Search this site:

5.4 BMP Implementation in Southern States

Pursuant to the Clean Water Act, each State has developed a State Water Quality Management Plan. These plans include BMPs to reduce nonpoint-source water pollution from various sources, including silviculture. State forestry agencies are typically designated by governors as the lead agency for silviculture BMP program management. Consequently, beginning in 1978, each Southern State forestry agency, working in cooperation with other forestry experts and their State's water quality agency, has adopted BMPs. Most have revised their BMPs since 1990.

BMP implementation is largely voluntary in Southern States, but three (FL, NC, and VA) have linked BMP implementation to other State regulatory programs, making them quasi-regulatory in some circumstances, and BMP implementation became mandatory in Kentucky in July 2000. There are also 15 mandatory Federal BMPs, or conditions, required in all states for exemption of certain silvicultural activities conducted in waters of the United States. See Chapter Socio-3 for a more thorough discussion of Section 404(f), of the CWA. Compliance with these Federal conditions has not been systematically monitored by any agency.

The voluntary nature of State BMP programs precludes establishing permit conditions. Lacking this mechanism, States have employed logger, forester, forest practice purveyor, and landowner education as the primary tool to achieve BMP implementation. Training has traditionally been conducted in cooperation with forest industries, forestry associations and State agencies. Member companies of the American Forest and Paper Association are required by the Sustainable Forestry Initiative Guidelines to meet or exceed State BMPs on company-owned forest land.

To gauge the effectiveness of their educational efforts and to target needed adjustments, State forestry agencies have sponsored or conducted surveys to measure the degree to which BMPs are being implemented. Twelve of 13 States have completed at least one survey. Findings are typically published in formal reports and are available from the respective State forestry agencies. Section 319 (Clean Water Act) funding has supported these efforts.

To correctly interpret monitoring results reported by State, it is essential to understand the history of implementation monitoring and how it has evolved. Implementation (compliance) monitoring of nonregulatory BMPs is unique to the forestry community. While other nonpoint-source sectors such as agriculture, are generally unregulated in the South, the degree of compliance with BMPs for agricultural activities has not been systematically measured or reported. Therefore, survey design standards and monitoring protocols have had to evolve over the 20 years of nonpoint-source program existence. During that time, State forestry agencies have approached implementation monitoring in different ways, degrees of detail, precision, and statistical strength.

Past differences in survey design and statistical strength, and metrics chosen for evaluation within and among States preclude precise reporting of State or regional progress over time. Results range from statistically valid to informative but of unknown statistical strength. Statistical approaches are noted in the individual State summaries below.

It is important to note that, as with sampling approaches, on-site evaluation of BMP implementation and reporting varies among States. Some provide largely qualitative judgments of overall effort; others calculate and summarize compliance with specific BMPs. These are noted in the State summaries.

States have differed in their aggressiveness toward monitoring BMP implementation, a direct reflection of State priorities and available resources. Seven States have completed more than one comprehensive statewide survey (Florida - 10; Texas - 4; Louisiana - 4; Georgia - 3; Arkansas - 2; North Carolina - 2; Tennessee - 2. Louisiana is in the process of data analysis and report preparation of its fourth survey. South Carolina has completed four harvesting and BMP surveys and two site-preparation BMP surveys. Alabama has surveyed compliance in differing manners since 1994, but has produced no formal survey report to date. Mississippi and Kentucky have completed 1 statewide survey, but neither have published a formal report to date. Pursuant to State law, Virginia monitors a percentage of the activities it is notified about. Oklahoma is planning but has not yet surveyed BMP implementation. Louisiana and Kentucky have been surveyed by university forestry specialists, and the other 10 surveys have been conducted by the State Divisions of Forestry.

Through the 1990s, CWA Section 319 funds became readily available to State forestry agencies for BMP program management, and the aggressiveness of implementation monitoring increased. In order to improve regional similarity in survey design and on-site evaluations, the Southern Group of State Foresters (SGSF) recommended in 1997 general forestry BMP implementation monitoring procedures for voluntary use by States (Mimeo from SGSF). To date, six States (Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas) have redesigned their programs to incorporate these recommendations. Others have chosen to continue their programs as previously structured.

The SGSF monitoring protocol recommends evaluation of specific BMPs in a manner that requires the evaluator to judge whether each applicable practice was implemented properly and completely and whether a risk to water-quality exists as a result of noncompliance. Rates are determined by calculating the percent of applicable BMPs fully implemented and are reported by BMP category, such as SMZs, and for the entire operation. The protocol also calls for sampling treated sites in a systematic and predetermined manner to ensure statistical validity.

5.4.1 State Implementation Monitoring Summaries

To compile information contained in the State summaries, written requests were made to each State forestry agency director in March, 2000, for BMP implementation monitoring data. Specific information requested included: monitoring design, BMP categories measured, implementation rates statewide and by physiographic province and ownership category if available. Responses were received from all States. As noted earlier, all but one (Oklahoma) reported that they had completed at least one monitoring survey. Following is a brief synopsis of the information received.

ALABAMA: The Alabama Forestry Commission began conducting annual BMP implementation surveys in 1994 (Boyce 2000, personal communication), and monitoring is accomplished by aerial reconnaissance only. BMP survey information is available, although there is no published survey report as such. Until recently the survey was conducted statewide, but currently the survey covers half the State each year, alternating between the north and south. The Commission records all forestry sites via aerial survey, and one site from each county is randomly selected for BMP implementation monitoring every 2 months. Selected sites must be well defined as forestry practices, be 1 year old or less, in any stage of completion (on-going, stopped, or completed), and free from sampling bias (neither size, ownership, or access are considered). BMP categories are streamside management zones (SMZs), stream crossings, forest roads, timber harvesting, reforestation/stand management (includes pesticides and fire breaks), and forested wetland management. The survey evaluation form includes yes or no questions under each BMP category, and at the end of the evaluation, the site is rated yes or no as to whether BMPs were adequately implemented overall. The most recent information is for the survey completed in northern Alabama in fiscal year 1998/1999. The survey rated BMP implementation as adequate on 93 percent of sites inspected. Of those with streams present, 80 percent were rated as adequate for SMZs. Alabama does not report by ownership category.

ARKANSAS: The Arkansas Forestry Commission has completed two statewide BMP monitoring surveys, the most recent one was for the survey period 1998/1999 (Eagle 1999). Sites were randomly selected and permission for access was obtained. The number of sites verified was based on sample percentage estimates for projected statistical accuracy of plus or minus 5 percent, and was distributed throughout the State on the basis of 1997 timber severance tax records. Sites were harvested from 1 to 24 months before survey, and categories of BMPs were forest road construction and maintenance, harvesting, mechanical site preparation, chemical site preparation, SMZs, and harvest planning. Forest industry provided the Arkansas Forestry Commission with closed-out and site-prepared sites for monitoring. Results are reported statewide and by physiographic region and landowner category.

The overall State BMP implementation rate for the 1998/1999 survey was 80 percent. Implementation was 88 percent for planning, 75 percent for roads, 77 percent for harvesting, 79 percent for mechanical site preparation, 80 percent for chemical site preparation, and 81 percent for SMZs.

In the Delta, about 7 percent of all sites were sampled and the overall compliance rate was 85 percent. About 14 percent of the sites in the Ouachita region were visited; the overall compliance rate was about 77 percent. About 12 percent of the sites were visited in the Ozark region, and overall compliance was about 77 percent. About 67 percent of the sites were visited in the Southwest region; the overall compliance was about 80 percent.

Four landowner categories were recognized in Arkansas. The survey reported 75 percent overall implementation for private nonindustrial landowners, 87 percent for forest industry, 96 percent for national forests, and 82 percent for State land.

FLORIDA: The Florida Division of Forestry began biennial silviculture BMP compliance surveys in 1981 (Vowell 2000). The most recent compliance report is for the survey completed in 1999. In all 199 sites were monitored, the number was that estimated to be needed to achieve statistical significance at the 95 percent confidence level. Candidate sites must have had silvicultural treatment within the past 2 years and had some part of the site within 300 feet of a stream, lake > 2 acres, sinkhole, or wetland identified in the BMP manual. Sites for the survey were distributed across the State based on the level of timber harvest by county, with at least 1 site for each county that had any harvest activity. Most sites were selected by aerial reconnaissance from aircraft flying over randomly selected township and range lines at an altitude of 800 to 1,200 feet until the target number sites for each county was reached. If flights were not available for any county, sites were selected from the ground, assigned a number, and then drawn by lot.

Florida has 14 BMP categories: SMZs, wetlands, public lands, canals, sinkholes, forest roads, stream crossings, timber harvesting, site preparation, fireline construction, pesticide/fertilizer, waste disposal, wet-weather operations, and emergency conditions. Multiple questions answerable by yes, no, or not applicable (N/A) were evaluated under each category in the survey form, so the total number of actual silviculture practices evaluated on the 199 sites was 4,997. The yes and no answers were tallied and the percent compliance, exclusive of the n/a answers, was calculated for each site. The survey determined that BMP compliance ranged by category from 91 percent to 100 percent. The statewide compliance rate was 96 percent in all BMP categories. Of the survey sites, 8 percent were on public land, 37 percent were on industry land, and 55 percent were on private nonindustrial land. Statewide compliance rates for the ownership categories were 99 percent, 97 percent, and 96 percent, respectively.

Included in Florida's BMP survey is opportunity to note whether significant risk to water quality exists on the evaluated site. The 1997 survey found 0.16 percent of the evaluated practices on all sites monitored posed significant risk to water quality. All of the conditions leading to a significant risk were corrected per the Division of Forestry recommendations.

GEORGIA: The Georgia Forestry Commission has completed its third BMP implementation survey (Green 2001). The latest survey is the first that conforms to the BMP monitoring protocol endorsed by the Southern Group of State Foresters in 1997. The survey was conducted from fall 1997 through summer 1998 on 386 sites selected from across the State in a stratified random sample. All sites experienced some kind of silvicultural treatment in the preceding 2 years, and represented all land ownership categories in all geographic and physiographic provinces. By ownership, 72 percent of the sites were nonindustrial private, 26 percent were forest industry, and 2 percent were public. By physiographic province about, 6.5 percent were in the Mountains, 34.5 percent were in the Piedmont, 19 percent were in the Upper Coastal Plain, and 40 percent were in the Lower Coastal Plain. BMPs were judged as in compliance (yes), not in compliance (no), or not applicable (n/a) under several BMP categories, and a percent compliance was calculated for each category, for the site as a whole, and for the State. A judgment was made for each BMP not properly implemented, or that was found to have failed, as to whether a significant risk to water quality resulted. Results were also expressed in acres, miles of road and streams, number of stream crossings in full compliance for each BMP category, for the site as a whole, and for the State overall. A total of 6,690 individual BMPs were evaluated over about 43,118 acres.

Percent implementation was calculated in two ways. The number of acres on which BMPs were properly implemented was calculated for each BMP category, and the number of applicable BMPs properly implemented was calculated. Therefore, BMP implementation was reported as a percentage by acres and a percentage by BMP. Categories for BMPs and respective compliance ratings were SMZs (80.9 percent), stream crossings (58.8 percent), main haul roads (76.6 percent), timber harvesting (87.3 percent), mechanical site preparation (96. percent), chemical applications (99.3 percent), control burning (61.5 percent), and artificial regeneration (93.4 percent). Statewide BMP implementation compliance was estimated at 78.7 percent for all BMP categories in all land ownerships and all physiographic regions. Statewide compliance on the number of acres assessed was 98.2 percent. By landownership, BMP compliance by acres assessed and BMPs implemented, respectively, was 97.4 percent and 75.4 percent on private nonindustrial, 99.1 percent and 86.3 percent on forest industry land, and 99.4 percent and 84 percent on all public land.

Of particular concern to the Georgia Forestry Commission were stream crossings. However, the Commission noted that many of the out-of-compliance stream crossings existed before silvicultural treatments were conducted and were not specifically related to forestry operations. Future surveys will include only treatments specifically related to the forestry activities.

KENTUCKY: The Kentucky Division of Forestry BMP monitoring program estimates BMP effectiveness at mitigating nonpoint-source runoff (Stringer 1997a). The University of Kentucky conducted a BMP survey from September 1995 to April 1997 (Stringer 1997b). The BMP categories monitored included SMZs, roads, trails, landings, and stream crossings.

A total of 100 timber harvest sites were located for systematic sampling from the three physiographic regions of the State. The three regions are Area 1 (Jackson Purchase/Western Coal Field/Pennroyal), Area 2 (Inner and Outer Bluegrass and the Knobs), and Area 3 (Appalachian Plateau and Cumberland Mountains).

Of the 100 sites monitored, evaluators determined that only 80 needed "active BMPs". Those 80 were evaluated for BMP implementation.

