National Forest Inventory, 2002-2003.

Biophysical information was collected directly though the biophysical survey in the field filling of paper forms. The socioeconomic information was collected though face to face interviews also through paper forms.

For the biophysical survey, as part of the organogram, two types of teams were formed, and some trainings took place:
• Consultants for the field survey: independent consultants were hired, who formed field teams, made up of forestry or agronomists, survey technicians and local personnel from each SU area.
• Consultants for processing and analysis: experts on specific topics were hired to facilitate processing and analysis.
• Technical advice: the project received continuous advice from the FRA Forest Resources Assessment program staff in FAO, for which 5 missions took place:

1. February 2002, to present an approach to the FRA methodology and support in the design and planning of the inventory.
2. June 2002 to support the field survey training and start of activities.
3. October 2002, follow-up to the field survey and review of the methodology for collecting socioeconomic information through interviews.
4. June 2003, participate in the taxonomic verification process during field work with a national expert and present the development of the database made for Guatemala.
5. October 2003, participation in the statistical discussion workshop together with an expert from the region. 

Capacity building for the field data collection teams took place through training workshops that were scheduled for the field crews and the technical supervisors of INAB and CONAP. Additionally, workshops were scheduled for teachers and students of the country's forestry schools, in order to broaden national knowledge and disseminate the project process. In total, 12 forestry engineers, field team leaders, 36 field assistants from the different regions of the country, 28 forestry technicians from INAB and CONAP, 8 municipal technicians, 5 professors of forestry universities, 20 university students and 6 forest ranger students.

The training workshops were held between 4-5 days and were scheduled as follows:
• 1-2 days to explain the methodology, based on the field manual, where the definitions, design, variables, field forms, location and measurement techniques, contact with owners, interview techniques were detailed.
• 2-3 days for field work, which was preferably carried out in the sampling units already established for NFI 2002-03. The practices were carried out on location with GPS and topographic maps, organization of crews, location of permanent marks, homogenization of measurements of plots and trees, identification of land uses and forest types, filling out forms and entering the database. 

Each field crew was made up of the following people:
• Field team leader: Forest engineer with the function of coordinating field activities, and overseeing the responsibilities of each member, ensure the correct use of the measurement equipment and complete the information on the forms.
• Field assistant: with the function of supporting the correct location of the plot and performing dasometric measurements.
• Two local assistants: in charge of guiding the team, opening the way, assisting in the measurement and identification of species.

In total, 1086 permanent and 6 temporary sampling units were measured. 2 sampling units were not lifted surveyed because they were located in water. The data collection in each sampling unit carried out by the crews is described below:
• Contact with owners, the Technical Unit provided letters of presentation of the project. Due to the great socio-cultural diversity of the country, each team had to contact the INAB or CONAP regional government offices, local governments and community leaders. It was recommended to use different strategies according to the conditions of each site.
• Access and transportation, each team had to analyze the form of access to each sampling unit relying on information from institutions and local guides. Each team was responsible for its own transportation (vehicle, boat, or pack animals).
• Location of sampling units and plots: it had to be done through navigation with GPS and topographic maps. At the starting point located, they placed a permanent mark (galvanized iron pipe) and made a strict description following the field forms. They drew the cartographic details of each plot and located the position of each measured tree.
• Data collection, based on the manual and field forms.
• Interviews, they collected information through 30-minute interviews with three types of users or knowledgeable people of each sampling area:

• owner or manager of the area
• user different from owner
• staff from government institutions or researchers.
• a local language-speaker was hired as a guide, facilitating plot access and tree identification.
  • Collection of samples for herbarium. Due to the difficulty of identifying forest species due to the linguistic diversity of the country, the teams had to collect the doubtful specimens for taxonomic determination in the herbarium of the Faculty of Agronomy of the University of San Carlos, with whom they have a cooperation agreement.
  • Field reports, which should have the following information:
• Geographic location, accesses and description of the sampling unit, including maps.
• Description of each measurement plot, emphasizing the location of the permanent mark and the land uses and forest types measured.
• Observations on the measurement of variables and interviews.
• Photo catalog with their descriptions.
• Field forms with complete information.

All field forms were in Spanish, and the design was based on the FAO-NFMA design (see “National Forest Monitoring and Assessment – Manual for integrated field data collection” at http://www.fao.org/3/ap152e/ap152e.pdf for more information). The forms are summarized below:
• Form 1: Data of the sampling unit. Location, registration of the crew, data of nearby towns and access.
• Form 2: Data for each plot. Register of owners and farms (2a), location of permanent mark (2b), sketch or plan of the plot (2c).
• Form 3. Data on land use classes and forest types. Biophysical and management registry (3a), registry on forest uses and services (3b).
• Form 4. Topography, soil and registration data of the regeneration plots.
• Form 5. Tree registration.
• Form 6. Registration of non-timber products (bayal, mimbre and xate).
More information can be obtained in the adjunct documents “Inventario Forestal Nacional de Guatemala: Manual de Campo” and “Evaluación Nacional Forestal: Inventario Nacional Forestal de Guatemala 2002-2003”.

To obtain the best data quality, several quality assurance and supervisory monitoring activities and control routines were implemented:
• The technical support unit (TU) participated in the survey of the first plot of each field crew group (hot check), to solve doubts about the methodology and classification of forest types, in addition, to observe the good,
execution, measurement and recording of data in the forms.
• With the support of several regional technicians from INAB, CONAP, and municipalities, the data collection was supervised and monitored in 28 sampling units (26%).
• As a routine control in the measurements, 9 sampling units were measured again (cold checks), this also allowed obtaining the experience of relocating the plots and measurements with the information provided in the field reports.
• At the end of half of the field surveys, a meeting was held with the consultants to discuss the difficulties encountered and standardize criteria on issues such as classification of forest types, interview and identification of common tree names.
• All sampling units passed through different control filters. Field forms and databases had to be delivered 1-2 weeks after the survey, for the TU review. Reports and databases were returned for presented inconsistencies to be corrected. The corrected reports and databases were sent back to the TU, where they were reviewed again and if they did not contain errors they were accepted and submitted to the central data base.
• The location of all sampling units was checked by digitizing the information from the GPS.
• At the end of half of the field surveys, a meeting was held with the consultants to discuss the difficulties encountered and standardize criteria on issues such as classification of forest types, interview and identification of common tree names.