A Critical Look at the Normality Concept
This paper documents definitions on normally and full stocking, the subjective nature of the terminology concerning normality, and evolution of the concept. The theoretical and practical limitations in the use of normality in growth and yield studies are developed. Among those included are: relativity of normal tables, biological weakness of overstocking, correction of yields for non-normal stands, disregard for tree size, and lack of economic and management optimization.
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
Document Type: Journal Article
Affiliations: Silviculturist, Southeastern Forest Expt. Sta., Forest Service, U. S. Dept. Agric., Asheville, N. C.
Publication date: 1965-02-01
More about this publication?
- The Journal of Forestry is the most widely circulated scholarly forestry journal in the world. In print since 1902, the Journal has received several national awards for excellence. The mission of the Journal of Forestry is to advance the profession of forestry by keeping forest management professionals informed about significant developments and ideas in the many facets of forestry: economics, education and communication, entomology and pathology, fire, forest ecology, geospatial technologies, history, international forestry, measurements, policy, recreation, silviculture, social sciences, soils and hydrology, urban and community forestry, utilization and engineering, and wildlife management. The Journal is published bimonthly: January, March, May, July, September, and November.
2016 Impact Factor: 1.675 (Rank 20/64 in forestry)
Average time from submission to first decision: 39.6 days*
June 1, 2016 to Feb. 28, 2017
Also published by SAF:
Other SAF Publications
- Submit a Paper
- Membership Information
- Author Guidelines
- SAF Convention Abstracts
- Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites