Home > Education > Continuing Education
Northern Journal of Applied Forestry Online Quiz
Derived from the 2012 March Northern Journal of Applied Forestry
Cost: $25 members      $35 nonmembers
Each time the quiz is taken, a fee will be required.

The Northern Journal of Applied Forestry Quiz is approved for 2.5 continuing forestry education (CFE) credit hour in Category 1-CF by the Society of American Foresters. Successful completion of the self-assessment, defined as a cumulative score of at least 70%, is required to earn CFE credit. CFE approval is valid for one year from the issue date of publication, and participants may submit the quiz at any time during that period.

Please provide the following information and select one answer for each question. If you do not wish to pay by credit card, you may complete the quiz by printing the PDF version, and mailing it and the fee to: SAF, 5400 Grosvenor Lane, Bethesda, MD 20814 ATTN: Pat Cillay.
Contact Information
First Name:
Last Name:
Street Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email:
SAF Certified Forester: Yes    No
SAF Member: Yes    No
Payment Information
Amount Due: $25
Payment Method:  American Express
 MasterCard
 Visa
 Discover
Credit Card Number:
CVV Code: What's this?
Expiration Date: /
1. According to the article by Li et al., which of the following is NOT a reason why taper equations can be more useful than standard volume equations?
a) Taper equations can be used to estimate merchantable volume based on any specification.
b) Taper equations can be localized.
c) Taper equations provide model flexibility, but are largely inaccurate.
2. The Kozak (2004) taper equation is an example of what type of taper equation?
a) Segmented.
b) Continuous.
c) Multi-dimensional.
3. VanderSchaaf suggests that in general the greatest advantage of a mixed-effects height-diameter model relative to a fixed-effects height-diameter model is:
a) An ability to account for site-specific conditions when fitting models.
b) An ability to fit model statistics and create a population average height-diameter equation.
c) An ability to account for site-specific conditions through model calibration for trees located on sites other than those used in model fitting.
4. In practice, the random effects of a particular plot/stand have sampling distributions and therefore the predicted values will depend on the particular trees used to calibrate the equation. According to VanderSchaaf, it will likely be best to select:
a) Trees across the range of observed diameters.
b) Trees randomly selected on the plot.
c) Trees with larger diameters, since large trees have more effect on total stand volume.
5. In the study by Kolka et al., only summer-harvested sites had greater bulk densities than unharvested sites for the 0-10 cm soil profile when:
a) Comparing toeslope locations.
b) Comparing backslope locations.
c) Comparing summit locations.
6. The USDA Forest Service has a compaction guideline that indicates that greater than 15% compaction is detrimental to forest sustainability. In the Kolka et al. study, which combination of soil and harvest season scenarios led to greater than 15% increases in bulk density?
a) Harvests in summer for both surface and subsurface coarse-textured soils.
b) Harvests in winter for both fine- and coarse-textured surface soils.
c) Harvests in summer for both fine- and coarse-textured surface soils.
7. From the comparison of aboveground dry-biomass estimators, Westfall found which method provided the largest aboveground biomass (AGB) estimates when applied to forest inventory data from New York?
a) CAN
b) CR
c) NE
8. The CR method of estimating AGB uses which biomass component as the basis for prediction of the other components?
a) Merchantable stem.
b) Stump.
c) Limbs/top.
9. In the Leefers and Subedi study FIA was viewed as the reference dataset given its:
a) Overwhelming number of plots in the dataset.
b) Rigorous data collection procedures at the plot level.
c) Both a) and b).
10. It is important for users of forest information to be familiar with the inherent accuracies associated with it. When the IFMAP, OI and FSVeg databases were triangulated Leefers and Subedi found that overall forest type classification accuracy was:
a) About 50%, but with few forest types having consistently high UAs.
b) Only a little over 50%, but with some forest types having consistently high UAs.
c) Well over 50% with all forest types having consistently high UAs.