Measuring harvest residue accumulations at New Zealand’s steepland log-making sites Campbell Harvey School of Forestry, University of Canterbury, New Zealand *Corresponding author: campbell.harvey@pg.canterbury.ac.nz (Received for publication 5 September 2021; accepted in revised form 26 March 2022) Abstract Background: When harvesting plantation forests of Pinus radiata (D.Don) in New Zealand, large residue piles commonly accumulate on or adjacent to processing sites. While the merchantable volume that is transported to market is carefully measured, little is known of the quantity of the piled, residual material. A working knowledge of residues is becoming more important as it is not only a potentially merchantable product for the bioenergy market, but when stored in perpetuity it can present a risk of self-ignition, and specifically on steep slopes, it presents a mobilisation risk if not stored correctly. Methods: The area, bulk volume and depth of residue piles at 16 recently harvested steepland sites were measured from a wide geographic spread across New Zealand. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle imagery was used to build georeferenced photogrammetric models of residue piles (94 per cent of the studied volume). Pile area was determined from interpreting boundaries from orthophotos and volumes determined by interpolating the obscured terrain surfaces on duplicate photogrammetric models. The remaining 6 per cent of pile volume was measured with handheld GPS tracking of the perimeters and on-site estimation of average pile depth. Results: For a mean harvest area of 18.9 ha, there was a mean of 2.4 piles per harvest site, 2600 m3 bulk volume and 2900 m2 of area covered. For every hectare harvested, a bulk volume of 170 m3 is piled at the landing, or alternatively, 0.23 m3 of bulk pile volume per tonne harvested. The manual terrain interpolation methodology was tested against collecting georeferenced pre-harvest terrain surfaces, yielding an average difference of 19% across two sites and six residue piles. Conclusions: This research demonstrates the ability to investigate the bulk volume and site coverage of landing residue piles with equipment and software tools available to today’s forester. Mean values for pile area and volume are presented to reflect the current state of knowledge and can be a reference point for future initiatives. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 https://doi.org/10.33494/nzjfs522022x186x E-ISSN: 1179-5395 published on-line: 13/04/2022 © The Author(s). 2022 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Research Article Open Access to market, is accurately measured and can be reconciled against the inventory data that is typically available to forestry companies (Gordon 2005). A recent study detailed the residues left in the cutover, which showed the median volume of Course Woody Debris remaining was 88 m3/ha (Harvey & Visser 2022). However, little is known about the residues that are left behind at the landings (processing areas). The majority of plantations currently being harvested have been tended under a clearwood regime; a result of markets and common practice in the 1990s (Maclaren & Knowles 2005). In recent times there has been an increasing proportion of stands transitioned into Introduction Most plantation-grown radiata pine (Pinus radiata D.Don) is typically harvested between the ages of 25 and 35 years in New Zealand, depending on a range of factors including market conditions, site and stand management (Maclaren 1993). Currently, the average felling age is 29.5 years (MPI 2020) with an estimated average Total Recoverable Volume (TRV) of 585 m3/ha (clearwood regime) or 593 m3/ha (framing regime) across New Zealand (MPI 2015), with comparatively lower stocking levels and larger tree sizes in clearwood regimes (Maclaren 1993). The recovered volume, taken as logs Keywords: Plantation forestry, slash, harvesting operations, biomass. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 2 framing regimes across New Zealand (MPI 2020). The regime change is expected to increase final crop stocking levels and decrease average piece sizes at harvest with time. Goulding (2005) estimated that in an average stand, 85 per cent of the total standing volume will be merchantable, leaving residues that will range from about 10 per cent in good condition, well-tended stands, to over 20 per cent for untended stands on moderately steep terrain. Murphy (1982) showed that value loss at harvest due to stem breakage increases with increasing Diameter at Breast Height (DBH); one consideration when assessing alternative regimes. Breakage at any point along the stem results in a change in the objective function for maximising the stem’s value; establishing a new, lower optimum for the remaining value. Stem breakage means a logging contractor needs to manage more stem ‘pieces’ and inevitably less log volume will leave the site; however, depending on where the breakpoint is along the stem, the value loss may only be trivial (Murphy 1982). Several studies have shown that most harvested trees are broken during felling in New Zealand and that the typical break height (for the first break) is around two-thirds of the height of the stem (Fraser et al. 1997; Lambert 1996; Twaddle 1987). Breakage typically results in the generation of un-merchantable woody debris, where the final section of stem before (and after) the break cannot conform to any available log grade specifications. Managing this additional debris provides only indirect benefits to logging contractors (e.g. tidy work area, reduced hazards) and can result in considerably reduced production. Harvesting systems can be categorised as either Cut-to-length (CTL) or Whole Tree Harvesting (WTH). In CTL systems the trees are processed in the cutover where the residues are left and only the logs extracted to roadside or a landing for subsequent transportation. In WTH the stems are extracted to a landing where they are processed into logs. WTH remains the preferred harvest system on steep slopes as it offers greater productivity and value recovery by enabling a larger number of log sorts that meet both domestic and international demand. Even with the widespread adoption of mechanisation on steep terrain and expanding slope limits for CTL, WTH still remains the preferred extraction option for steep slopes (Berkett 2012; Raymond 2018; Visser 2018). Where markets for the piled material either do not exist or extraction is deemed uneconomic, or no alternative management is applied (e.g. incineration), harvesting residues resulting from WTH accumulate at landings (Figure 1). Residues are not only the branches and tops, but also stem offcuts from felling breakage and trimming (Hall 1994). The poor form of some radiata pine crops means larger diameter segments will also accumulate at the landing. However, few market opportunities have developed to make use of the convenient accumulation of residues at steepland landings (Visser et al. 2019). Large residue piles remaining after harvest not only exclude land from re-establishment, but they can also present ongoing management problems. Piles generate heat internally by decomposition and those where the rate of heat generation is greater than heat shedding (typically deep piles) are prone to self-combustion (Buggeln & Rynk 2002). Piles located on unstable, steep FIGURE 1: An example of a residue pile at an operational landing in a radiata pine plantation. terrain can mobilise and cause significant impacts on the natural and built environment (Phillips et al. 2012). While there are risks posed by storing large residue piles on steep terrain over long periods of time, the resulting accumulation at landings from WTH systems can benefit biomass extraction programmes due to easy access to the material. Over the years, ‘fit-for-purpose’ management approaches have developed to ensure that permanent residue piles pose acceptable risk while they decompose in situ (Hall 1998; Visser et al. 2018). The Best Management Practices (BMPs) applicable at a particular site principally depend on the stability of the underlying soils and values at risk (NZFOA 2020). BMPs range from piling on a natural terrain bench adjacent the landing, to end-hauling loads to a nearby, unused landing with several other management options in between. Research was conducted in the 1990s on various aspects of New Zealand’s landing residue piles, including work studies on the management of them (Hall 1993a, 1993b, 1994, 1998, 1999; Hall & McMahon 1997). Various methods for bulk volume measurement have been used previously, including measuring dimensions of individual woody residues as-cut (Hall 1994), volumes of piles using broad approximations of geometry (Hardy 1996) or measuring cross-sections of piles as they are deconstructed with heavy machinery (P. Hall, personal communication, 14 April 2021). Hall (1993a) established that the typical solid volume of residues discarded into the piles was approximately 4 per cent of Total Extracted Volume (TEV) for hauler operations. Additionally, the relative proportion of the various components of the tree hat made up the pile mass were reported through a detailed study of log-making residues, as the material was produced. This study showed that 66 per cent of the pile volumes were made up of woody stem sections, with the remainder being branch material (Hall 1994). This study was a snapshot of harvesting residue production at the time and a benchmark for future change. There is a gap in recent literature and operational knowledge around the physical characteristics of landing piles. With a national increase in harvest mechanisation and greater incentive for industrial process heat users to transition to renewable energy sources (Climate Change Commission 2021), an up- to-date knowledge of the resource is necessary for the forest owners and managers aiming to make material available for the developing bioenergy market. New tools are now available for measuring piles with complex shapes. Structure from Motion (SfM) photogrammetry has become an increasingly useful tool for detailed measurement and terrain modelling, with assessments of piles (of any material) an established research and commercial application of the technology (Tucci et al. 2019). Model construction pipelines use the known camera dimensions, identifying tie points on overlapping digital images to precisely define the camera pose in each image. Known camera locations and common points on overlapping images contribute to calculations of geometry by the principle of motion parallax and a ‘cloud’ of points (point cloud) of the scene is constructed, with each point assigned a location in three dimensions. With georeferencing, point clouds can additionally be given geographic or projected coordinates for use in mapping. Davis (2015) investigated the use of photogrammetry with imagery captured from an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) to assess the volume of small (<10 m3 each) residue piles on near-flat cutovers. Measurement of small accumulations of woody debris in natural and modelled fluvial systems has also been completed, with a key focus on SfM workflows (Spreitzer et al. 2019, 2020). A common limitation is the estimation of surfaces occluded by piled material. This is typically handled by automated interpolation of datum surfaces for small piles or simple (i.e. flat) ground (Ajayi & Ajulo 2021; Davis 2015), and manual inference/interpolation for more complex datum surfaces (Spreitzer et al. 2019). Both result in model error. Where resources permit, calculating the temporal change of georeferenced surface models can reduce or eliminate surface estimation, ensuring highly accurate models of all relevant surfaces, as demonstrated by Baldi et al. (2007). This research aims to provide the latest benchmark for the bulk volume of harvest residues accumulating at New Zealand’s steepland landings by using modern and accessible measurement methods, demonstrating and discussing modern procedures that a forest owner/ manager may use to gain a better understanding of their own resource. Improved understanding of landing residue volumes promises to assist marketing the material, and/or decisions concerning containment where residues are to remain on site in perpetuity. Methods Sixteen recently harvested steepland sites were made available by participating forest companies for this research. All sites were radiata pine plantations, managed under typical silvicultural regimes and covered a wide geographic spread across New Zealand (Table 1). Forest managers provided data on regime, pre-harvest inventory, volume of each log grade sold, and harvesting method where available. Except for stands MH and GN that were grown under framing regimes, all other sites were clearwood regimes. The area and bulk volume were measured for all landing residue piles associated with a harvest area at each of the study sites. Three techniques were used for measuring the landing residue piles. The first technique (applied to the majority of piles) made use of photogrammetric models derived from UAV photography (example see Figure 2). Two consumer-grade UAVs were used for this study. The specifications for each model are detailed in Table 2. The second technique made use of portable Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking of pile perimeters (±6m accuracy) coupled with estimation of average pile depth. The second methodology was used on five small piles only – accounting for approximately 6 per cent of the total volume surveyed. The third was used on two sites only as validation for the first method. This involved collecting georeferenced pre- and post- harvest photogrammetric models of the sites. Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 3 TABLE 1: Description of the study sites The image capture methodology adapted as fieldwork progressed. For the initial three sites (GT, MH & TP) images of residue piles were captured by manually controlling the position of the UAV camera, firstly capturing images in a wide arc around the residue pile(s) then directly overhead of the pile(s), ensuring significant overlap between images. The process is described in Riedinger & Harvey (2021). Image capture was refined for the remaining sites by using the Pix4Dcapture flight control application (Pix4D S.A., Prilly, Switzerland). Pre- programmed flights standardised image capture (see Figure 2), ensuring image overlap exceeded 60 per cent at take-off elevation. Overlap, flight extents and UAV height were set to provide coverage beyond each pile’s extent and a Ground Sample Distance lower than 3 cm/ pixel at the take-off elevation. Georeferencing was used to ensure accurate dimensioning of all except two models (Sites GT and MH). Four Ground Control Points (GCPs) were arranged around residue piles, in locations visible to the UAV camera sensor. GPS coordinates of each GCP were averaged over 60 seconds using a Trimble Zephyr 3 Rover receiver (Trimble, Sunnyvale, CA, U.S.A.) and subsequently post-processed to 5-15 cm accuracy using local base-station datasets. Photogrammetric models were constructed using Agisoft Metashape (Agisoft LLC, St. Petersburg, Russia) Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 4 according to the flowchart in Figure 3. Input data for each model were the aerial photos (including geotag information) and post-processed GCP waypoints. GCP centres were located on aerial imagery prior to assignment of post-processed waypoints. ‘Medium’ Site Code Region Extraction System Harvest Area (ha) Stand Age (yrs) Extracted Volume per Hectare (m3/ha) GJ Canterbury Waitaha Ground-based 8.7 29 472 GT Cable 31.0 30 546 MH Ground-based 12.6 No data No data GN Tasman Te Tai-o-Aorere Cable 9.5 29 611 MG Ground-based 36.8 25 392 HT Gisborne Te Tai Rāwhiti Cable 25.3 27 553 PK Cable 23.0 25 507 MA Cable 16.7 28 594 MC Cable 8.3 27 866 PE Cable 6.9 26 507 HF Cable 13.9 27 553 MO Marlborough Te Tauihu-o-te-waka Ground-based 41.1 No data No data TP Ground-based 21.2 27 407 PC Wellington Te Whanga-nui-a-Tara Mixed 8.2 28 746 RK Cable 6.1 26 795 TK OtagoŌtākou Cable 33.5 33 841 TABLE 1: Harvesting site details. FIGURE 2: Example Agisoft Metashape point cloud of a residue pile and surrounding terrain. Blue squares show the location and orientation of the camera on a grid above the pile. resolution point clouds (standard Agisoft Metashape setting) were constructed in Agisoft Metashape, which were then downsampled to output 0.1 m resolution Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), along with orthophotos of varying resolutions; dependant on the limitations imposed on the pre-programmed flightpath. The DEM for each pile was imported into RoadEng9 Terrain (Softree, Vancouver, B.C., Canada) and a Triangular Irregular Network (TIN) model generated. A duplicate model of each residue pile was created and terrain obscured by the pile was estimated by manual interpolation due to the unique geometry of most sites. Manual interpolation required features such as the fill batter top edge or fill batter bottom edge to be manually projected underneath the pile, forming an estimated terrain surface. The resulting difference between the unaltered, original TIN (with pile surface) and the duplicate TIN (with the interpolated terrain surface) yielded the bulk volume measure of each pile. Maximum pile depths were additionally calculated by the difference in elevation between the interpolated surfaces and the unaltered, original surfaces using CloudCompare software (2.5D Volume function, www. cloudcompare.org). Histograms of pile depth on a 0.1 m raster grid were filtered for depths >0.1 m to eliminate noise on the pile boundaries. Maximum depth was established at the 90 per cent threshold to also eliminate noise at the upper threshold (random woody residues Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 5 UAV Model Camera Sensor Positioning System Rated Max. Flight Time per Charge DJI Mavic Pro 1/2.3” CMOS Effective pixels: 12.35 million GPS/GLONASS 27 min DJI Mavic 2 Pro 1” CMOS Effective Pixels: 20 million GPS+GLONASS 31 min TABLE 2: Specifications of UAVs used to capture images of landing residue piles. Source: DJI User Manuals FIGURE 3: Surface and volume calculation pipeline. poking up out of the pile). Average pile depth was calculated for each site by dividing total bulk volume by the total pile plan area. To establish a measure of the manual interpolation method’s accuracy, two sites were scanned after construction (but prior to harvest), then again post- harvest; these two sites contained six residue piles. The manual terrain interpolation method was completed ‘blind’ (prior to constructing the pre-harvest terrain model) and for each residue pile, two volume measures were calculated: one by computing the difference between the interpolated terrain surface and the post- harvest (pile) surface, and the other between the georeferenced pre-harvest datum (terrain) surface and the post-harvest (pile) surface. Results The study sites represent a typical range of harvesting systems employed to clearfell steepland forests in New Zealand; from tracked ground-based to cable hauler. Pile areas and volumes differ significantly between sites (Table 3). To compare in more equal terms, pile areas are also expressed in pile area per hectare harvested, as the harvest areas range in size from 6.1 to 41.1 ha. Of note is that several sites had residue piles that (when combined) covered approximately 0.5 ha each. Not all of the pile area is lost planting area however as landing surfaces are seldom replanted in New Zealand operations due to the need for soil rehabilitation and ongoing nutrient management (Hall 2000). Model accuracy was estimated using the Agisoft post- processing report feature and the user specified GCP locations. Except at three sites, the RMSE in the x-direction ranged from 1.4-4.9 cm, in the y-direction from 0.3-6.2 cm and in the z-direction from 0.2-5.9 cm for all sites. Site TP used GCPs but no automated flight control, gaining an x/y/z RMSE of 4.5/8.3/3.2 cm. Sites GT and MH neither used automated flight control, nor GCPs, therefore gained x/y/z RMSEs for estimated camera locations of 85/59/68 cm and 78/72/40 cm, respectively. Similar to pile area, bulk pile volumes varied significantly among study sites. Table 4 details the volume measured, and the directly comparable metrics of bulk volume per hectare harvested and bulk volume per tonne harvested. The measures of average pile depth and maximum pile depth (see Table 3) indicate that for most harvests, there is little difficulty in achieving a pile height less than 3 m to align with current industry guidelines. Table 5 provides the summary statistics from Table 3 and Table 4. Each site has been considered a data point in generating the mean values. A reduced dataset size is indicated where data could not be provided by the hosting forest manager. Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 6 Site Code Total # of Piles Combined Pile Area (m2) Pile Area per Hectare Harvested (m2/ha) Mean Pile Depth (m) Max Pile Depth at the 90% threshold (m) GJ 1 1360 160 1.6 4.3 GT 2 4730 150 0.7 2.2 GN 3 1500 160 0.7 1.7 HT 3 3680 150 0.8 1.7 HF 4 3450 250 0.7 2.1 MH 2 3730 300 0.5 2.8 MO 1 2630 60 2.8 5.5 TP 2 1040 50 0.9 2.1 PK 1 4910 210 0.9 2.3 PE 2 1340 190 0.9 2.2 MA 3 3750 220 0.5 1.6 MC 2 2680 320 0.7 1.9 MG 1 1480 40 1.4 3.7 PC 2 1920 230 1.2 3.1 RK 1 2280 370 0.9 2.3 TK 7 5560 170 0.8 - TABLE 3: Ground covered by residue piles and depth statistics. The assessment of accuracy for the six piles over two sites (Sites PE and HF) found that the mean difference between the volumes yielded by the manual interpolation method and the georeferenced pre-harvest datum surface method was 19%, with a range of 49%. Five of the six pile volumes were underestimated by the manual interpolation method – where the assumption is made that the georeferenced datum surface method is correct and the datum surface (landing shape/height etc.) remains constant between pre-and-post-harvest data collection visits. Discussion One of the goals of this study was to provide an up- to-date benchmark of residue pile volumes. Previous benchmarks were provided by earlier studies. For example, a 1993 study investigated the retrieval of residue piles at four hauler landings, which involved surveying the bulk volume of material moved and that beyond the machine’s reach (Hall 1993a). The mean bulk volume and mean TEV were 1400 m3 and 6694 m3, respectively. By assuming the density of freshly harvested radiata pine is 1 t/m3, the estimated bulk volume of residue Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 7 TABLE 4: Volumes of residue piles. Site Code Combined Bulk Volume (m3) Bulk Vol. per Hectare Harvested (m3/ha) Bulk Vol. per Tonne Harvested (m3/t) GJ 2190 250 0.53 GT 3520 110 0.21 GN 1100 120 0.19 HT 2770 110 0.20 HF 2250 160 0.29 MH 1880 150 No data MO 7235 180 No data TP 940 40 0.11 PK 4474 190 0.38 PE 1104 160 0.32 MA 1831 110 0.18 MC 1958 240 0.27 MG 2096 60 0.15 PC 2317 280 0.38 RK 2160 350 0.45 TK 4396 130 0.16 Attribute Value Harvest Area (ha) 18.9 Number of Piles per Site 2.4 Bulk Pile Volume per Site (m3) 2600 Pile Area per Site (m2) 2900 Pile Area per Hectare Harvested (m2/ha) 190 Bulk Pile Volume per Hectare Harvested (m3/ha) 170 Pile Depth (m) 0.92 Max. Pile Depth (at the 90% threshold) (m) *15 sites 2.6 Bulk Vol. / tonne harvested (m3/t) *14 sites 0.23 TABLE 5: Mean values for all parameters across all sites (n=16). piles in 1993 was approximately 0.21 m3/t harvested. A subsequent study in 1994 measured the solid volume of branch and stem material discarded from six log making operations on radiata pine cable hauler sites and three ground-based harvesting sites (Hall 1994). For the hauler sites (assuming that they were steepland harvests and therefore