Optimal zoning of forested land considering the contribution of exotic plantations

Mathematical and Computational Forestry and Natural-Resource Sciences

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 92-104

  Anderson, Jay A ^a   Armstrong, Glen W ^a   Luckert, Martin K ^a   Adamowicz, Wiktor L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Hybrid poplar; Timber supply; Triad

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; LAND USE; LINEAR PROGRAMMING; TIMBER; ZONING;

ECOLOGICAL PROTECTION; HYBRID POPLAR; LINEAR PROGRAMMING MODELS; NET PRESENT VALUE; OPTIMAL FOREST MANAGEMENTS; SPATIAL ALLOCATION; TIMBER SUPPLY; TRIAD;

FORESTRY;

FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY POLICY; LAND USE PLANNING; LINEAR PROGRAMING; PLANTATION FORESTRY; PROFITABILITY; TIMBER; ZONING POLICY;

E I S; FORESTRY; OPTIMIZATION; POPULUS; PROFITABILITY;

CANADA;

POPULUS;

EID: 84984575688     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19467664     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Adamowicz W.L., Armstrong G.W., and Messmer M.J. 2003. The economics of boreal forest management, chap. 6. NRC Research Press, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 181-211.
2. Alavalapati J.R.R and Luckert M.K. 1997. Modeling the Effects of Institutional Constraints on Short-run Timber Supply on Public Land: A Case Study of Quota Holders in Alberta Nat. Res. Model. 10: 263-282.
3. Anderson J.A. and Luckert M.K. 2007. Can hybrid poplar save industrial forestry in Canada?: A financial analysis in Alberta and policy considerations. For. Chron. 83: 92-104.
4. Binkley C.S. 1997. Preserving nature through intensive plantation forestry: The case for forestland allocationwith illustrations from British Columbia. For. Chron. 73: 553-559.
5. Boreal Songbird Initiative. 2007. 1,500 scientists worldwide call for protection of Canada's boreal forest. http://www.borealbirds.org/scienceletter.shtml.
6. Bradshaw H.D. and Strauss S.H. 2001. Breeding Strategies for the 21st Century: Domestication of Poplar, chap. 14.
7. Buongiorno J. and Gilless J.K. 2003. Decision methods for forest resource management. Academic Press, Amsterdam.
8. Carmean W.H. 2007. Intensive plantation management for good-site forest lands in northwest Ontario. For. Chron. 83: 41-53.
9. FAO. 2001. Global forest resources assessment 2000: main report. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
10. FAO. 2006. Global forest resources assessment 2005: progress towards sustainable forest management. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
11. GladstoneW.T. and Ledig F.T. 1990. Reducing pressure on natural forests through high-yield forestry. For. Ecol. Manage. 35: 69-78.
12. Government of Alberta. 1985. Alberta Phase 3 forest inventory: Yield tables for unmanaged stands. ENR Report Dept. 60a. Department of Energy and Natural Resources, Edmonton, Canada.
13. Government of Alberta. 2003. Grazing Statistics for Public Land. Ministry of Sustainable Resource Development. pamphlet. http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FormsOnlineServices/documents/GrazingStatisticsPublicLand-Dec-2003.pdf [accessed 10 August 2012].
14. Government of Alberta. 2012. Agricultural real estate transfers-County of Athabasca. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. web page. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/department/deptdocs.nsf/all/sdd1506?opendocument [accessed 10 August 2012].
15. Greenpeace. 2010. Say no to genetic engineering. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/agriculture/problem/genetic-engineering/ [accessed 17 June 2010].
16. Hegan R.L. and Luckert M.K. 2000. An economic assessment of using the allowable cut effect for enhancedforest management policies: an Alberta case study. Can. J. For. Res. 30: 1591-1600.
