Publicité
Lightning Round: Climate Change
Signaler
ColleenSchochSuivre
2 Dec 2022•0 j'aime•23 vues
0 j'aime
Soyez le premier à aimer ceci
afficher plus
vues
Nombre de vues
0
Sur Slideshare
0
À partir des intégrations
0
Nombre d'intégrations
0
Check these out next
Lightning Round: Climate Change
2 Dec 2022•0 j'aime•23 vues
0 j'aime
Soyez le premier à aimer ceci
afficher plus
vues
Nombre de vues
0
Sur Slideshare
0
À partir des intégrations
0
Nombre d'intégrations
0
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
Signaler
Environnement
Lightning Round: Climate Change
ColleenSchochSuivre
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Recommandé
Biomechanics of Trees in ROW Forestry Programs A Useful Metric to Guide Clima...LaurenWeyers
From global to local: How can spatial conservation prioritization inform con...jlehtoma
Place-making and Prosperous CitiesSarah Elizabeth Nurton
Edible Low-Maintenance Landscaping at Clark UniversityJenkins Macedo
Winter bulletin 2010 ~ save the redwoods league6D45520z848622K444
Biodiversity informatics and the agricultural data landscapeCyndy Parr
Lightning Round: Climate Change
- Photo: An Adventurous World
- Photo: @and_rew_and_you
- Photo: Bike Portland
- Photo: Pamplin Media Group
- Photo: The Oregonian
- Source: City of Portland
- Source: Portland Bureau of Transportation Yashar Vasef (he/him/his) Executive Director, Friends of Trees yasharv@friendsoftrees.org www.friendsoftrees.org
- Partners in Community Forestry Conference November 16, 2022 PLANTING FOR THE FUTURE WITH A SISTER CLIMATE CITY ANALYSIS Lightning Round – Climate Change
- Director of Urban Forestry Consulting Services Urban Forestry Planner Project Manager ISA Certified Arborist Municipal Specialist 41 urban forestry projects since 2014 8 years with PlanIT Geo Chris Peiffer 17
- 01 02 Background 03 Tools & Approach 04 Considerations & Inputs Agenda Applications & Future Use 05 Demo & Summary
- Background: Which Trees for the Future?
- Background: Urban Forest Benefits
- Background: Challenges Facing Urban Forests
- Considerations & Inputs Getting started Partners, planting for sustainability Existing lists, programs, standards Regional research and studies Intended application and user(s) Nursery availability, maintenance
- Tools & Approach Trees for climate change CA CO IA KS MN MO MT NE ND SD WY
- Tools & Approach CA CO IA KS MN MO MT NE ND SD WY NM IL PA FL TX
- Tools & Approach Sister Climate City Analysis Analysis Research Scope Sister Climate City Analysis Process SCCA = Sustainable Urban Forest
- Tools & Approach Sister Climate City Analysis Analysis Compare Research Scope Adapt Questions Sister Climate City Analysis Process SCCA = Sustainable Urban Forest
- Applications Align with city plans Update code & standards Collaborate & educate Increase accessibility & use Monitor, analyze, & update
- Example Analysis & Tool City of Fresno, CA Street Tree Lists Cercis canadensis ‘Oklahoma’ Redbud Eastern Oklahoma Cinnamomum camphora Camphor Fraxinus Americana ‘Autumn Purple’ American Ash Fraxinus Americana ‘Autumn Applause’ American Ash Koelreuteria paniculata Golden Rain Tree Lagerstroemia indica ‘Indian’ var. ‘Indian’ var. Crape Myrtle Magnolia grandiflora ‘Russet’ Southern Magnolia Pistacia chinensis Chinese Pistache Platanus acerifolia ‘Columbia’ London Plane Tree Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak Quercus virginiana Southern Live Oak Quercus wislizenii Interior Live Oak Sapium sebiferum Chinese Tallow Zelkova serrata ‘Village Green’ Zelkova Ginkgo biloba ‘Autumn Gold’ Autumn Gold Ginkgo Ginkgo biloba ‘Fairmont’ Fairmont Ginkgo Ginkgo biloba ‘Saratoga’ Ginkgo Saratoga Prunus cerasifera ‘Atropurpea’ Purple Leaf Plum Arbutus unedo Strawberry tree Questions Select 1) How tall would you like your tree to be? 15-35’ (Med) 2) Will it be a wide or narrow canopy? 20-35’ (Med) 3) How much shade would you like? Dense 4) Will there be low or moderate watering? Moderate 5) How much planting space is available? 6'-10' Width 6) Would you like a tree native to the area? Yes 7) Deciduous or evergreen tree? n/a 8) Amount of tree litter? n/a 9) Will you plant a Climate Resilient tree? Yes Common Name Scientific Name California Buckeye Aesculus california Strawberry Tree Arbutus 'Marina' Bottle Tree Brachychiton populneus Fan Tex Ash Fraxinus velutina 'Rio Grande' Australian Willow Geijera parviflora Heath Melaleuca Melaleuca ericifolia Selection Results Botanical Name Common Name H e i g h t : 0 - 1 5 ' ( s m a l l ) H e i g h t : 1 5 - 3 5 ' ( m e d i u m ) H e i g h t : > 3 5 ' ( l a r g e ) S p r e a d : 0 - 2 0 ' S p r e a d : 2 0 - 3 5 ' S p r e a d : > 3 5 ' 5 ' + P l a n t i n g W i d t h 6 ' + P l a n t i n g W i d t h 1 0 ' + P l a n t i n g W i d t h L o w W a t e r i n g N e e d s - Y e s L o w W a t e r i n g N e e d s - N o L o c a l l y N a t i v e - Y e s C i t y T r e e o n F r e s n o L i s t ? S a n J o s e N u r s e r y L i s t ? R e s i d e n t i a l ? B a c k - u p L o t ? T r e e W e l l ? S t r e e t M e d i a n ? P r i v a t e Y a r d ? P a r k ? Acacia melanoxylon Black Acacia X X X X Alnus cordata Italian Alder X X X X X Fraxinus americana 'Autumn Purple' Autumn Purple White Ash X X X X Fraxinus velutina 'Rio Grande' Fan Tex Ash X X X X Geijera parviflora Australian Willow X X X X X Betula pendula European White Birch X X X X X Brachychiton populneus Bottle Tree X X X X X X X X X Tristania conferta Brisbane Box Lophostemon confertus X X X X X X X X X Aesculus californica California Buckeye X X X X X X X X
- Partners in Community Forestry Conference November 16, 2022 THANK YOU! Lightning Round – Climate Change Chris Peiffer, Director of Urban Forestry Consulting Services, PlanIT Geo chrispeiffer@planitgeo.com │ (717) 579-9890
- Sooty Bark Disease Climate Change ‘Time Bomb’ Joey Hulbert Puyallup Research and Extension Center Washington State University
- WSU Puyallup Research and Extension Center Todd Murray Marianne Elliot Joey Hulbert Gary Chastagner native-land.ca
- Disease Environment Sooty Bark Disease
- Cryptostroma corticale
- https://ppo.Puyallup.wsu.edu/sbd https://doh.wa.gov/node/12614
- About ¼th of our street trees are maples
- Potential Hosts Common Name Species Field Maple Acer campestre Vine Maple Acer circinatum Fernleaf Fullmoon Maple Acer japonicum Bigleaf Maple Acer macrophyllum Japanese Maple Acer palmatum Norway Maple Acer platanoides Sycamore Maple Acer pseudoplatanus Red Maple Acer rubrum Water Birch Betula occidentalis European Beech Fagus sylvatica Orn. Cherry Plum Prunus cerasifera Horse Chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum Pacific Dogwood Cornus nuttallii Oregon Ash Fraxinus latifolia American Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua
- 122 maple trees Tacoma Sooty Bark Disease Vulnerability Study
- Washington Sooty Bark Disease Samples Pullman 1968 Centralia 2007 Seattle 2020 Greater Puget Sound 2021 2022
- Emerging Disease Favorable conditions for fungal growth Increased tree stress
- Berkshire Products
- Summary • ‘Rise of the secondaries’ • Urban forests are experiments • It is going to get worse • Don’t overlook interactions between environment and plant pathogens Disease Environment hulbe@wsu.edu What’s brewing in your urban forest?
- Which Urban Tree Canopy Types are the “Coolest” Clara Pregitzer, PhD, Natural Areas Conservancy Crystal Crown, Natural Areas Conservancy In Collaboration with the Forests in Cities Network
- Trees make our cities cooler McCarren Park, Brooklyn, NY
- Not all tree canopy is the same
- Value and Vulnerability of Forests in Cities Degraded Forests Healthy Fores Differences within Natural Area Forests
- Forests in Cities Network Goals 1. 1. Strengthen a community of practice 2. 2. Increase knowledge about natural area forests 3. 3. Advocate for increased resources and
- 2022 Summer Study Air temperature Sensors Surface temperature map Study Goal: Quantify temperature differences between healthy & degraded forested natural areas and tree canopy in the streetscape.
- Air Temperature Sensor Deployment June 21st - September 30 2022 12 City Teams participated 122 sensors up
- Surface Temperature 2,000 polygon sites digitized that account for ~75k acres across 12 cities
- Surface Temperure Outcomes- NYC Natural area land cover types are the coolest in the city
- Healthy Forests can be the Coolest
- Differences Magnified During Heat Waves ~ 9 degrees differences ~11 degrees differences ~6 degrees differences
- Working together has amplifed our impact
- Summary & What’s Next? • Natural area forests can be an average of 5 degrees cooler than tree canopy in the street scape - Lots of variation! • Healthy forests are usually cooler but not always • During peak hot hours during a heat wave these differences are magnified • Stay tuned for full analysis this winter!
- Learn more about Forests in Cities Come find us at our booth Naturalareasnyc.org Clara.Pregitzer@naturalareasnyc.org
Notes de l'éditeur
- 02.12.2022
- 02.12.2022
- 02.12.2022
- 02.12.2022
- Hello Everyone. I’m honored to be here My name is Clara Pregitzer and I am the Deputy Director of Conservation Science at the Natural Areas Conservancy based in New York City. Today I’ll be sharing some preliminary results from a project looking at temperature differences under different types of urban tree canopy in 12 cities across the US. I want to make sure to acknowledge Crystal Crown on our team contributed a great deal to this work as well as all members of the Forests in Cities Network. This was a truly collaborative project and I’m excited to share this with you today.
