[CANUFNET] Tree species selection
BGeerts at brantford.ca
BGeerts at brantford.ca
Fri Dec 5 15:51:55 EST 2008
RE: Tree species selection / Native trees
Native tree use in the urban landscape is quite a complex issue. Native
trees are slowly becoming mainstream as nurserymen recognize the positive
attributes, popular demand for, and profitability of producing more of
these species.
Using native trees in the urban landscape has great merit; one of the most
important points to consider is the blending of the urban environment into
rural landscapes. However, I don't think native trees will ever be
exclusively used in urban settings. I have heard talk in different
municipalities of pressure to plant only native tree species.
Many areas have very limited resources when choosing from native species,
as Ian Wilson of Kelowna has pointed out with an excellent example. Other
areas may have more species to choose from ,but the species are ill suited
to survive the ecological conditions of urban life.
It is imperative to consider the urban environment as a different habitat;
a different ecozone, an altogether unique ecological niche. Biologically
Appropriate Material (BAM), as previously referred to, is an excellent
model to follow. The key is in the word "Appropriate". That is where
sound management and insight pull everything together.
It is imperative to consider the "City" as an ecotype of it's own. Many
people consider nature (forest, field, desert, ocean) to be "natural" and
cities to be "unnatural". The reality is that people, human beings, are
natural too; therefore the actions of people are a natural consequence.
The fact that humans build cities is as natural as birds building nests.
When people live in close proximity to each other, they like to modify the
local surroundings to suit themselves.
Since the cities are their own unique ecosystem, there are native trees
from the "City Ecotype". There are tree species that are native to the
urban and sub-urban ecosystem. Ginkgo trees are essentially
extirpated/extinct in what was once it's native habitat, but they are
native to areas where humans culture them. Take the apple tree as another
example; this tree has been bred into so many different forms specifically
for human use. Ecologically, the apple tree follows human civilization
around. The golden delicious is native to human modified environments.
We must consider the city as a different ecotype to truly fit cities into
our environmental planning. This is how we must plan the urban forests of
the future. We design the non-living infrastructure of our cities to
complement human life. We also do the same with the living infrastructure
wherever we can.
We must design our urban forests and green spaces to meet the needs of
humans while blending the "City Ecotype" into the surrounding ecosystems.
Do no harm, and preserve the purity of life.
________________________
Brian Geerts
Urban Forestry Technician
City of Brantford
Parks & Recreation Department
1 Sherwood Drive
Brantford, ON N3T 1N3
519.756.1500 x5511
Fax 519.756.4893
bgeerts at brantford.ca
canufnet-request at list.web.net
Sent by: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
12/05/2008 12:00 PM
Please respond to
canufnet at list.web.net
To
canufnet at list.web.net
cc
Subject
CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 4
Send CANUFNET mailing list submissions to
canufnet at list.web.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://list.web.net/lists/listinfo/canufnet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
canufnet-request at list.web.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
canufnet-owner at list.web.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CANUFNET digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3 Re 1. Re: Urban
Tree
Species Selection (Fisher, Brian) (Boysen, Barb (MNR))
2. "Urban" forestry publications on insects and diseases (Steve Finn)
3. Re: FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3 Re 1. Re: Urban
Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian) (Fisher, Brian)
4. Re: FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3 Re 1. Re: Urban
Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian) (Ian Wilson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:55:43 -0500
From: "Boysen, Barb (MNR)" <barb.boysen at ontario.ca>
Subject: [CANUFNET] FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3
Re 1. Re:
Urban Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian)
To: <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<94E461E26D325A4B95B3E2339FF5C73C0773E68E at CTSPITDCEMMVX16.cihs.ad.gov.on.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hello,
I can't resist replying re the support of native species being called
dogmatic. I hope such arguments, surely well meaning if annoying, won't
prevent people from looking at the bigger picture. One species'
significant trouble under climate change impacts shouldn't be a reason
to throw out the whole suite of other choices.
One of the reasons we promote native species is that they are proven
performers on the landscape - they are adapted to the local sites,
climates and communities of species. Also in an urban setting promoting
natives helps the urban island contribute to the gene flow between
adjacent natural areas, rather than act as a barrier, or worse
contribute exotic material. That material rarely shows itself to be a
problem immediately, usually only after it is now difficult and
expensive to eradicate. Problems can include poor growth, short life
span, reduced diversity, and increased insect and disease problems;
never mind the really harmful effects if they invade native communities
with the problems of hybridizing and reducing ecological functions.
Where the urban sites themselves are highly disturbed and one could
argue no longer 'native' (or even at all suitable for a tree), the
introduction of exotics is still an experiment - what is the origin of
the clones or populations you are introducing; how different is the
source from your site, will it be long lived, healthy?
Why not experiment with natives on such sites. Or restore the sites?
Henry Kock of the University of Guelph used to talk about biologically
appropriate material (BAM). The idea is to assess what constitutes
biologically appropriate material for any particular situation. For
example, projects designed to naturalize areas should use seed and/or
propagules of adapted sources of native plants. An example of
inappropriate material would be the establishment of an exotic that
spreads (or hybridizes with native species) next to a natural area.
There may be cases when the use of an exotic is appropriate - when
native material to meet the planting objective is not yet available. An
example might be the planting of exotic cultivars that tolerate the
stressful conditions of an urban environment.
Here's some of his words:
"BAM - By only growing species that are genetically fit ... i.e.
- adapted to the local environment,
- of sufficient genetic diversity to avoid the pitfalls of clones,
and
- appropriate to the objectives of the planting project
can we ensure the success of our planting efforts and therefore the
benefits that we expect from a healthy forest - rural or urban. Consider
the consequences for the original planting but also for the subsequent
generations- the very long term impact your selections will have. "
Use these principles no matter what species you are considering - but
please consider the natives first.
OR - is the problem really that native species aren't as readily
available yet, in the preferred stock types as the exotic clones and
grafts that tend to be so mass produced?
In that case we can all dare to be part of the solution rather than keep
supporting the problem.
Barb Boysen, Coordinator
Forest Gene Conservation Association
Suite 233, 266 Charlotte Street
Peterborough, ON K9J 2V4
Tel: (705) 755-3284
Fax: (705) 755-3292
Cell: (705) 875-7150
barb.boysen at ontario.ca
www.fgca.net
www.ontariosnaturalselections.org
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of
canufnet-request at list.web.net
Sent: December 4, 2008 12:00 PM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3
Send CANUFNET mailing list submissions to
canufnet at list.web.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://list.web.net/lists/listinfo/canufnet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
canufnet-request at list.web.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
canufnet-owner at list.web.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CANUFNET digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Urban Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian)
2. City of Saskatoon Pest Management Supervisor Position
(McLeod, Geoff (IS - Parks))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:31:25 -0800
From: "Fisher, Brian" <Brian.Fisher at bchydro.com>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Urban Tree Species Selection
To: <spcushing at yahoo.ca>, "Canadian Urban Forest Network"
<canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<64B39DDD27287C4DB8A3448A44A8DF250548A097 at EDMBCHMBX2V2.bchydro.adroot.bc
hydro.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have a copy of an old manual - (1993)
Called STREET TREE FACTSHEETS
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 92.72203
ISBN 1-883956.00.5
Published by Penn State - College of Agricultural Sciences
with support of USDA , Penn Dept.of Env. Res (Bureau of Forestry)
Pennsylvania Electric Energy Research Council
and Pennsylvania Nurserymen's Association.
It has very good information on more than 200 species & cultivars and
would merit some updating if someone wanted to pursue that.
I am also finding that at least in our area, there seems to be an
increasing pressure for
Native trees from various ad hoc groups. While I certainly want to avoid
true invasives, I think that the approach is often
dogmatic and offers little that is truly helpful.
In a Province where more than half a billion (Yes that's a B) native
pines (95% of the pines in the province) have been
killed by Mountain Pine Beetle, I think we need to be looking at
importing new species, not insisting on natives.
Regards,
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Stephen Cushing
Sent: 2008, December 01 4:44 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: [CANUFNET] Urban Tree Species Selection
Hello everyone,
I am doing research on urban tree species selection, based on
environmental stresses. I am trying to find examples of municipalities
or organizations that have developed, use selection criteria, or follow
a defined process in selecting urban trees. Other than providing lists
of trees to choose from, most municipal websites and documents do not
outline how urban foresters are selecting the trees they do.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Stephen Cushing
MLA Candidate 2009.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 13:21:38 -0800
From: Steve Finn <Steve_Finn at bcit.ca>
Subject: [CANUFNET] "Urban" forestry publications on insects and
diseases
To: <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<OFEA298402.B89C8A25-ON88257515.00749CFD-88257515.0075568D at bcit.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi list members:
As our forest ecosystem program winds down and our new sustainable
resource
management program (http://www.bcit.ca/construction/srm/) , which has a
environmental and community planning option starts, I am looking at
modifying my forest insect and disease courses to meet the needs of our
new
students. Previously the courses were traditional forestry focused.
I am looking for recommendations of good references that I can use to put
more of an urban forestry focus on insects and disease, particularly
western Canada focused. Other than the ISA publications, any others come
to
mind? If you have some good on-line documents, that is great as well.
Thanks
Steve
BCIT SRM
Steve Finn M.F., R.P.F.
Project Coordinator (BCIT)
Brownfield Redevelopment Program
http://commons.bcit.ca/brownfield/
FSA Director
604 432 8857 (o)
778 928 2372 (c)
604 439 0791 (f)
steve_finn at bcit.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://list.web.net/archives/canufnet/attachments/20081204/71ec3a56/attachment-0001.htm
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:19:32 -0800
From: "Fisher, Brian" <Brian.Fisher at bchydro.com>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3
Re 1.
Re: Urban Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian)
To: "Canadian Urban Forest Network" <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<64B39DDD27287C4DB8A3448A44A8DF25054DD5F1 at EDMBCHMBX2V2.bchydro.adroot.bchydro.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
A well-written defence, although I'm not sure why.
When I get letters from an official representing an "Invasive Plant
Council" saying that "ANY Non-native planting is
promoting invasives" I see it as dogmatic.
>From my perspective, a bad experience with one imported species
(probably without much supporting research)
shouldn't be a reason to throw out the whole suite of other choices.
I am certainly not opposed to planting native species. I do, however,
think the "natives only" is a bit overdone.
Our nursery sciences have advanced a long way since some of our
pioneering bad experiences.
No we don't want invasives taking over, but diversity also has its
merits, particularly in areas where climate
change is making the environment less hospitable to natives.
We have more information now than we used to. We have strong imports (no
longer really "exotics") which enhance
the liveability of our communities, do not hamper native growth and are
sometimes less susceptible to insects and disease.
Imports or exotics may be appropriate in some areas particularly where
there are significant environmental changes happening.
It is, in my opinion, a bit of an overstatement to suggest that any
planting of a non-native anywhere is an experiment.
In many cases, we have long term background and experience to support
those choices.
Lastly, support for the wise selection of BAM within the urban
landscape, at least from me, does not eliminate the consideration
of appropriate natives. I did not suggest that support for native
species was dogmatic. I did imply that the attacking of any other
choice except a native was dogmatic.
Now if we can just get those Lombardi poplars onto the noxious weed list
.......................................
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Boysen, Barb (MNR)
Sent: 2008, December 04 11:56 AM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: [CANUFNET] FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49,Issue 3 Re 1. Re: Urban
Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian)
Hello,
I can't resist replying re the support of native species being called
dogmatic. I hope such arguments, surely well meaning if annoying, won't
prevent people from looking at the bigger picture. One species'
significant trouble under climate change impacts shouldn't be a reason
to throw out the whole suite of other choices.
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Stephen Cushing
Sent: 2008, December 01 4:44 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: [CANUFNET] Urban Tree Species Selection
Hello everyone,
I am doing research on urban tree species selection, based on
environmental stresses. I am trying to find examples of municipalities
or organizations that have developed, use selection criteria, or follow
a defined process in selecting urban trees. Other than providing lists
of trees to choose from, most municipal websites and documents do not
outline how urban foresters are selecting the trees they do.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Stephen Cushing
MLA Candidate 2009.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:03:11 -0800
From: "Ian Wilson" <IWilson at kelowna.ca>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3
Re 1.
Re: Urban Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian)
To: "Canadian Urban Forest Network" <canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<63C8F69A3250564AAAEE162EF144217F1101A43A at kelexchange.city.kelowna.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Regarding the Native vs. exotic species thread:
In my area, native basically mean Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir or
cottonwood. Some of the exotics, however, do quite well and have been
used successfully for a long time, here and elsewhere. Most of our
successful urban tree species are exotics that have been successfully
planted all over the world in the harshest, driest, worst soils and
inhospitable urban spaces.
Where there is enough space, then by all means let's use the native
species but unfortunately in our urban areas space is a real luxury,
native top soils are completely gone, and trees such as Ponderosa pine
just don't do very well in our downtown; they aren't the greatest
"shade" trees, not to mention planting under power lines or other
difficult spots. For me it all comes back to the "right tree for the
right space", but there are definitely some advantages to the exotics in
difficult urban settings.
Ian Wilson, RPF, Certified Arborist
City of Kelowna
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Boysen, Barb (MNR)
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 11:56 AM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: [CANUFNET] FW: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49,Issue 3 Re 1. Re: Urban
Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian)
Hello,
I can't resist replying re the support of native species being called
dogmatic. I hope such arguments, surely well meaning if annoying, won't
prevent people from looking at the bigger picture. One species'
significant trouble under climate change impacts shouldn't be a reason
to throw out the whole suite of other choices.
One of the reasons we promote native species is that they are proven
performers on the landscape - they are adapted to the local sites,
climates and communities of species. Also in an urban setting promoting
natives helps the urban island contribute to the gene flow between
adjacent natural areas, rather than act as a barrier, or worse
contribute exotic material. That material rarely shows itself to be a
problem immediately, usually only after it is now difficult and
expensive to eradicate. Problems can include poor growth, short life
span, reduced diversity, and increased insect and disease problems;
never mind the really harmful effects if they invade native communities
with the problems of hybridizing and reducing ecological functions.
Where the urban sites themselves are highly disturbed and one could
argue no longer 'native' (or even at all suitable for a tree), the
introduction of exotics is still an experiment - what is the origin of
the clones or populations you are introducing; how different is the
source from your site, will it be long lived, healthy?
Why not experiment with natives on such sites. Or restore the sites?
Henry Kock of the University of Guelph used to talk about biologically
appropriate material (BAM). The idea is to assess what constitutes
biologically appropriate material for any particular situation. For
example, projects designed to naturalize areas should use seed and/or
propagules of adapted sources of native plants. An example of
inappropriate material would be the establishment of an exotic that
spreads (or hybridizes with native species) next to a natural area.
There may be cases when the use of an exotic is appropriate - when
native material to meet the planting objective is not yet available. An
example might be the planting of exotic cultivars that tolerate the
stressful conditions of an urban environment.
Here's some of his words:
"BAM - By only growing species that are genetically fit ... i.e.
- adapted to the local environment,
- of sufficient genetic diversity to avoid the pitfalls of clones,
and
- appropriate to the objectives of the planting project
can we ensure the success of our planting efforts and therefore the
benefits that we expect from a healthy forest - rural or urban. Consider
the consequences for the original planting but also for the subsequent
generations- the very long term impact your selections will have. "
Use these principles no matter what species you are considering - but
please consider the natives first.
OR - is the problem really that native species aren't as readily
available yet, in the preferred stock types as the exotic clones and
grafts that tend to be so mass produced?
In that case we can all dare to be part of the solution rather than keep
supporting the problem.
Barb Boysen, Coordinator
Forest Gene Conservation Association
Suite 233, 266 Charlotte Street
Peterborough, ON K9J 2V4
Tel: (705) 755-3284
Fax: (705) 755-3292
Cell: (705) 875-7150
barb.boysen at ontario.ca
www.fgca.net
www.ontariosnaturalselections.org
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of
canufnet-request at list.web.net
Sent: December 4, 2008 12:00 PM
To: canufnet at list.web.net
Subject: CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 3
Send CANUFNET mailing list submissions to
canufnet at list.web.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://list.web.net/lists/listinfo/canufnet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
canufnet-request at list.web.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
canufnet-owner at list.web.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of CANUFNET digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Urban Tree Species Selection (Fisher, Brian)
2. City of Saskatoon Pest Management Supervisor Position
(McLeod, Geoff (IS - Parks))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:31:25 -0800
From: "Fisher, Brian" <Brian.Fisher at bchydro.com>
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Urban Tree Species Selection
To: <spcushing at yahoo.ca>, "Canadian Urban Forest Network"
<canufnet at list.web.net>
Message-ID:
<64B39DDD27287C4DB8A3448A44A8DF250548A097 at EDMBCHMBX2V2.bchydro.adroot.bc
hydro.bc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have a copy of an old manual - (1993)
Called STREET TREE FACTSHEETS
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 92.72203
ISBN 1-883956.00.5
Published by Penn State - College of Agricultural Sciences with support
of USDA , Penn Dept.of Env. Res (Bureau of Forestry) Pennsylvania
Electric Energy Research Council and Pennsylvania Nurserymen's
Association.
It has very good information on more than 200 species & cultivars and
would merit some updating if someone wanted to pursue that.
I am also finding that at least in our area, there seems to be an
increasing pressure for Native trees from various ad hoc groups. While I
certainly want to avoid true invasives, I think that the approach is
often dogmatic and offers little that is truly helpful. In a Province
where more than half a billion (Yes that's a B) native pines (95% of the
pines in the province) have been killed by Mountain Pine Beetle, I think
we need to be looking at importing new species, not insisting on
natives. Regards,
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: canufnet-bounces at list.web.net
[mailto:canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] On Behalf Of Stephen Cushing
Sent: 2008, December 01 4:44 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: [CANUFNET] Urban Tree Species Selection
Hello everyone,
I am doing research on urban tree species selection, based on
environmental stresses. I am trying to find examples of municipalities
or organizations that have developed, use selection criteria, or follow
a defined process in selecting urban trees. Other than providing lists
of trees to choose from, most municipal websites and documents do not
outline how urban foresters are selecting the trees they do.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Stephen Cushing
MLA Candidate 2009.
End of CANUFNET Digest, Vol 49, Issue 4
***************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20081205/06f3db9b/attachment.htm>
More information about the CANUFNET
mailing list