Newsroom

CORVALLIS - As population growth and urban areas increasingly crowd into nearby forests, an odd dichotomy is taking place - landowners on the urban fringe are surprisingly tolerant of the techniques and ethic of commercial forestry, and seem to have more in common with it than the mentality of the urban dwellers they have left behind.

A new study by scientists at Oregon State University, published in the Journal of Forestry, indicates that further urban development, rather than timber harvests, agricultural or land management, is the top concern of urban fringe landowners. And the best way to reduce conflicts is improvement in communication, such as advance notification of land management activities, the research showed.

"It's not that urban fringe residents necessarily love clearcuts or herbicides," said John Bliss, professor and holder of the Starker Chair in Private and Family Forestry at OSU. "What they cherish is the quiet and rural atmosphere of nearby farms and forests, and they see active forest management as highly preferable to more people or greater urban development."

And the small landowners, by themselves, are usually pretty active forest managers, Bliss said.

"One thing we've found is that even on small parcels of private land, when timber becomes mature and merchantable, it usually gets harvested," Bliss said. "This may relate to economic or financial needs, and often is associated with lands that have recently changed ownership. But small private landowners are very comfortable with managing and harvesting their forests."

The OSU study was done with a group of landowners in the Soap Creek Watershed north of Corvallis, in which lands are a blend of public, university, large industrial and small private ownerships. Researchers wanted to explore the concerns, attitudes and perceived problems of people who lived in and near the forests, and identify ways to successfully reduce conflicts. Small individual holdings, Bliss said, represent the most rapidly growing type of forest landowner in the nation, and increasing "parcelization" of forests in ever-smaller pieces is a growing trend, along with the potential clash of values that can entail.

"At first, in this type of research, you might think that logging or practices such as clearcutting would be the landowner's top issue of concern," Bliss said. "Our study showed that wasn't the case. People were more concerned about the rural character of their neighborhood and mostly worried about further development."

Wrote one survey respondent: "I can tolerate the temporary changes of clearcutting, but not the permanent changes of development and construction." Another resident echoed that issue: "I'm more worried about the density of housing increasing in the valley than I am in most land-use issues."

The study found that small private landowners have diverse interests and goals with the lands they managed, and often use modern and environmentally sensitive land management practices. Most accept forest harvests around them, especially if it's a neighbor or other private individual, instead of public property.

"The survey clearly showed that people living near the forest fringe expect the highest standards of management from large public lands," Bliss said. "They might cut a little slack to their next-door neighbor, but when it comes to large industrial holdings, they want the letter of the law followed exactly and a fair amount of emphasis placed on environmental concerns."

Oregon's progressive forestry and land use laws, in fact, appear to be a large part of what has created this comparatively harmonious relationship. These regulations are quite strict about replanting after harvests, protection of streams and many other issues. And the use of urban growth boundaries and protective zoning has worked to protect forest and agricultural lands, and the right to manage such lands.

"Some of the people we spoke with had complaints about various aspects of the regulatory environment," Bliss said. "But sometimes the complaint, as much as anything, was that the regulations weren't being enforced as rigidly as possible. Most people see these laws as protecting the land, and they generally support them."

Other findings included:

• Protection of water quality and availability is of considerable importance to many people.
• Herbicide application, especially aerial, was often considered a high-risk activity.
• Clearcutting was still a concern for many, especially residents, and harvest by other methods alleviated some of these concerns. However, many small private landowners used clearcutting techniques when harvesting timber on their own land.
• Communication and advance knowledge of land management activities went a long way toward resolving conflicts, especially advance notification of management activities by large companies or on public properties.
• About 81 percent of respondents said that active forest management was important, and 84 percent opposed conversion of forest or farmland for additional residential development.
• There are concerns about growing networks of regulation, and conflicts over public benefits versus private property rights are becoming more frequent.

"A lot of what we found out here is encouraging," Bliss said. "There are still concerns, but it appears that with good land use laws and good communication among neighbors, we should be able to manage these lands, work through most of the conflicts that come up and protect the quality-of-life values that clearly are the critical concern of most people."