List of all metadata reports | This report's TOC | Previous Page | Next Page
System Title |
5.9 Indigenous Forest Classification |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Classification; indigenous forests; New Zealand; forest classes; forest types; distribution; maps. |
| Description | This includes:
This forest class classification system was used to prepare the NZMS 6 New Zealand forest class maps. Although McKelvey and Nicholls (1957) and Nicholls (1976) used the same forest classes; they did develop different forest type classification systems. It is not possible to translate from one forest type system to the other. In a number of cases the two used the same forest type symbol to mean different things. The McKelvey and Nicholls classification system was used to prepare the 1:63,000 forest type maps of the Central North Island. The Nicholls (1976) classification has more of an ecological focus. A further classification system was latter devised for the forest types of the South Island (McKelvey, 1984). This system was used to prepare South Island forest type maps. |
| Original Purpose | To develop a nationwide classification system for mapping indigenous forests using data from the New Zealand Forest Service National Forest Survey (volumetric survey) (Thomson, 1946; Masters et al 1957); and the Ecological Survey (New Zealand Forest Service, 1957). |
| Status | The development dates are:
|
| Organisation | Landcare Research |
| Jurisdiction | Landcare Research |
| Contact person/position | Mark Smale |
| Address | Private Bag 3127, Hamilton. Phone +64 7 858 3700 Fax +64 7 858 4964 Email smalem@landcare.cri.nz |
| Available format | Forest class maps series including explanatory notes |
| Access | Freely available |
| Geographical coverage | New Zealand |
Operational Specifications |
|
|---|---|
| Scale of Operation | Mapping scale is 1:250 000 for forest classes; 1:63,000 for forest types. |
| GIS Compatibility | Requires accurate locational data identifying corners of all polygons. |
| Relationship between levels in the classification system | Each forest class includes a number of forest types with one or more important features in common. |
| Contributing databases/classification systems | N/A |
| Contributing database GIS compatibility | N/A |
| Relationship with other classification systems and spatial frameworks. | The indigenous forest classification systems have a different focus to the Atkinson indigenous vegetation classification system. Atkinson's system has an ecological focus while the forest classification systems have a bias to merchantable timber species (especially podocarps and kauri). The National Forest Survey (Masters et al 1957) produced maps using their own forest classification system. |
| Relationship with other databases | The forest classes (from McKelvey and Nicholls, 1957) and Nicholls (1976)
were used to compile the NZMS 6 1:250,000 maps of forest classes. The forest
classification by McKelvey and Nicholls (1957) was used to prepare the 1:63,000
forest type maps for the Central North Island area.
The forest classification by McKelvey (1984) was used to prepare forest type maps for the South Island. |
Current and emerging use for: |
|
|---|---|
| Assisting with determining historic state/ baseline | Much of the data using these classification systems is historic data derived from the 1940's and 1950's. |
| Assisting with determining current state/ baseline | The system can be used to describe present day indigenous forest. Forest classes are standardized. The Nicholls (1976) forest types would be most appropriate as they have more of an ecological focus. |
| Asssisting with scenario building and modelling of possible futures | N/A |
| Risk Assesment | N/A |
| Monitoring site selection and sample design | It would be possible for indigenous forests. The forest classes component classification provides relatively little detail for beeches which are a major component for NZ indigenous forest. |
Current use (who,level,why)
This classification system is the basis for the New Zealand Forest Service Mapping Series 6. This 1:250 000 map series shows the extent of each of the 18 Forest classes throughout New Zealand during the 1940s and 1950s. The Nicholls forest classes and the associated map series are regularly used by scientists and management agencies. The maps have recently been digitised.
User friendliness/public and decision maker understanding
The terms used are reasonably easy to understand. Explanatory notes accompany each forest class map. The terms "softwoods" and "hardwoods" are more commonly used by foresters than ecologists
System strengths
- The forest classes form a simple classification system that has been used for many years.
- It has been used to map indigenous forest class extent for the whole of mainland New Zealand.
Current limitations of framework
- The associated data set is relatively old.
- It only applies to forests.
- At the class level beech forests are not differentiated even though they occupy an extensive area.
- The classification systems are biased towards merchantable timber species (primarily kauri and podocarps). This results in classes and types differentiated primarily on the basis of the presence/absence of certain timber species, rather that their ecological significance.
- The different classification systems use the same names for different forest types. This is confusing.
References
Masters, S.E.; Holloway,J.T.; and McKelvey,P.J. 1957. The National Forest Survey of New Zealand, 1955. Volume one: the indigenous forest resources of New Zealand. Government Printer: Wellington.
McKelvey, P.J; Nicholls, J.L. 1957. A provisional classification of North Island forests. NZ Journal of Forestry 7:84-101
Nicholls, J.L. 1976. A revised classification of the North Island indigenous forests. NZ Journal of Forestry 12:105-132
New Zealand Forest Service,1957. Annual report of the Forest Research Institute for the year ending 31 March 1957.
New Zealand Forest Service. Forest Service mapping series 6: Forest class maps 1:250 000.
Thomson, A.P. 1946. Design for a forest survey. New Zealand Journal of Forestry 5(3): 191-9.