W-fewer than 50 owners or less than 0.5 percent. 45 Table 20.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary reason for owning forest land and past harvest experience, New York, 1994 Reason for owning Harvested Percent Did not harvest Percent Total Percent SE% (In ownerships) Land investment 9,300 5 14,400 5 23,700 5 19.8 Recreation 25,600 13 67,100 22 92,700 19 18.2 Timber production 1,200 l 300 W 1,500 W 24.9 Farm and domestic use 33,600 17 16,100 5 49,700 10 16.6 Aesthetic enjoyment 30,200 16 70,300 24 100,500 20 19.5 Part of farm 26,200 14 20,000 i 46,200 9 18.9 Part of residence 53,100 27 73,400 DS) 126,500 26 15.4 Estate 5,600 3 8,900 3 14,500 3 24.5 Other 6,800 3 10,200 3 17,000 4 pT No answer 1,600 1 17,400 6 19,000 4 67.6 Total 193,200 100 298,100 100 491,300 100 et SE% 8.6 10.9 oa dek (In thousands of acres) Land investment 784 9 542 10 1,326 9 9.8 Recreation JESS 17 1,296 DS 2,811 20 6.4 Timber production 1,193 13 59 1 ws 9 18.6 Farm and domestic use 1,319 14 259 5 1,578 11 8.6 Aesthetic enjoyment 1,110 12 1,118 21 2,228 16 7.4 Part of farm 1,030 11 448 9 1,478 10 8.9 Part of residence 1,090 12 761 14 1,851 13 7.9 Estate 430 5 298 6 728 5 13.2 Other 498 5 289 6 787 5 27 No answer 149 2 179 3 328 2 20.0 Total 9,118 100 5,249 100 14,367 100 0.4 SE% 2.4 42 0.4 W-fewer than 50 owners or less than 0.5 percent. 46 Table 21.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by primary and secondary reason for owning forest land, New York, 1994 Primary reason Secondary reason Reason for owning Number ‘Percent Number Percent (In ownerships) Land investment 23,700 5 30,900 6 Recreation 92,700 19 34,800 7 Timber production 1,500 W 12,600 3 Farm and domestic use 49,700 10 44,600 9 Aesthetic enjoyment 100,500 20 89,000 18 Part of farm 46,200 9 18,300 4 Part of residence 126,500 26 46,500 10 Estate 14,500 3 21,700 4 Other 17,000 4 1,100 W No secondary reason given - - 172,800 35 No answer 19,000 4 19,000 4 Total 491,300 100 491,300 100 (In thousands of acres) Land investment 1,326 9 761 5 Recreation 2,811 20 1,424 10 Timber production 15252) 9 857 6 Farm and domestic use 1,578 11 LEST 10 Aesthetic enjoyment 2,228 16 2,201 1) Part of farm 1,478 10 705 5 Part of residence 1,851 13 1,018 7 Estate 728 5 ls 8 Other 787 5 406 3} No secondary reason given - - 4,138 29 No answer 328 2 328 2 Total 14,367 100 14,367 100 W-fewer than 50 owners or less than 0.5 percent. v0 CV v'C %AS 70 001 LOC HI 001 67'S 001 8116 [210], 701 8 691'I ZI Lv9 9 cCS Jomsue ON eS v S8S ¢ 8S7Z v L7E 1ayIO Taare] iL 666 0 0 I] 666 poomoally vy SE AS 7 8r7°7 0€ SLL‘Z juowAofuas oay)soy lal L Z10'I ¢ S87 8 LUL 9sn dISOWOp pue Wey p'Sl II $9S‘I 0 0 LI $9S‘I Joquily Woy 9WIODUT a) 81 885°C Ge Iv‘ 9] Lev'l uoTeaINNy b'6 Ol 9¢r'I €] 0L9 8 9SL @SPIOUI ON|LA pur] (so1ov JO spuesnoy} uy) UL 601 9°8 %AS WW 001 O0E16r 001 001‘86Z 001 007 €61 [210 6'LZ II 00E'rS €] 00€ Or i 000‘r1 Jamsue ON 90 ¢ OOI‘EZ € 008‘L . 