Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 26, Issue 2–3, pp 153–163 | Cite as

Monitoring the urban forest: Case studies and evaluations

  • F. A. Baker
Article

Abstract

Urban forestry is a new science, with monitoring techniques that are still evolving. Tree inventory is most commonly practiced, but we are learning to better monitor the benefits and liabilities provided by urban trees. These results are often for political, social, and biological purposes. Although most monitoring is done at the project or local level, examples of state and national projects are given. Quality control procedures are infrequently used, but could substantially improve the accuracy of data collected.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anonymous: 1982, Municipal Tree Management. Urban Data Service, Volume 14, Number 1. Washington, D.C.: International City Management Association, 14 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous: 1976, Managing Urban Trees. Urban Data Service Reports, Volume 8, Number 11, 14 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Bartsch, D., Hook, J., Prince, E. and Schrom, D.: 1985, ‘Using Computer Simulation to Plan a Sustained Yield Urban Forest’, J. For. 83, 372–375.Google Scholar
  4. Bassett, J.R.: 1978, ‘Vegetation Inventories: Needs and Uses’, Proc. Natl. Urban For. Conf. November 13–16, 1978. Washington, D.C., pp. 632–644.Google Scholar
  5. Bernhardt, E. and Swiecki, T.: 1988, ‘The State of Urban Forestry in California’. Prepared for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Urban Forestry Program, 68 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Downie, A.M.: 1988, ‘Firmly Planted’, CADalyst 5, 31–35.Google Scholar
  7. Hathout, S. and Simpson, K.: 1986, ‘Boulevard Tree Studies from Aerial Photographs of Winnipeg City, Manitoba, Canada’, J. Env. Management 23, 203–214.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson, C., Baker, F.A. and Johnson, W.: 1990, Urban and Community Forestry: A Guide for the Interior Western States. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, UT, 215 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Kelsey, P.D. and Hootman, R.G.: 1988, ‘Soil and Tree Resource Inventories for Campus Landscapes’, J. Arboric. 14, 243–249.Google Scholar
  10. Kielbaso, J.J.: 1990, ‘Trends and Issues in City Forests’, J. Arboric. 16, 69–76.Google Scholar
  11. Laut, J.G.: 1978, ‘Detection of Insect and Disease Conditions: A Necessity for Urban Forest Inventories’, Proc. Natl. Urban For. Conf. November 13–16, 1978. Washington, D.C., pp. 645–649.Google Scholar
  12. Lindhult, M.S. and Ryan, H.D.P., III: ‘Street Tree Management: The Next Generation’, Arbor Age 7, 13–20.Google Scholar
  13. Majerus, K.A.: 1988, Urban Forest Management: Guidelines for Planning and Administration, University of Illinois, Department of Forestry, 46 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Mohai, P., Smith, L., Valentine, F., Stiteler, W., Elias, T. and Westfall, R.: 1976, ‘Structure of Urban Street Tree Populations and Sampling Designs for Estimating their Parameters’, METRIA : 1, Proc. First Conf. of the Metropolitan Tree Improvement Alliance, pp. 28–43.Google Scholar
  15. Schroeder, H.W.: 1990, ‘Perceptions and Preferences of Urban Forest Users’, J. Arboric. 16, 58–61.Google Scholar
  16. Smiley, E.T.: 1988, ‘Test Your Town's Trees’, Am. For. 94, 69–72.Google Scholar
  17. Smiley, E.T. and Baker, F.A.: 1988, ‘Options in Street Tree Inventories’, J. Arboric. 14, 36–42.Google Scholar
  18. Tate, R.L.: 1985, ‘Uses of Street Tree Inventory Data’, J. Arboric. 11, 210–213.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. A. Baker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Forest ResourcesUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations