Ground-Based 

Photographic 

Monitoring

Frederick C. Hall

United States 

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific Northwest

Research Station

General Technical 

Report

PNW-GTR-503

May 2001
Author Frederick C. Hall is senior plant ecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Natural Resources, P.O. Box 3623, Portland,

Oregon 97208-3623. Paper prepared in cooperation with the Pacific Northwest

Region. 
Abstract Hall, Frederick C. 2001 Ground-based photographic monitoring. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-503. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Northwest Research Station. 340 p.

Land management professionals (foresters, wildlife biologists, range managers, 

and land managers such as ranchers and forest land owners) often have need to

evaluate their management activities. Photographic monitoring is a fast, simple,

and effective way to determine if changes made to an area have been successful.

Ground-based photo monitoring means using photographs taken at a specific site

to monitor conditions or change. It may be divided into two systems: (1) comparison

photos, whereby a photograph is used to compare a known condition with field

conditions to estimate some parameter of the field condition; and (2) repeat photographs, whereby several pictures are taken of the same tract of ground over time

to detect change. Comparison systems deal with fuel loading, herbage utilization,

and public reaction to scenery. Repeat photography is discussed in relation to landscape, remote, and site-specific systems. Critical attributes of repeat photography

are (1) maps to find the sampling location and of the photo monitoring layout;

(2) documentation of the monitoring system to include purpose, camera and film,

w e a t h e r, season, sampling technique, and equipment; and (3) precise replication of

photographs. Five appendices include (A) detailed instructions for photo sampling,

(B) blank forms for field use, (C) specifications and photographs of recommended

equipment, (D) filing system alternatives, and (E) suggestions for taking photographs and analyzing change over time. 

Keywords: Monitoring, photographs, landscapes, transects, animal sampling, 

riparian, succession, forests, rangeland.
Preface This document started as an update of my 1976 publication on photo monitoring

to appraise rangeland trends. The update was stimulated by a desire to document

40 years of experience in rephotography. This included about 150 ecology sample

plots rephotographed at 5- to 10-year intervals, 25 years of herbage production,

25 years of riparian change photographed three times per season, and up to 

40 years of rephotography of about 80 other situations, including wildfires, prescribed fires, tussock moth and spruce budworm damage, mountain pine beetle

e ffects on lodgepole and ponderosa pine, fenceline contrasts between good

and poor range condition, logging, revegetation, research studies and various

landscape views. There is a great breadth of ground-based photographic monitoring in the literature. One aspect I found was use of photographs to estimate

various existing conditions of vegetation and soil, such as comparison photo

monitoring following Maxwell and Wa r d ’s (1976a) guides to estimate fuel loading, fire intensity, rate of spread, and resistance to control. Another was use of

remotely controlled cameras to monitor presence of animals as illustrated by

Kristan and others’ (1996) video monitoring of osprey nest activities. And finally,

repeat landscape photography of pictures taken at the dawn of cameras and exploration of the west, as exemplified by Progulske and Sowel’s (1974) rephotography

of Colonel Custer’s exploration of the Black Hills in 1874—100 years of change. It

is hoped that the information gained by personal experience and literature review

will provide some guidelines for successful ground-based photo monitoring.

Fred Hall
Contents 1 Introduction

1 Definitions

2 Comparison and Repeat Photography

3 Common Items

3 Select Specific Monitoring Objectives

4 Repeatable Photo Technique

6 Cameras and Film

10 Camera Format

20 Filing System

21 Comparison Photo Monitoring

21 Forest Residue Estimation

24 Herbage Utilization

27 Monitoring Public Concern

27 Repeat Photography

28 Maps of Location and Monitoring Layout

29 Documentation of the Photo System

30 Permanent Marking 

30 Landscape Photography

32 Purpose

33 Relocation

34 Considerations

38 Remote Photo Monitoring

41 Site-Specific Repeat Photography

41 Topic Photographs

47 Transect Photographs

48 Pole Camp

49 Exact Relocation

50 Camera Techniques

60 Photo Point Location

60 Camera Location

61 Riparian Areas

62 Relocation of Repeat Photography

62 Idiosyncrasies With Compass Directions

62 Field Book for Rephotography

64 Multiple-Camera System
66 Review

67 Literature Cited

77 Appendix A: Methodology for Photo Monitoring of Change in 

Vegetation or Soil

185 Appendix B: Blank Forms for Photo Monitoring 

271 Appendix C: Photo Monitoring Equipment

297 Appendix D: Photo Monitoring Filing System

303 Appendix E: Photo Techniques

326 Index

340 Metric and English Conversions
Introduction

Definitions

Ground-based photographic monitoring is designed for use by land managers, such

as foresters, wildlife biologists, range managers, ranchers, and forest land owners. 

It is a way to document management activities and evaluate changes. For many

people, photographs are faster and easier to interpret than measurements, and

measurements, if needed, can be made from the photographs. 

The system uses cameras at ground level rather than aerial photography or other

aboveground sensing. It includes several applications using either still picture or

video media. For example, fuel loading conditions found in the field can be compared with photographs of known fuel characteristics to estimate tonnage per acre,

flame length, rate of spread, and control problems; this is known as c o m p a r i s o n

p h o t o - g r a p h y. O r, cameras can be remotely controlled to document animal activities, which is remote photography. Camera locations also may be established and

the same scene rephotographed periodically for repeat photography. Photographs

produce a unique kind of monitoring not duplicated by measurement or inventory

systems, although photography is subject to requirements that limit its application

and use. 

I begin with definitions and concepts, then discuss items common to all photography,

followed by comparison photo monitoring, remote photography, repeat photography,

and end with relocation of photo monitoring sites.

Discussion of ground-based photo monitoring should start with a few definitions: 

M o n i t o r i n g is detecting change or condition of various topics. In this paper, it includes

detecting change in riparian shrub cover, healing of disturbed soil, identifying presence

of animals, documenting air quality, or estimating condition of some item such as fuel

loading or percentage of utilization of herbage. 

Photography refers to photographs or video or digital images, color or black and

white, taken or used at the site, as opposed to aerial photograph interpretation and

Landsat image analysis. The concept of ground-based photo monitoring therefore

means using photographs taken on the ground to evaluate change or condition of

various items. 

Camera format specifies a focal length of the lens and ultimate image size. Some

common formats are 50-mm lens on a 35-mm camera, 70-mm lens on a 2- by 2-in

camera, or a 128-mm lens on a 4- by 5-in camera. All are comparable insofar as

what part of the landscape is included in the final image. Formats may differ for 

the same camera. A zoom lens on a 35-mm camera can change from 35-mm focal

length wide angle to 110-mm telephoto. Most photographs in this publication were

taken with a 35-mm camera and a 50-mm lens.

Three terms are used to identify types of photography: 

Landscape photographs are of distant scenes or of a broad, general area often

more than 10 ha. 

1
Comparison and

Repeat Photography

General photographs document a topic being monitored and commonly cover 0.25

to 10 ha. They may be used alone or in conjunction with closeup photographs. 

Closeup photographs are made of a specific topic on a small tract of ground often

from a few decimeters to 10 by 10 m. They have no horizon reference, and the

locations from where the photographs are taken therefore must be marked with

stakes or fenceposts. 

Finally, three terms are important in photographic sampling systems: 

Witness site is an easily identified reference used to locate the monitoring area. 

It provides compass direction and distance to the camera locations. 

Camera location is a permanently marked location for the camera. 

Photo point is the direction of the photograph from the camera location. It is

marked permanently by a steel stake or fencepost and commonly involves a size

control board located in the center of the photograph. More than one photo point

may be taken from a single camera location, and more than one camera location

may photograph a single photo point.

Comparison—In comparison photo monitoring, existing conditions are compared

with conditions shown in a set of photographs. For example, Maxwell and Ward

(1976a) produced a color photograph field guide for estimating logging fuel loading

in tons per acre by size class with estimates of fire intensity, rate of spread, flame

length, and resistance to control. Kinney and Clary (1994) developed a guide for

estimating the percentage of utilization of riparian grasses and sedges by using

photographs of various stubble heights. And Magill (1990) evaluated public concern

over logging by having people rate a set of color landscape photographs taken at

different camera focal lengths to simulate various distances from the scene. 

Repeat—Repeat photography is characterized by taking multiple photographs of 

the same landscape, tract of ground, or activity, such as animal presence. It’s particularly useful in three situations: 

1. Landscape photography, where change is documented for landscape-sized 

areas over time. Some classic examples are Progulske and Sowel’s (1974) 

documentation of Colonel Custer’s exploration of the Black Hills wherein they

rephotographed pictures taken in 1874. Another is panoramic photography

using special camera equipment to take 360-degree views of landscapes, 

as Arnst (1985) shows for the Cascade Range of the Pacific Northwest. 

2. Remotely operated cameras used to monitor animal behavior such as that of

nesting ospreys (Kristan and others 1996), evaluate air quality (Fox and others

1987), or document animal distribution (Kinney and Clary 1998).

2
Common Items

Select Specific

Monitoring Objectives

3. Site-specific repeat photography identifies specific topics on selected tracts of

ground to document change or lack of change in vegetation and soil. Gary and

Currie (1977) show a 40-year record of plant and soil recovery on an abused

watershed in Colorado, and Smith and Arno (1999) document 88 years of

change in managed ponderosa pine forests through 14 camera locations. 

C l e a r l y, photo monitoring is not a simple, routine procedure, but rather a multifaceted

concept covering various purposes or objectives. To discuss this topic, the paper is

organized into seven main parts: items common to all photo monitoring, comparison

photos where current conditions are compared to a series of photographs and their

condition rated, repeat photography of landscapes, photo monitoring by remotely

operated cameras, site-specific repeat photography, and lessons in relocation of

repeat photography.

The appendices cover many items in detail: Appendix A gives the methodology for

monitoring change in vegetation and soil, appendix B contains blank forms for both

office and field ready to copy, appendix C has plans for construction of meter boards

and plot frames, appendix D discusses filing systems for photo monitoring, and

appendix E illustrates photographic tips. 

Common to all photographic monitoring are (1) determining specific objectives, 

(2) using a repeatable technique, (3) choosing appropriate camera and film, and 

(4) developing a filing system. 

The first and most important item in any monitoring project is to have specific

objectives. Questions answerable by photography must be asked before any kind 

of monitoring can be developed and installed. Consider a five-part query to develop

these objectives: why to monitor, where to locate the sampling, what specific topic 

to evaluate, when to do the photography, and how to accomplish the photography

(Borman 1995; Nader and others 1995; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of

Land Management 1996).

W h y—Why to monitor asks for definition of the question needing an answer.

Implementation monitoring asks if what was done was what was indicated, effectiveness asks whether the treatment did what was wanted, and validation asks if the

treatment met the objectives. Why sets the stage for all other questions. 

Where—Where to monitor depends upon the why. Where will the selected representative tracts, animal activity areas, treatment sites, or particular kinds of treatments be located? Will number, size, and location of activities such as fire, logging,

revegetation, livestock grazing or flood affect the selected site(s)? Ask where the

best location is that will answer the questions. Critical documents are a map to

locate the site and a site map to document all camera locations and photo points. 

3
Repeatable Photo

Technique

What—Which items on the selected tract—vegetation, soil, streambanks, animals,

air quality—will be monitored to support the why ? Ask what the critical few items 

are that must be documented. What is expected to change? What will the picture

demonstrate? Why should I take this picture (Johnson 1991)? The what dictates

sampling layout. 

When—When to monitor supports the why and what questions. Does monitoring

encompass one year or multiple years? One season or more? Specific dates and

time(s) of day? All are important in both animal and site monitoring. Scheduling

includes time before treatment as well as after and frequency after initial treatment.

Unplanned disturbances, such as fire or flood, pose special problems. A monitoring

protocol may have to be developed on the spot to determine when and where during the event to establish photo points and to define a followup schedule. 

How—How to monitor is determined by what, why, and when. It encompasses

detailed protocols for photographic procedures used to obtain qualitative data 

(estimates) or quantitative data (measured in the field or measured on photographs).

(Appendix B contains detailed instructions for both systems.) An example might be

dealing with effects of livestock grazing on a riparian area: (1) Are streambanks

being broken down? (2) Are riparian shrubs able to grow in both height and crown

spread? (3) Is there enough herbage remaining after grazing to trap sediments

from flooding? (4) Is herbaceous vegetation stable, improving, or deteriorating?

Answering these questions will require selection of a sampling location and establishment of photo points and camera locations sufficent to gather adequate data.

Try to select camera locations that will photograph more than one photo point. T h e

time or times of year to take photos then must be specified, such as just prior to

animal use of the area, just after they leave, or fall vegetation conditions. Will this

riparian site be monitored for high spring runoff, late season low flows, or during

floods? Monitoring of stream flows probably requires different scheduling from

monitoring of animal use. 

A second common item in photo monitoring is a repeatable technique that can be

used by various people to attain similar results. For a technique to be repeatable, it

must be simple, thoroughly documented, and illustrated. The following items are key

elements in a well-documented and -illustrated technique: 

1. A map locating the photo monitoring site and one or more maps of the photo

monitoring layout for the site. 

2. Camera locations and photo points permanently marked with steel fenceposts 

or iron stakes. Iron stakes should be flush with the ground to prevent tire and

foot (hoof) damage. They are difficult to relocate but can be found with a metal

detector. Positions of camera location and photo points are critical (Rogers and

others 1983). The need for a constant distance between camera and photo

point for all repeat photography is demonstrated under “Camera Format,” below.

4
3. Precise description, by time of day, weather, and season, of when landscape 

or general and closeup scenes are to be photographed—all are directly related

to the objectives for monitoring; for example, before 10 a.m. and after 3 p.m. 

if back-lighted vegetation is needed (app. E), visibility of 25 or more miles for

repeat landscape photography, high overcast to avoid shadows in forest photography (app. E), bird monitoring in spring, livestock grazing at mid or late

season, or documenting high and low stream flows in spring and late summer.

Special instructions, such as key landscape items to identify in landscape 

photography, also are needed.

4. A description of how to photograph and show camera locations and photo

points on the site map. A size control board (fig. 1; app. C), such as a meter

board, is needed for general photos and appropriate plot frames for closeup 

photos (app. C). 

5. Suitable forms and field instructions for accomplishing the monitoring (apps. 

A and B).

5

Figure 1—Landscape used to test effects of camera format (focal length), distance from camera to photo point (meter

board), and camera position on size and location of items. Camera format is 35-mm using three focal lengths (lenses):

35-mm wide angle, 50-mm standard, and 70-mm telephoto. Distances are 7, 10, and 14 m. Camera positions are eye

level (1.8 m), breast height (1.4 m), and offset right by 4 dm. Numbered items are outlined and compared: (1) bucket

between camera and meter board, (2) double meter boards, (3) log on the ground, (4) root wad, (5) cart 15 m from the

meter board, and (6) lamp pole 50 m from the meter board. Four situations will be evaluated: (A) varying the distance

from camera to meter board but using the same focal length camera (figs. 2 and 3); (B) varying both distance and focal

length such that the meter board is the same size in all pictures (figs. 4 and 5); (C) varying the camera focal length at a

given distance (figs. 6 and 7), and (D) varying camera position over the camera location fencepost (figs. 8, 9, and 10).
Cameras and Film

6. An equipment list including a specified camera and film, field forms to be used

in each photograph, any needed measuring or calculating equipment, and fenceposts and equipment to permanently mark photo locations. Specify whether a

tripod is required and why.

7. Specific, detailed diagrams and instructions for installing and maintaining photographic equipment. This is particularly important with remotely operated camera 

systems to assure their proper functioning.

8. A comprehensive filing system (app. D; Johnson 1991, Nader and others 1995)

with a container for each study to hold all information: monitoring objectives,

site descriptions, maps, color slides, and black-and-white pictures with their

negatives or digital memory cards with a copy of the images. All color slides,

black-and-white pictures plus their negatives, and digital images and their

memory cards need to be labeled immediately after processing. A note on the

outside of the file of the last monitoring date is helpful. 

The purpose of photo monitoring is to document change in a landscape or topic

over time. Measuring change requires photographs of good to excellent resolution

and color, both of which are influenced by camera and film. 

Two kinds of cameras are available: film and digital. Each has specified formats,

such as a film camera with 35-mm film with a 50-mm lens, which is similar to a

digital camera with a 13-mm lens. Some photographers suggest that changing from

one kind of camera format to another poses serious problems in matching photographs. This is not insurmountable, however, as discussed under “Camera Format,”

below. Another concern is quality of image. Switching from one brand of color film to

another tends to change tones, particularly green and blue. And changing from film

to digital usually influences image resolution and color.

Film and digital camera characteristics—Both types of cameras come in two

configurations: (1) viewfinder and (2) view-through-the-lens or single lens reflex

(SLR). Many digital cameras use SLR principles with a liquid crystal display (LCD).

An LCD is a miniature (about 25 by 37 mm) computer monitor screen that displays

the image as seen through the lens (Kodak 1999b). Viewfinders show an image

that is parallel with the lens and have an outlined box in the viewer to show what

the image will cover when a picture is taken at close range (parallax correction).

The image will always appear sharp. With SLR systems, the image is viewed

exactly as it will appear: there is no parallax correction and the image will appear

fuzzy when out of focus, but SLR cameras are more expensive. 

Both film and digital cameras provide for a strobe flash system. Less expensive

cameras often have built-in flash that fires straight ahead and is effective within 2 m

for direct light and within 6 m for fill-in. More expensive cameras provide a “hot

shoe” for attaching a more powerful and adjustable flash system. Additional flash

systems add cost to the camera. Some cameras provide both an internal flash and

a hot shoe.

6
Zoom lenses have become popular, particularly with the point-and-shoot automatic

35-mm cameras. They also seem to be common on many digital cameras. These

lenses have two main attributes: they add flexibility to the camera and they tend to

be less sharp than a fixed lens. Zoom lenses may pose problems in photo monitoring because of the need to set a precise focal length to reproduce the original image

coverage. For an SLR lens, this isn’t too difficult because the lens will have focal

lengths marked. But a point-and-shoot 35-mm camera will zoom from 35-mm focal

length to 100 mm or greater, a threefold difference in photo coverage, with no indication of the precise focal length used. The equivalent in digital cameras would be

9.2 mm to 28 mm. See “Camera Format” for details. 

Lens quality and speed vary. Lens speed is given in f-stops. The “f” indicates how

large a hole is open to admit light into the camera. Small f-stops admit much light

and large f-stops admit little: for example, at f-3.5, two times more light is admitted

than at f-5.6, and f-5.6 admits twice the light of f-8. Depth of field also increases with

an increase in f-stop. A slow lens of moderate sharpness is often characterized by

f-stops of 3.5 to 4.8 and fast lenses of good sharpness by f-stops of 1.2 to 2.4. A

film camera with an f-3.5 lens that’s wide open and shooting at 1/60 of a second will

create an underexposed image if the light meter says f-2.4 is needed, but a camera

with an f-1.2 lens can easily capture the image. Faster lenses are more expensive.

The processing unit in the camera computer usually provides digital camera speed;

faster speed costs more. 

Resolution (sharpness of the image) in film cameras is a function first of lens quality

and second of film speed, which translates to graininess in the final picture. The difference in cost for films between ISO 100 and 400 is minimal, but good lenses do

cost more. In digital cameras, resolution is determined by maximum dpi (dots per

inch) of the camera. As of January 2000, most digital cameras started at about 0.7

megapixels, suitable for 4- by 6-in snapshots, and go up to 3.6, appropriate for 11-

by 14-in pictures. Do not use less than a 2-megapixel camera. Good quality optical

lenses also enhance resolution. Most digital cameras offer a choice of three to five

resolution levels. For example a 1.3-megapixel camera might offer its best resolution at 1280 by 1020, midresolution at 900 by 700, and lowest at 600 by 400. Finer

resolution results in fewer images on a digital storage card and slower processing.

Quality also is influenced by the kind of compression, if any, used to store the image,

and compression influences how many images may be placed in a memory card. 

Film and digital concepts—One might consider the digital camera a special purpose computer designed to take photographs (Kodak 1999b). Digital images are

captured on an electronic storage, or memory, card that must be processed to

produce an image. The camera can alter an image with different settings. Images

are made up of dots called pixels, each composed of three colors: red, green, and

blue. Intensity of each color can be adjusted. Film and digital storage cards are

discussed shortly.

7
A camera using slide film exposes an image on film—period. Once the exposure is

made, there is no recourse with correction. There is some recourse with black-andwhite and color negative film by changing print exposure time, selection of paper,

and dodging or burning items to be enhanced. 

With digital cameras, the image is only one link in the chain to a photograph (Kodak

1999a): This chain is (1) the camera with its dpi or pixel resolution, lens quality that

captures the image, and the camera’s ability to modify pixel characteristics; (2) CPU

(the computer) that processes the image with its ability to make major changes in

the pixels and thus the image; (3) monitor with its color projection of the image on

the screen, which is used as a basis for changing the image characteristics; and (4)

the output device that either prints the image (printer) or projects it (projector). The

camera, CPU, and output device affect the resolution (dpi), color quality, and contrast. Matching the camera resolution with that of the CPU and output device attains

best image quality. They are not all the same. 

Film speed, the amount of light required to expose the film, is characterized by 

an ISO rating. Film resolution (graininess of an image) also is a product of film

speed: faster film has more grain. Common ISO ratings are 100 for slow speed and

fine-grain film (for example 1/60th second at f-5.6); ISO 200, which can be shot at

twice the shutter speed (1/120th second at f-5.6) and has medium graininess; and

ISO 400, which can be shot at four times the shutter speed (1/250th second at f-5.6)

but is rather coarse grained. 

Digital camera equivalents are approximately 1640 by 1400 dpi for ISO 400 (2.4-

megapixel camera), 1960 by 1600 dpi for ISO 200 (3.2-megapixel camera), and

2280 by 1800 dpi for ISO 100 (4.1-megapixel camera). To determine the camera

rating, multiply the two pixel numbers: 1280*1020 = 1.3 megapixels. 

Output (pictures) differs between film and digital cameras. The prints are similar

because they are all images printed on paper. Prints from color and black-and-white

film and from digital images all share the same result: a picture one can hold in their

hand or mount on a monitoring form. 

Slides made from film and digital images share few common traits, however. A

film image is determined at exposure and can be shown in presentations through 

a slide projector. A digital image cannot. Generally, the digital image first must be

downloaded from the camera and placed into memory of a laptop computer. T h e n

the laptop must be connected to a digital projector for presentation. Recently,

cameras have been programmed for download directly to a projector; however, this

projects only slides in the camera. It does not provide for a presentation using title,

data, and instructional slides. Here are some things to consider when projecting

digital images for a presentation (Kodak 1999a):

1. Know the native resolution (dpi) of the laptop and the camera. Select the resolution that will support “high color” (16 bit) color depth (1280 by 1024 dpi; a 1.3-

megapixel camera) or higher. Settings of the laptop computer above or below

the camera settings will result in reduced image quality. 

8
2. Match the resolution of the laptop with the resolution of the digital projector.

If the laptop uses 1280 by 1020 dpi and the projector only 800 by 600, image

quality will be at the projector resolution. 

3. Understand that colors on the computer monitor used to modify image characteristics are not the same as those projected. The projector gives the more

accurate color.

Film—Film is another consideration in photo monitoring, particularly the use of color

slide film compared to negative films when prints are the desired outcome. Prints

can be modified many ways by using different kinds of printing paper, exposure timing, dodging, burning, and different filters to make good comparison pictures. An

advantage of black and white film is its long life. Most color films or prints tend to

fade over the years, even if they are kept in dark, cool, dry locations. 

Tones in color film differ according to the chemicals used in manufacturing and 

processing the film: Kodachrome has warmer, more vivid colors then Elite Chrome

(Ektachrome), yet Elite Chrome (Ektachrome) tends to produce a truer reproduction

of the greens and browns in a natural landscape.1 Repeat photography done with

different brands of film therefore produce some significant differences in appearance

of vegetation conditions in the scene, whether real or not (Magill 1989). The photo

monitoring protocol should prescribe the brand of film, speed of film, and light

(weather) conditions for the project. 

Film processing will influence how well photos can be compared. Most film is sent to

a commercial processor where either slides are produced or pictures are printed at

a standard size, such as 32 by 5 or 4 by 6 in. Quality of processing differs. Do not

cheapen your product by cutting costs and quality at the final step (Johnson 1991). 

Weather should be related to film. How does current weather compare to conditions

of previous photographs (Magill 1989, Maxwell and Ward 1980a)? A dense, heavy

cloud layer will produce different colors and tones compared to a high, thin overcast,

which in turn will be different from full sunlight that causes deep shadows. Maxwell

and Ward (1980a) suggest overcast skies to reduce shadows and taking at least

three different exposures to bracket light conditions for comparable colors between

photos. Weather conditions of original photographs should be duplicated. 

Digital storage cards—Digital cameras do not use film, but rather electronic storage cards (Kodak 1999a). Storage cards are not developed but are processed by

computer. Any or all images can be erased and the card reused. The color quality,

contrast, and depth can be manipulated. Either all images or selected ones can be

copied from one card to another, greatly facilitating storage and retrieval of images.

Different brands of cameras use different storage cards. Storage cards also come 

in several sizes and makes. 

1 The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for 

reader information and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or services.

9
Camera Format

Storage cards vary in their megabyte (MB) capacity, which directly limits the number

of images that can be stored. A general conversion from number of pixels in an image

to number of images per storage card is a 1-to-1.2 ratio: a 1-megapixel photo requires

about 1.2-MB of storage card capacity. For example, an image at 1280 by 1024 pixels

(1.3-megapixels) would require an entire 2-MB card, or 24 photos could be placed

on a 32-MB card. The same 32 MB card would hold 66 photos at 800 by 600 pixels

(0.48-megapixel). 

Digital storage cards can be reused. The deleted images, of course, are lost. 

Processing of storage cards is quite different from film, with two alternatives: commercial or home processing. Commercial means the storage card is sent to a digital

processing laboratory for prints similar to film. Home processing requires use of a

CPU, with a download system from the camera, and a printer. For best image quality,

the dpi of the camera and computer should be compatible, and the dpi of the computer and printer also should be compatible. Image quality is sacrificed if either the

computer or printer cannot process the dpi of the camera, or image quality may be

sacrificed by color rendition of the printer.

Digital images may be stored in three ways: (1) in the memory card used with the

camera, (2) transferred to a compact disk (CD) and the memory card reused, or 

(3) transferred to a computer hard drive with essential information in its file and the

memory card reused. If stored in a computer, assure that instructions for locating

the folder or file are placed in the photo monitoring filing system. 

Color prints are similar in cost between film and digital systems; however, slides

made from digital memory cards tend to cost more. The use of two steps, from card

to negative and from negative to slide, tends to reduce quality of the image.

Camera format is the combination of camera body image size and focal length of a

lens. Format concepts apply to both film and digital cameras. Exact duplication of

camera format is not of critical concern (Rogers and others 1983) when evaluating

change in the subject photographed. Images may be enlarged or reduced to a constant area of coverage, printed, and compared. 

When using slide film, however, images taken with different camera formats will

project differently on the screen. This is a major concern discussed by Magill (1989)

in his analysis of change in campgrounds. He projected slides onto a screen with a

grid and adjusted size of the image according to specified criteria prior to analysis. 

Some examples of common film camera formats that cover about the same area 

of a landscape are (1) 1- by 1.5-in image size (35-mm camera) using a 50-mm focal

length lens, (2) 2- by 2-in (50- by 50-mm) image size using a 70-mm lens, or (3) a 

4- by 5-in (100- by 125-mm) image using 128-mm lens. All are equivalent to a digital

camera at 13-mm focal length. The advent of good quality zoom lenses permits a

great variety of camera formats having both desirable and undesirable features.

10
A desirable feature is increased flexibility in choosing photograph formats without

the need to change lenses. Undesirable features include higher f-stops and no constant focal length when rephotographing monitoring sequences.

The effects of camera format and distance from camera to subject are shown and

discussed in figures 1 through 7. Camera position concerns are illustrated in figures

8 through 10. Change in emphasis on a topic by distance is discussed in “Camera

Techniques,” below.

Figure 1 shows a testing landscape where six objects are positioned, photographed,

and outlined to compare size and location of the objects with change in distance,

focal length, and camera position. Three lenses were used with a 35-mm camera

body: (1) 35-mm wide angle, (2) 50-mm as a standard for comparison, and (3) 70-

mm telephoto; these are equivalent to digital cameras of 9, 13, and 18 mm. They

were used in conjunction with three distances from camera to meter board: (1) 7 m,

(2) 10 m as a standard for comparison, and (3) 14 m. The effect of camera position

was evaluated at 10 m with a 50-mm lens. The standard for comparison was 1.4 m

above the ground (breast height) centered over the camera location fencepost.

Camera position was moved upward 4 dm to 1.8 m (eye level) and sideways 4 dm. 

The first evaluation (fig. 2) is a standard camera format of 50-mm lens on a 35-mm

camera positioned 7, 10, and 14 m from a meter board. All photographs in figure 2

are clearly different. Outlines of objects, adjusted in size to the meter board at 10 m

are shown in figure 3. All objects are different in both size and location.

Next, both camera format and distance to meter board were adjusted. The objective

was to photograph the meter board at a constant size where the 35-mm lens at 7 m

gave the same size meter board as 50-mm at 10 m and 70-mm at 14 m (fig. 4).

Notice the difference in backgrounds. Comparison of object outlines in figure 5

shows that all objects are different in both size and location, almost identical with

figure 3. 

Finally, focal lengths (35, 50, and 70-mm) were changed at a fixed distance, 10 m

(figs. 6 and 7). Figure 6 appears to show very different scenes insofar as what is

included within each photo. But when the images are adjusted to size of the meter

board at 50 mm shown in figure 7, each object is almost exactly the same size and

location. This effect is what Rogers and others (1983) discuss. Figures 2 through 7

clearly indicate that distance from camera to meter board is critical; whereas focal

length is not.

11

Text continues on page 20.
Figure 2—Effect of distance from camera to meter board on location and size of outlined objects when

using the same camera format. Camera format is a 50-mm length lens on a 35-mm camera at 7, 10,

and 14 m from the meter board. Objects were outlined on clear plastic overlay sheets as follows: 10 m

in a solid line, 7 m in dashes, and 14 m in dots. Each outline was adjusted in size to match the meter

board at 10 m as follows: measure in millimeters from the top of the board to bottom; this measurement

is divided into the measure for 10 m for a percentage of change; then enlarge or reduce the overlay by

that percentage. (A) The 10-m board was 23.0 mm and 100 percent; (B) the 7-m board was 34.0 mm

reduced to 68 percent, and (C) the 14-m board was 16.5 mm enlarged to 139 percent. Figure 3 compares the adjusted outlines. 

12
Figure 3—Overlays of object outlines from figure 2 adjusted in size to 10 m. The 10-m outline

is solid, 7 m is dashes, and 14 m is dots. (A) Overlays of 7 m and 10 m shows objects of different size and location. (B) The 10-m and 14-m overlays also show different sizes and locations. (C) All three overlaid show that all objects are different in both size and location.

Distance from camera to meter board is critical if objects in photographs are to be compared. 

13
14

Figure 4—Both focal length and distance to meter board are adjusted to make the meter board the

same size in each photograph: (A) 50-mm at 10 m, (B) 35-mm at 7 m, and (C) 70-mm at 14 m. Meter

boards are measured to show similarity, and outlines were adjusted by the percentages shown. Objects

are outlined on clear plastic overlays as follows: 50-mm with a solid line, 35-mm in dashes, and 70-mm

in dots. Notice how the backgrounds change with a constant size meter board. Figure 5 compares the

object outlines. 
15

Figure 5—Object outlines from figure 4 overlaid to evaluate effects of camera focal length and

distance from camera to meter board on size and location of objects. Photos were taken to keep

the meter board at the same size. (A) The overlays for 35-mm at 7 m and for 50-mm at 10 m

show different sizes and locations of items. A similar situation occurs with B. (C) All three overlaid shows a striking similarity to figure 3 because distance from camera to meter board is critical

and focal length is not, as will be shown in figures 6 and 7.
16

Figure 6—Effects of change in camera focal length of 35-mm, 50-mm, and 70-mm, at 10-m distance

from camera to meter board using 50-mm at 10 m for comparison. Objects in each photograph were

outlined on clear plastic overlays and were adjusted in size to the 50-mm at 10 m from the meter board

as follows: (A) 50-mm was measured at 23.0 mm for 100 percent, solid outline; (B) 35-mm focal length

was 17.0 mm, enlarged to 135 percent, outlined in dots; and (C) 70-mm was 30.0 mm, reduced to 77

percent, outlined in dashes. They are compared in figure 7. 
17

Figure 7—Object outlines for three camera focal lengths taken at 10 m from the meter board shown

in figure 6. (A) Overlaying 35-mm and 50-mm shows almost no difference in object size or location.

(B) Similarly, overlaying 50-mm and 70-mm shows little difference. (C) When all three are overlaid,

there is almost no difference in object size or location. Camera focal length may differ without affecting analysis of photographic items when images are adjusted to a common size. A major disadvantage of using various focal lengths is the loss of background coverage in each photograph (shown in

fig. 6, B and C). Comparison with figures 3 and 5 clearly demonstrates that distance from camera to

meter board must remain the same. 

Open to view page 18.
18

Figure 8—Effects of camera height aboveground on size and location of outlined objects. (A) Height of

1.4 m (4.5 ft, breast height) outlined in solid lines, is compared with (B) eye level of 1.8 m (5.8 ft) outlined in dots. The difference of 4 dm (16 in) is shown in figure 10A. 

Figure 9—Effects of horizontal offset of the camera 4 dm (16 in) from center. (A) Center position is

outlined in solid lines and (B) camera position to the right is outlined in dots. Difference in object size

and location is shown in figure 10B. 
19

Figure 10—Effects of altering camera position by 4 dm (16 in) vertically and horizontally on size and location of outlined

objects in figures 8 and 9. The reference position is 1.4 m (4.5 ft) centered over the camera location fencepost and outlined in solid lines. (A) Vertical movement of camera position, outlined in dots, to 1.8 m results in no change in object

size but significant change in location on the photograph. (B) Horizontal movement of 4 dm (16 in) to the right, outlined

in dots, results in no change in object size but significant change in position with the shift in a different direction from A.

Position of the camera over the camera location fencepost affects location of objects but not size of objects.
Filing System A filing system must be developed for repeat photography. Place each photo study

in a folder complete with purposes for the monitoring, site descriptions, notes, maps,

color slides, and black-and-white prints with negatives or digital memory cards with

prints (Johnson 1991, Nader and others 1995). The purpose of the file is to contain

everything that other people will need for rephotography. Appendix D covers filing

systems in detail. 

Special note—It cannot be overemphasized to label and date all slides, black-andwhite and color photographs, and the negatives as they are processed. Date and

study location should be recorded on slides and negatives or digital memory cards

by use of photo identification forms placed in the picture view at time of photogr aphy. Too often, negatives cannot be positively identified with their prints or date of

photograph. I have found this a particular problem with negatives over 5 years old

that document gradual change in conditions. 

With these common characteristics in mind, two kinds of photo monitoring will be

discussed: comparison photos and repeat photos. 

20

Effects of camera position on object size and location are illustrated in figures 8

through 10. The photographs in figures 8 and 9 do not look different because 4-dm

movement of the camera is difficult to detect. Figure 10, however, illustrates how

much movement of objects occurs with only 4 dm (16 in) of change in camera position up or sideways. Although there is substantial change in object position, there is

no change in size because the distance from camera to meter board was the same.

Camera position is critical if location of objects is an objective of photographic monitoring; it is not critical if change in size of object is the objective.

Few restrictions and many opportunities exist in camera selection. The objective of

photo monitoring suggests the appropriate style of camera and economics dictate

the sophistication.
Comparison photo monitoring means comparing on-the-ground circumstances to 

a set of photographs depicting various known conditions and assigning a value or 

rating to the field situation. This deals primarily with effectiveness monitoring and

asking the question, “Did we do what we said we would?” Three examples are illustrated: (1) appraisal of fuel loading, (2) estimation of herbage utilization, and (3)

monitoring of public concern. 

An example of comparison photo monitoring is appraisal of fuel loading (fig. 11).

Maxwell and Ward produced photo series for quantifying forest residues in the

coastal Douglas-fir—hemlock type (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco-Tsuga

heterophylla (Raf. Sarg.) (1976a), ponderosa pine type (Pinus ponderosa P. & C.

Lawson) (1976b), Sierra mixed conifer type (Abies spp.) (1979), and natural forest

residues in several Pacific Northwest forest types (1980b). Other examples are

Koski and Fischer (1979) using photo series for appraising thinning slash in northern Idaho, Wade and others’ (1993) photo series for estimating posthurricane

residue in southern pine, and Ottmar and others’ (1990) sophisticated stereophoto

series for quantifying forest residues in the Willamette National Forest in Oregon. 

Maxwell and Ward (1980a) and Fischer (1981) present detailed instructions for

developing photo series for forest residues. Their procedures were very similar

except that Fischer placed the size control marker 20 ft (6 m) from the camera and

Maxwell and Ward placed it 30 ft (9 m). Color was preferred by both to enhance

recognition of dry and green fuel. The procedure of Maxwell and Ward follows:

1. Find very high and very low fuel loadings in the proposed forest type and 

size class, and then intermediate loadings. A forest type is the dominant tree

species, and size class is the diameter at breast height (dbh) of the stand; for

example, Douglas-fir pole size 5 to 9 in (12 to 22 cm) dbh. Their publications

showed three to five different fuel loadings per forest type and size class. 

2. Select slightly concave topography so that residue within 180 ft (54.5 m), a

desired sampling distance, is visible. 

3. Take photographs on overcast days because bright sunlight streaming through

canopies creates sharp contrasts (see app. E). 

4. Use a quality 35-mm camera with 50-mm lens.

5. Take the photograph in landscape format (long dimension of the photo will be

horizontal.)

6. Use a reasonably fast, fine-grained color film (for example, Kodachrome 64).

21

Comparison 

Photo Montoring

Forest Residue

Estimation
22

Figure 11—Fuel loading comparison photograph from Maxwell and Ward (1976a, p. 32), originally produced in color.

Conditions in the field are compared to a series of photographs to estimate fuel loading. This is one of a nine-report series 

showing residue after commercial thinning in Douglas-fir—western hemlock, size class 9 to 20 in dbh. The data table lists

fuel loading weight and volume by size class, residue depth, percentage of ground cover by residue, average duff and litter

depth, sound residue larger than 3.1 in by species, rotted residue larger than 3.1 in, harvest and precommercial thinning

data, and the USDAForest Service fuel rating. 
7. Shoot between f-8 and f-16 for a long depth of field.

8. Always use a tripod because low light under tree canopies may require exposures below 1/30th of a second. 

9. Use the standard national field system marker placed 30 ft (9 m) from the camera; it is a pole 6 ft (1.8 m) tall with a 1-ft2 (3 by 3 dm) marker at the top and

alternate foot distances painted black and white (fig. 11).

10. Take a minimum of three exposures so that all fuel loadings from different locations can be presented in the same color mode. 

11. To sample fuel loading, establish five base lines radiating from the camera and

equidistant apart, with five sample points on each line in view of the camera.

Sample the down material from each of the 25 sample points.

12. Sample standing live and dead material from six sample points distributed over

the 25 fuel loading points. 

13. Compute down fuels, standing fuel (live and dead trees, shrubs, grasses, and

forbs) by size class, anticipated rate of spread, and flame length under selected

moisture content and wind speed. 

Maxwell and Ward’s format shows a color picture of fuel loading with all data contained in that picture as computed by their instructions (fig. 11). The product is a

pocket-sized booklet, about 5 by 9 in (12 by 22 cm), listing the forest type, such as

west-side Douglas-fir or east-side pine associated, size class of the forest type, and

within each forest type and size class, three to five fuel loadings. 

To use their system, a person goes to the field, identifies the forest type and size

class, then turns to appropriate photographs in the booklet and compares the fuel

loading at the site with pictures in the booklet. The fuel loading is then estimated by

comparing the existing conditions to those described for the photograph most nearly

approximating field conditions. Jensen and others (1999) applied the concept for

estimating fuel loading to a fire hazard to do a watershed analysis for the parks

department of British Columbia.

23
Herbage Utilization Another comparison photo monitoring system deals with utilization of grasses and

forbs by livestock. Schmutz (1971) and Schmutz and others (1963) pioneered a

series of photographs for grasses in the Southwest. Kinney and Clary (1994) developed a series depicting various kinds of utilization on riparian graminoids (fig. 12).

On a single page, the latter depict six degrees of utilization: 0, 10, 30, 50, 70, and

90 percent. To use their guide, the species in question must be identified, its stubble

height determined, and the height compared to photographs in the guide to estimate

the percentage of utilization.

Kinney and Clary’s procedure for developing a guide is rather simple and straightforward, as follows:

1. A height-weight curve was developed for each species to be photographed. A

height-weight curve is the relation of the percentage of total height of the plant

with seed heads to percentage of utilization. For example, a plant 5 dm tall

might have 10 percent of its weight in the top 20 percent of its height (fig. 12).

Thus, a plant 80 percent as tall as an ungrazed plant would represent 10-percent utilization. 

2. A plant with seed heads of the desired species is selected, vegetation removed

from around that individual, and a black backdrop placed behind the plant 

(fig. 12). 

3. The plant is photographed in its full stature. Then it is clipped at heights that 

represent 10, 30, 50, 70, and 90 percent utilization. At each clipping, the plant 

is rephotographed. 

4. These six photographs are then assembled onto a single page and accompanied with a height-weight graph showing the relation between plant height and

percentage of utilization (fig. 12).

Guenther (1998), working in annual grass rangeland in California, developed a

photo-monitoring guide dealing with residual dry matter. He used a Robel pole2

(Robel and others 1970) photographed from 10 and 20 ft. Eight photographs depict

increments of annual grass biomass from over 1,000 lb/acre to less than 125 lb/acre.

The Robel pole is supplemented with a 0.96-ft2 hoop placed at its base with four

golf balls to help appraise grass density.

His procedure is to place the pole and take a photograph. Then the vegetation is

clipped within the 0.96-ft2 hoop to document the herbage production.

2 The Robel pole is discussed in appendix A.

24
25
26

Figure 13—Comparison photographs of smoke from a pulpwood mill along the Columbia River taken from a turnout on

Interstate 84: (A) 35-mm focal length simulating 20 mi distant, (B) 70-mm simulating 10 mi distant, and (C) 140-mm 

simulating 5 mi distant. Similar sets of photographs were used by Magill (1990), Benson (1983), and Ribe (1999) to

appraise viewer's reactions to landscape scenes. 
Monitoring Public

Concern

Monitoring of public concern for landscape quality also uses a comparison photographic technique as discussed by Benson (1983), Magill (1990), and Ribe (1999).

Their objectives were to test public awareness and concern for various landscape

items, particularly effects of logging. Magill (1990) used a set of three to five photographs of the same landscape viewed at different distances (fig. 13). These were

shown to people and their reaction or concern about the view documented. He tried

to develop a threshold definition of various landscape features. The technique was

as follows:

1. A landscape feature was selected as viewed from a suitable vantage point,

such as a road or viewpoint. 

2. This landscape was photographed with a 35-mm camera using color film and a

zoom lens. Pictures were taken at 50, 70, 100, and 150 mm (fig. 13). This was

done to simulate different distances from the landscape object, for example,

4.8, 3.2, 2.1, and 1.6 mi for each focal length, respectively.

3. No effort was made to select good visibility or particular weather conditions 

(fig. 13). 

Benson (1983) discusses scenic beauty estimation and visual quality objective

analysis through methods similar to those of Magill (1990). He also uses comparison photos to rate elk habitat characteristics and recreational impacts as part of 

forest planning. Ribe (1999) used photographs to test public response to 15-percent

retention of green trees in clearcuts as a research method for appraising acceptance of alternatives in the Northwest Forest Plan. 

As the name implies, repeat photography means retaking photographs from the

same spot and of the same subject several times. To be effective, most repeat 

photography requires precise replacement of the camera and composition of the

subject, be it a sample plot, view of a particular subject such as a streambank, or

rephotographing a distant landscape. 

Repeat photography is used for many purposes and, thus, can take on many different forms. It may be landscape rephotography covering 50 to more than 100 years

of change (Skovlin and Thomas 1995); documenting animal activity at a specific

site, such as ospreys (Pandion baliaetus) rearing young (Kristen and others 1996)

or livestock distribution in a meadow (Kinney and Clary 1998); assessing air quality

(Fox and others 1987); sampling change in vegetation using both general and

closeup views (Hall 1976, Nader and others 1995); and appraising effects of management such as livestock utilization or logging (Gary and Currie 1977, Kay 1999,

Kay and others 1999, Smith and Arno 1999). Hart and Laycock (1996) and Rogers

and others (1984) present bibliographies on repeat photography. In this paper, a

riparian setting, Pole Camp in eastern Oregon, will be used to illustrate various

aspects of repeat photography.

Three things must be done for repeat photography to be successful: (1) map the

site and the system layout, (2) document the system, and (3) permanently mark

camera locations and photo points.

27

Repeat

Photography
Maps are essential for relocating and rephotographing topics as discussed by Bauer

and Burton (1993), Borman (1995), Governor's Watershed Enhancement Board

(1993), Hall (1976), Nader and others (1995), National Park Service (1992), USDA

Forest Service (1982), and USDI Bureau of Land Management (1996). Two maps

are important: 

1. Map of the monitoring site location so that those other than the installers can

find it. Figure 14, a USDA Forest Service ranger district map, identifies the road

on which the site is located. Establish a witness marker along the road by placing an orange tag on a tree or fencepost. Inscribe on the tag the identity of the

monitoring site.

2. A map of the photo monitoring system layout so that others can duplicate the

original photography (fig. 15). From the witness marker identified on the general

map, record directions and measured distances to each camera location and

photo point (fig. 15). Measure on the ground; do not attempt conversion to horizontal distance. 

The emphasis on others (other people) refers to a problem discovered by many

(Borman 1995; Gruel 1980, 1983; Johnson 1984; Magill 1989; Nader and others

1995; Parker and Harris 1959; Phillips and Shantz 1963; Progulske and Sowel

1974; Puchbauer and Carrol 1993; Reppert and Francis 1973; Strickler and Hall

1980; USDA Forest Service 1982; USDI Bureau of Land Management 1996). 

Maps of Location and

Monitoring Layout

28

Figure 14—USDAForest Service Ranger District map showing locations of the Button Meadow, Pole Camp, and Lower

Emigrant riparian study sites in northeastern Oregon. Road numbers, mileage from road junctions, and directions to the 

witness sites (a tree or fencepost with an orange tag identifying the monitoring area) are given in the study writeup.
Documentation of the

Photo System

Compass deviation is one item of particular importance in laying out the site map

and relocating sites for repeat photography. In the Pacific Northwest, deviation is

about 21 degrees east. The problem is, What does this mean? Does one add or

subtract 21 degrees from the magnetic compass heading? Most people traveling by

water, air, or land use magnetic headings for their direction; land survey, on the other

hand, uses true direction. When providing direction on any map, specify true or magnetic. Notice in figure 15 that direction is listed first and distance second to provide

easily followed instructions: You have to know what direction you are going before

you can start moving.

Each repeat-photography monitoring system must be documented in writing (in other

words, a protocol for operation is created). It should include the following items: 

1. The original size and focal length of camera such as a 35-mm camera with 50-mm

lens or a 2- by 2-in (50- by 50-mm) square format camera with 70-mm lens.

2. The film to be used: speed and type of film such as Kodachrome 64 versus Elite

Chrome (Ektachrome) 200, color or black and white negative film. Using both

may require two different cameras or one camera with two backs. Digital cameras do not use film.

29

Figure 15—Study layout of the Pole Camp

riparian site. Notice

that all compass headings are shown as

magnetic (M) to reduce

confusion with the 21-

degree deviation from

true north in the Pacific

Northwest. When distance is shown with a

decimal point, it indicates a measured

rather than a paced

distance. Notice the

two photo points from

camera location 1—dry

and wet. The boxed

map is shown later in

figure 27, which details

location of the instream

photo point. 
3. Definition of methods for repeatability of photographs. Specify how to aim 

the camera to repeat the field of view; for example, “site on the 1M of a meter

board.” The field of view must be held constant so changes in the subject matter, such as stream stability, vegetation change, or management activities, can

be clearly documented. 

4. Time of day, season of year, air quality for landscape rephotography, and lighting conditions, such as overcast sky to reduce shadows or backlighting to highlight vegetation (app. E). 

5. A list of all equipment required. 

6. Instructions for using mechanical or electronic aids for rephotography.

Witness sites, camera locations, and photo points or transects must be permanently

marked for efficient photo monitoring. Steel stakes or fenceposts can be used. Each

has advantages and disadvantages: 

1. Steel stakes are difficult to find if vegetation overtops them. 

2. Steel stakes protruding above the ground may be stepped on by animals or 

people, or run over by vehicles causing foot or tire damage. Stakes can be

driven flush with the ground but then will require a metal detector to be relocated (White’s Electronics, Inc. 1996).

3. Fenceposts are clearly visible and thus subject to theft.

4. Cheap fenceposts made of stamped steel are useful and durable (including

against theft) when purchased in 5-ft (1.5-m) lengths and pounded 2 ft (0.6 m)

into the ground. The 3 ft (0.8 m) above the ground is easily seen, and the flimsy 

construction deters theft because the stamped steel posts are as difficult to

remove as strong T-bar posts. 

5. Any fencepost aboveground is subject to destruction by equipment when an

area is disturbed. When disturbance monitoring is contemplated, stakes driven

flush with the ground are appropriate. Most inexpensive metal detectors will

locate a 3/8-in (1-cm) diameter steel stake driven flush with the ground within 

a radius of 12 in (3 dm) (White’s Electronics, Inc. 1996). 

With this background, three kinds of repeat photography will be discussed: (1) landscape photography, (2) remote photo monitoring, and (3) site-specific monitoring.

Repeat landscape photography seems to have been devised by Professor S.

Finsterwalder, who photographed and mapped glacial changes in the eastern Alps

starting in 1888 (Hattersley-Smith 1966). In the United States, after the Civil War,

photographers were invited to participate in exploring the Western United States.

Some of these historical landscape pictures have been rephotographed 100 or more

years later; for example, Progulske and Sowel (1974) rephotographed the area of

Colonel Custer’s 1874 exploration of the Black Hills to show changes in 100 years,

30

Permanent Marking 

Landscape

Photography
and Skovlin and Thomas (1995) illustrated changes over 70 to 90 years in eastern

Oregon (fig. 16). Landscape photography of small areas (10 to 100 ha) is discussed

later and will be shown in figures 26 and 38. Appendix E illustrates some photographic techniques. 

Johnson (1984), whose purpose was to evaluate change in sagebrush (Artemisia

spp.) over 100 years or more, retook pictures taken by William H. Jackson during the

1860s to 1870s as part of the Hayden Expedition in Wyoming. Johnson concluded

31

Figure 16—Relocation of historical photographs showing a view (1992) by Skovlin and Thomas (1995, 

p. 22-23) of Branson Creek, Wallowa County, Oregon, originally photographed in 1914 (top picture). The

letter “A” identifies centerline orientation. Once the photographer was centered as on the original photograph, objects on the edges of the picture, such as “B” and “C”, were chosen to refine location of the original camera. The photographer has to move forward or back until the angles of “B” and “C” are similar to

the original photograph. Slight differences in orientation lines between 1914 and 1992 suggest the camera

in 1992 was a few yards left of the original location. The usefulness of black-and-white photographs is

illustrated here by triangulation lines placed directly on the picture.
Purpose

that sagebrush is highly site-specific, some changes have occurred but they differ

among sites, and there has been no major shift in sagebrush distribution, although

densities have changed. He felt the landscape today is a fair representation of the

1870s. 

Phillips and Shantz (1963), who compared photographs taken by Dr. Shantz 50 to

60 years previously, report on another historical photo series of vegetation changes

in the northern Great Plains. Dr. Shantz also photographed in eastern Colorado in

1904. Many of the locations for his pictures were rephotographed in 1986 after 82

years (McGinnies and others 1991). 

Branson (1985), Gary and Currie (1977), Gruell (1980, 1983), Johnson (1987),

Puchbauer and Carroll (1993), Rogers (1982), and Veblen and Lorenz (1991) 

discuss additional landscape rephotography.

Purposes other than historical documentation have prompted long-term retaking of

landscape photographs. Long-term, in this context, refers to retaking photographs

taken by another person, usually more than 20 years previously. Some have evaluated effects of livestock grazing and change in western rangelands (Branson 1985;

Chaney and others 1991; Johnson 1984, 1987; McGinnies and others 1991; Phillips

and Shantz 1963, Skovlin and Thomas 1995). 

Changes in rangeland vegetation from 1902 to 1988 were documented by Medina

(1996) in his history of the Santa Rita Experimental Range in southern Arizona. 

Fifty years of secondary succession under sheep grazing in green fescue (Festuca

viridula Vasey) grasslands were rephotographed in the Wallowa Mountains (Reid

and others 1991), and effects of revegetation in green fescue grasslands depleted

by sheep grazing in the Wallowa Mountains were shown by Strickler and Hall

(1980). They documented Dr. Arthur Samson’s pioneer range work in rehabilitation,

which helped to formulate the first textbook on range management.

Other uses for long-term landscape photography have been to appraise the historical effects of fire on wildlife habitat in the Bridger-Teton National Forest, Wyoming

(Gruell 1980, 1983); forest health concerns in the Boise National Forest, Idaho

(Puchbauer and Carroll 1993), which used photography from as early as 1870;

changes in wildlife habitat in north Yellowstone (Houston 1982); causes for mule

deer (Odocoileus hemionus Zimm) population eruptions in the intermountain We s t

(Gruell 1986); long-term successional changes in Blue Mountain ecosystems

(Skovlin and Thomas 1995) as it affects forest health, range condition, and wildlife

habitat; and to illustrate change in research natural areas (Herring and Greene 1997). 

Considerations in long-term repeat landscape photography include three important

factors: 

1. Relocating photographs done 50 to 100 years previously.

2. Duplicating photographs taken by cameras that are no longer manufactured or

available. 

3. Dealing with photographic conditions such as season, weather, light, and air quality. 

32
Relocation Most authors say that finding the camera location was their most difficult problem.

Without precise camera relocation, duplicating the scene photographed by original

cameras and duplicating weather conditions were unimportant (Gruell 1980, 1983;

Hart and Laycock 1996; Johnson 1984; Phillips and Shantz 1963; Progulske and

Sowel 1974; Puchbauer and Carroll 1993; Skovlin and Thomas 1995). 

Johnson (1984) notes that each: “...photosite was relocated over a 12 year period

through time-consuming search in the field aided by knowledge of the countryside

and comparison of expedition maps and reports with modern references.” He was

referring to the Hayden Expedition. He also says that: “...the exact photo point was

relocated by detailed inspection of photo features” (see fig. 16 and app. E). 

A summary follows of comments by authors who have had to relocate landscape

photography camera locations after 50 or more intervening years: 

1. Study the travel log books, trail routes, and other descriptions of travel, not

overlooking the slow rate of movement by horses and wagons, to locate a geographical area in which the old photograph might have been taken (Progulske

and Sowel 1974).

2. Show the old photographs and descriptions to local residents for their ideas

about location. In many cases, original photographers did not know local names

of buttes; however, shape of the buttes and landforms are clues current residents

can use to suggest camera locations (Progulske and Sowel 1974). If no travel

logs are available, study of historic travel routes and railroads can provide clues

as to where the photographers traveled and where they might have photographed (Phillips and Shantz 1963). 

3. Identify unique landscape features such as hills, drainage ways, and their interrelationships. Phillips (in Phillips and Shantz 1963) comments that Dr. Shantz

always seemed to find a prominent landmark to include in his photos, even 

on the Great Plains, which greatly aided in relocation. Many of Shantz’s photos

were taken from the first railroads into an area where he would take photographs from a siding, town, or coaling station that could be readily relocated. 

4. Orient the camera location by lining up near and distant objects in a triangulation system (fig. 16). For example, Progulske and Sowel (1974) point out that

mountain profiles, abundance of rocks, thickness of soil, escarpments, and

stream configuration were used. A search then can be made for rocks or dead

trees, which lead to the target camera location. As Puchbauer and Carroll (1993)

note, objects in the original photo often are overlooked during first examination;

they suggest using a hand lens to locate subtle objects, such as old monarch

trees (or their remains), on black-and-white photos.3

3 In my experience, black-and-white prints are superior to 

color slides in relocation because prints can be easily examined by hand lens, and triangulation lines, shown in fig. 16, 

may be placed directly on the photograph.

33
Considerations

5. Problems with relocation: 

A. Historic travel routes, roads, or railroads may have been obliterated by 

modern activities, thereby making identification of camera locations difficult.

B. Intervention by other objects is one of the most common problems encountered. These objects can be trees, buildings, or other obstructions to the view

from the original camera location. 

C. No clear, identifiable landscape feature by which to locate even the 

general area of a photograph. 

Camera—The original cameras and films cannot be duplicated by equipment available today in nearly all cases of photography before 1930. Duplication of the original

scene, therefore, requires matching negative size with focal length to replicate the

original photographs as nearly as possible. For example a 4- by 5-in press camera

with 128-mm lens is roughly similar to a 35-mm camera with 50-mm lens. Most

authors of historic landscape rephotography comment on this situation and recommend solutions. Rogers and others (1983) deal specifically with this problem and

demonstrate that camera format is not critical; camera location and distance to featured objects are the critical factors. They discuss adjustment of print size to original prints and some problems with loss of items on the periphery of photographs;

for example, some detail is lost when using a 35-mm camera format (a 2-to-3 ratio) 

to duplicate a 4- by 5-in format (a 2-to-2.5 ratio). 

Film—Film, of course, also is different; one would hardly expect to use a wet plate

glass negative in today's world. And even if an early camera is still in working condition, compatible films no longer are made.

Season and weather—The season and weather (lighting conditions, time of day,

and air quality) are a third important consideration in long-term landscape rephotography. Many authors note that not all the original photographs could be used

because of poor quality due to air conditions, deterioration, processing, or inadequate photographic technique. When a photo site was found, Johnson (1984)

points out that “subsequently, one or more visits were made to the site to duplicate

as closely as possible the light, time of day, and date of originals.” 

These problems and conditions lead to rejection of many photographed landscapes

as subjects for rephotography (Gruell 1980, 1983; Johnson 1984; Phillips and

Shantz 1963; Progulske and Sowel 1974; Puchbauer and Carroll 1993; Skovlin

and Thomas 1995). 

Panoramic cameras—Panoramic cameras also have been used in landscape 

photography (Arnst 1985, Hanemann 1989). Hanemann describes the Osborn

photo-recording transit, which is a unique camera once built in Portland, Oregon.

The lens rotates through an arc of 120 degrees and focuses through a narrow slit

onto a negative held in a semicircular position. This camera was used to rephotograph some of the scenes taken by Arnst (1985) in the Cascade Range of Oregon. 

34
35
Today, panoramic cameras are built such that the camera itself rotates on a 360-

degree arc while the film moves at the same rate of speed. The image passes

through the lens and is constrained by a thin slit. The film rotates past the thin slit.

An example is the Hulcherama® model 120 camera (Hulcher, n.d.; fig. 17). 

Panoramic cameras have a singularly important requirement: they must be very

accurately leveled so that rotation of the camera will photograph a constant horizon

and this photograph can be retaken at a later date. Modern cameras can use both

color and black-and-white film, commonly in 120 size, 12-exposure rolls. Exposure

is determined by f-stop, slit width, and speed of camera rotation (Hulcher, n.d.). 

Figure 18 illustrates problems using the meter board to orient general photographs

instead of keeping a panoramic camera level. Camera location 1 at Pole Camp was

chosen as the center of a 360-degree panoramic view of the area. Camera format

was a 50-mm lens on a 35-mm camera body. The meter board was placed 10 m

from the camera. For each successive photo, it was moved 8 m in a 10-m radius

around the camera. On a flat flood plain, a meter board could be used to focus and

orient the camera. However, camera orientation on the meter board in the stream of

figure 18B lowered the view 1.3 m at the board, thereby causing displacement of the

photos. Arrows point to a rock at top and a shrub in the center for orientation. An

ideal panoramic view would have the camera level in all views to show changes in

topography; thus the meter board would be lower in figure 18B and unusable for

photo orientation. 

Jensen and others (1999) used a camera rotated on a tripod similar to figure 17. In

a test of observer variability, they found that 72 percent of the repeat photographs

did not attain 20 percent overlap with originals. The causes were swapping cameras

during rotation (to change film), thus causing misalignment of the view; inconsistent

placement of the photo identification card, which should be placed at the same distance and location in the photo; and significant inconsistencies in exposure, which

rendered some photos unacceptable for comparison because sun angle changed

during 360 degrees of view.

36
37
Remote Photo

Monitoring

Remote photo monitoring uses unattended camera or video systems. Repeat photos are taken of a specific view, which may be a landscape (Fox and others 1987)

or a specific activity such as a nest of ospreys (Pandion haliaetus Linn.) (Kristen

and others 1996). Zielinski and Kucera (1995) deal with photo detection of animal

presence in detail (fig. 19). Because remote photo monitoring is a topic unto itself,

only a few examples will be presented. 

Time-lapse systems have been described by Bryant,4 5 Bull and Meslow (1988), 

Fox and others (1987), Kinney and Clary (1998), Kristen and others (1996), and

Temple (1972). They all used timing systems to trigger the camera at specified intervals ranging from fractions of a second to several hours. Movie cameras, 35-mm

cameras, and video cameras were used. Bull and Meslow (1988) monitored pileated

woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus Linn.) chick feeding with a super 8-mm camera set

to expose a frame every 8 to 12 seconds (Temple 1972). 

Bryant (see footnote 4) used a time-lapse super 8-mm movie camera (Temple 1972)

to monitor winter ice floods on Meadow Creek in eastern Oregon. The location was

a research study site testing various livestock grazing effects on riparian ecosystems.

The 45-minute flood lasted about 4 minutes at standard speed in a movie projector.

Super 8-mm movie cameras have been replaced by camcorders.

4 Personal communication. 1990. Larry D. Bryant,wildlife 

biologist, on Meadow Creek flood. USDAForest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station, 1401 Gekeler Lane, 

La Grande, OR 97850-3368.

5 Personal communication. 1990. Larry D. Bryant, wildlife 

biologist, on remote video camera. USDAForest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station,1401 Gekeler Lane, 

La Grande, OR 97850-3368.

38

Figure 19—Mechanically triggered camera system used by Bull and others (1992) to monitor presence of

marten (Martes americana Turton). Bait (arrow, lower right) was suspended on the tree to the right under a

cover as one modification for winter operation. Camera was a 110 size with flashcube. 
In another study (see footnote 5), Bryant used time-lapse remote video to document livestock use of riparian areas. He found that video “film” is less expensive

than camera film, instant viewing and transmission were advantages, and cost of

camcorders and deterioration of video film were disadvantages. 

Kinney and Clary (1998) monitored livestock distribution patterns over several

grazing seasons in meadows through repeat 35-mm camera photography. The

camera took a picture every 20 minutes during daylight hours during a 15- to 20-

day grazing period on three meadows over 2 to 4 years. Dry graminoid locations

were preferred even though forage production was not the highest. They emphasized several things: The sun must be behind the camera for all exposures. The

camera must be set to expose for the desired kind of vegetation; for example, on

grass and not on the surrounding evergreen forest. And, animals are curious and

often affect the camera location by pushing on it, which modifies the camera aim

or destroys the installation. 

Fox and others (1987) discussed monitoring of air quality with a 35-mm camera.

Their equipment was a 35-mm camera body with a 135-mm lens, automatic

winder, automatic exposure designed to be on only during the exposure (not continuously), an ultraviolet filter, a data back capable of imprinting the date and time,

and a battery-powered programmable timer capable of triggering the camera at

least three times per day in a housing for the complete system capable of standing alone and operating in temperatures from –34 to +54 °C while being unattended for at least 10 days. Their criteria state that the site must contain at least one

horizon-visibility target with as many of these characteristics as possible: (1) large,

(2) identifiable on a topographic map, (3) dark vegetation (such as conifers), (4) 32

to 80 km in distance, (5) two or three targets at various distances, (6) camera and

target at about the same elevation, (7) target centered in the camera viewfinder,

(8) site path not affected by local sources of air pollution, (9) target as free of

snow in winter as possible for contrast, (10) exceptionally bright or dark foreground objects avoided, and (11) camera oriented to avoid sun on the lens for

pictures taken any time during the day. They provide a diagram and a system for

evaluating film by using microdensitometric analysis of color slides.

Kristen and others (1996) monitored osprey nest activity over a season by using 

a video camera set to expose one frame every six-tenths to one second. T h e

images were then transmitted by a directional antenna to a receiving station up to

8 km distant and viewed on a monitor. The lapse in time could be adjusted at the

monitor receiving station. A deep cycle battery supplemented by a solar panel

supplied the power to the system. 

39
40

Figure 20—Pole Camp “wet” sample location showing three dates of the same

year. June 15 is before scheduled grazing, August 1 is at change in rotation pastures, and October 1 is after grazing. This pasture was rested from June 15 to

August 1. October 1 illustrates the degree of livestock use of Kentucky bluegrass

at the meter board, aquatic sedge behind the board, and willows in the distance. 
Site-Specific

Repeat

Photography

S i t e - s p e c i f i c means that a camera location and photo point or transect are permanently marked to document a specific topic on a limited tract of ground (not a landscape view) (Jensen and others 1999, Smith and Arno 1999). Directions and measured

distances from witness site to camera locations and from camera to photo points

or transects are required for precise relocation. For example, figure 20 is Pole

Camp photo point “wet” (the wet meadow view). Topics were animal affects on will o w

shrubs (S a l i x spp.) and herbaceous stubble height remaining after grazing along

the stream and adjacent meadow. A d i fferent kind of topic, planned disturbance

and plant community development, is illustrated in figure 21. 

Site-specific repeat photography may be divided into two kinds: topic and transect

systems. 

Topic photographs are shown in figures 20, 21, 22, and 23, where specific topics

were monitored. This system uses a general photograph and may be supplemented

by closeup photos of the meter board, a single plot frame (fig. 24), or overhead tree

cover (fig. 25). Cole (1993) points out some limitations of topic photography when

documenting damage to soils and vegetation from wilderness recreation. He indicates that measuring change from the photographs was difficult. 

Transect identification using topic photography is used in the three-step method

(Parker 1954, Parker and Harris 1959). In this method, Reppert and Francis (1973)

could appraise species identification and their change in density and could verify

correct replacement of the transect. 

In British Columbia, Jensen and others (1999) applied topic photography to monitor

recreational impacts, fuel loading, riparian vegetation and stream channels, disturbance recovery, and quantitative measurements of change in soil and vegetation. In

an appraisal of observer variability, they found that a topic photopoint system could

attain 80 to 100 percent overlap 95 times out of 100 (95-percent probability). 

French and Mitchell (1983) used the single-topic approach to photograph change 

in shrubby vegetation in southern Idaho over 21 years. Pond (1971) evaluated an

increase in chaparral (Quercus spp., Ceanothus spp., Rhus spp., Arctostaphylos

spp.) for 47 years in an enclosure erected in 1920. Sharp and others (1990) show

40 years of change in a shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia (Torr. and Frem.) S. Wats.)

stand in Idaho and correlate it with growing conditions to appraise effects of local

weather on species dominance. In another study, Sharp and others (1992) document crested wheatgrass (Agropyron desertorum (Fisch. Ex Link) J. A. Schultes)

production over 35 years and correlate it with growing conditions. Medina (1996)

photo documented vegetation changes in the Santa Rita Experimental Range in

southern Arizona at five locations: Burroweed (Haplopappus tenuisectus) increased

and decreased with precipitation; jumping cholla (Opuntia fulgida) was absent in

1902, increased by the 1940s, then decreased; velvet mesquite (Prosopis juliflora)

increased dramatically on mesic uplands but not on clayey, stony soils; and Lehman

lovegrass (Eragrostis lehmanniana) increased and displaced many native species. 

41

Topic Photographs
42

Figure 21—Aponderosa pine stand with pinegrass ground vegetation showing

conditions after logging: undisturbed in 1981, after the first partial overstory

removal in 1982, and in 1998 after the second overstory removal and precommercial thinning. These views, with their dramatic differences, emphasize the need for

permanent marking of both camera locations and photo points. Exact reorientation

of the picture uses the “1M” of the meter board as the photographic center (see

fig. 29). All photographs were taken the first week of August.
Figure 22—Photo monitoring each year at the same date (August 1) to document herbage production in a ponderosa pine stand with pinegrass. In 1979, drought occurred, which resulted in elk sedge (Carex geyeri Boott) dominance and only 400 lb of total herbage per acre. In

1980, lupine (Lupinus caudatus Kellog) was clearly important and pinegrass dominated over elk sedge with total herbage of 700 lb/acre. In

1981, Wheeler’s bluegrass (Poa nervosa (Hook.) Vasey) was important, lupine was nearly absent, and pinegrass was common with total

herbage of 750 lb, and in 1982, pinegrass was again clearly dominant without much bluegrass or lupine with total herbage about 600 lb/acre.

Notice the lack of shadows under overcast skies in 1979 and 1982 compared to full sun in 1980 and 1981.

43

Effects on vegetation, soil, and streambanks from adjustment in livestock management are shown by Anderson and others (1990), Chaney and others (1991), Elmore

and Beschta (1987), and Skovlin (1991). In Elk Creek, Oregon, a pair of repeat topic

photographs was used to show riparian improvement (USDA Forest Service 1993). 

Gary and Curry (1977) document changes in soil condition and erosion with a 40-

year photographic record of plant recovery on an abused ponderosa pine watershed

in Colorado. Skovlin (1991) shows changes in soil and vegetation on a forest zone

bunchgrass type with a series of 1939, 1949, and 1989 photos that follow a shift in

cattle grazing from season-long to deferred rotation. 

Fire effects were followed by Lyon (1984), who presents 21 years of postfire change

at the Sleeping Child burn, and Stickney (1986), who presents a similar series of

photographs on succession for the first decade after the Sundance fire, both in

northern Idaho. In another case, Lyon (1971) documented vegetation development
44

Figure 23—Streambank monitoring at the Pole Camp study site. In 1981 the camera location was 3 dm from 

the bank at a bend in the stream. An ice flood during early spring 1982 eroded the bend of the stream,

increased its meander, and destroyed the camera location. In 1982, the camera was relocated 1.3 m to

the left and 1 m back from the original location. The result was (1) apparent movement of the right bank,

(2) the hole indicated by an arrow shows that only a portion of the bank fell into the stream, and (3) the

angle between a rock in the stream bed and the camera to meter board was changed from 44 degrees to

39 degrees demonstrating the camera relocation. This kind of change in camera location or photo point

should be avoided.
45

after prescribed burning of Douglas-fir in south-central Idaho for 7 years; preburn

and postburn vegetation was sampled, and photo points were established and recorded annually for the 7 years. His publication shows prefire vegetation and conditions 1,

3, and 7 years after burning. Blaisdell (1953) documented effects of prescribed burning on big sagebrush-wheatgrass. He shows one general two-photo series and a

closeup six-photo series of before, immediately after, and 1, 2, 6, and 12 years after

the burn. Johnson (1998) shows 5 years of response to fire by grassland and forest in

eastern Oregon. The National Park Service (1992) provides detailed guides for documenting fire effects on vegetation.

Fire suppression effects in ponderosa pine stands are documented by Biswell

(1963), Gruell and others (1982), and Weaver (1957, 1959). Smith and Arno (1999)

provide repeat photos at 13 locations for an 88-year period. Gruell and others

(1982) show 10 sets of repeat photographs of changes in ponderosa pine stands

after logging and fire suppression. Shinn (1980) illustrates effects of fire suppression

on western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis Hook.) sites. 

Documentation of logging effects is shown in figure 21. In 1978, conditions were 

an undisturbed ponderosa pine overstory with pinegrass ground vegetation

(Calamagrostic rubescens Buckl.) in the southern Blue Mountains of Oregon. The

site was entered twice for selection cutting. The 1982 photo shows stand conditions

after the first selection cut, and the 1988 one shows conditions after the second

selection cut and precommercial thinning. Edgerton (1983) illustrates effects of logging on bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata (Pursh.) DC.) under lodgepole pine (Pinus

contorta Doug. ex Laud.). 

Figure 24—A1-m2 plot frame marked at 2-dm intervals. Plot frames are quite useful in sparse vegetation such as the Crooked River National Grassland. The decimeter marks may be used to grid the plot

frame (similar to fig. 28, below) to appraise vegetation change. However, riparian areas or other dense

vegetation make plot frames questionable for photography, as suggested by figure 34. 
46

Figure 25—Photographs taken with a fisheye lens document change in forest canopy in a

study of gap creation and effects on ground vegetation in 50-m-tall Douglas-fir (Easter and

Spies 1993): (A) Canopy conditions before gap creation, and (B) canopy conditions after

gap creation. Photographs cover a 180-degree vertical angle. 
Transect Photographs

Another use of topic photo monitoring was documentation of harvester ant

(Pogonomyrmex owyheei Cole) colonies over 9 years in southern Idaho (Porter 

and Jorgenson 1988). 

In forested settings, tree cover often influences ground vegetation. Brown (1962)

photographed tree canopy cover over a 180-degree arc using a special camera 

system. More recently, Chan and others (1986) applied electronic scanning and

computer techniques to analysis of fisheye photographs under 50-m-tall Douglas-fir.

Figure 25 illustrates use of fisheye photographs to monitor change in forest canopy

following treatment to create small gaps (Easter and Spies 1993). 

Topic photography does not have a fixed protocol similar to transect systems. Any

topic that can be photographed is suitable; this is a very flexible concept. 

Transect photo monitoring is a specialized activity dealt with in appendix A. Briefly,

a general view of the transect is supplemented by closeup photographs taken of

sample plots systematically along a line (fig. 25). Discussions are available in

Bonham (1989), French and Mitchell (1983), Hall (1976), Lyon (1971), Nader and

others (1995), National Park Service (1992), Owens and others (1985), Pierce and

Eddleman (1970, 1973), Pond (1971), Ratliff and Westfall (1973), USDI Bureau of

Land Management (1996), Wein and Rencz (1976), Wells (1971), and Wimbush

and others (1967). 

Winkworth and others (1962) supplemented their study of five measurement methods

with systematic quadrant photographs taken from a stepladder. The photos gave an

e x c e l l e n t representation of bunchgrass canopy coverage but were difficult to measure.

Measurement required a simplification of the grass canopy outline, which introduced

observer variability.

Transect photo monitoring may be summarized as follows: 

1. Lay out the system and document it on a sitemap with directions and measured

distances to camera locations and transect start and end (fig. 15). 

2. Use the specified camera and focal length. Some recommend a 35-mm camera

with a 28-mm lens. The 28-mm focal length will permit photographing a 1-m2

plot with the camera held at eye level. Others recommend a 35-mm camera

with 50-mm lens for small plots and oblique angles for larger plots (fig. 24).

3. Take two general photographs of the transect, one from each end, that include

the photo identification form.

4. Use the required plot frame, such as 0.5 by 0.5 m or 1 by 1 m, placed at specified distances along the transect with a photo identification form (fig. 24). 

5 . To photograph and prevent shadows, stand on the north side of the plot frame, 

with toes touching the plot frame; make sure the photo identification form is visible. 

6. Record data and information required by the system.

47
Pole Camp

48

Figure 26—Landscape view of the Pole Camp riparian study flood plain. One problem with these

landscape views is the lack of a fixed photo orientation spot, such as the meter board used in topic

photographs (figs. 1, 20, 21, 23, and 28). Rephotographing the scene requires techniques similar to

those shown in figure 17. 

Examples of site-specific repeat photography will use Pole Camp, a riparian meadow within a forested setting north of Burns, Oregon (fig. 26). In 1975 the cattle grazing system in Emigrant Creek watershed was changed from season-long use to a

three-pasture, rest-rotation system wherein one pasture is spring grazed, a second

is fall grazed, and a third is rested. This grazing is rotated over the following two

years so that no pasture is used during the same time each year of a 3-year cycle.

The purpose was to reduce livestock impacts on the riparian area and its stream.

Monitoring was designed to appraise effectiveness of changed grazing. The five

questions—why, where, what, when, and how—were addressed as follows. 

Monitoring questions—Why to monitor dealt with the effectiveness of rest-rotation

cattle grazing in improving riparian ecosystem function. 

W h e r e to monitor was determined by identifying critical or key livestock grazing areas.

Pole Camp is one of three locations selected (figs. 14 and 26). Figure 14 is a road

map locating the three areas, and figure 15 shows the Pole Camp monitoring layout. 

What to monitor dealt with selecting specific sites at Pole Camp to record streambank stability (fig. 23), riparian shrub (Salix spp.) growth in height and crown width

(fig. 20), herbaceous stubble height tall enough to trap sediments (fig. 20C), and

herbaceous plant community stability, deterioration, or improvement (fig. 20).
49

Figure 27—Triangulation location of the meter board (shown in figure 23) to document streambank erosion at Pole Camp. This map is the boxed area shown in

figure 15. Any photo point or camera location in a tenuous spot should be referenced by two or more locator stakes. 

When to monitor for livestock impacts was dictated by the grazing system, which

required three monitoring times during the season: June 15 just before cattle grazing, August 1 as pastures were rotated, and October 1 after the grazing season

ended (fig. 20). Pole Camp was used two years out of three: spring one year, fall

another, and no use the third year.

How to monitor required developing a system of landscape, general, and closeup

photos. A meter board in general photos is used for two closeup photos, one on

each side of the board. A meter board generally was not used in the landscape pictures (fig. 26). An integral part of how was a map of the sampling layout (fig. 15) and

any specific instructions, such as location of the instream meter board (fig. 23)

shown in figure 27. 

Exact relocation of photographs is one essential ingredient in site-specific photo

monitoring (fig. 20). This is required if any comparison analysis of photographs is

contemplated (Magill 1989, Rogers and others 1983; fig. 28 and app. A). Analysis

Exact Relocation
entails comparing or overlaying photographs so change in the subject matter, usually vegetation, can be analyzed. Analysis may be through the use of grids as shown

in figure 28 (Magill 1989 and app. A) or by use of digitizing (Cunningham and others

1996). 

Exact realignment of general photographs is greatly facilitated by use of a target

as shown in figures 20, 21, 28, 29, and 30. A meter board is recommended to mark

the topic of interest, which usually is located in the center of the photograph.

Place the meter board at a distance such that it will be 25 to 33 percent of the

height of the photograph. Using a 35-mm camera with 50-mm lens, 10 m from

the camera will produce 25-percent meter board height (fig. 2) and 7 m will 

produce 33 percent (fig. 2). This 7 m also will produce a 25-percent meter board

height with a 35-mm camera lens (fig.4). Both the camera location and the

meter board (photo point) are then permanently marked with fenceposts or

steel stakes. The meter board is designed such that the numbers and letters

can be read easily from a color slide or black-and-white photograph. Details 

of meter board construction are in appendix C. 

A successfully used alternative employs a target board 0.5 m wide and 2.5 m tall set

10 m from the camera. The board is painted black and white alternately every 0.5 m

(Van Horn and Van Horn 1996). It was designed to document riparian rehabilitation

efforts in herb and shrub vegetation. 

General photographs—Consistent rephotography requires a reference point to 

orient subsequent views. The objective is to have the view remain constant while

items within the view change. A meter board serves this purpose. Figure 29 illustrates three repeat photographs of a ponderosa pine-elk sedge community that was

selectively cut; figure 29A illustrates how the camera focus ring is placed over t h e

“1M.” This accomplishes two things: (1) it provides a common orientation point for

the first and subsequent photographs, and (2) it provides a locus for focusing the

camera for maximum depth of field. When the meter board is placed at the topic of

interest, the topic should be in sharp focus. Figure 30 illustrates effects of various

camera orientations.

The meter board also provides a size control for indexing a grid. A grid can be overlaid on the photograph as suggested by Magill (1989), depicted in figure 28, and 

discussed in appendix A. Grid analysis entails outlining each topic of interest and

counting the number of grid intersects within the outline. Figure 30D shows sloppy

installation of the meter board because the board is not vertical. Vertical orientation

is essential if grid analysis is contemplated. Appendix C has construction plans for a

meter board that include attaching a line or pocket level to the top so that the board

can be oriented vertically.

50

Text continues on page 54.

Camera Techniques
51

Figure 28—Grid intersect system used to outline and follow items with intersecting grid lines. This is Pole

Camp wet (fig. 20) showing change in willow shrub profile area from 1981 to 1997 following 12 years of

beaver (Castor canadensis Kuhl) utilization and high water tables caused by dams. In 1981, grid intersect

U-13 identifies a young willow missing in 1997. Intersect RR-24 is at the top of a tall willow in 1981. The

top is missing in 1997 owing to beaver cutting large stems for dam construction. Appendix Adiscusses grid

analysis of photographs. 
52
Figure 30—Photograph orientation using the camera focus system shown in A and placing it exactly on the “1M” of the meter

board. (B) The focus is on the photograph identification sheet showing a maximum of ground vegetation. (C) The focus is on the

distant horizon. (D) The meter board has not been set vertically, simply sloppy work. The tag on the meter board showing “2D”

means this is photo point D at camera location 2. Five photo points are taken at this camera location. Notice the fadeout of the

photo identification paper in B due to the light color. This will not happen with the medium blue shown in appendix C. 

53
Use of double meter boards for identifying a topic of interest is illustrated in figure

31. The area is Lower Emigrant, one of three study areas on Emigrant Creek (fig. 14).

When shrubs or other items exceed about 2 m in height, the double boards aid in

following changes. Appendix C has plans for this double meter board, which folds 

in the center to provide a choice of either a 1-m or 2-m board.

Topic emphasis—Figure 32 illustrates four degrees of topic emphasis. A g e n e r a l

topic, such as figure 21, may be represented by a 50-mm lens with meter board set

at 14 m, a more limited topic is identified by the board set at 10 m, a closer view with

the board set at 7 m, and a confined topic set at 5 m. The 5-m distance is recommended for shrub transect sampling discussed below.

Use of a 35-mm lens is illustrated in figure 33, a sagebrush-bunchgrass community.

The meter board was placed 5, 7, and 10 m from the camera. The size of the meter

board at these distances closely approximates a 50-mm lens at 7, 10, and 14 m,

respectively.

Closeup photographs—Closeup photography is strongly recommended for topic

monitoring locations. It is an integral part of transect systems. A view of ground

conditions is taken with the meter board as a photo point locator and size control

system. Figure 34 is a pair of closeup views from figure 20, Aug. ’76, showing

characteristics of the wet meadow at Pole Camp. Accompany each photograph 

with notes on the vegetation.

Some people might prefer a square target on the ground (fig. 24). In sparse vegetation this is satisfactory, but it may not be a suitable system in riparian areas such as

that in figure 35. Figure 35A was taken 1 month after cows were removed, and figure 35B shows the same area 3 months later. The 4-dm-tall vegetation would completely obscure any kind of plot frame laid on the ground. 

Figure 35 also illustrates the importance of standing 2 m away from the meter board

and placing the “1M” of the meter board in the upper corners of photographs. In figure 35A, the bottom of the meter board can be determined whereas in figure 35B 

it cannot be seen. The entire meter board must fit in the frame if analysis of the

images is to be possible. In figure 35C, the “1M” of the meter board is down a l m o s t

2 dm from the top of the frame; the bottom of the meter board, therefore is 2 dm

below the bottom of the photograph, which makes accurate comparison between

figures 35A and 35C difficult. 

This concept of precise relocation of photo images can best be illustrated by use of

lap dissolve 35-mm projection equipment. The objective is to hold the meter board

absolutely still on the screen and show the vegetation change as each photograph

is dissolved onto another.

54

Text continues on page 60.
55

Figure 31—Use of double meter boards for topic identification (in this case, impacts on willows from

grazing livestock) and monitoring: (A) a single meter board's effectiveness in appraising shrub

impacts, and (B) a better system for documenting shrub reaction to grazing. The camera is focused

on the “1M” for consistent photo orientation.
56
57
58
59

Figure 35—Riparian vegetation sampling on the Sandy Delta, south bank of the Columbia River,

east of Portland, Oregon. Aplot frame would be appropriate in photograph A with the 1-dm

stubble height, which also permits visual estimation of the bottom of the meter board. The plot

frame would not be visible in B or C. Exact reorientation of the photograph is essential: (1) T h e

“1M” must be in the top corner of the view, (2) the bottom of the board must be in the lower 

c o r n e r, (3) the photograph must be taken from 2 m with a 50-mm lens on a 35-mm camera, 

and (4) the camera must be tilted slightly off horizontal to make the board parallel with the side

of the view frame. In B, just 3 months later, grass is over 4 dm tall and effectively hiding the

bottom of the meter board and any plot frame that might have been used. Problems with tall

vegetation and exact photograph reorientation are shown in C, where the “1M” was not placed

in the top corner of the view frame. Instead it is about 2 dm below the corner meaning the bottom of the board is about 2 dm below the bottom of the picture, an unacceptable rephotograph.
Photo Point Location Photo point identifies the topic to be monitored (fig. 23); thus, it determines the

camera location. One important factor is relocation of the meter board to orient

later rephotography. In figure 27, the meter board was placed 10.3 ft from permanently marked camera location 1. The direction from the camera location to meter

board was 115 degrees magnetic. The meter board location was marked with a

fencepost, which severe flooding could remove; distance and direction to the

meter board from a permanent location therefore are essential. The most foolproof

method is a triangulation system using two permanent markers (fig. 27). T h e

direction and distance from each marker are recorded. This triangulation method

can replace the meter board within a decimeter of its original location. A d i a g r a m

of the monitoring system should be part of the site map (fig. 15). 

Selection of a camera location is determined by position of the topic (photo point)

to be monitored. Consider how the distance from the camera to the meter board

will influence topic emphasis (figs. 32 and 33). Both distance and photo point position are used to locate the camera for best documentation. Consider locating the

camera where it will serve more than one photo point. This accomplishes three

things: (1) efficiency is increased by using several photo points from a camera

location, (2) the photo monitoring system is easier to relocate when one camera

location will also locate two or more photo points, and (3) more information is

obtained from the specific site being monitored. 

Figure 35 shows “2E” on a meter board, meaning the fifth photo point at camera

location 2. Using more than one photo point means careful location of the camera

because it must be placed in a position to adequately depict several conditions

specified in the monitoring objectives (appendix D). If a distance of about 10 m from

camera to photo point is used, orient the camera location using a 10-m radius to

encompass as many topics of interest as possible. The same distance from camera

to photo point need not be the same for every photo point; for example, 8 m to

photo point A, 10 m to B, and 12 m to C. However, the same distance to each photo

point must be used for all subsequent photos: 8 m to A, 10 m to B, and 12 m to C. 

Vegetation close to the camera location is another important consideration. Most

authors who have rephotographed landscapes report vegetation grew up between

the camera location and photo point, which obscured the view and rendered the

rephotograph worthless. In many cases, the camera was moved to an unobstructed

view (fig. 36). 

Figure 26 illustrates a limited landscape photograph. The primary difference between

this and a general site-specific view is the lack of a meter board for centering the

camera view. Often, landscape views of an area must be reoriented in a manner

similar to long-distance landscapes (fig. 16). 

The need to map and stake both camera location and photo point is illustrated in

figure 21. Treatment of the ponderosa pine-pinegrass community was so dramatic

that relocation of photography without a map and permanent markings would be

nearly impossible. Here stakes driven flush with the ground were relocated by use

of a metal detector. Following treatment, fenceposts were placed at the stakes for

easy relocation. 

60

Camera Location
Riparian Areas Riparian areas pose some particular problems in regard to camera location and

photo points. Figure 23 documents streambank stability at Pole Camp. Figure 23A

was the original camera location and photo point; however, the camera location

was placed 2 dm from the bank. A winter ice episode eroded the bank, increased

stream sinuosity, and destroyed the camera location. The camera had to be moved

1.2 m to the left and 1 m back from its original location. This resulted in a different

view, as shown in figure 23B, which suggests that the streambank had moved 0.7

to 0.9 m to the right. But it had not moved to the right; the apparent movement was

caused by a change in camera location—a situation to avoid.

61

Figure 36—Effect of intervening vegetation between the camera and photo point. In 1975, the meter board was in full view at the start of the

study to appraise effects of livestock on willow growth. By 1982, willows had grown between the camera and meter board requiring a change

in the camera location. It was moved 1 m to the right. By 1996, willows had again obstructed the view so the camera location was moved 3

more meters to the right, a total of 4 m. This was a very poor camera location. Avoid locations where woody vegetation will obstruct the view

and render future photographs difficult to interpret. 
62

Riparian areas provide other challenges, particularly after floods. Deposition of silt 

is a valuable topic to document. Consider, when installing photo monitoring, pounding the fenceposts down to exactly the height of the meter board. When silt is

deposited, the height of the meter board above the fencepost will be a measure 

of silt deposition. 

Floods have other influences. Fenceposts may be torn out, thereby eliminating the

photo point or camera location. Thus, documentation of fencepost position is essential (Governor’s Watershed Enhancement Board 1993). Figure 27 illustrates a triangulation method for replacing washed out fenceposts. 

Finding existing camera locations and photo points, whether landscape or sitespecific, is sometimes difficult. Following are some suggestions for relocation.

In the Pacific Northwest, there is a 21-degree deviation from magnetic north. This

can result in problems of two kinds: 

1. The compass heading written on the map or layout instructions should be

labeled as either true or magnetic. If it is a true heading, was the 21-degree

deviation added or subtracted from the magnetic heading? 

2. When searching for the camera location or photo point, be prepared to try four

different headings.

A. Follow the heading and distance given. If the camera or photo point 

cannot be relocated, then . . .

B. Subtract 21 degrees from the recorded heading and look. If the locations still

are not found, then . . .

C. Add 21 degrees to the given heading and follow that direction. If the camera

location or photo point still has not been determined, presume that direction

from the witness site to the camera location or photo point is reversed. In

other words, a heading was taken from the photo point back to the camera

location or camera location back to the witness site and recorded.

Therefore . . .

D. Add 180 degrees to the compass heading and proceed with (A) through (C),

above. This system has produced results for me 95 percent of the time.

A photo-monitoring field book is recommended for carrying the original and some

intervening photographs into the field. If different people did previous photographs,

you may discover some disorientation of subsequent views. For that reason, a copy

of the original photograph is very important. Rephotograph the original and not the

misoriented intervening photographs.

Relocation of

Repeat

Photography

Idiosyncrasies With 

Compass Directions

Field Book for

Rephotography
63

Figure 37—The author’s system for finding camera locations and photo points. It 

is a pocket-sized set of photographs and directions mounted on cardboard (file

separator thickness). (A) A left landscape view of the sampling area at Pole Camp;

the right view is figure 26. A also locates camera locations 1 and 2. Camera location 1 has two photo points: D is Pole Camp dry and W is Pole Camp wet (fig. 20).

(B) The upstream photo point taken from camera location 2 to S and illustrated in

figure 23. Maps of this area are shown in figures 14, 15, and 27.
Multiple-Camera

System

A system I devised is shown in figure 37 for the Pole Camp example. Figure 37A

is a landscape view of the Pole Camp flood plain with camera locations and some

photo points identified. It locates the left of two flood-plain scenes; the right is shown

in figure 26. Both are mapped in figure 15. Figure 37B is a general view from camera location 2 to photo point S on the streambank, the scene in figure 23.

The pocket-size booklet has a picture of each camera location and photo point complete with directions from the witness site to camera location and orientation of the

photo point. Cheap 5-ft fenceposts driven 2 ft into the ground are used to mark both

camera locations and photo points. 

Once at the area, review the photographs for changes in vegetation. Next, note the

number of years since the last photograph, particularly if it was taken more than 3

years previously. The purpose is to evaluate changes in the vegetation that might

make previous photographs difficult to interpret (figs. 21, 23, 36, and 38; app. E). 

If camera locations and photo points are not marked, align items in the photographs

as depicted in figures 16 and 38 and appendix E. Start in the center of the photograph to orient the direction of the picture as shown by line 1 (fig. 38). Then, orient

items on the sides of the picture, shown by arrows 2 and 3, to triangulate the camera location. Move forward or back along the line to establish the distances shown

at 2 and 3. This is the camera location and photo point direction. Mark them with

fenceposts and add a meter board (photo point) location.

When both color and black-and-white photographs are to be taken, consider the

camera system shown in figure 39. One camera is for black-and-white, the other for

color. The cameras are the same make and model to simplify adjustment for lighting

and distance. Appendix C has construction details. 

64
65

Figure 38—Photograph reorientation uses a black-and-white photo on which a triangulation system is diagramed. A center line (1) is established on the original photograph (A) for direction. The center line is identified by position of trees in

the background and framing the picture with trees in the foreground. Then positions of items 2 and 3 at the sides of the

picture are used to triangulate the camera location. Looking to the right, note the position of trees at arrow 2 while also

looking left for tree positions at arrow 3. (B) Move forward and backward along the center line until items at arrows 2

and 3 are lined up. Try to include some unusual object in the photograph, such as the pair of stumps in the lower right

corner. Photograph A is a pre-underburn condition, and B is postburn and salvage of killed trees. In B, note missing

trees at arrows a and b, and a burned-out stump at arrow c. 
66

Figure 39—Asystem for combining color and black-and-white photography. Both cameras are

connected by strap aluminum 1/8 inch thick and 1 inch wide bent into a U-shape with holes

drilled for mounting screws to connect the cameras. The cameras operate independently.

Please consider using identical cameras so all setting controls are adjusted in the same way,

greatly avoiding mistakes.

Review Ground-based photo monitoring may be divided into two systems: (1) comparison

photos whereby a photograph is used to compare a known condition (shown in the

photo) with field conditions to estimate some parameter of the field condition, and

(2) repeat photographs where several photos are taken of the same tract of ground

over a period of time. Comparison systems can evaluate fuel loading and herbage

utilization and monitor public reaction to scenery. Repeat photography was categorized into landscape, remote, and site-specific systems. Critical attributes of repeat

photography are (1) maps to find the sampling location and of the photo monitoring

layout; (2) documentation of the monitoring system to include camera and film,

weather, season, sampling technique, and equipment; and (3) precise replication 

of photographs.
Literature Cited Anderson, E.W.; Franzen, D.L.; Melland, J.E. 1990. Rx grazing to benefit watershed-wildlife-livestock. Rangelands. 12: 105-111.

Arnst, Albert. 1985. We climbed the highest mountains. Portland, OR: Fernhopper 

Press. 22 p. 

Bauer, Stephen, B.; Burton, Timothy A. 1993. Monitoring protocols to evaluate 

water quality effects of grazing management on western rangeland streams. I:

Establishing permanent photo points. EPA 910/R-93-017. Seattle, WA: U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10: 145-149.

Benson, Robert E. 1983. Using photos to extend resource inventory data. In: Bell, 

John F.; Atterbury, Toby, eds. 1983. Renewable resource inventories for monitoring changes and trends. Proceedings: international conference; 1983 August 

15-19; Corvallis, OR. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, College of Forestry:

349-352.

Biswell, H.H. 1963. Research in wildland fire ecology in California. In: Proceedings:

Tall Timbers: fire ecology conference, 1963 [dates unknown]; [location unknown].

Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 63-97.

Blaisdell, James P. 1953. Ecological effects of planned burning of sagebrush-grass

range on the upper Snake River plains. Tech. Bull. 1075. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Agriculture. 39 p. 

Bonham, Charles D. 1989. Measurements for terrestrial vegetation. New York City: 

John Wiley & Sons.

Borman, Michael M. 1995. Photo monitoring. The Grazier. Corvallis, OR: Oregon 

State Extension Service. 282(May): 2-6.

Branson, Farrel A. 1985. Vegetation changes on western rangelands. Range

Monograph 2. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 76 p.

Brown, Harry E. 1962. The canopy camera. Sta. Pap. 72. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 22 p.

Bull, Evelyn L.; Holthausen, Richard S.; Bright, Larry R. 1992. Comparison of 3 

techniques to monitor marten. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 20: 406-410.

Bull, Evelyn L.; Meslow, E. Charles. 1988. Breeding biology of the pileated woodpecker—management implications. Res. Note PNW-RN-474. Portland, OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

8 p.

Chan, S.S.; McCreight, R.W.; Walstad, J.D.; Spies, T.A. 1986. Evaluating forest 

vegetation with computerized analysis of fisheye photographs. Forest Science.

32(4): 1085-1091. 

67
Chaney, E.; Elmore, W.; Platts, W.S. 1991. Livestock grazing on western riparian 

areas. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Cole, David N. 1993. Campsites in three western wildernesses: proliferation and 

change in condition over 12 to 16 years. Res. Pap. INT-463. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 15 p.

Cunningham, David J.; Anderson, William H.; Anthony, R. Michael. 1996. An 

image-processing program for automated counting. Wildlife Society Bulletin.

24(2): 345-346.

Easter, M.J.; Spies, T.A. 1993. Using hemispherical photography for estimating 

photosynthetic photon flux density under canopies and in gaps in Douglas-fir

forests of the Pacific Northwest. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 24: 

2050-2058.

Edgerton, P.J. 1983. Response of bitterbrush understory of a central Oregon lodgepole pine forest to logging disturbance. In: Tiedemann, A.R.; Johnson, K.L., eds.

Research and management of bitterbrush and cliffrose in western North America.

Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-152. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 99-106.

Elmore, W.; Beschta, R.L. 1987. Riparian areas: perceptions in management. 

Rangelands. 9: 260-266.

Fischer, William C. 1981. Photo guides for appraising downed woody fuels in 

Montana forests: how they were made. Res. Note INT-299. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 12 p. 

Fox, Douglas G.; Bernabo, J. Christopher; Hood, Betsy. 1987. Guidelines for 

measuring the physical, chemical, and biological conditions of wilderness

ecosystems. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-146. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment

Station. 48 p.

French, Norman R.; Mitchell, John E. 1983. Long-term vegetation changes in 

permanent quadrants at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory site. Bull. 36.

Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range

Sciences. 42 p.

Gary, Howard L.; Currie, Pat O. 1977. The Front Range pine type: a 40-year 

photographic record of plant recovery on an abused watershed. Gen. Tech. Rep.

RM-46. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky

Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 17 p. 

Governor’s Watershed Enhancement Board. 1993. Photo plots [Leaflet]. Salem, 

OR: State of Oregon. 16 p.

68
Gruell, George E. 1980. Fire’s influence on wildlife habitat on the Bridger-Teton 

National Forest, Wyoming. Volume I: Photographic record and analysis. Res.

Pap. INT-235. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 207 p. 

Gruell, George E. 1983. Fire and vegetative trends in the northern Rockies: interpretations from 1871-1982 photographs. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-158. Ogden, UT:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 117 p.

Gruell, George E. 1986. Post-1900 mule deer eruptions in the Intermountain West: 

principle causes and influences. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-206. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 37 p.

Gruell, George E.; Schmidt, Wyman C.; Arno, Steven F.; Reich, William J. 1982.

Seventy years of vegetative change in a managed ponderosa pine forest in western Montana: implication for resource management. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-130.

Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest

and Range Experiment Station. 42 p.

Guenther, Keith. 1998. Residual dry matter (RDM) monitoring photo guide. 

Clyde, CA: Wildland Solutions [234 Park Street, 94520]. 16 p.

Hall, Frederick C. 1976. Range trend sampling by photographs. R-6 Regional 

Guide 2-1. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Region. 50 p.

Hanemann, Mike. 1989. The Osborne photo recording transit. International 

Association of Panoramic Photographers: 6(1): 6-7, 9. 

Hart, Richard H.; Laycock, William A. 1996. Repeat photography on range and 

forest lands in the Western United States. Journal of Range Management. 49:

60-67.

Hattersley-Smith, G. 1966. The symposium on glacier mapping. Canadian Journal 

of Earth Sciences. 3(6): 737-743.

Hedgecoe, John. 1994. John Hedgecoe’s landscape photography. New York City: 

Sterling Publishing Co. 224 p.

Herring, Margaret; Greene, Sarah, eds. 1997. Natural Areas Report. Portland, OR:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research

Station. 9(1): 1-8.

Houston, D.B. 1982. The northern Yellowstone elk: ecology and management. 

New York City: MacMillan Publishing Co. 474 p.

Hulcher, Charles A. [N.d.]. Instruction manual for Hulcherama model 120 panoramic camera. Hampton, VA: Charles A. Hulcher Co., Inc. 4 p.

69
Jensen, D.; Smith, W.; Bodman, M. [and others] 1999. Application of photopoint 

monitoring for the CRD Parks and Water Departments. [City unknown], BC:

[Publisher unknown]. 114 p. Illustrated. [Water Department, Capital Regional

District; Parks Department, Capital Regional District; Environmental Youth Team

Program, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks].

Johnson, C. 1991. A photo point system: Eco-Area 3. Baker City, OR: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. 

6 p. 

Johnson, Charles Grier, Jr. 1998. Vegetation response after wildfires in National 

Forests of northeastern Oregon. R6-NR-ECOL-TP-O6-98. Portland, OR. U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 157 p.

Johnson, Kendall L. 1984. Sagebrush over time: a photographic study of rangeland change. In: Proceedings: symposium on the biology of Artemesia and

Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; [location of meeting unknown]. Ogden UT:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station:

223-252. 

Johnson, K.L. 1987. Rangeland through time: a photographic study of vegetation 

change in Wyoming, 1870-1986. Misc. Publ. 50. Laramie, WY: University of

Wyoming, Agriculture Experiment Station. 188 p.

Kay, Charles E. 1999. Repeat photography and long-term vegetation change on 

the U.S. Sheep Experiment Station and other rangelands in the Centennial

Mountains. Dubois, ID: Agricultural Research Service; final report to the U.S.

Sheep Experiment Station. 281 p.

Kay, Charles E.; White, Cliff A.; Pengelly, Ian R.; Patton, Brian. 1999. Long-term 

ecosystem states and processes in Banff National Park and the central Canadian

Rockies. Occas. Pap. 9. [Place of publication unknown]: Parks Canada, National

Parks. 

Kinney, John W.; Clary, Warren P. 1994. A photographic utilization guide for key 

riparian graminoids. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-308. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 13 p.

Kinney, John W., Clary, Warren P. 1998. Time-lapse photography to monitor 

riparian meadow use. Res. Note RMRS-RN-5. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 5 p.

Kodak. 1999a. Digital learning center. http://www.kodak.com/US/en/digital/dlc/. 

(March 2000).

Kodak. 1999b. Learn about digital cameras. http://www.kodak.com/US/en

/digital/cameras. (March 2000).

70
Koski, Wayne H.; Fischer, William C. 1979. Photo series for appraising thinning 

slash in north Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-46. Ogden UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

49 p.

Kristan, Deborah M.; Golightly, Richard T., Jr.; Tomkiewicz, Stanley M., Jr.

1996. A solar-powered transmitting video camera for monitoring raptor nests.

Wildlife Society Bulletin. 24(2): 284-290. 

Lyon, L. Jack. 1971. Vegetal development following prescribed burning of Douglasfir in southcentral Idaho. Res. Pap. INT-105. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

30 p. 

Lyon, L. Jack. 1984. The Sleeping Child burn: 21 years of postfire change. Res. 

Pap. INT-330. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 17 p.

Magill, Arthur W. 1989. Monitoring environment change with color slides. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. PSW-117. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 55 p.

Magill, Arthur W. 1990. Assessing public concern for landscape quality: a potential 

model to identify visual thresholds. Res. Pap. PSW-203. Berkeley, CA: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station.

48 p. 

Maxwell, Wayne G.; Ward, Franklin R. 1976a. Photo series for quantifying forest 

residues in the: coastal Douglas-fir-hemlock type; coastal Douglas-fir-hardwood

type. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-51. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 103 p.

Maxwell, Wayne G.; Ward, Franklin R. 1976b. Photo series for quantifying forest 

residues in the: ponderosa pine type; ponderosa pine and associated species

type; lodgepole pine type. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-52. Portland, OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 73 p.

Maxwell, Wayne G.; Ward, Franklin R. 1979. Photo series for quantifying forest 

residues in the: Sierra mixed conifer type; Sierra true fir type. Gen. Tech. Rep.

PNW-54. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 79 p.

Maxwell, Wayne G.; Ward, Franklin R. 1980a. Guidelines for developing or 

supplementing natural photo series. Res. Note PNW-358. Portland, OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 16 p.

71
Maxwell, Wayne G.; Ward, Franklin R. 1980b. Photo series for quantifying natural 

forest residues in common vegetation types of the Pacific Northwest. Gen. Tech.

Rep. PNW-105. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 229 p.

McGinnies, W.J.; Shantz, H.L.; McGinnies, W.G. 1991. Changes in vegetation 

and land use in eastern Colorado: a photographic study, 1904-1986. ARS-85.

Fort Collins, CO. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Research Service.

165 p.

Medina, Alvin L. 1996. The Santa Rita Experimental Range: annotated bibliography

(1903-1988). Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-276. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment

Station. 67 p.

Nader, Glenn; DeLasaux, Mike; Delms, Rick [and others]. 1995. “How to” 

monitor rangelands. Handb. Level-1. Alturas, CA: University of California,

Cooperative Extension Service, Modoc County. 44 p. 

National Park Service. 1992. National Park Service Western Region fire monitoring

handbook. Appendix D: Guidelines for establishing photopoints. San Francisco,

CA: National Park Service.

Ottmar, Roger D.; Hardy, Colin C.; Vihnanek, Robert E. 1990. Stereo photo 

series for quantifying forest residues in the Douglas-fir-hemlock types of the

Willamette National Forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-258. Portland, OR: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

63 p.

Owens, M.K.; Gardiner, H.G.; Norton, B.E. 1985. A photographic technique for 

repeated mapping of rangeland plant populations in permanent plots. Journal of

Range Management. 38: 231-232.

Parker, K.W. 1954. A method for measuring trend in range condition on National 

Forest ranges with supplemental instructions for measurement and observation

of vigor, composition, and browse [Internal publication]. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 37 p.

Parker, K.W.; Harris, R.W. 1959. The three-step method for measuring condition 

and trend of forest ranges: a resumé of its history, development, and use. In:

Techniques and methods of measuring understory vegetation: Proceedings of 

a symposium; 1958 October; Tifton, GA. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 55-69.

Phillips, Walter S.; Shantz, Homer L. 1963. Photographic documentation: vegetational changes in northern Great Plains. Rep. 214. Tucson, AZ: The University of

Arizona, College of Agriculture, Agriculture Experiment Station. 185 p.

72
Pierce, W.R.; Eddleman, L.E. 1973. A test of stereophotographic sampling in 

grasslands. Journal of Range Management. 26: 148-150.

Pierce, William R.; Eddleman, Lee E. 1970. A field stereophotographic technique 

for range vegetation analysis. Journal of Range Management. 23: 218-220.

Pond, Floyd W. 1971. Chaparral 47 years later. Res. Pap. RM-69. Fort Collins, CO:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and

Range Experiment Station. 11 p.

Porter, S.D.; Jorgenson, C.D. 1988. Longevity of harvester ant colonies in southern Idaho. Journal of Range Management. 41: 104-107.

Progulske, Donald R.; Sowel, Richard H. 1974. Yellow ore, yellow hair, yellow 

pine: a photographic study of a century of forest ecology. Bull. 616. Brookings,

SD: South Dakota State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 169 p.

Puchbauer, Truman C.; Carroll, Franklin C. 1993. Snapshot in time: repeat photography on the Boise National Forest 1870-1992. Boise, ID: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Boise National Forest. 239 p. 

Ratliff, Raymond D.; Westfall, Stanley E. 1973. A simple stereophotographic 

technique for analyzing small plots. Journal or Range Management. 26(2): 

147-148.

Reid, Elbert H.; Johnson, Charles G., Jr.; Hall, Wade B. 1991. Green fescue 

grassland: 50 years of secondary succession under sheep grazing. R6-F16-SO0591. Baker City, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, WallowaWhitman National Forest. 37 p. 

Reppert, Jack N.; Francis, Richard E. 1973. Interpretation of trend in range 

conditions from 3-step data. Res. Pap. RM-103. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 15 p.

Ribe, R. 1999. Regeneration harvest versus clearcuts: public views of the acceptability and aesthetics of Northwest Forest Plan harvests. Northwest Science. 73:

102-117.

Robel, R.J.; Briggs, J.N.; Dayton, A.D.; Hulbert, L.C. 1970. Relationships 

between visual obstruction measurements and weight of grassland vegetation.

Journal of Range Management: 23: 295-297.

Rogers, G.F. 1982. Then and now: a photographic history of vegetation change 

in the central Great Basin Desert. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.

152 p.

Rogers, G.F.; Malde, H.E.; Turner, R.M. 1984. Bibliography of repeat photography 

for evaluation of landscape change. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.

179 p.

73
Rogers, Garry F.; Turner, Raymond M.; Malde, Harold E. 1983. Using matched 

photographs to monitor resource change. In: Bell, John F; Atterbury, Toby, eds.

Renewable resource inventories for monitoring changes and trend: Proceedings

of an international conference; 1983 August 15-19; Corvallis, OR. Corvallis, OR:

College of Forestry, Oregon State University: 90-92.

Schmutz, Ervin M. 1971. Estimation of range use with grazed-class photo guides. 

Bull. A-73. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, Agricultural Experiment Station and

Cooperative Extension Service. 16 p. 

Schmutz, Ervin M.; Holt, Gary A.; Michaels, Charles C. 1963. Grazed-class 

method of estimating forage utilization. Journal of Range Management. 16: 54-60.

Sharp, Lee E.; Sanders, Ken; Rimbey, Neil. 1990. Forty years of change in a 

shadescale stand in Idaho. Rangelands. 12: 313-328. 

Sharp, Lee A.; Sanders, Ken; Rimbey, Neil. 1992. Variability of crested wheatgrass production over 35 years. Rangelands. 14: 153-168. 

Shinn, Dean A. 1980. Historical perspectives on range burning in the inland Pacific 

Northwest. Journal of Range Management. 33: 415-423. 

Skovlin, Jon M. 1991. Fifty years of research progress: a historical document on 

the Starkey Experimental Forest and Range. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-266.

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station. 58 p.

Skovlin, Jon M.; Thomas, Jack Ward. 1995. Interpreting long-term trends in 

Blue Mountain ecosystems from repeat photography. Res. Pap. PNW-GTR-315.

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest

Research Station. 102 p.

Smith, Helen Y.; Arno, Steven F., eds. 1999. Eighty-eight years of change in a 

managed ponderosa pine forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-23. Ogden, UT:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 55 p. + 14

foldout photopoint pages, 1 poster.

Stickney, Peter F. 1986. First decade plant succession following the Sundance 

forest fire, northern Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-197. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 26 p.

Strickler, Gerald S.; Hall, Wade B. 1980. The Standley allotment: a history of 

range recovery. Res. Pap. PNW-278. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment

Station. 35 p.

Temple, Stanley A. 1972. A portable time-lapse camera for recording wildlife 

activity. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 36(3): 944-947.

74
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1982. Recording the changes: 

field guide to establishing and maintaining permanent camera point systems. 

R6-10095-1982. Portland, OR: Pacific Northwest Region. 13 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1993. Riparian revival: the story 

of Elk Creek [Leaflet]. Enterprise, OR: Wallowa-Whitman National Forest,

Wallowa Valley Ranger District. 4 p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 1996. Sampling 

vegetation attributes: interagency technical reference. BLM/RS/ST-96/002+1730.

Denver, CO: Denver Service Center. 164 p.

Van Horn, Mia; Van Horn, Kent. 1996. Quantitative photomonitoring for restoration 

projects. Restoration and Management Notes. 14: 30-34.

Veblen, T.T.; Lorenz, D.C. 1991. The Colorado Front Range: a century of ecological

change. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. 

Wade, Dale D.; Forbus, James K.; Saveland, James M. 1993. Photo series for 

estimating post-hurricane residues and fire behavior in southern pine. Gen. Tech.

Rep. SE-82. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 19 p. 

Weaver, Herald. 1957. Effects of prescribed burning in ponderosa pine. Journal of 

Forestry. 55: 133-138.

Weaver, Herald. 1959. Ecological changes in the ponderosa pine forest of the 

Warm Springs Indian Reservation in Oregon. Journal of Forestry. 57: 15-20.

Wein, R.W.; Rencz, A.N. 1976. Plant cover and standing crop sampling procedures

for the Canadian High Arctic. Arctic Alpine Research. 8: 139-150.

Wells, K.F. 1971. Measuring vegetation changes on fixed quadrats by vertical 

ground stereophotography. Journal of Range Management. 24: 233-239.

White’s Electronics, Inc. 1996. Classic II SLTM. Sweet Home, OR: White’s

Electronics, Inc. [1011 Pleasant Valley Road, 97368].

Wimbush, D.J.; Barrow, M.D.; Costin, A.B. 1967. Color stereo-photography for the

measurement of vegetation. Ecology. 48: 150-152.

Winkworth, R.E.; Perry, R.A.; Rossetti, C.O. 1962. A comparison of methods of 

estimating plant cover in an arid grassland community. Journal of Range

Management. 15: 194-196.

Zielinski, William J.; Kucera, Thomas E. 1995. American otter, fisher, lynx, and 

wolverine: survey methods for their detection. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-157.

Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest

Research Station. 163 p., enclosure.

75
This page is intentionally left blank.
Contents 79 Introduction

79 Selection of an Area

81 When to Photograph

81 Maps to Locate the Monitoring

System

82 Identification of Photographs

84 Description of the Topic

84 Filing System

84 General Photography

84 Concept

86 Equipment

86 Technique

89 Topic Photography

92 Concept

92 Equipment

92 Technique

95 Analysis of Change

96 Photo Grid Analysis

96 Concept

96 Requirements

104 Technique

106 Analysis of Change

112 Grid Location of Items

112 Shrub Profile Photo Monitoring

112 Concept

113 Requirements

119 Equipment

120 Technique

121 Shrub Profile Grid Analysis

124 Transect Photo Sampling

124 Locating a Sample Area

130 Transect Installation

134 One-Square-Foot Plot 

Transect

77

134 Concept

136 Equipment

136 Technique

138 Summarize Data

141 Range Trend Analysis

142 Trend Interpretation

144 Nested Frequency Transect

144 Concept

145 Equipment

145 Technique

151 Summarize Data

159 Trend Interpretation

160 Nine-Square-Foot (1-SquareMeter) Plot Transect

160 Concept

160 Equipment

161 Technique

166 Summarize Data

166 Trend Interpretation

166 Tree Cover Sample

166 Concept

169 Equipment 

169 Technique

170 Summarize Data

174 Trend Interpretation

174 Usage Measured by Robel 

Pole

174 Concept

175 Equipment

176 Technique

184 Summarize Data

184 Literature Cited

Appendix A: Methodology for Photo Monitoring of Change in Vegetation or Soil
78

Figure 40—Ageneral photograph taken in 1997 with the topic of streambank stability. It is part of a riparian

study on Emigrant Creek, Snow Mountain District, Ochoco National Forest, near Burns, Oregon. The site is

Pole Camp, a place livestock find highly attractive. The location of Pole Camp is shown on the map in figure 41. This streambank photo point is taken up stream from camera location 2 shown on the map in figure

42. Fencepost 1 is camera location 1, fencepost 3 is camera location 3 looking downstream at photo point

S, S is photo point streambank, and fencepost W is photo point wet meadow. Other views of this streambank are shown in figures 23 and 49. 

Figure 41—Local map showing location of the Emigrant Creek riparian study, Snow Mountain District,

Ochoco National Forest, near Burns, Oregon. Three study areas are shown: Button Meadow at the head 

of Crowfoot Creek, Pole Camp shown in figures 20, 23, 26, 40, 44 and 49, and Lower Emigrant. This is

one of two essential maps designed so people other than those installing the monitoring system can find

the sampling sites. The other map is shown in figure 42.
Introduction This appendix contains instructions on how to apply various photographic sampling

methods designed to document changes in vegetation or soil on specific tracts of

ground. It does not deal with general landscape photography or remotely operated

cameras.

Nine photographic methods are discussed: 

1. General photography where a scene is followed over time.

2. Topic photography dealing with a selected item, such as a streambank (fig. 40) 

or logging disturbance (fig. 21).

3. Grid analysis of photographs to document change in the selected topic or item.

4. Shrub sampling to record change in shrub profile area, usually accomplished by

use of grid analysis.

5. Transect photography, in three dimensions, of square-foot plots.

6. Transect photo sampling of nested frequency plots.

7. Transect sampling of meter square (or 3-ft square) plots photographed at an

oblique angle.

8. Photo documentation of tree canopy cover.

9. Photo records of herbage utilization using the Robel pole system. 

All nine methods have several features in common, which are detailed in the following sections. 

Selection of a monitoring area requires professional expertise liberally dosed with

artistic finesse. The purpose for photographic monitoring is the most critical factor:

Where in the landscape is the topic of concern, and once at the area, what kind of

change should be documented? In some cases, where is straightforward; for example, documenting impacts of logging requires going to an area being logged (fig. 21)

and documenting effects of beavers on a stream requires finding beaver dams. On

the other hand, documenting impacts of livestock grazing requires understanding

livestock distribution plus knowing the location of areas sensitive to grazing and the

most critical season of use (figs. 20 and 40). 

Once in an area, determine specifically what is to be documented for change. In 

figure 40 at Pole Camp, for example, the purpose was to document effects of livestock grazing on a riparian area. Pole Camp was selected because livestock 

p r eferred it. Specific objectives were to evaluate grazing effects on streambanks,

willow shrub utilization, and differences in use between grass and sedge sites

(Kentucky bluegrass by the fencepost on the right [1]) and sedge (at the fencepost

in the background [W]). The topic in figure 40 is streambank stability.

Another example is the ponderosa pine stand shown in figure 21. In this case, 

the purpose for photo sampling was to document effects of a two-stage overstory

removal and subsequent precommercial thinning on stand structure and ground

vegetation. The site was selected based on the sale area. Stand conditions of open

pine and clumped reproduction across an opening were chosen for the photo point.

The opening was selected to avoid tree crown encroachment between the camera

location and photo point and to appraise logging effects on livestock forage. It was

photographed before and after each entry (fig. 21). 

79

Selection of an Area
80

Figure 42—Filing system form “Photographic Site Description and Location” showing the monitoring layout for Pole Camp. Note in

the lower left corner a reference to the junction of roads 43 and 4365 at 0.25 mi. Immediately opposite the road turnout is a 28-indiameter lodgepole pine stump. An aluminum tag, orange for visibility, is attached to the stump with directions and distances to

camera locations: a witness site. An additional map, noted by the square labeled “See detail attached,” is shown in figure 27. It

documents triangulation of the streambank photo point. Another note, “Shrub transect - see attached,” installed in 1997, is shown

in figures 64 and 65. 
When to Photograph When to photograph usually is determined by the activity being monitored. Pole

Camp is part of a study evaluating effects of cattle grazing on a riparian area. Figure

20 includes photographs taken three times per year corresponding to livestock activity: June 15 before grazing, August 1 as cattle change pastures, and October 1 after

animals leave the allotment. This three-season monitoring is repeated every year.

The ponderosa pine stand (fig. 21) illustrates a very different monitoring schedule.

Photography was planned for the first week in August so that vegetation development would be consistent. Photographs were taken just before logging and in each

of the two growing seasons afterward to document rapid changes in ground vegetation. Then a 5-year rephotographing cycle was established to follow slower changes

in both stand structure and ground vegetation. The routine was repeated with the

second logging and the precommercial thinning. 

If vegetation is a primary topic, consider establishing a fixed date for rephotography.

An established date has several advantages: (1) It offers an opportunity to evaluate

seasonal differences in plant phenological development, (2) it provides a consistent

reference for comparing change over several years, and (3) it establishes a consistent time interval over which change is documented. 

When the photo monitoring system has been established, prepare maps to locate

the area and document the sampling layout. Assume that the person installing the

monitoring program will not be the one to find and rephotograph the area. Provide

maps and instructions accordingly. A local map showing roads and site locations is

illustrated in figure 41 for Pole Camp, one of three locations for the Emigrant Creek

riparian study.

After establishing the sampling system, establish a witness site or tree which marks

the area. Identify it with a permanent marker, such as an orange aluminum tag, and

determine direction and distance to camera locations or transects. Inscribe these on

the identification tag. Next create a map of the camera locations and photo points 

or transects with directions and measured distances by using the filing system form

“Photographic Site Description and Location” (fig. 42) found in appendix B. Note

whether the direction is taken in magnetic or true degrees by indicating either “M” or

“T.” A 21-degree deviation in the Pacific Northwest must be accounted for. Measure

distances between witness site, camera location, and photo points on the ground.

Do not convert to horizontal distance. 

Fenceposts or stakes—Monitoring, by definition, means repeated observation.

Therefore, all camera locations, transects, and photo points must be permanently

marked. The recommended method is with stamped metal fenceposts (fig. 40).

These cost about $2.25 each for a 5-ft size in 2000. Stamped metal has several

advantages over strong T-bar posts: the former are flimsy and will bend if driven

into by a vehicle or run over by an animal; they will bend flat and remain in the

ground to mark the spot; they resist theft because they are just as difficult to pull

out as a good fencepost but not worth the trouble; and they are easy to carry and

pound. But the primary advantage of flimsy fenceposts is their visibility, as shown

in figure 40. If visibility is not desired, steel stakes are a choice but require a metal

detector to relocate. 

81

Maps to Locate the

Monitoring System
Steel stakes often have been used and may be necessary in shallow soils or in

areas that will be disturbed. If disturbance or shallow soils prevent use of fenceposts,

the stakes should be driven flush with the ground. If left a few inches aboveground,

stakes will damage tires, hooves, or feet and are often difficult to find. When driven

flush with the ground, they require a metal detector for location (White’s Electronics,

Inc. 1996). Even then, the stakes must be of some mass for detection with a simple,

$250 machine. Angle iron should be 1 in on the angle and at least 8 in long. Cement

reinforcing bar should be at least three-eights of an inch in diameter and at least 

8 in long. 

One overriding consideration in photo monitoring is the requirement that the same

distance be observed between the camera location and photo point for all subsequent photography of that sample. Any analysis of change depicted in the photographs can be done only when the distance remains the same. Therefore, always

measure distance from camera location to photo point. A fixed distance for all photo

monitoring is not required; this may differ from one photo point to another. Camera

format also may change, such as first pictures with a 50-mm lens and next pictures

with a 35-mm lens, but distance must remain the same. It can remain the same only

if permanently marked. 

Identify each photograph by site name, photograph number, and date. Figure 43 is

an example of a form for use in general or topic photographs (fig. 44). (Forms are in

appendix B.) The critical factor is identification of n e g a t i v e s for color or black-and-white

82

Identification of

Photographs 

Figure 43—An example of a photograph identification card to be placed in the camera view (fig. 44). This has been reduced to 60

percent. Appendix B has blank forms for reproduction onto dark blue paper. The best paper colors are Hammermill Brite Hue Blue®

or Georgia Pacific Papers Hots Blue®. Light colored paper, common in the office environment, fades out under direct sun and should

not be used. 
83

Figure 44—Filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” showing general photographs of Pole Camp taken from the witness

stump: (A) left landscape and (B) right landscape noted in figure 42. Note repeat of fenceposts 1 and 2 in both pictures. Fenceposts identify camera locations 1, 2, and 3 and photo points D for the dry meadow, W for the wet meadow, and S for the streambank. Photo identification cards similar to figure 43, a form from appendix B, are at the bottom of each picture. The purpose of these photographs is twofold:

(1) to illustrate the general sampling area and (2) to show location of the photo monitoring layout. Used in conjunction with the map in figure 42, someone other than the original sampling crew should be able to find and rephotograph this site. 
Filing System

General

Photography

Concept

pictures or digital images. Slides have borders to write on, but there is no similar

space on negatives. Placing a photo identification card in each view as it is photographed assures a permanent record on the negative. Negative identification has

been one my biggest problems!

Paper color is the next consideration. Plain white or light colors, common in the

o ffice environment, are not suitable because they are too light and will fade when

photographed outdoors in full sunlight (fig. 30). The recommended paper color is

either Hammermill Brite Hue Blue® or Georgia Pacific Papers Hots Blue® (app. B).

Tests have shown these darker blue hues are superior to other vibrant colors such

as green and yellow. 

Describe what is in the scene to be photographed (fig. 44). This might include plant

species, ground conditions, disturbances, or any other pertinent item. Appendix B

contains forms with provision for recording these notes. For example, the filing system form, “Camera Location and Photo Points,” is shown in figure 44 with two views

of Pole Camp. Figures 46 to 48 (shown below), using the same form, illustrate

mountain pine beetle effects on lodgepole pine over 13 years. And figure 50 (also

shown below) is the “Photo Points and Close Photos” form for a general view and

two closeup photographs of a ponderosa pine-elk sedge plant community in undisturbed condition. Recording of the percentage of cover for various items is recommended for good photo descriptions. 

Photo monitoring requires a way to file slides, prints, and negatives. My system is

organized around each study with an expandable file used to contain everything

(app. D).

The expandable files are placed in a file cabinet dedicated to sampling and organized first by geographic location and then by date for next photography. By filing

studies geographically, generally around overnight facilities, travel planning is

greatly facilitated. Noting the next photography date on each file helps with seasonal

planning (app. D). 

General photographs document a scene rather than a specific topic or conditions

along a sampling transect (discussed below). They are similar to landscape pictures

in that they do not require a size control board (meter board) on which to focus the

camera and to orient subsequent photographs. They usually cover an area of 2 to

20 acres and distance of 50 to 200 yards (figs. 26 and 44).

In many cases, general photographs document a scene in which a meter board 

cannot be placed where the camera can be focused on the “1M” of the board for

distance and photo orientation (fig. 18). One use of a general photograph is shown

in figure 26 depicting the setting of Pole Camp. Figure 44 is filing system form,

“Camera Location and Photo Points,” containing this and a second view of Pole

Camp wherein the fenceposts marking camera locations and photo points may be

identified. Another use is illustrated in figures 45 to 48 documenting effects of mountain pine beetle attack on lodgepole pine. 

84

Description of 

the Topic
85

Figure 45—Filing system form “Photographic Site Description and Location” with map to locate camera locations and photo points

documenting affects of mountain pine beetle on lodgepole pine. Two camera locations are shown. Figures 46 to 48 are from camera

location 1 showing photo points 1Aand 1B.
Equipment

Technique

The following equipment needs to be taken to the photography site:

1. Camera or cameras for different film or digital camera

2. Photograph identification form “Camera-Photo” (see index to app. B; the form

itself is not labeled)

3. Clipboard and holder for the photo identification sheets (app. C)

4. Previous photographs for orientation of the camera

5. Filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” (app. B)

6. Fenceposts and angle steel stakes, sufficient for the number of camera locations desired, with pounder

7. A tripod to use for camera orientation while viewing the photographs

Select a scene that will meet your monitoring objectives. Describe it by using the

filing system form, “Camera Location and Photo Points,” and include plant species,

ground cover items, disturbance, or whatever the topic of the photograph is. Photograph

the scene.

