Date post: | 18-Jan-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | rose-whitehead |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Urban update part II
Urban Reporting Team update Austin report Urban reporting in the future
What’s up in Wisconsin? New Tools
iTree Landscape My City’s Trees
Potential Guidelines for Urban Reporting
Annual Reports Automated “report” would be generated without
any customization. Initially core tables generated in publishable form and would evolve into automatically generated tables and figures with standard text
Future could include use of a dynamic table making program like Tableau
Begin production after 50% of data is collected In accelerated cities/states, first annual report
release TBD
Potential Guidelines for Urban Reporting
Comprehensive 5-year report Initial report after a full cycle of data is complete – including more
custom analysis Comprehensive follow up report after 100% remeasurement Standard template is being developed, but will evolve over time
until we have realized: the full analytical power of combining iTree and core FIA variables explored urban to rural forest analysis developed the ability to monitor change over time
The baseline and remeasurement reports will be the only promised urban-only reports – after, urban reporting will be FIA 5-year state reports. This will fulfill the 5-year reporting requirement and will facilitate urban to rural comparisons and demonstrate that urban forest reporting is a fully integrated “core” program.
Potential Guidelines for Urban Reporting
Regional/National Reporting: No formal timeline but national collaboration
will be encouraged to produce regional and national urban reports using urban FIA data.
What’s up in Wisconsin?
http://dnr.wi.gov/wnrmag/2015/10/WNR%20OCTOBER%20Forestry.PDF
Ten-year Change in Value to Communities of all Public and Private Trees
2002 2012Area: 729,000 ac 933,000 acNo. of plots: 111 185# of Trees (meas.): 651 597# of Trees (est.): 27 million 43 millionReplacement cost: $10.9 billion $19.3 billionCarbon Storage: $41 million $285 millionCarbon Seq./yr: $2.9 million $15 millionPollution Rem. /yr: $36.3 million $27.1 millionEnergy Savings: $25 million $86 million
2012 Species Diversity
2002: 56 Different SpeciesMaple – 23%; Ash – 20%2012: 65 Different SpeciesMaple – 16.7%; Ash – 7.6%
Change Analysis 2002 to 201291 plots were remeasured, but only 67
plots were used in change analysisNo significant change in total number of
treesOver the 10 year period, significant
changes in number of trees for 5 species:
Silver maple (n=9)White ash (n=10)Kwansan cherry (n=3)Red mulberry (n=5)Sugar maple (n=7)
Ash Mortality (FIA) in Wisconsin
0123456789
10
1983 1996 2009 2013
Mill
ion
cubi
c fe
et
Average annual mortality of ash
So…
We need a lot more urban plots!
General frameworkThe “three legged stool”
“The first leg”
Plot-based, continuous inventory and analysis on all ownerships to characterize the urban forest and its benefits
This will feed i-Tree Eco and i-Tree Landscape.
5x intensity on 1.25 million acres (roughly 1,300 plots)
“The second leg” : Wisconsin UTC Classification
Existing NLCD UTC Classification
Wisconsin UTC Classification
“The third leg”
Aggregation of existing municipal tree inventories to advise municipalities
These datasets are very useful in certain ways, but also have drawbacks
Other data sources may also become available
Currently assessing commercially available software
Study Area
Factsheets
Pilot street tree and canopy analysis factsheets were created to stimulate community questions.
Question:How much did the Fond du Lac City Council increase their annual Forestry budget as a result of this fact sheet?
Answer: $200,000
This DNR-developed template in now freely available to communities or to private consultants to use to assist other communities.
i-Tree Landscape Canopy
i-TL Census layers
i-TL Ecosystem Services
i-TL Planting Prioritization
i-TL Planting Priority
i-TL Report Generator