| A unit of Lasting Forests
evolving since March 30, 1999 |
|
A Total Forest Management Plan
|
|
|
Design of a Hardwood System for the Next Century
Under development
![]() |
My intent here is to use words precisely and to define them as I progress. I shall use old words but they may have new meaning, as defined herein. Perhaps readers and discussants can use the definitions and concepts here to advance rapidly and effectively the concept of long-lasting, modern, sophisticated entrepreneurial wildland resource management systems.
Starting at the End - One of the basic ideas of practical systems work is to start at the end. When the system operates, what happens? When the work is over, what do you have? How can you tell when you are successful? These are questions all related to objectives and performance measures. At the end we want a likely-to-be- sustained, profitable system directly related to and identifiable as a hardwood system but one having many components and subsystems related to the lands of the hardwoods. In addition to profits, we want all of the services, some enhanced, of such areas. We seek services, products, opportunities, views, ideas, information, memories and memberships, all together as a single system producing profits for the longterm future (at least 150 years sliding forward a year each year).We want a working system that is good for the landowner and neighbors. How to get that is the work described within this unit.
Subsystem Profits - I once thought that meaningful economic analyses could be done for systems like forests. Then I realized that land owners and corporate executives do not make decisions based on the profits within one branch of their company or ownership. They decide annually and on the basis of the entire enterprise. The farmer does not report forest income but total income from the farm for tax purposes. In fact, "conglomerations" are acquired for that very reason ... to average out gains and suppress information about losses. The reports are made about the total system performance; the losses within one or two subsystems are played-down, explained away. A farmer working with a beef cattle herd, tobacco, vegetables, and forest land reports on income, not separate sources. Management, labor, equipment, land, and facilities are used together to gain profits from the total enterprise. Being aware of this structure and the role of profits within the larger enterprise can affect decisions about how precisely certain decisions must be made. It affects sampling decisions, investments in information, and knowledge when "close-enough" is "good enough." Within the hyperhardwood strategy, mastery of all of the components of the subsystem (hereinafter the system) is attempted in order to allow it continue indefinitely as a very productive component of the larger system as defined by the owner. (We explore the larger system as imagined as Rural System elsewhere.)There is always the awareness that it is only a part of a larger system and must be fit within and analyzed as a part of that system, not just added into it.
Equifinality - Within the system I strive for the optimum but have become aware that within many natural resource systems there are plateaus, not optimum points. There are many different (and some equal) ways to get to the same point (or equi-valued plateau of points). There being equal procedures to the same end-state is called equifinality. The optimum point may be desired but there may be a cluster of equal values. This gives the manager much needed freedom. Choices can be made, even in conditions of conflict, when an an apparent loss can be claimed and an adversary appeased (but an equivalent to the desired condition,(unknown to the opponent), is selected. If equifinality can be seen, risks, frustration, and stress can be greatly reduced and many alternative strategies exposed for consideration.
Not trees and not money from wood, but lasting profits from a hardwood-related enterprise is the objective. "Wood" like wildlife is a mind magnet. It prevents temporarily a person thinking about the potentials of a large, diverse, profitable enterprise related to hardwoods. These are described in Lasting Forests texts but here the parallel is mentioned. The multibillion dollar football enterprise is related to a leather-covered ball, but the ball is almost irrelevant in terms of the profits and diversity of that enterprise. Analogously, I am describing a hardwood enterprise but the imagined greater corporation which is akin to that of football, is many times larger, more complex, and probably more profitable. We have had our eye on the ball (on wood) too long. It is now time to study and to create systems for managing profit-making from wildland into perpetuity.
Like a great modern sculpture, I can admire a clean, organized, profitable factory. It is a human creation, one of great size and complexity. It is physical and operational; it is people and leadership and team work. It can be a thing of great beauty. Beauty is not a clear justification for attempting to design and create the hyperhardwood system ... but it might happen. In the beauty may be the essence of profitability. Ability to do work is power (Odum); perhaps beauty for some people is the perception of power. Perhaps appreciation of power lies at the center of evolutionary survival.
Planting or Regeneration- Starting the forest is difficult. Few know enough about how to achieve adequate hardwood reproduction or re-planting. A manager must know
Inventory - Spurr (1952:3) said that forest inventory deals with methods of obtaining information on volume and growth. I revise this to suggest that the inventory is the result of counts and measures, tallies, analyses, and reporting. Inventorying, the verb, uses the best methods and procedures developed over the past 2 centuries at measuring primarily volume and change in volume (or growth) per unit area, typically the acre or hectare. It has been well established that volume is strongly related to tree height and tree diameter. Height and diameter are strongly related as well suggesting the single measurement of diameter can suffice if there are good models developed to estimate volume as a function of diameter within a region.
We are only interested in volume that can make money. We are only interested in volumes the value of which exceed the probable cost of making inventories and the other costs over about 150 years, only those ..."that can be financed under present-day economic conditions." We exclude all areas within an ownership that cannot be harvested by conventional and available harvest systems. This eliminates lands unsuitable (various criteria, viewsheds of importance, and special reserve areas.) It also eliminates destruction areas (where wood will be removed no matter what the findings about wood volume (e.g., creating a pond). It eliminates reserve areas where decisions have been made that little or no wood will be taken (e.g., ancient forests). It eliminates all riparian areas where special harvest considerations are required. The area for intensive study can become very small. Using the GIS to isolate pixels that are representative of others and near roads, the sampling procedures can be simplified and reduced further by sampling near roads proportional to the area in each forest site ( a combination of slope, aspects, elevation and position (McCombs 1998). Time and travel are high cost components of inventorying so field work needs to be carefully planned for effective field time spent in measurements.
