| Task | P | Description | Modification requested | Justification for modification |
| 1.1 | All | Implementation of refined landscape sensitivity methodology on the 3 no. sites | Intend to transmit and operationalise relevant landscape sensitivity criterion to the GIS "ArcView 3.0" | The proposed assessment methodology of the Technical Annex has been discussed critically and tested in Study Area III in 1995. We found out, that this methodological approach is not adequate to assess landscape in a satisfying way. |
| 1.2 | All | Implementation of refined aesthetic quality assessment methodology on the 3 no. sites | A Multi Media GIS has been developed, which combines sound, image and video data with raster and vector information to visualise and describe aesthetic quality in a flexible and almost holistic way. | There is also a variety of theoretical and complex methodologies in terms of sensitivity and aesthetic assessment in Germany which are scientifically proved and any research in more detail is like "re-inventing the wheel". We therefore do not expect new research findings in this field |
| 1.3 | All | Implementation of refined view distance zones methodology on the 3 no. sites | Intend to program a GIS routine in ArcView to analyse distance zones in a flexible way. | On the other hand detailed computer research like programming an open multimedial GIS which analyses landscape aesthetics and vulnerability in a comprehensive way in co-operation with the people using the internet technology is still missing and we regard this as the most innovative and needed approach in terms of FORAM design. |
| 1.4 | All | Implementation of refined visual absorption capacity methodology on the 3 no. sites | Intend to program a GIS routine, which is based on the ArcView Avenue request "visibility" | We discussed this point since 1995 and agreed on researching computer techniques in more detail at the meetings in Spain, Greece and Scotland |
| 1.6 | All | Refine and implement aesthetic vulnerability matrix on the 3 no. sites | Intend to program the mentioned MultiMedia GIS in order to visualise aesthetic vulnerability and alternative proposals | The methodological basis for the FORAM related GIS programming are our own research results, existing methodologies and findings of the FORAM partners |
| 1.7 | All | Initiate production of Volume I: Landscape assessment for development control - specific to each Participant Country | Modifications according to tasks 1.1 to 1.6 | |
| 2.4 | All | Analyse results of survey questionnaire | none | |
| 2.5 | All | Initiate production of Volume II: Public attitude and preference regarding forestry - specific to each Participant Country | none | |
| 3.1 | All | Production of digital terrain models of each landscape (3 no.) | none | |
| 3.2 | All | Implement visibility analysis of each landscape (3 no.) | none | |
| 3.3 | All | Produce photorealistic simulations of proposals | none | |
| 3.5 | All | Initiate production of Volume III: Computer graphics techniques for landscape development | none | |
| 4.1 | All | Final species selection | General recommendations of species according to site conditions (ecological factors), silvicultural requirements and aesthetic effects of species | Decision about species selection in Germany is dependant on site mapping, ecological factors and property structures (State forest, Community forest, private forest) as well as legal restrictions (Forest Function Planning, Forest Inventory and Planning). In Germany we have a mosaique of different structures and conditions. |
| 4.2 | All | Final silvicultural systems selection | Intend to develop general recommendations concerning silvicultural methods according to ecological, aesthetical and political conditions | Dependence on species selection and site
conditions (see. 4.1);
In addition there is an immense variety of silvicultural methods (prototypes and mixed types) in Germany. Some of these methods base on regional tradition and history, ie. they are regional specialties. Because of this inhomogen structure of forest property in Germany and because of alternating growing conditions for forests it is not possible to make concrete proposals for each silvicultural method. Additionally legal restrictions have always to be taken into account. |
| 5.4 | All | Production of detailed forest designs for 3 no. sites | Rather general recommendations instead of detailed designs | High variety of forest stand types, landscape structure and site conditions; |
| 5.5 | All | Production of detailed designs for amenity and forest interiors of 3 no. sites | s. 5.4 | s. 5.4 |
| 5.6 | All | Initiate production of Volume IV: Detailed forest and amenity design - specific to each Participant Country | s. 5.4 | s. 5.4 |
| 6.1 | All | Initiate assessment of aesthetic quality of proposal and relationship to landscape for the 3 no. sites | Intend to incorporate and assess proposals by the MultiMedia GIS | We have already designed a flow chart of the impact assessment methodology (Progress Report 94/95) which is based on existing scientific methodologies for EIA in Germany. |
| 6.2 | All | Assessment of perceptional vulnerability for the 3 no. sites | s. 1.6 | s. 1.6 |
| 6.3 | All | Assessment of visual absorption capacity of site and context for the 3 no. Sites | s. 1.4 | s. 1.4 |
| 6.5 | 1 | Initiate development of mathematical model to determine overall visual impact | s.1.2 | The development of a SBE model for the Study Area "Bavarian Alps" (see Progress Report 1996) has shown, that a mathematical model does not regard many not quantifiable psycho emotional factors which can be mediated in a much better way by using MulitMedia GIS applications |
| 6.6 | All | Initiate production of Volume V: Visual impact assessment of landscape development - specific to each Participant Country | Modifications according to 6.1 -6.5 | |
| 7.1 | All | Detailed evaluation of management implications of design proposals | none | |
| 7.2 | All | Detailed evaluation of economic implications of design proposals | none | |
| 7.3 | All | Detailed evaluation of ecological implications of design proposals | none |