HOME

JOURNAL

GUIDELINES

ABOUT
JOE

CONTACT

NATIONAL JOB
BANK

Current
Issue

Back
Issues

Search

Subscribe

April 2004 // Volume 42 // Number 2 // Research in Brief //
2RIB7

Forestry Extension Participation and Written Forest Management Plan Use in
New York City's Water Supply System

Abstract
The management of New York City's surface water
supply system entails sustaining a working landscape that balances economic
development with water quality conservation. Forestry Extension plays a vital
role in this approach, particularly with nonindustrial private forestland
owners, by serving as a resource for information and technical assistance,
promoting forest stewardship, and encouraging the use of written forest
management plans. The article presents findings from a recent survey that
suggests there is a relationship between the participation rates in forestry
Extension and written forest management plan use among New York City
nonindustrial private forestland owners.

John Munsell
Graduate Assistant

René Germain
Associate Professor
[email-masked]

State University of New York
College of Environmental Science and
Forestry
Syracuse, New York

Introduction

New York City's (NYC) water supply system is the largest unfiltered surface
storage and supply system in the United States. Comprised of two watersheds, the
entire system provides drinking water to roughly 9 million people in the greater
NYC area. The Catskill/Delaware watershed, located in the Catskill Mountain
region of New York State, comprises nearly 1,625 square miles and supplies
approximately 90% of the city's water. The older and suburbanized 375-square
mile Croton watershed, 40 miles north of Manhattan, supplies about 10% of NYC's
water. Forests cover approximately 75% of the 2,000 square-mile system, with
about 90% of the forest area owned by nonindustrial private forestland (NIPF)
owners (Watershed Forestry Task Force, 1996; NYC DEP, 2002).

Throughout most of the 20th century, NYC residents have benefited from some
of the purest drinking water in the nation. As we enter the 21st century,
changes in land use and development threaten the quality of NYC's water supply
(NYC DEP, 2002). Worldwide, large cities and rural communities are striving to
balance economic development and long-term prosperity with environmental quality
and protection. The NYC water supply system is a high-profile example of a
working forested landscape where NIPF owners hold the key to water quality.

Objectives

This article analyzes data extracted from a recent mail survey of
Catskill/Delaware watershed NIPF owners. (The suburbanized Croton watershed was
not included in the study due to its proximity to NYC and lack of a working
forested landscape.)

We use the data to:

Identify the percentage of Catskill/Delaware watershed NIPF owners with a
written forest management plan;

Evaluate the frequency of participation in forestry extension among NIPF
owners;

Determine if there is a relationship between NIPF owners' participation in
forestry extension and their use of written forest management
plans.

Rationale

Forestry extension programs targeting Catskill/Delaware watershed NIPF owners
are designed to increase NIPF stewardship through education and application
(Watershed Forestry Task Force, 1996). Forestry extension workshops and
technical assistance programs, in particular, afford NIPF owners the opportunity
to gain intimate knowledge of (1) sustainable forestry and its role in watershed
management, and (2) the benefits of a written forest management plan in
practicing sustainable forestry.

Background

In 1989, the United States Environmental Protection Agency promulgated the
Surface Water Treatment Rule, which stated that all surface drinking water
sources must undergo filtration unless managers can control human activities
within the watershed. In order to avoid building and operating an extremely
expensive filtration system in the Catskill/Delaware watershed, NYC sought to
control human activities and released a draft watershed protection plan in
September 1990 that included revised watershed regulations not updated since
1953.

The draft regulations sparked considerable opposition from local watershed
communities, especially farmers and the local forest industry, who asserted that
they would jeopardize their economic viability (Watershed Forestry Task Force,
1996). The 1997 signing of the NYC Watershed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) by
NYC, state, and federal agencies; watershed communities; and environmental
groups concluded 7 years of negotiations between upstate watershed communities
and NYC regarding the city's long-range watershed protection plans. The
agreement enabled NYC Department of Environmental Protection to receive a
long-term waiver regarding the federal requirement for a filtration plant in the
Catskill/Delaware watershed (NYCDEP, 2002).

The watershed management approach outlined in the MOA entails a
non-regulatory method that, among other things, seeks to expand the stewardship
values of watershed landowners. The amount of NIPF and its importance in
watershed management make NIPF owner stewardship a top priority in this
endeavor.

Several dimensions of forestry Extension in the Catskill/Delaware watershed
specifically seek to heighten forest stewardship among NIPF owners. To do this,
Extension organizations employ a wide variety of programs and activities such as
workshops and forest management technical assistance programs. Among the core
messages communicated at these programs and activities is the benefits of a
written forest management plan.

Written forest management plans have long been viewed as a promising vehicle
for building stewardship among NIPF owners. Not only do plans foster sustainable
forestry, but they also serve to educate and engage NIPF owners. When NIPF
owners better understand their forests and are active in management, they are
more apt to become better stewards (Best & Wayburn, 2001). Esseks and
Moulton (2000) found that over three-quarters of NIPF owners implement their
respective plans. Consequently, written forest management plans stand as a
practical tool for forestry Extension organizations promoting sustainable
forestry in the Catskill/Delaware watershed.

Methods

A mail survey was conducted in Spring 2002 for a larger study of NIPF owners
in the Catskill/Delaware watershed. The NIPF owner population was identified for
the study using the following criteria:

Private family ownership;

10 or more acres of land;

Forested land present on the property.

Private family ownerships were targeted because relating survey responses to
behavior is more precise when dealing with a single family versus, for instance,
a hunting club or corporation. The 10-acre threshold was based on management
plan eligibility criteria from the National Tree Farm Program and the Watershed
Forestry Program.

A survey was mailed to a random sample of 700 NIPF owners selected from a
population of 3,995. The sample size was determined by using the response rate
from a pilot study and the formulas for estimating a proportion based on a known
sample size (Cochran, 1977). The following two survey questions were used for
this article:

Do you have a written management plan for your forestland?

Yes
No

In the past year, how many times have you participated in forestry public
outreach or education programs (i.e., workshops or symposiums), or used their
services (i.e., management plan development or BMP subsidies)?

Never
Once
2-4 Times
More Than 4 Times

The wording of these questions created limitations in the analysis:

1.  A "written management plan" was not defined in the survey. Because
of this, the question was open to interpretation by the respondent;

2.  Participation responses pertained only to the year prior to
receiving the survey. Therefore, the analysis was limited to using the question
as a general indicator of extension participation.

Surveys containing usable responses for both questions were combined in a
cross-tabulation and analyzed to identify trends in Extension program
participation vis-à-vis written forest management plan use. Furthermore,
chi-square tests and a t-test were administered to test for statistical
significance between the responses.

Results

Of the 700 surveys mailed, 646 were successfully delivered, 54 were
unsuccessfully delivered (erroneous address, deceased respondent, no longer
owned forestland, etc.), and 274 were completed and returned, for an adjusted
response rate of 42%. This response rate compared favorably with other landowner
survey response rates.

Forest Management Plans

Of the 252 usable responses for this question, 21% (53) of the respondents
indicated that they had a written forest management plan.

Program Participation

There were 255 usable responses regarding the level of Extension program
participation. In the year prior to receiving the survey, 84% (214) indicated
that they did not participate in any program. Overall, 16% (41) of the
respondents participated in programs during the year prior to the mail survey.
Eight percent (20) indicated that they participated "Once" in a workshop or
technical service program during the previous year. Respondents participating "2
to 4 times" totaled 4% (14). Last, 3% (7) marked that they participated "More
than 4 times."

Program Participation Vis-à-Vis Forest Management Plans

There were 251 surveys containing usable responses for both questions. Of the
210 respondents that marked "Never" regarding Extension workshop or technical
service program participation in the previous year, 11% (24) indicated they had
a written management plan. Of the 41 respondents that participated during the
year, regardless of the frequency, 71% (29) indicated they had a written
management plan (Figure 1).

Figure 1.
Extension Program Participation ("Yes",
"No") Vis-à-vis Written Management Plan Use Among Survey Respondents

Specifically, 55% (11) of the 20 respondents that marked "Once" regarding
Extension workshop or technical service program participation in the previous
year indicated they had a written forest management plan. Of the 14 respondents
that marked "2 to 4 times", 79% (11) had written forest management plans.
Finally, 100% of the 7 respondents that indicated they participated "More than
4" times in the previous year had a written forest management plan (Table
1).

Table 1.
Extension Program Participation ("Never", "Once",
"2 to 4 times", "More than 4") Vis-à-Vis Written Management Plan Use Among
Survey Respondents

Program Participation Response

"Never"

"Once"

"2 to 4 times"

"More than 4"

Plan

n = 23
(11%)

n = 11
(55%)

n = 11
(79%)

n = 7
(100%)

No plan

n = 187
(89%)

n = 9
(45%)

n = 3
(21%)

n = 0
(0%)

Total n

n = 210

n = 20

n = 14

n = 7

Statistical Analysis

The first chi-square test indicated that the observed number of written
forest management plans for those respondents who participated in Extension
programs was significantly higher than expected (Table 2). The results of the
second test indicated that the observed number of plans was significantly higher
at varying intensities of participation--"Once", "2 to 4 times", or "More than 4
times" (Table 3). The results in the second test, however, included three
expected values less than 5. Nonetheless, both chi-square tests produced
significant results.

