This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 1 of this Preprint.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c64c6/c64c6bf6e1874074b32896073c9664a25f92aef4" alt="Modeling stand-level forest attributes using lidar and Common Stand Exam data"
Downloads
Authors
Abstract
Traditional forest inventories provide important information to forest managers regarding stand volume, structure, and species composition. While crucial for making informed decisions, forest inventories can be time intensive, costly, and acquisition can delay forest management actions. In some cases, publicly available and large-scale LiDAR datasets can serve as a means for assisting with or even substituting for pedestrian methods when collecting forest inventory data. This study focuses on the development of a new geospatial methodology and model development where LiDAR data was leveraged to recreate Common Stand Exam (CSE) results. CSE protocols are the U.S. Forest Service’s approach to conducting forest inventories, with Live Tree Stocking and Volume reports being major outputs following field data acquisition. Modelling efforts yielded statistically significant similarities in BA, TPA, board-feet volume, and tonnage volume when comparing traditionally acquired CSE data versus LiDAR-based analysis. While lidar-based approaches might not be appropriate for every forest management objective, these results demonstrate that they have the potential to be leveraged in scenarios where major forest metrics are required. This could represent significant time and cost efficiency for forest managers who are confronted with challenging deadlines, fiscal limitations, and harsh environmental conditions.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31223/X5TH9F
Subjects
Forest Management, Natural Resources and Conservation
Keywords
LiDAR, Common Stand Exam, shortleaf pine, loblolly pine, forest inventory
Dates
Published: 2025-02-04 11:39
Last Updated: 2025-02-04 19:39
License
CC-By Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Additional Metadata
Conflict of interest statement:
The author declares that they have no competing interests.
Data Availability (Reason not available):
Data can be made upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.
There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.