We used three sampling techniques in the virtual forest tutorial. Of the three techniques, the random sampling technique under the distance method had the fastest sampling time. The percentage error in systematic and random sampling were almost the same for the two most common and two most rare species. The haphazard technique, however, had minute differences from the other two techniques. Also the number of species sampled are almost double in systematic and random sampling compared to haphazard. In terms of accuracy, I think all three techniques are almost similarly accurate. It really comes down to which one is the most time efficient which is as earlier stated the random sampling technique.