Understanding Michigan nonindustrial private forest landowners attitudes and knowledge about forest management

Approximately one-fourth of the non-industrial private forestland (NIPF) owners in the state of Michigan, who collectively own approximately 50% of the private forested land, have conducted commercial timber harvest in recent years. Previous studies indicated that NIPFs preferred to manage their forest for a sustained yield of high-quality timber, but were limited to even-aged regeneration treatments or conversion for uneven-aged silviculture due to previous cuttings. Improved knowledge about NIPF’s intentions and forest management behavior could be useful for successful implementation of sustained yield management. This study’s objective was to identify more active NIPF’s attitudes towards timber management, their forest management practices and whether their forest management behavior leads or leads not to q management for sustained yield. Active NIPF’s intentions to harvest timber for biofuels and its suitability with NIPF’s forest management behavior will be discussed. Phone interviews of 30 NIPFs who have experience with commercial timber harvests were conducted between August and October 2011. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for identifying NIPF’s motivations, attitudes, forest management behavior and forestry related knowledge. Interviewees, whether consciously or not, tended to manage their land for a sustained yield and they would be willing to harvest timber for biofuels facility as long as it benefits landowners management goals.

Our Lives, Our Thoughts and Our Allegiance: New Immigrants and American Industry in 1914

Through comparative analysis of the immigrant labor forces at work in iron mining in northern Minnesota, coal mining in Illinois, and steel milling in the Calumet region of Chicago and Gary, this paper addresses the forms of social distance separating and marginalizing new immigrants from American society and trade unionism that existed in 1914, the year that marked the end point of mass immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe. The “new immigration” was a labor migration that congregated its subjects overwhelmingly in what were called "unskilled" or "semi-skilled" forms of labor. Skilled work was largely, with certain variations, the preserve of "American" or old immigrant workers. This labor gulf separating new immigrants and American workers was hardened by a spatial separateness. New immigrants often lived in what have been called industrial villages—the mining town or location, the factory neighborhood— striking in their isolation and insularity from mainstream society. This separateness and insularity became a major preoccupation for corporate managers, Progressive reformers, and for American trade unions as new immigrants began to engage in major labor struggles leading up to 1914. But among the three industries, only the union of coal miners, the United Mine Workers, enjoyed success in organizing the new immigrants. In the steel mills and the iron mines, the unions were either rooted out or failed to gain a foothold at all. The explanation for these differences is to be found in the different forms of industrial development among the industries studied.