If sampling is being conducted in a forest plantation to estimate timber volume, some foresters use the mean height of dominant trees in a sample as the height before using volume tables (The volume table needs height and DBH to determine the volume of a particular tree). Is it accurate?
or
Is the mean height of randomly selected trees within a sample more accurate rather using the heights of dominant trees?
(eg. If a sample contains 20 trees, randomly selected 10 trees are used to determine the mean height of the sample)
Intermittent scaling is the most accurate way to determine the cubic content of standing trees. We measure the diameter of the trunk at different heights, and knowing the distances between the measurement sites (differences in measurement heights), the volume of the tree trunk can be calculated by means of a geometric volume calculation.
Hello W. V.; Here is a link to a website that has a standard procedure. It relies on determining Diameter at Breast Height...4.5 ft above ground on uphill side,.
https://ohiotimberworks.com/blog/2013/08/standing-tree-volume/
Best regards, Jim Des Lauriers
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Remote Sensing