2010
DOI: 10.2737/pnw-rp-583
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reconstructed old-growth forest stand structure and composition of two stands on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington state

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
(25 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The establishment of permanent plots can also assist inspection agencies in cases of wood being illegally removed, in addition to helping understand the regrowth. This is because a relationship can be obtained with neighboring areas of similar composition and forest structure (ERCANLI et al, 2015;PETER;CONSTANCE, 2010) due to the diameter of the stumps left in the field for elaborating mathematical models to estimate the biomass that was extracted in an acceptable manner, thereby helping the agents to prepare infraction notices.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The establishment of permanent plots can also assist inspection agencies in cases of wood being illegally removed, in addition to helping understand the regrowth. This is because a relationship can be obtained with neighboring areas of similar composition and forest structure (ERCANLI et al, 2015;PETER;CONSTANCE, 2010) due to the diameter of the stumps left in the field for elaborating mathematical models to estimate the biomass that was extracted in an acceptable manner, thereby helping the agents to prepare infraction notices.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Stand reconstruction based on witness tree data assumes witness tree selection without bias, which is often wrong (Bourdo 1956, Schulte and Mladenoff 2001, Peter and Harrington 2010. However, in our study area we believe that because distances to witness trees tended to be longer than in forests, the closest tree was usually selected, which is probably why we detected little bias.…”
Section: Historical Structure and Compositionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…We used US Government General Land Office (USDI, Bureau of Land Management 2012) surveys from the mid-to late-1800s to describe the vegetation shortly after Native American burning stopped for comparison with modern vegetation. Elsewhere, GLO data has been used to document the past extent of prairies, Indian trails, and species composition in Oregon (Zybach 2002), to infer the structure and composition of old-growth forests in Washington (Peter and Harrington 2010), to Prairie Colonization by Douglas-fir map vegetation cover and characterize landscape heterogeneity (Delcourt and Delcourt 1996), to map prairies in Illinois (Anderson 1970) and to reconstruct the vegetation along the prairie-woodland border in the Big Woods of Minnesota (Grimm 1984).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%