You are here: SFFP Home / Public Input / Comments Received / Nashville

Comments Recieved at Nashvillee

image: painted buckeye bud opening

The table below captures the comments collected during the breakout session at the Nashville public meeting. Comments are grouped by major forces of change. Specific subregions of applicability are listed where provided.

  Comments Subregion
  Population Growth will be one of the biggest factors affecting forests in TN.
Generational differences affect whether forests are maintained.
Income & wealth affect forest management.
Age of landowners is increasing.
Parcelization will likely increase due to age, attitude & wealth.
Forestland will be increasingly developed.
Long term care health cost will encourage conversion.
Investment in timberland for other uses --hunting, recreation, timber will increase
Global competition will increase.
Energy prices will encourage bio-fuel production.
Celulosic technology is likely to emerge.
Co-Generation may increase and provide a new use for wood.
Diesel Prices will drive bio-diesel.
Ethanol could be a significant product of forests.
Utilization standards might change to improve efficiency.
Carbon banking or credits market offer potential.
Company/corporate 'supply agreement with sale of land' will dictate management for a period of time.
Public policies will increasingly affect resources.
Purchase of high fence hunting enclosures is likely to increase and could degrade forest ecosystems within due to over-grazing/overpopulation in those areas.
Reduction in number of hunters over time may affect land and hunting lease value.
Certification requirements and cost for small landowners may discourage timber production from those lands.
Sales of large tracts are likely to result in lower interest in timber management in sub parcels, especially true in hardwood forests due to longer rotations.
Farm Bill will be important factor as it relates to forestry and private land management (incentives).
Landowners need information on what to do to manage the land.
Carbon sequestration programs may be disincentive or barrier to eventual harvests and would decrease timber availability.
Urban expansion into remote areas complicates management.
The policy to provide water to whomever needs it leads to hop scotch growth. Public policy could use as tool to direct growth.
Lack of government funding of forestry department or extension agents discourages forest management
Consider regulations. Cons: more regulation will likely increase cost and reduce supply. Pros: Some regulations benefit forest cover conservation and associated benefits and some regulations help maintain more orderly development
New rural dwellers (from urban areas) will conflict with some forms of mgmt.
Will increased demand for energy result in more aggressive timber extraction and loss?
Will bio-fuel development threaten other forest markets in the Appalachians/Cumberland?
Changing racial demographics may change land management; timber, hardwood and resource production.
Labor shortage of forest workers is likely to get worse.
Urbanization will also expand urban forestry opportunities (shade trees & forest values could be managed for)
Urban development is likely to pose greatest threat to plant and animal species.
Urbanization will expand appreciation of urban forest resources.
Preservation pressures on public forests will increase as accessible wildlands become more scarce.
Land Uses/Forest Mangement
  Higher fuel prices may slow interface growth, may speed development of alternative fuels
Assess intrinsic values of forests vs. financial values; managers need to mitigate economic value/effects on intrinsic values
Consider intrinsic values are poorly understood in the south
Consider storm water in urban areas
Consider other regions have work
As we see more conservation easements, the timber industry might be affected (less aggressive timber management), but more forest land than otherwise
To slow development --there has to be fundamental change
With development of small tracts, there will be less large tracts of forest
Water management is going to be a huge forest management issue in the future
Cumberland plateau—more pressure on water resources with development
Issues could lead to more county-level land use planning
Counties want tax revenue (they will let growth continue)
Fragmentation complicates silviculture (economics). Wood and fiber puts sideboards on this. How to pay for management? Evaluate cost to landowner vs. value to landowner
Need to think on smaller scale for economic efficiency. Forest industry is going to have to think on smaller scale. Small scale can bring biology back into the front. Smaller land tracts, more conservation lands=less for timber management
Nashville has large Kurdish population. Population diversity have different ways to think of conservation
Developed real estate values increasing at greatest rate in “walkable” communities. Market is speaking. Land use patterns and ecosystem services could be affected
Consider water management on the Cumberland Plateau
Deal with migratory birds; need to consider wildlife. This is forest management
Net importer of forest products—shareholders are more urban; It is getting more difficult to find timber resources
Oaks and other high value hardwoods have been thought of as always being high value but markets are now declining
What is going to drive forest management now and in the future? Urban folks are driving forest management. What is the driving mechanism to create young successional forests for birds, etc.? With the loss of economic value, how will management be done? As timber values go down, what will drive management?
