An analysis framework for linking regeneration standards to desired future forest conditions

Forestry Chronicle

Volumn 85, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 285-292

  Farnden, Craig ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Forest management objectives; Mixedwood management; Regeneration standards; Simulation; Stocking standards; Surveys

Indexed keywords

REFORESTATION; STANDARDS; SURVEYING;

ANALYSIS FRAMEWORKS; BOREAL MIXEDWOODS; DESIRED FUTURE FOREST CONDITIONS; MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES; MIXEDWOOD; SIMULATION; SPECIES COMPOSITION; STOCKING STANDARDS;

FORESTRY;

ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK; BOREAL FOREST; COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; DECIDUOUS FOREST; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY MODELING; FORESTRY POLICY; REGENERATION; STANDARD (REGULATION);

FOREST MANAGEMENT; PICEA ENGELMANNII; PLANTATIONS; POPULUS; REFORESTATION; SIMULATION; STANDARDS; SURVEYS;

PICEA GLAUCA;

EID: 65649139931     PISSN: 00157546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5558/tfc85285-2     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alberta Reforestation Standards Science Council. 2001. Linking regeneration standards to growth and yield and forest management objectives. Alberta Ministry of Sustainable Resource Development, Edmonton, AB. 52 p.
2. Allen, G.S., B.G. Griffith and J.W. Ker. 1951. A comparison of several regeneration survey methods in terms of cost and usefulness. B. C. Lumberman 35: 66, 68, 89-90, 92, 94, 96.
3. Armson, K.A. 2005. Regeneration standards: what has the past to show us? For. Chron. 81: 781-784. (Pubitemid 43240923)
4. Astrup, R. 2006. Modeling growth of understory aspen and spruce in western boreal Canada. PhD Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
5. Baskerville, G.L. 1992. Forest analysis: Linking the stand and forest levels. In The Ecology and Silviculture of Mixed-Species Forests: A Festschrift for David M. Smith. pp. 257-277. Kluwer Academic Pub, Dordrecht, Netherlands.
6. BC Ministry of Forests. 2008. Silviculture survey procedure manual, stocking and free growing survey. BC Ministry of Forests, Forest Practices Branch, Victoria BC. Available at http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ hfp/silviculture/ Silviculture-Surveys.html [Accessed June 6, 2008].
7. Bergerud, W.A. 2002. The effect of the silviculture survey parameters on the free-growing decision probabilities and projected volume at rotation. Land Man. Hndbk No. 50. BC Ministry of Forests, Victoria, BC. 32 p.
8. Braathe, P. 1982. Stocking control and its effect on yield. Forest Industry Lecture Series, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. 21 p.
9. Brand, D.G. and G.F. Weetman. 1986. Standards for Regeneration Establishment in Canada: A Case Study for Douglas-fir. For. Chron. 62: 84-90.
10. Coates, K.D., C.D. Canham, M. Beaudet, D.L. Sachs and C. Messier. 2003. Use of a spatially explicit individual-tree model (SORTIE/BC) to explore the implications of patchiness in structurally complex forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 186: 297-310. (Pubitemid 37481313)
11. Corona, P., V. Leone and A. Saracino. 1998. Plot size and shape for the early assessment of post-fire regeneration in Aleppo Pine Stands. New For. 16: 213-220. (Pubitemid 29025606)
12. Dennis, B. 1984. Distance methods for evaluating forest regeneration. In New forests for a changing world: Proceedings of the 1983 Convention of the Society of American Foresters, October 16-20, 1983, Portland, Oregon. pp. 123-128. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD.
13. Fort St. John Code Pilot Project. 2004. Sustainable forest management plan. Fort St. John Pilot Project, Fort St. John, BC. 274 p. Available at http://fsjpilotproject.com/sfmp.html [Accessed Jan. 15, 2008].
14. Ghent, A.W. 1969. Studies of regeneration in forest stands devastated by the Spruce budworm. IV. Problems of stocked-quadrat sampling. For. Sci. 15: 417-429.
15. Grant, J.A.C. 1951. The relationship between stocking and size of quadrat. Univ. Toronto For. Bull. No. 1. 35 p.
16. Green, D.S. 2004. Describing condition-specific determinants of competition in boreal and sub-boreal mixedwood stands. For. Chron. 80: 736-742. (Pubitemid 40113054)
