Abstract

Accurate assessments of forest biomass are becoming an increasingly important aspect of natural resource management. Besides their use in sustainable resource usage decisions, a growing focus on the carbon sequestration potential of forests means that assessment issues are becoming important beyond the forest sector. Broad scale inventories provide much-needed information, but interpretation of growth from successive measurements is not trivial. Even using the same data, various interpretation methods are available. The mission of this paper is to compare the results of fixed-plot inventory designs and angle-count inventories with different interpretation methods. The inventory estimators that we compare are in common use in National Forest Inventories. No method should be described as “right” or “wrong”, but users of large-scale inventory data should be aware of the possible errors and biases that may be either compensated for or magnified by their choice of interpretation method. Wherever possible, several interpretation methods should be applied to the same dataset to assess the possibility of error.

Highlights

  • National forest inventories are an expensive and timeconsuming operation, in large, remote, and inhospitable regions

  • The mean volume estimated across all plots and time periods using fixed area methods was 775.5 m2/ha, with a standard deviation of 244.8 m2/ha

  • The mean was estimated as 779.8 m2/ha, with a standard deviation of 168.2 m2/ha

Read more

Summary

Introduction

National forest inventories are an expensive and timeconsuming operation, in large, remote, and inhospitable regions. Minor errors in current standing volume estimates may have little practical or policy impact, but these may translate to substantial errors and biases in the estimate of forest increment. In some cases, these biases may mean the difference between forest areas being assessed as a sink or a source of CO2 or could result in erroneous (but substantial) financial penalties to countries signing up to successor agreements to the Kyoto protocol. Countries may claim carbon credits for a degree of forest sequestration that does not exist

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call