comparable) mean measured solid log making residue volumes were 13.8 per cent of TEV, excluding the Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) stand datum. Making the same assumption on radiata pine density and assuming a bulk density of 0.25 t/ m3 for woody residues (Visser et al. 2010), the comparative bulk density figure for residues in the 1994 study is 0.55 m3/t. That places the 1994 result at the upper end of the range measured in this study. Recognising that a series of assumptions underlie these comparisons, it is significant that the bulk volume per tonne harvested the 1994 result is more than double the result from one year earlier. This study corroborates the results in the study by Hall (1993), although market conditions, harvesting machinery and harvest practice have changed markedly during the intervening years. Managing residue pile area requires balancing of competing interests. Soil area covered by a residue pile(s) can represent an opportunity cost by reducing land area available for establishing the succeeding crop. However, concentrating residues by piling high carries an increased risk of self-ignition. Self-ignition thresholds in radiata pine residue piles requires further research to expand the working knowledge, however anecdotal evidence has formed the basis for the current BMP for residue pile height (3 m) (NZFOA 2020). For the piles measured in this study, the average maximum depth is below the current target BMP for height. Increasing the average pile height may allow more land area to be replanted, however high stacking can only be done on stable ground (NZFOA 2020), with the understanding that increasing pile height on a slope decreases its stability and increases risk of mass movement. The results show that on these study sites, maintaining low overall pile depth takes priority over maximising replanted area. Further insight into the results of individual sites should consider operational factors. Additional reasons for a high or low pile area per hectare may be explainable by the log market conditions, landing layout, machinery used, management instructions or terrain form. Such finer details are beyond the scope of this study and may require much larger datasets to establish meaningful conclusions. New Zealand plantations are now trending more towards framing regimes. The majority of sites measured in this study were clearwood regimes, as is typical of most 1990s crops. Framing regimes when compared to clearwood (typically) have higher TRV, higher stocking and smaller piece size. Reduced piece size has been shown to lower the breakage rates (Murphy 1982), however with more stems per hectare the effect may be negated. Whether the physical differences between regimes results in a measurable difference in landing residue volumes (all other factors controlled) is yet to be established. This research was completed soon after a number of major mass mobilisation events (Cave et al. 2017). As such the measurements made for this study may already reflect changes to practices for both creating and storing harvest residue piles on or near landings in steep terrain. It is recognised that the current strong emphasis on both minimising environmental risk as well as creating biomass market opportunities for renewable energies may have already resulted in changed residue management practices (Dale 2019; Visser et al. 2018). While this study cannot predict those changes, it can serve as a benchmark and reference point to measure future developments against. This research demonstrates the ability to investigate the bulk volume of residue piles with the modern equipment and software tools available (or cloud- computing substitutes) to today’s forest manager. Previous methods required measurement in association with heavy machinery or estimation of both the terrain below and the surface of the pile (Hardy 1996), making use of the tools available at the time. The method employed in this study improves on previous methods by better modelling the pile surface. One way for improving terrain estimation would be to site residue piles on as flat ground as possible. Whilst clearly advantageous for measurement accuracy, several factors precluded the viability of the idea for this study. With additional time, more accurate results would be obtained by establishing a georeferenced datum surface of the completed landing formation, prior to piling with harvest residues – as used for the validation of the method employed in this study. Where serious consideration is given to removal of the product, accuracy may become increasingly important, justifying modelling landings (and surrounds) pre- harvest. Results from this project can assist forest managers to predict the bulk volume of residues that may accumulate at a steepland landing during a WTH operation. Estimation of volumes is recommended by guidance documents for current legislation (MPI 2018) to ensure storage capacity is adequate – or alternatives are planned for. These results are advantageous for feasibility studies on a forest’s ability to supply a biomass market with landing residues. Finally, this study sets the latest benchmark for residue volumes as harvesting machinery, methodology and markets develop over time. There is little, recently published information on the volumes of harvest residues discarded at New Zealand’s steepland landings. This study addresses the question, but much more can be done at a finer scale with the resources and data available to commercial operators. It is intended that this study provides accessible ideas and tools to foresters who are looking to supply (but not currently supplying) a biomass market. It is important that the industry collects information on the material as security of supply is critical to business cases for heat users considering conversion from fossil fuels to residual biomass. While international log markets continue to demand small-diameter or industrial logs, residual