HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP2. Bozeman urban forestry management plan
[URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN]
A plan to sustainably, holistically and efficiently manage
Bozeman’s urban forest to realize the full expanse of benefits
urban trees can provide
1
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Acknowledgements:
Mitch Overton: Director of Parks and Recreation Bozeman
Bozeman Tree Advisory Board
The Bozeman Citizenry
Jamie Kirby: Montana DNRC
This document was funded by an urban forestry program development grant from the State of
Montana - Department of Natural Resources & Conservation – Urban & Community Forestry Program
2
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Table of Contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 4
History and People .................................................................................................................................... 6
Process and Plan Development ................................................................................................................. 7
Climate and Environment ......................................................................................................................... 7
Political Climate........................................................................................................................................ 8
Value of Urban Forest ............................................................................................................................... 8
Organization of Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 9
Goals of the Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 10
Bozeman’s Relationship with the Urban Forest.......................................................................................... 11
Why Urban Trees ........................................................................................................................................ 12
Public Health ........................................................................................................................................... 13
Social Benefits ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Hydrology ............................................................................................................................................... 13
Environmental Energy Savings ............................................................................................................... 14
Air Quality .............................................................................................................................................. 14
Economic Value ...................................................................................................................................... 14
Bozeman’s Urban Forest ............................................................................................................................. 15
Tree Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................................... 17
Condition ................................................................................................................................................ 19
Species Diversity .................................................................................................................................... 19
Age Diversity .......................................................................................................................................... 20
Age and Size Diversity Analyzed ........................................................................................................... 20
Increasing the Canopy Cover in Bozeman .......................................................................................... 21
Tree Infrastructure Recommendations and Expected Outcomes ............................................................ 23
Management of Urban Forest ..................................................................................................................... 24
Current Management .............................................................................................................................. 24
Analysis of Current Management ........................................................................................................... 26
Preferred Management ............................................................................................................................ 28
3
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Superintendent of the Forestry Department Position .......................................................................... 28
Maintaining Public Trees .................................................................................................................... 29
Contracting Work ................................................................................................................................ 35
Maintaining Private Trees ................................................................................................................... 36
Bozeman Public Schools ..................................................................................................................... 37
Budget/Funding....................................................................................................................................... 37
Risk Management ................................................................................................................................... 39
Tree Characteristics Associated with Tree Failure .............................................................................. 40
Risk Management Plan ....................................................................................................................... 41
Management of Urban Forest Recommendations ................................................................................... 43
Community Engagement ............................................................................................................................ 44
Forestry Advisory Board ......................................................................................................................... 45
Health and Welfare Benefits ............................................................................................................... 46
Community Planning ........................................................................................................................... 47
Planting Trees...................................................................................................................................... 47
Education ............................................................................................................................................ 49
Coordination ....................................................................................................................................... 49
Assistance ............................................................................................................................................ 49
Bozeman School District (Planting Partnership) ................................................................................. 50
Partnering with Montana State University ......................................................................................... 50
Community Engagement Recommendations .......................................................................................... 51
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 52
Appendix 1 Job description for Urban Forester/Superintendent of Forestry .............................................. 53
Appendix 1. Planting trees in paved areas .................................................................................................. 54
Appendix 3 SWOT analysis ........................................................................................................................ 55
References ................................................................................................................................................... 56
4
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Abstract
The Bozeman Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) aims to sustainably, holistically, and
efficiently manage Bozeman’s urban forest and to illustrate the full expanse of benefits urban
trees can provide. This plan focuses on finding the most cost-effective ways to accomplish these
goals in Bozeman. The City of Bozeman and the public have given the urban forest in Bozeman
more attention and priority in recent years, resulting in more effective management and an
increase in the maintenance of public trees. This plan considers maintaining public trees an
essential element of successful urban forestry management, but it is only one component. This
plan emphasizes strategies to maximize the benefits the urban forest provides. These benefits
provide solutions to many of the issues faced by our modern-day society, especially in the
environmental, psychological, sociological, and economic areas.
The Bozeman UFMP is supplemented with the Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action
Plan, and together they offer a comprehensive approach to building a healthy urban forest and
preserving it from invasive pests. The Bozeman UFMP is comprised of three main parts: Tree
Infrastructure, Management of the Urban Forest, and Community Engagement. These three
components work together to build the most efficient urban forest in Bozeman.
Introduction
The Bozeman Urban
Forestry
Management Plan is
an updated version
of the previously
created Tree City
Master Plan created
in 2011 by the
Bozeman Tree
Advisory Board and
adopted by the City
Commission. This
project is the
accumulation of
much work done by
the Bozeman Tree Advisory Board, the Director of Parks and Recreation, and the public.
Monthly tree board meetings were held preparing this plan during the six-month drafting period.
A series of four public meetings were conducted on the topics of tree infrastructure, management
of the urban forest, emerald ash borer, and community engagement. Public comment was collect
South Church Avenue, Bogert Park
5
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
during the series of meetings. A draft version was created and the final document was produced
from revisions of the draft.
Bozeman’s Urban Forestry Management Plan presents the most cost-effective management
possible, yet it preserves the existing canopy cover, substantially grows canopy, and maximizes
benefits. Every opportunity to “do more with less” is stressed in this plan, and the budget
recommendations will result in greater overall efficiency while gaining a remarkable return on
investment. This plan represents an impartial overview of the current structure and offers a
management strategy that focuses on increasing work productivity, while addressing issues
related to risk and liability.
An important component to the
efficacy of this plan is the
immediacy of its implementation.
This is because Bozeman’s urban
forest is particularly vulnerable to
a looming forest pest, the Emerald
Ash Borer. The sooner
recommendations are
implemented; the more prepared
Bozeman will be for such an
event. Without immediate action,
Bozeman’s urban forest will be
compromised which will limit the
ability of the City to respond to or
handle large scale impacts from
invasive pests as well as storm
events, urban development, , and
risk management. Therefore the
urgency of implementation is
critical and cannot be understated.
The urban forest is the only
community infrastructure that increases in value over time. Bozeman’s urban forest offers
immense benefits and is worth the investment.
Mission Statement
The City of Bozeman is committed to providing a healthy, safe, and aesthetically
pleasing community forest for its residents and visitors. By maintaining, managing, and
Elm Tree in Cooper Park
6
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
preserving its trees, the city raises its citizens’ standard of living and maximizes the
benefits offered by its urban forest.
Vision Statement
Bozeman’s community forest is an essential component of municipal infrastructure, one
that creates efficiencies and long-term solutions to achieving a sustainable community.
The community forest is cared for by the city and its people, creating a high quality of
life, a healthier citizenry, and making it a leader of towns in the Mountain West.
This plan does not address the technicalities of tree maintenance, such as pruning or planting
trees. Suggestions are made when deemed appropriate as to new trends or when a cost-saving
measure can be made. This plan format summarizes recommendations at the end of each of the
three sections. These recommendations are steps that can be prioritized and “checked off.”
History and People
The City of Bozeman is Montana’s fourth largest city, with a population of 39,860, according to
the 2012 census estimate, and it is the seat of Gallatin County. Bozeman has a rich history of
notable figures, starting with its founder and namesake, John Bozeman, who platted the town in
1864. William Clark passed though and camped in the area, documenting this location.
The city has its roots in agriculture, and many of its earliest institutions reflect that, including the
Agricultural College of the State of Montana, established in 1893 and later renamed Montana
State University.
The Bozeman
National Fish
Hatchery was
established in
1892 and is the
fourth oldest fish
hatchery in the
United States.
Much of the
Gallatin Valley
was planted with
peas in the early
1900s. Pea
canneries in
Bozeman
produced 75% of
the seed peas in the
View of canopy in Bogert Park
7
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
United States, and Bozeman was once known as the “sweet pea capital of the nation.” The Sweet
Pea Festival, held the first weekend in August every year, is one of Montana’s largest festivals
and a source of community pride.
Bozeman prides itself in being a great place to raise families and a healthy place to live and
work. It has been documented in many publications as the “most livable” or recognized for its
recreational opportunities. It is located in a valley surrounded by mountain ranges that create
beautiful surroundings and great recreation. Tourism is an important part of the Bozeman
economy, with its proximity to Yellowstone National Park and area ski resorts. Bozeman’s
positive attributes have been noted in literature, film, and television media, ranging from author
John Steinbeck, filming locations for A River Runs Through It, and references in TV Shows “The
Big Bang Theory” and “CSI: NY.”
Montana State University is located in Bozeman and annually enrolls about 15,000 students.
This influences the character of the town in many ways, mostly giving the town a youthful feel
and adding to its vibrancy.
Process and Plan Development
During the development of this plan, four public meetings were held in City Hall. On three of
those occasions, there were other meetings occurring in different rooms at the same time as the
urban forest meetings. The other meetings were affordable housing, stormwater management,
and sustainable transportation. Urban trees have a direct relationship to every one of these topics:
Urban trees provide cost-saving benefits and raise the quality of life for people, especially
where affordable housing is concerned.
Trees reduce stormwater runoff.
Trees make sustainable
transportation much easier by
slowing down traffic and
moderating the elements.
Trees were not mentioned at any one of
these individual meetings, and that is an
opportunity lost for the City of
Bozeman. An urban forester could be
involved in all of these planning
meetings to make Bozeman run more
efficiently.
Climate and Environment
Bozeman is technically in the Zone 4B
climate zone, represented in the grey.
-25F
-30F
-35F
Figure 1. USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map
8
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Zone 4A closely borders Bozeman and affects the trees that will grow. In the Plant Zones map,
the purple represents Zone 4A and pink is a Zone 3B. The climate zone map is based on average
extreme low temperatures. Bozeman’s yearly average precipitation is 16.23 inches, which is
higher than surrounding areas in Montana but still considered a semi-arid climate.
The soil in Bozeman is generally a silty loam and conducive to tree growth. The soils are derived
from alluvial sources and are pH neutral to slightly alkaline. There are some poisoned soils in the
northeast part of Bozeman, but generally they are not an issue for tree growth.
Political Climate
Historically, Bozeman is known for being a conservative hub with an agricultural way of life. In
recent years, Montana State University as well as the town of Bozeman have become more
politically neutral to liberal. Issues of homelessness and care for the homeless, mass transit,
sustainable transportation, and bigger city issues have become much more prevalent in Bozeman.
Bozeman’s population grew by 40% between 2000 and 2013 and continues to grow. The urban
forestry department in Bozeman has had no net change in its number of arborists since the year
2005. As Bozeman grows, the urban forestry department must keep pace with the amount of
development and the increasing demand on its resources.
Value of Urban Forest
The replacement value of Bozeman’s municipal forest is $21 million. This is a substantial asset
and investment, one that requires maintenance, one that grows in value over time, and one that
exponentially pays its community back in benefits.
Urban forest management is a relatively new, yet vital, concept across the U.S. as well as in
Bozeman. This is due to the change in how we, as a community, value our trees. New studies and
developments show clear ties to mental, social, and physical health benefits from the community
forest. In addition, the ecological benefits of having trees in an urban environment are now more
important than ever. Because of this greater understanding, managing an urban forest has
evolved from the number of trees and how often they need pruning to now figuring out how the
community can receive—and sustainably grow—the greatest benefits from their urban forest.
Implementing recommendations from this plan will benefit Bozeman particularly well. This is
because Bozeman has a resource in its urban forest that has much potential, meaning the true
benefits of the urban forest have not been maximized. A stronger urban forest will mean a
stronger community in Bozeman. By investing in the urban forest and implementing the plan
right away, the City of Bozeman can make cost-effective, long-term solutions to human and
environmental issues, such potentials include:
Gain efficiencies and cost savings in city operations, namely hard infrastructure
Improve water quality, and stormwater management
9
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Increase human health and welfare
Increase the health and biodiversity of the urban forest
Differentiate Bozeman from most other Mountain West towns by further establishing
itself as a leader in sustainable practices and economic growth
Combat climate change and increase environmental health
Create a more environmentally literate population
Create recreational opportunities
Ensure Bozeman is a thriving community for future generations
Lessen the negative impacts of development
Lessen liabilities from neglecting urban trees
Create food sources for people, overwintering birds, and wildlife
Enhance stewardship opportunities for its citizenry and building community
Proliferate social justice and sanctuary for the underserved in our community
It is now more important than ever to invest in the future of Bozeman because of the need to
improve human health and welfare. This plan offers realistic, achievable solutions to critical
community issues; however, if Bozeman is to realize the full array of environmental benefits, a
thought paradigm shift must take place. The urban forest must be thought of as an essential
component of Bozeman’s infrastructure and must be included in the planning of Bozeman’s
growth and development.
It is difficult to grow an urban forest when it is implemented as an afterthought. Bozeman is well
positioned to implement many of the recommendations made in this report in a relatively quick
timeframe. This is due to the receptive citizenry, the growth of Bozeman, and the timing of this
plan with respect to changes in the Urban Forestry Department.
Organization of Plan
This plan first gives the background necessary to understand why an urban forest is beneficial to
the community that lives in it and why a plan is needed to achieve the principles of a sustainable
urban forest. Once this background is understood, three management components are analyzed.
These components are:
Tree infrastructure. This includes an assessment of the current condition and
characteristics of the urban forest.
Management of the urban forest. This includes the people and departments charged
with caring for and implementing this plan. Such entities include the Urban Forestry
Department, designated city employees, elected officials, and Tree Advisory Bozeman
Board.
10
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Community engagement. This is the relationship between the City of Bozeman and the
community that supports its endeavors. This management component shows the
important role the city has in engaging the public to raise awareness of the urban forest,
given that at least half of the urban forest is on private property.
