If you are experiencing problems downloading PDF or HTML fulltext, our helpdesk recommend clearing your browser cache and trying again. If you need help in clearing your cache, please click here . Still need help? Email email@example.com
When management decisions are based on a stand density measure, there is always a risk that sampling error will result in an incorrect management choice. Estimating confidence limits and associated probabilities for many popular stand density measures is computationally difficult, and can require information that is difficult to obtain in practice. Here, we present an alternative method for rapid assessment of risk that is applicable to Reineke's stand density index, Wilson's relative spacing, Drew and Fiewelling's relative density index, and Curtis's relative density. The method requires an independent estimate of stand density, for example, from a growth and yield model or from a subjective assessment before actual measurement. The results, while inexact, are both easier to obtain and more conservative than those obtained by exact methods. West. J. Appl. For. 14(3):149-152.
Document Type: Journal Article
Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, 360 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511
Publication date: July 1, 1999
More about this publication?
Each regional journal of applied forestry focuses on research, practice, and techniques targeted to foresters and allied professionals in specific regions of the United States and Canada. The Western Journal of Applied Forestry covers the western United States, including Alaska, and western Canada; WJAF will also consider manuscripts reporting research in northern Mexico that has potential application in the southwestern United States.