Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14578/jkfs.2018.107.4.344

Evaluation of Standing Tree Characteristics by Development of the Criteria on Grading Hardwood Quality for Oaks Forests in Central Region of Korea  

Lee, Young Geun (Forest Technology and Management Research Center, National Institute of Forest Science)
Lee, Sang Tae (Forest Technology and Management Research Center, National Institute of Forest Science)
Chung, Sang Hoon (Forest Technology and Management Research Center, National Institute of Forest Science)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science / v.107, no.4, 2018 , pp. 344-350 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was carried out to improve the forest management method considering the use of high value added timber in the natural broadleaf forests. For this purpose, the criteria for evaluating the quality grade of standing trees were established and applied to the oak stand in the central region of Korea. The evaluation factors of the grade were bending of stem, branch, stem damage, and other defects. If the logs are divided into 2.1 m units and three logs up to 6.3 m are available, they are classified as Grade I (G-I). If two logs are available, they are classified as Grade II (G-II), If only one log is available, it is classified as Grade III (G-III). When any log is not available as timber, it is classified as Grade IV (G-IV). As a result of applying the grade to the oak stand, G-I was 6.7 %, G-II was 28.0 %, G-III was 38.3 %, and G-IV was 27.0 %. The ratio of standing trees by oak species of higher than G-III was 88.2 % for Quercus acutissima, 88.1 % for Q. variabilis, 83.5 % for Q. serrata, 56.3 % for Q. aliena, and 50.3 % for Q. mongolica, respectively. The G-IV ratio for Q. variabilis and Q. mongolica tended to decrease with increasing diameter at breast height. The order of major defect affecting the grading level was bending of stem > branch > stem damage > other defects. Considering the grade level and oak species distribution, it was concluded possible to produce high quality hardwood timber when we concentrate forest tending techniques on Q. acutissima and Q. variabilis stand. In order to improve the accuracy of grading, it is necessary to continuous complement through the monitoring research for evaluation factors.
Keywords
broadleaf forests; evaluation of standing trees; high quality of hardwood; oak species; tending technique;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Kyle, C. 2017. Forest landowner's guide to field grading hardwood trees. Division of Agriculture, University of Arkansas System. pp. 8.
2 Martin, E.D and Rorbert, L.B. 1985. Butt log quality of trees in Pennsylvania oak stands. USDA Forest Service. Northeastern Station Research Paper NE-568. pp. 12.
3 National Institute of Forest Science. 2016a. Handbook of regeneration decision for bad quality forest. pp. 79. (In Korean)
4 National Institute of Forest Science. 2017. Development of assessment technic of hardwood forest stand for enhance of quality of forest tending. pp. 127. (In Korean)
5 Andrew, P., Adrian, H., Barry, G., Elspeth, M. and Paul, M. 2017. Assessing the stem straightness of trees : Technical Note 021. Forestry Commission. pp.6.
6 Pelletier, G., Landry, D. and Girouard, M. 2016. A tree classification system for new Brunswick. Version 2.0. Northern Hardwoods Research Institute. Edmundston, New Brunswick. pp. 53.
7 Robert, L.B. 1989. Central hardwood notes; Grading hardwood trees. Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. USDA Forest Service, West Virginia. pp. 5.
8 USDA Forest Service. 1973. A guide to hardwood log grading. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report. pp. 31.
9 Association of German Sawmill and Wood Industry. 2005. Guidelines for the factory measurement of logs. pp. 20. (In Germany)
10 Bachmann, P. 1990. Increasing of the forest production through consideration of added value. Snow and Landscape, Research Institute for Forests. Reports of the Federal 327. pp. 73. (In Germany)
11 Ernst, R., Norbert, B. and Burghard, L. 2013. Silviculture on an ecological basis. UTB GmbH. pp. 432. (In Germany)
12 Forestry Research Institute of Baden-Wuttemberg. 2001. Federal Forest Inventory II in Baden-Wuttemberg. pp. 16. (In Germany)
13 National Institute of Forest Science. 2016b. Empirical stand yield table. pp. 64.
14 IBM SPSS Statistics. 1989-2011. SPSS for Window. Version 20.0. IBM corp.
15 James, S.M. and Daniel, A.S.Jr. 2008. A new tree classification system for southern hardwoods. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 32(2): 69-79.
16 Korea Forest Promotion Institute. 2018. Information of price of wood. https://www.kofpi.or.kr/service/imupinfo. (In Korean)
17 John, R.M., Gary, W.M., Harry, V.W.Jr. and Joseph, E.B. 1986. Butt-log grade distributions for five appalachian hardwood species. US Fores Service. Northeastern Station Research Paper NE-590. pp. 7.
18 Klaus, G. 2005. Forest management: analysis and design of forest development. Gottingen University Press. pp. 342.
19 Korea Forest Promotion Institute. 2016. Handbook of national forest inventory and forest health. pp. 95. (In Korean)
20 Korea Forest Service. 2005. Standard manual for sustainable forest resource management. pp. 289. (In Korean)
21 Korea Forest Service. 2016. Statistical yearbook of forestry. pp. 415. (In Korean)
22 Korea Forest Service. 2017. Log grade. Korea Forest Service Notice. 2017-97.
23 Korea Forest Service. 2018. 6nd National Forest Plan. In publishing. (In Korean)