By James D. Arney, Forest Biometrics Research Institute (FBRI) Consider a Large Working Forest Ownership (0.5 – 1.5 million acres) Traditional Inventory Approach (1970 – 1995) – “Phototype & Cruise” Human Photo Interpreter using an Experienced Eye Stratify the Forest (48 – 72 Strata Maximum) 4 – 6 Primary Species …
Forest planners should be aware of a basic misunderstanding for classifying forest productivity.
A remarkable study design for unraveling the relationship between tree size and density: An easy-to-install design with a small footprint for any type/size of forest ownership.
As a working forester, researcher and educator for over fifty years, there are a number of trends which are occurring in plain sight, but appear to be hidden from view.
This note touches upon the measurement of tree taper and the modeling of tree taper. Methods incorporated into FBRI’s Forest Projection and Planning System (FPS) are compared to approaches used in other growth models.
There are an increasing number of operational field cruises being designed where the precision of measurements has been specified at levels either not necessary or not efficient.
If you manage forest stands with mixed species, mixed structure and/or irregular densities (spatial patterns), then you care what kind of growth model is applied and how it was calibrated. If your harvesting regimes have shifted away from even-aged clearcut harvests, then your forest structure is taking on the characteristics identified in the first sentence of this paragraph.
In September 1972, I organized a two-day forest biometricians meeting in Olympia, Washington, to explore ways to transition traditional printed “yield tables” into computer-based, dynamic “growth models”.
All organizations plan; the only difference is their approach. Prior to starting a new strategic planning process, it is necessary to recognize the past planning approaches which may have been used within that organization.