The Impacts of Calamity Logging on the Development of Spruce Wood Prices in Czech Forestry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study estimates the relationship between the volume of incidental logging and the decline in the price of spruce wood and claims the strong correlation between the measure of unplanned wood harvesting and the decrease in wood prices based on the decline in spruce wood prices is a serious problem for the forestry sector by the lease squares method.

Only the part of discussion has cited reference. Where those data come from in other sections, such as “recent years this situation has changed somewhat since Chinese traders offer prices 10 to 15% higher than Austrian partners for Czech wood”?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for your kind response regarding our manuscript. We have revised entire manuscript and corrected the following changes you have suggested:

the data in the article is up to date including its sources. We made all the needed correction in the article.

 

With best regards

Daniel Toth & co.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript raises an important problem, the impact of spruce disease on the wood market and timber prices. The high incidence of natural disasters throughout in the Czech Republic and Central Europe (Ips typographus,  windthrows) adversely affected spruce prices. Results of study could be interesting for Forests readers but manuscript should rewritten - major revision are needed.

Specific comments:

Abstract

Line 21. “Within the last year” - give a year (2019)

Line 23. The aim of this study

Line 25. The results shows

Line 28. Convert prices in to Euro (apply in whole work)

Line 28. SM II/JE II ? – should be explain in text

Line 31. “Wood prices” - use timber prices

Introduction

Short description of Czech forest management is needed, for example: forest ownership structures, percentage share of species (in particular spruce), volume and prices obtained from the sale of total wood (not only spruce), rules for the sale of wood in public forests etc. Need to be completed.

Line 40. Add a Latin name (Ips typographus)

Line 58. I suggest to verify the meaning of the sentence; “China is Germanys largest…”?

Line 58-61. Confirm the data described by quoting the literature

Line 80. “Crustacean” -  should be described/explain

Line 80. This sentences it should be rearranged probably “timber affected by bark beetle is too cheap” not Bark beetle…

 

Materials and Methods

Line 83. probably “was used”.

Line 95. Cite a appropriate literature

Line 100. Some mathematical formulas are not necessary, I suggest delete (for example formulas 6-8)

Line 106. “category SM II” – this category should be explain (described)

Line 107. M and SSx should be explained below formula as follow:

               Where:

              M-…..

              SSx-…..

 

Results - this part of manuscript should rewritten

Line 151-164. Sentences 151-164 is not result of the study and should be moved to paragraph Method

Line 165. Figure 1. Horizontal and vertical axis should be described

Line 165. CSU- should be explain

Line 165. Figure 1. (CZK/m3) - convert prices in to Euro/m3 (please apply in the text too)

Line 166. Figures and tables should be cited before in text

Line 175. - Table 1  Probably numbers are not in thousands so “.” (point) should be used instead of “,” (comma)

Line 177. “The table 1.” - before table

Line 202. Should be - Figure 2

212-216. These are not the results (please move to discussion)

Line 229. Figure 3. - describe axis.

Line 240-253. It’s not a results- this is part of discussion

Line 245-249. Confirm the data described by quoting the literature

Line 263. Figure 5. - (This chart is similar to chart 3 (Figure 3)

Discussion

Discussion is too short and needs extended. Some parts of the discussion do not connect to the purpose of study (for example, line 293-296). I suggest rebuilding and develop this part. Timber prices are also largely influenced by other factors, including wood market in neighboring countries (this should be widely described in discussion). Existing references in this area of research.

 

Conclusions – this part of manuscript should rewritten

Line 325-332. Confirm the data described by quoting the literature (discussion not conclusions)

Line 331- “China offers supply prices 10-15% higher” - repeated three times!, for example; line 52, line 242.

Line 335-342 - discussion not conclusions

Line 342-350 – This is not connect with the result of the study (please add to discussion)

Line 356-360. This is not connect with the result of the study.

 

References

Line 366. References – should be added. Literature about wood supply and timber prices analysis (including forecasting) on the European and global timber market is rich.

