LOSS AND ABANDONMENT OF CLEARED FARM LAND IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES¹

Abstract

The loss and abandonment of agricultural land in thirty-one states of the eastern United States has been more widespread than is commonly recognized. Changes in the acreage of cleared farm land provide a better indication of farm land loss and abandonment than changes in the total acreage of farm land, because of geographical and historical variations in the acreage of farm woodland. Eight areas in the East experienced especially heavy losses of cleared farm land between 1910 and 1959. No single statistical indicator provides a satisfactory explanation of the complex geographical patterns of loss and abandonment. Although urban expansion is a major cause for the permanent loss of cleared farm land, and despite its importance on the fringes of metropolitan areas, it is but one of many factors which influence loss and abandonment. Strip mining and the loss of a locally dominant crop have been important factors in certain areas, The Soil Bank program has had its greatest impact upon land of intermediate quality. Land acquisition by forest industry companies has borne little relationship to the loss and abandonment of farm land. In the East as a whole it appears that physical hindrances to effective agriculture have been the most important factor influencing the loss and abandonment of cleared farm land.HE frontier tradition of taming the wilder-

Soil Carbon Sequestration and Land-Use Change: Processes and Potential

“…One hypothesis that the information presented here can address is that the inferred northern hemisphere terrestrial sink is related to land-use change over the past 50 years. Hart (1968) reported that over the 1950s 27 3 10 6 ha of farmland was abandoned in the eastern United States. The amount of land in the U.S. reforested or afforested in the 1980s is reported in Winjum et al (1990) as 12 3 10 6 ha.…”

Reconstructed historical land cover and biophysical parameters for studies of land‐atmosphere interactions within the eastern United States

“…The Figure 5. Suitability of relief and soil for crops for a subset of the eastern United States from Hart [1968] showing crop suitability categories that include very favorable, medium favorable, and unfavorable conditions for crops plus steep and rocky, poorly drained, and swamps and marshes categories. Given caveats for wetlands conversion in the 19th and 20th centuries, the 1992 land cover patterns for the regrowing forest, mixed agriculture, and remaining wetlands generally correspond in firstorder approximation to the simplified land use suitability analysis that incorporates regional climate, topography, and soil constraints.…”

“…If the artificial drainage of wetlands for agriculture is considered, the suitability of relief and soil for crops map ( Figure 5) from Hart [1968] and Barnes and Marschner [1958] represents a first-order land use suitability analysis to help understand how the recent patterns have evolved over the past century. Figure 5 incorporates regional climate, topography, and soil as determinants of generalized land resource areas with emphasis on the favorability of land for crops [Barnes and Marschner, 1958].…”

“…The intensive and secondary agricultural production areas in 1992 (Figure 4c) generally correspond to the very favorable and medium favorable cropland suitability categories. The less favorable crop suitability categories were associated with low economic returns and abandoned farmland that reverted to forest or land that was placed in conservation reserve programs [Hart, 1968;USDA, 2000]. According to Figures 4a and 5, the 1992 forest was generally associated with the less suitable land categories for crops throughout the eastern United States.…”

“…With fluctuations in crop prices, changes in labor markets, and competition with farm products from other regions, farm abandonment continued throughout the East [Hart, 1968;Williams, 1989]. Efforts to promote forest regrowth received support from an environmental conservation movement that began in the 1880s, motivated by concerns about the negative consequences of land use change, specifically land and water resource degradation associated with deforestation and poor farming practices.…”