SINCE THIS SUMMARY IS BASED ON DATA FROM LESS THAN 30 SURVEYED POLYGONS, THE RESULTS presented ARE CONSIDERED preliminary.
This summary is from polygons surveyed in the Lakes TSA in 2011 and 2012. This summary is an example of the variety and depth of information that can be extracted from SDM data.
Currently, SDM field survey data is entered into an EXCEL spreadsheet template. This template provides an individual polygon data summary for immediate use. These spreadsheets are then loaded into the SDM ACCESS database. The database can be queried to produce an aggregated data summary like this one that includes data from multiple polygons within a TSA. The queries can be adjusted to extract data in various combinations depending on the user’s needs.
This summary is not an analysis; it provides limited interpretation of the data. Reports examining specific questions regarding productivity or that seek to explain trends and other behaviours can be constructed based on this data along with the use of other supporting tools or evidence.
Provincial and regional Forest Health and Silviculture staff can be asked to help with the interpretation of the information presented in the summaries and in the creation of more detailed reports.
Your input as comments and suggestions are needed to further develop these summaries. Please contact and provide your suggestions for improvement.
STAND DEVELOPMENT MONITORING - LAKES TSA Summary
Purpose and Audience – Data summaries can help statutory decision makers and operational foresters make informed decisions on stand development, TSR data package inputs, FSP renewals, and FFT activity priorities. They provide information on the growth and health of managed stands. The Forest and Range Evaluation Program (FREP) in conjunction with the provincial forest health program have designed an evaluation protocol (Stand Development Monitoring - SDM) that assesses the condition of post-free-growing managed stands by measuring stand attributes and the impact of biotic and abiotic damaging factors on stand health to help determine whether these free-growing stands are meeting productivity expectations.
NOTE – This report provides summary information obtained from surveyed polygons. Inferences from this summary should be made cautiously.
This summary includes data on: Sample Summary Forest Health Stand Density Species Composition Site Index
SAMPLE SUMMARY
Polygon and polygon population attributes, and numbers and percentages of sampled live trees.
A1 – number of polygons summarized
Survey year: / 2011DND / 7
A3 - sampled polygon attributes
Attribute / na / Mean / SDb / RangePolygon net area (ha) / 7 / 11.9 / 4.7 / 7 – 20
Stand Age (yrs) / 7 / 24.3 / 1.7 / 22 – 27
Harvest to Declaration (yrs) / 7 / 13.0 / 1.8 / 10 – 16
Planting to Declaration (yrs) / 7 / 10.3 / 1.4 / 9 – 13
Declaration to SDM (yrs) / 7 / 11.3 / 1. / 10 – 14
a. Differing ‘n’ values indicate missing information for some polygons.
b. SD - Standard Deviation
A4 - sample population coverage
TSApolygon population
(n) / Total polygon population
area (ha) / Number Polygons
≥5 ha
(n) / Population polygon area
≥5 ha
(ha) / Number of polygons sampled
(n) / Sampling intensity by number of polygons / Area
sampled
(≥5 ha)
(ha) / Sampling intensity by area
645 / 13545 / 435 / 13064 / 6 / 1.4% / 75.6 / 0.6%
A5 - number and percentage of sampled total live trees
Tree species: / Ac / Act / At / Bl / Pli / Sx / TotalNumber / 3 / 4 / 351 / 426 / 947 / 490 / 2221
Percent / 0 / 0 / 16 / 19 / 43 / 22 / 100
Lakes TSA Summary April, 2013 4
FOREST HEALTH
Forest Health is assessed using the SDM damage criteria for mid-rotation stands (see Appendix 1). The damage criteria establish forest health threshold tolerances identifying unacceptable and damaged trees. In the Mackenzie TSA: the pathogen most recorded was Western Gall Rust (DSG); the insect was Warren’s root collar weevil (IWW); the animal was Moose (AM); and the abiotic damage was Tree Competition (VT).
B1 – mean stems per ha by forest health status
Live Acceptable Trees (sph) / Live Unacceptable Trees (sph) / Dead Unacceptable Trees (sph) / Total Stemsa (sph)2714 / 459 / 181 / 3354
a For forest health purposes total stems equals all live trees plus all dead trees.
B3 - incidence of forest health factor by bec
BEC / Tree Layer / Total Stems / Acceptable Trees / Unacceptable Trees / Percent incidencec of Forest Health Factord for each tree layerLive / Dead
n / (%b) / n / (%b) / n / (%b) / DSG / DSC / DSS / DFE / DS / AM / AS / VT / UK / NY / TC / TL / Other / U
ESSFmc / 1 / 23 / 20 / 3 / 0 / 8.7 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 4.3 / - / - / - / - / -
2 / 51 / 43 / 8 / 0 / 3.9 / 7.8 / - / - / - / - / - / - / 2.0 / - / - / 2.0 / - / -
3 / 131 / 121 / 6 / 4 / 2.3 / - / - / - / - / - / - / 0.8 / - / 1.5 / - / 2.3 / 0.8 / -
205 / 184 / (89.8) / 17 / (9.2) / 4 / (2.0) / 3.4 / 2.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.5 / 1.0 / 1.0 / 0.0 / 2.0 / 0.5 / 0.0
SBSdk / 1 / 117 / 90 / 26 / 1 / 13.7 / 1.7 / 0.9 / - / - / - / - / - / 3.4 / - / - / - / 3.4 / -
2 / 275 / 195 / 73 / 7 / 9.5 / 7.6 / 5.1 / 0.4 / - / - / - / 0.4 / - / 0.4 / - / 0.4 / 5.5 / -
3 / 858 / 658 / 102 / 98 / 3.6 / 6.4 / 1.3 / - / 0.1 / 0.3 / 0.1 / 6.8 / - / 0.5 / 1.7 / 0.2 / 2.2 / -
1250 / 943 / (75.4) / 201 / (21.3) / 106 / (8.5) / 5.8 / 6.2 / 2.1 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 0.2 / 0.1 / 4.7 / 0.3 / 0.4 / 1.2 / 0.2 / 3.0 / 0.0
SBSmc2 / 1 / 102 / 91 / 11 / 0 / 2.9 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 2.9 / - / - / - / 4.9 / -
2 / 185 / 162 / 22 / 1 / 3.2 / 4.9 / - / - / - / 0.5 / - / - / 1.1 / - / - / - / 2.7 / -
3 / 605 / 520 / 70 / 15 / 0.7 / 2.3 / 0.2 / - / - / - / 0.2 / 5.1 / 1.5 / 1.2 / - / 0.7 / 2.3 / -
892 / 773 / (86.7) / 103 / (13.3) / 16 / (1.8) / 1.5 / 2.6 / 0.1 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 3.5 / 1.6 / 0.8 / 0.0 / 0.4 / 2.7 / 0.0
b Percent based on total stems (live and dead); c Percent incidence of the total stems by layer for each FHF; d Only the top FHF are listed, the Other column contains the minor FHF not listed.
FOREST HEALTH (continued)
B4 - incidence of forest health factor by tree species
TreeSpecies / Tree Layer / Total Stems / Acceptable Trees / Unacceptable Trees / Percent incidencec of Forest Health Factord for each tree layer
Live / Dead
n / (%b) / n / (%b) / n / (%b) / DSG / DSC / DSS / DFE / DS / AM / AS / VT / UK / NY / TC / TL / Other / U
Ac / 3 / 4 / 2 / 1 / 1 / - / - / - / - / - / - / 50.0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / -
4 / 2 / (50.0) / 1 / (25.0) / 1 / (25.0) / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 50.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0
Act / 2 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / -
3 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / -
4 / 4 / (100.0) / 0 / (0.0) / 0 / (0.0) / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0
At / 1 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / -
2 / 8 / 7 / 1 / 0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / 12.5 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / -
3 / 372 / 340 / 2 / 30 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 3.0 / - / 0.3 / 4.0 / - / 1.3 / -
381 / (91.3) / 3 / (0.8) / 30 / (7.9) / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.3 / 0.0 / 2.9 / 0.0 / 0.3 / 3.9 / 0.0 / 1.3 / 0.0
Bl / 1 / 31 / 28 / 3 / 0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 9.7 / -
2 / 51 / 45 / 5 / 1 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 2.0 / 9.8 / -
3 / 349 / 331 / 14 / 4 / - / - / - / - / 0.3 / 0.3 / - / 1.1 / 0.9 / - / - / 1.4 / 1.1 / -
431 / 404 / (93.7) / 22 / (5.1) / 5 / (1.2) / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.2 / 0.2 / 0.0 / 0.9 / 0.7 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 1.4 / 2.8 / 0.0
Pli / 1 / 185 / 148 / 36 / 1 / 11.4 / 1.1 / 0.5 / - / - / - / - / - / 3.8 / - / - / - / 3.2 / -
2 / 384 / 283 / 94 / 7 / 8.9 / 8.9 / 3.6 / 0.3 / - / - / - / 0.3 / 0.5 / - / - / - / 3.9 / -
3 / 460 / 239 / 147 / 74 / 8.3 / 15.0 / 2.6 / - / - / - / 0.4 / 14.1 / 0.7 / 2.0 / - / 0.4 / 4.6 / -
1029 / 670 / (65.1) / 277 / (26.9) / 82 / (8.0) / 9.0 / 10.2 / 2.6 / 0.1 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.2 / 6.4 / 1.2 / 0.9 / 0.0 / 0.2 / 4.1 / 0.0
Sx / 1 / 25 / 24 / 1 / 0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 4.0 / - / - / - / - / -
2 / 66 / 63 / 3 / 0 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 1.5 / 1.5 / - / 1.5 / - / -
3 / 407 / 385 / 14 / 8 / - / - / - / - / - / - / - / 2.5 / 0.7 / 0.7 / - / 0.5 / 1.0 / -
498 / 472 / (94.8) / 18 / (3.6) / 8 / (1.6) / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 2.0 / 1.0 / 0.8 / 0.0 / 0.6 / 0.8 / 0.0
a Percent based on total stems (live and dead); b Percent incidence of the total stems by layer for each FHF; c Only the top FHF are listed, the Other column contains the minor FHF not listed.
