Factors Influencing Family Woodland Management Action After Calling a Public Agency Forester

E. Sagor, Martha J Sebald, M. Kilgore, C. Blinn, S. Snyder, M. Russell
{"title":"Factors Influencing Family Woodland Management Action After Calling a Public Agency Forester","authors":"E. Sagor, Martha J Sebald, M. Kilgore, C. Blinn, S. Snyder, M. Russell","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvac006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Many public agencies make foresters available to answer landowners’ land management questions. We gathered data about landowner calls to private forest management (PFM) foresters employed by a Minnesota state agency in 2017 and 2018. We used a mailed questionnaire to assess the outcomes of these contacts, including land management actions taken and factors most influential the landowner’s subsequent decision process. The most common topic landowners called about was enrolling in a property tax program, followed by harvesting and planting trees, obtaining financial assistance, and controlling forest pests. Eighteen months after the initial call, implementation rates and intent were high, ranging from 73%–91%. Across management actions, information from a PFM forester, likelihood of timely implementation, and expected benefit were highly influential. PFM calls also informed landowners about additional land management actions, many of which they implemented. Our results offer new insight into the value of landowner contact with public sector foresters.\n \n \n \n Over one year in 2017–2018, about 2% of Minnesota family forest owners called a state service forester for information and advice. In declining frequency order, these landowners were primarily inquiring about enrolling in a property tax program, controlling forest pests, harvesting trees, obtaining financial assistance, and planting trees. The factors that most influenced their subsequent land management action were information from a private forest management forester, likelihood of timely implementation, and expected benefits. Our results highlight the value of professional advice and suggest an emphasis on advice for timely implementation and information about the benefits of potential management activities.\n","PeriodicalId":23386,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Forestry","volume":"2017 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Forestry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvac006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Many public agencies make foresters available to answer landowners’ land management questions. We gathered data about landowner calls to private forest management (PFM) foresters employed by a Minnesota state agency in 2017 and 2018. We used a mailed questionnaire to assess the outcomes of these contacts, including land management actions taken and factors most influential the landowner’s subsequent decision process. The most common topic landowners called about was enrolling in a property tax program, followed by harvesting and planting trees, obtaining financial assistance, and controlling forest pests. Eighteen months after the initial call, implementation rates and intent were high, ranging from 73%–91%. Across management actions, information from a PFM forester, likelihood of timely implementation, and expected benefit were highly influential. PFM calls also informed landowners about additional land management actions, many of which they implemented. Our results offer new insight into the value of landowner contact with public sector foresters. Over one year in 2017–2018, about 2% of Minnesota family forest owners called a state service forester for information and advice. In declining frequency order, these landowners were primarily inquiring about enrolling in a property tax program, controlling forest pests, harvesting trees, obtaining financial assistance, and planting trees. The factors that most influenced their subsequent land management action were information from a private forest management forester, likelihood of timely implementation, and expected benefits. Our results highlight the value of professional advice and suggest an emphasis on advice for timely implementation and information about the benefits of potential management activities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
呼叫公共机构林务员后影响家庭林地经营行为的因素
许多公共机构安排林务员解答土地所有者的土地管理问题。我们收集了有关土地所有者在2017年和2018年致电明尼苏达州一家机构雇用的私人森林管理(PFM)林务员的数据。我们使用邮寄问卷来评估这些接触的结果,包括采取的土地管理行动和对土地所有者随后决策过程影响最大的因素。土地所有者最常见的话题是参加财产税计划,其次是采伐和种植树木,获得财政援助,以及控制森林害虫。在最初的呼吁后18个月,执行率和意向很高,从73%到91%不等。在整个管理行动中,来自PFM林务员的信息、及时实施的可能性和预期效益具有很大的影响力。PFM还向土地所有者通报了额外的土地管理行动,其中许多已付诸实施。我们的研究结果为土地所有者与公共部门林业人员接触的价值提供了新的见解。在2017-2018年的一年多时间里,大约2%的明尼苏达州家庭森林所有者向国家服务林务员寻求信息和建议。这些土地所有者的询问频率依次递减,主要是关于参加财产税计划、控制森林害虫、采伐树木、获得财政援助和植树。对他们随后的土地管理行动影响最大的因素是来自私人森林管理林务员的信息、及时执行的可能性和预期的利益。我们的研究结果强调了专业建议的价值,并建议强调及时实施的建议和有关潜在管理活动益处的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Batı Karadeniz Bölgesi Kazdağı göknarı ormanlarında göknar ökseotu bulunma ve bulaşma durumu: Kökez Orman İşletme Şefliği örneği Hitit metinlerinde orman Almus yöresi doğal doğu kayını meşcerelerinin çap dağılımının Weibull dağılımı ile modellenmesi Türkiye’nin kuzeybatısındaki bir plantasyonda yerli ve egzotik çam türlerinin ibrelerinde görülen fungal endofitler Assessing Mid-rotation Loblolly Pine and Competing Vegetation Responses to Post-thin Fertilization and Herbicide Application in the Southeastern United States
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1