You are here

Harvard Forest Data Archive

HF252

Social Network Survey of Forest Landowners in New Hampshire and Vermont 2010

Related Publications

Data

Overview

  • Lead: David Kittredge
  • Investigators: Meagan Jones, Kristen Schipper
  • Contact: David Kittredge
  • Start date: 2010
  • End date: 2010
  • Status: completed
  • Location: New Hampshire, Vermont
  • Latitude: +42.795 to +43.000
  • Longitude: -72.663 to -71.990
  • Elevation: 67 to 585 meter
  • Taxa:
  • Release date: 2015
  • Revisions:
  • EML file: knb-lter-hfr.252.2
  • DOI: digital object identifier
  • Related links:
  • Study type: short-term measurement
  • Research topic: conservation and management
  • LTER core area: disturbance
  • Keywords: conservation, human disturbance, humans, management, surveys, timber harvest
  • Abstract:

    Forests provide invaluable services, and nationally a significant portion of them are owned by millions of individual, private decision makers. Butler (2008) reports that the vast majority of owners (92%, representing 87% of all family forest lands) make management decisions for their land on their own, with a very small minority relying on the advice of professional foresters. Nationally, Butler (2008) goes on to report that 4 % of family forest owners (representing 17% of family forest land) have a professionally prepared management plan for their lands. It is clear that family forests are important, yet millions of owners are apparently not making decisions on the basis of professional advice. Our goal was to improve our understanding of who landowners seek information from when making decisions about their forestland. More specifically, our objective was to explore the possible role of egocentric social networks that landowners may rely upon for information when making a decision. Can we estimate their composition, the possible role of professionals, and the nature of the relationships, in terms of involvement, helpfulness, and trust? Finally, we explored landowner egocentric networks in two similar and adjacent states (Vermont and New Hampshire) that have different programmatic approaches to reaching landowners. Do these result in different ways that landowners acquire information?

    Using two different approaches through a mail survey methodology, we assessed the extent to which private woodland owners are connected to other people, the degree to which they are considered information sources, and the nature of their decision making behavior. Respondents consistently report valuable connections to non-professionals. They similarly report nominal contact to public foresters, whose role is to inspire prudent forest stewardship on privately held lands. This minimal contact is consistent in two different states with rather different programmatic goals (e.g., education and outreach focus in NH vs. technical assistance in VT). Paradoxically, those respondents who do have contact with public foresters value their involvement and trust them highly. Our results suggest, however, that there currently exist informal and largely unrecognized connections and networks that woodland owners tap and place importance upon. Improving the decision making of private woodland owners, and shifting it from reactive to more proactive in nature, based on a full understanding of available information and alternatives, seems possible if means are developed to harness the potential power of these invisible connections.

  • Methods:

    Overview

    We selected 5 towns in the southwestern-most county in New Hampshire (Alstead, Dublin, Jaffrey, Swanzey, and Winchester), and 5 towns in the southeastern-most county in Vermont (Brattleboro, Dummerston, Marlboro, Newfane, and Wilmington) for sampling. We then contacted local property tax assessors in each town and acquired a list of all landowners. We excluded ownerships of less than 10 acres. We selected 100 landowners randomly from each town, for a total original sample size of 1,000.

    Our work was guided by a pilot study of private woodland owners and their egocentric networks (Kittredge et al. 2013), conducted in central Massachusetts in 2008. This pilot study used structured interviews with 47 woodland owners to explore the possible role of informal social networks in two explicit decisions: harvest timber or place an easement on their land. Interview subjects were asked a series of questions about the possible contacts they have in terms of their woodland, and the extent to which these contacts may have been involved with the decision. In an effort to expand our sample, we developed a mail survey instrument that asked respondents to complete a table, listing the initials of relevant contacts (maintaining anonymity), the type of person (e.g., friend, family member, neighbor, woodland owner, forester, logger), and indicating the extent to which each one is involved in a decision, helpful, and trusted. We provided 18 blank lines in the table, based on our pilot results suggesting an estimated network size of 7-10 people. Upon further consideration, we were concerned that respondents would either be hesitant to list individuals by their initials, or they would perceive the table as too onerous or demanding, and response rate would suffer. Thus, we developed a simpler version of the survey that asked only to indicate with a check if the respondent had received information from different generic types of people (e.g., family members, neighbors, friends, other woodland owners, loggers, foresters) or other written / educational sources (e.g., workshops, facts sheets, internet), and to indicate the extent to which the information from that type of person or source was helpful. We decided to split our overall sample, and send 50% of our sample the longer, more involved table version of the survey, and 50% of the sample the simpler, shorter version. Both versions of the survey asked about decisions made on the land in the last two years (e.g., sale of land, commercial timber sale, cut tees for personal use, conservation easement, development of a management plan, enrollment in current-use property taxation program, and include land in a will or estate plan). Both versions also posed a question about the extent to which respondents considered themselves a source of information, and the kinds of information they provided. Lastly, both surveys asked general questions about ownership goals, tenure, gender, age, education level, size of ownership, and residency.

    Surveys

    We followed a modified Dillman method for mail surveys (Dillman 2000), with a cover letter, survey booklet, and postage paid return envelope. We used two waves of mailing to respondents. Survey materials are contained in the following PDF files:

    New_Hampshire_Survey_Long_6.16.2010.pdf: Long version of the survey sent to NH respondents.

    New_Hampshire_Survey_Short_6.16.2010.pdf: Short version of the survey sent to NH respondents.

    Vermont_Survey_Long_6.16.2010.pdf: Long version of the survey sent to VT respondents.

    Vermont_Survey_Short_6.16.2010.pdf: Short version of the survey sent to VT respondents.

    Initial_postcard_final.pdf: Postcard mailed to respondents prior to wave 1 mailing of the survey.

    Thank_you_postcard_final.pdf: Postcard mailed to respondents reminding them to please respond, and thanking them if they have already.

    Survey_cover_letter_2010.pdf: Cover letter accompanying the survey, mailed to respondents.

    Survey_cover_letter_WAVE_2.pdf: Cover letter accompanying the survey, sent in wave 2, to those people who had not yet responded.

    References

    Dillman, D.A. 2000. Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Kittredge, D.B., M.G. Rickenbach, T. Knoot, E. Snellings, A. Erazo. 2013. It's the network: How personal connections shape decisions about private forest use. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 30 (2): 67-74.

  • Use:

    This dataset is released to the public under Creative Commons license CC BY (Attribution). Please keep the designated contact person informed of any plans to use the dataset. Consultation or collaboration with the original investigators is strongly encouraged. Publications and data products that make use of the dataset must include proper acknowledgement.

  • Citation:

    Kittredge D. 2015. Social Network Survey of Forest Landowners in New Hampshire and Vermont 2010. Harvard Forest Data Archive: HF252.

Detailed Metadata

hf252-01: short survey

  1. code: unique identifier for each survey response. Anonymous. V for Vermont response, N for New Hampshire response
  2. version: whether Vermont or New Hampshire short survey
    • 1: Vermont short survey
    • 2: New Hampshire short survey
  3. no.days: number of days elapsed between when the survey was sent, and when it was returned. This is useful for investigating the potential of non-response bias. (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  4. year.acquired: year the property was acquired by the current owner
  5. way.acquired: how property was acquired
    • 1: inherit
    • 2: purchase
    • 3: other
    • 4: inherit and purchase
  6. q2.other: text explanation of the meaning of “other” response
  7. acres: number of acres of the property owned by the respondent (unit: acre / missing value: NA)
  8. how.far.live: how far owner lives from land (in miles)
    • 1: on or beside it
    • 2: less than 10
    • 3: 11-25
    • 4: 26-50
    • 5: 51-100
    • 6: more than 100
  9. owner.type: type of ownership
    • 1: individual
    • 2: joint
    • 3: family partnership or corporation
    • 4: trust or estate
    • 5: club or association
    • 6: nonprofit organization
    • 7: other
    • 8: multiple types of ownership
  10. site.of.home: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Site of home
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  11. income: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Income
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  12. recreation: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Recreation
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  13. legacy: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Legacy for family
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  14. wildlife: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Wildlife protection
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  15. protect.env: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Protect the environment
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  16. scenery: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Enjoy scenery
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  17. q6.other: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Other
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  18. time.on.land: how much time do you spend in your woods?
    • 1: once or more per week
    • 2: once or twice per month
    • 3: once or twice every 3 months
    • 4: once or twice per year
    • 5: less than once per year
  19. sell.land: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Sell land
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  20. timber.sale: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Timber sale
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  21. cut.trees: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Cut trees for personal use
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  22. easement: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Conservation easement on some or all land
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  23. hired: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Hired someone to develop a management plan
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  24. current.use: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Enrolled in the current use property tax program
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  25. will: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Included land in a will or estate plan
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  26. q8.other: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Other
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  27. family: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Family members
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  28. neighbors: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Neighbors
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  29. friends: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Friends
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  30. other.owners: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Other woodland owners
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  31. loggers: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Logging contractors
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  32. priv.foresters: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Private foresters
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  33. pub.foresters: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Public foresters
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  34. conserv.people: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Land trust or conservation group member
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  35. locals: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Local community members not listed above
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  36. other.info: in the past two years, what types of information have you obtained from each of the following sources? Other
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  37. workshops: in the past two years, what types of information (written or educational) have you obtained from each of the following sources? Workshops or classes
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  38. books: in the past two years, what types of information (written or educational) have you obtained from each of the following sources? Books, fact sheets or publications
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  39. internet: in the past two years, what types of information (written or educational) have you obtained from each of the following sources? Internet
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  40. newpapers: in the past two years, what types of information (written or educational) have you obtained from each of the following sources? Newspapers
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  41. magazines: in the past two years, what types of information (written or educational) have you obtained from each of the following sources? Magazines
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  42. newsletters: in the past two years, what types of information (written or educational) have you obtained from each of the following sources? Newsletters
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  43. other.sources: in the past two years, what types of information (written or educational) have you obtained from each of the following sources? Other
    • 1: general woodlands info
    • 2: land care and management suggestions
    • 3: contacts to info or referral to other people
    • 4: general and land (i.e. 1 and 2)
    • 5: general and contacts (i.e. 1 and 3)
    • 6: land and contacts (i.e. 2 and 3)
    • 7: general, land and contacts (i.e. 1, 2, and 3)
    • 8: none
  44. important.person: when you obtained information from these sources, which was the most important type of person?
    • 1: family member
    • 2: neighbor
    • 3: friend
    • 4: other woodland owners
    • 5: logging contractors
    • 6: private forester
    • 7: public foresters
    • 8: conservation or environmental groups
    • 9: local community members not listed above
    • 10: other
    • 11: multiple important people
  45. important.text: when you obtained information from these sources, which was the most important written or educational source
    • 1: workshops or classes
    • 2: books, fact sheets or publications
    • 3: internet
    • 4: newspapers
    • 5: magazines
    • 6: newsletters
    • 7: other
  46. family.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Family members
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  47. neighbor.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Neighbors
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  48. friends.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Friends
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  49. owners.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Other woodland owners
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  50. loggers.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Logging contractors
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  51. priv.forester.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Private foresters
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  52. pub.forester.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Public foresters
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  53. conserv.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Conservation or environmental groups
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  54. locals.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Local community members not listed above
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  55. other.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Other
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  56. workshop.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Workshops or classes
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  57. books.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Books, fact sheets or publications
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  58. internet.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Internet
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  59. newpaper.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Newspapers
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  60. magazine.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Magazines
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  61. newletter.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Newsletters
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  62. otherinfo.help: when you have made decisions about the care and management of your woodland in the last two years, how helpful have you found information from each of the following sources? Other
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
    • 5: not applicable
  63. you.as.source: to what extent are you considered a source of information about woodlands?
    • 1: I am not
    • 2: People occasionally ask me about woodlands
    • 3: People often ask me about woodlands
    • 4: People seek me out to ask about woodlands
  64. year.born: year of respondent’s birth
  65. gender: gender(s) of respondent(s)
    • 1: female
    • 2: male
    • 3: female and male
  66. education: attained education level
    • 1: some high school
    • 2: high school / GED
    • 3: some college
    • 4: associate or technical degree
    • 5: bachelor's degree
    • 6: graduate or profressional degree
  67. profession: profession, whether retired or not
    • 1: retired
    • 2: not retired
  68. prof.type: profession type
  69. land.town: town where land is located
  70. land.state: state where land is located
  71. res.city: respondent's town of residence
  72. res.state: respondent's state of residence

