U.S. Timber Production, Trade, Consumption and Price Statistics 1965-2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report presents annual data but is published every 2 years. The data present current and historical information on the production, trade, consumption, and prices of timber products in the United States. The report focuses on national statistics, but includes some data for individual states and regions and for Canada. The data were collected from industry trade associations and government agencies. They are intended for use by forest land managers, forest industries, trade associations, forestry schools, renewable resource organizations, individuals in the major timber producing and consuming countries of the world, and the general public. A major use of the data is tracking industry production and consumption trends over time. One of the major shifts that occurred in the wood-using industry over the past 5 years is that both production and consumption of roundwood per capita decreased. The consumption of products per capita has also undergone a gradual decrease over the past 5 years. Because of increased paper recycling and increased processing efficiency, the consumption per capita in roundwood equivalent has decreased since about 1987 from 83 ft3 to 72 ft3 per capita. But over the most recent time period, the decline in production per capita is due to the U.S. economic weakness that severely impacted wood markets. In the 1960s and 1970s, consumption averaged 65 ft3 per capita before increasing and peaking in 1986 to 83 ft3 per capita. Since 2005, consumption per capita has continued to steadily decrease and reached 41 ft3 in 2009 remaining unchanged in 2010. Per capita consumption in 2011 increased to 47 ft3 the first increase since 2005. Since 2005, paper consumption fell from 41 thousand tons to 34 thousand tons in 2011. Since 2005, newsprint declined from 5.4 million tons to 3.3 million tons and printing and writing paper fell from 24.5 million tons to 19.3 million tons. Another shift occurring over the past several years is increased emphasis on wood energy use, which has shown wide fluctuations over the last decade and into 2011.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.022 |
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".