An analysis of the timber situation in the United States: 1952 to 2050

USDA Forest Service - General Technical Report PNW

Volumn , Issue 560, 2003, Pages 1-254

  Haynes, Richard W ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Assessments; Demand; Management alternatives; Projections; Resource trends; RPA; Supply; Timber

Indexed keywords

COMMODITY; INVENTORY; TIMBER HARVESTING;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 33646991459     PISSN: 08874840     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (155)

1. Adair, C. 2000. Regional production and market outlook for structural panels and engineered wood products 2000-2005. Report E66. Tacoma, WA: APA-The Engineered Wood Association. 57 p.
2. Adams, D.; Alig, R.; Anderson, J. [et al.]. 1992. Future prospects for western Washington's timber supply. Institute of Forest Resources Contribution 74. Seattle, WA: University of Washington, College of Forest Resources. 201 p.
3. Adams, D.M.; Alig, R.J.; McCarl, B.A. [et al.]. 1996a. An analysis of the impacts of public timber harvest policies on private forest management in the U.S. Forest Science: 42(3): 343-358.
4. Adams, D.M.; Alig, R.J.; McCarl, B.A. [et al.]. 1996b. The forest and agricultural sector optimization model (FASOM): model structure and policy simulations. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-495. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 60 p.
5. Adams, D.M.; Boyd, R.; Angle, J. 1992. Evaluating the stability of softwood lumber demand elasticity by end-use sector: a stochastic parameter approach. Forest Science. 38(4): 825-841.
6. Adams, D.M.; Haynes, R.W. 1980. The softwood timber assessment market model: structure, projections, and policy simulations. Forest Science. Monograph No. 22. 62 p.
7. Adams, D.M.; Haynes, R.W. 1996. The 1993 timber assessment market model: structure, projections, and policy simulations. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-368. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 58 p.
8. Adams, D.M.; Haynes, R.W.; Dutrow, G.F. (et al.] 1982. Private investment in forest management and the long-term supply of timber. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 64(2): 232-241.
9. Ahn, S.; Plantinga, A.J.; Alig, R.J. 2001. Historical trends and projections of land use for the South-Central United States. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-530. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 20 p.
10. Ahn, S.; Plantinga, A.; Alig, R. 2002. Determinants and projections of land uses in the South Central U.S. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 26(2): 78-84.
11. Alig, R. 1985. Modeling area changes in forest ownerships and cover types in the Southeast. Res. Pap. RM-260. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 18 p.
12. Alig, R. 1990. Nonindustrial private forests: timber supply for an uncertain future. Western Wildlands. Fall: 11-14.
13. Alig, R. 2000. Where do we go from here? Preliminary scoping of research needs. In: Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L., eds. Proceedings, forest fragmentation 2000. Washington, DC: American Forests: 371-372.
14. Alig, R.; Adams, D.; Haynes, R. 1983. Long-range projection of forest area change: new approaches are needed. Journal of Forestry. 81(11): 723-727.
15. Alig, R.; Adams, D.; Haynes, R. [et al.]. 2001. Large-scale forest scenario analysis in the United States: projections of forest investment using a network of models. Silva Fennica. 35(3): 265-276.
16. Alig, R.; Adams, D.; McCarl, B. 1998a. Impacts of federal farm and conservation programs on the agriculture and forestry sections. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics. 30(2): 389-401.
17. Alig, R.; Benford, F.; Moulton, R.; Lee, L. 1999. Long-term projections of urban developed land changes in the United States. In: Delany, C.; Otte, K., eds. Keep America growing: unnumbered conference proceedings [CD ROM]. Washington, DC: America Farmland Trust: 124-138.
18. Alig, R.; Butler, B.; Swenson, J. 2000. Fragmentation and national trends in private forest lands: preliminary findings from the 2000 RPA assessment. In: Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L., eds. Proceedings, forest fragmentation 2000. Washington, DC: American Forests: 34-46.
19. Alig, R.; Dicks, M.; Moulton, R. 1998b. Land use dynamics involving timberland: recent trends in the U.S. South. In: Abt, K.; Abt, R., eds. Proceedings of SOFEW conference. Research Triangle Park, NC: North Carolina State University. 218 p.
20. Alig, R.; Healy, R. 1987. Urban and built-up land area changes in the United States: an empirical investigation of determinants. Land Economics. 63: 215-226.