Table 2.
Chi-Square Test Results of Survey Respondent's
Management Plan Use and Extension Program Participation ("Yes",
"No")

Plan

Participation

Yes

No

Total

"Yes"

Count

29

12

41

Expected Count

8.5

32.5

Residual

20.5

-20.5

"No"

Count

23

187

210

Expected Count

43.5

166.5

Residual

-20.5

20.5

Total Count

52

199

251

χ2 = 74.224, df =
1, p < .0001

Table 3.
Chi-Square Test Results of Survey Respondent's
Management Plan Use and Extension Program Participation ("Never", "Once", "2
to 4 times", "More than 4")

Plan

Participation

Yes

No

Total

"Never"

Count

23

187

210

Expected Count

43.5

166.5

Residual

-20.5

20.5

"Once"

Count

11

9

20

Expected Count

4.1

15.9

Residual

6.9

-6.9

"2 to 4 times"

Count

11

3

14

Expected Count

2.9

11.1

Residual

8.1

-8.1

"More than 4"

Count

7

0

7

Expected Count

1.5

5.5

Residual

5.5

-5.5

Total Count

52

199

251

χ2 = 81.820a, df = 3, p <
.0001
aThree cells (37.5%) had an expected frequency less
than five.

The results of the t-test indicated that respondents with a written forest
management plan participated in forestry extension with greater frequency (Table
4). The means for the test were derived using a "participation continuum"
(Figure 2).

Table 4.
T-test Results of Survey Respondent's
Participation Based on Use of a Written Forest Management
Plan

n

Participation Mean

SE

Plan

52

2.04 a

.0225

No Plan

199

1.08 b

.15

Means with the same letter are not significantly
different (α = .05).

Figure 2.
Participation Continuum

Discussion and Implications

The Catskill/Delaware watershed provides a valuable service for NYC.
Protecting the quality of water that flows from the system is imperative. The
capacity of a sustainable forest to naturally protect water quality makes it an
important vehicle for realizing this necessity. NIPF owner stewardship is an
important component of sustainable forestry in the Catskill/Delaware watershed,
and written management plans are an effective tool in fostering sustainable
forestry and stewardship.

Mail survey results suggest that 21% of Catskill/Delaware watershed NIPF
owners have a written forest management plan. This rate far exceeds the
estimated average of 6% for New York State and 5% for the Northern Forest Region
(Birch, 1994; 1996).

On top of this, results of the cross-tabular analysis, chi-square tests, and
t-test indicate that participation in forestry Extension and the use of written
forest management plans are related. It is not possible, however, to determine
from the data collected whether or not there is a causal relationship between
the two. The data does suggest that NIPF owners active in forestry extension are
more likely to have a forest management plan and that the likelihood increases
with greater participation.

The association discovered between Extension program participation and
written forest management plans is especially important in the pursuit of
increased stewardship and sustainable forest management in the Catskill/Delaware
watershed. Extension programs transfer stewardship values and sustainable forest
management information, and, in turn, written management plans increase the
frequency and likelihood of implementation.

On the other hand, the results indicate that the work for forestry Extension
in the Catskill/Delaware watershed is far from complete. Almost 84% of the
respondents did not participate in any Extension workshop or technical service
during the year prior to receiving the survey, and 79% did not have a written
forest management plan.

The NIPF management situation in NYC's water supply system presents great
challenges. Thousands of NIPF owners are responsible for the management
decisions and actions taken on about 90% of the water supply's forestland. It is
the responsibility of forestry Extension to help meet this challenge by
expanding NIPF owner stewardship.

The results discussed in this article indicate that the more often NIPF
owners participate in watershed forestry Extension programs, the more likely
they are to have a written forest management plan. However, the majority of NIPF
owners are not actively participating.

In order to continue substantively improving the management of forestland in
the NYC water supply system, future strategies for forestry Extension
organizations need to include multi-faceted programs designed to increase NIPF
owner participation by first capturing their attention using innovative means,
followed by encouraging program participation. Improving NIPF owner
participation must remain a primary pursuit in the management of NYC's water
supply system because its link to the use of written forest management is too
valuable in sustaining clean drinking water.

References

Best, C., & Wayburn, L. A. (2001). America's private forests status
and stewardship. Island Press Inc. Washington, D.C. 144.

Birch, T. W. (1994). Private forest-land owners of the northern United
States. Resource Bulletin NE-136. Northeastern Experiment Station. Forest
Service. USDA. 7.

Birch, T. W. (1996). Private ownership trends in New York. Conference
Proceedings: The Empire Forest -- changes and challenges. 1995 November
13-14. State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and
Forestry. 14-21.

Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques. 3rd ed. New
York: John Wiley and Sons. 428.

Esseks, J. D., & Moulton, R .J. (2000). Evaluating the forest
stewardship program through a national survey of participating forest land
owners. The Center for Governmental Studies, Social Science Research
Institute, Northern Illinois University. 44, 67-80.

NYC DEP 2002. New York City's water supply system. Available at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/watersup.html

Watershed Forestry Task Force. (1996). Policy recommendations for the
watersheds of New York City's water supply. New York. 11.

Copyright
© by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the
Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be
reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training
activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or
systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or
written permission of the Journal
Editorial Office, [email-masked].

If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support

© Copyright by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Copyright
Policy