Bartlett's test was used to rank both field and photo schemes as to their ability to select 

 stands classified by field crews as high risk sawtimber, and to select those classified as young 

 stands needing management treatment. The field schemes are listed and ranked in table 3 . 

 Field- stratification method 6 based on management categories could not be ranked by this 

 method. The photo and map techniques are ranked in table 4. These data show that photo strat- 

 ification by 1 , 000 -cubic -foot volume classes ranks first in selecting both high risk sawtimber 

 and young stands needing treatment. Detailed examination of the limited basic data lends credence 

 to this ranking since most high risk sawtimber was confined to the higher cubic-volume strata, 

 and most young stands in need of thinning were confined to the lower cubic -volume strata. 

 Species group appeared next in value for management strata with stand size and crown cover 

 next. Crown cover appears to have value in locating young stands needing thinning. The wholly 

 subjective map classifications even though checked for accuracy on the ground are ranked below 

 the measured photo-volume strata. 



Study of table 3 indicates the ranking of the field methods is somewhat different from the 

 ranking of corresponding photo method. Cubic-volume strata are again best in segregating 

 high risk sawtimber. Stand density leads as a method of segregating young stands needing 

 thinning with species classification second. 



Table 3 . --Field-stratification schemes ranked by ability to segregate high 

 risk sawtimber and young stands needing management treatment 



No. 



: Stratification method : 

 : : Number : 

 : Description : of : 

 : : strata : 



High risk sawtimber : 

 Category 1 : 



Young stands needing 

 treatment 

 Category 5 









R an k - 





1 



Stand size and 











density 



10 



2 



4 



2 



Stand size 



4 



5 



3 



3 



Density 



3 



6 



1 



4 



Species 



10 



3 



2 



5 



Site 



6 



4 



6 



6 



Management 











category 1 



5 







7 



Cubic volume -- 











500- cubic -foot 











class 



11 



1 



5 



-"•This classification used in making the test. 



NOTE: Ranks are not on a consistent numerical scale, 



10 



