Basal Areas for common walnut

There are no published Yield Class tables for common walnut Juglans regia – at least that I am aware of. A search on the European Forest Yield Tables Database reveals that data are only available for black walnut Juglans nigra in Hungary.

I wrote previously about research that I undertook exploring the crown sizes of major hardwood species – Estimating tree crown size. This work provides the next best available data on managing a stand of common walnut, in the form of basal areas for common walnut ref.

The table below shows the stem diameter (dbh), crown diameter (cd), crown/stem ratio (cd/dbh), number of trees per hectare (Nha) and acre (Nac), and Basal Areas (G) in m2 per hectare. These data were collected from trees grown in open conditions, and calculated for stand densities with zero crown overlap.

dbh

cd

cd/dbh

N trees per ha

N trees per acre

Basal Area m2 per ha

0.10

4.47

44.70

500

202

3.9

0.15

5.35

35.67

349

141

6.2

0.20

6.23

31.15

258

104

8.1

0.25

7.11

28.44

198

80

9.7

0.30

7.99

26.63

157

64

11.1

0.35

8.87

25.34

127

51

12.2

0.40

9.75

24.38

105

42

13.2

0.45

10.63

23.62

88

36

14.1

0.50

11.51

23.02

75

30

14.8

0.55

12.39

22.53

65

26

15.5

0.60

13.27

22.12

57

23

16.1

0.65

14.15

21.77

50

20

16.6

0.70

15.03

21.47

44

18

17.0

common walnut basal areas
Common walnut Juglans regia basal areas with dbh.

A growth rate of 1cm per year in stem diameter can be presumed, permitting this graph and data to be used in estimating suitable basal areas at different stand ages. If real dbh data is available, then the accurate growth rates will provide accurate basal area increase projections for a given site.

Gabriel Hemery


Reference

Hemery, G.E., Savill, P. & Pryor, S.N. (2005). Applications of the crown diameter – stem diameter relationship for different species of broadleaved trees. Forest Ecology and Management 215, 285-294. View abstract

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Basal Areas for common walnut

  1. I am surprised you include this reference in your review of the year:

    >>I became deeply involved in this debate myself, commenting publicly on the proposed sales (see BBC TV interview
    https://gabrielhemery.com/2011/01/26/film-interview-bbc-newsnight/
    )>>

    This was the Newsnight programme the day before the government launched its sell-off consultation. In your interviewyou said you didn’t see any reason why some of the forests shouldn’t be sold off!

    1. Thanks for the comment Imogen. I think that the Newsnight interview was a highlight personally and for forestry in England, as it is rare to receive a media spotlight of such scale on the subject. Yes I clearly stated that I thought some public forests could be disposed of if they delivered low public benefits. This view was derived from direct experience of some woodlands that in my view would be better in the hands of private woodland owners. For example those woodlands with no public access and little biodiversity or landscape value.

      The recommendation coming from Our Forests vision published today, that naturally I totally agree with are that (Our Forests vision, Principle 1, page 8):

      “But until the PFE is provided with stronger, lasting protection as a national resource of public woods and forests, there must be no sales.”

      I hope that this clarifies.

      Gabriel

What are you thinking? Leave a reply or comment ...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s