Western Oregon forest landowner beliefs about the outcomes of mandatory riparian buffer regulations

Research about nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) landowners’ perspectives on voluntary conservation-based programs continues to proliferate. However, there is a gap in understanding NIPF landowner perspectives about the social and ecological outcomes of mandatory conservation-based regulations. We sent questionnaires to Oregon NIPF landowners to understand their beliefs about potential outcomes of proposed state regulations that strengthen mandatory riparian buffer habitat protection requirements. Factor analysis and multiple regression techniques revealed the most important variables that influence those beliefs. Overall, respondents believed that the socioeconomic outcomes were negative and the ecological outcomes were neutral or slightly positive. Respondents with more conservative political attitudes who owned larger properties were more likely to believe that the outcomes would be negative. As the importance of maintaining property for future generations and increasing timber productivity increased, respondents believed the potential outcomes would be increasingly negative. As the importance of improving water quality, increasing carbon storage, and improving recreational use on the property increased, respondents believed that the outcomes would be increasingly positive. We discuss management and policy implications, including communication strategies aimed at engaging with NIPF landowners to highlight the purpose and potential outcomes of forest and riparian management regulations.