21. Alig, R.; Mills, T.; Shackelford, R. 1980. Most soil bank plantings in the South have been retained; some need follow-up treatment. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 4(1): 60-64.
22. Alig, R.; Plantinga, A.; Ahn, S.; Kline, J. [N.d.]. Land-use changes and projections in the United States for the 2000 RPA assessment. Manuscript in preparation. On file with: R. Alig, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.
23. Alig, R.; Wyant, J. 1985. Projecting regional area changes in forestland cover in the U.S.A. Ecological Modeling. 29: 27-34.
24. Alig, R.J.; Hohenstein, W.G.; Murray, B.C.; Haight, R.G. 1990. Changes in area of timberland in the United States, 1952-2040, by ownership, forest type, region, and state. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-64. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 34 p.
25. American Forest & Paper Association [AF and PA]. 1999. AF and PA forest management intensity surveys. Unpublished report. [No pagination]. On file with: John Mills, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208-3890.
26. American Forest & Paper Association [AF and PA]. 2000. Wood statistical roundup. Washington, DC. Monthly.
27. American Forest & Paper Association [AF and PA]. 1991-2001. Paper, paperboard & wood pulp statistical summary. Washington, DC. Monthly.
28. American Pulpwood Association. 1999. Annual pulpwood statistics summary report 99-A-11. Rockville, MD. 23 p.
29. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics [ABARE]. 1999. Executive summary: a study on the global outlook for plantations. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia, Ministry of Forestry and Conservation. 12 p.
30. Barlow, S.; Munn, I.; Cleaves, D.; Evans, D. 1998. The effect of urban sprawl on timber harvesting. Journal of Forestry. 96: 10-14.
31. Best, C.; Wayburn, L.A. 2001. America's private forests: status and stewardship. Santa Rosa, CA: Island Press. 267 p.
32. Beuter, J.N.; Johnson, K.N.; Scheurman, H.L. 1976. Timber for Oregon's tomorrow, an analysis of reasonable possible occurrences. Res. Bull. 19, Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 111 p.
33. Binkley, C.S. 1999. Forestry in the next millennium: challenges and opportunities for the USDA Forest Service. Discussion Paper 99-15. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. 13 p.
34. Birch, T.W. 1996. Private forest-land owners of the United States. Resour. Bull. NE-134. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 44 p.
35. Bourke, I.J.; Leitch, J. 1998. Trade restrictions and their impact on international trade in forest products. Forestry Paper. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization, Forestry Department. [Pages unknown].
36. Brooks, D.J. 1993. U.S. forests in a global context. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-228. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 24 p.
37. Brooks, D.J.; Ferrante, J.A.; Haverkamp, J. [et al.]. 2001. Economic and environmental effects of accelerated tariff liberalization in the forest products sector: a study of the economic and environmental effects. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-517. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 70 p.
38. Brown, C. 2000. The global outlook for future wood supply from forest plantations. Working group paper GFPOS/WP/03. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Division, Forestry Policy and Planning Division. 146 p.
39. Burns, R.M.; Honkala, B.H., tech. coords. 1990a. Silvics of North America: 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 765 p.
40. Burns, R.M.; Honkala, B.H., tech. coords. 1990b. Silvics of North America: 2. Hardwoods. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 877 p.
41. Butler, B.; Alig, R. [N.d.]. Forest cover type changes in the United States: historical trends and projections to 2050. Manuscript in preparation. On file with: R. Alig, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331.
42. Calmels, P.; Buongiorno, J.; Zhang, D. 1990. PELPS II: a microcomputer price-endogenous linear programming system for economic modeling. R3477. Madison, WI: Department of Forestry, University of Wisconsin. 40 p.
43. Canadian Forest Service. 1999. The state of Canada's forests 1998-1999. Ottawa, ON: Natural Resources Canada. 112 p.
44. Clawson, M. 1979. Forests in the long sweep of American history. Science. 204: 1168-1174.
45. Council of Economic Advisors. 2000. Economic report of the President. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 284 p. [plus appendices].
46. Day, J.C. 1996. Population projections of the United States by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: 1995 to 2050. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census: 25-1130.
