Forests

National, state, and privately owned forests provide numerous benefits, including wildlife habitat; supporting biodiversity; taking carbon out of the air and thus serving as carbon sinks; and providing the outdoor environments desired by many people for recreation. Americans have strong values toward the use and protection of America’s forests. Accurate assessment of public and stakeholder attitudes toward the use and management of forests is critical to implementing sound policy.

Approximately 34% of all forest land is federally owned and managed by the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and other federal agencies. The rest is owned by nonfederal public agencies, the forest industry, farmers, and other private individuals. About 47 million acres (6% of all U.S. forest land) are reserved from commercial timber harvest in wilderness, parks, and other land classifications. Forest land is widely but unevenly distributed. Nevada has the smallest percentage of forest cover (0.5%) and Maine has the greatest (89%). Forest areas vary greatly from sparse scrub forests of the arid interior West to the highly productive forests of the Pacific coast and the South, and from pure hardwood forests to multispecies mixtures and coniferous forests. In total, about half of the forest land is east of the Great Plains states. In the east, the oak-hickory forest type group is most common, while in the west, the category referred to as “other softwoods” is most common.

Responsive Management has conducted research on various aspects of forest resources and forest management, including issues related to natural resource management strategies in state forests, wildfires and controlled burning, energy development on public lands, old growth forests, and the management of roads in National Forests. Study goals range from helping the wood products industry better understand the values people associate with forests to helping agencies and organizations better understand their constituents’ opinions and attitudes toward forest management policies.

In Oregon, Responsive Management conducted a study to determine the general population’s and stakeholders’ knowledge of, values regarding, and attitudes toward natural resource management in Oregon state forests. Although forest management is not the top issue of concern relative to all the various issues facing Oregon, it is still quite important to Oregonians, particularly in light of the economic importance forests play in Oregon: an overwhelming majority of Oregonians express concern about forest management. Oregonians are split on how well Oregon’s forests are managed and on whether forest management is weighted too heavily in favor of some interests over others.

Not surprisingly, clear-cutting is a very divisive issue, with many who support and many who oppose. Furthermore, much of the opposition is strong opposition. Some of the opposition appears to stem from misunderstandings about the ecological effects of clear-cutting, and some of the opposition is based on the aesthetic aspects of clear-cuts. Still others oppose because they associate clear-cutting with poor management practices and/or timber company greed. Certainly, clear-cutting will continue to be a problem if the public does not understand nor support it.

Oregonians’ understanding of forest management strategies is inconsistent. For instance, many Oregonians do not appear to understand forest managers’ needs for and use of clear-cutting in forest management, nor do some Oregonians have a complete understanding of the role of wildfires in a forest ecosystem and forest management techniques that address the risk of severe wildfires. However, Oregonians, for the most part, accept and appear to understand thinning (unlike clear-cutting), particularly in the role it plays in moderating the risk of severe wildfires and in improving the health of forests.

A study conducted by Responsive Management in South Carolina examined registered voters’ perceptions of, knowledge of, and opinions on wildfires and controlled burning. A large majority of South Carolina voters (79%) believe that wildfires are a threat in South Carolina and are about evenly split between believing them to be a very significant threat or a somewhat significant threat. Knowledge levels regarding wildfires’ place in the natural ecosystem is moderate, with small majorities or just under half giving correct answers to questions about the benefits of fire. For example, 66% of South Carolina voters correctly answered that fire is beneficial to some of South Carolina’s native plants and trees.

Knowledge of the use of prescribed fire for wildfire prevention is well known: 78% of South Carolina voters agree that prescribed fire is an effective method used to prevent wildfires. Further, most South Carolina voters appear to approve of controlled burning: 67% disagree with the statement that prescribed fires should not be allowed in South Carolina’s woodlands and 76% agree that, given the benefits of prescribed fires, they are willing to accept occasional smoke, as long as the smoke does not affect health and safety.

A nationwide study was conducted by Responsive Management to examine hunters’ and anglers’ attitudes toward energy development in the Rocky Mountain West (i.e., Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming). In general, sportsmen are concerned about how energy development on public lands in the Rocky Mountain West affects fish and wildlife.

A majority of sportsmen (52%) agree that America’s energy needs require increased energy development of traditional energy sources in the Rocky Mountain West area of the U.S.; however, a substantial percentage (37%) disagree. Most commonly, sportsmen think that public lands in the Rocky Mountain West should be managed about equally for fish/wildlife and energy development (48%), but nearly an equal percentage show deference for fish/wildlife, with 45% saying those lands should be managed more for fish and wildlife. Sportsmen overwhelmingly agree (85%) that the federal government should take more steps to protect fish and wildlife on public lands leased for energy development in the U.S.

In a study that Responsive Management conducted in Connecticut, residents were informed that old growth forests were those that have not been cut for hundreds to thousands of years. They were asked if they would support or oppose a state policy to preserve old growth forests from development. Most residents (81%) supported such a policy. Nonetheless, city residents were more likely than suburban and rural residents to oppose a state policy to preserve old growth forests from development.

In another Responsive Management study, 75% of hunters and 70% of anglers rated the U.S. Forest Service’s road management as either very or somewhat adequate. A majority of hunters (55%) and anglers (53%) wanted the number of roads in National Forests to remain at its present level. Strong support was found for designated roadless areas in National Forests. Large majorities of hunters (84%) and anglers (86%) supported efforts by sportsmen to keep the remaining roadless areas in National Forests roadless. Sixty-seven percent of hunters and 72% of anglers supported limiting the number of roads and off-highway vehicles (OHVs) in certain designated roadless areas in National Forests and allowing hunters and anglers to access the areas only by foot. Hunters and anglers also consistently supported road management efforts that protected roadless areas and placed a higher value on providing quiet quality hunting and fishing experiences rather than management efforts that provided greater ease and access to hunting and fishing areas.

Responsive Management’s experience with research on forest-related issues includes the following: