Comparison and Validation of Three Versions of a Forest Wind Risk Model
Environmental Modelling & Software 68 (2015) 27e41 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Environmental Modelling & Software journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envsoft Comparison and validation of three versions of a forest wind risk model * Sophie A. Hale a, Barry Gardiner a, b, c, , Andrew Peace a, Bruce Nicoll a, Philip Taylor a, d, Stefania Pizzirani a, e a Forest Research, Northern Research Station, Roslin, EH25 9SY, Scotland, UK b INRA, UMR 1391 ISPA, F-33140, Villenave d'Ornon, France c Bordeaux Sciences Agro, UMR 1391 ISPA, F-33170, Gradignan, France d Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bush Estate, Penicuik, EH26 0QB, Scotland, UK e Scion, Te Papa Tipu Innovation Park, 49 Sala Street, Rotorua 3010, Private Bag 3020, Rotorua, 3046, New Zealand article info abstract Article history: Predicting the probability of wind damage in both natural and managed forests is important for un- Received 14 July 2014 derstanding forest ecosystem functioning, the environmental impact of storms and for forest risk Received in revised form management. We undertook a thorough validation of three versions of the hybrid-mechanistic wind risk 24 January 2015 model, ForestGALES, and a statistical logistic regression model, against observed damage in a Scottish Accepted 26 January 2015 upland conifer forest following a major storm. Statistical analysis demonstrated that increasing tree Available online height and local wind speed during the storm were the main factors associated with increased damage This paper is dedicated to the memory of levels. All models provided acceptable discrimination between damaged and undamaged forest stands Mike Raupach whose work on aerodynamic but there were trade-offs between the accuracy of the mechanistic models and model bias.
[Show full text]