Huh, here I was thinking if you were a local of the correct climate you could buy the land they grow on and get the psychological benefit of knowing you were preserving them in the meantime and/or sustainably harvesting. But it sounds like regulation, or rather the possibility of regulation, might lead people to cut them down as quickly as possible. Ironic.
The correct climate for most of these tends to be in the developing world, and the locals are poor. If the land owner is poor but virtuous, his more desparate neighbours might just poach from him.
One could try planting some of these trees further north of their traditional range, since that's a thing nowadays-- I doubt the feds would mind one bit if someone planted a stand of
Lingum Vitae in California.(It used to be considered a strategic material, after all; over-harvesting during WWII is probably what's done most of the damage, in that particular case.) Be prepared to wait a few decades, though.
Thinking about regular timberland, this is just off the top of my head, but what about technological innovations that would make us less dependent on trees? Like the rise of paperless offices or, more impactful probably, the invention of more environmentally friendly or cheaper or recycled building materials? Plus more extreme weather patterns that might negatively effect the "crop" in ways impossible to predict over the timeframe.
Paper and building materials are mostly cheap, fast growing plantation pine. Innovations in this field wouldn't affect a small-business wood-lot, because you'd be insane to try and compete in that market. Forest is an incredibly resilient sort of ecosystem: this continent is (or was) forested from the gulf of Mexico up to the James Bay (southern tip of Hudson's bay, i.e., the arctic ocean) coast. Bad years might slow growth, but unless you've got yourself a bunch of pine for beetles to much on (and you don't want pine), I think you can weather whatever's coming. Just help succession along by introducing species from further south, since their ranges have all been moving north of late.
Personally I would be interested in purchasing land for recreational or preservation purposes and it would be nice to know more about the timber options just as a way to cover the property tax costs. Since several people have mentioned it here, anyone have any pointers to a good resource to learn more? And probably ultimately convince myself that it's a crazy stupid idea?
This seemed like a decent book to me, but I wasn't reading it to implement. You should probably get a more specialised resource based on what biome you're in, though; a boreal forest will be managed very differently from the deciduous hardwoods you get further south, or the temparate rainforests of the west coast.
If you have a plot with big, old oaks and can link up with a fellow with a bandsaw mini-mill, the property should have no trouble paying its taxes just from deadwood: large boards of quarter-sawn oak are very desirable to just about any fine woodworker.
If you're further north and find a plot with many maples, maybe consider a sugarbush-- but be warned! The southern fringe of workability is moving north as the climate warms.
If your region is mostly pine, I think you can forget about it. Pine is cheap, tasty to beetles, etc.
Ja, I have been thinking about this. How'd you guess?