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

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

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

4. 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

5. Conservation Easement
Agreement
Legally binding
Restricts development
Protects conservation values

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

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

8. 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

9. Participants CREP riparian buffer owners 20 original CREP counties
685 addresses

10. CREP Counties in Study
Map by A. Metcalf

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

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

13. Demographic Results

14. Demographic Results

15. Demographic Results
Annual Income

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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 %

20. 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

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

22. 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

23. 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)

24. 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

25. 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)

26. 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