Don, I do not want the data if it is measured using a clinometer at a certain distance from the base. Less data that is accurate is preferable to lots of data that incorporates unacceptable errors. The trees can be measured using a laser & clinometer sin/top sine/bottom method, by pole measurements, or by climbs and tape drops. Some combinations of these are fine. We can not accept clinometer at a set distance measurements into the dataset or it is useless for the purposes we desire. I don't trust data collected that way even if the measurer is meticulous in how it is collected, no matter who they may be.
Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: DON BERTOLETTE To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 5:22 PM Subject: [ENTS] Re: Tree Measurement Data Spreadsheet Steve- One of things we've discussed relative to data collection is that we're pretty much happy to have as many measurers out there measuring their hearts out, using whatever equipment that is available to them, we just need to know what level of accuracy we'll expect based on their equipment...if they're truly champion contenders, more accurate equipment, teams would be brought to bear. Until the laser rangefinders drop in price some more, so that more folks can afford them, the wily clinometer user can extract fairly good data, under a certain range of conditions, which get explored in Will's measurement tome. Good point! -Don --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
