Planning and Professional Assistance as Factors Influencing Private Forest Landowner Best Management Practice Implementation

Abstract

Abstract Virtually all states have developed best management practices (BMPs) to mitigate potential adverse effects associated with timber harvesting. This study examined how BMP implementation on Minnesota’s family forest lands varied according to whether the land had a forest management plan, the timber sale was administered by a forester, or a written timber harvesting contract was used. Analysis of field monitoring data from 174 commercial timber harvesting sites on family forest lands found that BMP implementation is only modestly influenced by a forest management plan, supervising forester, or timber harvesting contract. Supervision of a forester had the greatest influence, with six guidelines implemented differently. In contrast, differences were found for just two BMPs with a forest management plan and only one with a written timber harvesting contract. When timber sales were administered by a forester, forest management guidelines generally related to management of the land-water interface were implemented to a higher standard, with significant increases observed for avoidance of infrastructure in filter strips, use of water diversion and erosion control structures, avoiding unnecessary wetland and waterbody crossings, and slash management. Higher timber utilization efficiency (within leave tree guidelines) was also found when a professional forester supervised the timber sale. Study Implications: We examine how BMP implementation on family forest lands varies with three types of supervisory and planning assistance: a forest management plan for the property, sale administration by a professional forester, and a written timber harvesting contract. Field monitoring data from 174 commercial timber harvests on family forest lands indicate that BMP implementation is only modestly influenced by any single form of assistance. Supervision by a forester had the greatest influence, increasing use of four guidelines related to management of the land-water interface. Results may help to inform best practices for landowner assistance and planning.