Focus on TIMO's, but much (most) land owned by others with small lots. There is a misconception that industry land is all going to TIMO's
It's a stretch to say that State Forests are breaking, even with timber management profits not being there. Other values are also being lost
Consider that some species use older growth; some of these species are rare. It's a complex issue
Lots of forest edge may attract predators
Forest certification is going to be a big issue. Will this be required for future management?
Drought and temperature change—how long and how severe does it have to be before the composition of the forests change? Species migration may continue/occur. One example—loss of American Chestnut
Markets are dependent on non-domestic markets. Red oak market is weak. White oak market is strong—good international demand. We don't know what species to grow, no way to do that
Evaluate devaluation of wood. Sending timber overseas, getting products back. What is the effect of/on consumers?
Money talks—many products made in China. Hard for domestic producers to compete in international markets (certification issue)
Markets drive feasibility of forest management
Biodiversity is a big issue: how will it be affected by changes? One company with many acres offers good opportunity to manage biodiversity; alternative is not good opportunity
The break up of land into smaller parcels presents biodiversity management issue (size of habitat area (e.g., 4000 acres) is one example. Lack of forest management is also an issue.
There are lots of small mills (KY, TN) in terms of processing volume
Addition of bioenergy will effect markets (could be negative or positive). Pulp mills are decreasing, bioenergy could help utilization of low-grade materials. Short rotation woody crops could be negative if it takes over good hardwood sites. Or it could be positive in utilizing marginal land. Site-ing of bioenergy plants needs to be done strategically to improve management of forest lands. Scale of bioenergy plants is important consideration. How about mini mills? Retrofitting of pulp mills to produce bioenergy is a factor to consider
  Looking statewide – the aging of forests could lead to greater susceptibility of insects and diseases AC
Loss of habitat transition to early successional size classes –what are the effects on wildlife
Evaluate drought/gypsy moth combination-- could it coincide with increasing decline of oak?
Mast production is decreasing overtime reducing populations of certain wildlife species
Reintroduction of chestnut – could be a benefit?
Consider urbanization as a vector for invasive exotics
Consider rural/recreational development (WUI) landscaping as vectors for invasive introduction
Absence of management leads to greater susceptibility to insects and disease, reduction in age-class diversity, wildlife habitat loss, more closed canopy conditions (increase in maple/beech), affect food chain
Consider influence of keystone flora – chestnuts, shortleaf pine, etc
Asses urbanization-- changing soils leading to loss of beneficial microorganisms which limits ability to support trees
Consider urban pollutants in run-off changing forest
Assess threatened hemlocks. Eventual rapid transition to early successional. Impacts to stream temps. Stream diversity change
Consider climate change contributing to loss of spruce/fir communities
Consider urban heat islands resulting in influence on storm trajectories
Assess sudden oak death; hypoxylon canker
Climate change good and bad depending on how you look at it; extreme weather cycles, warming temperatures, higher temps may keep gypsy moth north of us, greater drought in conjunction with aging oak community could lead to greater incidence of oak decline, loss of oak silvicultural options could lead to greater species shifts to more shade tolerant species, large mammal population dependent on mast production, etc.; deer, elk
With lack of fire, table mountain pine and other fire dependent species populations reduced
Consider air pollution - Smoke management issues from increased urbanization; this is also an economic restraint
Consider working with nursery/horticultural industries to reduce invasive plant threat
Assess impacts of feral hogs in rural areas – potential problem; rooting in wetland
Consider urbanization and lack of fire in central basin and others-- ramifications of future ability to use as a tool
Consider fire and invasive plants – can control with fire; other invasives thrive on fire, could ultimately change composition of forest
Be careful about using fire too much on good quality hardwood stands – could reduce quality of hardwoods, and could change composition of landscape; some sites may be best left in hardwood stands vs. being converted to oak savannah community type.
Uncontrolled wildfires in WUI reduces quality of the local hardwood stands
Consider the impact of fire on water quality/quantity
Consider honeysuckle/privet and fire resistance/susceptibility
Forest Service using metric system. Discourages bids. Reflect market structure
Consider USFS failure to manage timber
AC region is one of the most biologically diverse (if not most in plants); as such, this sub-region (especially Blue Ridge Province) could be biological repository – biological Noah's Ark--could be used to benefit the sub-region itself, and other adjacent regions in restoration
this makes this sub-region potentially more important than other sub-regions if large-scale changes occur; i.e. more species are at risk to be adversely impacted