After analyzing one of these components, the plan makes recommendations on how to most
efficiently improve in that area.
Goals of the Plan
The goal of this plan is to coordinate the management of Bozeman’s urban forest. The plan
addresses environmental considerations, clarifies roles and responsibilities, and provides tools
for implementation such as action items and suggested time frames. This plan creates a holistic
urban forest. A holistic urban forest is one that:
Enhances the City of Bozeman through environmental and economic benefits
Is resilient to climate change and invasive pests
Is valued by the community as an essential resource and asset
A sustainable urban forest is one that is healthy, diverse, continually being added to and well-
adapted to the local climate and urban conditions. A healthy urban forest requires maintenance,
and this plan
seeks to find the
most cost-
effective way of
maintaining the
urban forest. A
diverse urban
forest has a
variety of species,
contributing
towards resilience
in the event of
insects and
disease, as well as
offering a rich
canopy in various
sizes and appearance. Continuous planting will ensure trees grow to maturity at different stages
and strengthen the age diversity of the urban forest. A well-adapted urban forest is one that uses
species that are resilient to pests and urban conditions, and suited to withstand harsh Montana
climates. Urban trees face a unique set of challenges in an urban environment, including
mechanical damage, soil disturbances, and above-ground limitations.
View of Bozeman from Pete’s Hill
11
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
This plan has seven essential elements, and if implemented correctly, will save the City of
Bozeman millions of dollars in management costs, preserve the existing canopy, and greatly
expand the urban forest and the benefits it provides. Five of these elements directly prepare the
City of Bozeman for the arrival of the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), and in doing so they create a
healthy, sustainable urban forest. The seventh element expands benefits and reduces liability.
The seven essential elements are as follows:
Create an urban forester position to oversee Bozeman’s urban forest
Plant a new generation of trees with appropriate species diversity
Establish a systematic and coordinated detection effort for EAB
Remove trees that are deemed hazardous, in poor condition, or in inappropriate locations
Establish a healthy and vibrant relationship between the community and Bozeman’s
Urban Forestry Department
Complete and maintain the tree inventory
Implement a proactive maintenance cycle
The plan is not organized around these elements, rather they are addressed in many ways and
though multiple management strategies throughout the plan. When necessary, they are
highlighted to show how the three management components (tree infrastructure, urban forest
management, and community engagement) work together symbiotically; not independent of each
other.
If EAB were to arrive in Bozeman without these essential elements being addressed, the city
would spend between $1.8 million and $7 million in response efforts and still potentially lose
9,000 of its 20,000 trees, as detailed in Bozeman’s Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Course of Action
Plan. The EAB Course of Action Plan operates as a supplementary plan to this UFMP and
elaborates on specific management decisions related to Bozeman’s ash trees. Together, both
plans will complement each other when looking into the long-term care and planning for the
urban forest.
Bozeman’s Relationship with the Urban Forest
The urban forest in Bozeman, Montana, is a cherished part of the city for its citizens and a
crucial part of the city infrastructure. The influence of the urban forest on quality of life and the
town’s character cannot be overstated. The significance Bozeman places on its urban forest
differentiates it from other western towns and makes Bozeman a more attractive place for people
to visit and make their home.
12
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Bozeman continues to
have a greater
influence in the West
among destination
mountain towns. The
urban forest is a major
component of this
draw. The urban forest
separates Bozeman
from other towns in the
state and Rocky
Mountain region.
Bozeman is unique in
that many other
Montana towns look
here for guidance on
matters such as urban forest management and economic growth. Bozeman is well positioned as
one of the most desirable places to live and visit. Investing in the urban forest is an essential part
of realizing this future.
This plan was developed with guidance from public input. From this input, it is clear that thehe
people of Bozeman place a high value on their urban trees and exhibit a willingness to invest in
the urban forest. Ultimately, the people of Bozeman remain the driving force for supporting this
Urban Forestry Management Plan.
Why Urban Trees
Urban trees
increase human
quality of life in
many ways. Trees
in the urban
landscape provide
economic benefits
such as increased
property values,
reduced demand on
sewer systems by
reducing storm
water runoff and
1 1
5
21
41
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Unvaluable Slightly
Valuable
Moderately
Valuable
Very Valuable Highly
Valuable
How much do you
value our urban
forest?
Figure 2
13
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
erosion, reduced wear on city streets, enhanced air quality, carbon sequestration, energy
conservation through shade and wind protection, and noise abatement. There are public health
benefits offered by urban trees, and investing in the community forest benefits everyone, not just
the privileged, thus adding an element of social justice. Other non-monetary yet important
benefits of urban trees include wildlife habitat for animals, especially birds, and the higher
quality of life created by having trees in the viewshed.
Public Health
Communities with a healthy urban forest will have a healthier population. People who live
around trees are three times more likely to be physically active and 40% less likely to be
overweight. (Donovan, G.H et. al.) offer important air purification benefits. In a study conducted
by the U.S. Forest Service, it was found that communities that have lost massive numbers of
trees were linked to higher death rates. Urban trees also lower stress levels, and even improve
recovery time for patients when given a view of trees.
Social Benefits
Urban trees contribute to important social and community dynamics. Trees provide an
opportunity for citizens to engage in an issue that benefits themselves, their neighbors, and the
entire landscape. Urban trees promote sustainable transportation in many ways. Trees slow down
vehicle traffic and help guide motorists making them physically safer by providing a barrier, thus
creating a naturally-convenient design in transportation (Tarran, 2009).
Urban trees aid in reducing crime rates. Areas with high numbers of healthy trees can reduce
crime rates as much as 50% compared to areas with low levels of vegetation (Kuo and Sullivan,
2001). Moreover, a 10% increase in canopy cover can result in a 12% reduction in crime levels
(Troy, Grove and O’Niel-Dunne, 2012). These trees also lower the fear of crime, thus lowering
stress levels (Donovan and Prestemon, 2013).
Hydrology
Urban trees work symbiotically with other parts of the city infrastructure. Urban trees reduce the
demand on sewer systems during periods of stormwater runoff. Tree canopies absorb rainwater,
lessening the amount of water entering the sewer system. Much of the water that runs down the
trunk of a tree is taken up by the roots. As much as 80% of rainfall in the summer months can be
absorbed by trees on impervious surfaces with tree pits (Stringer and Ennos, 2013). When a
raindrop is intercepted by a tree’s canopy, it does not impact the soil, thus limiting erosion.
These valuable soils are retained, and the sewer system does not have to process the particulate
matter. An average mature ash tree will intercept 1,209 gallons of water every year with an
implied value of $13 per year per tree (McPherson et.al, 2003). Trees also increase the soil’s
capacity to store rainfall through transpiration, and they increase soil organic matter.
14
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
A study conducted by the U.S.
Forest Service in Amherst,
Massachusetts, concluded that
trees on a lot can raise a lot’s
value as much as 15 percent.
Environmental Energy Savings
Trees can also provide energy
conservation services in an urban
environment. This is done by
shading buildings from the
summer’s sun and insulating them
from the winter wind. Deciduous
trees are able to absorb radiant
energy from the sun in the
summer yet in the winter they
allow it through with their branches.
In winter, we value the sun’s radiant energy, and because of this we should plant strategically
around our homes and buildings to realize the best energy savings (ISA website and Matheny
and Clark, 2008)). Trees planted on the west and north sides of buildings dissipate winter’s wind
coming from those directions. Air mass in a building with poor insulation can change two to
three times each hour, and even in well-sealed homes, the air mass can change once every two to
three hours. Trees that deflect winter wind can reduce air infiltration by up to 50%, resulting in a
heating savings of 10 to 12% (Heister, 1986).
Air Quality
Trees improve air quality by absorbing gaseous
pollutants such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide,
ozone, and smog. Trees also intercept particulates in
the air associated with soil tillage, construction, and
erosion. These airborne contaminates have been
associated with asthma, heart and lung disease, and
cancer. Trees sequester carbon, initially through
photosynthesis, by converting carbon into sugars. Over time these sugars are made into woody
material, storing the carbon from the atmosphere. Trees release oxygen though photosynthesis
and lower air temperatures via shade and transpiring water into the air. These trees can also
block undesirable views while reducing noise, especially from vehicles and construction.
Economic Value
A well-maintained urban forest creates value. A survey
by Arbor National Mortgage, Inc. found that a building
lot with trees would “be as much as 20% more saleable
than a house on a lot without trees.” These investments in
trees pay off in perceived values and in tax revenue from
“One acre of forest absorbs six
tons of carbon dioxide and puts
out four tons of oxygen” U.S.
Department of Agriculture
Figure 3
15
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
increased lot values. Mature
trees also reduce the
temperatures of the streets
below and in turn, decrease the
need for street maintenance
from every seven to 10 years to
every 20 to 25 years (Matheny
and Clark, 2008).
Consumers in shopping districts
that are shaded by urban trees
tend to linger and shop longer
(Matheny and Clark, 2008).
These consumers are also willing to
pay higher prices and tend to have
greater patronage for goods and services in these districts.
Landscaping with plants and trees positively influences businesses by:
Increasing workplace productivity and morale
Helping to recruit new employees
Attracting new customers or new business tenants
Being viewed as an employee benefit
Playing a role in creating a corporate image
Playing a role as a marketing tool
(Relf, 1996)
Bozeman’s Urban Forest
Church Street shaded by ash trees
16
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Bozeman’s publicly-owned forest can be assessed in many different ways. According to the i-
Tree analysis software, the average tree in Bozeman provides $111 in benefits annually. The
canopy cover from Bozeman’s public trees offers benefits equivalent to $58 per person annually.
If no greater investment is made, these benefits will decrease. However, when invested in, the
benefits grow in an exponential manner in comparison to the amount of money spent. Bozeman’s
tree infrastructure is an investment like any other infrastructure, such as public buildings and
sewer. Moreover, “unlike other public infrastructure components, properly planted and
maintained trees increase in value over time”. (APWA. Urban Forest Mangament Practices)
Figure 4
17
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Tree Infrastructure
Bozeman is fortunate to have an extensive urban forest offering numerous benefits. The current
inventory is continuously being updated, but only one half complete; hence, approximately
21,000 trees are recorded in Bozeman’s municipally owned forest. This number does not include
the wild trees growing along stream banks and on undeveloped city-owned properties.
18
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Figure 5
The urban forest is going to face increasing threats from climate change and invasive pests.
Climate change will result in increased storm severity, heat and drought periods, lower
temperature extremes, and changing weather patterns. These factors will exploit the weaknesses
in the urban forest. Addressing the health of the urban forest is among the highest priorities for
Bozeman.
19
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Condition
In the past four years, the Urban Forestry Department provided maintenance on 3,805 trees. Out
of 21,000 trees, this represents 5.5% of the population. The majority of Bozeman’s community-
owned forest has not been maintained, and the condition of the trees reflects this lack of
management. Roughly 50% of Bozeman’s community-owned forest is in good condition, but this
figure is largely comprised of young trees that have a diameter of six inches or less, which
represents almost half of Bozeman’s public forest.
Species Diversity
The major weakness in Bozeman’s urban forest is
its lack of species diversity.
In the downtown area, the
urban forest is composed of approximately 75% ash trees. Citywide, ash trees
make up 47% of the tree
population. Bozeman’s
downtown streets, especially the through-streets, is dominated by ash.
Church Avenue across from
Bogart Park is entirely ash;
Main Street, Wilson, and
Cleveland are marginally
better. Generally, recommended species diversity is to have no more than 30% of any family, 20% of
any genus, and 10% of any species represent the total tree population. This may not be fully
achievable in Bozeman; however the concept should be employed.
Species diversity is important to any plant population for the ecology to thrive. Monocultures harm the greater environment by inviting disease and depleting soil resources and diversification
of symbiotic animal life. The same principles hold true when looking at the population of trees in
an urban forest. When low species diversity is present, the tree population is especially
vulnerable to insects and disease. If an insect or disease were to be introduced to an area and affected the dominant species of that area, it would devastate the tree population.
Unfortunately, this is the problem Bozeman faces, and it is particularly disturbing in light of the
looming Emerald Ash Borer (EAB). Emerald Ash Borer is an invasive species that infests any
Fraxinus (ash) species. This pest will eventually kill every ash tree left untreated in Bozeman.
The EAB Course of Action Plan is to be used in conjunction with this plan, and for that reason
this UFMP plan will not go into great detail on matters of EAB.
Ash
47%
Maple
17%
Elm
11%
Linden
5%
Honey Locust
4%
Mountain Ash
3%
Aspen
3%
other
10%
Species Diversity
Figure 6
20
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Age Diversity
Age diversity is another indicator of urban forest health, which uses similar-sized trees of a
particular species for
comparison against the
total tree population.
For principles similar to
species diversity, no
more than 33% of one
age class (young,
medium, or old) should
comprise the urban
forest. This rule provides
a basic resource structure
so a younger age class is
always ready to replace
the older age classes.
Because of a strong tree
planting program,
Bozeman has a relatively young urban forest.
It is important that when an older tree dies, a younger tree is planted in its place. When an older
tree is removed, there is a significant loss of benefits, as a large tree provides three to eight times
the benefits that a small tree provides (Rogers, 2011). In light of this, Bozeman should continue
its tree planting program in order to build canopy cover and replace the aging ash trees.
Age and Size Diversity Analyzed
Age and size distribution are important
statistics and reveals useful information
regarding Bozeman’s urban forest::
The city-wide total age distribution is
fairly in line with where it should be.
However, when interpreting the
graph, it shows some concerning
factors, especially when compared to
the species diversity graph (Figure 8).
Ash
other0
10
20
30
40
Percentage of trees 0-3"3-6"6-12"12-18"18-24">24"
Ash 16 21 16 17 23 7
Maple 34 24 24 7 4 7
other 34 32 20 4 4 6
City wide total 25 25 20 11 12 5
Size Distribution
Ash
83%
other
17%
Percent of Species
that are >12"
Figure 7
Figure 8
21
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
The vast majority of the mature trees are in the downtown area, reflected in the blue ash
line. This means 83% of
Bozeman’s mature trees are ash,
leaving Bozeman in a very
tenuous position considering
EAB.
When the ash trees are not
considered, or the downtown area
is taken out, Bozeman has far
more young trees than old. This
points to a young, growing forest,
and it would be good if the
species being planted were diverse and appropriate. However, “Percent of Trees <3””
shows otherwise.
Many of the new plantings are in the newer developments and newer subdivisions,
reflected in the city-wide total line. When looking at species and size diversity graphs,
ash trees still are the majority of new trees planted.
This information depicts what species of trees to plant as well as what not to plant. It is likely
that public education would be very useful in conveying the liability of planting too many of any
one species, especially ash. Using the 30-20-10 species diversity rule should be the goal. In the
downtown area, the urban forest’s age class is heavily weighted to mature trees. It is important to
plant new trees as well as facilitate good growing conditions for the established young trees.
Planting new trees most likely means locating planting spots and also pushing to remove decrepit
ash, thus making way for the new generation.
Plant trees for function and performance. A large tree with a broad-leaved canopy offers more
benefits over time. These trees can reach heights of 60 feet and life spans of 100 years, and
planting should be encouraged where root and canopy space is adequate. Small, ornamental trees
that require less growing space are a wise choice where root development or overhead
constraints exist.
Increasing the Canopy Cover in Bozeman
Planting new trees with species diversity in mind is just one way to address overall urban forest
health. Consistently planting trees over time addresses age diversity, while planting more trees
increases canopy cover.
Canopy cover refers to the amount of land area covered by tree crowns, as viewed from the air.
This figure can also describe improvements toward quality of life. For example, a tree with a
large canopy in a park setting improves the park’s quality because it provides an ideal spot to
Ash
35%
Maple
29%
Linden
10%
Honey
Locust
9%
Elm
7%
other
10%
Percent of Trees <3"
Figure 9
22
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
have a picnic or place to sit while taking a rest from summer activities. Similarly, trees over
streets and sidewalks reduce frequency of resurfacing streets and offer cooler temperatures in the
vehicles parked under them. The extent of community tree canopy cover is a good indicator of
urban forest sustainability (Clark et al., 1997).
Currently between 7% and 9% of Bozeman is under the canopy of publicly owned trees.
Bozeman would greatly benefit from increasing this number, or even doubling it. The ways to
increase canopy cover are to plant more trees and protect the trees in the ground. Planting more
trees can happen with community support, education, and citizen involvement. Also, enforcing
city ordinances for planting requirements will increase the number of trees planted. Moreover,
updating ordinances for new developments to have a plan to achieve a 33% canopy cover in 15
years will help address the goal of increasing canopy cover.
The second way to increase canopy cover is to protect the trees already in the ground so they can
thrive. It is important to enforce ordinances regulating who can work on public trees. Bozeman
does a good job of this. Furthermore, educating the public on reasons why they should protect
their own trees is important. Street tree stand age—meaning the age of a particular generation of
trees—is typically 20 to 60 years (Maco, McPherson, 2002). Thus, maintaining a consistent
maximized canopy cover can be difficult because a stand will maximize its canopy and then
decline. If trees in poor condition or problem trees are removed and replaced with trees that have
appropriate mature canopy attributes for their location, a consistent canopy cover can be
achieved.
One possible option to strengthen the tree planting program is to develop and utilize city-run tree
lots or nurseries. The city has a nursery in the cemetery, and cost savings can be achieved to
make greater use of this and encourage neighborhoods to start their own nurseries in common
spaces. These programs can be very cost-efficient.
A greater partnership and relationship can be formed with our local nurseries to accomplish the
goal of a more species-diverse urban forest. Also, the city can be a greater resource to residents
looking to plant trees on their property. The city’s cost-share and voucher programs have been
popular, and these are an easy avenue for educating people. These programs can be expanded to
plant more trees and should focus on trying a wider variety of species. Planting a new generation
of trees is an essential element of the Bozeman UFMP and is explored in detail later in this report
under “Community Engagement.”
23
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Tree Infrastructure Recommendations and Expected Outcomes
The following table states the primary issue needing attention, makes a variety of
recommendations and provides expected outcomes. The outcomes can be used as checks to
evaluate if the recommendations are providing the desired outcomes. The issues are all
considered important therefore no particular order is provided.
Issue Recommendation Expected outcome
Structuring and strengthening City’s Urban
Forestry
Department
-Create a superintendent of forestry division/urban forester position within city hierarchy -Partner with other management plans, such as
sustainable transportation, water conservation
-Support the use of contracted arborists for initial aid
to bring tree maintenance cycle up to speed, and as first responders after storms
-Improved management, planning, and
oversight for the
urban forest
-Internal cross-program support -Higher level of tree
care and consistent
approach to tree
maintenance
Age diversity -Educate public as to the value of mature shade trees
-Implement tree protection strategies, such as requiring site plans for building permits and enact
measures to prevent or minimize damage.
-Use Montana’s Big Tree Program as a way to
increase awareness of heritage trees
-Structure tree planting program around species diversity
-Use “Right Tree, Right Place” model as tool for
public education
-Sustainable, healthy
urban forest -Increased public
awareness
Species
Diversity
-Equip local nurseries with information on
recommended planting species
-Educate public on EAB and appropriate species to
plant
-Sustainable, healthy
urban forest
-Higher resilience
from threats to the
urban forest
Increase
number of new plantings
-Enforce ordinances for planting street trees especially
in newer neighborhoods and for developers -Maximize the amount of “plantable” space in new developments
-Update ordinances for new developments with
impervious surfaces to have a plan implemented to
achieve 33% canopy cover over 15 years -Incorporate planting trees into capital improvement programs, street and sidewalk improvements, and
other city infrastructure projects.
-Sustainable, healthy
urban forest. -A more robust urban forest with a better-
educated public
investing in it.
-Cost-effective measures implemented
-Increased canopy
24
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
-Develop educational materials on the benefits of
urban trees and disperse them to neighborhood meetings and in the community
-Explore new methods such as gravel bed plantings
for tree growing sites, community and volunteer-run
nurseries, etc.
-Expand tree voucher and cost-share programs and awareness of these programs
-Explore cost-share programs for schools and
nonprofits planting anywhere on their property
-Work with utility companies to offer tree replacement
programs.
cover
-Trees better-adapted to local climate
Preserving mature trees -Support ordinance specification who can work on city trees -Develop ordinances on who can work on private trees
-Educate the public on the value of urban trees
-Create a heritage tree program to increase awareness
for legacy trees
-Increased age diversity -Improved tree
protection and
preservation
Sustainability
and utilization
-Explore urban wood use opportunities, i.e. use wood
chips produced by tree service activities to mulch trees
-Bring logs from non-diseased or uninfested removals to a yard where the public can have access to them
-Increased public
relations
-Decreased wood waste
Management of Urban Forest
Once the city understands the overall composition and condition of the urban forest in relation to
its population, it can then decide how to best manage the resource. This is an important
component of the Urban Forestry Department because it:
Keeps the citizenry safe
Creates a healthier tree population
Models proper tree care
Is one of the areas where cost efficiency is a premium and investing wisely is a priority
Current Management
The current Urban Forestry Department in Bozeman has four full-time staff. The department is
responsible for the care of all trees on the city’s land. This includes pruning, removal, storm
cleanup, and responding to maintenance calls from the public. The department is also responsible
for integrating the urban forest into city planning and growing the urban forest. It is the
responsibility of the Urban Forestry Department to do community outreach and education.
25
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Planting on city ground can be done
by anyone who is following city
ordinances. The Urban Forestry
Department does plant trees and is
responsible for planting projects on
reconstructed roads or new roads.
The department plants all of the
“Cost Share” trees.
The Urban Forestry
Department has not grown
at the same rate as the city. Since
2005, the city has employed four
arborists. Two arborists were hired
in 1998, one in 2005 and one prior to 1998. In September of 2014, the head of the department
(equivalent to the City Forester) retired, and subsequently one of the seasonal tree workers was
hired full-time. Under the current structure, the department’s head is effectively the “crew boss,”
although their title is Urban Forester. The department is under the governance of Parks and
Recreation. Strategic planning for the Urban Forestry Department, municipal forest, and
personnel management is executed by the head of Parks and Recreation.
Figure 11
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Year
Population and Size of Forestry
Division
Population in
thousdands for
Bozeman MT
Size of forestry
division
Figure 10
Pruning,
530
Removal,
125
Plant, 185
Stump
removal,
125
Young tree
pruning,
670
Completed Maintenace/year
4 Arborist s performing this work
On this
schedule
Bozeman's
trees are on
a 13 year
pruning
rotation.
Each arborist
worked on
26
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Management of the
community forest in
Bozeman has been
on a reactionary
basis. The
department is
bogged down with
service calls and
trees that have
broken or hazardous
branches.
Homeowners and
private tree care
companies maintain the
privately owned urban
forest. Currently the only requirement for a business to work on trees in city limits is to have a
business license.
A tree board exists in Bozeman and is active. The board was formed in 1992 and formally
adopted into city code in 1993. The board meets a minimum of quarterly and a maximum of
monthly. It discusses recent matters concerning the urban forest and plays a role in developing
policy. The board has a wide range of talents and experience and a deep pool of knowledge.
Analysis of Current
Management
The Urban Forestry
Department does
quality work but lacks
in efficiency and public perception. This is largely because it has
suffered from lack of
direction and the
department’s growth has not kept pace with the growth of Bozeman
as a community. The
optimal pruning cycle is
5-7 years. With the current pace, any particular pace, a tree will only be pruned every 13 years. Managing the municipal forest on a reactionary
14 13
27
12
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent
How would you
rate the care of
Bozeman’s
municipally owned
trees?
6
28
20
12
3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Poor,
changes
needed
fair, room to
improve
Good, quality
is sufficient
Very good,
better than
expected
Excellent,
quality is
optimal
What is your
overall
perception of
the quality of
Bozeman’s urban
Figure 12
Figure 13
27
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
basis is often a challenge and ultimately unsustainable. Often the department is pulled from
preventative maintenance work to respond to individual issues, creating an ever-increasing
backlog in work.
The department does not currently have the capacity to proactively manage the urban forest. This
is concerning from multiple standpoints:
An increased level of liability exists from unmaintained trees.
The trees are more susceptible to storm damage, having excessive limb load.
The department will be ill-adapted to deal with unplanned events, such as disease or
infestations.
The department will be unable deal with planned events, such as Emerald Ash Borer.
The Urban Forestry Department in Bozeman is well-established within the city system of
government, and this relationship is beneficial. Municipal trees in the ground are rarely disturbed
without consulting the department. Generally, the same is true for the public disturbing
municipal trees. For the public to work on a municipal tree, the head of the department must be
notified, the head must approve the tree work, and the person performing the work must be a
certified arborist as per the ANSI Standards and the International Society of Arboriculture. This
system has benefited the municipal forest.
The director of Parks and Recreation is assuming the role of implementing policy, vision, and
personnel management for the forestry department. The director’s time and talents are not
efficiently used when meeting with municipal arborists in matters concerning the management of
the department; this creates a loss of efficiency for the city.
Bozeman’s ordinances concerning trees are adequate. However, because they are largely not
enforced, they don’t provide protection and help the urban forest grow the way they potentially
could. The current enforcement mechanism in Bozeman has the code enforcement officer issuing
citations for violations or lack of action. This mechanism has the potential to work; however,
there is a lack of communication with the point person in the Urban Forestry Department
detecting violations and fielding information from the public.
Currently, the Tree Advisory Board is revising the street tree planting guide. The board does
great work but is probably underutilized. This is a willing group of people that could be doing
more to serve the urban forest with minimal direction or better utilization.
28
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Preferred
Management
Management of
the department
encompasses
much more than
instructing the
crews on what
trees will be
pruned each
week. To
implement the
vision, goals, and
objectives laid out
in this plan, it is recommended that a manager/superintendent (Urban Forester) position be
created and filled in the Urban Forestry Department. By doing this, the level of care of the public
and private urban forest will increase, as will the community support, creating a positive
feedback loop This “urban forest Manager” is a professional experienced in all aspects of
arboriculture, providing a broad managerial view and responsibilities to help the staff, city
officials, and citizens get the most for their investment in trees (Urban Forestry Best
Management Practices for Public Works Managers: Staffing).
Superintendent of the Forestry Department Position
The urban forest is considered part of the city’s core infrastructure. One of the high priority
recommendations from this plan would be creating a urban forester position as soon as possible.
This position is synonymous with what could also be called an urban forester. The
“superintendent of the forestry department” terminology is used to fit into the existing Bozeman
city job titling, and if possible using the ‘urban forester’ title would be preferred as it is easily
recognizable throughout municipal organizations. An urban forester is necessary to execute
many of the cost-saving elements and the community engagement movement. The urban forester
should be a part of any decision that is made affecting the city’s infrastructure. This includes
decisions in planning, utilities, architecture, and development from the beginning of planning
processes. This person should see the urban forest from a 30,000-ft. view, rather a 55-ft. view
from the inside of the bucket truck. With a strong leader and advocate, the community forest will
become more of a solution for many community problems. Public awareness of the urban forest
can become of equal importance and provide social benefits on par with transportation, services
for the under-served, and other important growth concerns particular to Bozeman.
3
32
22
6 6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Never heard of
them
Unfamiliar, I
am not sure
what they do
Familiar Somewhat
familiar, I try
to keep up on
their activity
Very familiar, I
am active or
have been
active
How familiar are
you with the
Bozeman Tree
Advisory Board
and their
activities?
Figure 14
29
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
A point person that manages the department will be able to stay abreast of the latest technology
developments. Many improvements have been made in recent years for efficiently managing the
urban forest with inventories, strategic planting, and modeling. Implementing these technologies
will make the department more efficient and the forest more sustainable. The department will
also be able to better maximize the benefits of a well-planned community forest.
Finding and hiring the correct person for the Urban Forester position will be an important, and
relatively easy, task to accomplish. When conducting the search, the Department of Natural
Resources & Conservation, International Society of Arboriculture and the American Society of
Consulting Arborists have resources to assist in recruitment. It is also very possible the right
person exists in the department or lives in Bozeman.
The benefits of this option include (Urban Forestry Best Management Practices, 2006):
Deepen ties with the community
Build institutional knowledge
Someone who is always available, more flexible for other work assignments, and can
respond to emergencies
Someone who is directly responsible to citizens and their department
Quality will improve over time with training to meet community standards
Workforce is more stable
Workforce is motivated by pride and residency and is knowledgeable about the
community
More control over training and specializations
Less administrative time needed to write and oversee contracts
It will liberate the municipal arborists to do their work, instead of defining their own roles
in the department
Maintaining Public Trees
Inventory
Bozeman has a half-completed inventory and completing this inventory is an important step in
maintaining public trees. Keeping track of maintenance performed on trees is important to the
managing the population but also for liability reasons. Knowing the locations of all the trees,
especially the ash trees, are important for planning for EAB and implementing the EAB Course
of Action Plan. It is also important to know to location of available planting spots for the new
generation of trees. The inventory will help save our mature tree population and save the city
millions of dollars in management costs. As detailed in the EAB plan, the city will proactively
manage ash trees in a systematic manner. Knowing the locations of these trees, which ones have
been treated, and which ones need treatment will be of the utmost importance. Having a
30
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
completed inventory prior to the arrival of EAB is essential. Potentially, time is not on
Bozeman’s side.
Proactive pruning cycle
Setting trees up on a five- to seven-year pruning rotation will increase the benefits offered by the
urban forest and reflect positively on the city. Proactively maintaining the trees will reduce the
workload of maintenance calls and decrease the amount of storm damage that occurs almost
yearly in Bozeman. Proactively maintaining the community forest is one of the essential
elements of this plan. By implementing this element, Bozeman is enacting a cost-effective
measure that maximizes benefits of the urban forest. When not performing timely tree
maintenance on trees, an opportunity is lost in benefits received. (Hauer, 2015)
Upon planting a tree, the cost of maintaining that tree initially outweighs the benefits received
from the tree. In addition to planting costs, watering and pruning the tree for good branch
structure after establishment are also costs. However, ensuring proper form and structure when
trees are small is less expensive than large-scale pruning when they mature. Such neglect results
in an even higher cost of either replacing a dead tree or long-term maintenance restoration
pruning after storm damage or due to general weak branch attachments (Gilman, 2001).
Once the tree is mature, proactively maintaining trees on a five- to seven-year pruning rotation
becomes less costly than reactive (i.e. crisis) maintenance (Hauer, 2015). The trees will still offer
benefits, but with regular pruning a higher amount of benefits will be realized and fewer
maintenance costs will be experienced. A lack of regular maintenance results in a shorter
lifespan of the tree. It also creates higher maintenance costs due to increased storm damage,
debris, pests, and branches blocking intersections or roads. This concept is similar to changing
the oil in a car. The car will still run without proper maintenance for a while, but in the end
regular servicing will result in a lower cost by avoiding a major breakdown.
When considering this concept, an inverse relationship exists between maintenance costs and
return on investment. The more trees are maintained, the lower the cost. Also, the more often
trees are maintained, the higher the amount of benefits provided by the trees, thus a higher rate of
return. The optimal pruning cycle for trees is four to five years (Miller, 1981). In Bozeman, the
optimal time is pushed back because of the slightly shorter growing season. The optimal pruning
cycle is where the cost of maintaining the trees intersects with the return on investment.
The investment in pruning trees on a five-year pruning rotation yielded a $1.47 to $1.69 return
on the costs of pruning the trees. Moreover, every dollar deferred in pruning costs yielded a two-
fold increase in maintenance costs (Browning, 1997). When Bozeman is considering EAB, the
costs of managing an infestation is greatly reduced by having a healthier ash tree population.
Currently, Bozeman’s Urban Forestry Department is not adequately staffed to proactively
maintain the community forest, and hiring additional arborists or contracting out
pruning/removals is recommended.
31
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
The City of Bozeman owns ~21,000 trees based on the trees inventoried thus far. A program to
maintain the trees the city currently owns is a priority and should be implemented before new
tree planning takes place. Using the work history of Bozeman’s four arborists for the past four
years, it would take a total of 13 arborists to accomplish the goal of pruning the municipal trees
on a seven-year pruning rotation. Hiring nine arborists is not realistic in Bozeman, so efficiency
must increase as well as management. Bozeman can accomplish the goal of responsibly
maintaining its trees within a realistic budget by first hiring a superintendent for the Urban
Forestry Department. This position will hold city arborists accountable for performance and
systematically implement pruning schedules. Additionally, the city should consider ways to
reach the recommended seven-year pruning cycle. The following alternatives recommend either
hiring two arborists in addition to the existing four or contracting out pruning and removal. The
following breakdown will articulate the changes to the department needed to accomplish a
proactive management.
Alternative 1: Hiring two additional arborists
Number
of trees
Number of trees to be
pruned each year on a
5- 7 year rotation
Number of trees each
arborist will work on
each year
Number of
additional
arborists
Cost
approximation
21,047 4,209-3,007 702 -502 2 $120,000/year*
*Wages are $30,000/year/arborist. Wages are doubled to account for benefits, taxes and
insurance.
For hiring two additional arborists, these figures double the number of trees each arborist will
work on each day compared to the past four years. However, it is still very reasonable, and only
two additional arborists are hired. These figures only assume the arborists are working 100 days
per year. At 20 work days per month, this is five months of pruning trees. The department still
has seven months to not work on extremely cold days, hang Christmas lights, chip Christmas
trees, shovel snow from sidewalks, and other activities with which the forestry department
currently is tasked.
Proactive management can also be achieved by using the same allocated funds to contract out
the tree maintenance. Pros and cons are highlighted later on in this report. In either management
approach, hiring an urban forester is still recommended in order to wisely execute the actions.
The numbers given here assume the same work performance from the four existing municipal
arborists.
Alternative 2: Contracting out maintenance
Number
of trees
Number of trees to
be pruned each year
on a 5-7 year
Number of trees
to be pruned
each year in
Number of trees to
be contracted out
every year. 5-7
Cost to be allocated
for contract work
32
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
rotation house. 5-7 years years
21,047 4,209 - 3,007 2,808 - 2,007 1401-1000 $120,000/year
By implementing a proactive pruning schedule, the department will set the number of trees to be
pruned. At the end of the year, the department will assess and review its goal number of trees to
be pruned and gauge the level of success. This unbiased number will represent the potential
performance and efficiency of the department and thus provide measurable reports to the city
commissioners and public who have invested in the department. This yearly work plan will
include all tree-related activities for street and park trees, including tree planting,
maintenance/pruning, tree replacement, inspections, and tree removals.
Alternative 3: Catch-up period
A third and less-sustainable alternative contracts out the pruning and removals of all publicly
owned trees and accomplishes this task in two to three years. After all of the tree work in
Bozeman has been executed, in theory, the Bozeman Urban Forestry Department would then be
able to keep up with tree work. A superintendent position would still be needed to manage a
sustainable urban forest, as articulated in “Community Engagement. (p.?)” This option is only
short-term and would not likely address the long-term care and needs of the urban forest. Once
the work is completed, Bozeman would have spent a lot of money and would still have an urban
forest with poor species diversity. They would lack the ability to move forward with planting
new trees because resources were allocated to maintenance, most likely at the expense of
creating a sustainable, holistic urban forest.
Number of trees Number of trees to be pruned each
year for 2.5 years*
Number of trees to be pruned in house
each year for 2.5
years
Number of trees to be contracted out each year
for 2.5 years
Cost at $150/tree/year
21,047 8,419 2,500 5919 $887,850/year
*Alternative 3. This expenditure only is in place for 2-3 years while the first two alternatives are
yearly costs.
After this “catch up” period has been executed, Bozeman can then address the hiring of two
additional arborists or contracting out work as needed.
The urban forestry department is quite competent as to tree care activities, and this report will
not discuss this aspect or what a tree needs to be correctly maintained. Rather, it will explore
areas where greater efficiencies can be made.
Tree pruning should be done year round. Of course, on particularly cold or snowy days, working
on trees is not productive. Pruning trees in the winter offers many benefits, such as being able to
better see branch structure and minimizing damage to the tree since it is dormant.
33
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Ensuring that trees with a caliper less than 6 inches receive special attention for structural
pruning will save considerable resources over time. When pruning a young tree, many long-term
benefits are realized by eliminating potential weak branch attachments, rubbing or crossing
branches, removing co-dominant leaders, or improving the general shape of the canopy. On
young trees this task can take only 10 minutes while a large tree can take much longer and is
more expensive. Trees should not be pruned at planting except for dead, damaged branches or
serious structure problems. It is appropriate to prune for structure after the tree has established
itself for a year. By doing this, the tree will have much less liability and experience less storm
damage when it reaches maturity.
Removals
Removing trees that are in poor condition or poor locations is a part of proactively managing the
community forest. Keeping current on the removal schedule is an essential element of this plan
because it plays a crucial role in preparing for EAB. When EAB arrives, the removal schedule of
ash trees in poor condition or bad locations, as outlined in the EAB Course of Action Plan, is
enacted, and thus reducing that workload in advance will help the city tremendously. Currently
there are 78 tree slated to be removed this year and another 300 mature ash trees in poor
condition, according to the half-completed inventory. This plan does not recommend increasing a
line-item budget for removals, but it does recommend increasing the number of removals on a
yearly basis by increasing efficiencies produced by creating the urban forester position. The
department will get its crew boss arborist back to managing the crew, where their talents are
suited and doing what their job description states. In effect, the department will be doing much
more in relation to what investments have been made.
Planting
Planting trees reflects well on a forestry department and creates a positive public perception.
Planting a new generation of trees is an essential element of this plan. How to most efficiently
execute this element is described in “Community Engagement p. 49.” Choosing the right tree for
the right place is an important consideration when planting, especially with street trees. It is
important to remember that planting a large tree can deliver as much as eight times the value of a
small growing tree or a medium stature tree. On Bozeman streets and in parks, it is important to
understand the site, how the tree will be maintained, and then select the right tree. The following
are considerations for choosing trees at specific locations (Clark, Matheny 2008):
Available growing space—above ground (horizontal and vertical), below ground (soil
volume), and ground level (distance to pavement)
Light—daily and seasonal
Wind—daily and seasonal
Soil—structure and texture, drainage, pH, chemistry
Surface cover—turf, mulch, herbaceous or woody plants
Irrigation—quality and quantity
34
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Management—pest control
Use—litter, canopy (above street)
On downtown roads such as Main Street, where much of the surface is impervious, trees have a
shorter lifespan due to compaction, lack of water, and restricted root growth. If these streets
were to be redone or upgraded, installing acceptable planting space for trees is advisable. See
greater detail (Appendix 2)
Another way to encourage root growth in paved areas is to implement the use of pervious
pavements (Volder et al. 2009; Morgenroth and Visser, 2011; Mullaney and Lucke, 2014). These
pervious pavements make stormwater and oxygen available to the soils and tree roots. This
approach is greatly beneficial to tree growth but also reduces stormwater runoff.
Planting trees in residential parts of the city, especially in new neighborhoods, also needs to be
addressed. These trees are of equal priority, and resources should be allocated appropriately.
Trees planted in neighborhood areas will be greatly valued by the residents, and and in turn they
would provide care. These areas have many families that will benefit from more urban trees, and
many times these trees are less susceptible to vandalism and damage. Public perception of the
Urban Forestry Department will be higher because the residents, many of whom are invested in
their communities and neighborhoods, will see the direct benefits of municipal investment.
The residents in these areas should utilize the tree voucher and cost-share programs. These trees
have greater survival rates because the residents have an invested interest in seeing the trees
reach maturity. When a tree is removed, having a plan for its replacement should be a part of the
removal process. This can be as simple as alerting the homeowner of the tree voucher or cost-
share programs or enforcing ordinances.
Detection
Detection and monitoring for invasive species or disease is an
essential element of this plan. One invasive species of
particular concern is Emerald Ash Borer (EAB). Detecting the
arrival of EAB
as early as
possible is very
important.
EAB traps are
installed in ash
trees to detect
and monitor
the infestation. The use of traps may help
Bozeman detect EAB very early in its arrival, which would give better Bouldercolorado.gov
35
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
chances to manage and contain the infestation. If EAB is detected early, more trees could be
saved which could potentially save the city millions of dollars. Additionally, a technique called
“destructive branch sampling,” is another effective detection method. This method is currently
being used by the urban forestry department and should be continued. The Bozeman EAB
Community Response Plan provides more detail on management and monitoring techniques.
The superintendent of the Urban Forestry Department should be designated as a reliable and
qualified resource for the community, serving as a primary contact for suspected EAB reports.
This will establish a consistent protocol. This person will coordinate with Montana State
University’s detection efforts, neighboring communities like Belgrade, and any other significant
landowner in the Gallatin Valley monitoring for EAB. The importance of a diligent and
consistent monitoring effort cannot be understated. Upon detection, the response plan detailed in
the EAB Course of Action Plan can be implemented immediately.
Contracting Work
On certain projects, Bozeman may consider contracting work out. Contracting out this work has
certain advantages, as detailed below:
Cost savings. In many cases, private tree care, for even very big cities, can be less
expensive
Funds are paid only if work is performed to specifications and satisfaction.
Labor is performed for peak demands.
Contractor provides all equipment, repair, maintenance, and downtime costs.
Insurance and workman’s compensation is provided by the contractor.
Contractor provides all training, supervision, and certifications.
Liability for damages is the contractor’s responsibility.
Contractors can be used as a complement towards operations in municipal tree care. There are
reputable tree services in Bozeman with certified arborists that are capable of performing any
project the city might have. This approach may be useful upon the arrival of EAB and when
planned removals are a priority. Also, it may be cost efficient to contract out for bulk pricing the
treatment of trees for EAB. In such a scenario, it is possible a tree service in Bozeman would
donate its service to support the department and the urban forest.
According to the booklet titled “Urban Forestry Best Management Practices for Public Works
Managers: Staffing”, often a combination of using both in-house personnel and contractors is
chosen to ensure that the urban forest management services provided are performed at the lowest
possible cost, as efficiently as possible, and with the greatest level of expertise. Upon using a
contractor, it is important to ensure they are qualified and maintain proper certifications, such as
36
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
having an ISA Certified Arborist or similar credentials on staff. To verify ISA Certification, go
to http://www.isa-arbor.com/.
At a Bozeman public meeting during plan development, discussion arose about shifting the
pruning and removals from the Bozeman Urban Forestry Department to contract work. This
option arises from a few public members who feel the urban forest has not been maintained to a
level of their satisfaction. While understandable, this option cannot be relied upon solely to
maintain public trees because it does not manage the public forest. It merely puts a Band-Aid on
a problem, is shortsighted, not cost effective, and does not maximize the benefits of urban trees.
This plan outlines the most cost-effective way to create a sustainable, healthy, and holistic urban
forest; and to do that, the superintendent position in the forestry department must be created.
The superintendent/urban forester position will increase efficiency within the department, and
contract out work when deemed appropriate. Bozeman’s urban forest can eventually reach a
proactive five- to seven-year pruning rotation. Contracting out work should be kept as a
management option when the superintendent determines it’s necessary and/or cost effective.
Maintaining Private Trees
As the level of care of the
public trees increases in
Bozeman, the private tree
care will in turn rise. This is
because the city will be
modeling good tree care and
the private property owners
will be educated through
this. Also inevitably, with
the implementation of this
plan, the urban forestry
department will have a
greater influence in the
community and the citizenry
will be will be more
educated as to the benefits of
a healthy urban forest.
The only recommendation this report makes as to the care of private trees is that anyone hired to
work on trees—private or public, within the city limits—be a certified arborist or tree worker. If
a private company is hired to perform tree work, the arborist working for the company must
maintain a minimum set of credentials. A large majority of survey respondents indicated they
wanted this as it will raise the level of care in the entire urban forest.
10
18
41
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
No No opinion Yes
Should there be a
certification standard for
private tree care
companies performing
tree care on private
property?
Figure 15
37
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Bozeman
Public Schools
An area for
opportunity for
the city is to
work more
closely with
Bozeman
Public School
District (BSD).
The public
schools in
Bozeman have
their own
jurisdiction as to
tree care, and the city is not responsible for the planting or maintenance of trees on school
property. Trees are priority for BSD and they have a maintenance fund for trees. Bozeman
School District has additional concerns when planning trees on their property, such as not
blocking line of sight and raised crown heights. However, BSD still has a reliance on the city to
lead and instruct on best management practices and appropriate species to plant. The city relies
on BSD to provide continuity to the urban forest. For example, if the city has tree-lined streets
with large canopy trees and an adjacent school property has no or smaller-stature trees, there is
an opportunity to work with the school for planting suitable trees. The city has an invested
interest in a strong working relationship with BSD, to provide expert counsel and possibly
provide resources for additional plantings. Partnering with the schools will improve relationships
and strengthen the ties to the community. This is a natural fit for incorporating an urban forest
curriculum into the schools. For example, the city could offer presentations and information to
science classes or perhaps donate removed hardwood trees for use in woodshop classes, and in
turn receive products like benches to display in local parks.
Budget/Funding
Additional funding will be required to implement many of the recommendations in this report.
Budget increases will allow for the addition of the superintendent position in the Urban Forestry
Department and the implementation of a proactive management approach.
Investment Estimated expenditure salary
Superintendent of the Forestry Department (Urban Forester) $50,000-$65,000
Arborists (2) or contract out pruning and removal work $30,000 X 2 or $60,000
Figure 16 2015 Arbor Day event at Bozeman Public Library
38
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
The Bozeman Urban Forestry Department’s budget is approximately $450,000 per year. A
modest 30% increase of $135,000 per year and corresponding tree assessment is recommended
to implement the Bozeman UFMP. Currently, the average city lot is assessed around $16 per
year to maintain the public trees. The recommendation is to raise the assessment by
approximately $5 per year. This new assessment is comparable to other Montana communities,
such as Helena and Billings.
A level of funding exists
where an acceptable level of
investment in the urban
forest is made and it
maximizes the benefits.
“Cost-efficiency in relation
to benefits provided can
make a difference.
Maintaining program
funding is intimately tied to
demonstrating the
importance of the urban
forest to the health, safety,
and economic vitality of the
community, and the
effectiveness of the program
in providing those goods and
services” (Matheny, Clark
2008).
Additional ways to implement funding for community trees include (Urban Forestry Best
Management Practice, 2006):
Grants. Grants play an important role in funding the current street tree-planting program
and will continue to do so in the future. The superintendent/urban forester can help apply
for and acquire grants. However these are not static sources of funds and cannot be solely
relied upon to support a local urban forestry program.
Taxes, special assessments and tax districts
Capital improvement project funds
Tree work permits, development and inspection fees. When a development occurs with
private business or developers, the urban forest goals should be considered and fees
assessed appropriately.
Compensatory payments when a public tree is damaged by a car or by construction
activity
29
39
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Yes No
Do you believe
the city’s
current funding
mechanism is
sufficient to
grow our
community
forest?
Figure 17
39
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Utility bill donations. Residents could be encouraged to fund tree programs by rounding
up their utility bill or voluntarily adding a small fixed amount, such as 50 cents, to each
bill.
Mill levy(s)
Gas tax
Partnerships with utilities
Community groups
Corporate and local business donations and sponsorships
Risk Management
Risk Management is defined as follows: “Risk is simply a measurement of potential of deviation
of an expected outcome, and the consequence of this deviation may either be good (resulting in
opportunity) or bad (resulting in loss). The process of dealing with this uncertainty and trying to
achieve the best outcome … in a changing environment is the essence of risk management.”
(Reiss, 2004).
There is an inherent risk with all trees. We choose to live among trees because their benefits far
outweigh their potential risk if managed appropriately (Rogers 2011). Controlling risk can be
articulated in five ways according to Young (2002):
Risk avoidance. Ex. Planting the right tree in the right spot, and not putting structures or
people under a tree with structural defects.
Loss prevention. Ex. Performing all regular maintenance and care such as pruning.
Loss reduction. Ex. Having a plan to deal with emergency situations such as in a storm.
Uncertainty reduction. Ex. Obtain risk evaluations from qualified risk assessors or
remove tree if risk level is not tolerable.
Risk transfer. Ex. Contracting with a tree risk consultant.
(Clark, Matheny, 2008)
Managing liability is of main concern. Acknowledging that it is the duty of the city to maintain
the public trees, Bozeman must maintain the trees to a reasonable standard of care. Bozeman
must account for the hazardous tree conditions existing today or those that may develop in the
future. If the standard of care falls below what is reasonable and prudent, liability resulting from
injuries or damages may result. The standard of care is one component of a risk management
document.
When a tree is identified as having a defect or being hazardous, the factors that must be
considered when deciding on the best option for that tree will include: involving the public as a
legitimate partner, planning/evaluating performance, and collaborating with other credible
sources (Covello and Allen, 1998).
40
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Tree Characteristics Associated with Tree Failure
Bozeman has variable weather conditions, making it a place where there is a potential for tree
failure. Tree characteristics and weather to consider will include:
Unusual storms with strong winds, snow
Winds or snow from prevailing direction
Weak branch attachment
Decay/ loss of structure
Crown decline or root decline
Diseases associated with either:
Excessive end weight on branches
Excessive root loss or defects
Leaning trees
Cracks
There are many considerations when deciding to
remove a tree. First, the urban forester’s
recommendations will be considered. Next, influences
such as site conditions and weather are considered which
affect the likelihood of failure. These conditions include:
Climate and seasonal precipitation
Site management history, including changes in grade or root injury
Soil drainage conditions
History of other tree failures
Obstructions to tree development such as pavement or structures
(Clark, Matheny 2008)
Lastly, the likelihood that a person or object could be injured is known as the target. Publicly
owned trees are considered to have targets at all times. Educating the public is an important step
when deciding if a specimen tree is to be removed, as emotion can influence this decision
making process.
The risk pertaining to the public could take the form of:
Tree failure
Grey infrastructure damage, including sidewalks and pavement, underground services,
and overhead utilities
Line of sight along streets
Figure 18 Obvious structural defect.
41
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Vehicle clearance over streets and sidewalks
Emergency planning
People in parks or community space
(Clark, Matheny 2008)
Risk Management Plan
Having a risk management plan in place is beneficial to limit liabilities. An actual risk policy
statement could be developed by the Urban Forestry Department and approved by the tree board
and city commission. Implementing the plan will to the duty of the urban forester. A policy
statement concerning risk should include (Young 2002):
A statement of commitment by the top officials stating they believe risk management is
important and identifies the overall purpose of risk management,
Statement saying who is responsible for risk management and their authority
A charge to select and implement risk control and how to finance it
A demand audit and report on risk management efforts
The International Society of Arboriculture (Matheny and Clark, 1994) has quantified risk with a
12-point rating system, which could be used as part of the risk management plan. (See Appendix
4.)
Proposed risk management policy statement for Bozeman:
Bozeman has an active policy in mitigating the effects from potentially hazardous trees.
The city will strive to eliminate, in a timely fashion, any tree deemed hazardous.
Proactive management of the community forest is an effective tool to ensure all city-
owned trees have been maintained to a reasonable level of care. Identifying potential
hazard trees will rely on any of the following: the publics’ concerns, the periodic
updating of the tree inventory, maintenance performed by city arborists, or maintenance
performed by contracted private arborists. The city urban forester will facilitate the
communication and documentation for the management of a particular tree marked as
having a high degree of risk. The urban forester will make the final judgment concerning
mitigation measures taken for trees identified as hazardous.
In addition to the risk management policy statement, a standard of care should be established.
The practice most likely will be carried out by an arborist conducting the pruning.
Proposed Standard of Care for Bozeman:
Bozeman will provide a reasonable level of care for all trees residing on publicly owned
spaces and adjacent vegetation that may impact safe public passage. This may occur
through outsourcing contracts and/or through the development of in-house expertise. The
42
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
arborist performing the maintenance will be technically proficient in current
arboricultural techniques, recognized through International Society of Arboriculture
(ISA). While maintaining a tree of concern, a systematic inspection shall occur by
examining the canopy of the tree and performing a vertical 360-degree inspection. The
inspection shall be documented and captured in an inventory update. The urban forester
shall determine the risk of the tree of concern based upon the observations and
recommendations according to the Risk Policy Statement. The tree in concern shall be
removed or treated as deemed appropriate. The arborists’ practices shall adhere to the
industry standards according to International Society of Arboriculture’s Best
Management Practices and adhere to the ANSI A300 pruning guide and the Z133.1
safety practices. Pruning goals should reduce failures of limbs.
Proactively addressing risk is imperative. Pruning a tree at a young age to develop good branch
structure and planting the appropriate tree in the appropriate location is always good practice.
Maintaining records of all treatments for the tree is in the best interest of the city as it
demonstrates performance of duty and builds a history for each individual tree.
43
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Management of Urban Forest Recommendations
This table is to be used as a quick source for list of actions that be “checked off” or goals to be
implemented to the forestry division.
Issue Recommendation Expected outcome
Maintaining the urban
forest and
increasing the
level of care
-Create superintendent/urban forester position in the forestry department position to implement
Bozeman UFMP
-Implement a 5-7 year pruning rotation for
public trees -Focus especially on young tree pruning as a
way to diminish structural problems and pruning
needs as the tree matures
-Develop a plan for replacing removed trees.
-Incorporate open planting spots into the tree inventory
-Promote honorary or memorial tree planting.
-Post the vision and mission statements in
forestry office to motivate and remind
-A more efficiently managed department
-A healthier urban forest
-An increased number of
trees worked on every year
Funding for
Urban Forestry
Department
-Increase funding for department by increasing
the tree assessment fees or implementing similar
funding strategy
-Explore new funding sources. Ex. partnering with health care organizations, community
welfare organizations, private organizations such
as alternative energy, downtown businesses, etc.
