Skip to main content

Two-Stage Forest Sampling: A Comparison of Three Procedures to Estimate Aggregate Volume

The full text article is temporarily unavailable.

We apologise for the inconvenience. Please try again later.

Three two-stage forest sampling procedures are examined in order (1) to quantify the variance penalty (if any) associated with second-stage sample restrictions; and (2) to quantify the variance gains (if any) associated with the incorporation of tree height data at the second stage. The three two-stage procedures share a common first stage, i.e., horizontal point sampling (HPS), which selects trees with probability proportional to tree basal area. The second stage selection approaches vary, as follows: 1. Trees are selected with replacement with probability proportional to tree height from a single list composed of all trees sampled across all first-stage sample points. 2. Trees are selected with replacement with probability proportional to tree height from separate lists compiled on each first-stage sample point. 3. Trees are selected randomly, with replacement, on each first-stage point. The results indicate that little or no reduction in variance accrues from incorporating height data into the two-stage sample design for the three mapped stands considered. HPS/simple random sampling yielded variances ranging from 7.1% larger to 9.2% smaller than the smallest HPS/list sampling variance, while maintaining an advantage in an even-aged stand. It is hypothesized that the HPS/list sampling procedures may prove more useful in mature, all-aged stands where height may account for a significant portion of volume or biomass variation. No loss of precision is noted when second-stage sampling is restricted by point on these three forest tracts. An investigation into the effects of first-and second-stage sample sizes provide a convincing argument to select only one tree per first-stage sample point when sampling is restricted by point. Considering both precision of estimation and field efficiency, these results suggest that the HPS/simple random sampling procedure is the most useful of the three tested. For. Sci. 40(2):247-266.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: PPS sampling; Variable-radius-plot sampling

Document Type: Journal Article

Affiliations: College of Forestry and Wildlife Resources, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0324

Publication date: 01 May 1994

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more