[CANUFNET] Suitability Criteria for Treatment of Ash Trees

Thu Feb 26 06:00:25 EST 2015

Good morning group!

I've been thinking a lot about EAB lately. It's great to see the discussion come up among urban forestry professionals throughout the country. I can add a few elements on this one.

The City of Montreal did announce a pretty substantial operating budget this year for urban forestry initiatives, notably emerald ash borer control and massive tree planting as part of the City's canopy plan. You can read a bit about the media coverage of this announcement here :

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/emerald-ash-borer-offensive-unveiled

http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/montreal-more-than-triples-money-destined-to-plant-protect-trees-1.2247869

The investment is predominantly going to treat trees with TreeAzin, coordinate extensive bark sampling on specimens throughout the island and replanting new trees. This year, the greater part of removals continue to be done by in-house crews.  

As for special rules, a pruning and removal moratorium has been in effect for City trees between March 15th and October 1 for the last couple of years. The idea is to limit tree work on ash trees to emergencies and limit the spread of the insect during its high risk dispersal period. The City has been trying to extend this practice to private trees as well. A by-law is forthcoming (possibly for this spring/summer) but nothing has come into effect just yet.  Other de-merged municipalities on the island of Montreal have adopted specific EAB by-laws, namely the cities of Beaconsfield and Pointe-Claire, sources here :

http://www.beaconsfield.ca/images/stories/urban-fields/720-101%20ASH%20BORER%20EN_final.pdf
http://www.ville.pointe-claire.qc.ca/en/page-mib/by-laws-mib.html

To answer Shelley's original question on suitability criteria for the treatment of ash trees, every municipality/borough around here does things just a tad differently but the principle is pretty standard,

1-) Get the most accurate portrait of your inventory as possible (this can be by consulting a digital tree database, compiling lists, doing drive-by assessments).
2-) Break down the list into specific sectors. Some municipalities focus on getting into those infestation sites and systematically treating everything that can still be retained in the site either in conservation or in SLAM. Others may opt for systematically treating everything around the city or treating specifically interesting trees. It really depends on what the available budgets, amount of viable trees and political/management priorities are. 
3-) Once you've got an idea of how many trees you have, where they are and what you can do with them, the next best step is to evaluate and WALK! I've worked with a few municipalities and have done a couple of inspection blitzes. The best bet is to develop a simple points system, print up a rating grid and evaluate each tree in the field.
4-) I've seen point systems anywhere from 3 to 10 points. The higher point rating, the more criteria is met and the more viable a tree may appear as a suitable candidate for treatment. We tend to look at variables from the ground up, 360 degrees around the tree. The criteria I've looked at are ;

                         - Condition of the trunk flare, absence of significant wounds or defects. Absence of significant problems such as excessive fill, drastic root pruning/excavation, major drainage issues. Likelihood that trunk injections will be able to be done efficiently and over as much of the circumference of the flare as possible.
                         - Structure of the trunk and branches. Absence of major cavities, cracks, inclusions etc. Anything major may be enough to disqualify the tree, minor things can be discounted if the other criteria checks out.
                          - Condition of the canopy. Overall vigor of the tree, abundance of buds, foliage. Likelihood that the product will be able to be taken up and distributed within the tree. We may look at trees under electrical wires a little differently, it really depends. Absence of major biotic/abiotic issures (cankers, diseases, significant crown dieback etc.)

I find the more simple the point system is, the easier it is to go out in the field, rate each tree, check off the list and conduct follow ups year after year. I hope that helps.

If anyone has read this far, I've got a question for municipalities that have dealt with EAB for the last few years or so :

* Knowing what you know now about the effect of the insect on your trees, what would you have done differently if you could manage the infestation all over again from day 1? 

I'm really eager to get some feedback on this. Thanks!

Good luck : )

Meagan Hanna
Arboriculture Inspector
City of Montreal
meagan.hanna at mail.mcgill.ca
meagan.hanna at ville.montreal.qc.ca
________________________________________
From: CANUFNET [canufnet-bounces at list.web.net] on behalf of Ethier Elaine [elaine.ethier at umontreal.ca]
Sent: February 24, 2015 10:13 PM
To: Canadian Urban Forest Network
Subject: Re: [CANUFNET] Suitability Criteria for Treatment of Ash Trees

Hello,
City of Montreal announced on air today new information from the parks and recreation department that new rules are in effect and will be detailed shortly involving private land, residential area and/or industrial -commercial zones. New measures will be implemented including systemic application / silviculture and removal to deal with the green ash borer infestation. not much news on city trees and Parc trees such as the protected patrimony all mount-royal area but also given announced a $13 million investment throughout 2015 this was just recently

iPhone, E. E.

Le 2015-02-24 à 3:30 PM, "peter.wynnyczuk at sympatico.ca<mailto:peter.wynnyczuk at sympatico.ca>" <peter.wynnyczuk at sympatico.ca<mailto:peter.wynnyczuk at sympatico.ca>> a écrit :

http://www.richmondhill.ca/subpage.asp?pageid=emerald_ash_borer

________________________________
From: SVescio at thunderbay.ca<mailto:SVescio at thunderbay.ca>
To: canufnet at list.web.net<mailto:canufnet at list.web.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:16:24 +0000
Subject: [CANUFNET] Suitability Criteria for Treatment of Ash Trees

Hi,

I am interested in finding out what criteria cities are using to determine the suitability of their ash trees for treatment.   Any assistance would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Shelley

Shelley Vescio RPF

City Forester

Thunder Bay Parks Division

work (807) 625-2473

fax (807) 625-3258

www.thunderbay.ca/urbanforestry<http://www.thunderbay.ca/urbanforestry>

The information contained in this email message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message and any attachments.