Abstract:A forest inventory is often carried out using airborne laser data combined with ground measured reference data. Traditionally, the ground reference data have been collected manually with a caliper combined with land surveying equipment. During recent years, studies have shown that the caliper can be replaced by equipment and methods that capture the ground reference data more efficiently. In this study, we compare three different ground based laser measurement methods: terrestrial laser scanner, handheld laser scanner and a backpack laser scanner. All methods are compared with traditional measurements. The study area is located in southeastern Norway and divided into seven different locations with different terrain morphological characteristics and tree density. The main tree species are boreal, dominated by Norway spruce and Scots pine. To compare the different methods, we analyze the estimated tree stem diameter, tree position and data capture efficiency. The backpack laser scanning method captures the data in one operation. For this method, the estimated diameter at breast height has the smallest mean differences of 0.1 cm, the smallest root mean square error of 2.2 cm and the highest number of detected trees with 87.5%, compared to the handheld laser scanner method and the terrestrial laser scanning method. We conclude that the backpack laser scanner method has the most efficient data capture and can detect the largest number of trees.

Modern cut-to-length harvesters are recording information about each harvested tree, and with accurate positioning, this information can be used as field reference data, replacing manually measured reference data. In the present study, models developed from accurately positioned harvester data were compared with a reference model. A set of ∼55 000 accurately positioned trees was used as the basis for a division into 792 reference plots of 400 m2 each. A set of manually measured field plots was used for validation. Regression models were developed based on the relationship between airborne laser scanning data and the reference plot volumes. Separate models were developed for two strata: medium and high site productivity. Several modelling methods were compared, including nonparametric models; at the plot level, predictions for the validation dataset yielded RMSEs of 32%–60% for the medium productivity stratum and 19%–22% for the high productivity stratum. A reference model was fitted to the manually measured validation data in each stratum, and RMSEs of 45% and 25% were obtained for the medium and high productivity strata, respectively. The results show that the models based on the harvester data yield prediction errors at the same level as the reference model.

No abstract

No abstract

Highlights• Airborne laser scanning (ALS) and digital aerial photogrammetry (DAP) are nearly equally valuable for harvest scheduling decisions even though ALS data is more precise.• Large underestimates of stand volume are most dangerous errors for forest owner because of missed cutting probabilities.• Relative RMSE of stand volume and the mean volume in a test area explain 77% of the variation between the expected losses due to errors in the data in the published studies.• Increasing the relative RMSE of volume by 1 unit, increased the losses in average by 4.4 € ha -1 . AbstractAirborne laser scanning (ALS) has been the main method for acquiring data for forest management planning in Finland and Norway in the last decade. Recently, digital aerial photogrammetry (DAP) has provided an interesting alternative, as the accuracy of stand-based estimates has been quite close to that of ALS while the costs are markedly smaller. Thus, it is important to know if the better accuracy of ALS is worth the higher costs for forest owners. In many recent studies, the value of forest inventory information in the harvest scheduling has been examined, for instance through cost-plus-loss analysis. Cost-plus-loss means that the quality of the data is accounted for in monetary terms through calculating the losses due to errors in the data in the forest management planning context. These costs are added to the inventory costs. In the current study, we compared the losses of ALS and DAP at plot level. According to the results, the data produced using DAP are as good as data produced using ALS from a decision making point of view, even though ALS is slightly more accurate. ALS is better than DAP only if the data will be used for more than 15 years before acquiring new data, and even then the difference is quite small. Thus, the increased errors in DAP do not significantly affect the results from a decision making point of view, and ALS and DAP data can be equally well recommended to the forest owners for management planning. The decision of which data to acquire, can thus be made based on the availability of the data on first hand and the costs of acquiring it on the second hand.

No abstract

Accurately positioned single-tree data obtained from a cut-to-length harvester were used as training harvester plot data for k-nearest neighbor (k-nn) stem diameter distribution modelling applying airborne laser scanning (ALS) information as predictor variables. Part of the same harvester data were also used for stand-level validation where the validation units were stands including all the harvester plots on a systematic grid located within each individual stand. In the validation all harvester plots within a stand and also the neighboring stands located closer than 200 m were excluded from the training data when predicting for plots of a particular stand. We further compared different training harvester plot sizes, namely 200 m, 400 m, 900 m and 1600 m. Due to this setup the number of considered stands and the areas within the stands varied between the different harvester plot sizes. Our data were from final fellings in Akershus County in Norway and consisted of altogether 47 stands dominated by Norway spruce. We also had ALS data from the area. We concentrated on estimating characteristics of Norway spruce but due to the k-nn approach, species-wise estimates and stand totals as a sum over species were considered as well. The results showed that in the most accurate cases stand-level merchantable total volume could be estimated with RMSE values smaller than 9% of the mean. This value can be considered as highly accurate. Also the fit of the stem diameter distribution assessed by a variant of Reynold’s error index showed values smaller than 0.2 which are superior to those found in the previous studies. The differences between harvester plot sizes were generally small, showing most accurate results for the training harvester plot sizes 200 m and 400 m.222222

Several methods to conduct single-tree inventories using airborne laser scanning (ALS) have been proposed, and even terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) has recently emerged as a possible tool for the collection of forest inventory data. In the present study, a novel methodological framework for a combined use of ALS and TLS in an inventory was tested and compared to a method without the use of TLS. Single-tree Norway spruce crown biomass was predicted using an ALS-model with training data obtained by TLS. ALS and TLS data were collected for sets of sample trees, including 68 trees with both ALS and TLS data. In total, 29 destructively sampled trees were used to fit a TLS crown biomass model, which then was used to predict crown biomass in a separate set of 68 trees. This dataset was subsequently used to fit an ALS crown biomass model. When validating the model, using a separate dataset with accurately measured crown biomass obtained through destructive sampling, the mean error was 32% of the observed mean biomass. Corresponding crown biomass predictions derived with ALS-predicted diameters and the use of conventional and existing allometric models resulted in a mean error of 35%. Thus, in the present study, a slight improvement, in terms of prediction accuracy, was found when using training data with ground reference values obtained by TLS. OPEN ACCESSForests 2014, 5 385