8 O0E'ST JoyIO 0'b7Z L 009‘rE 0 0 81 009‘r€ Ppoomoall wal OP 007'97Z pS 006‘6S1 SE 00¢°99 jusurXofua onaysoy Lye 9 OOI‘LZ p 00171 8 000‘S 1 9sn IJsoWOp puke ULIe.] 9°7E (6 00771 0 0 9 00771 Joquily Wo1y SUIODUT 81 SI 00€'bL 9] 008°8r El 00S°SZ UONea1D9y 0°07 8 00S°6€ 01 00767 ¢ 00€‘OI 9SPIOUI ON]LA pueT (sdiysisuMo uy) WAS jwsdI1Iq [B10 | JUdd19g jSOAJeY JOU PIG yUsI9g paysoAreyy P2AladaI IJOUDG £661 ‘Y4AOA MON ‘9IUBIIIdX9 JsaArvY jsed pue SAvIA CQ] JSC] 9Y) UI PIAloda4 JLQUEq AreUNLId Aq ‘pue] 3S210} JO Sa1de puL SdiYysAIUMO JO JIQUINU payEUIIsS|— ZZ I[qGe 48 v0 6 vl a cll Sv £01 vel 69 6L TL 8°8e C8E v'CC CCl BEC 8°97 vLI S (b %AS 001 001 Udd10g v0 LOE'V1 68S v9 106 6187 8811 178'1 €6r'C S161 ee 00€' 16r OOL'SE 00781 OOr'rE 001'77Z O0€' Ir 008'r1 00r‘OL 00r'rS [P}0L, CV 001 6b7'S 9 Lit S 89C 6 €8 Ov 780°C L v9E C Lil I? 560'I Li €C6 (soioe JO spuesnoy} uy) 601 001 001°86Z 6 006°97 ¢ 00I'r1 G 006°9 Ig 008° 1 9 009°91 I 006'1 SI 009'St Il OOE'E€ (sdiysioumo uy) JUDO d 001 v'C 8116 CLT ele 818 SL VC8 vOL'I 861 C66 9°8 007 E61 jsoAIeY JOU PIq WUIIJ9Od 008°8 00I'r 00S*LZ 00€°69 0O0L'rZ 006°71 008'rZ OOI'IZ Po}soAIe}] YAS [RIOL Jomsue ON IStIO poomolly juowiAofua onoyisoy ash oNsowop pue Wey JOquIt} WOIy 9UIODUT UOT}eO199Y asvoIOUI oNyeA puey] %AS [BIOL JOMSUe ON 1OYIO POOMOIIY juowiAofus o1jay)soVy asn o1sowop pure ue] JOquIt) WO, 9WIODUT UOT}BOINIY OSPdIOUI ON[VA pur] yyouag poyoodxq 1661 “NAOK MAN ‘aduUatedx9 JsoAavy jsed pue s1vok QT XU dy) UT paydodxe Jyjauaq AreuntAd Aq ‘puvy }sa.10J JO sade puv sdiyszsUMo JO AIQUINU pajyVUIs|— EZ 9[qQv I, 49 Table 24.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land owned, by primary benefit expected in the future, New York, 1980 and 1994 1980 1994 Expected benefit Number Percent Number Percent (In ownerships) Land value increase 110,300 22 54,400 11 Recreation 49,300 10 70,400 14 Timber production 13,700 2 14,800 3 Farm and domestic use 126,200 DS 41,300 Enjoyment of owning 152,000 30 222,100 45 Other 14,000 3 52,600 1] No answer 41,000 8 35,700 ff Total 506,500 100 491,300 100 (In thousands of acres) Land value increase 2,536 18 1,915 13 Recreation 2,150 15 2,493 17 Timber production 1,509 10 1,821 13 Farm and domestic use 2,679 19 1,188 8 Enjoyment of owning 3,543 aS) 4,819 34 Other 12523 10 1,542 11 No answer 487 3 589 4 Total 14,427 100 14,367 100 Table 25.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by whether a written management plan had been prepared, New York, 1994 Ownerships Acres owned Management plan preparation Number Percent Thousands Percent Ownerships with written plans 27,500 6 2,831 20 Forest industry 100 W 680 5 Other private 27,400 6 Dp\\3)) 15 Ownerships with no written plan 429,900 87 11,120 vel No answer 33,900 7 416 3 Total 491,300 100 14,367 100 W-fewer than 50 owners or less than 0.5 percent. Table 26.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by who prepared the written management plan, New York, 1994 gets OWnerships se ee ee Acresiowned Pala E Management plan preparation = Number __—Percent_—————s Thousands _—Percent_ Owners with written plans 27,500 100 2,831 100 Who prepared the plan Owner 2,400 9 305 11 Consultant 3,600 13 955 34 Industrial forester 400 ] 651 23 State employee 13,200 48 729 26 Extension 1,500 5 74 3 NRCS ? 2,500 9 130 5 Other 4,300 16 275 10 Total ° 27,900 101 3,119 110 “ Natural Resources Conservation Service. > Table totals to more than 100 percent because more than one person helped prepare some plans. 51 ‘jud010d ¢'() ULY} SS9] 10 SIOUMO (IF UL} IOMOJ-A\ v0 00! LOE'vI 001 90S"1 00l 6EVL 001 LSS'P 001 $98 [B10 Vl 9 vS8 I 91 S lev 8 06£ (4 fi JOMSUB ON 8'€ Is 96€'L 81 ELT €S [88'€ IL SIZE € EG SoUue}SISse ON vv ev LII‘9 18 LIZ cv MEN AS Ic cS6 $6 1c8 ourjsisse jYsNog sdiys1oumMO |[V CV Le 6v7'S SI CCC ce 179°C €s 907°C 0 0 © 6L t Ive 0 0 I 801 ¢ EG 0 0 JOMSUB ON vs SC Or9'€ [E 101 vc LSL‘I 6t 78L'I 0 0 SOULISISSE ON 9°6 6 8971 8 Icl Ol 9SL 6 16€ 0 0 oourjsisse JysNog SoAIBY JOU PId VC £9 811°6 68 p8c'l ) 818'P LV IST 001 $98 ssl t els I 91 v ee € LSI 4 LI JOMSUe ON eS 9 9SL'E I CLI 6 v717 (43 cer’ € LC SOULISISSE ON 6” ve 6r8'P €L 960°1 ce WE G a| 19¢ $6 1¢8 oouRjsIsse JYsNOg poysoare py (so1oe JO spuesnoy) Uy) Wh OO ONE CO OOS OO OOO —C ECE OW OUST Sy 80 cl 0) AAS v0 00! LOE HI 00! epr'€ 00! OSL‘€ O00! Mie, Oo! 668'P [R10 0'0¢ (4 SCE C LS S 66 14 16 C 18 JOMSUB ON Ll ¢ L8L 8 6LT7 8 987 € 6L € evi IYO Cel ¢ 8CL 9 SOC v C91 £ 6L 9 C87 9je]sq 6L €l 1$8'1 | 06S Ol CLE 0~ bry 6 Suv g9USpISol JO Led 68 Ol 8Lr'1 8 VLT Cl 9b 9 ee 8 SOV uliey JO ped VL 9] 8777 IC 6¢L IT 66£ 9 €Se cl [EXSHE, juowAolus o1jay)soy 9°8 Il 8LS‘I ft VVC el 680 9| €Se Ol C6v 9sn oIjsowop pue Ue Y 9°81 6 GIG C 6S 9 SEC I ve 6l 1@6 uonjonpoid Joquiry, v9 0¢ 118°7 Sl OCS SC L‘t6 9 CLE 0~ 6L6 UOTPBIIODY 86 6 97E'I vl OLD 8 GOS, ¢ vil 8 VIP JUSW}SOAUT pue’Ty (so1oev JO Spuesnoy} Uy) MIG el VA O'vl vel YAS We OO! 00€ 16r 00! 