Can Hybrid Poplar Plantations Reduce the Cost of Achieving Caribou Conservation Goals?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the role hybrid poplar may play in reducing the cost of achieving self-sustaining status in herds of boreal caribou, an ecotype of woodland caribou, Rangifer tarandus caribou found in northeast Alberta. Boreal caribou are currently listed as threatened both provincially in Alberta and federally in Canada. As hybrid poplar has a short-rotation and high yields, incorporating their use as a form of intensive forest management might reduce the pressure to harvest in the extensively managed forest which contains caribou habitat. A timber supply optimization model is developed which incorporates both timber values and the rate of change in caribou populations. As regulations exist which would restrict the use of hybrid poplar on public land, several alternative policy scenarios that relax these regulations are developed. The timber supply model is used to analyze the impact that each alternative policy will have on the net present value of a forestry firm, rates of caribou population change, and the cost of increasing the those rates to a sustained level. The results could contribute to policy discussion surrounding the use of hybrid poplar in Alberta.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".