Lakes TSA Summary April, 2013 4
STAND DENSITY
To produce a free-growing crop of trees a stand is managed to the target stocking level of well-spaced, preferred and acceptable species. Over time, changes in stand density may reflect tree competition, mortality due to pests, stand treatments, natural ingress or other influences.
C1 - number of polygons with changes to stand density
Change in Total Stand DensityTotal Trees (n= 30) / Change in Stocking Density
Well-Spaced Trees (n= 28)
Decreasing / 5 / Decreasing / 7
Increasing / 1 / Increasing / 0
Unchanged
Data missing / 1
7 / Unchanged
Data missing / 0
7
C2 - stand density attributes by bec – pre-sdm and at sdm
ESSFmc / SBSdk / SBSmc2 / ALLN / Mean (sph) / N / Mean (sph) / N / Mean (sph) / N / Mean (sph)
Total Density pre-SDM (sph) / 2 / 3009 / 5 / 4191 / 6 / 2820 / 13 / 3376
Total Density at SDM (sph) / 1 / 1660 / 3 / 3120 / 3 / 2047 / 7 / 2451
Change in Total Density (sph) / 1 / -940 / 3 / -551 / 3 / -160 / 7 / -439
Change in Total Density (%) / 1 / - / 3 / - / 3 / - / 7 / -
WS density pre-SDM (sph) / 2 / 1152 / 5 / 1132 / 6 / 1107 / 13 / 1123
WS density at SDM (sph) / 2 / 1040 / 3 / 847 / 3 / 920 / 7 / 906
Change in WS density (sph) / 1 / -98 / 3 / --269 / 3 / -220 / 7 / -224
Change in WS density (%) / 1 / - / 3 / -- / 3 / - / 7 / -
FG density pre-SDM(sph) / 2 / 1001 / 5 / 1003 / 6 / 990 / 13 / 997
FG density at SDM (sph) / 2 / 1103 / 5 / 970 / 6 / 993 / 13 / 1001
Lakes TSA Summary April, 2013 9
Lakes TSA Summary April, 2013 9
SPECIES COMPOSITION
Inventory labels are condensed representations of several stand attributes that describe conditions at the time of assessment. These attributes include leading, secondary and minor tree species by percentage class (usually rounded to the nearest 10%), average age and height of the dominant and co-dominant trees, a site index estimate, an estimate of crown closure, and the total trees per hectare. Inventory labels provide inputs used by the TASS stand model and by timber supply analysts projecting future stand development for timber supply purposes.
D1 - change in leading species between pre-sdm and sdm assessments
Leading Species at SDM / Leading Species Pre-SDMESSFmc / SBSdk / SBSmc2 / Alla
Pli / Sx / Pli / Sx / Pli / Sx / Pli / Sx
Pli / 1 / 3 / 2 / 6
Sx / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 1 / 0
Total / 1 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 7 / 0
(Shaded values indicate those polygons where the leading species has NOT changed). aBEC units with only 2 polygons are not shown.
(In this TSA, no change in leading species was found in 6 (86%) of the 7 polygons sampled.)
D2 – number of trees, by species and layer, contributing to mean basal area
Number of Trees / Mean Polygon BA (m2/ha)Tree spp. / Layer 1 / Layer 2 / All / Layer 1 / Layer 2 / All
Live / Dead / Live / Dead / Live / Dead / Live / Dead
Bl / 31 / 48 / 2 / 81 / 0.87 / 0.48 / 0.03 / 1.38