Methods ( by T. Cohen, E. Healy)

Over the course of four weeks we analyzed Site 2 and characterized it using the following methods:

Week 1
Our first visit was meant to familiarize our group with the site. We marked our site and paced out a 1 hectare plot, using a compass and calculated pace. As a group we decided to orient ourselves directly North from the original corner (by the vernal pool), then West, South, and finally East to establish the boundary of the hectare. We also used a GPS device to record our exact boundary coordinates for use on Google maps. After our corners had been marked, we explored our site and took pictures.

Week 2
For the second week we drew simple site maps in our field notebooks and dug a soil pit. While exploring our site we made note of vegetation, bedrock outcroppings/ledges, overall slope and other unique aspects of our site. Our soil pit was located in an area in the site that we felt was characteristic of the entire site. We dug until we hit bedrock, then placed markers in the pit to indicate the different layers and measured each layer. (See "Soil Pit" post for more information).

Week 3
During week three we divided our site into three different stands based on forest cover type. For the three stands, we designed two five-meter radius plots to more accurately estimate the composition of herbaceous and woody plants within the stand. We used a DBH tape and a clinometer to determine height and DBH of the trees within each plot. We decided to use a random sampling technique in determining the locations of the six plots.

Week 4

For the final week, we transected our plot three times, recording all visible snags as well as downed woody debris directly on the transect lines. We also noted presence of high and low exposed perches, and well as level of decay, height and diameter of the snags for a wildlife habitat assessment.