Comparison of Simple Random Sampling and Two-stage P.P.S. Sampling Methods for Timber Volume Estimation

임목재적(林木材積) 산정(算定)을 위(爲)한 Simple Random Sampling과 Two-stage P.P.S. Sampling 방법(方法)의 비교(比較)

The purpose of this paper was to figure out the efficiencies of two sampling techniques, a simple random sampling and a two-stage P.P.S. (probability proportional to size) sampling, in estimating the volume of the mature coniferous stands near Salzburg, Austria. With black-and-white infrared photographs at a scale 1:10,000, the following four classes were considered; non-forest, young stands less than 40 years, mature beech and mature coniferous stands. After the classification, a field survey was carried out using a relascope with a BAF (basal area factor) 4. For the simple random sampling, 99 points were sampled, while for the P.P.S. sampling, 75 points were sampled in the mature coniferous stands. The following results were obtained. 1) The mean standing coniferous volume estimate was $422.0m^3/ha$ for the simple random sampling and $433.5m^3/ha$ for the P.P.S. sampling method. However, the difference was not statistically significant. 2) The required number of sampling points for a 5% sampling error were 170 for the two stage P.P.S. sampling, but 237 for the simple random sampling. 3) The two stage P.P.S. method reduced field survey time by 17% as compared to the simple random sampling.

Simple random sampling과 P.P.S. sampling의 효율을 비교하기 위하여 오스트리아 Salzburg 부근의 침엽수 장령림 임분에서 임목조사를 실시하였다. 축적 1:10,000의 흑백 적외선 사진을 판독하여, 조사 임지를 제지, 유령림, 너도 밤나무 장령림, 침엽수 장령림으로 구분하고, 침엽수 장령림 내에서 random sampling에 의한 99개의 표본점과 P.P.S. sampling에 의한 75개의 표본점을 흉고 단면적 제수 4인 Relascope에 의하여 야외 조사한 자료를 비교한 결과는 다음과 같다. 1) random sampling에 의한 임분 재적의 추정치는 $422.0m^3/ha$이었고, P.P.S. sampling에 의해서는 $433.5m^3/ha$이었으나 이들간의 통계적 유의성은 없었다. 2) 5 %의 허용 오차내에서는 P.P.S. sampling에 의하여는 170점, random sampling에 의하여는 237점이 필요하였다. 3) P.P.S. sampling은 random sampling에 비하여 야외 조사 시간을 17% 감소시킬 수 있었다.