biomass will play a vital role in meeting bioenergy demand locally. The procedures discussed in this paper Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 8 require limited training and many can be completed with cloud-computing services, reducing computing capacity issues. Conclusions This is a renewed look at residual biomass accumulations at landings and demonstrates how an investigation could be conducted in a forest or forest estate with tools readily available to today’s forester. It sets the latest benchmark for landing residue pile volumes in New Zealand’s steepland plantations. Markets for harvest residues are developing, regime change is occurring, and innovations to harvest systems are promising to reduce the production of broken/low quality material. The information provided on current steepland pile volumes offers New Zealand forestry companies, forest owners and the biomass market, a better understanding about the current availability of the material in steepland plantations and therefore potential for increased utilisation. Competing interests The author declares that they have no competing interests. Acknowledgements The author would like to acknowledge the support by the forest companies and managers who were part of this study and hopes these methods and results may assist developments in the market for steepland landing residues. This project is part of a PhD research programme, and the author acknowledges the guidance by Professor Rien Visser of the School of Forestry, University of Canterbury and Peter Hall of Scion. Funding This research project is supported by Forest Growers Research Ltd. and the NZIF Foundation. The author gratefully acknowledges the support received from both organisations. References Ajayi, O.G., & Ajulo, J. (2021). Investigating the applicability of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) photogrammetry for the estimation of the volume of stockpiles. Quaestiones Geographicae, 40(1), 25- 38. https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2021-0002 Baldi, P., Coltelli, M., Fabris, M., Marsella, M., & Tommasi, P. (2007). High precision photogrammetry for monitoring the evolution of the NW flank of Stromboli volcano during and after the 2002–2003 eruption. Bulletin of Volcanology, 70(6), 703-715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-007-0162-1 Berkett, H. (2012). An examination of the current slope gradients being experienced by ground - based forest machines in New Zealand plantation forests. Masters in Forestry Science Thesis, University of Canterbury. Retrieved from https://go.exlibris. link/RW94d4by Buggeln, R., & Rynk, R. (2002). Self-heating in yard trimmings: conditions leading to spontaneous combustion. Compost Science & Utilization, 10(2), 162-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/106565 7X.2002.10702076 Cave, M., Davies, N., & Langford, J. (2017). GDC Report. Cyclone Cook Slash Investigation. 121 p. Gisborne, NZ: Gisborne District Council. Retrieved from h t t p s : / / w w w. g d c . g o v t . n z / _ _ d a t a / a s s e t s / p d f _ f i l e / 0 0 1 3 / 1 0 4 0 8 / c y c l o n e - c o o k- s l a s h - investigation-2017-report.pdf Climate Change Commission. (2021). Ināia tonu nei: A low emissions future for Aotearoa. CCC Report. Retrieved from https://ccc-production-media. s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/public/Inaia- tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa/ I n a i a - t o n u - n e i - a - l o w- e m i s s i o n s - f u t u re - f o r - Aotearoa.pdf Dale, R. (2019). Workshop report: Harvest residue mangement on erosion prone land. FGR Workshop Report. 18 p. Rotorua, NZ: Forest Growers Research (FGR). Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/7601?612598755 Davis, B. (2015). Refinement of a drone-based method for estimating coarse woody debris and biomass residue following forest harvest. (MSc.), University of Georgia, Georgia, USA. Retrieved from https:// getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/davis_brian_j_201708_ ms.pdf Fraser, D., Palmer, D., McConchie, M., & Evanson, T. (1997). Breakage in manually-felled clearfell radiata pine. LIRO Project Report 63, 42 p. Rotorua, NZ: Logging Industry Research Organisation New Zealand (LIRO). Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/4122?1322711812 Gordon, A.D. (2005). Forest sampling and inventory. In M. Colley (Ed.), Forestry Handbook (4 ed., pp. 132- 135). Tauranga, New Zealand: The New Zealand Institute of Forestry (Inc.). Goulding, C.J. (2005). Measurement of trees. In M. Colley (Ed.), Forestry Handbook (4 ed., pp. 145-148). Tauranga, New Zealand: The New Zealand Institute of Forestry (Inc.). Hall, P. (1993a). Dismantling of accumulations of logging residue around hauler landings. LIRO Report 18(6), 6 p. Rotorua, NZ: Logging Industry Research Organisation New Zealand (LIRO). Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/4578?2046499472 Hall, P. (1993b). Skid site rehabilitation. LIRO Report 18(8), 6 p. Rotorua, NZ: Logging Industry Research Organisation New Zealand (LIRO). Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 9 https://doi.org/10.2478/quageo-2021-0002 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00445-007-0162-1 https://go.exlibris.link/RW94d4by https://go.exlibris.link/RW94d4by https://doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.2002.10702076 https://doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.2002.10702076 https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/10408/cyclone-cook-slash-investigation-2017-report.pdf https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/10408/cyclone-cook-slash-investigation-2017-report.pdf https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/10408/cyclone-cook-slash-investigation-2017-report.pdf https://ccc-production-media.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/public/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa.pdf https://ccc-production-media.