00E'PLI OO! 006°SZI 00! 000°911 00! OOT*SL [BIOL 9'L9 v 000°61 NM OOE Gl 00r'rI I 00r'| v 006°Z JOMSUB ON VLC v 000°L1 S 00S°8 v 007'S 4 00r'7Z I 006 IYO CVC € 00S‘rI € O0€'V € 00€'r C 008'1 9 OOIP 97S vst KG 00S‘971 I¢ 00S*PS 9 00107 97¢ 00S‘0€ 8c 00r' 17 9OUSPISOI JO Led 681 6 007 9b iL 0017 iE 0076 | 000°61 8 006°¢ uuey JO Wed col OC 00S°001 It 008°rS vl 00r LI vA 006'S I 91 00r'ZI jyuowXolus saysoVy 9°91 Ol 00L‘6t 8 009°€1 6 OOE TI €l 006'r1 el 006°6 9sn oljsowop pue Uwe 6 VC NM 00S'I M 00! I OOL M 007 I OOS uonjonpoid Joquiry, C81 61 00L‘76 Ol OOTLI I¢ 007'6E O~ 006°7Z 8 00S'€I UOTPBSINIY 8'6l ¢ OOL*EZ iS 000°6 € 10) 9 000°L ¢ 009°€ JUDW}SOAUT PUB] (sdiysiouMo uy) MAS wooo [ejo] JU9910q yUdd10g yUd9I0g SBayINOS }SOMYINOS Ule|q 24e'] yorpuolipy Joaquin Joaquin Joquin qusolog Joquin UIUMO JO} UOSRIY quitntn, quinn quinn d quinn 4 F661 “A4AOA MAN ‘UOIdII Yydesdo0es puv purl jSa10J SUIUMO 10} UOSvaA AreULId Aq ‘pue] }sa.10J JO Sarde puv SdIysAUMO JO JIQUINU payeWIs|— Lp 2G, 70 ‘ju9d.10d ¢'() URY} SSO] 10 SIOUMO ()¢ ULY} JOMIJ-A\ v0 60 8°0 Gal 50 %AS v0 001 LOC'rI 001 epr'e OOT OSL'€ 001 SCC 001 668 '7 [R10 L 6 rl v 68S Si v9 v 9¢I S vil v SLI JOMSUB ON Srl g Ip9 ¢ S6l v Sel t 89 S eve JIWIO call 9 106 t cll L 8VC (6! (WL S 897 Poomerrd St ve 618'r vv 90S Of 6I1'I St S8L 6C 606'I juow£ofus snoysy £ Ol 8 8811 9 t6l 6 SSE 8 C81 6 8S1 sn olsowiop pue ULE vel tl 1Z8'1 v (3(4| el 60S 8 C8 IC L00'I FSC OT LUO eOS UT 69 Li £6r'C el Isp CC v18 81 Icv 91 LO8 UOHesINNY 6L el S161 OC 669 Il bev Il OSC Il ces OSBOIOUL ON[BA PUBT (saioe JO spuesnoy} uy) WHE Tel vvl Oa vel %AS lez 001 O0E'16r 001 00€'rLI 001 006°SZI 00 000°911 001 OOT'SL [R10 8°8t L OOL'SE S 00L'8 vl 000°81 Vv 00r'r 9 009°r Jomsue ON C8E v 00781 L 008°11 C 000°@ I 006 g O0S'€ AIYIO v'CC L 00r' rE L 008°7I L 001'8 9 009°L 8 006'¢ pocmeorny CCl Sv 00177 9S 000°L6 Ie 008°8€ Lv 006'rS (64 OOr'l€ jusuikofus sneyis” 8° £7 6 00 Ir 6 008°S1 v 000°S Y) 007'L 81 OO0€'€I SSM OSoulop pus ULeY 8°97 t 008'r1 I oor! G 000°€ 8 008°8 G 006'I JOQUIT} WOT SUIOSUT VLI vl 00r‘0L 9 OOT'TI 9C O07 EE cI 000°LI al| 0016 UONesIoOy (EN I OOr'PS 6 000°91 vl 008°L1 tl 007'S1 L 00's esvorOUL ones Pub] (sdrysiouMmo uy) HAS JUINIO [BIOL JUIIIOd JOquINN] JUdIIO JOquinny jsSBayINOS }SOMYINOS ule] g De] yoerpuolipy JUIIIO JOquinn] WUIIIO Joquinn po9}99aXxo }IJoOUNg 1661 “A404 MON ‘uOIdaA D1YdeadO0oS puL sAvad —] }X9U JY) Ul p9jdIdxo ylyoudg AreULAd Aq ‘puvyjsar0} JO Sade puv SdiysAUMO JO JIQUINU pajyVWIs|— gp I[qe J, 71 ‘yuoo10d CO UeU} SSO] JO SISUMO (CC UPY} JOMdJ- VC 09 CV 09 VE %AS VC 00r 8116 00! LvL'| 0al 6LY'7 00! pSe'l 00! 8ES‘€ [210 L CCl 6 v6L 8 Lvl 6 £CC cl SOc 9 VCC JaMsue ON €°CE L 609 IT 681 C vv (6 €C IT €6€ IBYIO 6 €l €l 691'1 8 Lel €l VEE 6 Scl 91 89S jusWyeod} [eINND 8 LS I CS I IT I SC 0 0 I 91 UONPII9AI 10 MOIA BAOIdUIT 9'SE I 901 I Il (6 Is 0 0 I a4 JUSWOAOIMUIT JeIIQeY OFITPTLM ¢9l ¢ 681 14 OL ¢ ell iE 16 9 SIC oseales JoquIt | cae LZ 68°C ve 88S CC Les 97 €Se 6C 1101 asn Aueduios 10 UM 6 Tl Ol £66 IT 881 6 56 €l ILI Ol 6SE Aauoy] PepeaNn L&C € S56 v 6L I €l € Sv £ 86 Sulieva[o pur] VLI iS 9D v cL 9 srl .S 89 14 Sel 99d Pooh £8 6l 9SL'| vl CST O€ 9SL 0c €LT €l SLY oINJEU JOQual |, (soioe JO Spuesnoy} uy) 9°38 VLI vel VLI 8 61 %AS 98 00! 007° £61 00! 0061S 00l 009° Er 001 00S‘7S 00! 007'St [RIOL VST 0c OOPr'8E 62 OOT‘SI 9] 000°L el 00L°9 Ol 009° JoMsue ON LO 14 00E'L 6 008° I 00V NM 00C v 006'1 IBYIO 6 0£ 9 00S‘TI € 00r' I vl 000°9 v 0077 14 006'1 juoW}eo1} Teng; y¢9 NM 008 M NM C OOL 0 0 NM 00! UONEIIN9I JO MITA DAOICUIT CCV I 009'T M 00! C 000°I 0 0 I 00S JUSWOAOIMUIT JeILQeY OJTTPTIM. 6 17C S 00€'6 C 00€ I v 006'1 9 OOI'€ L 000° aseAles Joquil | vl Of OOL‘LS 9¢ 009°81 VC 00901 ve 006°LI tc 00901 asn Aueduios 10 UMO ele Ol 009°07 L 009°¢€ Ol OOIr cl 000°8 Il 006‘ AQuo|| P2P22N L9Ov 6 00781 14 0017 I 009 S OOL'I le 008°€1 suliea[o pur] O8E C OOI'E (4 000°! ¢ 000°Z L 00S*€ 14 009°1 99Ud Pooh V LI el OOL'P7Z 8 006°€ IC 00€6 8 0076 ¢ O0E'7 oinjeul Joquit yy, (sdiysiouMmo uy) WAS wool [B10], qusdl9g Joquinyy jUus019g = Joquinyy qusdlag = Joquinyy qusdlog + Joquiny UT]JSOAIeY JOJ UOSeOY $661 ‘HAOA MIN ‘UOId1 J1ydeAZO0IS pue SUIDSIAIvY 10} UOSeaA Aq ‘pULT }S910} JO Sa1dv PUL SdIYSAIUMO JO JIQUINU PIJeWIISy— 6p I1QUL, 72 ‘judo10d ¢*() UBY} SSO] IO SIOUMO ()¢ ULY} JOMOJ-\\ CP 79 18 L’8 L‘8 %AS PY 001 6b7'S 001 969'I 001 ILZ'I 001 176 001 19¢‘T [210], /Lg) 6 76b Ol rll el 191 6 6L 9 8L Jamsue ON r9l 6 ILp I] 61 8 001 lL 89 8 601 Joy1O Vol 01 61S L ZI 8 L6 Ol 16 9] 6172 9dpa] MOU JUSIOLJNsUy Si0 Guam ELI S 06 Z SZ ¢ oF I ZI BOIL JUDO JNSU] C61 L ere ¢ 98 9 CL L 89 8 rll SUIN[OA Ysnoud JON O11 6l 766 LG bor Ol Zl IZ €6l 9I OIZ suljsoarey asoddgQ Gg 9 967 9 $6 6v I al Ol Ivl s19930] JsNAysIq 61 ZI S€9 8 O€I SI 861 SI 9€1 El ILI Sununy Aonsaq SI 01 97S €] 672 8 Ol 6 08 8 LOI paonpas A19Uu99g WEG ty 661 € 8P 9 bl Z €7 pS Ayipenb Moy sao1], Gra i L6E € 8b | 961 6 08 S €L [[BUs 00} s9a1], GSE VY 907 Z 97 ¢ 19 G 9b ¢ €L MO] 00} ddLId “JoxIVU ON (so1oe JO spuesnoy} uy) 601 081 LANG 1€7 p81 %AS 601 001 001‘86Z 001 00r‘7ZI 001 00€'78 001 00S‘€9 001 006‘6Z [R10], Ls. WE 008°6€ el 009°S1 IZ OOL‘LI S 007'€ II O0E‘E Jomsue ON OuGae a6 O0L‘SZ tl 00S‘LI 9 000‘¢ € 006'I O0€E'T JoyIO CUyG S 006‘S1 € OOr‘€ 9 000‘S L 008‘ 6 00L‘Z 98po|MOUy JUSIOIJNsUy Giiy Sl 008‘St {6 008°8Z 8 009°9 SI 0076 p 007'I BOIL JUSIOYJJNSU] CME -& OO0I‘SZ 8 OOT‘OI 4 000°€ 8 O0I‘S €7 006'9 SUIN[OA YsNous JON 181 rl 00€ ‘Or 9| 00761 L 008°S 9| OOT‘OI 81 007'S sunjsarrey asoddo (AS 6 I OOL‘E I 00r'| I 00L M M S 0091 $19330] Jsn.ysIq 9EE Pl 00L‘0r ¢ 009°9 81 00S‘rI $7 006‘SI ZI OOL‘E sununy Ao1soq Gilicae 28 00I‘bZ Ol 00L‘ZI 4 006'I ZI 008°L 9 00L‘I poonpa A19U99§ 69b OOI‘EI I 00L €l 00S‘OI (6 OOI‘I € 008 Aytyenb Moy sao1], poe Ss O0€‘rI € 00I‘r 6 oor‘. p o0r'z I 00r [[eUts 00) soar], TOb OE 009°6 G 00€‘Z ¢ 00Z‘r € 000‘Z p OOI‘T MOJ 00} ddLId “Jox.1VU ON (sdiysisuMo uy) WAS WUIIIO [PIOL JUIIDIO Joquinny WUDIDIOd JOquInny JU9DIOd JOquinny JUdDIO JOquinny ulsoArTey jou 10} UOSBOYY — 4yseaymnog —tsiSOMINOHEs— esti OPT CRPUCLIPY 1661 ‘N40A MON ‘UOIda1 T1Ydeas0IS pu SuUNSeAIvY JOU 10} UOS¥|.A Aq ‘puv] }S910J JO Sa1de PUL SAIYSAIUMO JO JIQUINU PIJBUIIISy|— 0S I1qBL 18) Table 51.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Adirondack Region, New York, 1994 Expected time of future harvest Harvested _—_ Percent 1-10 years 25,200 56 Indefinite 16,600 37 Never 2,000 4 No answer 1,400 3 Total 45,200 100 SE% 19.8 1-10 years 2,696 76 Indefinite 671 19 Never 93 3 No answer TI y) Total 3,537 100 SE% 3.4 Did not harvest Percent Total (In ownerships) 5,200 17 30,400 10,200 34 26,800 10,900 37] 12,900 3,600 12 5,000 29,900 100 75,100 18.4 13.4 (In thousands of acres) 402 29 3,098 511 38 1,182 326 24 419 123 9 200 1,362 100 4,899 8.7 0.5 Percent 100 Table 52.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Lake Plain Region, New York, 1994 Expected time of future harvest Harvested Percent 1-10 years 27,700 55 Indefinite 23,100 38 Never 600 5 No answer 1,100 2 Total 52,500 100 SE% Wal 1-10 years 830 69 Indefinite 455 24 Never 46 5 No answer 23 2 Total 1,354 100 SE% 6.0 74 Did not harvest _—_ Percent Total (In ownerships) 25,800 22 53,500 20,900 30 44,000 16,200 40 16,800 600 8 1,700 63,500 100 116,000 223) 14.0 (In thousands of acres) 228 28 1,058 375 37 830 295 30 341 23 5) 46 921 100 BAS 8.7 eZ Percent SE% 26.2 21.4 ASS 54.9 14.0 Wey 9.4 16.9 49.6 12 *U.S. GPO: 2001-650-336/20025 Table 53.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres pf forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Southwest Region, New York, 1994 Expected time of Did not future harvest Harvested Percent harvest _ Percent Total (In ownerships) 1-10 years 24,500 56 16,400 20 40,900 Indefinite 13,800 32 27,500 33 41,300 Never 4,200 10 24,600 30 28,800 No answer 1,100 22 13,800 17 14,900 Total 43,600 100 82,300 100 125,900 SE% 13.4 DN 14.4 (In thousands of acres) 1-10 years 1,719 69 478 37 2197, Indefinite 637 26 480 38 iy Never 49 2 263 21 S12 No answer 74 3 50 4 124 Total 2,479 100 PATE 100 3,750 SE% 4.2 8.1 0.8 Percent 32 33 23 12 100 100 SE% (3-72 22.8 325 85.2 14.4 4.9 8.9 19.2 S12 0.8 Table 54.—Estimated number of ownerships and acres of forest land, by expected time of future harvest and past harvest experience, Southeast Region, New York, 1994 Expected time of Did not future harvest Harvested Percent harvest Percent Total (In ownerships) 1-10 years 28,600 55 17,300 14 45,900 Indefinite 19,900 38 32,900 27 52,800 Never 3,300 7 66,400 54 69,700 No answer 100 W 5,800 5 5,900 Total 51,900 100 122,400 100 174,300 SE% 17.4 18.0 13.1 (In thousands of acres) 1-10 years 1,060 61 358 21 1,418 Indefinite 459 26 S72 34 1,031 Never 213 12 WAY 42 930 No answer 15 1 49 3 64 Total 1,747 100 1,696 100 3,443 SE% 6.0 6.2 0.8 Percent SE% 17.4 21.6 28.2 66.4 13.1 7.4 9.4 99 44.8 0.8 75 ae Birch, Thomas W.; Butler Brett J. 2001. Private forest-land ownerships of New York: 1980 and 1994. Resour. Bull. NE-153. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. 75 p. A report on a mail survey of private forest-land owners in New York State. Landowner characteristics, attitudes, harvesting experience, tenure, and management planning are discussed. Keywords: Forest-land ownership, owner objectives, timber harvesting, forestry assistance, recreation > S& we Printed on Recycled Paper —- @ Work Unit Location ae Headquarters Headquarters of the Northeastern Research Station is in Newtown Square, Pennsylvania. Field laboratories are maintained at: Amherst, Massachusetts, in cooperation with the University of Massachusetts Burlington, Vermont, in cooperation with the University of Vermont Delaware, Ohio Durham, New Hampshire, in cooperation with the University of New Hampshire Hamden, Connecticut, in cooperation with Yale University Morgantown, West Virginia, in cooperation with West Virginia University Parsons, West Virginia Princeton, West Virginia Syracuse, New York, in cooperation with the State University of New York, College of Environmental Sciences and Forestry at Syracuse University Warren, Pennsylvania The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family 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, 14th and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (202)720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. “Caring for the Land and Serving People Through Research”