Evaluating northern hardwood management using retrospective analysis and diameter distributions

Northern hardwood management was assessed throughout the state of Michigan using data collected on recently harvested stands in 2010 and 2011. Methods of forensic estimation of diameter at breast height were compared and an ideal, localized equation form was selected for use in reconstructing pre-harvest stand structures. Comparisons showed differences in predictive ability among available equation forms which led to substantial financial differences when used to estimate the value of removed timber. Management on all stands was then compared among state, private, and corporate landowners. Comparisons of harvest intensities against a liberal interpretation of a well-established management guideline showed that approximately one third of harvests were conducted in a manner which may imply that the guideline was followed. One third showed higher levels of removals than recommended, and one third of harvests were less intensive than recommended. Multiple management guidelines and postulated objectives were then synthesized into a novel system of harvest taxonomy, against which all harvests were compared. This further comparison showed approximately the same proportions of harvests, while distinguishing sanitation cuts and the future productive potential of harvests cut more intensely than suggested by guidelines. Stand structures are commonly represented using diameter distributions. Parametric and nonparametric techniques for describing diameter distributions were employed on pre-harvest and post-harvest data. A common polynomial regression procedure was found to be highly sensitive to the method of histogram construction which provides the data points for the regression. The discriminative ability of kernel density estimation was substantially different from that of the polynomial regression technique.

A comparison of ground cover and frequency estimation methods for post-harvest soil monitoring

The amount and type of ground cover is an important characteristic to measure when collecting soil disturbance monitoring data after a timber harvest. Estimates of ground cover and bare soil can be used for tracking changes in invasive species, plant growth and regeneration, woody debris loadings, and the risk of surface water runoff and soil erosion. A new method of assessing ground cover and soil disturbance was recently published by the U.S. Forest Service, the Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol (FSDMP). This protocol uses the frequency of cover types in small circular (15cm) plots to compare ground surface in pre- and post-harvest condition. While both frequency and percent cover are common methods of describing vegetation, frequency has rarely been used to measure ground surface cover. In this study, three methods for assessing ground cover percent (step-point, 15cm dia. circular and 1x5m visual plot estimates) were compared to the FSDMP frequency method. Results show that the FSDMP method provides significantly higher estimates of ground surface condition for most soil cover types, except coarse wood. The three cover methods had similar estimates for most cover values. The FSDMP method also produced the highest value when bare soil estimates were used to model erosion risk. In a person-hour analysis, estimating ground cover percent in 15cm dia. plots required the least sampling time, and provided standard errors similar to the other cover estimates even at low sampling intensities (n=18). If ground cover estimates are desired in soil monitoring, then a small plot size (15cm dia. circle), or a step-point method can provide a more accurate estimate in less time than the current FSDMP method.