{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030274361400189215, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011352885525070956, 'mean_word_length': 5.373493975903615, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Silvicultural systems and red-cockaded woodpecker management: another perspective

Rudolph and Conner (1996) maintained that a modified even-aged silvicultural system using irregular shelterwood as the method of regenerating new stands provides greater benefits for red-cockaded woodpeckers (Picoides borealis) than uneven-aged systems. Their argument was confined to loblolly (Pinus tuedu) and shortleaf (R echinatu) pine forest types and emphasized public lands. In a reply to Rudolph and Conner (1996) Engstrom et al. (1996) stressed the virtues of uneven-aged management, but rather than adhering to the context established by the former authors, framed their arguments largely around longleaf pine (P. pahstris) on private lands. This resulted in some disparate comparisons which obscured some issues and overlooked others. In an attempt to bring sharper focus to the issues, we offer the following thoughts. The context for our argument is the management of all southern pine forest types on national forest lands for red-cockaded woodpecker recovery.