-Explore state and national grants for urban forestry
Ability to meet present
work load requirements
-Efficient and timely
response to the expectations of residents
- Ability to successfully
fulfill mission and vision
Increase the
level of care of privately owned trees
-Require that tree services working on privately
owned trees use qualified & licensed tree care companies -Model proper tree care by implementing a 5-7
year pruning rotation of municipal trees
-Higher level of care of
the urban forest -Minimize and prevent poor tree care practices
Consistency of
care in the
urban forest
-Work with BSD to create congruency and build
support for the urban forest
- Develop a public outreach and communication
plan
-A higher overall level of
care of the urban forest
-Increased exposure and
awareness to the benefits
of urban forests
Support
conditions conducive to tree growth
-Limit the use of impervious surfaces where
possible. -Establish monitoring schedule to inspect newly planted trees and improve grow space around
existing trees (i.e. mulch, protection measures,
widening cutouts, etc.)
-Healthier more robust
urban forest -potentially increased lifespan of trees
44
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
-Use pervious paving surfaces when possible
-Develop tree care adoption/watering program with residents in needed areas
Community Engagement
The third component of a holistic, sustainable urban forestry program in Bozeman is community
engagement. It is the community that builds and supports its urban forest, and it’s the community
that reaps the benefits from the urban forest. Establishing a vibrant relationship between the
community and the Urban Forestry Department is
an essential element in this plan and a key
component to the plan’s success. More and more
research shows that many of the issues we face in
our world today can be addressed by the urban
forest. The urban forest helps combat climate
change and alleviate resource demands, among
other environmental issues. It also builds
community, educates the youth, provides social
justice, and promotes a healthy lifestyle for
everyone.
The urban forest is our habitat; it is where we live. If Bozeman were to have a point person
whose job it was to raise public awareness of the urban forest, a positive feedback loop would
start. The more people that are involved, the more support the department will have, and the
more resources it can draw from.
Thus the cycle continues. A campaign that articulates the benefits of the urban forest will make
it fashionable and in the businesses’ best interest to support the community forest.
Urban
Forester
Greater
public
awareness
for the urban
forest
More trees
planted by
public
Higher
quality of life
and cost
savings from
synergies
Added
resources for
forestry
division
45
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Bozeman’s culture
includes trees,
which highlights the
importance of
community
engagement.
Partnering with the
community possibly
offers the most
potential in this
whole plan. The key
here is for the
Bozeman Urban
Forestry Department
to be a leader and a
key player in this
culture of trees.
Churches and civic groups often have a network of people ready to perform community projects.
Having “shovel-ready” projects for these organizations would be advantageous and reflect well
upon the urban forestry department.
A point person for community outreach in the Urban Forestry Department will be able to keep up
on the latest technology developments in social media and community engagement. Use of such
technology, such as smartphone apps and online inventory management, will help illustrate the
benefits coming from Bozeman’s urban forest. The department will become a primary resource
for community education, and in turn the community will develop support for the department.
A trained volunteer workforce could accomplish a lot of tree care activities, including planting,
mulching, watering, and maintenance. This would raise the vitality of the urban forest and aid the
Urban Forestry Department. A coordinated effort between a volunteer group and the department
could also keep the inventory and work maintenance records updated. These records and
relationships could be sourced through the forestry website.
Forestry Advisory Board
The Forestry Advisory Board in Bozeman is a wealth of talent and knowledge and an asset to the
community. Here again much potential exists because the board is underutilized. Projects that
would suit the board well include:
Technical review of management of trees or developing management strategies
4
35
8
16
5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Not interested Rarely
involved
Take it or
leave it
Somewhat
involved
Highly
involved
What is your level of
involvement with tree-
related community
events?
Figure 19
46
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Development of technical literature or public outreach material
Community education programs in the schools, at the Museum of the Rockies, or
partnering with education groups like Montana Outdoor Science School
Tree planting or volunteer programs with neighborhoods or interested groups
Media relationships or developing periodic PSAs
Assist with certain implementation phases from this plan
This is a ready workforce that is available to the city with minimal investment. Moreover, it is
likely that on certain projects, especially community events, the tree board members will enlist
their families and/or friend networks to be involved and engaged. This group would work closely
with the city urban forester position.
Health and Welfare Benefits
Bozeman’s investment in the community forest has further potential to serve its population,
especially the underserved through the concept of community orchards. Bozeman currently
plants trees with edible fruit. However, this practice should be expanded. Fruit trees provide a
healthy food source for Bozemanites and are a healthy alternative to processed foods.
Organizations such as the Alliance for Community Trees offer grants to help develop and plan
community orchards, which could be a unique program for the community.
The urban forest lowers heating and cooling bills by shading houses from the summer’s sun and
blocking the winter’s wind, which could be very important for those who depend on energy
efficiency. The average ash tree
provides $145 per year in energy saving
benefits such as heating and cooling
according to the i-tree analysis for
Bozeman’s public trees. The community
forest also improves psychological-
social well-being and promotes a
healthy lifestyle that benefits all, maybe
especially those who don’t have the
opportunity to recreate in Bozeman’s
outdoors as much as they need to.
This aspect of the urban forest provides an important opportunity for the city to partner with
local nonprofits who work with the underserved. A healthy urban forest can help build a healthy
community. By partnering with these organizations, Bozeman’s Urban Forestry Department can
gain access to this key part of the population. This is an important relationship and a potential
source for supplemental funding to the department.
47
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
When cities consider what options they have for creating affordable housing, it has been the case
that park space and urban trees are often not incorporated or the requirements are less stringent in
these developments. This is the exact opposite of what is cost effective, for a multitude of
reasons. Trees should be incorporated all the more in affordable housing situations because trees
increase the standard of living for people who live around them. Cost savings in other aspects of
affordable housing are made up for when a proper investment is made in the urban forest.
Community Planning
Trees should be considered as an essential component into the planning of Bozeman’s growth.
Trees have special requirements for both above-ground and below-ground space. Healthy soils
need to be made available as well as efficient watering mechanisms. These elements are difficult
to implement after construction has begun, and are much easier to incorporate early in the
planning process. An effort of outreach to designers and architects as to the importance and
requirements of trees needs to take place. A strong city contact such as the superintendent/urban
forester will aid in this process, both in city workings and in the private sphere.
Regular meetings should be scheduled with homeowner associations to encourage and instruct
neighborhoods on how to manage their trees. The city will be a resource for the neighborhoods
and will raise the overall quality of the urban forest by increasing the level of care of privately
owned trees.
The community could be engaged though the forestry website where they can view and perhaps
contribute updates to the inventory of the urban forest. By doing this, the community can take
ownership for the urban forest and see how their trees function as part of the big picture of
Bozeman’s urban forest.. There
would also be an education
piece for the community
associated with this online
inventory, furthering the goal
of a healthy urban forest.
Planting Trees
Planting a new generation of
trees is one of the essential
elements this plan recommends
for creating a healthy and
sustainable urban forest. By
46
20
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
More Sufficient Fewer
Do you believe there
should be more or fewer
trees in our municipally
owned forest?
Figure 20
48
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
40
28
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Yes No
Would you like to
be more involved
with the
community-owned
forest and
associated
community
events?
doing this, it creates an urban forest for future generations of Bozemanites, prepares the urban
forest for the arrival of EAB, and improves the population dynamics of the urban forest in
Bozeman. The forestry division currently plants many trees though its cost share program.
Instead of recommending budgeting for a great increase by the forestry division in planting a
new generation of trees, the Bozeman UFMP relies on the public to incur the cost of planting the
trees while being guided by the city urban forester. This is done by the urban forester forming
relationships with largely untapped resources:
The public
Businesses
Schools and parents organizations
Neighborhood groups/HOAs
Downtown Bozeman and chamber of commerce/Tourism industry
Churches/civic organizations
Nonprofits of every kind including: The CO-OP, Friends of … , Cancer Support,
Craighead Institute, Polar Bears International, Montana Environmental Education
Association, etc.
Bozeman Deaconess, Community Health Partners, Bozeman Creek, and other health care
groups
Environmental and recreational groups i.e. trail improvement, parks/recreation, biking,
hiking, running, etc. etc.
Forming these relationships would be the job of the urban forester that this plan recommends
creating. Bozeman’s Urban Forestry Department is maintaining more trees, integrating itself into
the city workings, planting
more trees, maximizing the
benefits of the urban forest,
and gaining support for the
department all by creating
one position.
To plant a new generation of
trees, it is the city’s
responsibility to coordinate
this undertaking. Once
Bozeman’s residents knows
and understands the need,
direction and motivation
must be given by identifying
Figure 21
49
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
the engines that will enable tree planting. Coordination needs to take place so species diversity
goals are met and the groups planting trees are doing so correctly. Any assistance needed is
addressed by providing resources or creating new entities such as neighborhood nurseries. These
steps are detailed in the following paragraphs.
Education
A massive education movement must be initiated to educate the public as to the benefit of urban
trees and what is at risk concerning EAB. Training workshops or guidance for proper selection
and planting would be promoted. In terms of planting trees, partnerships formed with the
community will fit into one of two categories: those doing the planting and those serving a
supporting role. . Some of the groups will probably fit into both categories. These groups must
be identified and utilized according to their skills and available resources (i.e. equipment,
materials, etc.). These groups include civic groups, school/parent groups, homeowner
associations, etc.
Trees and materials will come from the supportive groups, such as Downtown Bozeman, Health
Care organizations, nonprofits, banks/businesses, etc. These newly formed relationships are vital
towards bettering our community and must be publicly recognized to continue their involvement.
Coordination
Ultimately these newly planted trees will reflect on the integrity of the Urban Forestry
Department. Is there appropriate species diversity? Are the trees planted correctly and in good
locations? All groups buying trees and planting trees must be educated on how to do so correctly.
Possibly all the tree purchasing would be done though the City of Bozeman to ensure proper
species diversity. If all tree purchasing is not done though the city, then some mechanism must
be set in place to accomplish species diversity. Planting clinics can be held for those doing the
planting or an urban forestry arborist could be present at planting time to give direction and
assistance. A monitoring schedule may also be necessary to inspect new tree plantings
periodically in the first few years following planting.
Assistance
Currently Bozeman runs the cost-share and tree voucher programs, which are two popular
programs for planting trees. These programs could be expanded in their current state if desired,
but this plan does not rely on these programs to plant a new generation of trees. This plan does
recommend creating provisions to these programs, such as access to city nursery trees or
assistance to start nurseries on their own on city property. The neighborhood groups could be
responsible for transplanting the trees on their own or contracting with a tree service. A gravel
bed system could be utilized if appropriate. If neighborhoods had access to the city nursery in its
50
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
current state, mechanized equipment would need to be employed. Again, education will be
needed to ensure species diversity and proper placements of the trees.
Bozeman School District (Planting Partnership)
Bozeman is fortunate to have a citizenry that is active in the natural surroundings and is largely
environmentally literate. Students will take their knowledge home and educate their parents,
furthering the cause. An educational program could be spearheaded by the city urban forester
and aided greatly by the Tree Board.
Tree planting programs on school grounds would also be beneficial. Planting orchards on
property is a great way to engage students and is currently being done at a couple of the schools.
These efforts are mostly carried out by the parent organization at the school. These efforts could
be furthered by the Urban Forestry Department
Montana Outdoor Science School (MOSS) would be a potential partner for educating in the
schools. Instructors could be provided by MOSS and a curriculum provided by the city, MOSS,
or teachers. This partnership could go further than the schools, and the urban forester could
become a resource for MOSS’s summer camps and adult education programming.
Partnering with Montana State University
Partnering with Montana State University (MSU) is a natural alliance. They have an urban forest
within their own campus and an urban forestry department. Montana State University has a large
number of ash trees and is facing the same lack of species diversity that exists in the municipal
forest. Montana State could also monitor for EAB and assist in the effort for detection of pests
and diseases.
MSU is currently a Tree Campus USA and has an active work plan. Like the relationship with
BSD, the city and MSU would benefit from a continuity of tree planting and tree maintenance.
Best management practices and ecological advances in the urban forest could be studied and
shared between both entities. A common philosophy and appreciation for the urban forest
currently exists and positive outcomes will result from a closer relationship.
MSU students can also be used as a resource:
Help teach an urban forestry curriculum in the public schools and in the community.
Students clubs could take on tree planting projects.
Develop research projects relating to urban forestry.
Assist in developing a marketing plan for the city urban forestry department and the
benefits of the urban forest.
Help develop modeling and survey techniques relating to the urban forest.
51
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Community Engagement Recommendations
The following action list is a summary of recommendations to promote and strengthen
relationships with the community.
Issue Recommendation Expected outcome
Public Education -Create a superintendent/urban forester position in the forestry department within the
city hierarchy to spearhead these programs
-Engage the Tree Advisory Board to start an
urban forest community awareness program -Create a school program for K-12
engagement
-Partner with MOSS for public education in
the schools, at the Museum of the Rockies, in
the community, or at their summer camps -Always have a special project in the works
and keep information updated on the city
webpage
-Work with MSU to create congruency and
explore possibilities for continued education regarding urban forestry.
-A coordinated volunteer workforce
-A new generation of urban
foresters
-A more engaged citizenry
Raise public
awareness for the urban forestry
department
-Start a community urban forest newsletter or
the electronic equivalent to educate, keep the public current, and recognize local
businesses that have contributed
-Brand the Urban Forestry Department using
social media, website, and utilizing local marketing companies -Partner groups help to raise awareness and
funds
-Recognize partners that contribute to the
urban forest department on the city’s website or on materials
-An urban forestry
department that is the leader of the tree culture in
Bozeman
-A high public perception
of the Urban Forestry Department in Bozeman -An urban forestry
department that receives
monetary and labor support
from the community
Raise public
awareness for the benefits of trees
-Work with public health departments and
medical organizations for funding and to raise awareness of the health benefits to the urban forest
-Work with environmental and climate
change organizations to focus on how the
urban forest can be a part of the solution -Meet with the Downtown Business Association and businesses to discuss tree
canopy and preservation goals
-Seek financial support for department
-Possibly set up a nonprofit the community
-A sustainable, holistic
healthy urban forest
52
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
and businesses can donate to
-Create an online community engagement page on the forestry website where the public
can view the city-wide urban forest inventory
-Save firewood and lumber from tree
removals to provide to the community
- Register historical trees on Montana’s big tree list
-Create a legacy tree recognition program in
Bozeman
- Meet with HOAs to educate and provide
assistance for caring for the urban forest
Continuity of
urban forest and synergetic relationships
-Strengthen relationship with BSD and offer
expert council -Strengthen relationship with MSU for expertise and student resources
-A stronger relationship
with community organizations
Conclusion
Investments in the urban forest offer a cost-efficient expenditure by working symbiotically and
reducing stress on other parts of the city infrastructure while offering benefits of their own
accord.
The Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan makes recommendations on how to most
efficiently make improvements to Bozeman’s Urban Forestry Department and in turn raise the
quality of Bozeman’s urban forest. Much good work is currently being done and much potential
exists for managing Bozeman’s urban forest. This plan relies heavily on some changes to the
department and community involvement. By doing this, the tree infrastructure in Bozeman will
be healthier and more robust. Incorporating the recommendations made here will create a
sustainable, holistic, and healthy urban forest providing benefits for all who inhabit it.
Key steps to realizing the potential that exists are to create and fill the superintendent of urban
forestry position. This person is charged with executing the second key principle of this plan:
planting a new generation of trees. This is done by engaging the public, gaining support of the
forestry division and becoming a resource for the community.
Investing in the urban forest is a worthwhile endeavor for its citizenry. Maybe more importantly,
it is even more valuable for future generations and the climate. Previous generations invested
greatly in planting all of the mature trees Bozeman now has, and now is the time to continue that
legacy.
53
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Appendix 1 Job description for Urban Forester/Superintendent of Forestry
This person will possess a unique set of qualities and physical abilities. Some of the qualities to
hire for will be: (adapted from Indiana University Human Resources Services, 2005)
Leadership. This person will communicate the vision and benefits of trees to
stakeholders. Working with the city bureaucracy will be a part of this job, and
cooperating with and obtaining commitment from these departments is crucial.
Maintaining open lines of communication with stakeholders and the public is important
to build relationships. This person will delegate responsibilities and provide motivation
for subordinates to execute their jobs effectively.
Team Orientation. This person will work effectively with others and actively contribute
to group and organizational goals. They will take ownership and share responsibility of
projects and utilize strengths of individuals within the group with which they are
working.
Customer Service. Ultimately, this person works for the public, and when this person is
out in the community, they will serve as a useful resource to residents. This person will
assume ownership for the municipal trees and greater urban forest. They will respond to
the public’s concerns and the trees’ needs.
Problem Solving/Decision Making. This person will make decisions using the
information they have in a timely manner. They will use the resources they have and
involve the appropriate people.
Interpersonal Communication. This person will listen well to others and ask the
appropriate questions when they need clarification. This person will receive and give
suggestions well. Bozeman has an eclectic citizenry, and adapting to different
communication styles will prove useful. This person will recognize and manage conflict
as appropriate.
Flexibility. This person will be able to adjust their behavior when faced with changing or
uncertain situations. They will still be effective when adapting to change and dealing with
ambiguity. They will acquire new information to meet changing demands.
Performance Management. This person will distinguish between good and bad
performances and adjust the plan going forward. Providing feedback and receiving
feedback are important qualities in being an effective superintendent of the Urban
Forestry Department. This person will also acquire the appropriate help for each task.
Arboricultural Aptitude. While this person won’t be working in trees as much, having
that experience and knowing current practices are a priority.
A list of job duties will include the following. All are important while the first three are crucial:
Must be proficient in arboricultural duties such as, but not limited to, pruning techniques,
removing trees, diagnosing disease, and plant health care
54
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Coordinate with other departments in Bozeman to direct all tree-related activities
Engage the public to build a culture of trees, and enlist the community to plant a new
generation of trees
Alert the code enforcement officer of violations of laws, ordinances, rules, and
regulations
Influence the interests of the Urban Forestry Department and express the benefits of
urban trees
Prepare and supervise budgets
Prepare and supervise planning documents
Analyze programs and policies
Manage employee selection, supervision, and employee relations
Manage department operation and maintenance
Manage, analyze, and update the urban forest inventory software program
Maintain contracts with groups and people outside of the municipality
Fit short-term work plans into the long-term UFMP
Appendix 1. Planting trees in paved areas
A minimum of 100 cubic feet of irrigated soil is needed to sustain long-term tree growth
(DeGaetano, 2000). In these planters, after 2 feet in depth is reached, an increase in soil surface
area is of greater benefit than greater depth. This would make a realistic planter size a minimum
of 2 feet deep, 3 feet wide, and 16 feet long.
If a city street is ever reconstructed, the city should consider suspended pavement sidewalks,
which are an ideal way to provide future planting locations. This suspended pavement sidewalk
does not bear extreme loads and is placed over non-compacted soils in hardscapes. According to
a study conducted by Bartlett Tree Research Lab (2006), trees with room to grow their roots
under concrete in sidewalks were “larger, faster growing, had better color, and more root growth
than most other treatments.” On these pavement plantings, or any plantings in sidewalks,
surrounding pavement should slope away from the planters, thus not sending contaminated water
into the tree. The following is a description of what this might look like.
55
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Appendix 3 SWOT analysis
Strengths
- Place for community engagement and building
- Synergetic relationships with other city infrastructure
- Provides essential canopy cover in parks and on streets
- Competent forestry division
- Dedicated, passionate and educated citizenry who supports the urban forest
- Tree board
Weakness
- Age and species diversity
- Forestry division prioritization in city government
- Enforcement of city ordinances involving trees
Opportunities
- Potential for a new generation of trees
- Added cost savings to city though appropriate management of the urban forest
- Volunteer opportunities in the urban forest though the coordination of the Urban Forester
- Environmental benefits
Threats
- Climate and environmental stressors
- Damage to sidewalks and roads
56
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
- Exotic pests and diseases
- Forestry Division not growing in proportion the population of Bozeman
References
American Public Works Association. Urban Forestry Best Management Practices for Public Works
Managers
Abby, B, 1998. U.S. Landscape Ordinances: An Annotated Reference Handbook. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York, NY.
Appleton, Bonnie, 2003. Right Tree Right Place. International Society of Arboriculture, Tree Selection
and Planting. A CEU Compendia.
Ball, J. 2003. Tree Planting the Foundation of Plant Health Care. International Society of Arboriculture,
Tree Selection and Planting. A CEU Compendia.
Browning, D.M., and H.V. Wiant, 1997. The economic impacts of deferring electric utility maintenance.
Journal of Arborculture. 23(3): pp. 106-112.
Coder, Kim D., 2003. Preserving Trees During the Construction Process. International Society of
Arboriculture, Plant Health Care. A CEU Compendia .
Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers (CTLA), 2000. Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th edition.
International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign IL, pp. 143.
Covello, V.T., and Allen, F., 1988. Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Policy Analysis, Washington, DC.
Clark, J.R., N.P. Matheny, 2008. Municipal Specialist Certification Study Guide. 2008 International Society
of Arboriculture, Champaign IL, pp. 279
Clark, J.R., Matheny, N.P., Gross, G., and Wake, V., 1997. A model of urban forest sustainability. J
Arboric. 23(1): pp. 17-30.
DeGaetano, L.R., 2000. Specifications of soil volume and irrigation frequency for urban tree containers
using climate data. Journal of Arboriculture 26(3):142-151
Donovan, G. H., Butry, D. T., Michael, Y. L., Prestemon, J. P., Liebhold, A. M., Gatziolis, D., et al. (2013).
The relationship between trees and human health: Evidence from the spread of the Emerald ash borer.
American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 44, 139–145.
www.Emeraldashborer.info
Gilman E.F., 2001. Effect of Nursery production method, irrigation and inoculation with mycorrhizae
forming fungi on establishment of Quercus virginiana. Journal of Arboriculture 27(1): pp 30-39
57
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Greenpassivesolar.com/passive-solar/scientific-principles/movement-of-the-sun/
Heisler, G.M., 1986. Energy Savings with Trees. Journal of Arboriculture. 12(5): pp 113-125
International Society of Arboriculture website http://www.isa-arbor.com/education/onlineResources/
Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001). Environment and crime in the inner city: Does vegetation reduce
crime? Environment and Behavior, 33, pp 343–367.
Kuhns M.R., B. Lee, and D.K. Reiter. 2005 Characteristics of urban forestry programs in Utah, U.S. Journal
of Arboriculture 31(6) : pp 285-295
Matheny, N., and J.R. Clark, 1994 Photographic Guide to the evaluation to Hazard Trees in Urban Areas,
2nd edition, International Society Of Arboriculture, Champaign, IL.
McPherson, G., and Rowntree, 1993. Energy conservation potential of urban tree planting. Journal of
Arboriculture, 19: pp 321-331
McPhearson, G., and J. Simpson, 1999. Carbon Dioxide Though Urban Forestry: Guidelines for
Professional and Volunteer Tree Planters. USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station.
General Technical Report PSW_GTR-171.237 pp.
Maco, Scott E., McPherson, Gregory E., 2002. Assessing Canopy Cover Over Streets and Sidewalks in
Street Tree Populations. Journal of Arboriculture, 28(6): November 2002.
Miller, R., 1997 Urban Forestry: Planting and Managing Urban Green Space, 2nd edition. Prentice Hakk,
Upper Saddle River, NJ. 502 pp.
Miller R.W. and W.A. Sylvester, 1981. An economic of the pruning cycle. Journal of Arboriculture 7(4):
pp. 109-112
Reiss, C.L. 2004, Risk Management for Small Businesses. Public Entity Risk Institute, Fairfax, VA.
www.riskinstiute.org
Rogers, Dan. Edits for the 2011 Dillon Community Forest Management Plan.
Suspend pavement.
http://www.asla.org/uploadedFiles/CMS/Meetings_and_Events/2010_Annual_Meeting_Handouts/Sat-
B1The%20Great%20Soil%20Debate_Structural%20Soils%20Under%20Pavement.pdf
Swiecki, T.J., and E.A. Bernheardt, 2001. Guidelines for Developing and Evaluating Tree Ordinances
www.isa-arbor.org/publications/ordinances.aspx
Tarran, J. (2009). People and trees, providing benefits, overcoming impediments. In D. Lawry, J. Gardner,
& M. Bridget (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th national street tree symposium Adelaide University,
Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 63–82.
58
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan
Tate, R.L., 2007. Urban and Community Forestry: Financing and Budgeting. Kuser, J. (ed.). Urban and
Community Forestry in the Northeast, 2nd edition. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, pp. 133-146.
Thompson, R.P., and J.J. Ahern, 2000. The State of Urban and Community Forestry in California: Status in
1997 and Trends Since 1998, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Technical Report
No. 9 Urban, Forest Ecosystem Institute, Cal Poly State Univ., San Luis Obispo, CA, 48 pp.
Troy, A., Grove, J. M., & O’Neil-Dunne, J., 2012. The relationship between tree canopy and crime rates
across an urban–rural gradient in the greater Baltimore region. Landscape and Urban Planning, 106, pp.
262–270.
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2005. Benefits of Urban Trees. Urban and
Community Forestry: Improving Our Quality of Life.
Ulrich, R.S., 1986. Human responses to vegetation and landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 13:
pp 29-44.
Urban Forestry Best Management Practices for Public works Managers: Budgeting and Funding, 2006.
Urban Forestry Best Management Practices for Public works Managers: Staffing, 2006.
Urban Forestry Best Management Practices for Public Works Managers: Ordinances, Regulations, &
Public Policies, 2006.
Volder, A., Watson, W. T., & Viswanathan, B., 2009. Potential use of pervious concrete for maintaining
existing mature trees during and after urban development. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 8, pp
249–256.
Warriner, J.W., 2006. Contracting with municipal agencies. Part 1; Reasons for privatization, Tree Care
Industry, February: pp. 52-56
Western Forestry Leadership Coalition. http://www.wflccenter.org/across-the-western-landscape/six-
point-plan.php
[EMERALD ASH BORER COURSE OF ACTION PLAN]
A plan to prepare Bozeman for the emerald ash borer and
efficiently manage the city’s ash tree population during the
infestation while creating a sustainable, healthy urban forest.
