Preserving CREP Forested Riparian Buffers through Conservation Easements By: Emilie R. Cooper School of Forest Resources The Pennsylvania State University

Presentation Outline Study problem and rationale Research methods Survey results Future implications Photo by E. Cooper

Study Problem and Rationale Contracts 10-15 yrs. Prevent destruction of established buffers in the future Past studies … Conservation easements as preservation tool Photo by S. Torgerson

CREP Buffer Benefits Erosion control Wildlife habitat Water quality Stabilize stream bank Wildlife habitat Organic matter and debris Decrease stream temperature Water quality Decrease suspended solids Photo by E. Cooper

Conservation Easement Agreement Legally binding Restricts development Protects conservation values

Easement Benefits Voluntary, flexible agreements Historical, biological, and cultural preservation Remains private property Financial Benefits Income taxes Property taxes Estate taxes

Three Main Objectives Identify future plans for buffers Understand landowner knowledge of conservation easements Establish possible reasons landowners would sign riparian conservation easements

Survey Instrument Mail questionnaire Three sections January 2005 Initial mailing, reminder postcard and second mailing Examples Three sections Land and forested riparian buffer Conservation easements Demographics

Participants CREP riparian buffer owners 20 original CREP counties 685 addresses

CREP Counties in Study Map by A. Metcalf

Analysis Descriptive statistics Relationships between variables using Chi-square Factor analysis - data reduction Logistic regression

Survey Results 550 (80.3 %) useable surveys Land Characteristics Average parcel size - 173 acres Average buffer size - 9.46 acres DEP 6.27 acres Years established - 2.6 Family partnership - 50% Land uses Crops/vegetables/grains Forest Pasture

Demographic Results

Demographic Results

Demographic Results Annual Income

Participants opinions of PA agriculture issues MOST IMPORTANT LEAST IMPORTANT Crop damage from wildlife Factory farms replacing small farms Availability of conservation education Availability of clean drinking water Taxes Stream bank erosion Farmland preservation programs

Participant reasons for CREP enrollment Most Important Improve water quality Express environmental stewardship Receive incentive payment Improve non-game wildlife habitat Least important Neighbors installed a buffer Improve herd health Photo by S. Torgerson

What has CREP done? ■ Participants found decreases in: Land production Stream bank erosion Stream temperature Visual aesthetics Participants found increases in: Aquatic fishes Wildlife Birds Invasive weeds Property income Photo by E. Cooper

Landowner Future Intentions for CREP Buffers Likely to: Leave buffer intact 85% Remove buffer to re-crop or graze 5% Manage for timber 44% Harvest non-timber forest products 9% Donate conservation easement 15%

Conservation easements knowledge and understanding ■ 78 % understand the basics of easements ■ 15 % have a conservation easement ■ 30 % owners think CREP is an easement program Photo by E. Cooper

Easement establishment on CREP buffers ■ Over half are unsure ■ previous questions -15% likely to establish easement

Observations Demographics Knowledge of conservation easements Age - negative relationship Education - positive relationship Occupation - white collar Income - 60K -100K Knowledge of conservation easements Positive relationship Participant concerns when establishing an easement Giving up landowner rights

Logistic Regression – Five Models Variables included in analysis Gender Age Education Income Likeliness to remove buffer Conservation easement knowledge Established easement Total buffer acreage Easement environmental benefits (Q19) Financial issues (Q4)

What does this mean Education is important Personal Conservation easement education Established conservation easement Identify landowners with easements Finances matter Environmental awareness Photo by E. Cooper

Outcome for Future Management Implications Increase conservation easement education Possible incentive programs Environmental awareness leads to easement acceptance Landowners intend to leave buffers Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen 1991)

Questions? Thanks to: Graduate Committee Dr. Michael Jacobson Dr. James Finley Robert McKinstry, Jr. Esq. Dr. Fern Willits DEP- Keith Ashley USDA / FSA Bureau of Forestry Chesapeake Bay Foundation Penn State Extension