17. Hunter M.L. and Calhoun A. 1996. A triad approach to land use allocation. In Biodiversity in managed landscapes. (Edited by R.C. Szaro and D.W. Johnston). Oxford University Press, New York, New York, 477-491.
18. Insley M., Fox G., and Rollins K. 2002. The economics of intensive forest management: a stand level analysis for the Romeo Mallette forest in Ontario. Tech. rep. Report prepared for Tembec Inc., the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and ULERN.
19. Johnson K.N. and Scheurman H.L. 1977. Techniques for Prescribing Optimal Timber Harvest and Investment under Different Objectives - Discussion and Synthesis. No. 18 in Forest Science Monograph. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD, USA.
20. Johnston M.H. and Williamson T.B. 2008. Adapting forest management to the impacts of climate change in Canada. BIOCAP Canada Foundation, Kingston, Ont.
21. Krcmar E., Vertinsky I., and van Kooten. G.C. 2003. Modeling alternative zoning strategies in forest management. International Transactions in Operations Research 10: 483-498.
22. Kuhnke D.H., WhiteW.A., and Bohning R.A. 2002. The Alberta logging cost survey: Data for 1996-1998. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-375, Canadian Forestry Service. Natural Resources Canada, Edmonton, Canada.
23. Luckert M.K. and Haley D. 1993. Canadian forest tenures and the silvicultural investment behavior of rational firms. Can. J. For. Res. 23: 1060-1064.
24. Luckert M.K. and Haley D. 1995. The allowable cut effect as a policy instrument in Canadian forestry. Can. J. For. Res. 25: 1821-1829.
25. Makhorin A. 2010a. GNU Linear Programming Kit: Reference Manual for GLPK Version 4.45 (Draft, December 2010). Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. http://www.gnu.org/software/glpk/. [accessed 29 January 2011]
26. Makhorin A. 2010b. Modeling Language GNU Math-Prog. Language Reference for GLPK Version 4.45 (Draft, December 2010). Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. http://www.gnu.org/software/glpk/. [accessed 29 January 2011]
27. Messier C. 2007. Making Canadian forestry the best in the world. For. Chron. 83: 8-11.
28. Montigny M.K. and MacLean D.A. 2006. Triad forest management: Scenario analysis of forest zoning effects on timber and non-timber values in New Brunswick, Canada. For. Chron. 82: 496-511.
29. Natural Resources Canada. 2010. Key facts. http://canadaforests.nrcan.gc.ca/keyfacts. [accessed 29 November 2010]
30. Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration. 2001. Project Summaries 2000 and 2001. pp. 50-55. Agri-Food and Agriculture Canada.
31. Richardson J., Brourard J., Hogg T., Khasa D., Schroeder B., and van Oosten C. 2005. Poplar in Canada: information and research, 2005. Presentation to the Poplar Council of Canada Annual General Meeting, August 23, 2005.
32. Rodrigues P.M.J. 1998. Economic analysis of ecologically based mixedwood silviculture at the stand level. Master's thesis, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
33. Schweitzer, D.L.R., R.W. Sassaman, and C.H. Schallau. 1972. Allowable cut effect: some physical and economic implications. needs. J. For. 70:415-418.
34. Sedjo R.A. 1999. The potential of high-yield plantation forestry for meeting timber needs. New Forests 17: 339-359.
35. Thomas B. and Kaiser C. 2003. Poplar farming in the boreal transition zone: Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. http://www.poplar.ca/pdf/thomas.pdf [accessed 29 November 2006].
36. Victor D.G. and Ausubel J.H. 2000. Restoring the forests. Foreign Affairs 79: 127-144.
37. Vincent J.R. and Binkley C.S. 1993. Efficient multipleuse forestry may require land-use specialization. Land Econ. 69: 370-376.
38. Westworth and Associates. 1994. Aspen woodlot feasibility study. Pub. No. I/529, Canada-Alberta Partnership Agreement in Forestry.
39. WRI. 2000. North American wood fiber review. Available at http://www.wri-ltd.com/woodfibre.html [accessed 29 July 2004].