|
 Reforestation
Monitoring: The Study
This is an
ongoing study of the Cloudbridge reforestation effort. Each year,
starting in 2003, we monitor a substantial sample of the trees that
have been planted, to assess their growth and health. We are seeking
volunteer researchers to continue with this
project.
Reforestation Monitoring:
Methodology
Originally designed by Kate Moss
The purpose of the data collected on planted tree sites is
to give an evaluation of each site and to start compiling a database on
the
conditions preferred by different tree species. Information
concerning slope, competition, coverage, soil
quality and
drainage was collected along with the tree species (if known) and tree
condition. At the same time sites were
numbered and labeled so that specific sites could be revisited in the
future.
The labels: Metal tags were affixed to the stake
corresponding to tree site. The tree
number,
species and date planted were engraved into the tag. At
the beginning another number corresponding
to the number of the specific species planted (similar to the number of
tree
but only the number of trees of that species) was also included but
later
dropped as deemed unnecessary. The
labels now read tree number, species, date. For
example: [134 CY
02] would indicate tree
number 134 is a Cypress
planted in 2002. If species or date are
not know than that space is left blank. Metal
tags are first etched with a ball point pen and then
retraced with
a black permanent marker. This creates a
much longer lasting label than just permanent marker.
Between tree 200 and 300 we ran out of metal
tags and started using orange flagging tape. This
flagging tape is always tied below that corresponding
to the date
as not to get the two confused. It is
important that these tags soon be replaced with metal tags so that a
more secure
marker be in place.
Tree number: Sites
(with or without trees) that are deemed good for planting (for example,
if is a
site is located under another tree it is not good for planting and
should be
excluded) are given a tree number. If
there is no tree or if the tree is dead this should be noted in the
additional
section so that one may be planted there later. In
the tree number column it is also important to note the
tree species
and date it was planted.
The following are the
measures we take for each tree:
| Tree height: |
The height in meters beginning at the base
to the top of the crown with measuring stick or Abney |
|
|
See
separate Abney Guide. Picture of Abney Level below (Stephan used
Blume-Leiss device) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DBH |
The
stem diameter at the height of 1.3 m in cm with measuring tape or
caliper (cross measuring) |
|
| (diameter at breast height) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Crown Diameter: |
The crown radius in 4 cardinal directions in meters with
measuring stick or measuring tape |
|
|
(survey
from trees higher than 1.5 m ->
determination of the crown coverage (crown projection) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ground Coverage: |
estimation of the ground cover within a radius of 1 m around
the planting point - Scale from 0 to 5: |
|
|
0
(no ground cover) |
|
|
|
|
5
(completly covered) |
|
|
|
|
with
the steps 1 (20 % covered), 2 (40 % covered), 3 (60 %
covered), 4 (80 % covered) |
|
|
The
type of the coverage is also noted (gr -
grass, fb - forbs, fr - fern ect.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Competition: |
estimation
of the competition situation, especially LIGHT
0 (no effect on the tree) to |
|
|
5 (completly covered - overshaded / highest
amount of shade degree) - Steps
like Ground Coverage |
|
|
Type
of competition - tree(species)(tr), fern (fr), grass (gr) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Soil quality/Drainage: |
estimation
on a scale from 1 - 5 - this should not change from year to year |
|
|
|
1
(puddles no drainage) 5 (steep slope good
drainage) |
|
|
|
Type
of soil: R - rock; S- sand; C - clay; D - dark rich soil |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Health: |
estimation
of the vitality on a scale from 0 to 5: |
|
|
|
scale: |
0 -
dead |
|
|
|
|
1 - very bad developed trees, decaying (only isolated foliage / needle foliage, |
|
|
badly damage, etc.) |
|
|
|
|
2 - bad developed trees (depending on the
species - (needle) foliage below average |
|
|
and/or
height below average and/or (lightly) damaged) |
|
|
|
3 - trees of average development (depending on
the species) |
|
|
|
4 - well developed trees (depending on the
species - (needle) foliage above average |
|
|
and/or
height above average, only few damages) |
|
|
|
5 - very well developed trees (only picked out
spicemen of a tree species with strong, |
|
|
stable growth and height/crown projection above average,
only few little damages) |
The
following are some of the trees in the reforestation plantation:
| tree code: |
common name: |
scientific name: |
|
| AA |
Jaul, Alder |
Alnus acuminata |
|
| CT |
Cedro dulce, Sweet cedar |
Cedrela tonduzii |
|
| CDS |
Dama |
Citharexylum donnell-smithii |
|
| CL |
Cypress, Cipress |
Cupressus lusitanica |
|
| DA |
Guachipelin |
Diphysa americana |
|
| EJ |
Manzana de rosa, Rose Apple |
Eugenia jambos |
|
| IN |
Guayaba de montana, wild avocado |
Inga sp.(mainly Inga sierrae) |
|
| PF |
Zapote, Nispero |
Pouteria
fossicola (manilkara zapota - change to last methodology) |
| PC |
Aguacatillo, wild avocado |
Persea caerulea |
|
| QC |
Roble blanco, white oak |
Quercus copeyensis |
|
| QCC |
Roble negro, black oak |
Quercus costaricensis |
|
| QS |
Encino blanco, Roble, oak |
Quercus seemannii |
|
| QGT |
Roble blanco, white oak |
Quercus gulielmi-treleasii |
|
| QO |
Encino blanco, Roble, oak |
Quercus
oocarpa (insignis, rapurahuensis) |
| SP |
Yos |
Sapium pachystachys |
|
| SC |
Llama del bosque, flame of the forest |
Spathodea campanulata |
|
| TS |
Vainilla, Candelillo |
Tecoma stans |
|
| UM |
Tirrá, Mexican elm |
Ulmus mexicana |
|
| Laur |
aguacatillo, aguacaton |
Lauraceae
(including following species: |
|
|
Cinnamomum spp. (not seen but possible); Nectandra spp.; |
|
|
Ocotea
spp.; Persea spp.; Beilschmiedia spp.) |
To see how the data
are recorded, download the following spreadsheet: Cloudbridge
Tree Monitoring Template (Excel file)
|