Make maps of the location and layout of the scene on the filing system form,

“Photographic Site Description and Location” (app. B; fig. 45). 

Reorientation—Reorientation of subsequent pictures is a major concern if a meter

board was not used originally to mark and establish photo orientation. Key items of

each view have to be identified. For example, in figure 44, the tall tree in the right

background of picture (A) is the same tree in the left background of picture (B).

Panoramic views such as figure 44 always should have about 10 percent overlap

between photographs.

Systems used for landscape photo reorientation, (see fig. 16) are of major help. On

a black-and-white copy of the scene, mark reorientation items as shown in figures

16 and 38. With the camera mounted on a tripod, compare the picture in hand with

the scene through the camera. Orient the camera accordingly.

Figure 37 illustrates a method for rephotographing general views. It shows 3- by 5-in

photographs mounted on 5- by 5-in cardboard. Instructions are given under each

picture for its location and orientation. These fit into a vest pocket for use in the

field. Figure 44A is a recent picture of figure 37A.

Example—Figures 45 to 48 illustrate general photography to document effects of

mountain pine beetle on lodgepole pine along Oregon highway 244 in the Blue

Mountains of eastern Oregon. Figure 45 is filing system form “Photographic Site

Description and Location” mapping two camera locations. Camera location 1 has

two photo points (figs. 46 to 48) and camera location 2 has three photo points.

Monitoring started in 1976 when beetles first attacked the stands.

86
87

Figure 46—Filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” documenting stand conditions in 1977, 1 year after a mountain pine 

beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) attack on lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelm.). Trees killed the first year have lost their

needles. Compare to figures 47 and 48. Photo orientation used the road center line but cut off tops of the trees in both A and B.

Figures 46 to 48 use filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” to document beetle effects over 14 years. Figure 46 depicts effects in the second year of

beetle attack when trees killed the first year started to drop their needles. Figure 47

is the third year after attack and shows massive standing fuel in A and salvage in B.

Figure 48, taken 14 years after initial attack and 13 growing seasons after figure 46,

illustrates tree fall in A and growth of natural regeneration in B.
88

Lack of a meter board on which to orient the camera is evident in figures 46 to 48.

Treetops are cut off in figure 46, they are visible in figure 47, and again cut off in 

figure 48. It is important to precisely reorient repeat photos. 

Figure 47—Stand conditions in 1978, 2 years after beetle attack in 1976. Photo point A shows 90 percent kill and massive standing dead

fuel. Photo point B was salvaged in winter 1977-78. These photos were properly oriented to show tree tops and road center line.

Text continues on page 92.
89

Figure 48—Stand conditions in 1991, 14 years after beetle attack and 13 growing seasons since figure 46. Photo point A shows most

dominant trees are down, thereby creating severe burn conditions at ground level. Photo point B illustrates natural regeneration height

growth. Compare photo orientation with figure 47, which is optimum; here, B has the tree tops cut off and about a 1/2 inch more pavement at the bottom. Orientation of repeat general photography requires skill and a set of orientation pictures similar to figure 37.

Topic photography narrows the subject from a general view to a specific item of

interest. It adds a meter board, or other size control object, to identify the photographic topic (figs. 40 and 49). 

Topic Photography
90

Figure 49—Topic photographs of streambank stability at Pole Camp. The specific topic of interest

was fate of the fallen block of sod shown in 1977. Its fate might resolve the question of how fast the

streambank will erode under change in livestock management from season-long use to three-pasture rest and rotation. By 1987, beavers had moved into the area raising the stream level, which

converted Kentucky bluegrass on the fallen block to aquatic sedge. By 1997 the stream was dry

because a flood in February 1996 washed out the beaver dams, cut a new channel, and drained

late summer flows from this part of the stream. The block of sod is still present after 20 years of

livestock grazing. See figure 23 for effects of a winter ice flood on the original camera location. 
91

Figure 50—Filing system form “Photo Points and Close Photos” documenting effects of selection logging in a ponderosa

pine/elk sedge community (fig. 29). This area had not been previously logged and had only sporadic sheep use because

water was 1.5 mi distant. The general view is followed by pictures to the left and right of the meter board. The concept is to

show both a general view and a pair of closeups to document change. Figure 29 illustrates what happened in this view after

logging and 18 years later. Figure 51 illustrates the same series to the left of the meter board. Species are CAGE (Carex

geyeri Boott, elk sedge), PONE (Poa nervosa (Hook) Vassey, Wheeler bluegrass), CARO (Carex rossii Boott, Ross’ sedge),

and FRVI (Fragaria virginiana Duchesne, strawberry).
A meter board, or other size control board, is placed at the topic to (1) identify the

item to be monitored for change; (2) establish a camera orientation reference point

for subsequent photography; (3) set up a constant sized reference by which change

may be documented, for example by grid analysis; and (4) provide a point to focus

the camera for optimum depth of field. 

Figures 40 and 49 illustrate identification of a very specific topic, streambank stability.

Figure 50 deals with a general view limited to area around the meter board, the topic

being effects of logging and precommercial thinning on stand structure and ground

vegetation. The purpose of topic monitoring is the primary factor in selecting a monitoring layout.

Effects of camera focal length and distance from camera to meter board to emphasize the topic are discussed in figures 31 to 33. When the distance from camera

location to topic is the same (figs. 6 and 7), the 70-mm and 35-mm pictures can 

be enlarged or reduced to the same size meter board as in the 50-mm photograph

(fig. 7). When cropped, all pictures will be the same. This can be done with prints

from negatives or digital images; it cannot be done with slides. Try to use the same

focal length for all subsequent photographs.

The following equipment is required for topic photography:

1. Camera or cameras with both color and black-and-white film, or digital camera 

2. Form “Camera-Photo,” from appendix B for photograph identification, printed on 

medium blue paper

3. Forms from appendix B for site identification: “Photographic Site Description and

Location,” and photo points: “Camera Location and Photo Points”

4. Meter board (app. C)

5. Clipboard and holder for the photo identification sheets (app. C)

6. Fenceposts and steel stakes, sufficient for the number of camera locations and

photo points desired, with pounder

7. Compass and 100-ft tape for measuring distance

8. Metal detector for locating stakes

Several steps are necessary to establish topic photo monitoring. Pole Camp (fig. 44)

will be used as an example. 

Define the topics of interest—At Pole Camp, primary topics of interest were

effects of livestock grazing on streambank stability, differential utilization of dry and

wet meadows, and impacts on willow shrubs. Next, the desired coverage of the

monitoring area must be defined. How many streambank sites are desired? How

many dry and wet meadows and where? How many shrubs should be monitored

and where are they located? Note in figure 44A the distribution of willow shrubs

and in figure 44B, the pattern of dry to moist to wet meadow.

92

Concept

Equipment

Technique
93
Figure 52—Filing system form “Photo Points with Overhead Views” documenting current tree canopy cover in a stand precommercially

thinned 25 years previously. The form is in appendix B. Remember to make notes on what is in each photo. 

94
Closeup photos—In many cases, details might be desired that are not accommodated by a meter board 7 to 10 m distant. Closeup photos, one on each side of the

meter board, are recommended (fig. 34). After the general photo is taken, walk up 

to the meter board and photograph it on each side. With a 50-mm lens, stand 2 m

away or with a 35-mm lens, stand 1.5 m away. Figure 34 illustrates the result with 

a 50-mm lens. The critical element is to always place the top of the meter board all

the way up in a corner of the view (fig. 35). Details on the ground are shown in

about a 1.5- by 1.5-m area on each side of the meter board (fig. 34). The concept 

is a general photo and two closeup photos to document change (fig. 50). 

Figure 50 illustrates use of filing system form “Photo Points and Close Photos” (app.

B) for mounting and filing topic photographs. It is the 1977 view of ponderosa pine

shown in figure 29. Figure 51 has close views of general conditions, shown in figure

29 for prelogging, that were taken 1 year later and 18 years later.

Multiple photo points—Coverage could be either multiple photo points from the

same camera location or multiple camera locations focusing on the same photo

p o i n t . Figure 42 maps two photo points (D and W) from camera location 1 and two

camera locations (2 and 3) focusing on one photo point (S). Figure 44 shows these

camera locations and photo points. Advantages are twofold: First, relocation tends to

be easier because only one point must be located that will serve two or more views,

and second, one point showing several views tends to tie the sampling area together. 

Overhead canopy—Overhead canopy pictures may be useful when documenting

changes in tree canopy cover (fig. 52). A word of c a u t i o n: camera focal length

must be the same for all subsequent pictures because there is no size control

board by which to adjust different photos taken at different focal lengths to the

same size. Directions for overhead photography are contained in the “Tree Cover

Sampling” section, later in this appendix.

Distance from camera to photo point—Distance between camera location and

photo point is critical for any repeat photography from the camera location: It must

remain the same. Exact replication of distance for all rephotography is the reason

camera locations and photo points must be permanently marked in the field and

their distances measured. I have found the best system is with flimsy fenceposts.

The same distance is not required, however, for other photo monitoring. Figure 42

shows different distances of photo points from camera location 1. 

An investigator may elect to do all three kinds of photography: topic view, closeups

on each side of the meter board, and an overhead view for maximum documentation of treatment effects. 

The meter board is used as a constant size reference point for analyzing changes.

The recommended system is grid analysis, discussed next. A clear plastic form with

site identification information is taped to the photo and topics of interest outlined.

Then an analysis grid is adjusted to exactly match the size of the meter board in the

outline and is printed on white paper. The outline form is taped to the grid, and grid

intersects on and within the outlines are counted and recorded. Amount of change

between photos can then be determined.

95

Analysis of Change
Photo Grid

Analysis

Changes in vegetation, soil, fuel loading, streambanks, or other photographed items

can be monitored by outlining the items on a clear plastic sheet that is then placed

over grid lines. The method involves counting grid intersects falling on and within

the outline and recording them. They are then compared to outlines of previous 

photographs of the same topic to estimate change. Each plastic sheet with its outlines becomes a database and must be identified. Outlines may be laid on top of

each other and compared between photographs to visually assess changes. 

The concept of grid analysis is based on a fixed geometric relation between camera

and meter board to compare photographs. The basic requirement is a constant distance between camera and meter board (photo point) for the initial and all subsequent

photographs. Different distances may be used for other photo points from the same

camera location and at other camera locations depending on the topic of interest (figs.

49 and 50). An established camera height is desirable but not essential unless the grid

is used to track change in position of items over time. Use of the same camera format,

such as 50-mm lens on a 35-mm camera body, is recommended but is not required.

Grids are designed to encompass a view limited to 13 to 15 degrees both horizontally

and vertically. Views exceeding 15 degrees suffer from parallax caused by light refraction at the edges of a lens. Heavy lines surrounding the grid emphasize this limit.

A photograph of the topic (fig. 53, for example) is enlarged to 8 by 12 in for easy

viewing. A clear plastic sheet, with information on date, site location, and topic, is

attached to the photograph (figs. 54 and 55). The meter board in the photo is

marked and the objects of interest outlined. Then a master analysis grid is adjusted

for size by using the meter board on the outlined plastic sheet. For adequate precision in grid size adjustment, the meter board must occupy at least 25 percent of the

height of the photograph; 35 to 50 percent is better. Adjustment in grid size requires

measurement of the outlined clear plastic meter board (fig. 56), measurement of the

meter board on a master grid (fig. 57), and reducing the size of the master to match

the outline. Each individual picture must be measured for grid adjustment. Grids are

reduced with a copy machine, printed on white paper, taped under the outlined clear

plastic sheet, and grid intersects counted that fall on or within each outline (fig. 58). 

Requirements for photography suitable for grid analysis include the following:

1. Camera location and photo point (meter board) permanently marked so that

exact relocation is possible. Consider use of cheap (stamped metal) fenceposts

driven 2 to 3 ft into the ground for both camera location and photo point.

2. A size control board, such as a meter board, placed a prescribed distance from

the camera for each photo point. The distance selected may be from 5 to 20 m

depending on the meter board selected, a single meter board 1 m tall (figs. 49

and 50) or a double board 2 m tall (fig. 31). Distance for other locations may be

selected according to the topic identified by the meter board. Make sure the 

visible part of the meter board occupies at least 25 percent of the picture height. 

96

Concept

Requirements

Text continues on page 103.
97

Figure 53—A1981 view of the Pole Camp wet photo point to be used as an illustration of grid analysis.

This photograph will be compared to one from 1996. The first step is to attach a clear plastic outline

form (fig. 54). Fill in the required site information and outline the shrubs (fig. 55). 

Figure 54—Form used to identify photographic outlines. Reproduce the form on clear plastic overhead

projection sheets. This form has been reduced to 85 percent of its size in appendix C. The full-sized form

is suitable for color photographs of 8 by 12 in. Use of the clear plastic overlay is illustrated in figure 55.
98

Figure 55—Photographs to be evaluated by grid analysis: (A) 1981 (fig. 53), and (B) 15 years later in

1996. Clear plastic overlays (fig. 54) have been taped to each photo. Each overlay is a data sheet so it

must have all information entered to identify the outlines. First the meter board is outlined on its left side

and top. Then each visible decimeter line on the meter board has been marked and the decimeter number written on the overlay. Finally, each shrub has been carefully outlined and given either a letter or

number identification. The next step is size adjustment of the analysis grid.
99

Figure 56—Measurement of meter boards for size adjustment of analysis grids: (A) 1981 and (B) 1996.

Measure from the top down to the lowest visible decimeter mark to the nearest 0.5 mm, in these photos

the 2-dm mark. Both measurements are 17.0 mm, which indicates the same distance from camera to

board in both and consistent enlargement of the photos. The analysis grid (fig. 57) will have to be

reduced in size to exactly match size of the meter boards in these outlines. An exact match is required

for consistency in measurement between photographs. 
100
101

Figure 58—Outline overlays placed on analysis grids: (A) 1981 and (B) 1996. The next step is to count

grid intersects within each outline. When an outline crosses a grid intersect, such as the two intersects

between shrubs 17 and 19, AA/18 and AA/19 in photo B, count the intersects for the shrub in front

(shrub 17). Also count intersects along the grid edge, such as the five intersects in shrub 24 on line YY,

photo B. 
102

Figure 59—The filing system form “Photo Grid Summary” where number of grid intersects by outline are recorded. In figure 58A, shrub A had 21 intersects; 21 is entered for shrub A under 1981. The primary purpose for identifying each outline is to aid in recording the number of intersects. Notice that three more shrubs were identified

in 1996 than in 1981, even though only 64 percent as many intersects were recorded.
Suggestion: When grid analysis is contemplated, clip vegetation away from the

front of the meter board to expose the bottom decimeter line. This will provide for

maximum precision in grid adjustment. 

Photographed with a 50-mm lens on a 35-mm camera, a single meter board set 

at 10 m is 25 percent of the photo height (fig. 2A), at 7 m it is 36 percent (fig. 2B). 

A double meter board, 2 m tall (fig. 31), will be 25 percent of photo height at 20 m.

The meter board is used to orient the photograph and adjust size of an analysis

grid.

3. Orient the camera view on the meter board. Place the camera focus ring on the

“1M” and focus (figs. 29 and 30). This accomplishes two things: (1) it provides

for reorientation of all subsequent photographs, and (2) it provides for a sharp

image at the topic marked by the meter board and an optimum depth of field.

The following items are required for grid analysis:

1. Photographs of the monitoring situation. Figure 53 is the wet meadow photo

point at Pole Camp taken in 1981. It will be compared to a photo taken in 1996

to appraise change in shrub profile area. Print all photographs to be compared 

at the same size, preferably about 8 by 12 in, and in color for best differentiation

of items to analyze. 

2. “Grid Analysis Outline” (app. B) printed on clear plastic sheets used for overhead projection (for example, 3M® or Labelon® Overhead Transparency Film).

Film is specifically designed for use with various printers (inkjet, plain paper, or

laser). These sheets are imprinted with site information from the form in figure

54 and are used for drawing outlines around topics of interest. 

3. The “Analysis Grid” form, shown in figure 57 (app. B). The grid must be adjusted in size to precisely fit each picture and outlined meter board (figs. 55 to 58).

Instructions are given in the section, “Grid Adjustment,” below.

4. “Grid Summary” form (fig. 59 and app. B). 

5. Permanent markers for drawing on clear plastic (for example, Sanfords

Sharpie® Ultra Fine Point Permanent Marker). Three colors are recommended

when encountering overlapping outlines, as in figure 60, to aid in differentiating

items. Colors suggested are black, red, and blue. 

6. Good quality hand lens to help identify the periphery of items being outlined—in

this case, shrub profiles.

7. A copy machine that will produce clear plastic overhead projection copies and

can adjust size of the master grid to fit the photographs. Many copy machines

can reduce to about 50 percent or enlarge to 200 percent. Be sure to use a

copy machine that does not stretch the copy in either direction. Grids, adjusted

for size and printed on white paper, are taped under each outline for analysis.

103
Technique

104

Figure 60—Outlines from 1981 (letters) and 1996 (numbers) overlaid for comparison of change in shrub

profile. Note major changes in shrubs Q, V, and W, and a new shrub shown as 1. The dramatic reduction in shrub height of Q, V, and W from 1981 to 1996 was caused by beavers cutting the largest stems

for dam construction.

Technique for grid analysis requires outlining the meter board and selected objects

on the plastic overlay, “Grid Analysis Outline” form (app. B). The overlay has site

information at the bottom because it becomes a permanent record of conditions on

the date of each photograph (fig. 54). 

Outlines on the overlay are interpreted by use of a grid that must be adjusted in

size to exactly match divisions on the overlay meter board (figs. 56 and 58) in each

photograph. The recommended procedure follows.

Outlining—Determine what is to be interpreted. In this example, change in willow

profile area is the topic so all other items—grasses, sedges, forests and water—are

not outlined. Decide whether individual shrubs will be evaluated or all shrubs lumped

t o g e t h e r. In this case, combined shrubs will be evaluated. Proceed as follows:

1. Fill out all information on the clear plastic overlay, because it becomes the permanent data record and must be identified (fig. 54). Date is the photography

date, not when the outline was made. 

2. Attach the plastic overlay to the photo at only one edge, such as the top, so

that it may be lifted for close inspection of the photograph and then replaced

exactly (fig. 55). 

3. Using a straight edge, mark the left side of the meter board and its top on the

overlay (fig. 55). Next, mark each decimeter division on the meter board and

identify even-numbered decimeter marks by their number, such as 2, 4, 6, 

and 8 (fig. 55).
4. Starting in front, work systematically from left to right, outlining each shrub and

labeling it with a letter or number (fig. 55). The primary purpose for identifying

each shrub (or any outline) is administrative to assure that grid intersects inside

an outline are not repeated or missed if interruptions occur during recording. 

At times, identifying change in specific shrubs might be desirable. If so, each

shrub identified in the initial photo will have to be identified in all subsequent

photos and the letter or number used initially will have to remain exclusive to the

shrub or to the location where the shrub used to be. This is best accomplished

by shrub profile monitoring, discussed in the next section. Any new shrubs will

require their own exclusive new identification. 

5. When outlining, pay particular attention to the periphery of the shrub by following as carefully as possible the foliage outline. Do not make a general line

around the outside of the shrub. Mark directly on the foliage, not outside of it.

Check outlines by lifting the overlay to check on foliage and inspect with the

hand lens. 

6. Work back into the photograph. The letter inside the front shrub outline identifies

the overlapping shrub (figs. 55 and 56). Using different colored marking pens

may enhance overlapping outlines. Intersects often will occur under an outline.

Count them for the shrub in front only (do not count the intersect twice).

Grid adjustment—Outline interpretation requires use of an analysis grid (fig. 57),

whereby each grid intersection on or inside the outline is counted and recorded. 

The grid must be adjusted in size based on the meter board outlined on each overlay. Proceed as follows:

1. Measure height of the meter board as it appears on the overlay to the nearest

0.5 mm. If the bottom line on the board is not visible, measure to the lowest

visible decimeter mark. In figure 56, it is 2 dm and measures 17.0 mm from

top to 2 dm. Similar measurements between the 1981 and 1996 photographs

indicate that distance from camera to meter board was the same and that both

pictures were enlarged identically.

2. Next, measure height of the meter board on the master analysis grid. In figure

57, it is 37.5 mm from the top to the 2-dm grid line (second from the bottom).

3 . Determine the percentage of change required for the master analysis grid:

17.0/37.5 = 45 percent. On a copy machine, reduce the grid to 45 percent and

print on plain paper. Overlay the outline on the grid to determine any additional

size adjustment (fig. 58). This usually requires two or three trials. 

4. Place the clear plastic overlay on the grid and assure that grid divisions exactly

match those on the overlay meter board. Orient the overlay on the grid by using

the left side of the meter board outline (fig. 58). Adjust the grid as necessary.

When both overlay and grid meter board marks match exactly, tape the overlay

to the grid. 

105
Analysis of Change

Note borders on the grid. These mark the maximum 12- to 15-percent angle 

useful for grid analysis. Do not count intersects on outlines outside the grid. 

5. On the filing system form, “Photo Grid Summary” (fig. 59), complete the required

information and enter the year of the photograph in the “Date” column. This is

the same date as on the plastic outline. List shrubs by letter or number in the

“Item #” column. The form provides for recording intersects for three photographs.

Note that items, shrubs in this case, are not required to have the same identification. Here, shrubs from 1981 are letters and those from 1997 are numbers

because exact relocation of shrubs was not possible. 

6. Starting in front and working from left to right, count the number of grid intersects

on or within each outline. An intersect is where a horizontal and vertical grid line

intersect. When the outline covers an intersect, count it for the shrub. Many times,

the outline will separate two shrubs. Count the outline intersects for the shrub

in front. Do n o t count the intersect twice. See figure 58A: intersect W-20 is on

the outline for shrub “R” with shrub “Q” behind it. Record the intersect only for

shrub “R.” This is why outlining o n rather than outside of shrub foliage is import a n t . Do not try to count intersects for the shrub behind when they cannot be

seen; for example, in figure 58A, intersects of shrub “Q” behind shrub “R” should

not be counted. Count intersects on the edge of the grid but not beyond the

grid even though the shrub or outline might extend beyond the grid, such as

shrub W in 58A along the Y Y line. The grid defines the area of analysis, not

the photo coverage. 

7. Record the intersects for each shrub beside its letter or number (fig. 59). Recording

by shrub letter or number will simplify record keeping. Disturbances or the need

to stop can occur at any time, and a record is needed of shrubs already recorded

and where to begin again. When finished, sum all the intersects (fig. 59): 1981

had 404 and 1996 had 318 intersects. Ask yourself if these are significantly different. The next section deals with analysis of change.

N o t e : Each picture is produced by enlargement of a negative. Seldom are two

enlargements made at exactly the same scale even though the negatives might be

precisely sized. Therefore, grids must be sized independently for each photograph

(figs. 56 and 58).

Figure 58 compares outlines from 1981 and 1996. Visually, there is a difference in

shrub profile area. These outlines are overlaid in figure 60 as one way to interpret

change. 

This section deals with analysis of change considering grid precision and observer

variability. The grid monitoring system provides an opportunity to overcome both

problems, which are primarily differences among observers. Let each observer do

grid analysis on all photographs and interpret the results. The same personal idiosyncrasies will be applied in object outlining, grid sizing and placement, and interpretation of grid intersects, greatly reducing between-observer differences that affect

interpretation of change.

106
Correct grid sizing and differences among observers influence analysis of change.

Area within successive grid outlines may be digitized and compared. The data are

entirely dependent, however, upon exact duplication of meter board outline size. 

Grid precision—Percentage of photo height represented by the meter board is an

important factor in precise fit of grids. The minimum is 25 percent and the optimum

is 35 to 50 percent. A 35-percent meter board is 1.3 times more precise than a 25-

percent board for grid adjustment.

Using a single meter board at 10 m (fig. 53), which is 25 percent of photo height,

just a 0.5-mm difference in measurement at the meter board (17.0 vs. 17.5 mm;

fig. 56) results in a 2.9-percent change in grid height. Grids 2.9 percent different in

height also are 2.9 percent wider which results in a 5.9-percent difference in outline

area. This same percentage applies to the number of intersects that may be within

an outline. 

A meter board occupying 33 percent of photo height would measure 22.5 mm in figure 56. A 0.5-mm difference here is only a 2.2-percent change in grid size. The 2.2

and 2.9 percent represent errors in measurement precision. 

Distance from camera to meter board also affects precision of measurement on

items beyond the meter board. Table 1 illustrates the effects of three distances

between camera and meter board and how they affect grid precision at various

d i stances from the camera. Because grids are adjusted to size at the meter board

location, each grid is 1 by 1 dm at that location but this will change as distances

increase. 

A grid sized to a meter board 5 m from the camera measures 2 dm between grid

lines at 10 m from the camera. This is two times greater than a grid sized at 10 m

from the camera. At 30 m from the camera, a grid sized to a board 5 m from the

camera will cover an area 6 by 6 dm. When sized to a meter board set 10 m from

the camera, it will cover an area only 3 by 3 dm, one-half the dimensions and onequarter of the area—a significant improvement in precision. Monitoring objectives

help determine the optimum distance from camera to meter board as grid size

adjustment and outline precision are balanced. 

107

Table 1—Effect of distance from camera to meter board on grid

coverage at 10, 20, 30, and 60 m

Grid size at distance

Distance, camera from camera of:

to meter board Ratio Angle 10 m 20 m 30 m 60 m

Meters Percent -----------Decimeters-----------

5 1:50 2.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 12.0

7 1:70 1.4 1.4 2.8 4.2 8.4

10 1:100 1.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 6.0
Observer variability—“Perfect” outlines are influenced by differences among

observers.

1. Size adjustment of grids is influenced by observer skill. With a meter board at 

25 percent of photo height, a 0.5-mm measurement difference of the meter board

can mean as much as 2.9-percent difference in grid dimensions and 5.9-percent

difference in area. Meter boards closer to 33 percent of photo height and larger

photographs help to reduce this error. I recommend 8- by 12-in color photographs.

A meter board at 33 percent of photo height would measure about 55 mm. A

0.5-mm measurement discrepancy would be only a 0.9-percent precision error. 

2. The grid must be oriented exactly along the left side of the meter board as

viewed (the observer’s left side) and precisely at the top and bottom or lowest

clear decimeter mark. Orienting precision is subject to observer skill.

3. Interpretation of what constitutes the periphery of an object profile (shrub in

this case) is subject to observer variability. Choices have to be made about

where to place an outline and how precise it will be, particularly for overlapping

shrubs. An intersect is counted if the outline crosses it. The desirability of the

topic being outlined tends to influence a person's willingness to include or

exclude marginal parts. Outlining on clear plastic without grid lines tends to

reduce observer bias. 

A test was made in January 1998 of observer variability in outlining the shrub profile

area shown in figure 53. Results of the seven observers are in figure 61. A 6- by 9-in

color print with properly sized grid was provided. Observers placed the grid, outlined

shrubs, and summarized intersects within each outline. Variation between observers

was measured by the 5-percent confidence interval (CI). The CI also was calculated

as a percentage of the mean: CI divided by the mean, then multiplied by 100 equals

the CI% for each shrub, total of all shrub intersects, and an average CI. Low CI%,

such as 5 percent (shrub H), is interpreted as low observer variability, and a change

of more than 5 percent in intersects probably is a significant difference. High CI%,

such as 25 percent (shrub B), means high observer variability and more than a 25-

percent change is required to be significant. 

Percentage of confidence intervals ranged from 4.2 percent (shrub L) to 54.4 percent (shrub D) (fig. 61). The average CI% among the observers was 15.4 percent,

suggesting that a change of more than 15 percent in intersects is required. However,

the CI% for total intersects of all shrubs combined was only 5.7 percent indicating

good concurrence among observers. 

The number of intersects in an outline seems to influence the CI%. A graph at the

bottom of figure 61 show higher CI% with lower intersects per shrub. 

Differences in shrub profile area are rather clear in figure 58. Profile area in 1996

was 79 percent of that in 1981 (fig. 59). The reader may wish to test this observer

variability; count the shrub profile intersects in figure 58 and compare to the data in

figures 59 and 61. 

108
Figure 61—Summary of seven observers determining grid intersects on 18 shrubs from the same photograph. Variability among

observers is characterized by the 5-percent confidence interval (5%CI) and is expressed by dividing the 5%CI by the mean intersects by shrub and multiplying by 100 (CI%Mean). The mean and CI%Mean are graphed by shrub.

109

Because CI% was rather high for individual shrubs, another observer variability test

was conducted in winter 1999. Eight observers were provided with two photographs,

one from 1975 and another from 1995, and asked to count total intersects of shrub

profile. The CI% for 1975 was 7.5 percent and that for 1995 was 11.6 percent (fig. 62).

The 1995 photo was more difficult to interpret. 

The graph in figure 62 illustrates the mean, 5-percent confidence interval, and

observer variability by year. Using the largest CI%, 11.6 percent, the averages

are significantly different at the 0.5-percent level. Given a maximum of 12-percent observer variability here and 15 percent for total individual shrubs, a value

greater than 12 percent of the average intersects is proposed as being significant

at the 5-percent level of confidence for observer variability; for example, a mean of

384 intersects must change by more than 46 to say that the change was real and

not due to observer variability at the 5-percent level of confidence (384*0.12 = 46.1).

This may be expressed as 384±46 so that intersects greater than 430 or less than

338 may be considered a real change. 
110
111
Grid Location of Items

Studies, such as at Pole Camp where photographs are taken every year, are

amenable to regression analysis of grid intersects. If the same person does the outlines, observer variability is greatly reduced. Figure 63 illustrates regression on shrub

profile intersects at Pole Camp from 1975 to 1997 as determined from yearly photographs. Regression for the entire data set showed a decline of -0.63; however, when

data were selected for the time of beaver activity in the area, 1983 to 1994, the

regression was at -0.90, highly significant. Trendlines such as these seem very

useful. 

Documenting change in position of items on a photograph requires precise photography. Three kinds of precision are required: (1) Distance between camera location

and meter board must be the same for all repeat photos, (2) height of camera above

the ground must be the same for all repeat photos, and (3) sizing and orientation of

the grid must be precise. 

Height of camera above the ground or orientation over the camera-location fencepost will change position but not size of objects. Figures 8 to 10 illustrate this relation by using the photo test view. Figure 10 overlays two sets of object outlines

illustrating effect of camera position on location of objects and thus on the overlay

grids. Reasons for this are shown in table 1. 

Grid sizing and placement on the outline overlay, discussed previously, also are critical in detecting change in position. 

None of these precision variables consider observer interpretation. They suggest

that attempts to use photographs for monitoring change in position of objects seems

questionable. If documentation of position change is desired, place the meter board

in close proximity to the topic of interest, such as a streambank (figs. 23, 40, and

49), and measure from the meter board to the object of interest.

Change in shrub profile area can refer to either shrub utilization or shrub growth. It

may be documented by repeat photography that uses grid analysis and horizontal

camera orientation. Permanent camera locations and photo points, marked by either

steel fenceposts or stakes, are required. Season of photography is a key factor in

documenting change and causes of change in shrub profiles owing to shifts in leaf

density.

Documenting change in shrub profile area involves photographing a shrub on two

sides with the camera location moved 90 degrees for the different views. This photographs all profiles of a shrub. Camera locations and photo points must be marked

with steel fenceposts or stakes to assure the same distance from camera to meter

board for all future photographs. The same distance need not be used, however, for

other camera locations. Adjust distance to suit the topic being photographed. Tall

shrubs, where double meter boards are used (fig. 31), require a much greater distance than short shrubs. 

The primary objective in monitoring change in shrub profile area or shape is to

document utilization (reduction in area) or growth (increase in area). Thus, season

of photography is of critical concern. If effects of animal browsing are the topics of

interest, then photography both before and after utilization may be necessary. This

112

Shrub Profile

Photo Monitoring

Concept
Requirements

requires selecting two seasons to photograph, such as just before livestock grazing

and immediately after. If livestock graze at different seasons in the same pasture

over several years (as with rest-rotation systems), as many as four dates may be

required to document grazing effects over the period. Other dates, established by

local knowledge, probably would be required with wildlife. 

If growth in shrub profile area were the topic of interest, then photography after 

termination of growth would be desirable. Dryland shrubs usually have a definite 

termination of growth, called determinate shrubs. Some riparian shrubs, such as

many willows, continue to grow until environmental conditions (for example, frost)

cause a termination in growth. These are known as indeterminate shrubs. For

these, the season to photograph must be based on the phenological development

of the shrub species under consideration. 

Once photographs have been taken, use the “Photo Grid Analysis” procedure 

(previous section) to document and estimate change in shrub profile area and

shape. 

All basic photo monitoring requirements must be met for relocating the monitoring

area and maintaining the same distance from camera to meter board: 

1. Establish a monitoring objective when selecting an area and shrub species to

evaluate. Determine a photography date or dates. 

2. Make a map to find the monitoring area (fig. 64) and a map of the transect layout (fig. 65). The transect layout must include direction and distance from the

witness site to the first shrub photo point and then its two camera locations,

and from there, the direction and distance to the next shrub photo point and

its camera locations. All shrub photo points must be tied together for ease in

future location. The transect layout need not, probably will not, be a straight 

line (fig. 65). 

3. Placement of the meter board is of critical interest because it will be used to

document changes in shrub profile. There are three concerns: (1) Placing the

meter board far enough to the side of the shrub to allow the shrub to grow in

crown diameter (figs. 66 through 69)—consider a distance that is half the current shrub crown diameter (fig. 66); (2) placing the bottom of the meter board far

enough toward the camera to assure the lowest line of the grid will be b e l o w

the bottom of the shrub if it grows—consider placing the 2-dm line opposite the

current bottom of the shrub (figs. 67 through 69); and (3) placing the board in

one location and moving the camera for a 90-degree change in view (figs. 66

and 67).

4 . Select a camera-to-photo-point distance that will permit the shrub to grow in

both height and diameter. Consider a distance where the current shrub is about

50 percent of the camera view height and 70 percent of the camera view width

(fig. 67, B and C).

Text continues on page 118.

113
Figure 64—The filing system form “Sampling Site Description and Location” identifies the Pole Camp shrub profile monitoring

system. The first line of the form provides for circling one of several monitoring systems; here, “Shrub Form” has been circled.

Information on the area is entered, and a map is drawn to locate the monitoring system. This shrub profile transect is one of

several photo monitoring installations at Pole Camp. Figure 42 diagrams four other camera locations and four photo points. A

note at the bottom of this map says an attached page has details. The page is shown in figure 65.

114
Figure 65—Details on the Pole Camp shrub profile transect. Instructions begin at camera location 1 for Pole Camp monitoring.

The dry meadow photo point has been used as a camera location for a view down the transect (fig. 64). Direction in magnetic

degrees and distance are shown for the five shrubs and the 10 camera locations. 

115
Figure 66—System for location of a meter board when photographing shrub profiles. Figure 67 shows the views from

photo 1Aand photo 1B. Locate the board as follows: Measure the shrub radius in two directions at 90 degrees to correspond to the direction of photographs (12 in and 10 in). Move out from the shrub the same distances (12 in and 10 in)

and locate the meter board at the intersection of the distances. This will place the meter board far enough to the side

and front of the shrub so that the shrub can grow and still be analyzed with a grid. 

116
Figure 67—The filing system form “Shrub Photo Transect” (app. C) showing Pole Camp willow transect 1 and both views of shrub number 1.

The top photograph (A) was taken down the transect and B and C are of shrub number 1. Notes on the vegetation and item photographed

are made opposite each photograph. The form provides for two views each of 10 shrubs with views down the transect from each end. 

117
Figure 68—Grid analysis of shrub 1, view A, on the Pole Camp shrub profile transect. The outline form has been placed

on the photo, information filled in, and the meter board marked. Outline as carefully as possible the shrub profiles. Do the

same for photo B of shrub number 1 (fig. 69).

118

5. Try to select a single shrub or several shrubs separated from other shrubs in

the camera view. If shrubs grow in profile area, their outer crown periphery may

become difficult to separate from adjacent shrubs. Color photographs greatly aid

in shrub-profile delineation.

6. Aim the camera so that the meter board is in the extreme left or right of the view

(figs. 67 through 69). The shrub grid analysis overlay shows the meter board at

the sides. Next, orient the camera so that the bottom of the meter board is just

above the bottom of the camera view (figs. 67 through 69). Thus, a maximum

amount of photo is allocated to current and future profile area of the shrub. 

Notice in figures 67 through 69 the relation between placement of the meter

board bottom about 2 dm below the bottom of the shrub and orientation of the

camera at the bottom of the meter board. The objective is to document change

in shrub profile both upward and outward.

When tall shrubs require double meter boards, such as in figure 31, the boards

may be placed centered in front and the 2-m board grid (board in the center)

used for analysis. 
Figure 69—Outlines of view B, shrub 1, on the Pole Camp shrub profile transect. When two shrubs are present, separate

their outlines as shown. Information on the bottom of the clear plastic overlay must be filled in for each photo. Remember

to outline and mark the meter board.

119

7. Fill out and place the photo identification card, “Shrub Photo Sampling,” next to

the meter board (figs. 67 through 69). This is essential for labeling each slide,

negative, or digital image.

8. Focus the camera on the meter board to assure greatest depth of field for the

shrub. Then swing the camera either left or right to place the meter board at the

side. 

The following equipment is required for shrub profile sampling:

1. Camera or cameras with both color and black-and-white film or digital camera

2. Forms from appendix B for photo and transect identification: “Shrub Photo

Sampling” printed on medium blue paper, data and photo-mounting form “Shrub

Photo Transect” printed on medium yellow paper, the “Grid Analysis Outline”

printed on clear plastic, and “Analysis Grid-Shrub Analysis” adjusted in size and

printed on white paper 

3. Meter board (app. C)

4. Clipboard and holder for the photo identification sheets (app. C)

Equipment
Technique

5 . Fenceposts and steel stakes sufficient for the number of transects desired: 

1 fencepost and 2 steel stakes per shrub; for a 10-shrub transect, 10 fenceposts

and 20 stakes required; include a pounder

6. Compass and 100-ft tape

7. Metal detector for finding camera locations

The technique for shrub profile monitoring combines a transect system with principles discussed under “Photo Grid Analysis,” above. A primary objective is to monitor

change in shrub profile area and not to measure canopy cover of shrubs or shrub

profile area per acre. Shrubs therefore are objectively selected for photography. The

following technique emphasizes this selectivity.

1. Locate the area of consideration. Walk the area to select shrubs to be monitored. In many cases, shrub distribution does not lend itself to straight line 

transects, particularly in riparian areas with winding streams. Ask, “Why am I

concerned with change in shrub profile area?” Is it to appraise utilization, assess

vigor, or document increase in profile area? Is the location of shrubs important,

such as shade along streams? 

2. Mark each shrub to be photographed with steel fenceposts or a combination of

posts and stakes: a fencepost to mark the meter board and two more posts or

stakes to mark camera locations that view the shrub at 90 degrees (two different

sides). Whenever possible, select a single meter board position that will accommodate the two camera locations (figs. 66 through 69). Measure distances from

the photo point to camera locations. 

3. After marking all the desired shrubs, diagram the transect layout (fig. 65). Take

a direction and measured distance from the witness mark to the first shrub

meter-board position. Diagram the two camera locations with direction and

measured distance from the meter board. Then take direction and measured

distance from the first shrub meter board to the second, documenting direction

and distance of the camera locations. Continue to the end of the transect.

Remember to indicate magnetic or true north.

4. When ready to photograph, fill out the filing system form, “Shrub Photo

Sampling,” for photograph identification (app. B) as shown in figure 67. 

5. Take a general picture of the transect by setting the meter board at shrub 1 

(fig. 67A). Stand 7 to 10 m from the board and place the “Shrub Photo Sampling”

form in view (fig. 67A). Stake the camera location and add to the sampling layout

diagram. Reference it to the witness location.

6. For each shrub, place the photo identification form,“Shrub Photo Sampling,”

next to the meter board (fig. 67, B and C). The form has a shrub number and

letter for 10 shrubs. Match the shrub number and letter on the form with the

transect diagram and circle it (in fig. 67B, 1A is circled). 

120
Shrub Profile 

Grid Analysis

7. Photograph the shrub. Then move to the second camera location, turn the

meter board and the photo identification form to face the camera, cross out the

last shrub view on the form, and circle the current one. In figure 67C, 1A is

crossed out and 1B is circled. 

8. Make notes of what is in the view (fig. 67). Identify the shrub, list herbaceous

vegetation, and note anything of interest, such as browsing and by what. 

9. Then move to the next shrub and repeat the process until completed. 

10. Mount the photographs as shown in figure 67. The filing system form, “Shrub

Photo Transect,” is designed for 3- by 42-in photos. 

11. Conduct grid analysis of the pictures as discussed next. 

A complete review of the “Photo Grid Analysis” section, above, is necessary to do

this evaluation. Only highlights specific to shrub-grid interpretation are presented

here. 

Print the photographs to be analyzed, in color, at 8 by 12 in. From appendix B,

select the “Grid Analysis Outline” form (fig. 54) and duplicate on clear plastic. Fill out

all information at the bottom of the outline form. The completed outline becomes a

data file and must be identified. Tape the outline form to the photograph along one

edge or top so that the outline can be lifted for close inspection of the photo and

then replaced exactly (figs. 68 and 69). 

Outline the shrub or group of shrubs in the photo. Do not try to guess the outline of

a shrub hidden behind another. Outline, only what can be seen. Be as precise as

possible. 

Next, adjust the grid (with meter boards at each side) for shrub analysis (app. B) to

exactly match the outline meter boards as discussed in “Photo Grid Analysis” (figs.

56 and 57). Tape the outline form to the grid (fig. 70). 

Count intersects within each outline including intersects falling under an outline line

(figs. 58 and 67), and enter on the filing system form, “Photo Grid Summary” (fig. 71).

Please refer to the section “Photo Grid Analysis,” and within it “Analysis of Change,

Observer Variability,” for a discussion of what constitutes a significant change in

shrub profile area. 

Test your own observation skills. Count grid intersects in figure 70 and compare to

the results shown in figure 71. Expect a difference of three to six grid intersects. 