17. Green, D.S. and C.D.B. Hawkins. 2005.Competitive interactions in sub-boreal birch-spruce forests differ on opposing slope aspects. For. Ecol. Manage. 214: 1-10. (Pubitemid 40912398)
18. Haig, I.T. 1931. The stocked quadrat method of sampling reproduction stands. J. For. 29: 747-749.
19. Hosie, R.C. 1953. Forest regeneration in Ontario based on a review of surveys conducted in the province during the period 1918-1951. Univ. Toronto For. Bull. No. 2. 134 p.
20. Kabzems, R., A.L. Nemec and C. Farnden. 2007. Growing trembling aspen and white spruce intimate mixtures: early results (13-17 years) and future projections. BC J. Ecosys. and Manage. 8: 1-14.
21. Kaltenberg, M.C. 1980. Evaluation of regeneration sampling methods: a Monte Carlo analysis using simulated stands. DNR Report No. 39. State of Washington, Dept. of Nat. Res. 50 p.
22. Ker, J.W. 1953. The relationship between the number of trees [seedlings] per acre and the percentage stocking of reproduction. J. For. 51: 342-344.
23. Lieffers, V.J., G.W. Armstrong, K.J. Stadt and E.H. Marenholtz. 2008. Forest regeneration standards: are they limiting management options for Alberta's boreal mixedwoods? For. Chron. 84(1): 76-82.
24. Lieffers, V.J., K.J. Stadt and Z. Feng. 2007. Free-to-grow standards are poorly linked to growth of spruce in boreal mixedwoods. For. Chron. 83(6): 818-824. (Pubitemid 350272943)
25. Lowdermilk, W.C. 1927. A method for rapid surveys of vegetation. J. For. 25: 181-185.
26. MacLeod, D.A. and M.A. Chaudhry. 1979. A field comparison of distance and plot methods for regeneration surveys. For. Chron. 55: 57-61.
27. Martin, P.J. 2005.Design of regeneration standards to sustain boreal mixedwoods in western Canada. Internat. For. Rev. 7(2): 135-146. (Pubitemid 44227913)
28. Martin, P.J., B. Bancroft, K. Day and K. Peel. 2005. A new basis for understory stocking standards for partially harvested stands in the British Columbia interior. West. J. Appl. For. 20: 5-12.
29. Mitchell, K.J. 1975. Dynamics and simulated yield of Douglas-fir. For. Sci. Mon. No. 17. 39 p.
30. Munger, T.T. 1945. Stocked quadrats vs. number of trees as a basis for classifying reforesting land. For. Res. Notes No. 33. USDA For. Serv., Pacific NW For. Exp. Stn. 7 p.
31. Newton, P.F. 1998. An integrated approach to deriving site-specific black spruce regeneration standards by management objective. For. Ecol. Manage. 102: 143-156. (Pubitemid 28190177)
32. O'Hara, K.L., R.S. Seymour, S.D. Tesch and J.M. Guldin. 1994. Silviculture and our changing profession: leadership for shifting paradigms. J. For. 92: 8-13.
33. Oxford University Press. 2005. New Oxford American dictionary. 2nd Ed., embedded in Mac OS X v. 10.5.
34. Pacala, S.W., C.D. Canham and J.A. Silander Jr. 1993. Forest models defined by field measurements: I. The design of a northeastern forest simulator. Can. J. For. Res. 23: 1980-1988. (Pubitemid 24412719)
35. Sall, J., L. Creighton and A. Lehman. 2005. JMP start statistics: a guide to statistics and data analysis using JMP and JMP IN software. 3rd Edition. SAS Institute Inc. and Thompson-Brooks/Cole, Belmont CA. 560 p.
36. Staebler, G.R. 1949. Predicting the volume and normality of reproduction stands of Douglas-fir. J. For. 47: 828-833.
37. Stage, A.R. and D.E. Ferguson. 1984. Linking regeneration surveys to future yields. In New forests for a changing world: Proceedings of the 1983 Convention of the Society of American Foresters, October 16-20, 1983, Portland, Oregon. pp. 153-157. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD.
38. University of Alberta. 2007. Mixedwood Growth Model (MGM). 2007. Available at http://www.ales2.ualberta.ca/rr/mgm/mgm.htm [Accessed Feb. 23, 2009].
39. Wood, C. 2001. Grizzly bear habitat in managed forests: silviculture treatments to meet habitat and timber objectives. Ext. Note 54. BC Min. For., Res. Br., Victoria, BC. 7 p.
40. Wyeth, M.H. 1984. British Columbia ministry of forests regeneration survey system. In New forests for a changing world: Proceedings of the 1983 Convention of the Society of American Foresters, October 16-20, 1983, Portland, Oregon. pp. 149-152. Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD.