Collaborative Mapping Platforms for Forestry Applications

Almost every forester uses a geographic information system (GIS) in some form or fashion. Whether this may be accessing remotely hosted satellite or aerial imagery for a qualitive assessment of forested area, tree size, and density, or investigating terrain to assess wetness or slope that affect operability and site potential, using such tools as topographic map services or digital terrain models. 

However, most of this data is in raster form, especially derived forest characteristics such as forest type, stand density or size, and mapped as 30-meter resolution cells at best, usually from space-based sensors such as the Landsat or Sentinel programs. LiDAR-derived products such as digital surface models, canopy height and density models do offer better precision. Being an arbitrary and often coarse-scale grid, raster data does not conform well to natural topography that may be fine-scaled, sinuous or undulating depending on geomorphology and parent material origin such as from erosion patterns (residuum), landslides (colluvium ), alluvium (water-deposited) or glacial-origin (glacial till, outwash, eskers and moraine). Topographical patterns can be mapped at the wide-scale, but are also fractal in nature (pun-intended), with complexity evident all the way down to the micro-scale, as evidenced by the vast diversity of soil profiles mapped in soil classification. Along with anthropogenic and biological interactions, the geographically fractal nature of physical site characteristics contributes to much speculation and mystery in forestry. 

To better capture this fine-scale variability, vector data of forest stands is usually adopted by natural resource agencies or other land managers to better capture the fluidity of forest characteristics. Stand boundary lines can be infinitely precise depending on the spacing of points or nodes, with a usually minimum effective spacing necessary to lasso in a single tree as the fundamental biological unit of forestry (and often a folly when attempting to layout and mark on-the-ground stand boundaries).  Urban forestry has long recognized individual trees as points in community tree mapping, and new technology has now enabled continuous individual tree-level mapping at the stand-level (at least of canopy trees), a move towards census-level forest inventory and a great boon for cruise planning (see LiDAR- tree segmentation!) which helps supplement or otherwise aid vector-based stand mapping.

Practically however, many managers set a minimum stand size for assessment purposes and suggest following topographically surveyed and/or observed stand-type (composition/size/density) boundaries evident in remotely sensed imagery (traditionally stereoscopically paired aerial photographs used in manual photogrammatry).  Historically, manually-mapped vector data was recorded first on paper topographic maps, then later digitized or otherwise integrated into computer-based geographic information systems, often part of an institution's enterprise data system for internal use only. More modern methods such as automatic segmentation of remotely sensed data usually just transmits the same inaccuracies of the base raster data and often is less satisfactory than well-maintained legacy data products. Due to file sizes, accuracy concerns or combination thereof, these proprietary authoritative, working vector datasets are often limited to internal-use or otherwise permitted users such as with the United States Forest Service's FSVeg Spatial dataset. Given the effort to map and maintain these datasets, the extent of institutional stand-level vector datasets is usually limited only to immediate ownership of the agency. Sometimes legacy map products can be found, usually not digitized, that do cover larger areas but have inaccuracies due to interpretation errors or needed updates from disturbances such as harvest, fire, or wind events. This extent limitation of good stand vector data greatly impairs assessment at wide-ranging mid- or regional scales. 

An alternative option for forestry vector data exists for the rest of us however, and comes from the world of open data and Free Open-Source Software (FOSS). 

From their website:

"OpenStreetMap is a free, editable map of the whole world made by people like you. It was started in 2004 in the UK, out of frustration with the lack of availability of good map data that was free to use. OpenStreetMap includes data about roads, buildings, addresses, shops and businesses, points of interest, railways, trails, transit, land use and natural features, and much more."

Roll up your sleeves, however, as much of the world-wide map extent is incomplete or lacks precision for forestry purposes such as with distinguishing between upland and lowland forests (natural=wood, natural=wetland), this requires significant contributions to make the map better and more usable for foresters. 

Historically, vetted imports of public domain vector data such as the US Census TIGER roads dataset have been used to help fill-in the map, with other possibilities from the National Wetlands Inventory as well as established workflows to vectorize public domain raster datasets such as the National Land Cover Dataset. The default iD web editor provides many built-in reference imagery datasets with the ability to add custom layers as well. Specialized OSM data editors such as the web-based Rapid or desktop JOSM can assist efforts to enrich the dataset through community-approved imports of existing data. OSM Notes and MapRoulette challenges help identify and provide a workflow to address known issues. 

Though a relatively anarchic and often incomplete dataset, OpenStreetMap has wide use and adoption by institutions. For example, the US Department of Interior uses OSM base maps via MapBox for many of their website maps. Many other OSM-based services are available, with strong documentation on the OpenStreetMap Wiki. The data is published as vector tiles, and available in QGIS using the QuickOSM plug-in, based on the Overpass API. 

However you use GIS in your work, whether as an institutional user or if you keep your own self-hosted geodatabase, consider including OpenStreetMap as one of your resources. If not an active contributor, consider using OSM as a reference layer, as a basemap with attribution in your published maps. Either way, you help promote open data and the Free Open Source Software initiative.

New Website

I have launched a new website: TheModernForester.com as an introductory and landing page for services I offer in forestry consulting. The blog will continue as a repository of articles and musings about forestry and is linked from the website URL. Thank you everyone for your interest and support!

Automation and Teleoperation in Forestry

The trend in harvesting equipment has been to maximize size and thereby capacity for greater productivity. As a result, forestry machines have become increasely expensive and complicated for maintenance and repair. This challenge becomes more formidable with proprietary software and computer controls, emissions equipment and so on.

In agriculture, older tractors have been a receiving a premium and desired for simplicity and ease of repair. In forestry, wear and tear of ardous year-round working conditions often makes older equipment cost-prohbitive to repair, especially as service parts are not as readily available as agricultural equipment produced in greater numbers.

Many loggers are therefore relying on smaller numbers of newer, highly productive equipment, especially given the limitation of readily available forest labor. Ground-based logging in the United States, with few variations, is either cut-to-length teams of a harvestor and forwarder or tree-length operations of a feller-buncher and one or two skidders. When one machine goes down, many loggers bring in older equipment kept just in case- an out-dated harvestor, processor, loader, or skidder that can be put into service and make or break production goals and maintain profitability.

Again, the above trend towards fewer, larger, more expensive equipment assumes forest labor as the limiting factor. Smaller, more inexpensive machines allows greater reliabilty- if a machine goes down, productivity is not as greatly affected. Cycle of replacement can be simplier with staggered acquisition and disposal so equipment has a range of use and wear. However more labor would be required to operate more equipment, unless a new innovation is introduced such as AI.

Forestry Assistance Services

 Do you own forested property? 

Do you want to enhance your property for wildlife, recreation, or profit?

Professional forestry assistance can help you meet your objectives. 

Focusing on your goals as a landowner, I offer specific, detailed forestry assistance on trees to plant or remove, hazard tree assessment, ecological restoration, and opportunities to generate revenue through sustainable timber management such as sawlog timber sales to thin and enhance forest quality, regenerate or create wildlife gaps, improve maple syrup production, or assist firewood production and marketing. 

Contact me now for a free, 2-hour, no-cost consultation and preparation of an initial plan with your goals and objectives as well as actionable practices you can implement right away to improve your forest. 

Your woods are important to you. Your careful ownership provides much needed conservation and stewardship of natural resources, protecting wildlife, water quality, and alleviating urban development and sprawl. 

As an appreciation of your request for forestry technical assistance, this a free, no-cost initial service which can you access programs such as the American Tree Farm System, Family Forest Carbon Program, Quality Deer Management, or conservation easements to protect your property for future generations.

Single Tree Harvest vs. Commercial Logging

The increased affordability and availability of consumer-grade sawmills from domestic and off-shore manufacturers has made single tree extraction for personal use or small commercial sale of specialty products from non-industrial private forestlands (NIPF) more viable and affordable option for forest landowners. Many forest landowners who represent the Greatest Generation or the Baby-boomer generation are embracing forest management as a hobby in retirement, finding an outlet for their disposable income and enjoyment in time spent managing their woods. Recent events and economic pressure has contributed to the resurgence of interest in homesteading and rural economic independence for younger generational demographics as well. 

On small tracts < 40 acres especially), single tree harvest has been the predominant management activity. Whether operating under the guidance of an approved forest management plan, or individual judgement and prudence of the landowner, trees are usually individually selected with care and extracted a few at a time at the landowner's convenience and prerogative. Again, expansion and greater access to new and used equipment markets has made low-impact, small equipment much more affordable. Small landowners use such extraction equipment as hydraulic or PTO winches on ATVs, compact track loaders, small bulldozers, old and obsolete small skidders, or three-point attachment mounted logging winches on 4-wheel drive farm tractors. Predominate harvest methods are end-lining or ground-lead cable logging to skid trails or permanent woods roads. Even chainsaws have come down in price with unlicensed copies of professional-grade models readily available from internet vendors.

Small tract logging usually isn't economical for the low-intensity harvest methods usually favored by  NIPF owners. Move-in/move-out costs and necessary road work are not often ameloriated by days on site and harvest volume such that small landowners often find it difficult to attract a commercial logger when they do wish to offer stumpage for sale. As a result, NIPF landowners often forgo management entirely or are relegated to DIY harvesting with resulting products usually not entering the commercial wood-supply chain or instead of merchandizing as sawlogs or pulpwood are offered as lower-value products such as firewood more easily produced and marketed to end-consumers in a small-radius with minimal individual return. Landowners would indeed generate greater individual return with less expenditure of their time and money if the stumpage produced from their forest land instead was sent to existing wood-processing industries to be made into a value-added product - dimensional lumber, veneer, paper, etc. - that would have greater overall economic impact, support more jobs and end product be made available to a far-larger economic radius.

"Farm Forestry" or "Private Forestry" has long been a forestry topic, addressed by instructional books, professional articles, federal/state agency programs and university extension services for decades. Whether professional foresters are involved or not in the tree selection process by marking or establishing marking guides to implement a silviculture prescription, these relatively few acres annually affected by hobbyist do not matter much wood extraction and harvest volumes at established reporting levels. Rather instead I would argue is the important of established landowner intent- their forest land is working forestland, distinguishable from other NIPF in that management objectives include timber production as a primary focus. With increased fragmentation of former industrial forestlands by transfer to private ownership, the timber objective of new owners may be of minimal importance, thereby removing available, productive forest acreage from the timber base (wood basket). Most forest biometricians in their quantitative assessment of growing stock and harvest amounts overlook changes landownership and landowner intent, thus the continued. importance of social forestry for the periodic census of forest landowners and their ranking of management objectives to assist in timber availability forecasting. Should circumstances such as mortality, markets or individual economic situations change, these private forestlands may be made available for more significant, commercial-level harvests given compatible landowner attitudes and priorities. 

Public/non-profit/private outreach should focus on those landowners interested in managing their forest lands and provide more information to those receptive to forest management. For increased outreach effectiveness, leads may be acquired from logging supply/chainsaw/sawmill merchants, forest landowner organizations, public records of federal/state program recipients, or other sources. Wildlife habitat management-focused landowners, especially game species-interested landowners, may be reached through outdoor expos, sportsman clubs including local or state chapters of national organizations such as the National Deer Association, National Wild Turkey Federation, and many others. Those timber-curious NIPF landowners may be the best untapped resource for a consulting or procurement forester looking to unlock additional working forestlands in their woodbasket and thereby find new stumpage.