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for your detailed response regarding our manuscript. We have revised entire manuscript and corrected the following changes you have suggested.

The changes are as following:

 

Line 21. “Within the last year” - give a year (2019) – We have added year to the sentence for no more confusions.

Line 23. The aim of this study – The sentence had been updated into more appropriate one.

Line 25. The results shows – We have changed sentence into advised version.

Line 28. Convert prices in to Euro (apply in whole work) – The currency was updated to EURO in whole manuscript.

Line 28. SM II/JE II ? – should be explain in text – We have changed this sentence for better understanding.

Line 31. “Wood prices” - use timber prices – This sentence was updated upon suggestion.

Introduction

Short description of Czech forest management is needed, for example: forest ownership structures, percentage share of species (in particular spruce), volume and prices obtained from the sale of total wood (not only spruce), rules for the sale of wood in public forests etc. Need to be completed. – The sentence was revised and several sentences were added into Introduction part.

Line 40. Add a Latin name (Ips typographus) – We added latin names for all 3 species of bark beetles appearing in the Czech Republic.

Line 58. I suggest to verify the meaning of the sentence; “China is Germanys largest…”? – We updated this sentence for better understanding.

Line 58-61. Confirm the data described by quoting the literature – We added the source for the data described in the sentence.

Line 80. “Crustacean” -  should be described/explain – The word was left out due to translations typo.

Line 80. This sentences it should be rearranged probably “timber affected by bark beetle is too cheap” not Bark beetle… -  We have updated this sentence.

 

 

Materials and Methods

Line 83. probably “was used”. – We changed sentence into the past tense.

Line 95. Cite a appropriate literature – This sentence was revised and updated.

Line 100. Some mathematical formulas are not necessary, I suggest delete (for example formulas 6-8) – We pruned two formulas from the manuscript and updated their reference numbers.

Line 106. “category SM II” – this category should be explain (described) – The description was added into brackets.

Line 107. M and SSx should be explained below formula as follow: - This part was highlighted in the text above the formula and explained on line 110

 

Results

Line 151-164. Sentences 151-164 is not result of the study and should be moved to paragraph Method – We moved these sentences into appropriate part of the manuscript which starts on line 144.

Line 165. Figure 1. Horizontal and vertical axis should be described -  All horizontal and vertical axis were given their description.

Line 165. CSU- should be explain – This shortcat was described in brackets.

Line 165. Figure 1. (CZK/m3) - convert prices in to Euro/m3 (please apply in the text too) all prices were in entire manuscript both in text and tables & figures were changed to fit in EUR currency.

Line 166. Figures and tables should be cited before in text – According to “instructions to authors” on the MPDI website it states otherwise.

Line 175. - Table 1  Probably numbers are not in thousands so “.” (point) should be used instead of “,” (comma) – This changes was implemented. – All “,” were changed into point in entire table.

212-216. These are not the results (please move to discussion) – We moved those sentences into discussion part.

Line 240-253. It’s not a results- this is part of discussion – We moved those sentences into discussion part.

Line 245-249. Confirm the data described by quoting the literature – We edited this sentence and added new data along with literature sources.

 

Discussion

The first paragraph of the conclusion had been revised and updated.

Line 331- “China offers supply prices 10-15% higher” - repeated three times!, for example; line 52, line 242. – We deleted this sentence due to its repetition.

 

References

We added few more relevant sources and it got added to the list and was cited in the manuscript.

 With best regards

Daniel Toth & co.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The Authors made corrections.
In my opinion manuscript is OK now.

Author Response

Dear Respected editors and reviewers

This letter is to confirm that all concerns and suggestions from the reviewers have been addressed and implemented. The entire manuscript has been reviewed for both content and updated language.

• We have gone throughout the entire manuscript. It has been reviewed and certain oars have been updated.
• We have added the needed sources and make the needed corrections regarding the citations in the manuscript
• The methodology has been discussed with a very famous econometricians and he has confirmed that it is correct
• One small part of the discussion has been moved to the section of methods.
• The manuscript has been reviewed, and certain typographical errors have been corrected.