hf252-02: long survey

  1. code: unique identifier for each survey response. Anonymous. V for VT response, N for New Hampshire response
  2. version: survey version
    • 2: Vermont long survey
    • 4: New Hampshire long survey
  3. no.days: number of days elapsed between when the survey was sent, and when it was returned. This is useful for investigating the potential of non-response bias (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  4. year.acquired: year the property was acquired by the current owner
  5. way.acquired: how the land was acquired
    • 1: inherit
    • 2: purchase
    • 3: other
    • 4: inherit and purchase
  6. q2.other: text explanation of the meaning of “other” response
  7. acres: number of acres of the property owned by the respondent (unit: acre / missing value: NA)
  8. how.far.live: how far owner lives from the land (in miles)
    • 1: on or beside it
    • 2: 0-10 miles away
    • 3: 11-25 miles
    • 4: 26-50 miles away
    • 5: 51-100 miles away
    • 6: more than 100 miles away
  9. owner.type: type of ownership in which woodland is held
    • 1: individual
    • 2: joint ownership
    • 3: family partnership or corporation
    • 4: trust or estate
    • 5: club or association
    • 6: nonprofit organization
    • 7: other
    • 8: multiple types of ownership
  10. site.of.home: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Site of home
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  11. income: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Income
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  12. recreation: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Recreation
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  13. legacy: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Legacy for family
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  14. wildlife: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Wildlife protection
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  15. environment: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Protect the environment
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  16. scenery: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Enjoy scenery
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  17. q6.other: how important are the following possible reasons for owning woodlands to you? Other
    • 1: not important
    • 2: slightly important
    • 3: somewhat important
    • 4: very important
  18. time.on.land: how much time do you spend in your woods?
    • 1: once or more per week
    • 2: once or twice per month
    • 3: once or twice every 3 months
    • 4: once or twice per year
    • 5: less than once per year
  19. sale.land: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Sell land
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  20. timber.sale: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Timber sale
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  21. cut.trees: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Cut trees for personal use
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  22. easement: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Conservation easement on some or all land
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  23. hired: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Hired someone to develop a management plan
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  24. current.use: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Enrolled in the current use property tax program
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  25. will: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Included land in a will or estate plan
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  26. q8.other: have you done any of the following things on your land in Vermont in the past two years? Other
    • 1: yes
    • 2: yes, satisfied with outcome
    • 3: yes, unsatisfied with outcome
    • 4: no
    • 5: not applicable
  27. family.member: number of family members who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  28. neighbor: number of neighbors who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  29. friend: number of friends who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  30. wood.owner: number of other woodland owners who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  31. local: number of local community members who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  32. logger: number of logging contractors who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  33. priv.forester: number of private foresters who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  34. pub.forester: number of public foresters who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing values: NA)
  35. conserv.person: number of land trust or conservation group members who have visited your land, whose land you have visited, or who you have talked to about your land in the last two years (unit: number / missing value: NA)
  36. you.as.source: to what extent are you considered a source of information about woodlands?
    • 1: I am not
    • 2: people occasionally ask me about woodlands
    • 3: people often ask me about woodlands
    • 4: people seek me out to ask about woodlands
  37. info.provided: type of information provided
  38. year.born: year of respondent’s birth
  39. gender: gender(s) of respondent(s)
    • 1: female
    • 2: male
    • 3: female and male
  40. education: attained education level
    • 1: some high school
    • 2: high school / GED
    • 3: some college
    • 4: associate or technical degree
    • 5: bachelor's degree
    • 6: graduate or professional degree
  41. profession: profession, whether or not retired
    • 1: retired
    • 2: not retired
  42. prof.type: type of profession
  43. land.town: town where the land is located
  44. land.state: state where the land is located
  45. res.city: respondent's town of residence
  46. res.state: respondent's state of residence

hf252-03: social network

  1. code: unique identifier for each survey response. Anonymous. V for VT response, N for New Hampshire response
  2. version: survey version
    • 2: Vermont long survey
    • 4: New Hampshire long survey
  3. initials: respondents were asked to identify individual members of their social network by their initials in the table associated with Question 8
  4. family: type of person: family member
    • 1: yes
  5. neighbor: type of person: neighbor
    • 1: yes
  6. friend: type of person: friend
    • 1: yes
  7. other.owner: type of person: other woodland owner
    • 1: yes
  8. local: type of person: local community member
    • 1: yes
  9. logger: type of person: loggin contractor
    • 1: yes
  10. priv.forester: type of person: private forester
    • 1: yes
  11. pub.forester: type of person: public forester
    • 1: yes
  12. conserv.person: type of person: land trust or conservation group member
    • 1: yes
  13. other: type of person: other
    • 1: yes
  14. other.text: text describing "other" type of person
  15. involvement: degree of involvement from 1 [not involved] to 4 [very involved]. *Please note that involvement may not be limited to knowledge or actual effort. It could reflect someone's "moral support" or assistance in helping you "think through" a decision. For example, involved might mean: gave advice on other people to talk to, gave you the name of a logger or forester, talked to you about their own experience, provided direct professional advice or service.
  16. helpfulness: helpfulness, from 1 [not helpful] to 4 [very helpful]
  17. trust: trust, from 1 [I don’t trust them] to 4 [I trust them completely]
  18. contact: whether or not respondent had a contract with the person or their organization
    • 1: yes

hf252-04: written responses

  • Compression: none
  • Format: pdf
  • Type: pdf file

hf252-05: individual points

  • Compression: zip
  • Format: zip
  • Type: zip file