47. DeCoster, L. 2000. Summary of the fragmentation 2000 conference: how forests are being nibbled to death by DUC's, and what to do about it. In: Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L., eds. Proceedings, forest fragmentation 2000. Washington, DC: American Forests: 358-359.
48. Fairbanks, R.; Green, J. 2001. Zero cut: the wrong solution. Forest Magazine. Eugene, OR: Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. 3(1): 45-48.
49. Field, B.C. 1994. Environmental economics: an introduction. New York: McGraw Hill. 482 p.
50. Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO]. 2001a. Forest products 1998. Forestry Series 33. Statistics series 155. Rome, Italy: United Nations. 243 p.
51. Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO]. 2001b. State of the world's forests. Rome, Italy: United Nations. 181 p.
52. Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 [RPA]; 16 U.S.C. 1601 (note).
53. Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team [FEMAT]. 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S. Department of the Interior [et al.]. [irregular pagination].
54. Forest Resources Association. 2001. Annual pulpwood statistics summary report, 1996-2000. Report 01-A-7. Rockville, MD. 27 p.
55. Gardner-Outlaw, T.; Engelman, R. 1999. Forest futures. Washington, DC: Population Action International. 68 p.
56. Gilless, J.K.; Buongiorno, J. 1985. PELPS: price-endogenous linear programming system for economic modeling. R3329. Madison, WI: Department of Forestry, University of Wisconsin. 34 p.
57. Greene, J.L.; Siegel, W.C. 1994. The status and impact of state and local regulation on private timber supply. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-255. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 22 p.
58. Hann, W.J.; Jones, J.L.; Karl, M.G. [et al.]. 1997. Landscape dynamics of the basin. In: Quigley, TM.; Arbelbide, S.J., tech. eds. An assessment of ecosystem components in the interior Columbia basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 337-1055. Vol. 2.
59. Hardie, I.; Parks, P. 1997. Land use with heterogenous land quality: an application of an area base model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 79: 299-310.
60. Haynes, R.W., coord. 1990. An analysis of the timber situation in the United States: 1989-2040. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-199. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 286 p.
61. Haynes, R.W. 1993. Forestry sector analysis for developing countries: issues and methods. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-314. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 47 p.
62. Haynes, R.W. 1999. Chip prices as a proxy for nonsawtimber prices in the Pacific Northwest. Res. Note PNW-RN-537. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 25 p.
63. Haynes, R.W.; Adams, D.M. 1985. Simulations of the effects of alternative assumptions on demand-supply determinants on the timber situation in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Resources Economics Research. 113 p.
64. Haynes, R.W.; Adams, D.M.; Mills, J.R. 1995. The 1993 RPA timber assessment update. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-259. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 66 p.
65. Haynes, R.W.; Horne, A.L. 1997. Economic assessment of the interior Columbia basin. In: Quigley, T.M.; Arbelbide, S.J., tech. eds. 1997. An assessment of ecosystem components in the interior Columbia basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 1715-1869. Vol. 4 (Quigley, T.M., tech. ed.; The Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: scientific assessment).
66. Haynes, R.W.; Quigley, T.M. 2001. Broad-scale consequences of land management: Columbia basin example. Journal of Forest Ecology and Management. 153: 179-188.
67. Helms, J.A., ed. 1998. The dictionary of forestry. Bethesda, MD: Society of American Foresters. 210 p.
68. Hernandez, GA.; Moulton, R.J. 1999. Tree planting in the United States-1997. Tree Planters' Notes. 49(1): 1-15.
69. Hough, F.B. 1878. Report upon forestry. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 650 p.
70. Howard, J.L. 2001. U.S. timber production, trade, consumption, and price statistics 1965-1999. Res. Pap. FPL-RP-595. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 90 p.
71. Ince, P.J. 1994. Recycling and long-range timber outlook. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-242. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 23 p.
72. Ince, P.J. 1999. Long-range outlook for U.S. paper and paperboard demand, technology, and fiber supply-demand equilibria. In: Proceedings of the Society of American Foresters 1998 national convention. Bethesda, MD: Society of American Foresters: 330-343.
73. Ingram, D.; Ince, P.J.; Mehlberg, R.L. 1999. United States pulpwood receipts, softwood and hardwood, roundwood and residues. Gen. Tech. Rep. FPL-GTR-115. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 34 p.
74. Johnson, K.N.; Scheurman, H.L. 1977. Techniques for prescribing optimal timber harvest and investment under different objectives. Forest Science Monograph. 18 p.