Because inventory has financial importance, the very concept of inventory has to be changed from an interest in volume/area to valued-volume/area, quantity to quality, and thus from the first, there must be included concepts of wood uses and at least gross values for pulpwood volumes, board feet, and energy-wood.
This creates conceptual as well as data-gathering problems. We can see the tree and measure it, but we can only approximate wood values. They may change in the market tomorrow. By the rules of arithmetic we have to round our numbers to the lowest level of confidence, the fewest significant figures. We measure to the third decimal place, then divide grossly estimated or temporary dollar-worth figures! We must be aware of the balance we must make and in general use the numbers as guides to decisions, not precise estimates. One consequence is that we can take smaller samples, fewer samples, and incur less cost. We will be making better decisions because of use of our superior models rather than excessive time spent in taking very large samples.
Errors in sampling or field observations are well known. If the estimated probability of no measurement error is 0.8, and the probability of no sampling error is 0.8, and the probability of not having data transcription errors is 0.9, then the joint probability of all three being the case is 0.57. The odds of a correctly measured and reported number are only a little better than those for a coin-toss. Recall, too, that merchantable height of a tree is an expression of the distance from the base to a point where the stem becomes some percentage of the base (or a minimum) ... then rounded to the nearest multiple of 2 feet.
We use a tape to measure tree diameter. This over-estimates the diameter slightly but consistently (due to bark and oval shapes encountered); the overage declines in the larger trees.
V = ((a + b)/2)/ length
where a is the cross-sectional area at the small end and b is the area at the larger end.
A first approximation of volume of a tree can be found from
V = (D2/100)(H/4)
or the square of the diameter rounded to the nearest 100 and multiplied by one-fourth of the tree height.
Heights have been difficult to measure. We work from felled-tree measures.
where r is the rings in the outer inch of the diameter, D
An equation found for all hardwoods:
V = 1.99 + 0.002229 D2H (Spurr p.141)
Spurr (1952) reported that in 1925 there were 80 volume tables for yellow pines but that they could not be compared or standardized. Many such tables for eastern hardwoods exist; some are proprietary, and recently Rauscher and others have tried to synthesize them. Cotta is said to have published the first volume table in 1804.
We continue to study form class as it can be measured as dameter at 2.3 meters or 7.5 feet from the ground, and at dbh. Once divided, we now use these two numbers in a multiple regression to estimate form class or taper. (The division hides the variations. (See Green's comments on indexes.))
In the hyperhardwood system we typically have GIS area maps with many factors stored for each alpha unit. Site characteristics for each major hardwood species are combined in logistic regressions and species maps developed. We progressively build volume tables over time that are site specific (i.e., for species-specific units that are alpha unit specific). Typically five representative trees are selected in a stand, a GPS location recorded, and the measurements entered. These are added to a growing tree data base for a region or large ownership.
Site factors are numerous but solar radiation and soil moisture are dominant. We cannot measure them all along with trees to understand every forest. We can reduce the variance in our estimates by developing GIS units in which moisture and radiation are similar, thus controlling the two dominant variables, thus reducing variance, thus reducing required sample size. Confidence limits are relaxed to alpha=0.90 and tolerance limits reduced to 10%. We take this standard, fixed procedure, fully aware of the uncertainties and variables described above. The fixed procedure allows us to make adjustments (so-called "adaptive management") in decisions, not to re-do models and re-compute intricate hypothesized relationships. We model the best thought processes of the experts, not necessarily the processes of the biological or physical system.
The general pattern for our volumetric relations studies is:
log V = loga + blogD + clogH + dlogk
where D is diameter H is height, and k is the diameter at 7 feet (reflecting form class when linked to dbh) and multiple regression is used. Corrections needed after log uses are made based on Spurr 1952:74).
Tables are no longer of use for we employ the equations (developed in auto-regression procedure for stands and site conditions) to calculate a volume and then to present it in a standard readable format for the land owner, stand by stand, area by area.
Work Toward a Hyperhardwood Policy
The policy…
Information about 21 species of North American hardwoods is now available from the Hardwood Manufacturers Association. The address of the Hardwood Association information center is 400 Penn Center Boulevard, Suite 530,Pittsburgh, PA 15235 (412-829-0770).
The hypertext unit on oaks of D. Mike Rauscher may soon be reached on this system.
The Hardwood Forestry Fund can be reached at hffund@hpva.org.
Robert H. Giles, Jr., 2000
Literature Cited
Spurr, S. 1952. Forest inventory, Ronald Press Co., New York, NY 476pp.
Giles, R.H. Jr. 1999. Forest faunal systems.
Green, Statistics for Ecologists
Rouse, C. 1985. Fire effects in northeastern forests:oak, USDA Forest Serv. Gen Tech Rpt- NC-105, North Central For. Exp. Sta.,
This Web site is maintained by R. H.
Giles, Jr.
D2
or
B = D2 / 183.3465
or
B = 237.583 D2 / (Spacing)2
Elliott, Boring and Swank (2002. Canadian J For. Research 32:667-683) ) (table at right) found at Coweeta in 20-year-old stands the relative weights of interest.
Community
Mg ha-1
Cove Hardwood
81.7
Mesic Mixed-oak
96.9
Dry Mixed-oak
85.4
Other Resources:
[ HOME | Lasting Forests (Introductions) | Units of Lasting Forests | Ranging | Guidance | Forests | Gamma Theory | Wildlife Law Enforcement Systems | Antler Points | Species-Specific Management (SSM) | Wilderness and Ancient Forests | Appendices | Ideas for Development | Disclaimer]
Quick Access to the Contents of LastingForests.com
Last revision January 17, 2000.