Difference between revisions of "LMS"
SeanGordon (Talk | contribs) m (→Scope of the system) |
Ola Eriksson (Talk | contribs) |
||
| (16 intermediate revisions by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Decision support system]] | [[Category:Decision support system]] | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:USA DSS]] | [[Category:USA DSS]] | ||
| Line 20: | Line 19: | ||
=== System origin === | === System origin === | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the late 1980s, the state government of Washington asked Professor Chad Oliver for help in managing their forests for multiple values because of intense political conflicts between timber and wildlife advocates. It did not begin as a software project but rather as an effort to organize theory and information relevant to the problem. The complexity of information involved led toward the development of a computerized DSS. Support from a local representative to the national government helped secure financing from the US Forest Service, and an initial version was released publicly in 1997. | ||
=== Support for specific issues === | === Support for specific issues === | ||
| Line 33: | Line 34: | ||
* Conservation | * Conservation | ||
* Restoration | * Restoration | ||
| + | * Carbon sequestration | ||
* Policy /intervention alternatives | * Policy /intervention alternatives | ||
| Line 73: | Line 75: | ||
=== Social models === | === Social models === | ||
| + | LMS has the ability to take harvest cost and timber price information to calculate economic returns. | ||
== Decision Support == | == Decision Support == | ||
| Line 79: | Line 82: | ||
[Define what is available for the manager to intervene in the forest: time of harvest, plantations, thinnings, reconversions...Existence of prescription writer, simple enumeration of all possibilities, scenario simulation , etc.] | [Define what is available for the manager to intervene in the forest: time of harvest, plantations, thinnings, reconversions...Existence of prescription writer, simple enumeration of all possibilities, scenario simulation , etc.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Management interventions are those provided by the FVS component system, including harvests, thinnings, prunings, site preparation, planting, prescribed fire, fuel treatments, etc. Any number of activities can be scheduled at any time during a simulation. Activities may be scheduled to occur in a particular year, or they may be scheduled to occur when a specific condition is met. For example, a harvest could be scheduled for 2035 and a planting scheduled for 2037, or the harvest could be scheduled to occur when the stand basal area exceeds 100 and the planting could be scheduled to occur two years later. Management can be as simple or complex as the user desires. Simulations are easily edited and re-run to gain knowledge of a range of possible scenarios. | ||
=== Typical temporal scale of application === | === Typical temporal scale of application === | ||
| − | + | Generally used for longer-term strategic decisions, but also sometimes used for near-term tactical decisions. The simulation component, FVS, typically uses 10 year intervals, but the user can specify the number of years in each cycle, and can include up to 40 total intervals in a simulation. | |
=== Types of decisions supported === | === Types of decisions supported === | ||
| Line 95: | Line 100: | ||
=== Types of outputs === | === Types of outputs === | ||
| − | * | + | * 20 standard tables: standing and/or harvested volume, inventors wind hazard, habitat suitability for different species, costs and returns and other features. |
| − | + | * Visualizations of conditions via companion programs: landscape (Envision) and stand (SVS) | |
| − | + | ||
=== Spatial analysis capabilities === | === Spatial analysis capabilities === | ||
| + | LMS does not perform any spatial analyses itself, however, it does include a landscape visualization component (Envision). Envision requires a stand boundaries polygon layer (in ESRI shapefile format) and a raster digital elevation layer (in PCPlans Binary DTM format). | ||
=== Abilities to address interdisciplinary, multi-scaled, and political issues === | === Abilities to address interdisciplinary, multi-scaled, and political issues === | ||
| Line 112: | Line 117: | ||
=== System requirements === | === System requirements === | ||
| − | Operating systems: Windows2000, WindowsXP | + | Operating systems: Windows2000, WindowsXP, Windows Vista |
Other software needed: Includes FVS growth models, and WinSVS & Envision visualization systems. | Other software needed: Includes FVS growth models, and WinSVS & Envision visualization systems. | ||
| Line 121: | Line 126: | ||
[Describe the basic architecture of the system in software and hardware. Desktop client-server, web based, as well as the integration with available systems.Basic data flow, focusing on retrieval of required input and propagation and implementations of decisions. Mention its modular and scalability capabilities.] | [Describe the basic architecture of the system in software and hardware. Desktop client-server, web based, as well as the integration with available systems.Basic data flow, focusing on retrieval of required input and propagation and implementations of decisions. Mention its modular and scalability capabilities.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | LMS is a Microsoft Windows program written in the Python programming language. It connects to its companion programs via <pre style="color:red">???</pre>. Basic information flow is described in McCarter et al. (1998). | ||
=== Usage === | === Usage === | ||
| − | + | LMS has been used by governmental agencies at the state and federal levels (and also by private landowners & consulting foresters?). A number of cases are available on the website: | |
| − | + | * Chernobyl | |
| − | + | * Indian Island - DoD, NDCEE | |
| − | + | * Maine | |
| + | * Mid Forest Lodge, MI | ||
| + | * Pack Forest, WA | ||
| + | * San Carlos Apache, AZ | ||
| + | * Satsop, WA | ||
| + | * Solduc, WA | ||
=== Computational limitations === | === Computational limitations === | ||
[Describe the system limitations: e.g. number of management units, number of vehicles, time horizon.] | [Describe the system limitations: e.g. number of management units, number of vehicles, time horizon.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | The FVS growth simulation subcomponent is limited to projecting 40 periods. | ||
=== User interface === | === User interface === | ||
| − | User interface quality: | + | User interface quality: Designed for use by non-experts |
| − | Complexity of system / user interface: | + | Complexity of system / user interface: Medium - the underlying tools are fairly complex, but LMS simplifies their use by providing a common interface and connections between them. |
=== Documentation and support === | === Documentation and support === | ||
| Line 164: | Line 178: | ||
Website: http://lms.cfr.washington.edu/ | Website: http://lms.cfr.washington.edu/ | ||
| + | * McCarter, J.B., J.S. Wilson, P.J. Baker, J.L. Moffett, and C.D. Oliver. 1998. Landscape management through integration of existing tools and emerging technologies. Journal of Forestry. June 1998:17-23. | ||
* Marzluff, J. M., J. J. Millspaugh, K. R. Ceder, C. D. Oliver, J. Whithey, J. B. McCarter, C. L. Mason, and J. Comnick. 2002. Modeling changes in wildlife habitat and timber revenues in response forest management. Forest Science 48:191-202. | * Marzluff, J. M., J. J. Millspaugh, K. R. Ceder, C. D. Oliver, J. Whithey, J. B. McCarter, C. L. Mason, and J. Comnick. 2002. Modeling changes in wildlife habitat and timber revenues in response forest management. Forest Science 48:191-202. | ||
| − | |||
*Comnick, J.M. 2002. Development and Application of a Decision Support Tool to Analyze Alternatives for Landscapes Composed of Multiple Ownerships. College of Forest Resources. Seattle, WA : University of Washington. | *Comnick, J.M. 2002. Development and Application of a Decision Support Tool to Analyze Alternatives for Landscapes Composed of Multiple Ownerships. College of Forest Resources. Seattle, WA : University of Washington. | ||
| + | * Ceder, K.R.; Marzluff, J.M. 2002. Linking tools of forest and wildlife managers: wildlife habitat evaluation using the landscape management system. In: Crookston, N.L.; Havis, R.N., eds. Second Forest Vegetation Simulator Conference. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station: 200-208. | ||
| + | * Courtmanche, J. 2002. LMS Software: Changing the Face of Forest Management. Environment Yale. Fall: 3-7. http://environment.yale.edu/pubs/EnvironmentYale-Fall-2002/ | ||
Latest revision as of 07:05, 14 October 2012
General System description
System Name: Landscape Management System
Acronym: LMS
Brief overview
LMS coordinates the flow of information among existing growth models, computer visualization software, and analysis tools to allow the user to simulate the growth and management of stands and landscapes and to view the outcomes.
Contents
Scope of the system
The Landscape Management System (LMS) and companion tools are an evolving set of computer applications designed to facilitate the analysis and communication of landscape-scale forest management decisions. They use standard inventory information to integrate many analyses and predict complex changes in stands and landscapes over time. The Microsoft Windows computer-based system coordinates the flow of information among existing growth models, computer visualization software, and analysis tools to allow the user to simulate the growth of stands and landscapes and to view the outcomes using a "point-and-click" system. Preferred management scenarios are developed in LMS by evaluating multiple projections that can be done either at the stand or landscape level. Companion tools allow the user to develop and compare many alternatives very rapidly.
System origin
In the late 1980s, the state government of Washington asked Professor Chad Oliver for help in managing their forests for multiple values because of intense political conflicts between timber and wildlife advocates. It did not begin as a software project but rather as an effort to organize theory and information relevant to the problem. The complexity of information involved led toward the development of a computerized DSS. Support from a local representative to the national government helped secure financing from the US Forest Service, and an initial version was released publicly in 1997.
Support for specific issues
- Trade-off methods
- Risk analysis
- Landscape planning
Support for specific thematic areas of a problem type
- Silvicultural
- Certification
- Conservation
- Restoration
- Carbon sequestration
- Policy /intervention alternatives
Capability to support decision making phases
Related systems
- Forest Vegetation Simulator & ORGANON: growth models
- Stand Visualization System (SVS): stand visualization
- Envision: landscape visualization
- Toggle: facilitates the generation of treatment alternatives
Data and data models
Typical spatial extent of application
- Multi-owner forest
- Single-owner forest
- Site
Forest data input
- Forest
- Stand
- Tree
Type of information input from user (via GUI)
- Management
- Biophysical
Models
Forest models
- Silvicultural
- Fire
Social models
LMS has the ability to take harvest cost and timber price information to calculate economic returns.
Decision Support
Definition of management interventions
[Define what is available for the manager to intervene in the forest: time of harvest, plantations, thinnings, reconversions...Existence of prescription writer, simple enumeration of all possibilities, scenario simulation , etc.]
Management interventions are those provided by the FVS component system, including harvests, thinnings, prunings, site preparation, planting, prescribed fire, fuel treatments, etc. Any number of activities can be scheduled at any time during a simulation. Activities may be scheduled to occur in a particular year, or they may be scheduled to occur when a specific condition is met. For example, a harvest could be scheduled for 2035 and a planting scheduled for 2037, or the harvest could be scheduled to occur when the stand basal area exceeds 100 and the planting could be scheduled to occur two years later. Management can be as simple or complex as the user desires. Simulations are easily edited and re-run to gain knowledge of a range of possible scenarios.
Typical temporal scale of application
Generally used for longer-term strategic decisions, but also sometimes used for near-term tactical decisions. The simulation component, FVS, typically uses 10 year intervals, but the user can specify the number of years in each cycle, and can include up to 40 total intervals in a simulation.
Types of decisions supported
Decision-making processes and models
- Simulation
- Evaluation
Output
Types of outputs
- 20 standard tables: standing and/or harvested volume, inventors wind hazard, habitat suitability for different species, costs and returns and other features.
- Visualizations of conditions via companion programs: landscape (Envision) and stand (SVS)
Spatial analysis capabilities
LMS does not perform any spatial analyses itself, however, it does include a landscape visualization component (Envision). Envision requires a stand boundaries polygon layer (in ESRI shapefile format) and a raster digital elevation layer (in PCPlans Binary DTM format).
Abilities to address interdisciplinary, multi-scaled, and political issues
Produces coordinated results for decision makers at different scales: Capability to evaluate landscapes as an aggregate of stands.
Facilitates social negotiation / learning: Useful in demonstration of silvicultural alternatives for evaluation of alternatives.
System
System requirements
Operating systems: Windows2000, WindowsXP, Windows Vista
Other software needed: Includes FVS growth models, and WinSVS & Envision visualization systems.
Development status: Regularly distributed
Architecture and major DSS components
[Describe the basic architecture of the system in software and hardware. Desktop client-server, web based, as well as the integration with available systems.Basic data flow, focusing on retrieval of required input and propagation and implementations of decisions. Mention its modular and scalability capabilities.]
LMS is a Microsoft Windows program written in the Python programming language. It connects to its companion programs via???. Basic information flow is described in McCarter et al. (1998).
Usage
LMS has been used by governmental agencies at the state and federal levels (and also by private landowners & consulting foresters?). A number of cases are available on the website:
- Chernobyl
- Indian Island - DoD, NDCEE
- Maine
- Mid Forest Lodge, MI
- Pack Forest, WA
- San Carlos Apache, AZ
- Satsop, WA
- Solduc, WA
Computational limitations
[Describe the system limitations: e.g. number of management units, number of vehicles, time horizon.]
The FVS growth simulation subcomponent is limited to projecting 40 periods.
User interface
User interface quality: Designed for use by non-experts
Complexity of system / user interface: Medium - the underlying tools are fairly complex, but LMS simplifies their use by providing a common interface and connections between them.
Documentation and support
Documentation: Windows Help File, Tutorials (pdf) on-line or distributed on CD-ROM.
Training: 10+ tutorials are available online. Online discussion group. 2-3 day training sessions offered (see web site).
Installation
Prerequisite knowledge needed: Forestry knowledge useful. Microsoft Excel useful for customized analysis.
Cost: Free
Demo:
References
Cited references
External resources
Website: http://lms.cfr.washington.edu/
- McCarter, J.B., J.S. Wilson, P.J. Baker, J.L. Moffett, and C.D. Oliver. 1998. Landscape management through integration of existing tools and emerging technologies. Journal of Forestry. June 1998:17-23.
- Marzluff, J. M., J. J. Millspaugh, K. R. Ceder, C. D. Oliver, J. Whithey, J. B. McCarter, C. L. Mason, and J. Comnick. 2002. Modeling changes in wildlife habitat and timber revenues in response forest management. Forest Science 48:191-202.
- Comnick, J.M. 2002. Development and Application of a Decision Support Tool to Analyze Alternatives for Landscapes Composed of Multiple Ownerships. College of Forest Resources. Seattle, WA : University of Washington.
- Ceder, K.R.; Marzluff, J.M. 2002. Linking tools of forest and wildlife managers: wildlife habitat evaluation using the landscape management system. In: Crookston, N.L.; Havis, R.N., eds. Second Forest Vegetation Simulator Conference. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station: 200-208.
- Courtmanche, J. 2002. LMS Software: Changing the Face of Forest Management. Environment Yale. Fall: 3-7. http://environment.yale.edu/pubs/EnvironmentYale-Fall-2002/