75. Kallio, M.; Dykstra, D.P.; Binkley, C.S. 1987. The global forest sector: an analytical perspective. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 703 p.
76. Kline, J.; Alig, R. 1998. Does land use planning slow the conversion of forest and farm land? Growth and Change. 30: 3-22.
77. Kline, J.; Benford, F.; Swenson, J. 2000. Historic and projected trends in private forest land in the western U.S. In: Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L., eds. Proceedings, forest fragmentation 2000. Washington, DC: American Forests: 73-79.
78. Kline, J.D.; Alig; R.J. 2001. A spatial model for land use change for western Oregon and western Washington. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-528. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 24 p.
79. Knight, H. 1973. The pine decline. Journal of Forestry. 85(1): 25-28.
80. Koch, P. 1992. Wood versus nonwood materials in United States residential construction-some energy-related global implications. Forest Products Journal. 42(5): 31-42.
81. Londo, A. 2000. Effects of fragmentation on forest management for Mississippi forest landowners. In: Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L., eds. Proceedings, forest fragmentation 2000. Washington, DC: American Forests: 116-124.
82. Lowell, E.C.; Willits, S.A.; Krahmer, R.L. 1992. Deterioration of fire-killed and fire damaged timber in the western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-292. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 27 p.
83. Luppold, G.W.; Dempsey, P.G. 1989. New estimates of central and eastern U.S. hardwood lumber production. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 6(3): 120-123.
84. Marcin, T.C. 1972. Projections of demand for housing by type of unit and region. Agric. Handb. 428. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 76 p.
85. Marsh, G.P. 1864. Man and nature, or physical geography as modified by human action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 472 p.
86. Mauldin, T.; Plantinga, A.; Alig, R. 1999a. Determinants of land use in Maine with projections to 2050. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. 16(2): 82-88.
87. Mauldin, T.; Plantinga, A.; Alig, R. 1999b. Land use in the Lake States region: an analysis of past trends and projections of future changes. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-519. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 22 p.
88. McKeever, D.; Howard, J.L. 1995. Value of timber and agriculture in the United States, 1991. Forest Products Journal. 46(10): 45-50.
89. McKeever, D.B. 2002. Domestic market activity in solid wood products. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-524. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 76 p.
90. Mills, J.; Kincaid, J. 1992. The aggregate timberland analysis system-ATLAS: a comprehensive timber projection model. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-281. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 160 p.
91. Mills, J.; Zhou, X. 2003. Projecting national forest inventories for the 2000 RPA timber assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-568. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 58 p.
92. Mills, J.R. 1989. Inventory, growth, and management assumptions for the 1989 RPA timber assessment. Part I: The South and Part II: The North and West. Unpublished document. 606 p. On file with: John Mills, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890,.Portland, OR 97208-3890.
93. Mills, J.R. 1990. Developing ATLAS growth parameters from forest inventory plots. In: Proceedings, state of the art methodology of forest inventory symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-263. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 112-118.
94. Mills, J.R. 1993. Inventory, growth, and management assumptions for the 1993 RPA timber assessment update. Unpublished document. 531 p. On file with: John Mills, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208-3890.
95. Moffat, S.; Cubbage, F.; Cascio, A.; Sheffield, R. 1998a. Estimations of future forest management intensity on NIPF lands in the South: results of the Southern State Foresters' survey. Working Paper Series, SOFAC Rep. 14. Research Triangle Park, NC: The Southern Forest Resource Assessment Consortium. 7 p. [plus appendices[.
96. Moffat, S.; Cubbage, F.; Cascio, A.; Sheffield, R. 1998b. The future of forest management on NIPF lands in the South: results of an expert opinion survey. In: Abt, K.; Abt, R., eds. Proceedings of SOFEW conference. Research Triangle Park, NC: North Carolina State University: 17-24.
97. Montgomery, C.A. 2001. The future of housing in the United States: an econometric model and long-term predictions for the 2000 RPA timber assessment. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-531. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 38 p.
98. Montreal Process Technical Advisory Committee. 2000. Technical notes, Criteria 1-6. http://www.mpci.org/meetings/tac-mexico/tn1-6_e.html#s3 (June 2001).
