The economics of site preparation and the impacts of current forest policy: evidence from central British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A trend in forestry is to move away from intensive stand establishment practices in favor of prescriptions that are lighter on the land. This study examined the condition and projected yields of nine different site preparation treatments on two high-elevation sites in central British Columbia. Treatments included the following: raw planting (i.e., no site preparation); scalping; mounding; chemical site preparation; chemical brushing; and combinations of mounding and chemical treatments. All treatments were manually planted with 2+1 bare-root interior spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss × Picea engelmannii Parry ex Engelm.) seedlings. By age 15, trees growing on prepared sites had significantly greater survival, larger stem diameters, and taller tree heights than did trees that were raw planted as seedlings. Moreover, site preparation generally led to earlier and less costly compliance with mandatory reforestation requirements. Growth and yield simulations predicted raw-planted timber volumes that were just 33%51% of the volumes in the most productive treatments. Financial returns varied as well. Site preparation typically resulted in larger land expectation values than that resulting from raw planting; however, the results were sensitive to rotation length and discount rate. Collectively, these results suggest that moderate investments in site preparation may lead to a more profitable allocation of regeneration resources and a greater future timber supply.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".