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/public/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa.pdf https://ccc-production-media.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/public/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa.pdf https://ccc-production-media.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/public/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa.pdf https://ccc-production-media.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/public/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa/Inaia-tonu-nei-a-low-emissions-future-for-Aotearoa.pdf https://fgr.nz/documents/download/7601?612598755 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/7601?612598755 https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/davis_brian_j_201708_ms.pdf https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/davis_brian_j_201708_ms.pdf https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/davis_brian_j_201708_ms.pdf https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4122?1322711812 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4122?1322711812 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4578?2046499472 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4578?2046499472 Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 10 Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/4574?1197501549 Hall, P. (1994). Waste wood at logging landings. LIRO Report 19(15), 14 p. Rotorua, NZ: Logging Industry Research Organisation New Zealand (LIRO). Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/4514?1060028902 Hall, P. (1998). Logging residue at landings. New Zealand Forestry, 43(1), 30-32. Hall, P. (1999). Effect of Logmaking on Production of Stem Wood Residue at Landings. LIRO Report 24 (4), 4 p. Rotorua, NZ: LIRO Forestry Solutions. Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/4310?879758742 Hall, P. (2000). Skid site rehabilitation - tree growth trials, results to age 7. LIRO Report 25(1), 10 p. Rotorua, NZ: LIRO Forestry Solutions. Retrieved from https:// fgr.nz/documents/download/4284?696343852 Hall, P., & McMahon, S. (1997). Logging residue at hauler landings - results from an industry survey. LIRO Report 22(2), 8 p. Rotorua, NZ: LIRO Forestry Solutions. Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/ documents/download/4394?565924820 Hardy, C.C. (1996). Guidelines for estimating volume, biomass, and smoke production for piled slash. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-364. 28 p. Portland, OR, USA: U.S. Department of Agriculture. Retrieved from https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/ pnw_gtr364.pdf Harvey, C., & Visser, R. (2022). Characterisation of harvest residues on New Zealand’s steepland plantation cutovers. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science, 52:7, 12 p. https://doi.org/10.33494/ nzjfs522022x174x Lambert, M.J. (1996). Stem breakage of Pinus radiata during mechanical felling in Kinleith Forest, Central North Island, New Zealand. Master of Forestry Science Thesis, University of Canterbury. Retrieved from https://go.exlibris.link/9dGDHqRy Maclaren, J.P. (1993). Radiata pine growers’ manual FRI Bulletin No. 184 (pp. 144). Rotorua, New Zealand: Forest Research Institute. Maclaren, J.P., & Knowles, R.L. (2005). Silviculture of radiata pine. In M. Colley (Ed.), Forestry Handbook (4 ed., pp. 119-121). Tauranga, New Zealand: The New Zealand Institute of Forestry (Inc.). MPI, Ministry for Primary Industries. (2015). 2015 Yield tables. Retrieved from: https://www.mpi.govt.nz/ dmsdocument/30954-2015-yield-tables MPI, Ministry for Primary Industries. (2018). Harvesting (Regulations 62-71). Wellington, NZ: Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI). Retrieved from https:// www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/27948-NES-PF- 5.6-Harvesting-Regulations-62-71 MPI, Ministry for Primary Industries. (2020). National exotic forest description as at 1 April 2020. Wellington, NZ: Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI). Retrieved from https://www.mpi.govt.nz/ dmsdocument/43540-2020-NEFD-report Murphy, G. (1982). Value savings from alternative felling patterns on steep country. LIRA Report 7(8), 4 p. Rotorua, NZ: Logging Industry Research Association Inc. Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/ documents/download/5053?973453426 NZFOA, New Zealand Forest Owners Association. (2020). Forest Practice Guides Managing processing slash on landings. New Zealand Forest Owners Association. Retrieved from https://docs.nzfoa.org.nz/site/ assets/files/1509/6-1_harvest-slash_managing- processing-slash-on-landings-2-0.pdf Phillips, C., Marden, M., & Basher, L. (2012). Plantation forest harvesting and landscape response - what we know and what we need to know. New Zealand Journal of Forestry, 56(4), 4-12. Raymond, K. (2018). PGP Steepland Harvesting – a collaborative research and development programme. New Zealand Journal of Forestry, 63(3), 4 p. Retrieved from http://www.nzjf.org. nz/free_issues/NZJF63_3_2018/166DE66F-78E0- 42a2-8FA1-5453573FDC3D.pdf Riedinger, L., & Harvey, C. (2021). Structure-from-Motion photogrammetry as a tool for harvest residue pile measurement. New Zealand Journal of Forestry, 65(4), 6-11. Spreitzer, G., Tunnicliffe, J., & Friedrich, H. (2019). Using Structure from Motion photogrammetry to assess large wood (LW) accumulations in the field. Geomorphology, 346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. geomorph.2019.106851 Spreitzer, G., Tunnicliffe, J., & Friedrich, H. (2020). Porosity and volume assessments of large wood (LW) accumulations. Geomorphology, 358. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107122 Tucci, G., Gebbia, A., Conti, A., Fiorini, L., & Lubello, C. (2019). Monitoring and computation of the volumes of stockpiles of bulk material by means of UAV photogrammetric surveying. Remote Sensing, 11(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11121471 Twaddle, A. (1987). Piece size characteristics of managed stands after felling. LIRA Report 9(1), 4 p. Rotorua, NZ: Logging Industry Research Association Inc. (LIRA). Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/5210?2137134046 Visser, R. (2018). Benchmarking Harvesting Cost and Productivity – 2017 Update. FGR Report HTN10- 02, 4 p. Rotorua, NZ: Forest Growers Research (FGR). Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/ download/7091?936289211 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4514?1060028902 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4514?1060028902 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4310?879758742 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4310?879758742 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4284?696343852 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4284?696343852 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4394?565924820 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/4394?565924820 https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr364.pdf https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr364.pdf https://doi.org/10.33494/nzjfs522022x174x https://doi.org/10.33494/nzjfs522022x174x https://go.exlibris.link/9dGDHqRy https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/30954-2015-yield-tables https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/30954-2015-yield-tables https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/27948-NES-PF-5.6-Harvesting-Regulations-62-71 https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/27948-NES-PF-5.6-Harvesting-Regulations-62-71 https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/27948-NES-PF-5.6-Harvesting-Regulations-62-71 https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/43540-2020-NEFD-report https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/43540-2020-NEFD-report https://fgr.nz/documents/download/5053?973453426 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/5053?973453426 https://docs.nzfoa.org.nz/site/assets/files/1509/6-1_harvest-slash_managing-processing-slash-on-landings-2-0.pdf https://docs.nzfoa.org.nz/site/assets/files/1509/6-1_harvest-slash_managing-processing-slash-on-landings-2-0.pdf https://docs.nzfoa.org.nz/site/assets/files/1509/6-1_harvest-slash_managing-processing-slash-on-landings-2-0.pdf http://www.nzjf.org.nz/free_issues/NZJF63_3_2018/166DE66F-78E0-42a2-8FA1-5453573FDC3D.pdf http://www.nzjf.org.nz/free_issues/NZJF63_3_2018/166DE66F-78E0-42a2-8FA1-5453573FDC3D.pdf http://www.nzjf.org.nz/free_issues/NZJF63_3_2018/166DE66F-78E0-42a2-8FA1-5453573FDC3D.pdf https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2019.106851 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2019.106851 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107122 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107122 https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11121471 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/5210?2137134046 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/5210?2137134046 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/7091?936289211 https://fgr.nz/documents/download/7091?936289211 Harvey New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science (2022) 52:12 Page 11 Visser, R., Hall, P., & Raymond, K. (2010). Good Practice Guide: Production of Wood Fuel from Forest Landings. (Technical Guide 9.0), 44 p. Wellington, NZ: The Energy Efficiency & Conservation Authority (EECA). Retrieved from https://ir.canterbury. ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/5545/12626362_ G o o d % 2 0 P r a c t i c e % 2 0 G u i d e % 2 0 w o o d % 2 0 fuel%20FINAL.pdf ?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Visser, R., Harrill, H., & Baek, K. (2019). Biomass recovery operations in New Zealand: a review of the literature. FGR Report H041, 32 p. Rotorua, NZ: Forest Growers Research (FGR). Retrieved from https://fgr.nz/documents/download/8199 Visser, R., Spinelli, R., & Brown, K. (2018). Best practices for reducing harvest residues and mitigating mobilisation of harvest residues in steepland plantation forests., 53 p. Gisborne, NZ: Gisborne District Council (GDC). Retrieved from https://www.gdc.govt .nz/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0012/13710/best-practices-for-reducing- harvest-residues-and-mitigating-mobilisation-of- harvest-residues-in-steepland-plantation-forests. pdf https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/5545/12626362_Good%20Practice%20Guide%20wood%20fuel%20FINAL.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/5545/12626362_Good%20Practice%20Guide%20wood%20fuel%20FINAL.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/5545/12626362_Good%20Practice%20Guide%20wood%20fuel%20FINAL.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/5545/12626362_Good%20Practice%20Guide%20wood%20fuel%20FINAL.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y https://fgr.nz/documents/download/8199 https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/13710/best-practices-for-reducing-harvest-residues-and-mitigating-mobilisation-of-harvest-residues-in-steepland-plantation-forests.pdf https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/13710/best-practices-for-reducing-harvest-residues-and-mitigating-mobilisation-of-harvest-residues-in-steepland-plantation-forests.pdf https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/13710/best-practices-for-reducing-harvest-residues-and-mitigating-mobilisation-of-harvest-residues-in-steepland-plantation-forests.pdf https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/13710/best-practices-for-reducing-harvest-residues-and-mitigating-mobilisation-of-harvest-residues-in-steepland-plantation-forests.pdf https://www.gdc.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/13710/best-practices-for-reducing-harvest-residues-and-mitigating-mobilisation-of-harvest-residues-in-steepland-plantation-forests.pdf