99. Munn, I.A.; Barlow, S.A.; Evans, D.L.; Cleaves, D. 2002. Urbanization's impact on timber harvesting in the south-central United States. Journal of Environmental Management. 64(1): 65-76.
100. National Forest Management Act of 1976 [NFMA]; Act of October 22, 1976; 16 U.S.C. 1600.
101. National Research Council [NRC]. 2000. Ecological indicators for the Nation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 180 p.
102. Niemi, E.; Fifield, A. 2000. Seeing the forests for their green. Eugene, OR: ECONorthwest; Washington, DC: Sierra Club. 31 p.
103. Northern Forest Lands Council. 1994. Finding common ground: conserving the northern forest: the recommendations of the Northern Forest Lands Council. Concord, NH. 101 p.
104. Parks, P.; Murray, B. 1994. Land attributes and land allocation: nonindustrial forest use in the Pacific Northwest. Forest Science. 40: 558-575.
105. Plantinga, A.; Mauldin, T.; Alig, R. 1999. Land use in Maine: determinants of past trends and projections of future changes. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-511. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 20 p.
106. Powell, D.S.; Faulkner, J.L.; Darr, D.R. [et al.]. 1993. Forest resources of the United States, 1992. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-234. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 132 p. + map [revised, June 1994].
107. Random Lengths. 1998. Forest product market prices and statistics. Yearbook. Eugene, OR: Random Lengths Publications, Inc. 250 p.
108. Row, C. 1978. Economies of tract size in timber growing. Journal of Forestry. 76(9): 576-579.
109. Sample, V.A. 2001. Sustainable forestry and biodiversity conservation: toward a new consensus. Discuss. Pap. DP-12-01. Washington, DC: Pinchot Institute for Conservation. 10 p.
110. st century. In: Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L., eds. Proceedings, forest fragmentation 2000. Washington, DC: American Forests: 53-59.
111. Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L. 1997. Public programs for private forestry: a reader on programs and options. Washington, DC: American Forests. [Pages unknown].
112. Schmidt, T.; McWilliams, W. 2000. Current status and trends of privately owned northern U.S. timberlands. In: Sampson, N.; DeCoster, L.; eds. Proceedings, forest fragmentation 2000. Washington, DC: American Forests: 64-72.
113. Schwartz, P. 1991. The art of the long view: planning for the future in an uncertain world. New York: Doubleday. 258 p.
114. Sendak, P. 1994. Northeastern regional stumpage prices: 1961-91. Res. Pap. NE-683. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 6 p.
115. Siry, J. 1998. Southern plantation pine yield tables. SOFAC (The Southern Forest Resources Assessment Consortium) report. Unpublished document. 5 p. [plus appendices]. On file with: John Mills, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forest Sciences Laboratory, P.O. Box 3890, Portland, OR 97208-3890.
116. Smith, W.B.; Vissage, J.S.; Sheffield, R.; Darr, D.R. 2001. Forest resources of the United States, 1997, Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-219. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Services, North Central Research Station. 109 p.
117. Spelter, H. 1984. Price elasticities for softwood plywood and structural particleboard in the United States. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 14: 528-535.
118. Spelter, H. 1985. A product diffusion approach to modeling softwood lumber demand. Forest Science. 31(3): 685-700.
119. Spelter, H. 1992. Technology-driven substitution in the forest sector: the variable price elasticity model revisited. In: Lönnsted, L., ed. Forest sector analysis. Proceedings P06.02 FORESEA, IUFRO Centennial 1992. Uppsala, Sweden: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Forest-Industry-Market Studies: 24-29.
120. Starr, F., Jr. 1866. American forests: their destruction and preservation. Report of the Commissioner of Agriculture, 1865. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office: 210-234.
121. Strigel, M.; Meine, C., eds. 2001. Report of the Intelligent Consumption Project: a collaborative project of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin. 30 p.
122. Tedder, P.L.; LaMont, R.N.; Kincald, J.C. 1987. The timber resource inventory model (TRIM): a projection model for timber supply and policy analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-202. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 82 p.
123. Tomberlin, D.; Buongiorno, J.; Brooks, D. 1998. Trade, forestry and the environment: a review. Journal of Forest Economics. 4(3): 177-206.
124. Turner, M.G. 1989. Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. Annual Review of Ecological Systems. 20: 171-197.
