Effects of Population Pressures on Wood Procurement and Logging Opportunities in Northern New England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The availability of raw material for harvest and use by wood-consuming mills in northern New England is a concern of the region's forest products community. Shifting populations, as well as shifting priorities for and values of land uses in the region, have placed pressures on landowners to subdivide and sell their forestland, resulting in concern about future wood supply in some areas of the region. Wood procurement managers and professional loggers, key participants in supplying raw material to wood-consuming mills, were surveyed to better understand the relationships between phenomena such as land development and the availability of logging and wood procurement opportunities. Results suggested concern about sprawl among approximately one-half of the logger respondents in the region, particularly in New Hampshire, where 60% of respondents indicated that there will be less logging in their area in 10 years because of sprawl. Three-quarters of procurement managers said that uncertainty about the future of the region's wood supply was an important or very important barrier to maintaining or expanding their businesses, and over one-half of respondents from New Hampshire indicated that too much development was a barrier. In addition, sawmills receiving at least one-half of their raw material from nonindustrial private forests were more concerned about their future wood supply than those that did not. However, stumpage prices and regulations were cited as important factors affecting mills' wood supplies more often than factors related to population pressures, such as sprawl, development, and shrinking woodlot sizes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".