Staying Alive: Street Tree Survival in the Inner-City

Abstract

A study was conducted from 1978 to late 1984 of the survival of inner‐city street trees planted by the Oakland, California urban forestry program. The tree survival rate of approximately 60 to 70 percent from the trees planted in neighborhood parkways through urban forestry sponsored block parties contrasted sharply with less than one percent survival of trees planted earlier by the Model Cities program without community participation or ceremonial plantings. Explanations for the high tree survival were tested using participant observation, interviews with residents, and a small panel. Tree survival was not found to be related to the explanations provided by urban forestry ideology; namely, that residents had been educated to hold both instrumental and expressive values toward trees. Rather, the explanation appeared to be the function of an unintended solution to the issue of parkway ownership. The tree planting process which included species selection meetings and tree planting ceremonies tended to define the parkway trees as a resident's property, thus decreasing the significance of the parkway‐property barrier. The generality of the Oakland illustration is discussed.

The carbon footprint of urban green space—A life cycle approach

“…Mortality of urban trees varies greatly (see Roman (2006) for a review) and is influenced by a variety of factors. For example, Sklar and Ames (1985) report that community participation can significantly reduce tree mortality. In a study of urban trees in Baltimore, MD, USA, Nowak, Kuroda, and Crane (2004) found lowest mortality rates for low and medium density residential land and highest for transportation land use (2.2 and 20.2%, respectively).…”

Analyzing growth and mortality in a subtropical urban forest ecosystem

“…Urban tree mortality has been the subject of relatively few studies, but some studies of street trees in the temperate northeastern and western US and northern England have shown that mortality was related to tree condition, size, age, land use, water and nutrient stress, socio-economic status, community participation, and maintenance practices (Foster & Blaine, 1978;Gilbertson and Bradshaw, 1985;Nowak, McBride, & Beatty, 1990;Nowak et al, 2004;Sklar & Ames, 1985). For instance, Nowak et al (1990) observed an average morality of 19% for trees along boulevards in Oakland, California, with higher rates (34%) observed adjacent to apartments and public greenspaces.…”

Examining Motivations and Recruitment Strategies for Urban Forestry Volunteers

“…Community outcomes flow from the social interactions that occur between participants of tree planting events that are held within their neighborhood (Bloniarz and Ryan 1997;Summit and Sommer 1997;Dwyer et al 2000;Westphal 2003;Elmendorf 2008). Community involvement in the planting and caring for trees can help to ensure the long-term survival of urban trees (Sklar and Ames 1985;Nowak et al 1990). Data collected during the 2005 trees census in New York City revealed that newly planted trees that exhibited visible signs of stewardship (i.e.…”