125. Ulrich, A. 1989. U.S. timber production, trade, consumption and price statistics, 1950-1987. Misc. Publ. 1471. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 77 p.
126. United Nations. 1992. Earth summit, agenda 21: the United Nations programme of action from Rio. New York: United Nations, Department of Public Information. 294 p.
127. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE), ed. 2000. Forest resources of Europe, CIS, North America, Australia, Japan and New Zealand (industrialized temperate /boreal countries). New York: United Nations Publications: [Pages unknown].
128. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. 1995. Major uses of land in the United States, 1992. ERS Agric. Econ. Rep. 723. Washington, DC: 39 p.
129. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. 2000. Agricultural outlook. ERS Rep. AO-276. Washington, DC: Economic Research Service, Agriculture Outlook. [Pages unknown].
130. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1958. Timber resources for America's future. For. Resour. Rep. 14. Washington, DC. 713 p.
131. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1965. Timber trends in the United States. For. Resour. Rep. 17. Washington, DC. 235 p.
132. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1974. The outlook for timber in the United States. For. Resour. Rep. 20. Washington, DC. 367 p.
133. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1982. An analysis of the timber situation in the United States 1952-2030. For. Resour. Rep. 23. Washington, DC. 499 p.
134. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1988. The South's fourth forest: alternatives for the future. For. Resour. Rep. 24. Washington, DC. 512 p.
135. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2001. 2000 RPA assessment of forest and range lands. FS-687. Washington, DC. 78 p.
136. th Street, at Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20250.
137. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2001. The 1997 national resource inventory in the United States (revised). Unnumbered Report. Washington, DC. [Pages unknown].
138. U.S. Department of Commerce. 1958-96. Lumber production and mill stocks. Curr. Ind. Rep. Ser. MA-24T. Washington, DC. Annual.
139. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1997. Projections of the population of the United States: 1995 to 2010. Report P25-1129. Washington, DC. [Pages unknown].
140. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. 1997. Annual energy outlook, 1998. DOE/EIA-0383(98). Washington, DC. 223 p.
141. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1958-96. Producer prices and price indexes. Washington, DC. Monthly and annual.
142. Verkaik, E.; Nabuurs, G.J. 2000. Wood production potentials of Fenno-Scandinavian forests under nature-oriented management. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research. 15: 445-454.
143. Vesterby, M.; Heimlich, R.; Krupa, K. 1994. Urbanization of rural land in the United States. Agric. Econ. Rep. 673. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. 36 p.
144. Victor, D.G.; Ausubel, J.H. 2000. Restoring the forests. Foreign Affairs. 79(6): 127-144.
145. Waddell, K.L.; Oswald, D.D.; Powell, D.S. 1989. Forest statistics of the United States, 1987. Resour. Bull. PNW-RB-168. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 106 p.
146. Wear, D.; Lui, R.; Foreman, J.; Sheffield, R. 1999. The effects of population growth on timber management and inventories in Virginia. Forest Ecology and Management. 118(1-3): 107-115.
147. Western Wood Products Association [WWPA]. 1999. 1999 statistical yearbook of the western lumber industry. Portland, OR. 36 p.
148. Western Wood Products Association [WWPA]. 1992-98. Statistical yearbook of the western lumber industry. Portland, OR. [Pagination varies]. Annual.
149. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. 400 p.
150. Zhang, Y. 1995. Demand for paper and paperboard products in the United States: econometric models and forecasts. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison. 158 p. Ph.D. dissertation.
151. Zhang, Y.; Buongiorno, J. 1997. Communication media and demand for printing and publishing papers in the United States. Forest Science. 43(3): 362-377.
152. Zhang, D.; Buongiorno, J.; Ince, P. 1993. PELPS III: a microcomputer price endogenous linear programming system for economic modeling: version 1.0. Res. Pap. FPL-526. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 43 p.
153. Zhang, D.; Buongiorno, J.; Ince, P.J. 1996. A recursive linear programming analysis of the future of the pulp and paper industry in the United States: changes in supplies and demands, and the effects of recycling. Annals of Operations Research. 68: 109-139.
154. Zhu, Z.; Evans, D.L. 1994. US forest types and predicted percent forest cover from AVHRR data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 60(5): 525-531.
155. Zinkhan, C. 1993. Timberland investment management organizations and other participants in forest asset markets: a survey. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 17(1): 32-38.