Trends in Tennessee Forest Lands andTrends in Tennessee Forest Lands and
Real Estate Values
Don Hodges & Dave OstermeierDon Hodges & Dave OstermeierDon Hodges & Dave OstermeierDon Hodges & Dave OstermeierThe University of TennesseeThe University of Tennessee
Natural Resource Policy CenterNatural Resource Policy CenterDepartment of Forestry, Wildlife & FisheriesDepartment of Forestry, Wildlife & Fisheries
Tennessee Farmland Legacy ConferenceTennessee Farmland Legacy ConferenceMontgomery Bell State Park Montgomery Bell State Park
October 9October 9‐‐10, 200810, 2008
MORE PEOPLE, MORE CROWDS MORE PEOPLE, MORE CROWDS
CHANGES IN LAND VALUES & PARCEL NUMBERS CHANGES IN LAND VALUES & PARCEL NUMBERS IN METRO COUNTIESIN METRO COUNTIES
NORTHERN PLATEAU CASE STUDYNORTHERN PLATEAU CASE STUDY
IMPLICATIONS IMPLICATIONS
8.00
POPULATION GROWTH AND DENSITY PROJECTIONSPOPULATION GROWTH AND DENSITY PROJECTIONS
7.00
7.50
6
6.50
7.00
5.50
6.00
ACRES/RESIDENT
POPULATION (in millions)
4.50
5.00
3.50
4.00
3.002000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
SOURCE: UT CENTER FOR BUSINESS AD ECONOMIC RESEARCH 2006
Change in Forest ParcelizationChange in Forest Parcelization
PeriodNumber of
PatchesAvg. patch
size (ac)Patch Density
(#/100ac)Period Patches size (ac) (#/100ac)
1992 2617 143.35 0.70
2001 4488 64.62 1.55
Change (%) 71.49 -54.92 122.09
KNOXVILLEKNOXVILLE CHATTANOOGACHATTANOOGA NASHVILLENASHVILLE MEMPHISMEMPHISBLOUNT BRADLEY BEDFORD FAYETTEJEFFERSON MARION CHEATHAM HAYWOODLOUDON SEQUATCHIE SUMNER TIPTONQSEVIER WILLIAMSON
WILSON
CHANGE IN APPRAISED CHANGE IN APPRAISED LAND VALUE LAND VALUE BY BY METROPOLITAN METROPOLITAN REGIONREGION
$14,000,000,000
$10,000,000,000
$12,000,000,000
$8,000,000,000
2001 VALUE
2007 VALUE
$4,000,000,000
$6,000,000,000
$2,000,000,000
$0KNOXVILLE CHATTANOOGA NASHVILLE MEMPHIS
SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008 SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008
CHANGE IN PARCEL NUMBERS BY CHANGE IN PARCEL NUMBERS BY METROPOLITAN REGIONMETROPOLITAN REGION
250,000
200,000
150,000
2001 PARCELS
2007 PARCELS
100,000
50,000
‐KNOXVILLE CHATTANOOGA NASHVILLE MEMPHIS
SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008 SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008
CHANGE IN AGRICULTURAL VALUE PER PARCELCHANGE IN AGRICULTURAL VALUE PER PARCEL
$350,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$250,000
2001 VALUE
2007 VALUE
$150,000
$50,000
$100,000
$0KNOXVILLE CHATTANOOGA NASHVILLE MEMPHIS
SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008 SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008
CHANGE IN FOREST VALUE BY CHANGE IN FOREST VALUE BY PARCELPARCEL
$140,000
$160,000
$120,000
$80,000
$100,000
2001 VALUE
2007 VALUE
$40 000
$60,000
$20,000
$40,000
$0KNOXVILLE CHATTANOOGA NASHVILLE
SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008 SOURCE: TENNESSEE PROPERTY TAX DIVSION, 2008
NORTHERN CUMBERLAND PLATEAUNORTHERN CUMBERLAND PLATEAUNORTHERN CUMBERLAND PLATEAUNORTHERN CUMBERLAND PLATEAU
CASE STUDYCASE STUDYCASE STUDYCASE STUDY
ACRES SOLD IN CUMBERLAND PLATEAU COUNTIES(developed)
12000
ES
8000
10000
AC
R
4000
6000 1985-19901991-19951996-2000
0
2000 2001-2005
COUNTY
ACRES SOLD IN CUMBERLAND PLATEAU COUNTIES(undeveloped)(undeveloped)
1800020000
ES 12000140001600018000
AC
R
60008000
10000 1985-19901991-19951996-2000
020004000 2001-2005
COUNTY
Subdivision Parcels vs. Non-Subdivision Parcels Sold1985 - 2005
25000
1985 2005
20000
Pa
rcel
s So
ld
15000
Nu
mb
er o
f P
Parcels sold not within a subdivision
5000
10000 Parcels sold within a subdivision
0
5000
1985-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005
Years
Place of Residence of PurchasersPlace of Residence of PurchasersN th C b l d Pl t P lN th C b l d Pl t P l
2000
Northern Cumberland Plateau ParcelsNorthern Cumberland Plateau Parcels
1400
1600
1800
yers
South
800
1000
1200
mb
er o
f B
uy South
Northeast
Mid-central
California
200
400
600
Nu
m California
Florida
0
1985 - 19901991 - 1995
1996 -2000 2001 -2000 2001 -
2005
Comparing the Forest Coverage
Land Use Change & Loss of Forest Habitat
Implications of Parcelization
•Land Use Change & Loss of Forest Habitat•Decrease in Timber Harvesting from these lands•Change in Rural Character •Change in Ecosystem Services
• Decline in Water Quality & Quantity• Impacts on Aquatic Systemsp q y
Implications of Parcelization
•Importance of Planning at Local Levels
Implications of Parcelization
•What to develop and what to sustain?•New Links: Landowners and Service Agencies•New Partners & Networks
• New Linkages Among State/Fed Agencies• EC&D, Local Planning Assistance• Institute for Public Service, MTAS, CTAS, ,• Development Districts• TDA, Division of Forestry• TN Wildlife Resources Agency• Natural Resource Conservation Service• Univ of TN: Research & Extension
• New Linkages Between City/County Officials and State & Fed Agencies, Universities