Balanço do volume de madeira pré e pós-exploratório de plano de manejo florestal empresarial na Amazônia Central

Abstract

The forestry legislation establishes the obligation of companies that carry out Sustainable Forest Management in the Amazon to present a comparative volume by means of a volumetric equation between the licensed volume and the explored volume. Companies that work with forest management present marked differences in licensed volume with volume produced, influencing the sustainability of sustainable forest management and economic viability. This research aimed to study the influence of different methods of estimating the volume of wood in a business forest management plan in the state of Amazonas. Data collection was carried out in the forest management area of the company Mil Madeiras Preciosas. Three different methods were applied for the strict cubing of logs: combined method (Smalian and Hohenadl), Smalian and Huber and the equation that uses the form factor 0,7 and thus compared with the estimates obtained by a volume equation used by the company, 103 individuals were divided, divided into 19 species. In addition to comparing the ways to obtain the volume of a tree, the cubing data was used to generate a new volume equation for the managed area. In rigorous cubing, the diameters of the various sections and the commercial height of each log were collected. The mean DBH and commercial height were 69,9 ± 2,8 cm and 15,2 ± 0,7 m respectively. The total cubed volume was 478,61 m3 with an average volume of 4,65 ± 0,44 m3/log. There was little variation in the average volumes obtained by the different methods tested and the equation that uses the 0,7 form factor. The Smalian method showed the smallest deviation – 0,28 ± 4,28% compared to the other cubing methods, while the equation that uses the 0,7 form factor presented the largest deviation. In general, the equation used by the company mostly overestimates all forms of obtaining volume used in research. The analysis of variance between the cubing methods and the equation that uses the average form factor 0,7, presented strong evidence that there is a difference between the volume averages