4 Methods

The general methodology (Figure 4-1 to Figure 4-2) used was based on the two objectives: 1)
Finding productive harvest sites; 2) Planning least-cost path.
Data validation

Preparation of
variables

Query

Determination
of productive
harvest sites

Figure 4 - 1 Methodology for finding productive harvest sites

Data validation

Reclassification
of variables

Application of
Weighted
Overlay

Calculation of
least-cost path

Figure 4 - 2 Methodology for planning the forest route

The major software applied in the project included ESRIArcMap10.1, ESRIArcScene10.1,

and ESRIArcGlobe10.1. The approach used to simulate the landbase determination and find
least-cost path was to use ModelBuilder to combine together existing tools from the
ESRIArcMap10.1 ArcToolbox. The ModelBuilder interface can be seen in Figure 4-3. The
complete workflows of each component can be seen in Figures 4-4 to 4-12.

Figure 4 - 3 ModelBuilder Interface

4.1 Assumptions
Within the project, the following assumptions were made:
1. The final selection of the planning harvest units, where cutblocks were regarded as the
ending points of the least-cost path to the Al-Pac mill, would not be affected by the past
harvesting activities and the not outdated AVI data (2001).
2. Slopes greater than 60% were considered to be impractical for road construction. Although
cable logging can be applied on very steep slopes, considering the forest practices in
Alberta, it would not be recommended.
3. The process of mosaicking four DEM tiles would not distort, stretch, or skew the image
significantly; therefore, this process has minor impacts on the project analysis.
4. The assigned values for each input variables in the re-classification process were based on
the characteristics of input variables and could be applied in the current project for leastcost path illustration purposes.

4.2 Methodology for finding productive harvest sites

4.2.1 Data validation
Landbase determination was processed via a series of queries then outputted as GStands. Figure
4-4 to 4-7 illustrates the workflow of selecting the final productive harvest sites in FMU L1J.
Before running the program, the following information were verified:
1. All file paths about data had been identified.
2. All data had been projected in the same projection.
3. No empty datasets had been input.
4.2.2 Preparation of variables
Small permanent streams were provided with a surrounding 30m buffer, large permanent streams
with a 60m buffer and lakes with a 100m buffer (Table 4-1). The resulting buffer coverages were
merged together to generate a whole coverage encompassing the entire FMU L1J area (Figure 44). The buffer coverage was then embedded into AVI coverage, to identify stands that were outside
the buffer zones (Figure 4-5). Similarly, Caribou range coverage was intersected by the AVI
coverage to identify stands that were outside the caribou ranges (Figure 4-6). The above procedure
was also applied in the Aboriginal Reserve coverage.
Table 4 - 1 Buffer distance setting based on Albertas watercourse classification system

Alberta's Watercourse Classification

Classification

Buffer

Small Permanent

30m

Large Permanent
Lakes

60m
100m

AVI Code / NHN Code

Classification
NHN-06AB000
NHN-07CA000
NHN-07CB000
NHN-07CE000
AVI: NWR
AVI: NWL

Figure 4 - 4 Workflow of small/large permanent watercourse and lake buffering process

Figure 4 - 5 Workflow of intersection between buffered watercourse, lakes and L1J area

Figure 4 - 6 Workflow of intersection between Caribou ranges and L1J area

4.2.3 Query
A series of selections were made to exclude aboriginal reserve areas, riparian areas and caribou
ranges from the existing AVI coverage. Then productive and operable stands were selected (Figure
4-7) based on the criteria from the Northeast Alberta operating Ground Rules (OGR) (2014):
1. Tree height > 5m (OGR stated coniferous or deciduous > 4.88m, in the project higher
standard was made based on 5m and above)
2. C Crown closure (51 to 70%) or D Crown closure (70%+)
3. Aspen or White spruce
4. Tree productivity rating (TPR) = Good

Figure 4 - 7 Workflow for selecting productive harvest sites

4.3 Methodology for planning forest routes

4.3.1 Data validation
Before running the whole program, the following information was verified:
1. All file paths about data had been identified.
2. All data had been projected in the same projection.
3. No empty datasets had been input.

4. Two points were created representing locations of proposed cutblocks using Create Feature
Class tool. The locations of proposed cutblocks were manually selected from the Map of
productive forest sites (Figure 5-1).
5. The Al-Pac mill location had also been created based on its coordinate system.
4.3.2 Reclassification of variables
Reclassify tool is defined to reclassify values in an input raster. However, the input rasters such as
Roads, Caribou, Small permanent watercourses, Aboriginal Reserve, Large permanent
watercourses and Lakes, did not have valid statistics for reclassification. Therefore, for each
landscape type except for Slopes (derived data from DEM), initial predicated values were assigned
using Add Field and Calculate Field tools (Figure 4-8). The Reclassify tool used in this analysis
was to verify that, whether or not, values that were assigned previously can reflect the true levels
of road construction costs. Because road development costs vary from variable to variable, the
relative weighting of assigned values for different variables had been considered, the Classify tool
used here was just to verify the weighted values again.
4.3.2.1 DEM
The DEM was used to calculate the slope for each cell in the FMU L1J area. The initial
classification of slopes was based on the Jenks Natural breaks algorithm. It can group similar data
together in the same class based on their intrinsic properties; at the same time, the differences of
each class can be maximized. The derived slope data has an effect on the mobility of vehicles
travelling through the cell. Slopes of each pixel in the FMU L1J were grouped into seven categories
and assigned a weighted value during the reclassification process. The list of the categories and
the associated weights are listed in Table 4-2. According to the Forest Road Engineering
Guidebook (British Columbia Ministry of Forests, 2002), roads with a slope of greater than 60%
must be reported and a special assessment must be done. For the purposes of simplicity, a slope of
60% was regarded as the maximum for road development. The rest of the categories denote
different construction costs associated with the slope.
Table 4 - 2 Slope reclassification

4.3.2.2 Roads
The raster - Roads was used to denote areas through which a vehicle would have the easiest way
to travel. The list of the categories and the associated weights are listed in Table 4-3. Roads were
assigned a value weighting of one, because an existing road is the most accessible route to take.
All other cells in that extent contained no data and were reclassified with new value together with
other variables in the Weighted Overlay processing.
Table 4 - 3 Road reclassification

4.3.2.3 Caribou range

The raster - Caribou range was used to denote areas through which a vehicle has some difficulty
to travel. The list of categories and the associated weights are listed in Table 4-4. Because the
author wanted to have a minor impact on the activities of caribou, and other ungulate species, the
Caribou range was assigned a value of six, thus increasing construction costs in this case.
Table 4 - 4 Caribou range reclassification

4.3.2.4 Small permanent watercourses

The raster - Small permanent watercourses was used to denote areas through which a vehicle would
have a certain difficulty in travelling. The list of the categories and the associated weights are listed
in Table 4-5. A weight of six (the same value as in the weighting of Caribou range) was assigned
because the author wanted to reduce the numbers of bridges to be built. The costs for building
bridges above small permanent watercourses are lower than for bridges over large permanent
watercourses.
Table 4 - 5 Small permanent watercourse reclassification

4.3.2.5 Aboriginal Reserve

The raster - Aboriginal Reserve was used to denote areas that present vehicles with certain
difficulties to travel through. The list of the categories and the associated weights are listed in
Table 4-6. As the author wanted to ensure minimal impact on the local community, the Aboriginal
Reserve was assigned a weighting of seven, thus making construction costs higher in this case.
Table 4 - 6 Aboriginal Reserve reclassification

4.3.2.6 Large permanent watercourses

The raster - Large permanent watercourses was used to denote areas through which a vehicle would
have a certain difficulty in travelling. The list of categories and the associated weights are listed in
Table 4-7. The weight of seven (the same of value as in the weighting for Aboriginal Reserve) was
assigned here, as the author wanted to reduce the numbers of bridges that would need to be built,
thereby reducing road construction costs.
Table 4 - 7 Large permanent watercourse reclassification

4.3.2.7 Lakes
The raster - Lakes was used to denote areas through which a vehicle would have the most difficulty
in travelling. The list of the categories and the associated weights are listed in Table 4-8. The
weight was assigned as ten (the maximum costs) in the Lakes because the construction costs for
building bridges or tunnels would be extremely high in these cases.
Table 4 - 8 Lake reclassification

4.3.3 Application of Weighted Overlay

After seven rasters were reclassified, a cost surface was produced (Figure 4-8). The Weighted
Overlay tool was the geoprocessing tool required to create a cost surface. It combined multiple
rasters and conducted an integrated analysis.

Figure 4 - 8 Workflow of Cutblock 1 Least-Cost Path with existing road network

Table 4 - 9 Weighted overlay interface

It should be noted that for cells that had no data were assigned a value of one, except for roads
(Table 4-9). Without conducting this step, the weight cost surface would not be produced correctly
based on the principles of cell statistics (ESRI, 2012a) and weighted overlay (ESRI, 2012b).
Specifically, if any input cell had no data, the corresponding output cell produced no data on that
cell, whatever the cell value in other input rasters. Weighted Overlay overlaid the seven input
rasters using a defined measurement scale and weighted each raster based on its importance.

Figure 4 - 9 Algorithm for Sum function in Cell Statistics tool (ESRI, 2012a)

Figure 4 - 10 Algorithm for Weighted Overlay tool (ESRI, 2012b)

Figure 4 - 11 Workflow of Cutblock 1 Least-Cost Path, without existing road network

Figure 4 - 12 Workflow of Cutblock 2 Least-Cost Path, with existing road network

4.3.4 Calculation of least-cost path

The Cost Distance and Cost Path tools were used to produce the least-cost path. The Cost Distance
was used to calculate the least accumulative cost distance for each cell to the nearest source over
a cost surface (ESRI, 2012c). The Cost Distance tool needed two inputs: a weight cost surface
raster and an Al-Pac mill location feature class. The weight cost surface was the raster produced
by the Weighted Overlay tool. It can be seen in Figure 4-11 that the Cost Distance tool produced
an output cost distance raster and a backlink raster. The output cost distance raster is used to
identify for each cell, the least accumulative cost distance over a cost surface to the identified
source locations (ESRI, 2012c). The backlink raster is used to define eight directions (north, east,
south, west, northeast, southeast, southwest and northwest) or determine the next neighbouring
cell along the least accumulative cost path from a cell to reach its least cost source (ESRI, 2012c).
The Cost Path tool required three inputs: an output cost distance raster, a backlink raster and one
of the cutblocks locations. It calculated a least-cost path from the Al-Pac mill to the cutblock, and
a cost path raster was then produced. The Raster to Polyline tool was used to covert the path into
a vector format. A new field was then added to the table of least-cost path feature class. The values
of that newly added field were defined as NEW by Calculate Field tool; thus if the new route
was embedded in the existing road network, it could be easily revealed.