Forest Mensuration. Brack and Wood
Stand Basal Area is a useful parameter for the forest mensurationist
because it is relatively easily collected and can be related to many other
parameters of interest (e.g. site density
and stand volume). The internationally
accepted symbol for stand basal area is G (m^2 ha^-1) and for tree basal
area, g (m^2). G is an important reference variable for a stand and is
particularly useful in quantitative description.
G values commonly range from 10 to 60 m^2 ha^-1 in both coniferous and
hardwood forests. In rare cases, G values of 150 m^2 ha^-1 may be reached
on exceptionally good sites.
G is the sum of the basal areas of all (living)
trees, in the stand. G is derived by reference to tables or by summation
by calculator:
G (square metres) = 0.000 078 539 8 x d^2, where d is DBH in cm.
Note: 0.000 078 539 8 is (PI/40 000). The division by 40 000 corrects
for the difference in units (cm and m) and diameter to radius.
G is usually expressed over bark and on a unit area basis, e.g. m^2
/ ha.
Stand mean BA is also a useful stand variable. It is calculated as G/N,
where N is the number of trees in the stand. The diameter equivalent to
g is called the QUADRATIC MEAN DBH:
dg = sqrt( (G / N) x 40000 / PI)
where dg is the international symbol for quadratic mean DBH.
The quadratic mean DBH is preferable to the arithmetic mean DBH as a
size parameter of trees in a stand because of the additional weight it
gives to the larger diameters.
Estimating stand basal area
The basal area of a forest stand is estimated by sampling in one of
two ways:-
- fixed area plots
- variable radius plots. Also known as angle count or point sampling
as well as other names.
Fixed area plots
The DBH of each tree is measured using circular, rectangular or square
sample units (plots) and mean stand basal area (G) is determined by totalling
the basal area of each tree in the plot, and dividing by the area of the
plot. Sampling using fixed area plots is not as efficient as angle count
sampling for estimating G.
Angle count sampling
When a population mean depends more on the size of large compared with
small units, it is more efficient to select the larger units with greater
probability. This technique is called PPS Sampling or sampling with Probability
Proportional to Size.
This principle has been applied to various forest sampling problems
but most notably to estimating basal area per unit area by angle counting,
where inclusion of a tree in the count depends on the basal area of the
tree and its proximity to the sampling point, ie small trees are not included
if they are some distance from the sampling point, while larger trees will
be included at even greater distances.
Angle count sampling estimates G per unit area of a stand without measuring:
- the g of any tree in the stand or
- the area of ground surface sampled.
The method was developed by an Austrian forester Dr W. Bitterlich in
the late 1930s and perfected in the late 1940s. Its application was recognised
by Cromer (1952) in Australia and Grosenbaugh (1952) in the USA ahead of
European foresters. In the literature, it is referred to under various
names, namely:
- Angle count sampling
- Point sampling
- PPS sampling
- Variable radius plot sampling (VRP sampling)
- Plotless cruising or plotless survey.
Angle count sampling procedure
- Select the angle count spot
- Count within a complete circular sweep the number of trees whose diameters
at breast height subtend angles at the operator
- larger than a certain reference angle (n1)
- equal to a certain reference angle (n2).
- Add n1 and 0.5 x n2 and then multiply the result by a factor (BAF) appropriate to
the reference angle.
Principle of angle count method
A simple "mind experiment" might help explain the principle
of the method:
Imagine that there exists a forest with only small and large diameter
trees (e.g. 10 cm and 50 cm DBH respectively) for which we want to determine
stand basal area. A single 10 cm DBH tree only has a basal area of 0.00785
m^2 while each 50 cm tree is 0.196 m^2 (= PI * Radius^2 ). We do not want
to waste time measuring too many small trees, but do not want to miss the
big values contributed by the large trees, so we use 2 circular plots of
5 m and 25 m radius and measure only small and large trees respectively
within each plot. 
Now imagine that we established our plots and found that there were
3 small trees within the 5 m radius plot and 4 large trees within the 25
m radius plot. The stand basal area would be calculated as:
10 cm tree contribution:
= 3 * (PI * Radius(tree)^2 ) / (PI * Radius(plot)^2) (m^2/m^2)
= 3 * (PI * 0.05^2) / (PI * 5^2) (m^2/m^2)
= 3 * 0.00785 / 78.5 (m^2/m^2)
= 3 * 0.00001 (m^2/m^2)
= 3 * 0.00001 * 10000 (m^2/ha)
= 3 * 1 (m^2/ha)
50 cm tree contribution:
= 4 * (PI * 0.25^2) / (PI * 25^2) (m^2/m^2)
= 4 * 0.196 / 1960 (m^2/m^2)
= 4 * 0.00001 (m^2/m^2)
= 4 * 0.00001 * 10000 (m^2/ha)
= 4 * 1 (m^2/ha)
Stand basal area = 3 + 4 (m2/ha) = 7 (m2/ha)
But of course a real forest would have trees of a range of DBH values.
We could therefore establish a range of plots for all the different DBH
classes. For example, our imaginary forest above might also have trees
of 20, 30 and 40 cm DBH which we could sample in circular plots of 10,
15 and 20 m radius respectively. Using the same calculations as above therefore,
we would find that each 20, 30 or 40 cm DBH tree that is within its 10,
15 or 20 m radius plot adds 1 m^2/ha to the overall stand basal area. Now
that is the important part of the matter! We have set up our plot dimensions
so that each tree of X cm DBH adds 1 m^2/ha to the stand basal area if
it is within a radius X/2 m of the plot centre - where X is any number.
In fact, we no longer even need to know what is the value of X. All we
need to know is whether the ratio of DBH to distance from the plot centre
is greater than 2 cm : 1 m. If the ratio of DBH : Distance is greater than
2 cm : 1 m (1 : 500), then the tree of whatever DBH is within its respective
plot and that tree adds another 1 m^2/ha to the estimate of the total stand
basal area. An optical wedge, Dendrometer II, Spiegal
Relakop or similar instrument simply helps determine if the ratio of
DBH : Distance away exceeds the critical ratio and therefore whether the
tree is within the plot and adds to the estimate of stand basal area.
Note that a tree of X cm DBH is within its respective plot when the
ratio of DBH : Distance from centre exceeds 2 * X cm : X m. Thus a tree
of 20 cm DBH is counted if it is anywhere from 10 m away right up to the
exact plot centre! A tree is either in or out of the plot - a 20 cm tree
right at the centre is no more or less within the plot than a similar tree
that is 3, 6 or 9 m away from the centre.
Alternatively, the following argument may help explain the pinciples:
Assume:

- the ground is level
- an observer is standing Y metres from a tree of radius R metres. He
is holding X metres from his eye a horizontal stick 2L metres long which
is at right angles to his line of sight to the tree. Thus, the angle Q
depends on X and L.
Now:
- The area of acceptance for trees of radius R is
= (PI x Y^2/10 000) ha
(This is the area within which a tree of radius R will appear "bigger"
than the 2L stick.)
- and the basal area of a tree of radius R is
= (PI x R^2) m^2
- If then there are n trees are of size R, then the basal area of these
trees is
= n x PI x R^2 (m^2)
- The stand basal area (G) of these n trees is then
= n x PI x R^2/(PI x Y^2/10 000) (m^2/ha)
= n x 10 000 x R^2 / Y^2 (cancelling out PI)
- or alternatively by trigonometry, G
= n x 10 000 x Sin^2Q
- If there are also m trees of radius S, the basal area (m^2/ha) = m
x 10 000 Sin^2Q
- Thus, total G = N 10 000 Sin^2Q where N denotes all the trees with
a radius that appears bigger than 2L.
The value 10 000 Sin^2Q, (which is the equivalent to 10 000 x R^2 /
Y^2) is known as the basal area factor or BAF. Stand basal area = N x BAF.
Angle count instruments
Collectively, instruments used in angle count sampling procedures are
termed angle gauges. Built into each gauge is a certain reference
angle. When using an angle gauge, this reference angle is compared
with the angle subtended at a fixed point (the angle count spot)
by the sides of a tree (usually at breast height). If the subtended angle
is larger than the reference angle, then the tree is included in the angle
count.
Instruments include:
Practical aspects when using angle count instruments
- When sweeping, use an assistant carrying a 'T' piece to define the
DBH point. The cross bar of 'T' is a 1.3 m so that the correct height for
measurement is easily seen. If the T piece is positioned behind the tree
so that the arms of the T extend beyond either side of the bole, then is
is easier to determine if the reference angle is exceeded.
An experienced observer only needs the 'T' piece in the borderline situation.
- Trees can be missed in sweeping dense stands. This error can be avoided
in plantation stands by proceeding by rows.
- When using a wedge prism, hold the wedge precisely over the angle
count spot at all times. This point, and not the observer's
eye, is where the reference angle is generated. In contrast, when using
the Spiegel Relaskop, thumb, etc., the angle is generated at the observer's
eye and so the user's eye must be precisely above the angle count spot.
- When using a wedge prism, hold the wedge in a vertical position at
any convenient distance from the eye and at right angles to the
line of sight. View through the centre of the wedge. These precautions
are necessary to avoid error.
- The number of borderlines (i.e. trees not clearly greater or smaller
than the reference angle), in general, should not exceed 10% of the total
count. The only reliable way to avoid operator bias with borderline trees
is to:
- measure tree DBHOB (d)
- calculate for the BAF of the angle count instrument, the maximum distance
(LD) from the angle count point within which a tree of that d is counted.
- LD = d / (2 x sqrt(BAF)) (d in cm and D in m).
- compare this calculated limiting distance (LD) with the actual distance
(D) from the centre of the tree to the sampling point:
- If D > LD, the tree is OUT (not counted)
- If D = LD, we have a true borderline (count as half)
- If D < LD, the tree is IN.
- NOTE: Checking borderline trees when sweeping with a Spiegel Relaskop
requires measurement of slope angle as well as dbhob.
- One cannot overstress the need to check borderline trees by direct
measurement. Angle-count sampling is often used in resource inventory where
the intensity of sampling is much less than 0.1%, i.e. one tree in a sweep
actually represents at least 1000 trees in the population. If that one
tree is a doubtful/near borderline tree and it is worth $20 on the stump,
then $20 000 hinges on the decision whether the tree is 'in' or 'out'.
Should not such a decision be made with extreme care?
- Trees wrongly counted lead to an error in BA estimation equal to the
BAF in m^2 / ha.
- Thus, one must compromise in selecting the BAF to use. A small factor
instrument (low strength) will result in a count of many trees with a greater
likelihood of a wrong count but a relatively small error from a wrong count.
A large factor instrument (high strength) will result in a low count with
less likelihood of a wrong count but a large error if a wrong count is
made.
- Too many 'IN' trees in a sweep makes the assessment rather tedious
whilst too few leads to relatively low precision. A satisfactory compromise
is a count of 7-12 trees per sample point. In Australian forests, basal
area per hectare of fully stocked stands frequently lies in the range 20-50
m^2 / ha suggesting BAF values of 2 to 5. For heavily thinned stands and
young poorly stocked crops, basal areas of 10-20 m^2 / ha are common suggesting
BAFs of 1 to 2.
- Check for slope and correct if necessary. Determine the maximum slope
(Q) that goes through the angle sample point and correct the estimated
stand basal area:
G = N x BAF x Sec(Q)
Note that the Speigal Relaskop corrects automatically for slope so this
correction is not needed.
If a 360 sweep is not possible (e.g. boundary of stand) accept 180
or 90 sweeps when necessary and weight the estimate accordingly, i.e. x
2 or x 4 (Grosenbaugh's method). This eliminates bias. Alternatively, one
can apply what is called the "mirage" method (Schmid-Haas's method).
For sample points near the forest margin, make a 360 sweep as usual. Then
measure the horizontal distance from the angle count spot perpendicular
to the forest margin. Extend the line an equal horizontal distance into
the area beyond the margin and locate the "mirage" angle count
spot. Then, from this spot, make another 360 sweep. Stand density at the
point in the forest is then derived by summing the two estimates.
Bias is also likely with LEANING or ECCENTRIC stems. The latter is
the more serious and nothing can be done about it. One hopes that in a
full sweep, the errors will compensate. With leaning stems, align the angle
gauge at right angles to the leaning axis of the stem. Be careful with
trees which lean towards or away from the observer, particularly if they
are borderline. In this case, the check distance is to the centre of
the stump.
When one tree is obscured by another, move sideways on the radius,
i.e. keep distance from tree constant. Then make the reading and return
to the angle count spot.
Be alert for dead trees which normally would be excluded from assessment.
If a stand is composed of several species, separate basal area estimates
can be made sfor each species by keeping a separate tally.
Establishing angle count spots
- If the basal area of a forest stand is required, select a number of
points either systematically (point-sampling grid on a map) or by some
random process. Use the same factor gauge at each point. Varying the BAF
leads to problems in the statistical analysis of the data. (If the structure
of the forest is heterogeneous, an acceptable procedure is to stratify
the forest prior to assessment and select a gauge of appropriate strength
for each stratum). In both cases it is important to exclude bias in marking
the sample point in the field. Pacing the distance between successive sample
points may be permissible provided one does not (consciously or unconsciously)
veer away from the specified bearing or alter one's pace to prevent the
sample point being, say, hard up against a rocky outcrop or inside a large
clump of nettle. One way to prevent such personal bias is to pace out part
of the distance only and measure the last 20 metres or so by tape, keeping
to the exact bearing. Statistically speaking, each point within the stand
qualifies as an independent sample point, i.e. two points only a metre
apart could provide two independent estimates of basal area for a given
stand even though the individual trees included in both samples may be
the same or differ by only one or two trees. In practice, however, one
will try to prevent such overlap. This means that the distance between
plot centres will have to be more than double the marginal distance of
the largest trees likely to be encountered in the stand.
- A rough guide to the number of sampling points required in reasonably
uniform stand conditions is given below:-
Area (ha) |
No. of Sampling Points |
0.5 - 2.0 |
8 |
2.0 - 10.0 |
12 |
over 10.0 |
16 |
- Where the crop is more variable, the number of sample points should
be increased. The number of points required will vary with the error limits
specified and the size and variability of the forest stand. A rough estimate
of the number required can be obtained from a pilot sample using the formula:
- N = (Ct/e)^2 ,
- where N denotes the estimated sample size,
- C denotes the coefficient of variation of the pilot sample in percent,
- t denotes Student's-t read from a table for the appropriate number
of degress of freedom attached to the pilot sample and probability level
(at the 95% level of confidence, this value is usually set at 2),
- e denotes the error limits (desired standard error of estimate) specified
in percent.
- Accurate use of angle count instruments requires much practice. In
particular, when using instruments with small BAFs, e.g. 0.5, there is
a tendency to underestimate basal area.
Disadvantages of Angle Count Sampling
- The method estimates G from a sample so the estimate is subject to
sampling error. The precision in a series of estimates will depend on:
- size of sampling unit, i.e. BAF of angle gauge
- variation of G in the area under study
- experience of operator.
- The stocking density (number of trees) per hectare or per size class
is not given directly. This information can be derived by having the assistant
measure the DBH of each tree counted in the sweep. Then:
- G ha^-1 of each d class = No. of trees in class x BAF
- and No. of trees ha-1 in class= G (of class)/g(equivalent. to mid-class
d ).
- Usually, it is cheaper, and more reliable, to lay out temporary plots
and count.
- Remember that in sampling for stocking as opposed to basal area, probability
is no longer proportional to size but to frequency of occurrence. Bounded
plots are more appropriate in this case.
- It is sometimes difficult to obtain a clear unimpeded view in unpruned
stands or in stands with heavy undergrowth. Of 82 angle count plots established
in native hardwood stands (dry to wet sclerophyll) in the Cotter catchment
in 1973, vision was impeded in only about 10% of the plots. Using a higher
BAF (Spiegel Relaskop) and moving on the radius overcame most of the sighting
problems. G s ranged from 5 to 50 m^2ha^-1.
Some Experiences with Angle Count Sampling
Van Laar (S. Afr. J. For. 72: 1-6 (1970)) estimated G in 77 sample plots
using the Spiegel Relaskop, a wedge prism and calipers. He found:
- Differences in the G estimates by wedge and caliper were insignificant;
- The Spiegel Relaskop underestimated G by 4% compared to the calipers
- an insignificant difference;
- The tendency with the angle count instruments was to count too many
border line trees (checking the borderlines would eliminate this error!).
- Angle count sampling reduced the cost of field work by 50%.
Whyte and Tennent (N.Z. J. For. 20 (1): 134-47, 1975) point out that
whenever angle count and bounded plot estimates of mean basal area per
unit of area are compared, foresters almost invariably assume that the
bounded plot gives the correct value, and this is then used to judge the
accuracy of the angle count estimate. This assertion is quite wrong since
a theoretically unbiased estimate of mean basal area should sample in proportion
to stem basal area, not stem frequency. Bounded plot sampling does not
achieve this whereas angle count sampling does. Both samples, however,
provide only estimates of the true population mean. Each is subject to
sampling error.
Publications by Palley and O'Reagan (For. Sci. 7: 282-93, 1961) and
Kulow (J. For. 64: 469-74, 1966) also attest to the superiority of angle
counting in accuracy and precision for estimating mean stand basal area.
However, all authors agree that bounded plots are more efficient for determining
stocking density (number of stems per unit area).
![[Index]](index1.GIF)
![[Help]](help1.GIF)
![[Authors]](author1.GIF)
http://online.anu.edu.au/Forestry/mensuration/S_BA.HTM
Cris.Brack@anu.edu.au
Tue, 1 Nov. 1997