Effects of diameter-limit by-laws on forestry practices, economics, and regional wood supply for private woodlands in southwestern Ontario
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The agriculturally dominated Counties of Huron and Perth in southwestern Ontario regulate forest harvesting on private land through diameter-limit-based tree conservation by-laws. The rates of harvesting, along with the volume and value of timber sales and the type and quantity of tree marking were examined for the years 1997 to 1999. Although these harvests may form an important part of periodic farm income, at only 13% forest cover, these landscapes maybe further degraded by unsustainable forest harvesting practices. Based on the three study years, the mean annual area of forest harvested was found to be 4.4% of the total private forest landbase. The mean volume harvested from upland and lowland deciduous forest was 4666 and 6148 fbm/ha, respectively. Over-harvesting under a diameter-limit or hybrid method occurred in 8% of woodlot area with removal rates in excess of 10 000 fbm/ha. The most severe over-harvesting disproportionately targeted lowland woodlots, possibly compromising the ecological health of these often sensitive areas. Sugar maple, red/silver maple and ash were most commonly harvested at 33%, 31% and 21% of total species volume, respectively. On average, for standing timber, landowners received $680/Mfbm in the upland hardwood forests and $281/Mfbm in the lowland hardwood forests. On an area basis, mean price paid was $3680/ha and $1956/ha respectively on upland and lowland forests. Only 8% of the private land was harvested using single-tree selection or stand improvement (92% harvest was diameter-limit or a hybrid of same). Using a simple model, we found that woodlot owners comprising at least 74% of private woodland area would need to participate in forest harvesting in order to maintain the 1997 to 1999 partial harvest area rate of 2349 ha/yr. This rate may not be sustainable, given poor forest conditions in some areas, past management practices and a reduction in landowners interested in forest harvesting. Improvements are needed to bring the level of good forestry practice up by 62% to meet the rates that were being performed under pre-1994, free, provincial government private land forestry programs. Key words: private land forestry, forest harvesting, forest conservation by-laws, sustainable forest management, diameterlimit harvest, private woodlots
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».