- Heat is the #1 weather related cause of illness and death. Last summer Seattle experienced the hottest temperure on record – 108F. Our cities are becoming warmer and this has many negative outcomes. Trees can cool cities down. Studies starting in the 1980s have looked at the cooling benfits of trees in cities. With shaded areas typically ~7 degrees cooler than non shaded areas – and areas with grass rather than pavement cooler, and air temperature in parks have been found to be about 1 degree cooler than the surrounding neighborhoods.
- Trees grow in different places and in different spatial arrangements in cities. This leads to different management needs, and different uses and magnitude of benefits. We know that forested natural areas or forest patches have higher density, soil and pervious surface underneath, and rely on natural regeneration. These are the “woods” in the city. We know that on a per-canopy basis they can store and sequester more carbon than other types of tree canopy. our organization focuses on forested natural areas.
- Within a broad canopy type = Natural areas , there can be differences in the structure and composition of the forest. The reasons for these differences can vary but could include climate change, urban impacts, land use history. And these differences can have consequences for how people experience the forest, to which plants and animals can thrive and the magnitude of ecological benefits. Forests need care and resources to maximize their benefits. We have observed differences in temperature in different forest types, and how management and care of healthy forests could lead to cooler cities.
- In 2019 we started the Forests in Cities Network to address the need for increased funding, a stronger sense of community of practice, and to generate new knowledge and elevate the good work of practitioners across the US. We currently have 17 cities that are part of the network- they form teams within their city and apply to be part of the network. We’ve worked together to generate case studies, a resource library.
- Working with our Forests in Cities Network we designed a study in 2022 to quantify differences in 3 types of urban tree canopy. Healthy natural areas, degraded natural areas, and tree canopy in the street scape. The study has two components: Deploy air sensors that are then attached to trees. Each city team got a minimum oc 9 sensors that were paired in groups of 3 (healthy, degraded, and street trees). Then using existing surface temperature anomaly maps to get a broader spatial distribution city teams drew polygons around different land cover types.
- 12 of our city teams participated – we got all the sensors up around the first day of summer June 21s and just took them down about 7 weeks ago. So they are up for the full summer. They log temperature every 5 minutes and they are blue tooth enabled – so our city teams had to go aound using an app a few times during the summer to download the data. Why we use both air temperature vs surface temperature
- This gives s sense of the scale of the study. Overall we had 122 sensors up in 12 cities. and nearly 2000 polygon sites digitized that account for ~75k acres of land area. Those aren’t all forests- so with the surface temperature anaomply we are also comparing to the built environment. We are just now getting to analyzing some of this data
- Our results from surface temperature analysis in NYC show that on average upland natural area forests at 5 degrees cooler compared to tree canopy in the right of way. These are polygons across NYC and you can see natural area land cover types are the coolest – forested wetlands being overall the coolest- You can also see a TON of variation. All these dots ar polygons across NYC – with natural areas being sometimes >10degrees cooler – but also sometimes the exact same temperature. Of course this could have a lot to do with spatial context, elevation, proximity to water bodies, adjacencies to buildings and other features.
- When we look at healthy vs degraded forests for the city of Seattle in 6 sites for day and night time temperatures for the full summer we can see in general healthy forests are a little cooler than degreaded forests – but not by much and it’s not always the case. For Seattle heathly forests wer typically ~1 degree cooler during the day than degraded forests.
- Looking just at a heat index day- this is the same 6 sites but over a 24 hour period during one of the hottest days in the summer. The patterns are much starker- but also vary based on site. You can see in the Dwamish valley the healthy forest during the heat of the day was nearly 7 degrees cooler than the unhelathy forested and street tree- but in Kudoba gardens the healthy/unhealthy are about the same but both are about 5 or 6 degrees cooler than the street tree. Then at night the temperatures come closer together.
- This is Weston Brinkley and Michael Yadrick who work here in Seattle and have been incredible partners on this project and are leaders in the field of urban forestry/natural areas. One of the aspects of this project that I anticipated but not to the magnitude was how powerful it was to work together on this study and activate this project in 12 cities. Over the summer many cities got stories written about cooling and the importance of natural areas.
- In summary- we know that Natural Area Forests can be some of the coolest types of forest in cities- and can play a big role in cooling. If we know that street trees are ~7 degrees cooler than no shade and natural areas ares ~ 5 degrees cooler than street trees that temperature differential makes a big difference. We are seeing trends that our healthy forests are cooler than degraded forests. This reinforces the importance of healthy forests and need for investment and care of natural areas. Stay tuned as we finalize this analysis
- Thank you very much for your time. This is a QR code for our Forests in Citeis Resource library- there are over 100 resources submitted by our FiC network. If you would like to learn more about the network, this study, or just talk about natural areas - We have a booth in the exibit hall- or come find me during the break.
Publicité