121
Figure 70—Grid outlines for shrub 1, views A and B on the Pole Camp shrub profile transect. Grids have

been adjusted for size by the outlined meter board. Outlines are then taped to the grid. Count the grid intersects and record on the filing system form “Photo Grid Summary” (fig. 71). 

122
Figure 71—Filing system form “Photo Grid Summary” for the Pole Camp transect. Future data on these shrubs may

be compared for change as discussed in the “Photo Grid Analysis” section. 

123
Transect Photo

Sampling

The historical purpose for transect sampling was to document change in vegetation

and soil caused by livestock grazing, commonly called range trend analysis (Parker

1954, Parker and Harris 1959). The Parker three-step method (Parker 1954) was

designed for this purpose. It used a 0.75-in diameter loop dropped at each foot

along a 100-ft line. The system was supplemented by photographs taken of the

transect from the 0- and 100-ft ends with additional closeup pictures of a 3- by 3-ft

square at each end. 

By 1970, the system had been installed at 16,500 locations and reviewed by the

Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station (Reppert and Francis 1973).

The findings suggested that photographs are the most valuable part of the system.

Photos (1) documented transects across two or more sites, (2) helped to evaluate

species identification, and (3) were used to validate interpretation of measured data

through a four-step process. 

Based on these findings, Hall (1976) developed a photo monitoring method, which

has been updated for presentation here. 

Five kinds of photo transects will be discussed and illustrated: (1) 1-ft2 frequency

photographed with a stereo attachment on the camera (or photographed without the

stereo), (2) nested frequency using four plot sizes in a 0.5- by 0.5-m frame, (3) 1-m2

plot frame photographed at an angle, (4) vertical photographs of tree canopy cover,

and (5) measurement of herbaceous stubble height using the Robel pole system.

All five may be applied on top of any three-step transect or they may be installed in

new areas for any documentation of ground vegetation and soil surface monitoring.

The following factors apply to any transect system. 

The introduction to this appendix discussed selection of an area and when to photograph. Probably the most important of these suggestions was to define a purpose

for monitoring. In addition, several other elements might be considered: livestock

grazing, wildlife distribution, and planned and unplanned disturbance because the

investigator must be guided by factors not under their control. Transect photo monitoring is not limited to livestock effects analysis.

Livestock considerations—The three-step sampling system (Parker 1954) was

designed to evaluate livestock grazing impacts on vegetation and soil. Instructions

called for one to three transects. The objective was to attain 60 or more hits on

vegetation with a 0.75-in loop. If more than 60 hits were not recorded on the first

transect, then a second or third transect was installed until either 60 hits were

obtained or three transects were established. Each set of transects was called a

c l u s t e r. Nested frequency, also an appraisal tool for livestock impacts, requires five

transects. 

Location of transects has three primary requirements:

1. The site under each transect must be homogeneous. If an entire cluster of two

to five transects is to represent a single site, vegetation and soil surface conditions under each of the transects must be homogeneous and similar to each

other.

124

Locating a 

Sample Area
2. The kind of site selected should be one sensitive to livestock use. For example,

in a complex meadow where dry meadow around the edge grades into moist

meadow, which finally grades into wet meadow, the most desirable sampling

location would be in the dry meadow because it is most sensitive to livestock

use. 

3. Locate the sample in an area best representing current livestock utilization. 

These three criteria generally will satisfy the objectives of monitoring management

effectiveness by photographic documentation of conditions; evaluation of sensitive

areas which, when indicating an upward trend, imply that less sensitive areas are in

a faster upward trend (or are in better condition); and distributing sampling locations

on a least-cost or cost-effective basis.

The most difficult aspect of sample location deals with suitable representation of

current livestock activity. Samples on a range area (allotment) grazed season long

may not be adequately located or sufficient in number for the same area under restrotation grazing. Furthermore, locating a transect may be difficult in an allotment that

has had a major change in management—for instance, from season long to restrotation—until livestock distribution over an entire grazing sequence has been evaluated. Selection of a site sensitive to livestock use in a unit under spring grazing

might be quite different from that selected in the same unit under fall grazing.

Locating a sampling site requires a great deal of professional expertise liberally

mixed with artistic finesse. Investigators must understand seasonal and topographic

effects on livestock distribution, seasonal effects on plant community, and soil sensitivity to grazing, and they must have a critical eye for site homogeneity.

Wildlife considerations—Locating transects or clusters suitable for monitoring

impacts of wildlife, including big game, on vegetation and soil requires knowledge of

animal distribution and most critical season of use. Wild animals may be year-round

residents or may be moved by snow or other weather conditions. The investigator

must determine which season is most critical and where the animals are at that 

season for both transect or cluster location and season of sampling. 

Planned disturbance—Planned disturbance sampling is where a treatment is 

prescribed and the area is sampled before and after implementation. Figure 21, 

a logged and precommercially thinned ponderosa pine stand, is an example of

planned disturbance sampling. Two important factors to consider are (1) where to

locate the sampling transects so they best represent effects of the treatment, and

(2) use of camera location and photo point stakes pounded flush with the ground to

resist mechanical displacement. These require use of a metal detector to relocate

(White’s Electronics, Inc. 1996). Use maps with directions and measured distances

to aid in relocating stakes. 

Fenceposts, flimsy or strong, used in any kind of disturbance other than prescribed

fire, tend to do two things: (1) they bias operators of equipment to stay away from

the posts, and (2) they may be removed completely from their location making exact

replacement of camera locations and photo points nearly impossible. Prescribed fire

125
sampling, however, might well use fenceposts, particularly for photo point locations.

Pound the fenceposts down to the exact height of the meter board. Then photograph the fire as it passes the fencepost to document fire intensity, flame length,

and burn aftermath. Coordination with the fire boss on transect layout and direction

given topography and fire behavior might be advisable. 

Unplanned disturbance—Unplanned disturbance, such as fire, blowdown, or flood,

generally preclude predisturbance transect or cluster installation. Care should be

taken to select areas where change is most critical or where postdisturbance activity, such as salvage logging, most likely would occur. If activity is probable, consider

use of steel stakes driven flush with the ground and a metal detector to find them

Maps—Each cluster should have two maps: one to find the monitoring area (fig.

72), and another of the cluster layout (fig. 73). A blank form for “Sampling Site

Description and Location” is in appendix B. 

To use the “Sampling Site Description and Location” form shown in figure 73, circle

the type of sample in the (top line), in this case “1 sq. ft.” Most items are self-explanatory such as entering the date installed, the name of the area, and the allotment.

Grazing system should be entered, such as season long, enclosure, deferred-rotation,

elk fall range, deer fawning area, etc., and the date when initiated or season of use.

Circle the kind (or kinds) of animals using the sample area. 

Describe location with both standard survey nomenclature and a description of

where the sample is located in relation to land, vegetation, or road features.

Describe it as if you were telling someone how to find it. Then diagram the sample

layout in the map space (fig. 73). Note, location of identifiable features, compass

headings as either true (T) or magnetic (M), measured distances, transect location

and orientation, and the 0- and 100-ft ends. With transects laid end to end, continue

the sample layout map on the back of the form (fig. 74). 

The front side of the form is for a site description (fig. 73). Enter elevation and percentage of slope. Then circle the item best describing aspect, slope position, micro

(within one acre) and macro (within one section) topography, kind of soil deposition,

soil parent material, and kind of restriction to rooting depth (if there is a restriction

within 5 ft of the soil surface). Enter depth to restriction and rooting depth. Circle

items describing soil compaction, soil stone, and texture. A space is provided for

comments not otherwise addressed.

Note: A single site description presumes all transects are on the same site. If they

are not on the same site, fill out a new form for each different site. 

Choice of film—Choice of film is a concern. Photo trend sampling is designed to

measure change in vegetation and soil over time. Photographs taken 5, 10, or 15

years earlier are compared to current photographs. Film therefore must be selected

that will retain its sharpness and clarity for a long time. Black and white film should

be the first choice, but it can be supplemented by color film. 

Text continues on page130.

126
Figure 72—Ranger District map locating the Madras Exclosure and three range trend sampling clusters having three

transects each in the Crooked River National Grassland. Cluster number 3, transect 1, will be used to illustrate photo

sampling of square-foot frequency, nested frequency, and square-meter systems. 

127
Figure 73—Filing system form “Sampling Site Description and Location” for finding the Madras Exclosure cluster 3. The first line

lists a choice of sampling systems. Circle “1 sq. ft.” Fill in the required information as shown. After laying out the photo sampling

system, plot it in the map space provided. If several transects require more space, use the form back (see fig. 74). Take direction and measured distance between the witness point (Crooked River National Grassland sign) and the first transect (185

degrees magnetic, 70.0 ft). Next take direction and measured distance to the 100-ft end of the tape (170 degrees magnetic,

99.6 ft). The 100-ft end-stake is at foot mark 99.6. See figure 74 for continuation of the map.

128
Figure 74—Map on back of figure 73 showing location of transects 2 and 3. When distances are measured, as shown

here, use feet and tens of feet, for example, 50.0 ft between transect 1 at its 100-ft end and transect 2 at its 0-ft start.

Then 99.7 ft between the 0-ft stake and the end stake located at foot mark 99.7 for transect 2. Continue for transect 3.

129
Transect Installation

Film with an ISO rating of 100 or better should be used, particularly in forested

conditions. A film of ISO 160 will have good contrast and fine grain. ISO ratings up

through 400 may be considered. Higher ISO ratings mean smaller f-stops (higher

f-number) and produce greater depth of field. Photos taken with films rated higher

than ISO 400 will be grainy and nullify lens sharpness. 

Digital cameras should have 2.1 megapixels or more. Graininess of images from

cameras of 1.6 megapixels or less usually precludes accurate analysis of prints. 

Season of year—Season of year for photography depends on objectives and past

history. Reppert and Francis (1973) recommend repeat sampling within plus or

minus 2 weeks of the original date. When placing the 1-ft2, nested frequency, or 

1-m2 transects on top of existing three-step transects, date of sampling should be

governed by the original readings. For newly established transects, date of installation should be governed by plant growth development (phenology) and season of

critical concern. In general, a good time to sample is when plants are well into flowering or just completing their maximum seasonal growth.

Document the direction and measured distance from a witness site to the 0-ft end

of the first transect. Set a fencepost to mark the transect. Drive stakes to leave

about 6 in aboveground onto which the 100-ft steel tape is clamped. Vice grips are

very convenient. The 0-ft mark on the tape is aligned with the first angle iron stake

and clamped in place. A mid-stake is located between foot marks 50 and 51, and

the end-stake is located between the 99- and 100-ft marks and clamped in place.

Make sure the zero end is labeled and that 0- and 100-ft ends are properly documented on the map (figs. 73 and 74). Mark both ends with fenceposts for easy 

relocation.

In disturbance sampling, presample the area with 6 in of stake aboveground for

fastening the steel tape. After sampling, drive the stakes flush with the ground. For

postsampling, plan on adding a stake nested inside the flush stake extending 6 in

aboveground on which is clamped the 100-ft steel measuring tape. Relocation of

the flush-pounded stakes will probably require a metal detector (White’s Electronics,

Inc. 1996). 

From the 0-ft stake, record direction (note true or magnetic) and measured distance

to the 100-ft steel stake (figs. 73 and 74) for each transect. Tie the transects together

for easy relocation by direction and measured distance from one to another (fig. 74).

Always record location of both the 0- and 100-ft ends. 

Every transect should have a photograph taken from both the 0- and 100-ft ends

(figs. 75, top, and 77). Each photograph down the transect should be identified with

the cluster-transect form (app. B). Place the identification form at 15 ft, a size control board at 33 ft, hold camera at eye level, and photograph the transect with the

camera focus system on the size control board’s “1M” and the photo identification

sheet at the bottom of the picture (fig. 75). Repeat this procedure at the 100-ft end

of the tape by placing the identification sheet at foot mark 85 and the size control

board at foot mark 67 (fig. 77).

Text continues on page134.

130
Figure 75—Filing system form “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” illustrating its use (continued in figs. 76 and 77). Two additional

forms are shown: transect identification (top picture) and plot identification (lower two pictures). Fill out required information on

each form: CRNG (Crooked River National Grassland), Madras Exclosure, cluster 3, transect 1, date, and notes. Photograph

the transect from the 0-ft (top picture) and the 100-ft ends (fig. 77). Then place the square-foot plot at the specified foot mark

(plot 1 from 0 to 1 ft). Fill out the plot identification form, circle plot 1, and place in view. Soil surface items are B = bare

ground, G = gravel, R = rock, L= litter, and C = cryptogamic crust. Circle each item occurring in the plot. 

131
Figure 76—Second page of the “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” form with provision for three more sample plots. Notice

under plot 3 that ARTR (Artemisia tridentata Nutt., big sagebrush) intersected the tape between foot marks 12 and 15 for 3 ft

of line intercept. Intersect is counted between the first foot mark from one plot to the next; in this case, from foot 10 to 15.

ARTR also intercepted the line as shown under plot 5. Additional pages provide for all 20 ft2 plots. Other species are AGSP

(Agropyron spicatum vis. Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) A. Love., bluebunch wheatgrass), and POSA3, (Poa secunda J.

Presl., Sandberg’s bluegrass). 

132
Figure 77—Last page of the form “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” with a view up the transect from the 100-ft end. This page

is also the summary sheet where frequency of species and soil surface items are listed. Space is provided for observed utilization, activities, climate, condition, and comments. The sign in the upper right is the witness point for this cluster (fig. 73).

Species are AGSP (Agropyron spicatum vis. Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) A. Love, bluebunch wheatgrass), POSA3 (Poa

secunda J. Presl, Sandberg’s bluegrass), SIHY (Sitanion hystrix (Nutt.) J.G. Sm., squirreltail), STOC (Stipa occidentalis

Thurb. ex S. Wats., needlegrass), BISO (Balsamorhiza sagittata (Pursh) Nutt., arrowleaf balsamroot), LOMAT( Lomatium

species), PHLOX (Phlox species), ARTR (Artemisia tridentata Nutt., big sagebrush, PUTR (Purshia tridentata (Pursh.) DC.,

bitterbrush), and CHNA (Chrysothamnus nauseosus (Pallas ex. Pursh) Britt.). 

133
One-Square-Foot 

Plot Transect

Concept

The cluster-transect identification form (app. B) is used for both the 0- and 100-ft

ends of a transect. Print information in large letters similar in size to those on the

form. This size can be read on the photographs (figs. 75 and 77). Circle “0” in upper

right corner for the 0-ft end (fig. 75). After taking the picture, cross out the “0” and

circle the “100” for the picture at the 100-ft end (fig. 77).

A size control board is required (specifications in app. C). The illustrations in figures

75 and 77 have a size control board marked with “1M” (indicating 1 m) and decimeters labeled as 2, 4, 6, and 8. Use of a size control board has several purposes: (1)

depth of grass, height of shrubs, or other items can be estimated; (2) when the camera focus system is placed on the “1M,” pictures will be consistently oriented both

horizontally and vertically for easy comparison; (3) focusing the camera on the “1M”

assures sharp picture clarity and greatest depth of field at the meter board; and (4)

grid analysis may be performed if desired. 

General transect photographs from the 0- and 100-ft ends should be taken with

the three-dimensional attachment (fig. 78) on 1-ft2 transects (fig. 75 through 77) if

available, otherwise with a 50-mm lens. For other sampling, use a 50- or 35-mm

lens for nested frequency, 1-m2, and canopy cover. A 50-mm lens should be used

with Robel pole to adequately document pole divisions. In addition, a standard

photograph (without 3-D) is highly recommended on 1-ft2 transects to encompass

a broader horizon of the plant community and, when color slides are produced, to

use in slide talks dealing with range trend (fig. 77).

Transect data forms—Forms are provided in appendix B. The series of “Photo

Trend Sample-...” forms double as both data forms and a filing system for the photographs. Another form identifies the cluster and transect photograph in letters large

enough to be read on the negative. The plot identification form identifies each plot

and labels it on the photo negative. Because these forms are used in the field, they

should be printed on a paper color that is easy on the eyes and will not burn out in

photography under direct sun. “Photo Trend Transect” forms should be printed on

medium yellow paper, such as Champion Goldenrod© or Hammermill Copy Plus

Goldenrod©, which have been found quite acceptable. Light yellow paper, common

in the office environment, is less satisfactory. Transect and plot photograph identification forms will resist fading out under direct sun if printed on medium blue color

paper. Tests have shown that Hammermill Brite Hue Blue© or Georgia Pacific

Papers Hots Blue© are most useful.

One-square-ft sampling employs a square-foot plot placed every 5 ft along a 100-ft

transect for a total of 20 plots. It is designed to document changes in species, their

density, and frequency as a means to estimate change in vegetation and soil surface conditions.

Each 1-ft2 plot is photographed in stereo to provide a permanent, visual record of

vegetation and soil surface conditions. At the same time, each plant species rooted

in the plot is recorded and presence of bare soil, gravel (1/8- to 3/4-in diameter),

rock, litter, and cryptogams are noted. At a later time, the same transect will be

134
135

Figure 78—Camera using a 50-mm lens with stereo adapter mounted (A and B). This a Honeywell Pentax Stereo Adapter® with

the connection plate removed because it will not fit on a Canon® camera. (C) The connection plate and its cover are shown

removed. In B, the stereo system has been taped to the camera over a filter. It must be aligned horizontally with the camera (A).

(D) The complete system includes the stereo adapter and slide viewer.

reread and rephotographed to provide a comparison set of pictures and data. Range

trend is interpreted by comparing original and followup photos and data of each 1-ft2

plot to appraise changes in species presence, density, basal area, frequency, shrub

and tree line intercept, and soil surface characteristics.

Photographs are used to measure or estimate vegetation and soil parameters, aid 

in evaluating plant identification, facilitate illustration of range trend or lack of trend,

and reduce observer variability in comparing transect readings taken at different

times. Anybody can compare and measure the difference between photographs.
Stereo photographs greatly aid species identification and interpretation of vegetation

and soil parameters. Try evaluation on one-half of a stereo pair—then view it with a

stereoscope (fig. 75)!

The following equipment is required for 1-ft2 sampling:

1. Camera or cameras with color and black-and-white film and stereo adapter 

(fig. 78)

2. A 1-ft2 plot frame (app. C)

3. Forms from appendix B: for photo identification “Cluster-Transect” and “Square

Ft Frequency” printed on medium blue paper; and the data and photo-mounting

form “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” printed on medium yellow paper

4. Meter board (app. C)

5. Clipboard and holder for the photo identification forms (app. C)

6. Compass and a 100-ft steel tape with clamps or vice grips to clamp onto angle

iron stakes

7. Fenceposts and angle iron stakes sufficient for the number of transects desired:

two fenceposts and three angle iron stakes per transect and a pounder

8. Metal detector for locating transect stakes

Map the location of the transect cluster (fig. 72). Establish the transects and map

them on the filing system form “Sampling Site Description and Location” (fig. 73). If

slope exceeds 10 percent, orient transects on the contour so that uphill is left of the

transects when viewed toward the 100-ft end. Placing plot frames and photographing uphill is easier than working downhill. Fill out information on the form and circle

“1 sq. ft.” on the top line. If transects fall in a line, continue the map on the back of

the form (fig. 74). 

A three-dimensional adapter for 35-mm cameras with 50-mm lenses is desirable for

both general and 1-ft2-plot photographs (fig. 78). Such adapters may not be available, however. If not, use a 50-mm lens in preference to a 35-mm for best detail

resolution. Take general pictures from the 0-ft (fig. 75, top) and 100-ft ends (fig. 77)

to show vegetation prior to trampling from placing and photographing the 1-ft2 plot

(figs. 75 and 76). 

The filing system form, “Photo Trend Sample – 1 sq. ft.” (app. B), is illustrated in 

figures 75 to 77. It should be printed on medium yellow paper such as Champion’s

or Hammermill’s Goldenrod© to ease eyestrain. It is used to diagram plants and

mount photographs of the 20 plots. Fill in date, area (Crooked River N.G.), allotment

(Madras grazing unit), cluster number (3), transect number (1), and the investigator’s name. “Season of use” means when during the previous 12 months the area

was used, such as season long, spring, summer, fall, or winter. The “% use” is the

average utilization at the time of sampling. “Grazing system” means the kind currently being used, such as season long, rest-rotation, or alternate year. Any comments may be made under “Remarks” (fig. 75) or “Comments” (fig. 77). 

Transect photos are identified by the filing system form “Cluster-Transect” (figs. 75

and 77). It should be printed on medium blue paper. Fill in the date (97/3/22), circle

either “0” or “100” (fig. 75 is 0, and fig. 77 is 100) to indicate which end of the transect is being photographed, area (CRNG), allotment (Madras), cluster number (3),

136

Technique

Equipment
and the transect number (1). For the downtransect photo, place the camera at the

0-ft stake, photo identification form at 15 ft, and the meter board at 33 ft; for uptransect photos, camera at 100 ft, photo identification form at 85 ft, and meter board at

67 ft. 

Each square-foot plot and its photograph is labeled individually (“Square Foot

Frequency”) and positioned on the transect as noted on the form “Photo Tr e n d

Sample - 1 sq. ft.” Place the 1-ft2 plot at the first location, between 0 and 1 ft, with

its identification card. Diagram the location of each plant species and label as

shown in figures 75 and 76. Diagram basal area in bunchgrasses and area of rhizomatous or single-stemmed species when they occur within the square foot. The

diagram is used for species identification and counting frequency, not for measurement of change. The stereo photograph is used to measure plant and soil change. 

Under the plot diagram, circle soil surface items in the plot: “B” is bare ground

(> 50 percent ground cover), “G” is gravel (> 50 percent ground cover of stones

1/8- to 3/4-in diameter), “R” is rock (> 3/4 in), “L” is litter (> 50 percent ground

cover), and “C” is cryptogamic crust (> 50 percent ground cover). 

Identify each square foot plot with the “Square Ft Frequency” form (app. B). It labels

each 1-ft2 plot and its photograph (figs. 75 and 76). One sheet is designed for use

with all 20 plots on a transect. Try to print the necessary information in letters similar

in size to those on the form. This will ensure readability in photographs. For plot 1,

circle number 1, place form on ground next to the tape and adjacent to the squarefoot plot. Place the plot frame at footmarks 1 and 2 as noted on the form. With a

stereo adapter attached to the camera, hold the camera at eye level directly above

the plot and expose for both the square-foot plot and the photo identification paper

(fig. 75). For plot 2, cross out number 1 and circle number 2 (fig. 75). Place the plot

frame at foot marks 5 and 6 as noted on the form. For plot 3, cross out number 2

and circle 3 (fig. 76) and place at foot marks 10 and 11. Repeat for all 20 plots. Use

a new sheet for each transect.

C a u t i o n : Expose for both the photo identification paper and the plot. Generally,

paper will reflect more light than vegetation and soil; the paper therefore should be

slightly overexposed while soil and vegetation are slightly underexposed. Acceptable

paper exposure is essential to read the printing in each plot photo. Medium blue

paper, not office blue color, may be attained at most office supply stores. 

In addition, from plot number 1, record shrub and tree (under 6 ft tall) canopy cover

intercept by species above the transect tape between the start of one plot and the

start of the next. Record beginning and ending foot marks and number of feet

between intercepts. For example, in figure 76, plot 3 starting at 10 ft had a shrub

intercept from 12 to 15 ft between it and plot 4, for a total of 3-ft crown intercept.

Plot 5 starting at 20 ft had a shrub intercept from 22 to 23 ft between it and plot 6,

for a total of 1 ft. 

Another important source of supplemental information, particularly in the Pacific

Northwest where many range types are forested, is the effect of tree cover. Cover

must be sampled on all forested ranges. It is discussed as an additional transect

sample in the “Tree Cover Sampling” section, below.

137
After all 20 plots have been photographed and diagrammed, the transect is summarized on the last page of the “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” form (fig. 77). The left

side documents frequency and line intercept by species as well as by soil surface

items. List all species found on the transect. Sometimes a shrub or tree species will

be rooted in a plot for frequency and also will be recorded for crown intercept. Record

the shrub or tree species in both cases. For frequency, count the number of plots in

which the species occurred and record. For intercept, total the number of feet for each

species and record (fig. 77).

The same procedure is followed at the bottom of the species listing for bare ground,

gravel pavement, rock, litter, and cryptogams. Determine the number of plots in

which each of these items occurred (fig. 77). Bare soil occurred in 18 sample plots,

gravel pavement in 15, rock in 2, litter in 15, and cryptogams in only 8 plots.

The rest of the “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” form is devoted to supplemental

information (fig. 77). At the bottom left, record the two or three species sustaining

the greatest utilization regardless of whether they are decreasers or not. The objective is to document how much utilization occurred for which species, not to estimate

“proper use.” 

On the lower right side of figure 77, briefly describe any activities that occurred

since the last transect reading. Provision is made for logging disturbance, fire,

revegetation, insects, wildlife effects, and other.

Evaluate recent climatic conditions (fig. 77). Circle whether temperature was hotter,

about average, or colder for this growing season (when the sampling was done),

last year, two years ago, three years ago, and four years ago. Do the same for precipitation falling between January 1 and July 1: Was it above average, about average, or below average? This information should be available from local weather

stations. Precipitation in the mountains can differ considerably from local stations,

and no attempt is made to quantify differences.

Estimate whether apparent range condition is good, fair, poor, or very poor. These

are range management terms equivalent to ecological definitions of potential natural

vegetation (PNV), late seral, mid seral and early seral. PNV is the stable, native plant

community that will become established after succession following disturbance. In

much of the Pacific Northwest, livestock forage rating guides can be used to determine range condition. For areas without livestock forage rating guides, estimate

range condition to the best of your ability.

Next, estimate apparent range trend. If you have a strong feeling that range trend is

down, say so; if you have a strong feeling the trend is up, say so; if you are not sure

about trend, say that also.

Space is provided for other comments. Whenever possible, make these additional

comments in the field while you are looking at the transect.

If the site is forested, add the “Tree Cover Sampling” transect to this file. 

138

Summarize Data
Figure 79—The filing system form “Range Trend Rereadings” is printed front and back (fig. 80 shows the back). Provision is made for

10 rereadings of each transect. Fill in the top section to identify the cluster and transect. Then enter the year of each reading and copy

data from the last page of the “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” form (fig.77). 

139
140

Figure 80—Back of the “Range Trend Rereadings” form providing for data analysis by use of rating guides for livestock forage (range condition guides). The remaining transect summary data from figure 77 may also be added by date. 
Data obtained by square-foot frequency are summarized for trend analysis in the 

filing system form “Range Trend Rereadings” (fig. 79). The form is designed for 

a series of up to 10 transect readings that may be compared side by side. T h e

columns under “Averages by Year” require the year of reading to be entered at the

top. The form in appendix B is printed front and back corresponding to figures 79

and 80. 

Figure 79 is the front of the form. Circle which sampling system was used, “20 plots

1 sq. ft.” in this case. Enter the information on area, allotment, and cluster number

and circle the transect number. Enter the date of reading at the top of the “Averages

by Year” column. Figure 79 shows three hypothetical transect readings: 1957, 1982,

and 1997. The data in figure 79 refer to the 1997 reading. 

If tree cover was sampled (trees over 6 ft tall), enter the total number of feet of

intersect by species and total. Then enter the total number of feet of intercept by

shrub species and total. Shrub species intercept is summarized on the last page of

the form “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” (fig. 77), a total of 7 ft. 

The next data set (fig. 79) is for herbaceous species sampled by either 1-ft2 or 1-m2

or nested frequency. The data are summarized on the last page of the form “Photo

Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” (fig. 77). Circle the sample plot used (“1 sq. ft.”). Enter

the number of plots in which each species was rooted. Maximum number of plots

for 1 ft2 is 20 and 9 ft2 or 1 m2 has five plots. Nested frequency uses a diff e r e n t

value. It is the total value of all five transects (100 plots) by species. See the

“Nested Frequency Transect” section, below, for details. 

Figure 80 shows the back of the form, which summarizes additional information 

and data. Enter data by date in the column “Averages by Year.” If a range condition

guide (or livestock forage rating guide) is available, list it and its date. In this case,

an old bunchgrass guide of 1951 was used for the 1957 reading, which rated P

(poor condition). A 1983 guide for big sagebrush (ARTR, Artemisia tridentata Nutt.)

was used to estimate range condition for all three years. The 1983 guide showed

data for 1951 rated F (fair) condition instead of poor.

These range condition guides list species by their reaction to livestock grazing:

decreasers decrease under heavy use; palatable increasers are less palatable and

tend to increase with heavy use. However, if heavy use continues, these species

also decrease. Unpalatable increasers are species that livestock do not like to eat,

and they tend to increase. Invaders are species generally not found on rangeland 

in good condition. 

Data are summarized by the above categories of plant species (fig. 80). Total 

the number of plots by species in each category and enter. For example, A G S P

(Agropyron spicatum vis. Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) A. Love, bluebunch

wheatgrass) is the only decreaser, so its data are entered (5 plots). Palatable

increasers are POSA3 (Poa secunda J. Presl, Sandberg’s bluegrass), SIHY

(Sitanion hystrix (Nutt.) J.G. Sm., squirreltail), STOC (Stipa occidentalis T h u r b .

Ex S. Wats., needlegrass), and BASA (Balsamorhiza sagittata (Pursh) Nutt.,

141

Range Trend Analysis
Trend Interpretation

arrowleaf balsamroot), so their data are summarized and entered in “palatable

increasers” (18 plots). LOMAT (L o m a t i u m species) and PHLOX (P h l o x s p e c i e s )

are considered unpalatable increasers and are entered as such (2 plots). 

The next section of figure 80 deals with soil surface conditions. “Vegetation - (root

crown)” is the number of plots in which a root crown of a bunchgrass is present. In

1997, 17 plots had a root crown and 3 had no vegetation rooted in them. Single

stem plants, like many forbs, do not contribute directly to soil surface protection.

This information is taken from the stereophotographs as is the frequency of bare

ground, gravel, rock, litter, and cryptogams. The latter five items are summarized at

the bottom left of the “Photo Trend Sample - 1 sq. ft.” form (fig. 77). The section on

“% Utilization by species” provides space to enter stubble height or other means to

estimate utilization by species as taken from the “Photo Trend Sample” form, lower

left. In this exclosure, there was no utilization. If there was use, estimate the season

of use, as spring (spr), summer (sum), fall (fall), or winter (wint). 

Climate information is listed in the next section for the current and preceding three

years, which has been summarized in the lower right of the form, “Photo Trend

Sample - 1 sq. ft.” (fig. 77). Finally, copy the estimates of apparent range condition

and trend from the “Photo Trend Sample.” Abbreviations are G = good, F = fair, P =

poor, and VP = is very poor, a condition where decreasers are absent and livestock

management is no longer a feasible means for attaining an upward trend to good

condition. Trend abbreviations are U = upward trend, S = static or no trend, and 

D = downward trend. 

Interpretation of trend is accomplished by comparison of data in the columns. Data

for 1997 were measured; those for 1982 and 1957 were constructed. A c u r r e n t ,

soundly developed livestock forage rating guide (range condition guide) is a major

aid in trend interpretation. Statistical analysis is not possible on this kind of data.

No trend, or stable status, is indicated by little change in either vegetation or soil

surface data. 

Upward trend, or successional change to good condition (potential natural vegetation: PNV), is generally indicated by increased decreasers, and often palatable

increasers, accompanied by a decrease in unpalatable increasers. If earlier condition was below fair, there should be improvement of soil surface conditions, such as

litter and cryptogamic crust, with less bare soil. Seldom will rock or gravel change in

an upward trend. Consult the livestock forage rating guide (range condition guide)

for data characterizing the PNC soil surface status 

A downward trend, or successional change to poorer condition (earlier seral status),

is characterized by reduction in decreasers, increase in palatable increasers initially

in fair and good condition (late and PNV seral status), and then their decrease as

seral status approaches very poor condition (early seral). Soil surface data also

should change with decreases in vegetation, litter, and cryptogams and increases

in bare soil and possibly gravel. 

142
143

Figure 81—Nested frequency sampling frame with four plot sizes and its carrying case.

Plot size 4 is 5 by 5 cm, size 3 is 25 by 25 cm, size 2 is 25 by 50 cm, and size 1 is 50

by 50 cm. Plant species rooted within each of the plot sizes are assigned the plot size

value. The ends of each prong are sharpened for use as point samples of soil surface

conditions (short arrows). The frame case has a strap for easy handling. 

Poor and very poor condition classes (early and mid seral ecological status) pose

two important questions: (1) Has vegetation passed a threshold whereby it may not

be able to reattain its PNV composition and density of species? An example is a

cheatgrass-dominated stand where decreasers are absent and only a few palatable

increasers are present. Adjustment in livestock management is no longer feasible to

attain an upward trend. (2) Has the soil been damaged sufficiently that it has passed

a threshold and no longer can support the historic PNV community? Such threshold

changes are indicated by erosion of the A-horizon, increase in gravel as a result of

erosion, and severe compaction. A well-developed livestock forage rating guide

c o n t a i n s parameters on PNV status of bare ground, gravel pavement, rock, and Ahorizon characteristics that may be compared with current soil conditions. It should

specify criteria when a soil threshold has been crossed. 
Nested Frequency

Transect

Nested frequency employs a sample frame with four nested plot sizes. It documents

change in species frequency along five 100-ft transects of 20 plots each. Statistical

analysis suggests significant change in frequency at the 80-percent level of probability.

Frequency is defined as the number of times a species occurs (is rooted) in a given

number of plots and considers only whether species are present or absent. It is an

objective and repeatable means of collecting data to evaluate change.

The nested frequency concept involves sampling vegetation with four various sized

plots nested within a frame (fig. 81). The overall frame is 50 by 50 cm with smaller

subplots of 25 by 50 cm (50 percent of the large plot area), 25 by 25 cm (25 percent

of the large plot area), and 5 by 5 cm (1 percent of the large plot area). The assumption is made that a species rooted within the 5- by 5-cm subplot also occurs in the

25- by 25-cm subplot, the 25- by 50-cm subplot and in the 50- by 50-cm subplot.

S i m i l a r l y, a species rooted in the 25- by 25-cm subplot occurs in the larger subplots.

Therefore, once a species is recorded in a subplot, it is n o t recorded if found in a

larger subplot. 

Samples are taken along five randomly selected transect lines confined to a single

ecological type (range site). The data collected are a function of plot size, which is

related to density and distribution of the vegetation. These data serve as a basis for

determining trend and can be evaluated by applying statistical procedures. Statistical

analysis requires use of 100 plot frames or 400 total plots. Twenty plot frames on

each of five transects yield 100 plot frames. 

Ground cover measurements are obtained by sampling soil surface items under

pointed ends of four prongs of the nested frequency frame (fig. 81). Twenty sample

frames on five transects will yield 400 sample points. Items recorded are vegetation

(root crown), bare soil, gravel (1/8- to 3/4-in diameter), rock (>3/4-in), litter, and

cryptogams. 

When trees or shrubs occur on the transect, their canopy intercept above the transect is recorded. 

It is recognized that the nested plot has apparent replication. A plant occurring in the

5- by 5-cm plot also occurs in the 25- by 25-cm plot, the 25- by 50-cm plot, and t h e

50- by 50-cm plot. As this is a question of statistical bias, two things overcome the

possible sampling error. One is that each frame is not an independent sample; theref o r e , only one degree of freedom is used. Secondly, empirical analysis indicates that

if a site is adequately sampled, in this case 400 nested plot samples (100 plot frames),

the final result is highly similar whether all plots are randomly tested or if a nested

plot (with apparent replication) is used.

Plants rooted within each of the four plots in the frame are recorded by plot size.

The 5- by 5-cm plot is assigned the value of 4 (fig. 81), the 25- by 25-cm plot the

value of 3, 25- by 50-cm plot a 2, and the 50- by 50-cm plot a 1. These values are

then assigned by species and recorded on the filing system form, “Nested

Frequency Transect Data” (fig. 86, discussed below). 

144

Concept
Equipment The following equipment is required for nested frequency sampling:

1. Camera or cameras with both color and black-and-white film, or digital camera

2. A nested frequency plot frame (app. C)

3. Forms from appendix B: “Cluster-Transect” for transect identification, and

“Nested Frequency” for plot identification both printed on medium blue paper,

and data and photo mounting form “Photo Trend Sample - Nested Frequency”

and “Photo Trend Sample -Nested Frequency Summary” printed on medium

yellow paper

4. Meter board (app. C)

5. Clipboard and support for holding the photo identification forms (app. C)

6. A compass and 100-ft steel tape with clamps or vice grips to clamp onto angle

iron stakes

7. Fenceposts and angle iron stakes sufficient for the number of transects desired:

2 fenceposts and 3 angle iron stakes per transect and a pounder 

8. Metal detector for locating transect stakes

Each of the five transects is defined as a randomly selected line along which data

are collected. A minimum of five transects are established at five randomly selected

compass directions radiating from a central point whenever site conditions are suitable. 

145

Technique

Table 2—Table of random numbers

Row ---------------------------------------------Random Number---------------------------------------------

1 23 25 75 48 59 01 83 72 59 93 76 24 97 08 96 95 32 03 67 44 05 54 55 50 43 

2 10 53 74 35 08 90 61 18 37 44 10 96 22 12 43 14 87 16 03 50 32 40 43 63 23 

3 50 05 10 03 22 11 54 38 08 34 38 97 67 49 51 94 05 17 58 53 78 80 59 01 94 

4 32 42 87 16 95 97 31 26 17 18 99 75 53 08 79 94 25 12 58 41 54 88 21 05 13 

5 11 74 26 93 81 44 33 93 08 72 32 79 73 31 18 22 64 70 68 50 43 36 12 88 59 

6 11 01 64 56 23 93 00 90 04 99 43 64 07 40 36 93 80 62 04 78 38 26 80 44 91 

7 55 75 11 89 32 38 47 55 25 71 49 54 01 31 81 08 42 98 41 87 69 53 82 96 61 

8 77 73 80 95 27 36 76 87 26 33 37 94 82 15 69 41 95 96 86 70 45 27 48 38 80 

9 07 09 25 23 92 24 62 71 26 07 06 55 84 53 44 67 33 84 53 20 43 31 00 10 81 

10 44 86 38 03 07 52 55 51 61 48 89 74 29 46 47 61 57 00 63 60 06 17 36 37 75 

11 63 14 89 51 23 35 01 74 59 93 31 35 28 37 99 10 77 91 89 41 31 57 97 64 48

12 62 58 48 69 19 57 04 88 65 26 27 79 59 36 82 90 52 95 65 46 35 06 53 22 54 

13 09 24 34 42 00 68 72 10 71 37 30 72 97 57 56 09 29 82 76 50 97 95 63 50 18 

14 40 89 48 83 29 52 23 08 25 21 22 53 26 15 87 93 73 25 95 70 43 78 19 88 85 

15 56 67 16 68 26 95 99 64 45 69 72 62 11 12 25 00 92 26 82 64 35 66 65 94 34 

16 71 68 75 18 67 61 02 07 44 18 45 37 12 07 94 95 91 73 78 66 99 53 61 93 78 

17 97 83 98 54 74 33 05 59 17 18 45 47 35 41 44 22 03 42 30 00 89 16 09 71 92 

18 22 23 29 06 37 35 05 54 54 89 88 43 81 63 61 25 96 68 82 20 62 87 17 92 65 

19 02 82 35 28 62 84 91 95 48 83 81 44 33 17 19 05 04 95 48 06 74 69 00 75 67 

20 65 01 71 65 45 11 32 25 49 31 42 36 23 42 86 08 62 49 76 67 42 24 52 32 45
Select compass headings in 10-degree increments between 0 and 35 from table 2.

If site conditions require placement in a line, distances between transects should be

randomly chosen. The example below illustrates transect placement around a central witness location by using the first five values in table 2 that are between 0 and

35 (from 0 degrees; that is, 360 degrees to 350 degrees). Chose numbers less than

36 (360 degrees) and add a “0” to the value for compass bearing. For example, in

the first row, “23” would be a compass bearing of 230 degrees for transect 1.

Transect 2 would be 250 degrees, transect 3 is 10 degrees, transect 4 is 240

degrees, and transect 5 is 80 degrees. Select a different row for each new cluster

of five transects. 

Placement of the transects requires a witness site with direction (indicate whether

magnetic or true) and measured distance to the central marker for five radiating

transects or to transect number 1 (fig. 82). For radiating transects, measure out 5 ft

from the central marker (fencepost) and start the transect as discussed under

“Transect Layout” in the “Transect Photo Sampling” section above. Record direction

determined above (magnetic or true) and distance to the three angle iron stakes. If

transects are in a line, record direction and measured distance between the 100-

and 0-ft ends of each transect (fig. 74). 

Diagram the transect layout on the filing system form (fig. 82), and fill out information on the form. Remember to circle “Nested Freq.” on the top line of the form.

Note the transect numbers at their 0-ft ends. 

Each transect photo is identified by the filing system form shown in figures 83 and

85. The photo identification form should be printed on medium blue paper for use

in the photographs. Fill in the date (97/3/22), circle either “0” or “100” (fig. 83 is 0,

fig. 85 is 100) to indicate which end of the transect is being photographed, note

area (CRNG), allotment (Madras), and cluster number (3), and circle the transect

number (1). 

Place the nested frequency plot frame uphill on the left of the transect tape as viewed

toward the 100-ft end. Locate the 5- by 5-cm plot against the tape, open end of the

frame toward the 100-ft end. Figures 83 and 84 show, under the plot diagram, foot

marks on the tape where each plot frame is placed. Print this form on medium yellow

paper to reduce glare because it is used to record data. 

Place the nested plot frame at the first location, between 0 and 1.6 ft. The form

“Nested Frequency” (app. B) shown in figures 83 and 84 identifies each plot frame.

It should be printed on medium blue paper to reduce overexposure in the Sun. For

photo plot 1, circle number 1 and place on the ground at the open end of the plot.

For plot 2, cross out number 1 and circle number 2 (fig. 83). Repeat for all 20 plots

(fig. 84). 

List all species in each frame and diagram their locations (figs. 83 and 84). A plant

is considered rooted within the plot if any portion of the stem or root crown is contained therein. For mat-forming species, any portion of the crown extending into the

plot will constitute presence of that plant. 

146

Text continues on page 151.
Figure 82—Filing system form “Sampling Site Description and Location” for this nested frequency discussion (same as fig. 73).

First, circle “Nested Freq.” on the top line, then fill in the information requested, and diagram the transect layout. Figures 73 and 74

are the complete documentation. 

