<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Traditionally forest resources are estimated in each compartment or stand with ocular standwise forest inventory. However, this inventory technique has shortages with measurement accuracy. In the study the accuracy of the standwise forest inventory was estimated by comparing the growing stock volume of the standwise inventory with the accurate (instrumental) re-measurements. Comparison was done with 4515 mature stands of pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.), birch (Betula spp.), aspen (Populus tremula L.) and black alder (Alnus glutinosa L.). The stands’ measurements by callipers or by harvesters (recalculated to growing stock volume) were used for accurate re-measurements. The study results show that the volume of standwise forest inventory have relative bias of 17.6% (volume is underestimated by 17.6%) and relative root mean square error 27.5 % for the whole data. Spruce stands are more accurately measured and black alder stands - inaccurately. The accuracy of pine, birch and mixed stands was similar to overall trends. Stands with volume 200 - 300 m3 ha-1 are more accurately measured and stands with the volume less than 200 m3 ha-1 - most inaccurately. The accuracy of stands with the volume more than 300 m3 ha-1, decreases by increasing the volume of stands. The volume estimation of individual species has different trends in standwise forest inventory. The volume of pine and birch is overestimated and the volume of spruce, aspen and black alder is underestimated.</abstract>

Traditionally forest resources are estimated in each compartment or stand with ocular standwise forest inventory. However, this inventory technique has shortages with measurement accuracy. In the study the accuracy of the standwise forest inventory was estimated by comparing the growing stock volume of the standwise inventory with the accurate (instrumental) re-measurements. Comparison was done with 4515 mature stands of pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.), birch (Betula spp.), aspen (Populus tremula L.) and black alder (Alnus glutinosa L.). The stands’ measurements by callipers or by harvesters (recalculated to growing stock volume) were used for accurate re-measurements. The study results show that the volume of standwise forest inventory have relative bias of 17.6% (volume is underestimated by 17.6%) and relative root mean square error 27.5 % for the whole data. Spruce stands are more accurately measured and black alder stands - inaccurately. The accuracy of pine, birch and mixed stands was similar to overall trends. Stands with volume 200 - 300 m3 ha-1 are more accurately measured and stands with the volume less than 200 m3 ha-1 - most inaccurately. The accuracy of stands with the volume more than 300 m3 ha-1, decreases by increasing the volume of stands. The volume estimation of individual species has different trends in standwise forest inventory. The volume of pine and birch is overestimated and the volume of spruce, aspen and black alder is underestimated.

The Accuracy of Standwise Forest Inventory in Mature Stands

JSC “Latvijas valsts meži”, Kristapa 30, Rīga, LV–1046, Latvia

Rural Sustainability Research

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

{"article-title":"The Accuracy of Standwise Forest Inventory in Mature Stands"}

Traditionally forest resources are estimated in each compartment or stand with ocular standwise forest inventory. However, this inventory technique has...

The Accuracy of Standwise Forest Inventory in Mature Stands

Published Online: Dec 30, 2014

Page range: 2 - 8

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/plua-2014-0007

© by Ainārs Grīnvalds

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.