Monitoring indicated that, of those 80 monitored sites, 35 percent had BMPs that were effective, 12.5 percent had BMPs that were partially effective, 10 percent had BMPs that were not effective, and 42.5 percent had no BMPs. In other words, more than half (52.5 percent) of the 80 sites either had no BMPs or the BMPs were ineffective, and less than half (47.5 percent) had BMPs that were effective or partially effective.

Area 2 had the highest incidence of "BMPs Not Used or Not Effective" (59 percent), and Area 3 was evenly split 43.2 percent between "BMPs Not Used or Not Effective" and "BMPs Effective or Active BMP Use Not Needed".

Nonindustrial private land had slightly less implementation and effectiveness of BMPs than the other landowner categories. On a scale of 1 - 5 (1 is worst and 5 is best), public ownerships rated about 4.5 for BMP use and effectiveness, forest industry rated about 3.75 to 4, and nonindustrial private land ownership rated about 3.

LOUISIANA: The Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry has conducted four BMP implementation surveys (1991,1994,1997,and 2000). The most recent published report was for the 1997 survey (Hughes and Feduccia 1999), and the 2000 survey was not published in time for inclusion in this SFRA study. The number of survey sites necessary to determine with 95 percent confidence if forestry BMP implementation in Louisiana was at least 80 percent in 1997 was estimated at 256; 266 individual sites were actually surveyed. Sample sites were randomly selected by aerial observation, regardless of ownership, and the number of sites in each parish was based on 1996 timber harvest volume. Land ownership categories were forest industry, corporate non-forest industry, nonindustrial private, and public (Federal, State and local governments). The geographic regions were Delta, Northwest, Southeast, and Southwest.

Categories for BMPs were SMZs, road construction, timber harvest, site preparation and reforestation, and fireline construction. The survey form showed the number of specific BMPs in each category that were assessed. Implementation of BMPs was noted as: exceeds; full implementation; minor departure; needed but not applied; and no action required. Exceeds, full implementation, and minor departure were categorized as implemented; needed but not applied was considered not implemented.

Each survey site was given both an overall qualitative and quantitative implementation rating. The qualitative rating was in answer to the yes or no question, "Do you feel there was adequate BMP implementation on this site?" The quantitative rating was calculated as the percentage of implemented BMP guidelines on the site.

The overall statewide qualitative implementation rate was 83 percent, and the statewide quantitative implementation rate was 93 percent. Quantitative geographic implementation rates were 93 percent in the Delta, 94 percent in the Northwest, 92 percent in the Southeast, and 96 percent in the Southwest. Quantitative implementation rates by ownership category were 97 percent for forest industry, 95 percent for corporate non-forest-industry, 91 percent for nonindustrial forest, and 93 percent for public. Qualitative rates were not reported for geographic or landowner category.

MISSISSIPPI: The Mississippi Forestry Commission conducted a forestry BMP implementation survey in 1994, although there is no published implementation monitoring report (Sampson 2000, personal communication). Fifteen tracts harvested during 1993 were randomly selected from among all landowner categories from each of Mississippi's 82 counties, for a total of 1,230 tracts sampled. The survey estimated Statewide BMP implementation at 87 percent. The Commission recommended corrective measures on the surveyed sites needing BMPs. A new BMP monitoring strategy is being developed.

NORTH CAROLINA: The North Carolina Division of Forest Resources has instituted voluntary BMPs to ensure that the nine mandatory Forest Practice Guidelines (FPGs) related to water quality are met by forest management operations in the State (White 1992). Mandatory FPGs are required for exemption of forestry operations from the Sediment Pollution Control Act passed in the early 70s. The FPGs are performance standards that must be complied with, while BMPs are the more specific on-the-ground activities that, when applied, should result in maintaining compliance with the FPGs.

The Division conducted forestry BMP surveys in 1995 and 1996 (Hensen 1996) and is in the process of completing a 2000 survey. Two hundred timber harvest and 23 site-preparation sites, most of which were harvested between spring 1995 and spring 1996, were selected for the 1996 survey. Tracts had to have potential for affecting some water body, and were randomly selected and distributed throughout the State based on each county's timber production. BMP categories were permanent roads, skid trails and temporary roads, SMZs, landings, and site preparation. Each category had a number of questions to be answered as yes, no, or not applicable (N/A), and each site received an overall rating of no effort, poor, fair, good, or excellent. Landowner categories were public, industrial, and nonindustrial private. There was no physiographic or geographic stratification in the survey, but there was a slope category broken into three slope ranges: flat (0-5 percent), hilly (6-25 percent), and steep (>25 percent).

Overall statewide BMP implementation was rated at 95 percent as either good or excellent. Public land was rated at 100 percent, industry land at 90 percent, and nonindustrial land at 76 percent. There was no discernable BMP implementation pattern based on slope.

OKLAHOMA: Oklahoma is in the process of conducting its first forestry BMP implementation survey at the time of this Assessment (Atkinson 2000, personal communication).

SOUTH CAROLINA: The South Carolina Forestry Commission conducted BMP compliance surveys for timber harvesting in 1990, 1991, and 1994 (Jones 2000). A site preparation BMP monitoring survey was conducted in 1996. The BMP monitoring report published in February 2000 presents findings of the harvesting and site preparation BMP survey begun in 1997.

In 1997, 200 recently harvested sites were located through aerial survey across South Carolina for BMP compliance evaluation. Sites were distributed in proportion to timber harvests in each county relative to the whole State. Three visits were made to each site: one after harvest for compliance with harvest BMPs, one after site preparation for compliance with site preparation BMPs, and a third visit 2 years after harvest. The final visit examined site stabilization, BMP effectiveness, species and regeneration method used, and any ongoing erosion from silvicultural activities.

Harvesting BMP ratings were 98.6 percent acceptable for road systems, 86.7 percent acceptable for road stream crossings, 83.7 percent acceptable for SMZs, and 89.0 percent acceptable for logging systems. Statewide and overall, 91.5 percent of harvesting BMP categories were rated as acceptable.

Site preparation category ratings were 95.9 percent acceptable for mechanical treatments, 100 percent acceptable for herbicide applications, and 100 percent acceptable for prescribed burning. No sites had minor drainage activities to be evaluated in this survey. Statewide and overall, 98.0 percent of site preparation BMPs were rated acceptable. Visual observations of groundcover during the second and third visits indicated that naturally occurring vegetation generally stabilized harvested areas after one growing season, even in high-traffic areas and where mechanical site preparation occurred.

Findings by landowner categories were: nonindustrial private with under 1,000 acres, 87 percent acceptable BMPs; nonindustrial private with over 1,000 acres, 94 percent; forest industry, 98 percent; and public, 100 percent.

There was no physiographic reporting in the 1997 survey, but 11 sites with inadequate harvest system BMPs were noted in the Piedmont and 6 in the Coastal Plain.

TENNESSEE: The Tennessee Forestry Division reported two forestry BMP surveys -- one conducted in 1993 and one in 1996 (Tennessee Department of Agriculture, Forestry Division 1996). The survey form and protocol were modified in 1995, so results of the two surveys are not entirely comparable. In the second survey, 200 timber harvest and associated road construction sites were evaluated in all physiographic regions. One hundred seventy-nine sites were randomly selected, and 21 sites were investigated in response to water-quality complaints. Monitoring was conducted within 6 months after all activities were completed. Sites selected randomly were not reported separately from those visited due to complaints, so the overall results are not completely unbiased. During the survey, investigators noted instances where water pollution occurred or was likely to occur due to lack of BMPs or improper use of BMPs. In such instances, the operator or landowner was contacted and advised of necessary corrective action.

Examiners noted whether guidelines under each BMP category were implemented or whether the BMP was not applicable to that site. Responses were summed to determine the BMP implementation rates for the forestry practices and the operation as a whole. From the 200 sites evaluated there was a total of 1,787 individual BMP observations. Ratings for BMP categories were: roads, 59.5 percent compliance; SMZs, 70.5 percent compliance; stream crossings, 59.8 percent compliance; timber harvesting, 47.6 percent compliance; and waste disposal, 87.0 percent compliance. Only one site had been mechanically prepared, and all BMPs were implemented on that site. There were no observations in either the tree planting or fireline construction categories.

The overall statewide BMP compliance rate for the 1996 survey was 62.9 percent for all sites visited - the randomly chosen ones and those visited in response to water-quality complaints. Monitoring results were not broken out by landowner group or physiographic province.

TEXAS: The Texas Forest Service conducted forestry BMP surveys in 1992, 1996, 1998, and 2000 (Carraway, Clendenen, and Work 2000). Texas revised its survey form and protocol in 1998 to incorporate the protocol of the Southern Group of State Foresters.

The most recent survey was conducted between June 1998 and August 1999. A number of yes, no, or not applicable assessment questions were evaluated under the various BMP categories. An evaluation of "significant risk" was added for each assessment question. The purpose was to assess whether failure to properly implement a specific BMP posed significant risk to water quality. The yes and no answers were summed and an overall site compliance rating was calculated.

One hundred fifty timber harvest sites were randomly selected for investigation by aerial reconnaissance and from knowledge of harvest activities gathered from Texas Forest Service personnel. The sites were distributed among the counties based on estimated annual timber harvest. Sample sites were located without regard to ownership or proximity to water.

Results are reported by BMP category, ownership, and type of operation. BMP categories and overall compliance rates reported were: permanent roads, 94.1 percent; skid trails/temporary roads, 77.5 percent; stream crossings, 66.7 percent; SMZs, 86.0 percent; site preparation, 96.2 percent; landings, 98.8 percent; and wetlands, 86.7 percent. Overall State compliance for all categories was 88.6 percent.

Compliance by ownership category was: Forest Service, 97.9 percent; forest industry, 94.2 percent; and nonindustrial private, 81.2 percent. Compliance by type of operation was: clearcut, 85 percent; partial cut, 93 percent; thinning, 92 percent; and site preparation only, 93 percent.

In general, as terrain steepness increased, compliance decreased. Also, the Texas Forest Service reported for the first time a statistically significant increase in BMP compliance when:

· a forester was involved in the timber sale,




· the logging contractor attended the BMP training workshop,




· the landowner was familiar with BMPs, and




· there were BMPs in the timber-sale or site-preparation contract.

VIRGINIA: Virginia State law requires notification of Virginia Department of Forestry within 3 days of initiating timber harvest (Austin 2000). Semi-annually, the Department randomly selects 30 timber harvests from this database for BMP audits. Monitoring categories are stream crossings, water control structures, seeded areas, SMZs, trail/road grade, rutting, gravel/mats, oil spill/trash, and other. To be in full compliance, 100 percent of applicable BMPs at the audit site have to be 100 percent implemented and meet 100 percent of the technical specifications of the BMP manual. Measured in this way, compliance has ranged from 16 percent in 1991, to 7 percent in June 1999. Effort to implement BMPs was noted on 90 percent of the sites visited. The field evaluator indicated that 90 percent of the sites were experiencing no related water quality impacts, but 38 percent exhibited potential for impact.

The above summary of State reports illustrates the variety of BMP monitoring approaches and levels of monitoring effort employed by Southern State forestry agencies over the past 20 years. This reflects the priority placed on BMP implementation monitoring by States, as well as human and financial resource constraints.

The summary also demonstrates the difficulty of discerning actual rates of compliance with specific BMPs. Many on-the-ground determinations of BMP implementation are qualitative by design, adding to the difficulty of comparing or reproducing results.

It is noteworthy that most State surveys are conducted after on-the-ground activities have ceased. Thus, it is possible that water quality impacts could occur but stabilize prior to the site being evaluated.

Given the nature and limitations of the reported data, three important and consistent patterns emerge. First, BMPs are being implemented broadly across the South, and the rates of implementation, while subject to interpretation, appear to be generally high. Second, implementation of BMPs tends to be highest on public land, followed in descending order by forest industry, corporate nonindustrial, and private nonindustrial forest land. Third, forest management operations that involve advice and oversight by forestry professionals exhibit higher BMP implementation rates than operations not having that involvement.

On the whole, the State forestry agencies report increasing BMP implementation over time. They credit this improvement to the on-going efforts to educate those involved in forestry about BMPs and the benefits of BMPs, technical assistance, changing legislation in some of the States, increasing partnerships with forest industry, and increasing efforts of forest industry (including industry imposed penalties on noncomplying timber producers and forestry professionals) to get BMPs implemented.

These findings indicate that the current approach to achieving BMP implementation is having positive results, particularly on large ownerships. The challenge remains large and persistent, however, to achieve equal success on nonindustrial private tracts, given that they are owned by almost 5 million individuals (Health 1, Timber 2), and a relatively small percentage of such individuals who typically receive professional forestry assistance prior to treating their land (Chapter Socio-5).