Next Article in Journal
Ammonia, Hydrogen Sulfide, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Lab-Scaled Manure Bedpacks with and without Aluminum Sulfate Additions
Previous Article in Journal
Nano Silver-Iron-Reduced Graphene Oxide Modified Titanium Dioxide Photocatalytic Remediation System for Organic Dye
Open AccessArticle

Comparison of the Timber Management Expenses of Non-Industrial Private Forest Landowners in Mississippi, United States: Results from 1995–1997 and 2015

Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, 180 E. Green St, Athens, GA 30602, USA
Department of Forestry, College of Forest Resources, Mississippi State University, PO Box 9681, MS 39762, USA
Coastal Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, 1815 Popps Ferry Rd. Biloxi, MS 39532, USA
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Environments 2019, 6(9), 107;
Received: 28 June 2019 / Revised: 16 September 2019 / Accepted: 18 September 2019 / Published: 19 September 2019
Forest landowner activities change over the lifespan of the forest and ownership cycle. Patterns of change emerge which suggest the evolving nature of forest landownership and Non-industrial Private Forest (NIPF) landowners’ interest in their land. The objective of this study was to examine trends in NIPF landowners’ distribution of forestry expenses in their management activities over time. First, 2010 Mississippi NIPF landowners were randomly selected from a property tax roll list. Our analysis compared study results of Arano et al. (2002) with a 2016 survey that was conducted by the authors of this paper. Both studies drew on assessments of timber management expenditures that were conducted on behalf of a state government department of revenue to determine ad valorem taxes for forest land. As such, both studies contained similar survey questions with 12 forestry-related activities grouped into four major categories: (1) Fees for Professional Services (e.g., consulting foresters, surveyors), (2) Timber Management Expenditures (e.g., site preparation, planting), (3) Other Management Expenditures (e.g., road construction), and (4) Property Taxes. Like the 2002 article, results here are presented as descriptive statistics. In both survey cycles, Timber Management Expenditures represented the largest component of annual expenditures in both the 1990s and 2015. The largest decrease in reported expenditures occurred for Other Management Expenditures. By broadly describing differences in expenditures over time, this study provides insights into the involvement of NIPF landowners in management activities on forest land such as reforestation after final harvest, thinning, and timber stand improvement, which can impact forest products’ supply over time. View Full-Text
Keywords: private forest; expenditures; costs; taxes private forest; expenditures; costs; taxes
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Godar Chhetri, S.; Gordon, J.; Munn, I.; Henderson, J. Comparison of the Timber Management Expenses of Non-Industrial Private Forest Landowners in Mississippi, United States: Results from 1995–1997 and 2015. Environments 2019, 6, 107.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop