Forestland Social Values and Open Space Preservation Forestland Social Values and Open Space Preservation

December 2004 • Journal of Forestry Historically, many issues in US forest policy have involved heated exchanges between timber interests and environmental groups over the future of the nation’s national forests. Debate about whether national forests should produce timber and rural economic opportunities, or pursue other objectives such as ecological restoration and recreation, generally ignored private lands. However, nearly three-fifths of the nation’s forests are privately owned. Private forests also generate economic value and employment, and provide nonmarket scenic, recreation, ecological, and resource protection benefits. Private forests also have the potential to eventually be lost to nonforest, developed uses. Despite significant population growth and development in the past half century, US forestland area has remained relatively stable, declining 1% from 1953 to 1997 (Smith et al. 2004). Remaining forestland, however, is shared among more people. Forestland per capita has declined by half, from 5.0 ac to less than 2.7 ac per person, and by as much as two-thirds in specific regions like the Pacific Northwest (Figure 1). Almost 1 million ac of private forestland were lost to development each year from 1992 to 1997, with many important timber-producing states—California, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Washington—experiencing the greatest losses (Natural Resources Conservation Service 2001). Projections suggest that another 26 million ac will be lost to development by 2030 (Alig and Plantinga 2004). Jeffrey D. Kline, Ralph J. Alig, and Brian Garber-Yonts