147
Figure 83—Filing system form “Photo Trend Sample - Nested Frequency” illustrating its use. Two additional forms are

required: transect identification (top picture) and plot identification (lower two pictures). Fill out required information on each

form: CRNG (Crooked River National Grassland), Madras Exclosure, cluster 3, transect 1, date, and notes. Photograph the

transect from the 0-ft (top picture) and the 100-ft ends (fig. 85). This is the same transect shown in figure 75. Notice the soil

surface items at the end of each prong: B = bare ground, G = gravel, R = rock, L = litter, and C = cryptogamic crust. 

148
Figure 84—Nested frequency data sheet and photo-mounting form for plot frames 3 to 5. A space on the left is available for

recording crown canopy intercept along the transect. Under plot frame 3, ARTR (Artemisia tridentata Nutt., big sagebrush)

canopy intersected the transect at foot marks 12 to 15 for 3 ft of intercept. Record intercept between plot frames starting and

ending with the beginning footmark for each plot. For plot frame 3, the intersect is from footmark 12 to 15. Plot 5 had ARTR

intercept between footmarks 22 and 23 for 1 ft of intercept. Other species are A G S P (Agropyron spicatum vis. P s e u d o r o e g n e r i a

s p i c a t u m (Pursh.) A. Love., bluebunch wheatgrass), and POSA3, (Poa secunda J. Presl., Sandberg’s bluegrass). 

149
Figure 85—Last page of the filing system form “Photo Trend Sample - Nested Frequency.” Notice that data are not summarized on

this form. Instead, they are summarized for each transect on the filing system form, “Nested Frequency Transect Data” (figs. 86 and

87), and all five transects are summarized on another form, “Nested Frequency Cluster Summary” (figs. 88 and 89). Fill in activities,

climate, and comments as appropriate. 

150
Next, record point sampling by noting what is under the pointed end of the four

prongs (figs. 83 and 84). Use the following abbreviations: V = vegetation (plant root

crown), B = bare soil, G = gravel (stones 1/8- to 3/4-in diameter), R = rock (> 3/4 in),

L = litter, and C = cryptogams. These are point samples. 

After photographing and diagramming a plot, determine shrub or tree (under 6 ft)

intercept along the line from the start of one plot to start of the next. For example,

figure 84 between plot numbers 3 and 4 (between foot marks 10.0 ft and 15.0 ft),

A RTR (big sagebrush) intersected the line from foot marks 12 to 15 for 3 ft of

intercept. 

Proceed down the transect with photographs and diagrams of each plot frame.

Complete the last page of the form “Photo Trend Sample - Nested Frequency”

(fig. 85). 

Another important source of supplemental information is the effect of tree cover.

Cover should be sampled on all forested ranges. It is discussed below in the “Tree

Cover Sampling” section. 

Transect summary—Using diagrams for each sample on the form, “Photo Trend

Sample - Nested Frequency” (figs. 83 and 84), summarize them on the filing system

form, “Nested Frequency Transect Data” (figs. 86 and 87). Fill in information at the

top for unit, area, cluster, and transect. This form is printed front and back. The

table lists “Sample Number” across the top. These correspond to the sample numbers shown on figures 83 and 84. Species are listed down the left side.

Using “Nested Frequency Transect Data” (fig. 86), start with sample 1 of the transect (fig. 83) and evaluate the smallest subplot (rated 4 in fig. 81), record species

rooted within it, and assign the frequency value of 4 (no species in sample 1). Next

record species rooted within the next largest subplot (rated 3 in fig. 81) and assign 

a frequency value of 3. POSA3 is recorded at 3. Continue with the next largest plot

(25 by 50 cm) rating species a 2 (none in sample 1). Do n o t record a species rooted

within a smaller plot. Finally, record species only in the whole plot frame (50 by 50

cm) with a 1 (none in sample 1).

Continue to record the frequency value in each sample by species (fig. 86). Total

the value for each species on the right. These totals will be entered in the form,

“Nested Frequency Cluster Summary” (figs. 88 and 89). The maximum total would

be 80 if the same species occurred in every 5- by 5-cm plot rating 4. Species that

do not fall in a plot of the frame are not given a value; that is, ARTR and BASA in

figure 86. 

Next summarize point sampling at the bottom of figure 86. Dot tally the occurrence 

of each of the six items from abbreviations at the ends of the four frame prongs (figs.

83 and 84). Sum the dot tallies in the “Totals” space. Next add the totals row for a

grand total, which must equal 80 because there are 80 points in the 20 samples. 

151

Summarize Data

Text continues on page 158.
Figure 86—Filing system form “Nested Frequency Transect Data,” where frequency values by species and point sampling on the plot

frame prongs are recorded. Starting with plot frame 1 (sample number 1), list the frequency value for each species in the “Sample

Number” column. POSA3 rated a “3” (fig. 83). Next, add up the 20 frequency values and enter in the “Total Value” column. POSA3

added to 56. Transfer these values to the “Nested Frequency Cluster Summary” form (fig. 88). Then, dot tally in “Point Sampling” the

items at each of the four prong points. Plot 1 had one litter (L), two bare soil (B), and one cryptogam (C). Add the dot tallies in each

column by item. The sum of these “Totals” tallies should be 80. The sum of each item is then transferred to the “Nested Frequency

Cluster Summary (continued)” form (fig. 89). 

152
Figure 87—Second page of the “Nested Frequency Transect Data (Continued)” form where line intersect data for shrubs and

trees are summarized. ARTR added to 6 ft of line intercept for 6 percent canopy cover. Line intercept data are summarized in

the “Nested Frequency Cluster Summary (Continued)” form (fig. 89). 

153
Figure 88—The filing system form “Nested Frequency Cluster Summary” where five transects of the nested frequency cluster are

summarized. The frequency values for transect 1 (fig. 86) are entered in the “Transect Number” column 1. Add the frequency values by species and enter in the “Total Value” column. The maximum value is 400 if the same species occurred in all 5- by 5-cm

plots rating a 4. These values are then transferred to the filing system form “Range Trend Rereadings” (fig. 90) according to date

of the rereading. The data summarized above are shown for 1997. 

154
Figure 89—Back page of the “Nested Frequency Cluster Summary (Continued)” form where line intercept and point sampling data are

entered for each of the five transects. For line intercept, enter the feet by transect. Total the feet by species; for example, ARTR (35)

and enter. Then divide the total feet by 500 (500 ft of transects) for the percentage of cover (7 percent). Transfer the “Total” by species

to the “Range Trend Rereadings” form (fig. 90). In “Point Sampling,” enter each transect’s data and sum in two directions. Data for

each transect column must total 80. Add across rows for “Total Hits” by item. Determine percentage of occurrence of each item by

dividing by 400, the total maximum number of hits possible. Add the “Total Hits” column to ensure it is 400. Transfer data in the “Total

Hits” column by item to the “Range Trend Rereadings (Continued)” form (fig. 91).

155
Figure 90—The filing system form “Range Trend Rereadings” where transect data are entered each time the cluster is read. Circle

the sampling system on the first line (“100 plots Nest. Frequ.”). Enter the cluster identification information. Notice that “Transect 1 2 3

4 5” are all circled. Enter the line intercept for shrubs and trees from each “Nested Frequency Cluster Summary (Continued)” (fig. 89)

by year. Circle “nested frequ. value” and enter the sum of frequency values by year from figure 88. These values, by species, will be

tested for significant change by using table 3. See text for details.

156
Figure 91—Second page of the “Range Trend Rereadings (Continued)” form where data are interpreted for change in vegetation and soil surface characteristics. If a range condition guide (livestock forage rating guide) applies to the monitoring area,

list it and its date. Then rate the condition of each rereading. Next list the frequency values for decreasers, palatable

increasers, unpalatable increasers, and invaders. There is no maximum value because species are lumped together and may

total more than 400. See text for details. 

157
158

Finally, if shrubs and trees were intercepted, record the number of feet of intercept

on the form, “Nested Frequency Transect Data (Continued)” (fig. 87). Total the number of feet and determine the percentage cover. For ARTR, 6 ft of intercept in 100 ft

of line is 6 percent. If a tree or shrub was not intersected, there will be no data for it. 

Cluster summary—Once the transect has been summarized, transfer data to the 

filing system form, “Nested Frequency Cluster Summary” (fig. 88). Fill in the required

information at the top. List species down the left side and enter their frequency 

values by transect. Add the species values for a “Total Value.” These total values

are transferred to the “Range Trend Rereadings” summary to test for significant

change in species (fig. 90). The maximum value possible would be 400 if the same

species occurred in all 5- by 5-cm plots on all transects. 

Table 3—Table of significant change for nested frequencya

Less Initial More Less Initial More Less Initial More

than value than than value than than value than

17-------25------31 137-----155-----171 257-----280-----301

21-------30------37 142-----160-----176 261-----285-----307

25-------35------43 147-----165-----181 266-----290-----312

30-------40------48 151-----170-----176 271-----295-----317

35-------45------55 156-----175-----192 276-----300-----322

39-------50------59 161-----180-----197 281-----305-----327

43-------55------65 166-----185-----202 285-----310-----333

48-------60------70 170-----190-----208 290-----315-----338

53-------65------75 175-----195-----213 295-----320-----343

57-------70------81 180-----200-----218 300-----325-----348

62-------75------86 185-----205-----223 307-----330-----353

67-------80------91 189-----210-----229 309-----335-----359

71-------85------97 194-----215-----234 314-----340-----364

76-------90----102 199-----220-----239 319-----345-----369

81-------95----107 204-----225-----244 324-----350-----374

85-----100- ---113 209-----230-----249 329-----355-----379

90-----105 ----118 213-----235-----255 334-----360-----384

95-----110 ----123 218-----240-----360 339-----365-----389

99-----115----129 223-----245-----265 343-----370-----395

104-----120----134 228-----250-----270 348-----375-------*

109-----125----139 233-----255-----275 353-----380-------*

113-----130----145 237-----260-----281 358-----385-------*

118-----135----150 242-----265-----286 363-----390-------*

123-----140----155 247-----270-----291 368-----395-------*

128-----145----160 252-----275-----296 372-----400-------*

132-----150----166 

a Using 100 nested frequency plot frames, the table shows a significant change in frequency value at

the 80-percent probability level. Enter the table at “Initial value” with the previous frequency value for

the 5 transects(100 plot frames). Compare the previous value with the current value to determine

whether a significant change has occurred. A change is significant if the current value is smaller than

the “Less than” value or greater than the “More than” value.
Trend In t e r p r e t a t i o n

Next, transfer the line intercept data for each transect to the “Nested Frequency

Cluster Summary (Continued)” form and total (fig. 89). A total of 35 ft of ARTR was

intersected in 500 ft of transect for 7 percent cover. Transfer the intercept in feet to

the “Range Trend Rereadings” form (fig. 91). 

F i n a l l y, transfer the point sampling data by transect to the “Nested Frequency

Cluster Summary (Continued)” form (fig. 89). These data must be added in two

directions. Each transect column must add up to 80. Then add each item by row

for their total hits. Add the “Total Hits” column, which must add to 400. Finally,

determine the percentage of each item (hits/400). Transfer total hits to the form,

“Range Trend Rereadings (Continued)” (fig. 91). 

If the site is forested, tree canopy cover must be determined, a topic discussed in

the “Tree Cover Sampling” section, below 

Interpretation of trend in species frequency values is facilitated by table 3, used in

conjunction with the “Range Trend Rereadings” summary form (fig. 90).

Interpretation is illustrated with measured data for 1997 and constructed data for

1957 and 1982. For example, AGSP, a decreaser, is a key species used to indicate

trend. In 1982, its total frequency value was 92 and in 1997 it was 114. The previous value of 92 is located in table 3 in the “Initial value” column, falling between

90 and 95. Then the current value of 114 is compared to the values in the “More

than” column opposite 90 and 95. These table values are 102 and 107. Because

114 exceeds the values, there is an 80 percent probability that a significant upward

trend in AGSP frequency has occurred. 

Downward trend is a reverse of this procedure. The 1982 total frequency value for

POSA3 of 288 was the initial value and the value for 1997 of 274 is the current

value (fig. 90). In table 3 in the “Initial value” column, find 288 and read 266 as the

“Less than” value. The current value of 274 is not less than 266 and the downward

change in POSA frequency therefore is not significant. 

L O M AT, an unpalatable increaser, on the other hand, did show a significant decrease

between 1957 and 1997. The initial value of 43 (fig. 90) is found in the “Initial value”

column with a “Less than” value of about 33. The 1997 frequency value of 29 is less

than 33, thereby suggesting an 80-percent significant probability of a reduction in

frequency.

One could conclude that an increase in A G S P, a decreaser, and a decrease in

L O M AT, an unpalatable increaser, indicate an upward trend in range condition.

There is no statistical test for line intercept or point sampling data. Interpretation

would suggest little change in A RTR cover. A decrease in bare soil and an i n c r e a s e

in cryptogams, from 1957 to 1997 (fig. 91), suggested by table 3, would tend to

support an upward trend interpretation. 

In the upper left of the “Range Trend Rereadings (Continued)” (fig. 91) form under

the “Elements” column, provision is made for use of range condition guides (livestock forage rating guides). List the guide name and date if one is applicable to the

ecological type. The guides group plant species into four categories. Decreasers are

159
Nine-Square-Foot

(1-Square-Meter)

Plot Transect

species that are most palatable and decrease in frequency with heavy livestock 

use. Palatable increasers are species that are eaten but are less palatable than

decreasers. They tend to increase in frequency or percentage of composition as

decreasers decline. If heavy grazing continues, these species also decline. Unpalatable

increasers are species that livestock do not care to eat but are present in good

range condition (potential natural community ecological status). Invaders are those

species that generally do not occur in good condition; they invade the site after 

serious heavy grazing. 

Add the frequency values of those species falling into each category. For example,

A G S P is the only decreaser so its frequency value for 1997 is 114. Palatable

increasers are POSA3, BASA, SIHY, and STOC, whose frequency values (fig. 90)

add up to 287 (274 + 2 + 9 + 2 = 287). Unpalatable increasers are ARTR, LOMAT,

and PHLOX whose frequency values add up to 42. There is no statistical test for

significant change in these items. They are presented to aid interpretation.

Nine-square-foot transects are designed to enhance the three-step sampling system

by increasing the number of ground view photographs from two to five. Reppert and

Francis (1973), in their analysis of the three-step method, found photographs to be

the most useful part of the method and could be used to test and validate the transect data.

The 9-ft2 ( 1 - m2) plot system is derived directly from the three-step concept of a

general transect photograph plus a photo of a 3-ft square at each end of the transect. This system adds three more 9-ft2 ( 1 - m2) plots at the 25-, 50-, and 75-ft locations on the transect. Photographs are taken of the plot frame at an oblique angle

from eye level. There are no plot measurements involved, but line intercept of

woody species is provided. A grid may be imposed on the plot frame by physically

connecting marks on the frame, but interpretation is difficult owing to the oblique

angle. 

The 9-ft2 (1-m2) plot is not a sample of frequency because five plots are too few 

and 9 ft2 is too large. In many cases, two or more species will occur at 100-percent

frequency. A person cannot determine whether plants were spaced at 2 ft 10 in in

distance (which would mean 100-percent frequency) or at 10 in in distance (which

also would result in 100-percent frequency). The difference between 10 in and 2 ft

10 in can be important in evaluating range trend. Five plots of 9-ft2 do provide, however, a repeatable view of vegetation and soil surface conditions for comparison

between photos taken over time, a subjective means for interpreting trend. 

The following equipment is required for 9-ft2 (1-m2) sampling:

1. Camera or cameras with both color and black-and-white film, or digital camera

2. A 9-ft2 (1-m2) plot frame (app. C)

3. Forms from appendix B are for transect identification, “Cluster – Transect,” and

for plot identification “9 sq. feet - 1 sq. meter” printed on medium blue paper;

and data and photo-mounting form, “Photo Trend Sample – 9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m),”

printed on medium yellow paper

4. Meter board (app. C)

160

Concept

Equipment
Technique

5. Clipboard and support for holding the photo identification forms (app. C)

6. Compass and a 100-ft steel tape with clamps or vice grips to clamp onto angle

iron stakes

7. Fenceposts and angle iron stakes sufficient for the number of transects desired:

2 fence posts and 3 angle iron stakes per transect, and a pounder

8. Metal detector for locating transect stakes

Establish the transects and map them on the filing system form, “Sampling Site

Description and Location” (fig. 92). Fill out information on the form and circle 

“1 sq. m” on the top line. If transects fall in a line, continue the map on the back 

of the form (fig. 74). 

General photographs from the 0- and 100-ft ends of the tape are required (figs. 93

and 95). Remember to circle “0” for the front photo and cross it out and circle “100”

for the end photo. 

The 9-ft2 (1-m2) plot transect is different in several respects from the 1-ft2 and nested frequency transects: 

1. Plot photographs are taken from an oblique angle rather than overhead

2. The picture is taken down the transect line

3. The transect line bisects the center of the plot (figs. 93 and 94)

4. The photograph of the last plot is taken from a different direction. Photo plot 1 

is taken with camera over the 0-ft stake and the plot at 3.5 to 6.5 ft, whereas 

the last plot at 96.5 to 93.5 ft is taken with the camera over the 100-ft end and

aiming back down the transect to the plot

Place the plots, on center, down the transect. Figures 93 and 94 illustrate the foot

marks on the transect where each plot is located. Place a 9-ft2 ( 1 - m2) plot between

the 3.5- and 6.5-ft marks (fig. 93). Roughly diagram the location of each species

and label. Circle soil surface items listed under the plot diagram: B = bare soil (> 50

percent of ground cover), G = gravel (> 50 percent cover of stones 1/8 to 3/4 in),

R = rock (> 3/4 in), L = litter (> 50 percent of ground cover), and C=cryptogams

(> 50 percent of ground cover). 

Fill in photo identification form “9 square feet-1 square meter,” circle photo 1 and

place at a far edge of the plot (fig. 93). Handhold the camera over the 0-ft stake

(see note in fig. 93 under the photograph), make sure the photo identification sheet

is visible, and take the photo.

Move to the next plot location at 25 ft (fig. 94). Determine canopy intercept along the

line for trees less than 6 ft tall and shrubs from the start of plot 1 (0.0 ft) to the start

of plot 2 (25.0 ft). A single species may have more than one intercept if more than

one individual crosses the transect between 0 and 25 ft (fig. 93). 

At plot 2, repeat diagrams. Camera location is at foot mark 21.5 (3.5 ft away from

the plot) as shown in figure 94 under the photograph. On photo identification form,

“9 square feet - 1 square meter,” cross out “1,” circle “2,” and photograph. 

161

Text continues on page 166.
Figure 92—Filing system form “Sampling Site Description and Location” locating the 9-ft2 (1-m2) transect system. It is the

same location used for 1-ft 2 and nested frequency sampling. Circle “1 sq. m.” on the top line. Fill in the rest of the information. Map the transect layout. Transects had to run end to end so the map continues on the back of the form (see fig. 74). 

162
Figure 93—Filing system form “Photo Trend Sample - 9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m.)” illustrating its use. Two additional forms are required: transect

identification (shown in the upper picture) and plot identification (lower picture). Fill out required information on each form: CRNG

(Crooked River National Grassland), Madras Exclosure, cluster 3, transect 1, date, and notes. Photograph the transect from the 0-ft

(upper picture) and the 100-ft ends (fig. 95). This is the same transect shown in figures 75 and 77. Soil surface items are B = bare

ground, G = gravel, R = rock, L= litter, and C = cryptogamic crust. Circle each item occurring in the plot. 

163
Figure 94—Second page of the “Photo Trend Sample - 9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m.)” form locating plots 2 and 3. Plot location foot marks are

shown on the left. Camera location foot mark is shown under the photograph. Remember to circle the soil surface items within the plot.

Cross out the previous plot number and circle the current one. 

164
Figure 95—Summary sheet of the “Photo Trend Sample - 9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m)” form with the 100-ft transect photograph. Frequency of

occurrence by species is on the left. Under that is frequency of soil surface items. Fill out appropriate information on the right. 

165
Summarize Data

Trend Interpretation

Do the same for plots 3 and 4. 

Plot 5 is different. It is photographed in the opposite direction from the others, back

down the transect (see number 4, above). 

After sampling, fill in the summary on the last page of form, “Photo Trend Sample -

9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m)” (fig. 95). It is the same summary sheet used with the 1-ft2 plots,

and the procedure is identical. If the site is forested, tree crown cover must be sampled as discussed below.

Transfer summary data from the last page of the form, “Photo Trend Sample – 9 sq.

ft. (1 sq. m)” (fig. 95) to the “Range Trend Rereadings” form (figs. 96 and 97). Fill

out the form information and circle “5 plots 9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m)” on the top line. Enter

the transect intercept data by date of rereading. Then enter the frequency data by

date of rereading (fig. 96). Data were measured for 1997 and constructed for 1957

and 1982.

On the second page (fig. 97), summarize by date and frequency by decreaser,

palatable increaser, unpalatable increaser, and invader. Do not add up the frequency ratings from the first page (fig. 96) because frequency of these large plots is not

additive. Instead, return to the data forms (figs. 93 and 94) and count the number of

plots by species. Often two species in a category, such as unpalatable increasers,

will occur in the same plot. The total frequency for unpalatable increasers from figure 96 is 4 but the frequency for the category had a frequency of only 3 (LOMAT,

PHLOX, ARTR). 

Transfer the soil surface items. Vegetation is any plant root crown, so a frequency of

5 for a species would be a 5 for vegetation. Transfer utilization and climate information. Finally, transfer the estimated range condition and trend information. 

Interpretation of change is based on professional judgment and interpretation of

photos. 

Tree cover has direct influences on ground vegetation by casting shade. Trend in

density and composition of species is often as much influenced by this shade as by

grazing or light disturbance. Any transect placed in a forest setting should have tree

cover sampled.

Tree canopy cover significantly influences density and composition of ground vegetation (shrubs and herbs). The effect is so important that documentation of tree

cover on forest land transects is strongly recommended. Tree canopies are photographed by using a camera leveling board to assure vertical orientation of the

camera (fig. 98). 

On a 100-ft transect used for square-foot, nested-frequency, or 9-ft2 (1-m2) sampling, photograph tree cover at the 0-, 25-, 50-, 75-, and 100-ft locations. Overhead

photos also may be taken with topic photography utilizing a single overhead photo

(fig. 52). At 40-percent canopy cover using a 50-mm lens, trees taller than 70 ft will

166

Tree Cover Sample

Concept

Text continues on page 169.
Figure 96—The filing system form “Range Trend Rereadings” where the transect data are compared to previous readings. Fill in the

required information and circle “5 plots 9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m).” Transfer information from figure 95 to this form.

167
Figure 97—Second page of the “Range Trend Rereadings” form where previous information is compared. See text for details. 

168
Equipment

Technique

appear in adjacent pictures providing a continuous 100-ft transect of tree cover. If 

a 35-mm lens is used, trees over 50 ft tall will provide a continuous strip. Whatever

focal length is used to begin, the same focal length must be used for subsequent

photos. Long axis of the camera should be across the transect. 

The following equipment is required for sampling tree cover:

1. Camera or cameras with both color and black-and-white film, or digital camera

2. A camera leveling board (app. C)

3. Form from appendix B for data and photo mounting: “Photo Trend Sampling -

Tree Cover” 

4. Meter board (app. C) to set the leveling board and camera on

5. A compass and 100-ft steel tape with clamps or vice grips to clamp onto angle

iron stakes used for ground vegetation sampling

6. Fenceposts and angle iron stakes sufficient for the number of transects desired:

2 fenceposts and 3 angle iron stakes per transect and pounder (these are on

the equipment list for ground vegetation sampling system)

7. Metal detector for locating transect stakes

On the 100-ft transect used for square feet, nested frequency, or 9-ft2 sampling,

photograph tree cover at the 0-, 25-, 50-, 75-, and 100-ft marks. Position the meter

board at each of the foot marks, place the camera leveling board on top of the

meter board, and set the camera on the leveling board with the long axis perpendicular to the transect and the viewfinder toward the 0-ft mark (fig. 98). 

Move the meter board sideways to level the camera board cross-transect. T h e n

level the camera board down-transect, bend down to take your head out of the

picture, and photograph (fig. 98). 

Important criteria—There is neither a size control (meter board) nor photo identification sheet in these pictures. Four procedures, therefore, must be followed: 

1. The same focal length lens must be used for all subsequent photographs so

images can be compared. Note the effects of focal length in figures 6 and 7. 

2. The camera must be the same height aboveground. Use the meter board for

consistent heights. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the effect of change in distance

using the same focal length lens. 

3. Make sure the camera is oriented perpendicular to the transect with the viewfinder

toward the 0-ft mark (fig. 98). Remember this by viewing the transect through

the camera, and then rotating it 90 degrees upward to view the canopy. T h i s

camera orientation helps with placement of photos on the form. There is no

“right side up” on these photos. Their orientation can be determined only by

the exposure numbers at the bottom of the film.

4. Write down the film exposure number and the cluster and transect data so that

negatives can be identified and picture orientation determined. 

169
Attach crown cover photos to the filing system form, “Photo Trend Sampling - Tree

Cover” (figs. 99 and 100). Fill out information on the top two lines. Roughly diagram

canopy outlines and label by species for identification. Then proceed as follows to

determine canopy cover on each photo (figs. 99 and 100):

1. Print on clear plastic five copies of the grid analysis outline form (fig. 54), one

for each photo. Tape along one edge over a photo and enter information for the

photo (fig. 101). Outline the tree canopies carefully and identify by letter or number.

2. Print (without size adjustment on white paper) a copy of the analysis grid for

shrub analysis (grid with meter boards at each edge) from appendix B. Remove

the outline overlay from the photo and tape onto the grid. Orient the outline

overlay on the bottom line of the grid and next to the left meter board but one

grid line to the right (fig. 101). The top and right edges of the outline probably

will fall between grid lines. 

3. Determine the total number of grid intersects on the picture. Remember to count

the left and bottom grid lines to determine total number. In figure 101, there are

26 grid lines across and 17 up for a total of 442 intersects. 

170

Figure 98—Tree canopy cover photography system. Ameter board is placed crosswise (perpendicular) to the transect at

foot marks 0, 25, 50, 75, and 100. Hold camera level board on top of the meter board and place the camera on the level

board. First center the crosstransect level by moving the meter board sideways. Then tilt the camera level board so the

down-transect-level is centered, move your head out of the camera view, and photograph. 

Summarize Data

Text continues on page 174.
Figure 99—Filing system form “Photo Trend Sampling - Tree Cover” used to mount tree canopy cover photos and to estimate

cover. Percentage of cover is determined by dot or intersect grid analysis (illustrated in fig. 101). Diagrams of cover are used to

identify species, not to determine the percentage of cover (PIPO: Pinus ponderosa P. & C. Lawson, ponderosa pine). 

171
Figure 100—Second page of the “Photo Trend Sampling - Tree Cover” form with the cover summary. In this case, statistical analysis results

were added: SD = standard deviation, SE = standard error, and CI5 = the confidence interval at the 5-percent level of probability.

172
Figure 101—Determination of tree canopy cover using grid intersect. The grid intersect outline form printed on clear plastic is overlaid

on photo A and tree canopies outlined, here for the 25-ft photo (fig. 99). Then in B, the outline is placed on the shrub analysis grid

(with meter boards at each side) and printed on paper. Intersects within each tree canopy outline are counted (131) and divided by

the total number of intersects within the photo (442, or 17 × 26) for 30-percent canopy cover.

173
Trend Interpretation

Usage Measured

by Robel Pole

Concept

4. Decide if tree canopy or open space will be counted. To ease counting, I prefer

to count the item of least coverage: open space in the 0-ft picture of figure 99

and tree cover in the 25-ft picture (fig. 99). Count grid intersects on the left

edge and bottom of the photograph. When counting open space, subtract the

grid intersects from the total to determine canopy cover. In figure 101, the number of grid intersects falling on the tree canopy is 131. Percentage of cover is

131 ÷ 442 = 29.6, or 30-percent canopy cover. 

5. For each photo, list canopy cover by species on the left of the filing system

form, “Photo Trend Sampling Tree Cover,” under the canopy diagram. Retain

each outline as a permanent data form. 

6. Add canopy cover for each photo, average, and enter in the summary shown in

figure 100: a total of 330 divided by 5 is an average of 66-percent canopy cover.

If there are five samples for statistical analysis of change, the mean of 66.0 will have

a standard deviation of 22.7, a standard error of 10.2, and a confidence interval at

the 0.05-percent probability level of 28.3 (fig. 100). The Student’s T-test may be used

to evaluate significant change in tree canopy cover between two data sets. 

Stubble height of vegetation remaining after livestock grazing indicates animal preference for certain areas, may be used to adjust animal distribution, and suggests

intensity of utilization. The Robel pole system documents this stubble height.

The basic concept is to measure stubble height, or ungrazed herbaceous height,

by using a pole marked in inches and photographing it (a “visual observation”) from

a specific distance and height aboveground. Robel and others (1970) discuss the

mathematics and test results. Guenther (1998) used the same concept to estimate

annual grass herbage production in California. He uses two views: one from 20 ft

and another from 10 ft. A 0 . 9 6 - f t2 hoop is placed at the base of the pole for visual

r e f e r e n c e .

The pole is 2.5 in in diameter and marked in alternate black bands by inches (fig.

102). A 4-m-long line is attached at 1-m height on the Robel pole and connected to

the top of a 1-m-tall line pole (app. C). The Robel pole is set at the sample location

(station) while the line is stretched and a photograph taken (visual observation) from

the top of the line pole (fig. 103). Landscape orientation seems to be better than

portrait for depicting utilization, because the former broadens the view at the Robel

pole. 

The location of the Robel pole is termed a “station” from which two visual observations are made: one in the direction of the transect and a second 180 degrees backwards to the start of the transect. 

These consistently used measurements, 4-m distance and 1-m height of camera

(4-to-1 ratio), provide repeatable angles for documenting stubble height (Robel and

others 1970). 

174
Equipment

175

Figure 102—Robel pole has

two main parts: the Robel

(measuring) pole (A) and the

camera height pole (B). T h e

Robel pole is 2.5 in diameter

and the camera height pole

1.5 in so the latter will fit

inside the Robel pole. “A”

points to an eye where a 4-m

long line is attached. T h e

line is shown wrapped around

the camera height pole in B.

A tent peg with 2 m of line

may be used to hold the

Robel pole when one person

is sampling. See appendix D

for details. 

Transects generally are not permanently located with fenceposts and steel stakes.

A fencepost marking a sampling station may significantly alter domestic livestock

use owing to its physical presence. If permanent transects are desired, they should

be located with fenceposts identifying the transect start and end. They may be set

at visual observation camera locations with the station located by a steel stake

driven flush with the ground. A metal detector is needed for relocation (White’s

Electronics, Inc. 1996).

The following equipment is required for Robel pole transect sampling:

1. Camera or cameras with both color and black-and-white film, or digital camera 

2. Robel pole with its 4-m line and a line pole (fig. 102, app. C) 
Figure 103—Technique for photographing the Robel pole. In this case, the camera is held in the “portrait” or vertical position. I prefer the “landscape” or horizontal camera orientation (see fig. 106) because it covers a broader area of ground at

the Robel pole. Spikes on the bottom of the Robel pole and line pole (fig. 102) are 1/4-in steel rod 6 in long, which are

capable of holding both poles upright. 

176

3. Forms from appendix B for transect identification, “Cluster – Transect,” and station identification, “Utilization - Robel Pole,” both printed on medium blue paper,

and data and photo-mounting form, “Utilization - Robel Pole Sampling,” printed

on medium yellow paper

4. Meter board (app. C)

5. Clipboard and support for holding photo identification sheet (app.C)

Site selection is a function of animal use and management objectives. For this illustration, a moist meadow in forested rangeland was selected because it is the most

palatable kind of vegetation in the area and because it is adjacent to a water hole.

Provide the usual two maps: one to locate the sampling area (fig. 104) and another

to map the sampling transect (fig. 105). Draw a map on the filing system form,

“Sampling Site Description and Location” and fill in necessary information. 

1. Determine the number of transects and number of visual observation stations

per transect. Then determine the direction of each transect and the interval

between stations. All are influenced by two factors: homogeneity of vegetation

and uniformity of animal use. Record and map transects on the filing system

form, “Sampling Site Description and Location” (fig. 105). The filing system form,

“Utilization - Robel Pole Sampling,” provides for 25 stations and 50 observations

(fig. 106).

Technique
Figure 104—Ranger District map of the Robel pole utilization sampling site. It is on the West Summit Allotment at a road junction. Figure

105 shows the precise location.

177
Figure 105—Filing system form “Sampling Site Description and Location” with information and transect location diagrammed.

Remember to circle the sampling system, “Robel Pole,” on the first line. 

178
2. In this illustration, the meadow is small, oblong, and homogeneous. Only one

transect is needed with 10 stations. The transect is oriented lengthwise and

calls for a compass heading of 273 degrees magnetic and a total distance of

94 yd, which results in 8-yd intervals between stations (fig. 105). 

3. Mark station 1 of the transect with the meter board. Place the camera location

fencepost 10 m distant on the transect line. Fill out the transect photo identification form, circle the “0,” place it at 5 m, and photograph the transect (fig. 106 A). 

4. At the first station, fill out the photo identification form, “Utilization - Robel Pole

Sampling,” printed on medium blue paper; circle “1A,” and place next to the

Robel pole at the station (fig. 106 B). Extend the line its full 4 m along the

transect toward the fencepost that locates the transect. Set the line pole on

the transect line, and photograph the Robel pole with the bottom of the pole in

the center of the photo (fig. 106B). Focus on the pole to assure the sharpest

image. 

5. Using the filing system form, “Utilization - Robel Pole Sampling,” printed on

medium yellow paper (fig. 106), fill in the first page. Then opposite “Vi s u a l

Observation 1A” (station 1), record the stubble height, any comments, and the

one to three species immediately in front of the pole that are being measured

for stubble height. In this case, Kentucky bluegrass and analogue sedge are

intermixed (fig. 106 B). Stubble is shown on the white “3” band with very little

on the black “4” band. Record 3 for stubble height (3 in). 

6. Next, move to the opposite side of station 1, 180 degrees, for visual observation

1B (fig. 106C). Pick up the line pole, turn the Robel pole and the photo identification paper around, cross out “1A” and circle “1B” on the identification paper,

extend the line, and repeat the photography (fig. 106C). Record on the

“Utilization - Robel Pole Sampling” form, in the “Visual Observation 1B” space,

species being measured, the stubble height, and any comments. In this case,

Kentucky bluegrass and California oatgrass are intermingled. Stubble is shown

on the black “2” band and not on the white “3” band for a height of 2 in.

7. For the next station, determine direction and step off the required distance, in

this case 8 yd. Forms in appendix B following the first page of “Utilization -

Robel Pole Sampling” do not have visual observation (station) numbers, but a

blank space instead (fig. 107). Print sufficient sheets for the number of stations.

Then enter appropriate visual observation (station) numbers. Thus each station

has its own page. Take photographs, data, and notes as discussed above (fig.

106). 

8. Repeat for each station (figs. 107 and 108). At the end of the transect (fig. 108C),

establish a fencepost 10 m beyond the last station. On the transect photo identification sheet, cross out the “0” and circle “100” to indicate the end of the transect.

Photograph the transect looking toward the “0” end. 

179

Text continues on page 184.
180

Figure 106—The filing system form “Utilization - Robel Pole Sampling” is used to mount pictures, record stubble height,

and identify species at the Robel pole. Only those species immediately in front of the pole, whose stubble height is being

photographed, are listed. (A) Looking down the transect with station 1 at the meter board. Both visual observations of

station 1 are shown: (B) down the transect, and (C) 180 degrees reversed and looking up the transect. The fencepost

marks the camera location and start of the transect. Species are POPR (Poa pratensis L., Kentucky bluegrass), CASI

(Carex simulata Mackenzie, analogue sedge), and (DACA (Danthonia californica Boland, California oatgrass). Species in

front of the Robel pole must be recorded. The line upper right in B and C is the 4-m-long line measuring distance from

camera to pole.
181

Figure 107—Second page of form “Utilization - Robel Pole Sampling” illustrating documentation and photographs of station 2.

On this form at the top, enter the station number in the blank at “Visual Observation # ___ A”. Remember, on the photo identification form, to cross out “1B” and circle “2A” before photographing. Notes often are valuable in these situations. 
Figure 108—Last page of the form “Utilization - Robel Pole Sampling” with the last station, number 10 in A and B, and a 

transect view toward the 0-ft end (C). The camera is 10 m from the last station and the photo identification sheet is halfway

between camera and meter board. JUBAis Juncus balticus Willd., baltic rush. Remember to cross out the “0” and circle “100.” 

182
183

Figure 109—Filing system form “Utilization - Robel Pole Summary” with location information, stubble heights, and

species taken from the transect data and photo-mounting form. Add the stubble heights in each column (37 and 38),

total the columns (75), and determine the average (75 ÷ 20 = 3.75). The average stubble height is 3.75 in. Variability

in stubble height may be calculated by determining the standard deviation (SD), standard error (SE), and the confidence interval at the 5-percent confidence level (CI5

). These have been entered on the form. The stubble height is

3.75 ± 0.66 in, at the 5-percent confidence level. 
Summarize Data

Literature Cited

Add each of the stubble height columns: visual observation A (“VO A”) is 37 and 

“B” is 38; then add the column totals: 37 + 38 = 75. Determine the average stubble

height for 20 observations: 75 ÷ 20 = 3.75. In this example, the standard deviation

(SD) was 1.41, standard error of the estimate (SE) was 0.32, and the 5-percent confidence interval (CL5

) was 0.66, which were recorded on the form. These data also

may be used to determine significant differences among transects by using the

Student’s t-test. In this case, the stubble height was 3.75 in ± 0.66 in at the 5-percent probability level.

Guenther, Keith. 1998. Residual dry matter (RDM) monitoring photo guide. 

Clyde, CA: Wildland Solutions [234 Park Street, 94520]. 

Hall, Frederick C. 1976. Range trend sampling by photographs. R6 Regional 

Guide 2-1. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific

Northwest Region. 50 p.

Parker, K.W. 1954.A method for measuring trend in range condition on National 

Forest ranges with supplemental instructions for measurement and observation

of vigor, composition, and browse. Admin. Publ. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 37 p. 

Parker, K.W.; Harris, R.W. 1959. The three-step method for measuring condition 

and trend of forest ranges: a resume of its history, development, and use. In:

Techniques and methods of measuring understory vegetation: Proceedings of 

a symposium; 1958 October; Tifton, GA. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station: 55-69. 

Reppert, Jack N.; Francis, Richard E. 1973. Interpretation of trend in range 

conditions from 3-step data. Res. Pap. RM-103. Fort Collins, CO: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range

Experiment Station. 15 p.

Robel, R.J.; Briggs; J.N.; Dayton, A.D.; Hulbert, L.C. 1970. Relationships 

between visual obstruction measurements and weight of grassland vegetation.

Journal of Range Management. 23: 295-297.

White’s Electronics, Inc. 1996. Classic II SLTM. Sweet Home, OR: White’s

Electronics, Inc. [1011 Pleasant Valley Road, 97368].

184
This appendix contains forms for photo monitoring. To be of the most use, they

need to be copied onto three paper colors or overhead projection clear plastic,

depending on their use. Office forms are printed on standard white paper. Field

forms are printed on either of two colors: blue paper to place in photographs to

identify each photo or yellow paper to ease eye strain for field forms. Outline forms

for grid analysis are printed on clear plastic. Grids and summary forms are printed

on white paper. Paper colors I’ve found suitable for each form are shown in b o l d.

White paper is used for summary forms and for grids adjusted to size of the outline

overlays.

Blue paper is Hammermill Brite Hue Blue® or Georgia Pacific Papers Hots Blue®,

or equivalent, used in the actual photographs for identification. This shade of blue

has proven to be least sensitive to changes in sunlight, from full sun to shade, and

has the least tendency to “bleach out” in full sun. 

Yellow paper is Champion Goldenrod® or Hammermill Copy Plus GOLDENROD®,

or equivalent, to be used for field forms. It has proven to be the least annoying in

direct sunlight for field recording data, maps, diagrams, and other descriptions. 

Clear plastic sheets for printing outline overlays are 3M® or Labelon® Overhead

Transparency Film. These films are specifically designed for different printers such

as laser, inkjet, or plain paper.

These forms are printed here at 90 percent of their original size. To reproduce at full

size on 82- by 11-inch paper, set the copy machine for a 110-percent enlargement.

Page and figure numbers for examples of their use are given in the following list. 

185

Appendix B: Blank Forms for Photo Monitoring
Paper and form Page Figure examples

Photograph identification forms, 

printed on blue paper:

Cluster, transect 33, 66, 75, 83, 93, 106

Camera, photo 26, 43

Shrub photo sampling 67-68

Square-foot frequency 75-77

Nested frequency 83-85

9 square feet – 1 square meter 24, 93-95

Utilization, Robel pole 106-108

Sampling site description and location (map), 

printed on yellow paper 65, 73-74, 82, 92, 105

Photographic site description and location 

(map), printed on yellow paper: 26, 42, 45

Photo mounting and data forms, 

printed on yellow paper:

Camera location and photo points 44, 46-48

Photo points and close photos 50

Photo points with overhead views 52

Grid analysis outline form, printed 

on clear plastic 54-56, 58, 60, 68-70, 101

Analysis grids—adjust size and print 

on white paper:

1 meter 28, 57-58

2 meter

Shrub analysis 70

Photo grid summary form, printed 

on white paper 59, 71

Transect sampling forms for photo mounting 

and data collection, printed on yellow paper:

Shrub photo transect 65, 67-69

Photo trend sample - 1 sq. ft. 75-77

Photo trend sample - nested frequency— 83-85

Nested frequency transect data 86-87

Nested frequency cluster summary 88-89

Photo trend sample - 9 sq. ft. (1 sq. m) 93-95

Photo trend sampling - tree cover 99-100

Utilization - Robel pole sampling 106-108

Summary forms, printed on white paper:

Photo grid summary 59

Range trend rereadings 79-80, 90-91, 96-97

Nested frequency transect data 86-87

Nested frequency cluster summary 88-89

Utilization - Robel pole summary 109

186

191

192-193

194

195

196

197

198-199

200

201

202-205

206-211

212-221

233

234

235

236

237

222-231

238-245

246-253

254-255

256-258

259-262

263-266

267-299

237

265-266

255-256

256-258

270
Paper color found best for photo identification forms is this color blue.

It is Hammermill Brite Hue Blue®

or Georgia Pacific Papers Hots Blue®

187

Paper color that is easy on the eyes and used for transect data collection as well as

photo mounting is this color.

It is Champion Goldenrod®

or Hammermill Copy Plus GOLDENROD®

189
/
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232

This page is intentionally left blank.
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
Contents 273 Meter Boards

273 One-Meter Board

274 Two-Meter Folding Board

279 One-Meter Folding Board

279 Photograph Identification-Sheet Holder

284 One-Square-Foot Sampling Frame

286 Nested Frequency Sampling Frame

288 One-Square-Meter Sampling Frame

290 Robel Pole Sampling System

293 Camera Leveling System

294 Double-Camera Bracket

296 Fenceposts

296 Identification Tags

271

Appendix C: Photo Monitoring Equipment
Figure 110—Construction details of a 1-m-tall meter board. The same measurements are used for the 1-m-tall folding

board and for the 2-m folding board. 

272
Meter Boards

One-Meter Board

Meter boards are used to mark photo points. They help in taking consistent repeat

photographs if the camera is oriented on the “1M” of the board. Sharp exposure at

the meter board is assured by focusing the camera on the “1M.” Meter boards also

provide a size control in photographs that can be used to adjust the analysis grids

when measuring the attributes shown in a photo. This section described how to 

construct meter boards.

Materials Cost1

Dollars

1 piece 1/2-in 4-ply exterior or marine plywood, 

finished on one side, 1 by 4 ft @ $20/sheet 3

1 steel rod 3/16-in diameter, 36 inches long 1

Numerals:

1 packet adhesive-backed numerals, 

5-1/4 in tall, on a reflector, (need numbers 1, 2, 4, 6, 8) 4

(Alternative is 4-in nail-on numbers, 5 @ $2/numeral) (20)

1 4- to 5-in-long line or pocket level 4

1 16-oz can dull yellow spray paint, exterior 4

Screws:

2 #4 5/8-in line level screws

9 #6 3/4-in spike plate screws 1

A few feet of black electricians tape 1

Total 18

Meter boards are constructed from 1/2-in, 4-ply plywood, at least exterior quality

and preferably marine quality (waterproof glue). Waterproof glue is desirable when

sampling riparian areas because the meter board often will be placed in water.

(Dimensions and layout are shown in fig. 110). Cut out according to the measurements shown in figure 110.

Prime the front of the board before painting. Then apply two coats of dull, textured,

yellow paint to reduce reflection from the sun. Yellow is used for visibility. If dull yellow paint is not available, do not sand or smooth the front of the board. Unsanded

roughness causes the paint to be rough, thus reducing glare. Most of the 12-oz

pressure can will be required for two coats.

1 Prices given are approximate as of 2000.

273
The numerals 2, 4, 6, and 8 should be black and at least 4 in tall. For good readability in projected slides, 5 in is even better. All illustrations in this publication show

5-in numbers. There are many sources for these, including paste-on numbers,

numbers on a card that must be cut out, and nail-on numbers. I use 5-1/4-in-tall

numbers on a reflective card with adhesive back. Each number must be cut out

and applied to the painted surface. The “M” in “1M” is made from electricians tape,

or it may be painted on.

Black marks at each decimeter and bands at top and bottom may be applied in 

one of two ways: paint them on at 2 cm wide or use black electricians tape, which

is 3/4 in wide (1.8 cm). The top, bottom, and decimeter marks are used to adjust

grid size before grid analysis of items in the photographs. Location of the marks 

on the meter board therefore must be positioned precisely (fig. 11 0 ) .

A line level is attached to the back of the board at the top (fig. 111). This allows 

the board to be oriented vertically, which is essential for grid analysis, and it makes

pictures look good.

Steel spikes are attached to the bottom of the board (fig. 112) to hold it in the

ground. Steel rod, 3/16-in diameter, works well because it is strong enough to hold

the board upright and small enough in diameter to be pushed into rocky soil. Spikes

should extend 6 in below the bottom of the board (fig. 112). Rods come in 36-in

lengths. About 30 in is required. Bend the rod into a “U” shape to match the dotted

outline in figure 112. 

For convenience, a carrying handle may be attached to the edge of the board near

the 5-dm position.

Two-meter boards are used when shrubs or other vegetation exceeds the height of

a 1-m board (fig. 113). They are, very simply, two single-meter boards attached by

hinges and a barrel bolt so that either the 1-m or 2-m length may be used.

274

Two-Meter Folding

Board
275

Figure 111—Aline level is used to orient the board vertically. Obtain a 4- to-5-inlong line level and drill a hole in each end for a screw. Attach one end of the line

level to the back of the meter board 2 in (1 cm) from the top. Then orient the

board vertically by using a carpenters level along one side. Hold the board in

position, adjust the line level to horizontal, and carefully screw in the other end. 

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

2 pieces 1/2-in 4-ply exterior or marine 

plywood, finished on one side, 1 by 4 ft @ $20/sheet 6

1 steel rod 3/16-in diameter, 36 in long 1

Numerals:

2 packets adhesive-backed numerals, 54 in tall, 

on a reflector, (need 2 each of 1, 2, 4, 6, 8) 8

1 4- to 5-in-long line or pocket level 4

2 16-oz cans dull yellow spray paint, exterior 8

2 strap hinges, 4-in size, heavy duty 5

1 barrel bolt, 5-in size, heavy duty 8

Screws:

2 wood screws, #4 5/8-in line level screws

9 #6 3/4-in spike plate screws

1 #10 1/2-in sheet metal screw, for below 

the barrel bolt (sheet metal needed for hardness);

2w-in washers

10 #10 1-in hinge wood screws

8 #10 1/2-in barrel bolt wood screws 2

Several feet of black electricians tape 1

Total 43
276

Figure 112—Spikes in the bottom of

the board are pushed into the ground

to hold the board upright. Use a 3/16-in

diameter steel rod about 30 in long.

Bend it into a U-shape as shown by

the dotted line. It is placed under a

plywood plate and held in place by

nine screws. Leave about 6 in (1.5

dm) of rod below the board. Screws

are positioned to hold the rod in place.

(A) Insert a screw on each side of the

rod at the bottom. (B) Insert three at

the top to prevent upward and downward movement of the rod. (C) Pl a c e

one at each side at top to prevent

sideways movement. Drill out doweling to fit over the spikes for safety.

Figure 113—Use of a folding 2-m board to document height and growth of tall shrubs. This board is hinged in the middle

and held upright by a barrel bolt. When folded together (fig. 109), it functions as a 1-m board. Here, the board has been

unfolded to 2 m.
277

Construct two 1-meter boards as discussed previously. On the first, construct with

spikes at the bottom and numerals as shown. On the second, use “2M” at the top

instead of “1M,” and add numeral “1” to each of the decimeter numbers as shown 

in figures 113 and 114. The numeral “1” can be made from electricians tape.

Figure 115 illustrates the hinge, barrel bolt, and position of the line level between

the two halves of the meter board. Proceed as follows:

1. Refer to figure 115. Attach hinges (A) to plywood the same thickness as the 

barrel bolt and glued to both halves of the meter board. The 5-in bolt shown in

figure 115 required 3/8-in plywood. These plywood blocks raise the meter board

halves so that the barrel bolt will clear both its connecting strap (B) and the line

level (D) when folded. Attach the hinge straps to the top board first. Then use a

straight edge to align both halves in a straight line. Finally, attach the bottom

straps to the bottom board while firmly holding both halves together.

2 . Install the barrel bolt next. Position the barrel bolt at the very bottom of the

upper meter board so the bolt drops down when the boards are erected. Place

the barrel bolt strap (B) as close to the top of the bottom board as possible without the screws splitting the wood. The bolt should protrude about 3/8 in below

the strap (figs. 115C and 116A). Insert a sheet metal screw and sufficient washers under the bolt end to hold it firmly against the strap to prevent flexing when

the boards are unfolded (fig. 116B).

3. Position the line level on the bottom (1-meter) board where it can be seen from

above when the boards are folded for 1-meter use, and from the back when

unfolded for 2 meters (fig. 115D). The line level can be seen when the boards

are folded by looking down through the strap holding the barrel bolt when it

d r o p s .

Figure 114—The 2-m board system. (A) Standard 1-m board with the top half folded underneath. (B) The folded

board has been turned over to show the 2-m section. 
278

Figure 115—Hinges and a barrel bolt connect the halves of the 2-m board. (A) When

installing hinges, attach to the top board first,

carefully align the boards in a straight line,

and then attach the lower straps of the hinges. (B) The barrel bolt should be oriented to fall

down when the board is unfolded. P o s i t i o n

the bolt and its strap at the edges of the

board halves so that the bolt protrudes about

3/8 in below the strap. (C) Install an adjusting screw (fig. 116) to tighten the barrel b o l t

against its strap and stiffen the two boards

when unfolded. (D) A line level is placed an inch below the barrel bolt on the lower board

half such that it can be viewed from above

when folded and from behind when unfolded,

as shown. 

Figure 116—Adjusting screw

and washer used to remove play

between the barrel bolt and its

strap, which will stiffen the two

halves when unfolded. (A)

Measure the distance between

the bolt and the board. (B) Insert

a round-headed sheet metal

screw with enough washers to

make the bolt fit firmly under the

flange. Sheet metal screws are

preferred because of their hardness. Pound the flange down if

necessary.
279

Photograph

IdentificationSheet Holder

Figure 117—Folding 1-m board specifications. (A) Cut a standard 1-m board at 4

dm and install hinges and a barrel bolt.

This offset is used to protect the spikes

(B). Assemble the board before painting

and application of decimeter marks to

assure correct measurements.

If field transportation of a meter board is a concern, the 1-meter board can be made

to fold. The hinge system is described and shown in figures 115 and 116. Figure 117

illustrates dividing the board at 4 dm to provide protection for the spikes.

Each photograph taken in photo monitoring should be identified. Plot photographs

are identified by a form attached to a clipboard and placed within view of the plot

form. General and topic photos taken of the meter board are identified by a form

attached to a clipboard and positioned between the camera and meter board.

Making the clipboard and a post to hold it are described.

One-Meter Folding

Board
The clipboard is shown in figure 118. It is a standard 12-in clipboard with the addition of a second clip removed from another clipboard and attached by rivets or

screws as shown. The critical factor is to place the clips no closer than 102 in to

avoid covering any information on the identification paper. Two clips are required 

to prevent the identification sheet from blowing in the wind.

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

2 clipboards 12 in long @ $4.50/each; 

second clipboard for its clip 9

6 1/8-in diameter bolts or rivets to attach the second 

clipboard clip and straps for the clipboard post 1

2 1/4-in line guides or straps 1

Total 11

Remove the clip from the second clipboard and attach it to the first board with either

two bolts or two rivets.

280

Figure 118—Clipboard for displaying photo identification forms. A second clip (A) is taken

from another clipboard and either screwed or riveted to this clipboard. Distance between the

clipboard clips should be 102 in to do two things: (1) hold the sheet in windy conditions and 

(2) not cover essential information. The clipboard is placed on the ground for plot photos or

on top of a clipboard post (see fig. 119) to be set in front of the camera. When placed on the

post, a screw (B) is inserted into the wooden block holding the 4-in rod behind the clipboard

(see figs. 119 and 121) to prevent the clipboard from rotating in the wind. 
281

Figure 119 shows the clipboard post in its compressed position. Two straps capable

of having a 1/4-in diameter rod inserted are attached to the back of the clipboard in

the middle, as shown. They are centered 6 in from each end and placed 42 in apart

so that the 5-in rod will engage each (fig. 119B).

The clipboard post is an adjusted pole, 1 in in diameter, with a spike on one end to

push in the ground and a telescoping inside pole with a rod at the other end to which

the clipboard is attached (fig. 119A). It is composed of telescoping plastic pipes each

18 in long (fig. 120A). It is 22 in long when compressed and 32 in long when

extended (fig. 120B). An adjustable hose clamp is attached to the upper end of the

larger pipe so that it may be compressed around the inside pipe to hold it in place

(fig. 120).

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

1-in CL 200 PVC pipe @ $1/10 ft 1

3/4-in CL 200 PVC pipe @ $1/10 ft 1

1-in diameter hose clamp 1

1/4-in diameter, 36-inch steel rod; piece, cut two 7-in pieces` 1

Several feet of black electricians tape 4

Total 8

Figure 119—The clipboard

post (A) in its compressed

position ready to be inserted

into the straps behind the clipboard. The 

 4-in rod slides into

two 4-in straps on the clipboard. (B) These straps a r e

positioned 42 in apart and

riveted (as shown) or bolted

to the clip board with 1/8-in

rivets or bolts.
282

Figure 120—Details for constructing the clipboard post. (A) The 1-in PVC pipe CL200 and w-in PVC pipe CL200,

which fits inside the 1-in pipe, are each 18 in long. When the w-in pipe is inserted into the 1-in pipe and compressed, they are 22 in long. (B) The 18-in inside pipe has been extended 14 of its 18 in, for 32 in. The 4-in diameter spikes at the bottom and top both extend 5 in beyond the pipe and are imbedded into doweling inserted in the

pipe. 
283

The clipboard post is composed of two parts (fig. 121). One is 1-in CL 200 PVC pipe

and the other is 3/4-in CL 200 PVC pipe, both 18 in long. The 3/4-in pipe fits inside

the 1-in pipe with some slack. If pipe specifications other than these are used, be

sure that one pipe will fit inside the other. When compressed, the clipboard holder is

22 in tall. When extended with 4 in of pipe inside, it is 32 in tall (fig. 120B).

To make the clipboard post adjustable, saw down 2 in into the end of the 1-in pipe

(fig. 121G). Attach a 1-in hose clamp an inch below the top of the pipe and secure it

with electricians tape (fig. 121H). Tighten the hose clamp so that the inside 3/4-in

pipe can just be moved up and down to adjust height of the clipboard above vegetation or other obstructions.

Figure 121—Details of how the clipboard is

placed over the rod as viewed from the edge

of the clipboard. (A) The clip of the clipboard.

(B) The edge of the clipboard, in this case 

an aluminum board. (C) The 4-in straps into

which the 4-in rod of the post is inserted. 

(D) The 4-in rod of the post inserted into the

clipboard straps. (E) A screw inserted into

the wood doweling to hold the 4-in rod, which

prevents the clipboard from rotating in the

wind (see fig. 118). (F) A piece of doweling

fitted inside the w-in PVC pipe, which is

drilled out for a 4-in steel rod and held in

place by a screw. (G) A sawcut 2 in into the

1-in PVC pipe so that the pipe can be compressed by the hose clamp (H) to hold the

inside pipe at the desired height. At H, the

hose clamp is secured with electricians tape. 
One-Square-Foot

Sampling Frame

284

Figure 122—The 1-ft2 sampling frame is made from 2-in PVC pipe. Inside measurement is 12 in square.

The side opposite the handle is open to facilitate placement in shrubby vegetation. An 18-in-long handle

facilitates placement of the frame. 

The 1-ft2 sampling frame is used with stereo photographic sampling. It is constructed

from 1/2-in-diameter PVC pipe and measures 12 in square (fig. 122). An 18-in-long

handle reduces effort when placing the frame.

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

1/2-in-diameter PVC pipe, 10 ft long @ $3/piece 3

2 90-degree, 1/2-in PVC elbows; 1 1/2-in PVC “T” 1

Total 4

Consider not cementing the elbows to the pipe so that the frame can be taken apart

to transport. Figure 123 shows the frame disassembled with its carrying case. The

case is made from canvas with a handle and two snaps at the open end.
285

Figure 123—A1-ft2 sampling frame disassembled with its carrying case. The case is made from canvas with

a handle and two snaps at the open end. 

Figure 124—Nested frequency plot frame specifications. Measurements shown are

inside dimensions. The four prongs must be cut 2 cm longer to provide for threading

the ends and the aluminum back piece must be cut 2 cm longer to provide for 4-in

tapped drill holes for the edge prongs. 
Nested Frequency

Sampling Frame

Nested frequency is a sampling system designed for low variability rates among

observers; it is based on statistical analysis to detect change. A plot frame, 1/2-m

square, with four sizes of nested plots is used (fig. 124). Species are recorded and

given a value when rooted within any of the four subplots.

Values are assigned based on plot size (fig. 125). Species numerous enough to fall

within the smallest subplot are rated highest to reflect their greater density. Species

are recorded starting with the smallest subplot (4) and proceeding to larger subplots. Once a species is recorded, do not repeat its presence in a larger subplot.

Figure 124 specifies plot dimensions. Please note length requirements in the materials list below. The steel rods must be cut 2 cm longer so they can be threaded and

screwed into the aluminum back piece. The aluminum back piece must be 2 cm

longer than the dimensions shown in figure 124 to accommodate tapped holes for

the outside rods.

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

1 tap and die set for 1/4-in steel rod (borrowed)

3 1/4-in steel rods, 36 in long: 

3 pieces cut 52 cm long, threaded for 2 cm 

(effective length 50 cm) 

1 piece cut 7 cm long, threaded for 2 cm 

(effective length 5 cm) 3

1-in by 1/4-in aluminum bar stock cut 52 cm long 

@ $10/6 ft (drill and tap 4 holes, each 1/4-in 

diameter, at 1, 6, 26, 51 cm) 4

5 wing nuts for 1/4-in threaded steel rod 1

PVC pipe 1/2-in diameter SCH40 cut 50 cm long, @ $3/10 ft 1

Total 9

286

Figure 125—Plot locations in the

nested frequency plot frame. The

smallest is rated “4,” next largest

a “3,” half the plot frame is rated

“2,” and the rest a “1.” Plants

rooted in each section are given

the assigned rating, which is

recorded by species. 
Sharpen the ends of the four prongs to a 45-degree angle. These points are where

ground cover items are recorded, such as bare ground, gravel, or rock.

Screw the threaded rods into the aluminum back piece (fig. 126A). Secure the rods

with wing nuts. Be sure the measurements shown in figure 124 are met.

The 50-cm PVC handle is cut out and attached (fig. 126B). Cut one-third of the way

through the pipe 1 in above its end to fit over the aluminum back piece. Then, from

the bottom and starting in the center, cut at an angle to the upper cut. Finally, drill 

a 1/4-in hole to match the hole at 26 cm in the aluminum back piece (fig. 126B).

Assemble as shown in figure 126B.

287

Figure 126—Method for attaching the nested frequency prongs to the 1-in by 4-in aluminum back piece. (A)

A 50-cm prong is shown threaded and ready to screw into the aluminum back piece. Next to it is the 5-cmlong prong attached. The 5-cm subplot is identified by the black mark on the 50-cm prong and the end of the

5-cm prong. (B) The center 50-cm prong is shown screwed into the aluminum back piece and through the

50-cm handle, with a wing nut ready to tighten the handle to the back piece. 
One-Square-Meter

Sampling Frame

Paint the frame with dull yellow paint. When dry, paint the black marks at 5 and 25

cm on one prong and at 25 cm on the other prongs. These marks identify the various subplots sizes shown in figures 124 and 125. 

The plot frame may be disassembled for carrying as shown in figure 127.

One-square-meter photo plot frames are designed to replace Parker’s (1954) threestep method using a 3-ft by 3-ft plot frame. Both are used in photographs taken at

an oblique angle. His plot frames were made from two 6-ft folding rulers, the joints

of which could be used to draw a grid on a photograph. This 1-m2 frame is marked

off in 2-dm increments (fig. 128).

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

3/4-in SCH40 PVC pipe @ $2/10 ft, 2 required 4

90-degree 3/4-in PVC corners SCH40, 4 required 2

4 by 8 inch, 1/2-inch thick scrap plywood (scrap)

2 screws #6, 1 in long

Several feet of black electricians tape 4

Total 10

Cut the 3/4-in PVC pipe into four 1-m lengths (fig. 128A). Be precise because the

pipes, when inserted into the elbows, fit at exactly the elbow corner. Do not glue the

pipes to the elbows. The frame will be adequately stable with the pipes simply

pushed into the elbows and then can be broken down for transport (fig. 128B).

288

Figure 127—The disassembled nested frequency plot frame is shown with its carrying case. Notes on

the aluminum back piece show percentage of the plot frame occupied by the 25- by 25-cm subplot (25

percent), 25- by 50-cm subplot (50 percent), and the 5- by 5-cm subplot (1 percent). 
289

Figure 128—The 1-m2 plot frame (A) is marked off in 2-dm increments. Inside measurements are 1-m

per side. The w-in pipe may be measured precisely and inserted into the elbows because the elbows

have a stop at the exact position of the elbow bend. Do not cement the elbows to the pipe because the

plot frame can be disassembled for easy transport in its canvas carrying case (B). 

Next, measure out 2 dm on all four pipes and circle the pipe at these locations with

electricians tape to mark a 2-dm grid system (fig. 128).

In figure 128, a 1/2-in-thick piece of plywood measuring 4 by 8 in (1 by 2 dm) has

been attached to identify the meter plot frame. The “1” and “M” are made with 3/4-inw i d e electricians tape. The plywood is attached with two screws through the board

and into the PVC pipe. I use the identification for slide talks to quickly identify the

size of plot frame.
Robel Pole

Sampling System

290

Figure 129—Amethod is shown for estimating small increments of cover. In a 1-m2 plot frame, 1 dm2 is 1 percent cover. This represents about the front one-third of my foot. Because a 1-m2 plot is 3.4 feet on a side, each

large step represents 1 percent cover so long as the cover is represented by each and every step. An area 2 by

2 dm is 4 percent cover, about 1.3 of my foot. I now have a measuring system for estimating cover of items I

encounter while walking across an area.

Figure 129 reflects a system I have found useful in estimating cover of vegetation

or soil surface items. An area 1 dm by 1 dm is 1 percent of a square-meter plot. 

A square-meter plot, being 3.4 ft on a side, is a little longer than the stride of a 

person about 6 ft tall. The front one-third of my foot is about 1 by 1 dm (fig. 129).

Therefore, each time I take a long step, any vegetation that covers the front onethird of my foot is 1 percent of the cover. But the vegetation must approximate that

area for each and every step. If it does not, then canopy cover of that item is less

than 1 percent.

Each 2-dm area is 4-percent cover, a little more than one of my whole feet. Thus,

when walking through an area, I have some reasonably firm idea of how to estimate

cover of various items.

The Robel pole (Robel and others 1970) offers a way to document stubble height 

of herbaceous vegetation. They tested various systems for observing stubble height

and settled on a pole marked in 1-in increments and set 4 m from an observation

position 1 m high. Figure 130 shows specifications for making the Robel pole system.
291

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

2-in diameter CL200 PVC pipe @ $3/10 ft 

(cut 1 piece 1.2 m for the Robel pole) 3

1.5-in diameter CL200 PVC pipe @ $3/10 ft 

(cut 1 piece 1.0 m for the camera-height pole) 3

20 ft 1/8-in diameter nonstretch rope 1

12-ft 1/4-in diameter steel rod (cut 2 pieces 8 in long) 1

2 #6 size eye screws; 1 6-in tent stake 2

1 snap with ring; several feet of black electricians tape 3

Total 13

The Robel pole system consists of two poles and a 4-m section of line attached

between the poles. Figure 130 lists the specifications permitting the camera-height

pole to be placed inside the Robel pole for carrying. Figure 131 illustrates construction and marking of the Robel pole and details.

Figure 130—Robel pole specifications and criteria are shown. 

(A) A 2.0-in diameter PVC pipe 

is used for the Robel pole and

12-in pipe for the camera height

pole. These diameters permit the

camera height pole to be inserted

into the Robel pole (B) for carrying. A tent stake for supporting

the Robel pole is carried in a 

person’s pocket. In A, the Robel

pole is 1.2 m tall with an eye at

1.0 m. The camera height pole 

is 1 m tall to which is fastened a

4-m measuring line. When working alone, use a tent stake with 2

m of line to hold the Robel pole

vertically while pulling the 4-m

line taunt. 
292

Figure 131—(A) The Robel pole is marked at 1-in increments with black electricians tape. Alternate

inch increments are inscribed with permanent black markers for every odd-numbered inch. Steel rods

4-in diameter extend 6 in below the Robel pole and the line pole. The Robel pole rod is protected by

doweling drilled out for 4-in steel rod. Steel rods are secured inside the PVC pipe by doweling. (B) An

eye is attached to the Robel pole 1 m aboveground. After screwing in the eye, remove it and cut off

the sharp end, then replace the eye. Cutting off the sharp end provides room for the camera height

pole to be inserted into the Robel pole (fig. 130B). A 4-m line, secured by a nail, is wrapped around the

camera height pole. It is snapped to the eye on the Robel pole to measure consistent distance

between Robel pole and the camera. The camera height pole, 1 m tall, provides a consistent camera

height when the camera is positioned at the top of the pole. 

Figure 132—Aleveling board for taking overhead photos of tree canopy cover measures 42 in

by 6 in and has a two-way level attached. It is made from scrap 2-in plywood. 
Camera Leveling

System

Photographs taken looking up at the tree canopy require a camera leveling system

for consistent rephotography. The system described here uses the meter board top

as one axis for consistently orienting the camera and a leveling board for the other

axis (figs. 132 and 133).

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

1 2-way level or 2 line levels 4

42- by 6-in, 1/2-in thick, scrap plywood (scrap)

Total 4

Figure 132 illustrates the camera leveling board’s dimensions and placement of the

two-way level. Figure 133 illustrates uses of the leveling board. Place it on the top

edge of the meter board, move the meter board left or right to center on the crosstransect level, then tilt the board to center the down-transect level. Move your head

out of the way and photograph.

293

Figure 133—The camera leveling board is used to consistently rephotograph the tree canopy. Place

the leveling board on top of the meter board for consistent height above the ground. Place the meter

board at a right angle to the transect line. Move the meter board sideways to center the crosstransect bubble, then tilt the level board to center the downtransect bubble, and photograph.
Double-Camera

Bracket

Two cameras usually are needed to photograph in both color and black and white.

A bracket holding both cameras together provides for simple and effective manipulation of the cameras (fig. 134). Identical cameras simplify adjustment. When ready

to photograph, simply shoot with the top camera, then the bottom, and advance the

f i l m s .

Materials Cost

(see footnote 1)

Dollars

1 6-ft piece aluminum bar stock, 1 in wide by 

1/8 in thick (cut a piece 18 in long) 8

Instant thumb screws:

2 1/4-in diameter standard 20 thread, 

3/8-in shank screws 1

2 instant thumb screws 1

Total 10

294

Figure 134—Double camera

bracket for use when photographing in both color and black

and white. The bracket is made

from 1- by 1/8-in stock aluminum bar with holes drilled to

mount the cameras. Identical

cameras are recommended to

simplify camera adjustment.

Figures 135 and 136 illustrate

construction details.
295

Figure 135—The double-camera bracket (A) with thumb screws

to attach the cameras. Washers may be needed if thumb screw

shanks are too long. (B) Thumb screws come in two parts: the

shank and the head. The head must be forced onto the shank

by using a vise (C).

The aluminum bar stock, cut to 18 in, is bent into equal 6-in segments to form a 

“U” (fig. 135A). Then, 1/4-in holes are drilled 22 in from the ends (fig. 135A) to

hold the cameras. Be sure the holes will place the cameras where the rewind buttons

will be accessible (fig. 136B). Next, on the aluminum bar make two 1/4-in cuts, 2 i n

apart, into the aluminum toward the front of the camera and bend the 1/2-in piece

upward to about a 30-degree angle (fig. 136A). Do not bend more than 30 degrees

or the aluminum will break. These tabs will prevent the cameras from rotating on

the bracket.

Assemble the thumb screws, which come in two parts — the shank and the thumb

head (fig. 135B). Be sure the shank will fit the camera mounting socket. A 1/4-in

diameter, 20-thread shank 3/8 in long will work. Press the head onto the shank as

shown in figure 135C using a vise. Heavy pliers usually do not apply sufficient force

to seat the thumb head.
Fenceposts

Identification Tags

296

Figure 136—Two factors are important in attaching the camera to the bracket. (A) Make two 4-in cuts into the

front of the bracket, 2 in apart, and bend upward no more than 30 degrees to prevent rotation movement of

the camera. (Bending them farther may break them off.) (B) Be sure the bracket clears the rewind button so

that film may be changed while the camera is attached to the bracket.

Flimsy fenceposts are available at builders supply outlets such as Home Depot©.

They are listed as “light duty” stamped metal fenceposts. Measured across the top,

the long axis is 14 in. Medium duty stamped fenceposts measure 2 in. Light duty

posts may have to be ordered.

Orange colored, aluminum tags suitable for installing on witness sites to identify a

monitoring location may be obtained from:

Dixie Steel and Sign Co.

P.O. Box 54616

Atlanta, GA 30308

Phone: 404-875-8883

Fax: 404-872-5423

Obtain a tool-steel inscriber to inscribe directions and distances to camera locations

and photo points directly on the tags. The tags are about 12 gauge thickness with

black and orange paint.
Contents 297 Introduction

299 Office Filing System

299 Date of Photography

299 Topic Being Monitored

299 Geographic Location of the Study

300 File Contents

300 Authorization, Approval, or Justification

301 Map1

301 Photo-Mounting Forms

301 Summary Forms

301 Envelopes for Negatives

302 Slide Files

The concept of photo monitoring implies repeat photography, which in turn suggests

the need for a filing system where, over the years, one can regularly deposit their

photographs and data. This appendix describes some attributes of filing systems

I’ve found useful over the last 40 years.

297

Appendix D: Photo Monitoring Filing System

Introduction
298

Figure 137—File folder contents for the Crooked River National Grassland trend

cluster C3. I use several sizes of expanding folders: 2-fold shown here, 4-fold,

and 8-fold to fit the file size. Each folder is labeled and the last date of sampling

is attached to the upper right corner (arrow). All items pertaining to the sample

location are included in the file: (A) general area map (fig. 72), (B) the form

“Sampling Site Description and Location” for a plot layout map (fig. 82), (C) a

form for attaching photographs and recording data shown here as the “Photo

Trend Sample - Nested Frequency” (figs. 83-85), (D) data summary forms shown

here as “Nested Frequency Transect Data” (figs. 86 and 87) and “Nested

Frequency Cluster Summary” (figs. 88 and 89), (E) trend interpretation using

“Range Trend Rereadings” (figs. 90 and 91), and (F) clear plastic holders for

slides (fig. 139). Not shown are black-and-white negatives in their envelopes

identified by date, cluster, and transect.
Office Filing

System

Date of Photography

Topic Being Monitored

Geographic Location

of the Study

O ffice organization of the filing system presumes that each monitoring location is

completely contained in its own folder (fig. 137). Consider three alternatives for filing

these folders: by (1) date of rephotography, (2) topic of the study, or (3) geographic

location of the study.

Date of photography may be season of year, such as Pole Camp in spring, summ e r, and fall (fig. 20); once each year at a specific date, such as herbage production (fig. 22); irregularly based on disturbance such as logging (figs. 29, 50, and

51); or at specified intervals, such as every 5 years—the three intervals between

1977 in figure 46 and 1991 in figure 48.

An advantage of organizing by date is having files immediately available each year

according to their schedule. This means that topics of sampling and geographic

locations are interspersed requiring search of all files. I place the date information

on the upper right corner of the file rather than file by date.

The topic being monitored determines the purpose for monitoring and the kind of

vegetation under consideration. Topics may be exclosures (fig. 137), livestock trend

sampling (figs. 75, 83, and 92), sagebrush-grass (figs. 75, 83, and 92), logging

effects (figs. 21, 50, and 51), herbage production (fig. 22), or livestock utilization

(figs. 20 and 106-108).

Similar topics are filed together, such as logging with overstory removal (fig. 21)

and a single light thinning (figs. 50 and 51) in ponderosa pine. All logging may be

put together or all ponderosa pine may be located together. If logging is the topic,

salvage of beetle-killed lodgepole pine (figs. 46-48) would be filed with it. Decisions

must be made on organizing the files by topic, none of which will prove wholly 

s a t i s f a c t o r y.

Geographic location is determined by the closest available motel, access by major

road, or distance to travel. My work from Portland, Oregon, covering two states, is

organized by towns that gave good access and an acceptable motel. When going to

an area on other work, I look in its geographic file to determine if any photo monitoring locations are due for sampling. What might be combined between current work

activity and photo monitoring? Are there any monitoring sites in the neighborhood of

the work area or on the route? Dates on the files are the first consideration. Is the

work activity occurring about the same date as required for sampling? Consider

organizing files by date and then by topic within a geographic file. Another approach

is to allot several days for monitoring. Having files by location greatly facilitates travel planning and might save considerable time in visiting each site. Filing by location

has been my choice for many years.

299
File Contents

Authorization,

Approval, or

Justification

All information pertaining to a photo monitoring project should be placed in a single

file. This may entail duplicate copies of some items, such as a request and authorization for a study, which might require filing in an office administration folder as well

as in the project folder. Long-term investigation, like photo monitoring, is significantly

enhanced when historical documents are included in the file. 

Consider six kinds of items to include: (1) authorization, approval, or justification

for the project; (2) maps to find the monitoring location—a general map noting the

location and a site-specific map diagraming the sampling layout; (3) photo-mounting forms that also may be used to record data, such as transect sampling systems; (4) envelopes for negatives, either color or black-and-white, or both, digital

memory cards, or compact discs (CDs); (5) summary forms when data are collected;

and (6) plastic sheets for holding slides.

Document initiation of the photo monitoring project. This may entail copying instructions or policy from an organization, a written request to monitor and subsequent

approval, or those parts of an environmental impact statement requiring monitoring

of specific activities. If an environmental impact statement, or similar document, is

required, include it. Assume that someone totally unfamiliar with your organization’s

policy, protocol, or operational procedures may pick up the file and will have everything they need to understand and use the monitoring system. This has proven

invaluable in monitoring projects older than 20 years because policy, protocol, and

operational procedures change.

300

Figure 138—Three pages of filing system form “Camera Location and Photo Points” overlapped to compare changes

between three dates. These are figures 46, 47, and 48 located by the map in figure 45. Essential information for

making comparisons is in the upper right portion of the form: date and camera location. Overlay the forms so that

photographs can be compared as shown. Camera orientation in close landscape photography can be a problem

resulting from no meter board or permanent item on which to orient the camera. Compare photo B for 1977 and

1978 with B for 1991. The horizon is similar for the first two but quite different for 1991, a situation to be avoided.

Also notice the variation in the road crest in the A p h o t o s .
Maps

Photo-Mounting Forms

Summary Forms 

Two maps always should be included in the monitoring file (fig. 137): a general map

showing how to find the monitoring site (fig. 72), and a detailed site map of the monitoring system (fig. 73). These maps should be in such detail that a person new to

the area can find the monitoring location and do the rephotography.

Effective use of photographs in monitoring suggests that they should be mounted 

to facilitate comparison. The filing system forms in appendix B are organized so that

photos are mounted on the right, underneath the date and camera location. Pages

may be overlapped to compare any number of photos by date (fig. 138).

Two kinds of photo-mounting forms are provided: those for topic or landscape photography where measurements are not made (figs. 44, 45, 46-48, and 138), and

those for transect sampling where measurements are recorded in the field (figs. 67-

69, 75-77, 83-85, 93-95, 99-100, and 106-108). The form shown in figure 137 is a

transect form (figs. 83-85). These forms have space for 3- by 5-inch photos.

Summary forms are used with transect sampling to summarize and interpret the

data. One important form is “Range Trend Rereadings,” used to compare data

among years (figs. 79-80 and 90-91). It may be used with several of the sampling

systems. Other forms are designed for a specific system, such as nested frequency

(figs. 86-89; tables 2 and 3) or Robel pole utilization (fig. 109).

A different kind of summary form is used with grid analysis. It is a piece of clear

plastic (fig. 54) labeled with sampling date, site name, and item, on which outlines

of items (shrubs in this illustration) are drawn (figs. 55-56, 60, and 68-69). The outlined sheet is placed on a grid (figs. 58 and 70), which is adjusted in size to the outline, and the number of intersects within each outline are recorded on a summary

form (figs. 59 and 71). The photograph, sized grid, outline sheet, and summary form

are all filed. 

Negatives, color or black-and-white, should be kept in the monitoring file. I find 

that keeping them in the envelopes from processing is quite satisfactory; there is a 

compartment for the negatives and one for the pictures. I routinely have two prints

made: one for mounting and another as a spare. The envelope is labeled with date

of photography, monitoring location, and camera-photo point identification. 

Each picture on the negative should be identified by a photo identification sheet

placed within the camera’s view. After several sessions of rephotography, identifying

which negative was taken in what year can be impossible. This becomes a serious

threat to integrity of the project when prints are made simultaneously from several

years of rephotography of the same photo point. How might the various negatives

be returned to their proper envelope? 

Digital images may be stored in the file by any of three methods: (1) memory cards

with their containers, (2) transferred to a CD, or (3) stored on the hard drive of a

computer with essential identifying information. Directions to find the computer filing

system should be placed in the file. 

301

Envelopes for

Negatives
Slide Files Slides may be filed in two kinds of holders: rigid opaque plastic or flexible clear

plastic sheets. Rigid holders protect the slides on only one side, the other is open.

Clear plastic have pockets (2 by 2 in) into which slides are placed (fig. 139). T h e y

are protected on both sides. A product n o t having PVC in its makeup will not damage the slide itself (for example, ClearViewTM). Some flexible pocket sheets will

adhere to the slide and damage the emulsion. Slides do not fall out of rigid h o l ders but they do tend to fall out of flexible pocket holders. Even so, my preference 

is for flexible pocket holders because they take only one-third the filing space of

rigid ones.

Slides may be returned to you from processing in either paper or plastic mounts.

Paper is less rigid and easier to write on but will hang up in projectors more often

and is useless if ever dampened. Plastic requires felt-tip pens for effective writing

such as Sanfords Sharpie® Ultra Fine Point Marker, the same one used for drawing

outlines on clear plastic sheets. I specify “plastic mounts,” “number only,” and “do

NOT date” when I have slide film processed.

All my slides are dated by when they were taken, not when processed. I use a “000”

size date stamp with year, month, and day. A stamp significantly reduces time handling the slides. Each should be identified by a “photo identification” form within the

view (figs. 26, 33, 67-68, 75, 83, 93, and 106). In addition, I label each slide for easy

recognition and add any pertinent information (fig. 139).

Consider filing slides in columns by date (figs. 137 and 139). If there are five slides

for a photo point, I file them in landscape orientation (horizontal) in the slide holder.

This permits comparing five sets of slides from five different dates on one sheet. If

there are four or less slides, I use columns in portrait (vertical) orientation (fig. 139)

where four columns may be compared. Using a light table, one can view a number

of photo points over considerable time. In figure 139, only photos A and B are

shown covering a time span from 1977 to 1997.

302

Figure 139—Slides filed in clear plastic sheets facilitate comparison among years. I use either of

two systems: four columns by date using the slide holder in portrait view (shown here) or five

columns by date using the slide holder in landscape view where five sets of slides are compared.

Shown here are slides of figures 46 though 48 and 138. This system of four dated columns also

was used in figure 137, where four sheets were required to hold slides for each date.
Contents

Introduction

303 Introduction

305 Composition of Photographs

313 Light

323 Relocation of Photographs

This appendix is devoted to several topics with much of the discussion occurring in

the figure captions.

Hedgecoe (1994) introduces his treatise on landscape photography by discussing

learning how to see. What the eye transmits to the brain is not what the camera

records. The eye scans a topic for several seconds while the brain filters out the

surroundings. Our eyes perceive fine detail over just a small area in the middle of

the view. The camera records a fixed rectangular part of the scene with no overt

identification of a topic. The view recorded has constrained edges, unlike the movement of eyes. A photograph, therefore, must be purposely oriented to record what

the eye and brain see.

Johnson (1991) suggests asking several questions to help resolve eye and camera

relations: Why am I taking this picture? What is the purpose of this picture? What

will the picture demonstrate? What appeals to me in this scene? and What am I

looking for? “Looking for,” the topic of interest, might occur in one of three planes:

foreground, middle distance, and far distance. These are relative distances between

the camera and the horizon. Close photography might have only 200 yards from the

camera to the horizon or back of the scene (fig. 26), in contrast to 10 miles in a general landscape view (fig. 16). Composing the picture to focus on the topic is an

important objective.

303

Appendix E: Photo Techniques
304
Composition of

Photographs

Hedgecoe (1994) suggests that camera orientation helps to convey a message.

Landscape (horizontal) orientation suggests peaceful and stable conditions, and

portrait (vertical) orientation connotes active and unstable situations. Figure 140

compares these orientations.

Mobility of camera location is more valuable than a battery of lenses for photographic composition (Hedgecoe 1994). By moving around to view the topic, one

can totally change the composition of the picture. Different foreground and background elements may be aligned, or detail close to the camera may be avoided

or included. The point is to make the picture emphasize the chosen topic.

The next consideration is composition: First identify the topic of interest, and then

position the camera to enhance the topic. Hedgecoe clearly discusses the “rule of

thirds,” which is based on the golden mean, a 1:1.62 ratio, about the dimensions of

a 35-mm image, which seems to be the ratio most pleasing to people from western

cultures (fig. 141). It suggests that about 33 percent is a valuable percentage to use

for positioning the topic. In landscape photography, it is used to position the horizon:

one-third sky to two-thirds land, or as shown in figure 135, one-third land and twothirds sky. The next “third” is to frame the picture on at least one side with something. And the last “third” is to divide the land (or sky) into thirds by use of an angle.

The angle may be a road, change in vegetation, crest of a hill, cloud formation (fig.

140), or other item. Perhaps the mnemonic “one-SAT” will help recall “one side, one

angle, one-third.”

Figure 142 begins a series illustrating this adage. Figure 143 is a broad view of the

landscape used for illustration. Figure 144 is a common type of camera orientation,

placing the horizon in the center of the picture. Lowering the camera, as in figure

145, illustrates a one-third horizon; in figure 146, the camera moves to the right to

frame the scene. One angle is represented by the slope. Figure 147 is the actual

scene taken near the Snake River in Oregon, showing the topic of terracing on the

near slope resulting from livestock grazing and no terracing on gentler slopes.

Figure 148 illustrates the “thirds” concept but reverses one-third sky for one-third

land to emphasize the topic of spring rain showers in the Great Basin. (In reality,

only one-fourth is land.) In photo (B) the camera was repositioned to frame the picture with sagebrush and to include a fence for the “angle” and as a perspective on

scale.

Pattern is use of contrasting objects such as a house in a field, row of trees, hills

and a valley, or dramatic differences in vegetation as shown in figure 149. The topic

was a meadow and its adjacent forest. Pattern also is illustrated in figure 150 but in

a dramatically different way. Here pattern is related to texture of the siding compared to the roof and ground.

305

Text continues on page 313.
306

Figure 141—The “rule of thirds”

depicted with a 35-mm image.

Divide the image into thirds and

use the intersection of the lines as

a guide for topic location. In portrait

photography, a person’s face or

other item of interest is located at

one of the circles. Landscape photography uses a modification as

shown in figure 142. 

Figure 142—Figures 143 through 147 illustrate the concept of “thirds” (Hedgecoe 1994)

or the concept of “one-third, one side, one angle” for placing the topic of interest in a

photograph. “One-third” suggests that only one-third of the picture should be sky or

land. In figure 142, only one-third is sky. “One side” suggests framing the picture in

some way, here with a tree. “One angle” calls for some line in the picture at an angle.

This diagram is expanded to a real landscape diagram in figure 143.
Figure 144—Here the camera focus has been placed on the horizon resulting in half sky and half land. Compare to

figure 147A.

307

Figure 143—Abasic scene. Orientation of the camera will be further illustrated in figures 144 through 146.
308

Figure 145—The camera has been lowered to one-third sky providing some focus on the foreground topic of a rippled slope. Compare to figure 147B.

Figure 146—The camera was moved sideways to the right so that a tree would frame the picture. Here, four landscape photography concepts are illustrated: (1) one-third sky; (2) one-side framing; (3) one angle, the crest of the

foreground slope; and (4) topic of the foreground rippled slope. The rippling (terracing) was caused by livestock

use. These views are shown in figure 147.
Figure 147—A, B, and C correspond to figures 144, 145, and 146, respectively.

Exposure is an important consideration in landscape photography. In A, the land

has been underexposed because the camera light meter was overly influenced

by the bright sky. Expose for the topic of interest. If serious photography is contemplated, always take at least three exposures: one at what the meter says,

one an f-stop less, and one an f-stop more. 

309
310

Figure 148—Reversing the “one-third sky” rule is necessary when the topic is weather. (A) Land was reduced

to about 25 percent to emphasize spring rain clouds over the Great Basin. (B) Moving the camera a few feet

uphill provided framing with sagebrush and a fence line, which provides scale and an angle. Also see figure

140.
311
312
Light

313

Figure 151—Aframed landscape view is shown with the topic of a farmstead. Buildings are used to

provide scale as is the fence. Backlight (sun shining towards the camera) creates a halo effect around

each tree below the farm to give a three-dimensional effect. 

Perspective or scale is provided by objects of known size; for example, the farm

buildings in figure 151. In figure 148B, the fence line provided both an angle and 

a sense of perspective. Figure 149 could have been enhanced by an object in the

meadow to indicate how wide it is.

Change in camera focal length is another method for dealing with composition and

emphasizing a topic. Figure 152 compares two focal lengths and their effect on

emphasis of ponderosa pine savanna. Figure 153 illustrates change in topic with

change in focal length. The topic changes from an island in a river to a sweeping

bend in the river with an island.

Composition may be summarized as follows: define a topic (What do I want to

show?), apply the one-SAT concept (one side, one angle, one-third), use pattern

to emphasize the topic, and provide perspective for the topic.

Light is abused more often than used. It may be used to highlight objects, put a

three-dimensional effect into a landscape, create unsolvable problems with shadows,

and wreak havoc with a topic when sky and ground exposure are being reconciled.

Abuse of light results from inattention to exposure and lack of time to photograph in

suitable lighting conditions.

Sun may be used to enhance a three-dimensional effect in a two-dimensional photograph (figs. 151 and 154). Sun from behind the topic, particularly vegetation, tends

to shine on the outside leaves while making a shadow in back. This forms a “halo”

effect setting off individual plants and simulating a three-dimensional effect. Figure

155 illustrates the effect in grass, shrubs, and trees. Notice how the trees stand out

as individuals in figure 151. The halo effect is summarized in the proverb of “photograph before 10 and after 3” when the Sun is low enough to create a good halo.

Text continues on page 319.
Figure 152—Effect of focal length is important in photograph composition and topic identification: (A)

50-mm lens on a 35-mm camera 10 m from the meter board emphasizing savanna ponderosa pine, and

(B) 35-mm lens on the 35-mm camera from the same camera location but the meter board has been

moved to 7 m making it the same size as in A. Scale of the grassland has been increased. Which picture

more honestly illustrates forest savanna? 

314
315
Figure 154—Light position affects emphasis on vegetation. (A) Photo taken into the Sun so that the subject

is backlighted, which produces a “halo” around the edges and a shadow away from the Sun. The halo

highlights vegetation and tends to give the picture a three-dimensional effect. An old adage says to photograph “before 10 and after 3" so that the Sun is low enough to enhance the halo effect. (B) The Sun is

shining on the front of the vegetation (frontlight). Notice in B how the hills in the distance stand apart from

each other owing to haze in the air.

316
317

Figure 155—Asecond example of how backlight (A) versus frontlight (B) affects the highlighting of vegetation. The

halo effect is well illustrated by the trees in A. 
Figure 156—Overcast or full sunlight has major effects in shadow formation, a particularly serious consideration in

forests. Overcast days (B) produce no shadows. Compare to full sunlight in A. With black-and-white film, the shadows may be “dodged” during the enlargement process to bring out much detail. Color film unfortunately has only

about half the latitude of black-and-white film for shadows, so particular care must be taken when adjusting exposure. Slides cannot be dodged.

318
319

Sunlight compared to overcast skies has advantages and disadvantages. Overcast

provides no three-dimensional effect and sunlight produces shadows. Figures 156

and 157 illustrate the disadvantages of shadows.

Camera exposure setting is a key to good use of light. Figure 147, A and B, illustrates the effects. In figure 147A, the exposure was overly influenced by the bright

sky, which resulted in underexposure of the land. Determine the camera exposure

for the brightest item close to the topic (sky or vegetation in full sunlight) and then

for the topic or darkest item at the topic. Average the exposures. If you have any

doubt, take three shots: one at the average, one an f-stop under, and one an f-stop

over the average. Figures 156 and 157, however, illustrate a problem. The shadow

is too dark and the sunlight on the vegetation too bright to be properly exposed,

even with black-and-white film. Black-and-white film has about twice the latitude of

color; color latitude is about one f-stop above and below average, and black-andwhite film is about two f-stops.

Camera exposures in landscape photographs, particularly those showing areas

more than 2 mi in the distance, should be set at a minimum of three f-stop settings:

the light meter reading and one f-stop below and one above. When distance exceeds

2 mi, haze in the air influences the light meter to indicate less brightness than the

land actually is reflecting, which causes overexposure of the land. In these cases,

consider taking photos at both one and two f-stops additional exposure. Aerial photography suffers the same problem.

The effect of shadows and poor exposure in photographs may be partially corrected

on prints (not slides) by dodging during enlarging. Dodging entails use of a cotton

swab 2 to 2 in in diameter or a piece of light cardboard with a hole in it 2 to 2 in

i n d i a m e t e r. Both should be very ragged around the edge to avoid creating a

harsh edge in the finished print. During enlargement exposure, wave the swab

above the overexposed area to cast a shadow and reduce the exposure time for

that area. For underexposed areas, use the cardboard with the hole to shade most

of the print and allow longer exposure to bring out details. Digital images may be

enhanced by computer.
Figure 157—This example is taken at the same photo point as figure 156: (A) overcast and (B) a clear day with full

sunlight. 

320
321

Figure 158—Relocation of photographs may be difficult when disturbance has occurred. In 1963, the centerline was established with a rock at 1 and the side of a large tree at 2. The arrows, A and B, indicate

large rocks present in all photographs but not on the centerline; they help to locate the site and to validate

the location. Left-side triangulation is identified by arrows at 3 showing the distance between a large tree

and a small one. Right-side triangulation at 4 is identified by the side of a large foreground tree and one in

the background. These triangulate the camera location. In 1974, the same items are shown without a

meter board. Selection cutting occurred after 1974 with results shown in figure 159.
Figure 159—By 1987, selection cutting had removed the right foreground tree and the tree in the background located at 4 in figure 158, which eliminated the triangulation point. The rock at 1 was missing but

the large tree in the background at 2 was present. Left-photo triangulation was still identified at 3. By

1996 after final overstory removal, all original vegetation orientation references were missing. Finding the

location is facilitated by rocks at A and B, particularly B with its permanent location at the base of a tree.

Precise relocation of both camera and photo points (meter board) were possible only from permanent

steel stakes in the ground. Note soil hole spoils in the foreground. There has been no colonization of B

or C horizon by native species in 33 years.

322
323

Figure 158 illustrates relocation of a camera location and photo point. The procedure

is similar to that shown in figure 38. On the original photo (1963), draw a central line.

A rock in the foreground and a tree in the background help establish the line.

R e m e m b e r, the meter board will not be in position when the site is next visited, so

it cannot be used for the center line. Then establish reference points at the edges

of the photograph to triangulate the camera location (fig. 158, 1963, points 3 and

4). For the1974 photo, walk forward and backward on the center line looking at the

left and right sides of the picture, (3) and (4), for triangulation of the camera location. When these side identifications match numbers 3 and 4 in 1963, the camera

location has been established. Note change in size of small trees between 1963

and 1974. These changes can be confusing in relocation.

Figure 159, 1987, is 13 years after figure 158 and after a first partial overstory

removal. The foreground tree (item 4 in fig. 158) and the background tree are both

missing so this triangulation point is no longer usable. On the left of the photo, triangulation point 3 is still available to aid location of the camera location. However, the

rock at 1 has been removed and the down tree has shifted position making exact

location of the center line difficult. By 1996, after the final overstory removal (fig. 159),

all original reference points have been destroyed. Only rocks at arrows A and B

remain. They verify that this is the same area, but do not relocate the camera location or photo point.

The moral to this story is to permanently locate, with steel stake or fencepost, both

the camera location and the photo point. If disturbance such as this is anticipated,

use steel stakes or 2-in-diameter rebar driven flush with the ground. Driving them

flush with the ground will help prevent them from being ripped out by equipment. 

A metal detector will be needed to relocate the stakes.

Any kind of disturbance or vegetation growth can make relocation of photo monitoring points difficult if they are not marked by steel stakes or fenceposts. Figure 160

illustrates the effects of a wildfire where the camera location and photo point were

permanently staked. The camera location could have been located approximately by

aligning the meter board with a juniper in the background, the pair of junipers on the

far right, and juniper branches on the left.

The advantages of using steel stakes are shown in figure 161. This kind of photo

point cannot be exactly relocated by referring to general triangulation methods. 

Relocation of

Photographs
324
325
Index

326

Regular = page where item is included in discussion

Bold = page where major discussion occurs

Italic = page with an illustration

Bold italic = page with an illustration and a major discussion

“1M” 30, 37, 41-42, 50, 52, 54-55, 58-59, 84, 103, 130, 273

adjusting size 10, 11, 12-17, 34, 96, 98-101, 103, 104, 118

aiming the camera See orientation; photography, orientation

air quality 2, 27, 30, 32, 34, 39

alignment 31, 64-65, 323

analysis 27, 39, 49, 82

animals 2, 4, 38-39, 112, 125, 126

annual grass 24

aquatic sedge 40, 90

Arizona 41

backlight 30, 79, 313, 316-317

bare ground See soil, surface

beaver dams 79, 90, 104

beavers 51, 79, 90, 111, 104

big sagebrush-wheatgrass 45, 57, 131-133, 148-150, 163-165

bitterbrush 45, 93, 324

blowdown 126

Blue Mountains 32, 45

bluebunch wheatgrass 324-325

British Columbia 41

bunchgrass 45, 47, 324-325

burning 8, 45, 323-324

burroweed 41

California oatgrass 180-181

cameras 3, 6, 29, 34, 47, 66

2×2 format 1, 10

4×5 format 1, 10

35-mm format 1, 5, 6-7, 10, 12-17, 21, 22, 27, 34, 36, 38-39, 47, 50, 56-59,

96, 103

data back 39

digital 6, 7-8, 10, 130

distance to meter board (topic) 4, 5, 11, 12-15, 20-21, 23, 26, 29, 34, 36, 44,

50, 54, 56-59, 60, 82, 92, 95, 96, 105, 107, 112, 113, 116, 120, 130

duplicate 10, 34

exposure See exposure

flash 6

focal length 5-7, 10-11, 12-17, 27, 34, 47, 92, 95, 96, 169, 313, 314-315

focusing 6, 36, 50, 52, 58, 84, 92, 103, 119, 134, 179, 273

format 1, 5-6, 10-11, 12-17, 26, 27, 29, 34, 36, 82, 96

f-stops 7, 11, 23, 36, 46, 52, 309, 319

height aboveground 11, 18-19, 20, 96, 112, 169
327

cameras (continued)

lenses See lenses

leveling board 166, 169, 170

location 2-5, 12, 1 8 - 1 9, 20, 2 7 - 2 8, 29, 3 3 - 3 4, 41, 4 4, 47, 4 9, 6 0 - 6 5, 74, 7 8 - 8 2,

84-86, 95, 113, 115-116, 305, 321-322, 323

multiple 64, 66

orientation 30, 33, 36, 37, 39, 50, 51-53, 55, 58-59, 64, 65, 86, 92, 103, 118,

134, 179, 273, 305

panoramic 34-36

point-and-shoot 7

position 5, 11, 16-17, 20, 112, 116

remote 2, 6, 38

single lens reflex (SLR) 6-7

super-8-mm movie 38

unattended 38-39

video 38-39

canopy 46-47, 94, 95, 137-138, 139, 144, 166, 170-173

CD See compact disk 

center line 31, 65, 321-322, 323

change 1, 3-4, 6, 10, 27, 31-32, 41, 43-47, 50-52, 61, 64, 79, 81-82, 90-91, 93-94,

96, 103, 104-106, 120, 124, 144, 323

accuracy 108, 109-110

grid analysis 50, 51, 96, 102, 106, 109-111, 112

observer variability 41, 107, 108, 109-110

precision 41, 107, 108, 109-110

significance 108, 109-110

CI See confidence interval

chaparral 41

clear plastic (sheet) 10, 96, 97, 103, 104, 118-119, 121, 122, 185

clipboard 86, 92, 280

climate 133, 138, 140, 142, 

close-up photography 2, 5, 45, 49, 54, 58-59, 91, 93, 95, 117-119 See also meter 

boards, close-up photography

cloud layer 9, 21, 23

cluster layout 126, 127-129

color 6, 9, 39, 52

digital 6, 8-9

paper 53, 82, 84, 119, 134, 136, 179, 185

prints 8-10, 23, 92, 96, 97-98, 103, 104, 118-119

quality 7-9, 23, 52

slides 8-10, 39, 84, 92

comments See descriptions

compact disk (CD) 10

compaction (soil) 143

comparing 1-2, 9, 21, 22, 23-27, 49, 96, 142

comparison photos 2, 21, 22, 25-26, 49

compass 85, 92, 119

deviation 29, 62

heading 29, 62, 81, 145, 146

composition 166, 305, 313
328

compression (digital) 2, 7 

computers 8-10

laptop 8-9

monitor 8

condition (range) 133

good 142, 160

fair 141-142, 160

poor 141, 143, 160

very poor 142-143, 160

confidence interval (CI) 108-109, 109-110, 172, 183

constant distance See distance

contrast 21, 305

copy machine 96, 103, 105

correlate 41

cover 47, 84, 86, 91, 94, 95, 137, 170-173

CPU See computer 

crested wheatgrass 41

cryptogams 131-133, 134, 140, 144

cutting See logging

damage 30, 82, 87-89

dams 51, 79

data back 39

data record 97, 102, 104, 121, 123

dates 4, 81, 84, 126

decreasers 140, 141, 157, 159, 168

density 41, 165

depth of field 7, 23, 50, 52, 103, 119

descriptions 5, 83, 84, 87-89, 91, 94, 117, 121, 138

destruction of site 44, 61, 323

deterioration 4, 48

deviation 29, 62, 81

diagrams 28, 29, 49, 80, 85, 114-116, 126, 131-132, 137, 147, 161

digital

cameras 6-8, 130

images 7-9, 10, 84, 92, 119, 319

memory cards 7, 9-10

projectors 8-9

storage cards 7-10

digitizing 50

directions 27, 28, 29, 47, 60, 64, 65, 80, 81, 113, 115, 120, 126, 128-129, 130

distance 4-5, 11, 12-13, 14-15, 23-24, 26, 27, 28-29, 34, 39, 41, 47, 54, 56-57, 60,

80, 81, 82, 95-96, 105, 107, 112-113, 115, 116, 120, 126, 128-129, 130

disturbance 84, 86, 

planned 30, 41, 42, 52, 81, 93, 125, 130, 321-322

unplanned 4, 87-89, 126, 323, 324

documentation 27, 28-29, 47, 62, 80, 81, 83, 85, 94, 95, 115, 128, 130, 147, 162, 178

dodging 8, 318, 319

dots per inch (dpi) 7-10

double meter boards See meter boards
329

Douglas-fir 21, 22, 45-47

downloading 8, 10

downward trend 142, 159

dpi See dots per inch 

early seral See seral status

ecological status See seral status

effectiveness 3, 48

electronic storage card 7-10

elk habitat 27

elk sedge 42, 43, 91, 93

emphasizing the topic 54, 56-57, 305, 313, 314-315

enlargment of images 10, 12-13, 14-15, 16-17, 92, 96, 105-106, 318, 319

equipment 6, 30, 85, 92, 119

erosion 43, 44, 49, 61, 78, 90, 143

exposure 22, 23, 34, 36, 39, 137, 309, 313, 318, 319

fade out 53, 82, 84, 134

fenceposts 2, 4, 28, 30, 50, 60, 62, 78, 79, 81, 83, 84, 95-96, 112, 119, 125, 130, 

137, 323

field book 62, 63

field forms 5, 29, 48, 51, 57, 80, 82-83, 85, 87-89, 91, 97, 100, 102-103, 114-115,

117, 120, 122-123, 126, 128-134, 139-140, 147-151, 162-168, 171-172,

185-189

filing systems 3, 6, 10, 20, 84, 297, 298

film 3, 6, 9, 29, 34, 52

black-and-white 8-9, 31, 33, 64, 65, 82, 86, 126, 318, 319

camera 6-8, 34

choice 29, 126

color negative 8-9, 21, 82, 126, 318, 319

color slides 6, 8-10, 64, 66, 86, 126, 318, 319

graininess 7-8, 21, 130

ISO rating 7-8, 130

speed 7-8

filters 9, 39 

fire 

effects 4, 32, 43, 45, 65, 126, 138, 323, 324

fuel 22, 41

hazard 22

prescribed 45, 65, 125

suppression 45

flood 4, 44, 90, 126

flood plain 48, 64

focal length See cameras, focal length

focus 

camera See cameras, focusing

ring 50, 52-53, 103

forage production 43

forage rating guides See livestock, forage rating guides

forest residues 21, 22, 23
330

forests 21, 22, 42, 46, 52, 65, 85-89, 94, 300, 302, 314, 318, 321-322

formats See cameras, format

frequency of species 138, 139

f-stops See cameras, f-stops

fuel loadings 21, 22, 23, 41, 87, 89

gaps 46

general photographs 2, 5, 22, 36-37, 48, 49, 50, 83, 87-89, 117, 131, 133, 148, 150,

163, 165, 171, 180, 182, 311-315, 318, 321-322, 324

geographic location 84

graininess See film, graininess

grasses 24

gravel 131-133, 134, 140, 144

grazing

effects of 38-39, 166, 181-183

seasons 40, 48-49, 126

systems 40, 48-49, 126

Great Plains 32

green fescue 32

grids 10, 45, 50, 51, 96, 100, 185

adjusting 50, 96, 99-100, 103, 105-106, 107-108, 121, 122, 185

analyzing 97-101, 103, 104, 106, 111-113, 118-119, 120-121, 122,

134, 170, 173

concept 96

confidence intervals 109-110

described 104, 106, 120

intersects 50, 51, 96, 101-102, 105, 106, 108, 109, 111, 112, 121, 122-123,

170, 173

object locations 18-19, 20, 112

observer variability 108-110

orientation 105, 108, 112, 170

outlines 50, 96, 97-99, 101, 104, 105, 118-119, 122, 170, 173

precision 96, 99, 103, 105, 107-108, 112

shrub analysis 50, 113, 118-119, 122

significant differences 108-109, 110

regressions 111

ground cover 86, 131-133, 137, 140, 144, 148-149, 152, 155

ground vegetation 43, 45, 47, 58-59, 79, 81, 91-93, 117-119, 131-132, 148-149, 

163-164, 166, 180-182

growth 41, 43, 48, 59, 61, 87-89, 112, 113, 118, 321-325

halo effect 313

hand lens 103

harvester ants 47

height-weight curves 24, 25

hemlock 21, 22

herbage

production 24, 43, 174, 325

stubble 25, 48, 180-183

utilization 21, 24, 25, 180-183
331

“high color” 8

historic 30-32, 34

homogeneous 124, 176

horizon 39, 53, 304, 306-310

horizon visibility 39, 316

hot shoe 6

ice floods 38, 44, 61

Idaho 

state of 21, 41, 43, 45, 47

fescue 324

identifying 20, 28, 36, 45, 47, 48, 53, 81, 82-83, 84, 86, 92, 96, 97-98, 104-105, 

117-119, 120, 130, 131-133, 134, 136, 146, 148-150, 161, 163-165,

179, 180-182

image quality 6-8, 10, 34

images 6-8, 10, 36, 84, 92, 119, 319

implementation 3

improvement 4, 48 

instructions 21, 30, 62, 81

intervening objects 34, 60, 61

invaders 140, 141, 160

ISO rating 7, 8, 130

jumping cholla 41

juniper See western juniper

Kentucky bluegrass 40, 78, 79, 90, 179

key areas 48, 79

landscapes 1-2, 5-6, 26, 27, 30, 31, 39, 48-49, 83

features 31, 33-34, 39

photographs 26, 27, 31, 34, 35, 83, 87-89, 306-310, 311, 313, 315

laptop computers 8-9

LCD See liquid crystal display 

Lehman lovegrass 41

lenses 7, 10

9-mm digital 7

13-mm digital 6, 10

28-mm 7, 47

35-mm 5, 10, 11, 14-17, 26, 50, 54, 57, 82, 95-96, 134, 169, 314-315

50-mm 1, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12-19, 21, 27, 34, 36, 47, 50, 54, 56, 58-59, 82, 95, 

103, 134, 314-315

70-mm 1, 5, 10, 11, 14-17, 26, 27, 315 

128-mm 10, 34

fisheye 46, 47

f-stops See cameras, f-stops

panoramic 34, 35

quality 7

speed 7

telephoto 5, 10, 11, 14-17, 26, 27, 39, 315
332

lenses (continued)

wide angle 5, 10, 11, 12-17, 26, 46, 54, 57, 82, 95-96, 134, 169, 314-315

zoom 1, 7, 10, 27

level 36, 166, 169, 170, 292

light conditions 9, 23, 30, 32, 34, 313, 316-318, 320

backlight 30, 79, 313, 316-317

before 10 and after 3, 313, 316

cloud layer 5, 9, 43, 47

front light 316-317

forests 23

halo effect 313, 316

highlight 313, 316

overcast 9, 21, 22, 43, 47, 318-320

shadows 9, 30, 43, 47, 166, 313, 318-320

line intercept 132, 137-138, 139, 144, 149, 151, 153, 155-156, 159, 160-161, 

163-164, 167

liquid crystal display (LCD) 6

litter 131-132, 134, 140, 144, 148-149, 155, 168

livestock 5, 24, 90, 124

distribution 27, 39, 79, 125, 174, 176

forage rating guides 91, 140, 141-143, 159, 324

grazing 4-5, 24, 32, 39, 40, 43, 48-49, 55, 78, 81, 90, 92, 113, 125, 126, 

174, 176

impacts 39, 40, 49, 61, 78, 79, 90, 92, 125, 174

locating objects 11, 18-19, 20, 31, 65, 78, 80, 81, 112, 124, 321-322

lodgepole pine 45, 80, 85-89

logging 21, 22, 23, 27, 42, 45, 50, 52, 65, 79, 81, 91-93, 125, 138, 321-322

lupine 43

magnetic heading 29, 49, 62, 80, 81, 115, 129, 147, 162, 178

magnetic north 62, 81, 120

maps 3-4, 27, 28-29, 47, 48-49, 60, 62, 64, 78, 80, 81, 85, 113, 114-115, 120, 126, 

127-129, 136, 147, 162, 177-178

marking locations 2, 4, 27, 30, 42, 50, 60, 64, 81, 112, 120

matching 99-101, 105, 121

meadows 27, 39-40, 48, 51, 54, 58-59, 78, 83, 92, 115, 117-119, 176, 180-182, 311

measuring distances 4-5, 11, 12-15, 28, 29, 41, 47, 50, 54, 56-57, 60, 80, 81-82, 95,

96, 107, 112, 116, 120, 126, 128-129, 130

megabytes (MB) 10

megapixels 7, 8, 10, 130

memory cards 7, 9-10

mesquite 41

metal detectors 4, 30, 60, 81, 82, 92, 120, 125, 130, 175, 323

meter boards 5, 36, 40, 42-43, 49, 50, 51, 52-53, 56, 57, 58-59, 60-62, 84-85, 91,

92, 93, 98-101, 117-119, 131, 133-134, 148, 150, 163,165, 169, 170

close-up photography 43, 54, 58-59, 84, 91, 93, 116-119, 118

double 54, 55, 103, 112, 118

measurement 11, 12-19, 50, 96, 98-101, 104, 105, 107, 121
meter boards (continued)

not used 36, 48, 84, 86, 87-89, 95, 169, 323

as a percentage of photo height 50, 96, 103, 107

placement at topic 36, 37, 40, 49, 50, 60, 78, 90, 92, 97, 113, 116-119, 169, 

170, 323

photo points 36, 40, 60, 90-91, 97, 125, 273, 323

monitoring 1, 27, 41, 48, 60, 78

area 28-29, 48, 49, 78, 79, 83, 92, 114-115, 120, 126, 128-129, 176, 

177-178

date 81, 106

effectiveness 3, 48, 125

how 4, 28-29, 49, 60, 78, 80, 82-83, 92, 114-116, 128-129, 170-178

implementation 3

objectives 3, 48, 60, 78, 79, 86, 92, 107, 112-113, 120, 124-125, 176

site 4, 27-28, 78, 79

systems 27-29, 49, 60, 79, 80, 83, 86, 92, 104, 113, 120, 136

validation 3

what 4, 48, 79, 80, 92, 104

when 4, 40, 49, 81

where 3, 48, 78, 79, 92

why 3, 48, 79, 92

mountain pine beetle 84, 85, 86, 87-89

negatives 82, 84, 92, 106, 119

nest activities 39

nested frequency 124, 144

notes See descriptions

objects

position 11, 12-19, 20, 112

size 12-15

objectives 3-4, 5

observer variability 36, 41, 47, 106, 108, 109-110, 135

confidence intervals 108, 109-110

grid analysis 108, 109-110

orientation of grids 51, 108

outlining 108

obstructions 34, 60, 61

“one-SAT” 305, 306-309, 313

“one-side, one-angle, one-third” 305, 306-313

Oregon 27, 31, 34, 38, 43, 48, 57, 78, 86

orientation

camera 29-30, 33, 36, 37, 39, 50, 52-53, 55, 58-59, 64, 65, 86, 103, 113, 

118, 134, 179, 273, 305

grid 107-108, 170

vertical 94, 170-173

osprey 2, 27, 39

other people 4, 20, 28, 62, 78, 81, 83

333
outlines 11, 12-19, 50, 96, 97-99, 101, 103, 104, 105-106, 108, 116-119, 121, 122,

170, 173, 185

confidence intervals 109-110

observer variability 108-110

precision 96, 105, 108, 121

techniques 98, 101, 104, 105

output devices 8

overcast 5, 9, 21-23, 43, 47, 318-320

overhead photographs 41, 46, 94, 170-173

overlap 36, 37, 41, 86

overlay 12-19, 50, 104, 105-106, 118-119, 122

overstory removal See logging

palatable increasers 140, 141, 160

panoramic 34, 35, 36, 86

paper color 53, 82, 84, 119, 134, 136, 179, 185

pattern 305, 311, 313

percentage of change 105

percentage of utilization 24, 25, 133, 140, 150, 157, 165, 168

periphery 105, 108

permanently marking 2, 4, 27, 30, 41, 42, 50, 81-82, 95-96, 112, 321-322, 323

perspective 313, 314-315

phenological development 40, 43, 81, 113, 130, 325

photography 1-2 12, 14, 16, 21, 36, 37, 40-42, 47-49, 50, 51-53, 64, 65, 78,

82-84, 87-89, 97, 117, 120, 130, 131, 148, 150, 171, 180, 182,

311, 314, 318, 321-322, 324

background 305

“before 10 and after 3” 313

close-up 2, 24, 25, 41, 47, 49, 54, 58-59, 84, 91, 93, 95, 117-119, 121, 124, 

131-133, 148-149, 163-164, 176, 180-182, 320, 325

comparison 2, 21, 22, 23-24, 25

composition 305, 313, 314

foreground 305

identification 20, 36, 41, 45, 47, 48, 53, 57, 82, 83, 84, 117-119, 131-133,

148-150, 180-182

landscape 1, 2, 26, 30, 31, 34, 35, 37, 48, 60, 304-311, 313, 315-317

“one-SAT” 305, 306-309, 313

“one-side, one-angle, one-third” 305, 306-313

orientation 29, 31, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42, 50, 52-53, 59, 62, 64, 65, 86, 87-89,

96, 103, 113, 116, 118, 134, 179, 273, 305

overexposed 319

overhead 41, 46, 94, 170-173

panoramic 34, 35, 36, 37

pattern 305, 311, 313

plots 4, 45, 47, 124, 131-132, 148-149, 163-164, 180-181

points 2, 3-4, 5, 27, 28, 29, 41, 42, 45, 47, 49, 60, 62, 63, 78-84, 86, 95, 96, 

113, 115-116, 120, 126, 273, 323

portrait 304-306

relocation 28, 31, 32, 33-34, 48, 49, 60, 62-65, 95-96, 125, 321-322, 323

remote 2, 6, 38, 39

334
photography (continued)

repeat 2, 9-10, 27, 29, 30, 31, 34, 36, 38, 40-44 , 48-49, 51-52, 59-62, 65,

79, 81-82, 86, 87-93, 96, 98, 103, 105-106, 112, 134, 160, 321-322,

324-325

rephotograph See repeat

sampling 78, 79

scale 305, 313-315

time lapse 38-39

topics See topics

underexposed 309, 319

pileated woodpecker 38

pinegrass 171, 321-322

pixels 7-8, 10 

planned disturbances 30, 41, 42, 65, 125, 130, 321-322

plastic sheet 10, 12-17, 96, 103, 104, 105, 118-119, 122, 170, 173

plot frames 5, 41, 45, 47, 54, 59, 131-132, 148-149, 163-164

point-and-shoot cameras 7

Pole Camp 27, 37, 44, 48-49, 51, 54, 61, 63, 64, 78-80, 81, 83, 84, 90, 92, 97-98,

103, 111, 112, 114, 117, 122

ponderosa pine 21, 42-43, 45, 52, 60, 65, 79, 81, 84, 91, 93-94, 95, 171-172, 314,

318, 321-322

pine-elk sedge 50, 53, 84, 91, 93

pine-pinegrass 42-43, 45, 60, 65, 79, 321-322

potential natural vegetation (PNV) 138, 142, 160

precise replacement 27, 41, 49, 50, 52, 53, 59, 88, 96

fit of grids 96, 103, 105

measurement 102, 105

replication 50

precision 96, 103, 105-106, 107, 108, 112

precommercial thinning 42, 94, 125

prescribed burning 45, 126

prescribed fires 45

presentations 8

prints 8, 9, 10, 31, 34, 51, 65, 84, 96, 97, 98, 118-119, 173, 319

printers 8, 10

problems with relocation 33-34

processing 7-10

projector 8-9, 10

protocols 4, 9

public concerns 21, 26, 27

purposes 3, 32, 79, 92, 112, 124

quantitative data 4, 41

railroads 33-34

randomly selected 144-146

range condition guides See livestock, forage rating guides

range trend 124, 135, 138

analysis 124, 141

rangelands 32

335
recreational impacts 27

record 47, 106

reduction of images 10-11, 12-17, 92, 100, 105

reference points 31, 50, 65, 81, 92, 95, 321-322, 323 See also orientation

regressions 41, 111, 112 

rejection 34

relocation 41, 51, 63, 64, 78

exact 49-50, 52-53, 59, 95-96, 125

photographs 28, 31, 48, 52, 59, 63, 64, 65, 86, 95-96

problems 33, 34, 44, 59, 62, 65, 86, 321-322

remote photography 2, 38

reorientation See orientation

repeat photography See photography, repeat

repeatable techniques 3, 4, 31, 36, 52, 58, 59, 65, 81, 113, 114-115, 321-322

residues 21-23

resolution 7-9

rest-rotation 40, 48, 90, 113

riparian 4, 37, 39, 41, 45, 48, 49, 58-59, 61, 62, 78-79, 97-99, 117-119, 180-182,

311, 315

riparian shrubs 4, 61, 79, 97-99, 117-119

Robel pole 24, 124, 134, 174, 175, 180-183

rock 131-133, 134, 144

root crown 131-133, 134, 140, 142, 144, 146

rule of thirds 305, 306

sagebrush 31, 45, 57

scale 305, 313-315

scanning 47

scheduling 40, 42, 51-52, 81, 93, 324

searching for photo points 62 

season of year 4-5, 29-30, 32, 34, 40, 43, 48-49, 79, 81, 90, 112, 125, 130, 325

sedges 40, 78, 79

seed heads 325

sensitive areas 48, 79, 125

seral status 

early 142

mid 143

potential natural vegetation (PNV) 138, 142, 160

shadows 5, 9, 30, 43, 47, 166, 313, 318-320

shadscale 41

shrubs 40, 41, 48, 54, 55, 61, 78, 79, 97-99, 104, 106, 112, 117-119

change 48, 61, 112-113, 118, 120

profiles 98-99, 101-102, 104, 105, 108-112, 116-119, 120, 122

sampling 61, 80, 92, 98-99, 101-102, 103, 112, 114-115, 117-119, 120-121

utilization 79, 112

slides 8-10, 39, 84

Sierra mixed conifer 21

significance 112, 121, 144, 158, 172, 174, 183 See also confidence interval

single lens reflex (SLR) 6-7

336
sites (area) 3, 27, 29, 41, 79

describing 80, 83-85, 114, 126, 128, 147, 171, 177-178

homogeneity 124, 126

mapping 3, 27, 28-29, 47, 49, 78, 80, 85, 114-115, 126-129, 147, 162

177-178

selecting 4, 79, 92, 113, 124, 176

site-specific 3, 41

size of photographs 10, 11, 12-13, 54-55, 103

size classes 21, 22, 23

size control boards See meter boards 

slash 21, 22

slide projectors 8

slides 8, 10, 92, 119, 134

slopes 126

soil 3, 128, 131-133, 134

change 41, 79, 124

characteristics 126

compaction 126

depth 82

disturbance 43, 44, 93, 124, 322

sensitivity 125

surface 131-132, 137, 140, 148-149, 152, 155, 157, 163-165, 168, 322

sloppy work 53

SLR See single lens reflex 

species, frequency of 138, 139

specific dates 40, 49

stability 4, 48

stakes 2, 4, 27, 30, 49, 50, 60, 81-82, 125, 175, 321-324

stand structure 22, 42, 45, 52, 79, 81, 87-89, 92, 171, 314, 321-322, 324

standard deviations 109-110, 172, 183

standard errors 109-110, 172, 183

statistical analysis 108, 109-110, 144, 172, 183

stereo photos 124, 131-132, 134, 135, 136

storage cards 7, 9-10

streams 41, 44, 49, 61, 81, 90, 112, 125, 130

stream flows 5

streambanks 41, 43, 44, 48, 78, 80, 83, 90

stability 44, 49, 61, 78, 90, 92

strobe light 6

stubble heights 4, 24-25, 40, 48, 59, 174, 180-183

succession 32, 42, 52, 93, 142, 159, 321-322

summary 102, 133, 139-140, 152-155, 167-168, 183

Sun 9, 36, 39, 43, 47, 52, 313, 316-320

super 8-mm camera 38

telephoto lenses See lenses, telephoto

thinning slash 21, 22, 45

three-dimension effect 313, 316, 317

three exposures 23, 309, 319

three-step method 41, 124, 160

337
thresholds 143

time-lapse photography 38-39

timers 38-39

time(s) 

of day 5, 34, 39, 313

interval 30, 40, 42-43, 81, 87-90

by year 42-43, 81, 87-90

of year 4, 30, 40, 42, 43, 81, 90, 112, 113

tones 6, 9 

topics 3, 6, 41, 50, 60, 78, 86, 89-92, 104, 108

description of 2, 41, 54, 82, 84, 87-89, 92, 94, 95, 108, 112

identifying 40, 44, 90, 92, 96 

emphasis of 54, 56-57, 59, 60, 305, 314-315

photography 21-23, 43, 54, 59, 90, 95-96

selecting 78, 92, 104, 118-119, 125, 315

trail routes 33

transects 41, 47, 81, 115, 117-119, 120, 124, 126, 128-129, 130, 131-133, 145, 

147-150, 162-165, 171-172, 178-182

travel 

log books 33 

routes 33

treatments 4, 95, 125

tree cover 41, 46, 47, 94, 95, 137, 170-173

trend interpretation 142-143

triangulation 31, 33, 49, 60, 62, 64, 65, 80, 321-323

tripods 6, 23, 86

true heading 29, 62, 81, 120

unattended camera 38-39

underexposure 309, 319

unpalatable increasers 140, 141, 159-160

unplanned disturbances 126

upward trend 125, 142, 159

utilization 24, 25, 27, 40, 51, 79, 92, 112, 120, 125, 133, 138, 140, 174, 180-183

validation 3

vegetation 3, 27, 39, 41, 43, 60, 64, 79

aquatic sedge 40, 90

annual grass 24

big sagebrush-wheatgrass 45, 57, 131-133, 148-150, 163-165

bitterbrush 45, 93, 131-133, 148-150, 163-165, 324

bluebunch wheatgrass 45, 57, 131-133, 148-150, 163-165, 324-325

bunchgrass 43, 45, 47, 131-133, 148-150, 163-165, 324-325

burroweed 41

California oatgrass 180-181

chaparral 41

crested wheatgrass 41

cryptogams 45, 131-133, 134, 140, 144, 148-150, 163-165

Douglas-fir 21, 22, 45-47

grass-sedge 24, 43, 93

338
vegetation (continued)

Great Plains 32 

green fescue 32

ground vegetation 43, 47, 58-59, 79, 81, 91, 92, 166

hemlock 21, 22

jumping cholla 41

Kentucky bluegrass 40, 78, 79, 90, 179

Lehman lovegrass 41

lodgepole pine 45, 80, 85-89

meadow 27, 39, 40, 48, 51, 54, 58-59, 78, 83, 92, 115, 117-119, 176,

180-182, 311

pinegrass, 171, 321-322

ponderosa pine 42-43, 45, 52, 60, 65, 79, 81, 84, 91, 93-95, 171-172, 314,

318, 321-322

rangeland 32

riparian 4, 37, 39, 41, 45, 48, 49, 58-59, 61, 62, 78-79, 97-99, 117-119,

180-182, 311, 315

riparian shrubs 4, 40, 79, 97-99, 117-119

sagebrush 31, 45, 57

sedge 25, 40, 44, 78, 79, 97, 118-119, 179, 180-182

shadscale 41

shrubs 40, 41, 48, 54, 55, 61, 78, 79, 97-99, 104, 106, 109-111, 112, 

116-123, 131-133, 139-140, 148-150, 153, 155-156, 324

Sierra mixed conifer 21

velvet mesquite 41 

water sedge 25

western juniper 45, 323, 324

willow 40, 48, 51, 55, 61, 79, 92, 98-102, 104, 109-111, 117-119, 122-123

vertical orientation 46, 94, 166, 170-173

video 38, 39

viewfinders 6

visibility 5, 27, 81

visual observation 174, 175-176, 180-183

visual quality objectives 27

water sedge 25

weather 5, 9, 27, 32-33, 34, 41, 125, 304

western juniper 45, 323, 324

wheeler’s bluegrass 43, 91

wheatgrass 45

wide angle lenses See lenses, wide angle 

wild fires 324

wildlife 32, 113, 125, 138

willow 40, 48, 51, 55, 61, 79, 92, 98-102, 104, 109-111, 117-119, 122-123

witness sites 2, 28, 30, 37, 41, 64, 80, 81, 83, 113, 120, 130, 146

year 4, 40, 42-43, 45, 51

zoom lenses See lenses, zoom

339
Metric and English

Conversions

When you know: Multiply by: To find:

Millimeters (mm) 0.04 Inches

Centimeters (cm) 0.39 Inches

Decimeters (dm) 3.9 Inches

Inches (in) 2.54 Centimeters

Meters (m) 3.28 Feet

Feet (ft) 0.3 Meters

Square meters (m2) 10.76 Square feet

Square feet (ft2) 0.09 Square meters

Meters (m) 1.09 Yards

Kilometers (km) 0.62 Miles

Miles (mi) 1.61 Kilometers

Hectares (ha) 2.47 Acres

Acres 0.4 Hectares

Kilograms per hectare (kg/ha) 0.89 Pounds per acre

Pounds per acre (lb/acre) 1.12 Kilograms per hectare

Grams (g) 0.035 Ounces

Ounces (oz) 28.35 Grams

Celsius (°C) (1.8 × °C) + 32 Fahrenheit

Fahrenheit (°F) 0.55(°F - 32) Celsius

340
The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle

of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of

wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation

with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests

and National Grass l a n d s , it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly

greater service to a growing Nation.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs

and activities on the basis of race, c o l o r, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability,

political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases

apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact

U S D A’s TA R G E T Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and T D D ) .

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights,

Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC

20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity

provider and employer.

Pacific Northwest Research Station

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw

Telephone (503) 808-2592

Publication requests (503) 808-2138

FAX (503) 808-2130

E-mail desmith@fs.fed.us

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Pacific Northwest Research Station

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Pacific Northwest Research Station

333 S.W. First Avenue

P.O. Box 3890

Portland, OR 97208-3890

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300