2
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Acknowledgements:
Mitch Overton: Director of Parks and Recreation Bozeman
Bozeman Tree Advisory Board
The Bozeman Citizenry
Jamie Kirby: Montana DNRC
This document was funded by an urban forestry program development grant from the State of
Montana - Department of Natural Resources & Conservation – Urban & Community Forestry Program
3
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 4
Organization of Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 6
About the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) ........................................................................................................... 6
Management of Tree Infrastructure .............................................................................................................. 8
Tree Inventory ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Detection ................................................................................................................................................... 9
Management of EAB and Achieving Goal Species Diversity ................................................................ 10
Economics of Ash Trees and EAB ......................................................................................................... 11
Management of Ash Trees 10 Inches in Caliper and Over ..................................................................... 12
Management of Ash Tree 9 Inches in Caliper and Under ....................................................................... 14
Removals ................................................................................................................................................ 16
Quarantine ............................................................................................................................................... 17
Contracting Out Removals vs. Keeping Removals In-House ................................................................. 17
Contracting Out Tree Treatment vs. Keeping Treatments In-House ...................................................... 18
Insecticide Treatment Options ................................................................................................................ 19
Biological control.................................................................................................................................... 20
Funding/Budget....................................................................................................................................... 20
Response Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 22
Re-evaluate ............................................................................................................................................. 22
Management of Tree Infrastructure Recommendations .......................................................................... 23
Community Engagement ............................................................................................................................ 23
Public Education ..................................................................................................................................... 24
Management of Private Trees ............................................................................................................. 25
Political Support...................................................................................................................................... 26
Tree Replacement ................................................................................................................................... 26
Community Engagement Recommendations .............................................................................................. 27
References ................................................................................................................................................... 27
Appendix 1 Cost breakdown of management options ................................................................................ 28
4
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Introduction
The major weakness of Bozeman’s urban forest is its lack of species diversity. In the downtown area, the urban forest is composed of approximately 80% ash trees. City wide, ash trees make up
around 50% of the tree population. The tree population on any of Bozeman’s downtown streets,
especially the through streets, is dominated by ash. Church Avenue across from Bogert Park is
entirely ash. Main
Street, Willson, and Cleveland are
marginally better.
Species diversity is
important to any plant population for the
ecology to thrive.
Monocultures in any
plant community harm
the greater environment by
inviting disease and
depleting soil resources
and diversification of
symbiotic animal life. The same principles hold
true when looking at the population of trees in an urban forest. When low species diversity is
present, the tree population is especially vulnerable to insects and disease. If an insect or disease
were to be introduced to the area that affects the dominant species, it will devastate the tree
population. This situation would reduce the quality of life for the people who live around these trees, and it would ruin benefits and cost savings the trees provide to the community.
Unfortunately, this is the problem Bozeman faces, and it is particularly disturbing in light of the
looming emerald ash borer (EAB). Emerald ash borer is an invasive species that infests any
Fraxinus species. This pest was first introduced in the U.S. outside Detroit, Michigan, in 2002 and has spread throughout the Midwest, East and now the West.
The EAB can fly; however this mode of dispersion is limited. Generally, EAB can only fly one
half-mile from where it was hatched. The spread of this bug is largely due to human means. It
can be spread by transporting ash firewood and ash wood products. Rake handles, baseball bats, and pallets are all made from ash wood. As these products are distributed around the country, the risk of distributing the pest is elevated. Bozeman has a freight train route through town, also
increasing our vulnerability. Infestations and pest outbreaks are almost always worse and spread
faster than what was expected. For this reason, focusing on creating a healthy, sustainable urban
forest ahead of EAB in Bozeman should be a priority. The City of Bozeman faces many challenges when planning for EAB given the importance of
our urban forest and sheer number of ash tree we have. Given that it is almost inevitable EAB
Church Street ash trees
5
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
will be introduced to Bozeman, we must approach this threat on many fronts. The impacts the
city must consider are:
a. Public safety
When Ash trees die or a limb dies, it become extremely hazardous. The grain of the
wood in ash trees can cause the tree to fail with little or no cause or warning.
The city will become vulnerable to lawsuits from destruction caused by neglected ash
trees. b. Public health
Increased rates of cardiovascular disease from decreased air quality
Increased rates of lower cardiovascular disease from decreased air quality
c. Economic
Loss of benefits provided by urban trees
Substantial costs of removing many ash trees and stumps
Substantial biannual costs associated with treating trees
Decrease in value of properties without mature trees
Increased stormwater volume
Increased water usage
Higher utility bills for residents
d. Environmental
Decreased air quality from the loss of 75% canopy cover in Bozeman - Particulates not being filtered from air
- Carbon dioxide not being absorbed
- Oxygen not being emitted
e. Political
Losing many mature trees will create a negative political perception of the city and
the Urban Forestry Department.
When EAB arrives in Bozeman, it is in the best interest to keep the ash trees that provide most of
the urban forest benefits. Moreover, from a management cost perspective, treating trees for the
duration of the pest outbreak or the lifespan of the tree is more cost effective than removing them
in certain size classes of trees. Also consider the cost of replacing the tree and the time it would
take for the tree to reach parity of the lost tree. Timely treatment of these assets preserves the
benefits they offer the community, and this management philosophy will ultimately make money
for the City of Bozeman.
This report details planning for EAB and managing it once it arrives. This is an issue that will
initially cost the City of Bozeman money and must be dealt with. If this is done, the urban forest
in Bozeman will continue to be a source of pride, offer benefits that far outweigh the cost, and
remain a healthy urban forest. If proper planning and management is not executed, the city will:
Experience exponential death of its ash trees
Threaten public safety
Devastate the budget of the urban forestry department for years
Lose many of the benefits the urban forest provides
6
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
This EAB Course of Action Plan operates on the foundation of Bozeman’s newly created Urban
Forestry Management Plan (UFMP). The recommendations made in this report assume the
appropriate personnel are in place, as recommended in the UFMP. By doing this, Bozeman will create the most efficient Urban Forestry Department possible and ultimately create millions of dollars in benefits for the city. This investment in city infrastructure addresses Bozeman’s most
current needs in our modern-day society.
The city will be the driving force for educating the public on the dangers of this pest. Once EAB arrives, it will be the city’s responsibility to educate the public on management options. If this is executed well and efficiently, we will be implementing the most cost-effective approach,
preserving the most canopy cover, and making our community forest healthier for it.
Organization of Plan
The Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan operates in conjunction with the
Bozeman Urban Forestry Management Plan. Together they create a holistic, sustainable urban
forest in the most efficient way possible.
This EAB plan is broken in to two main parts: “Management of the Tree Infrastructure” and
“Community Engagement.” The two components cannot operate without the other and should be
executed simultaneously. However, there is a natural division.
About the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB)
The emerald ash borer (EAB) is considered
to be the most destructive forest pest ever
seen in North America. The emerald ash
borer (Agrilus planipennis) is a beetle
originally from Asia. It most likely was
transported in hardwood packaging, such
as a crate. Emerald ash borer was first
detected outside Detroit, Michigan, in 2002
and since then has spread throughout the
East, Midwest, South, and now the West.
The areas shaded in green in figure 1 have
EAB and the states in the sage green are in
immediate danger of EAB’s arrival. The
earliest year that EAB was found to be
responsible for an ash tree death was as early as 1997 (Seigert et al. 2014). It attacks any
Fraxinus (ash) species, and any size tree is vulnerable to attack.
Figure 1
7
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Emerald ash borer larvae bore holes in to the cambium of
ash trees, disrupting the flow of water and nutrients. This
causes initial dieback and eventually kills the tree.
An ash tree infested by EAB exhibits dieback in the canopy
above the infested portion of the tree. One-third to one-half
of the canopy may
die in one year. A
tree may be treated if it shows less than 30% canopy
dieback, and this can prevent further damage. Smaller
trees may be killed in one or two years by EAB, while
larger trees will die in three to four years if left
untreated.
The EAB emerges from a tree in late May though mid-
June and begins to lay eggs two weeks after
emergence. The eggs hatch in one to two weeks and
begin feeding on the cambium of an ash tree, thus disrupting the flow in the phloem and girdling
the tree. (Information provided by emeraldashborer.info.)
Emergence
late May-
late June
Lays eggs
mid June
Eggs hatch
and begin
boring late
July-October
OverwInter
under bark
Pupation in
spring
Figure 2
8
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
The population of EAB will stop growing if it runs out of a food source, experiences extreme
low temperatures, or human intervention. Ash trees are not native to the Bozeman area, in turn
limiting the natural dispersion of EAB. Ash trees have largely been planted in landscaped areas
therefore island of ash trees are present, limiting the insect’s ability to travel from ash tree
population to ash tree population. The US Forest Service, Northern Research Station concluded
that sustained temperatures of -30F is required to kill EAB. These temperatures are rare in the
Bozeman area. Human intervention is therefore the effective method to limit the expansion of
EAB populations. This is done by treating ash trees to be retained and removing ash trees
marked as such. In addition, biological control insects have helped to slow population growth.
Management of Tree Infrastructure
Bozeman’s urban forest consists of approximately 21,000 trees, 47% of which are ash. The
following sections provide the necessary knowledge and steps to be taken to prepare Bozeman
and manage Bozeman’s ash tree population though the EAB infestation.
Tree Inventory
As of 2014 Bozeman has inventoried approximately half of its publicly owned trees. This is a
good start, and completing the inventory is essential for planning and managing it once EAB
arrives. First, the city needs to know how many ash trees it has since all of its management
decisions and budgets will be based on this number. The inventory is a database that is key for
budgeting, limiting liability, and managing the urban forest. The existing inventory incorporates
many of the categories below, and it will be beneficial to also add categories particular to EAB.
Planned Maintenance
Once it is decided which ash trees will be retained, the rest of the trees will eventually be
removed. Some of the ash trees that are in poor condition or are in conflict can be removed prior
to the emergence of EAB. Once EAB arrives, the infested trees will need to be immediately
removed. Trees not yet showing signs of infestation will be treated to delay their removal. All of
this planned maintenance should be documented in the inventory. It allows for the plan to
continue being executed regardless of personnel changes.
This section of the inventory will document the trees that will be preserved though the infestation
and will help prevent any errors or loss of the city assets. If a tree is to be treated in order to
delay its death due to workload constraints, this is where it will be documented.
Completed Maintenance
9
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
The ash trees that are removed are documented to keep track of budgeting for future years of the
EAB infestation. Each removal should document the resources expended, such as as how many
people, equipment needed, and time spent, including the stump removal.
Trees that receive treatments must be documented accordingly for the same budgeting reasons.
In addition, it aids in scheduling the next treatment or when to next inspect the tree for signs
infestation.
Inspections
Regular inspections will lessen liability. For example, if a tree were regularly inspected and
documented with photos to be structurally sound, yet it failed and caused damage, the city could
use the inventory records to show their diligence in monitoring tree infrastructure.
Condition
Documenting the condition of a tree in the inventory will aid in making management decisions.
Open Planting Spots
Knowing how the number and location of appropriate planting spots is maybe the most important
aspect in moving forward after EAB runs its course. In Bozeman, it will be fairly obvious which
streets or parks are in need of trees, but it will be important to plant trees systematically
throughout the entire city using the inventory.
Detection
Detecting the presence and monitoring the severity of the EAB
infestation is an essential part of this plan. Multiple detection
methods should be used because each method has strengths and
weaknesses. Emerald ash borer traps, which are baited with
pheromones, are installed in ash trees to detect and monitor the
infestation. The use of traps should be implemented
immediately because if EAB is detected very early in its arrival
to Bozeman,
the
possibility
will exist to
suppress and contain the infestation. The traps
are not time consuming or overly expensive.
However, the traps are not a totally reliable
way to monitor the presence of EAB so this
this method should be aided by “branch
sampling”. Branch sampling is requires the Bouldercolorado.gov
10
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
removal of two live branches (2-6” diameter) from the south side in the mid height of the
canopy. The bark is removed from the branches, with a knife. Any visible signs of EAB: feeding
galleries, D-shaped exit holes or EAB in the larval or beetle form are note. This method is being
utilized now and should be continued. However, it is time consuming and labor intensive. It
should be used but not solely because of the limited resources of the forestry division.
Many cities and states have indicated that tree mortality did not occur until year 3-5 of EABs
arrival. (Siegert et al., 2007 McCullough and Mercader, 2012). This highlights the need for
consistent detection because most likely the by the time tree mortality occurs or the presence of
“D” shaped holes in the trunk are present due to EAB the EAB population will be spread and
established.
A point person in the department should be designated to be a reliable and qualified resource for
the community and to provide identification when EAB is reportedly suspected. This way our
efforts are coordinated and a protocol is being developed. This person will coordinate with
Montana State University’s detection efforts, Belgrade, and any other significant land owner in
the Gallatin Valley monitoring for EAB. The importance of a diligent and consistent monitoring
effort cannot be understated. Upon detection, our response plan can be implemented
immediately.
After the arrival of EAB, monitoring should continue to keep track of the severity of the
infestation. With consistent monitoring techniques, a graph of EAB population levels can be
created. The city will reach its desired ash tree population and continue to treat the remainder of
its ash trees for eight years. During this period, the city will want to see EAB levels decline and
eventually reach zero.
Management of EAB and Achieving Goal Species Diversity
The newly created Urban
Forestry Management
Plan for Bozeman sets
goals for the urban forest
to increase species
diversity and age
diversity. Planning for
EAB creates an
opportunity to achieve
those goals in a timely
manner. The current
species distribution is
heavily weighted by ash
trees (47%). Progress can
Ash
47%
Maple
17%
Elm
11%
Linden
5%
Honey Locust
4%
Mountain Ash
3%
Aspen
3%
other
10%
Species Diversity
Figure 3
11
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
be made to achieve the goal of having no more than 20% of any one genus. Some ash trees will
be lost in our urban forest due to EAB, and this loss will address our lack of species diversity.
However, species diversity is achieved through appropriately planting new trees, which will be
key in creating a sustainable urban forest and improving its health.
Economics of Ash Trees and EAB
Urban trees offer the community many economic benefits, which must be calculated to make
fiscally sound decisions on how to manage EAB. Costs to consider include the cost of treating
ash trees to preserve them through the outbreak or until the city is ready to remove the tree and
the cost of removing the tree and grinding the stump.
There are approximately 10,000 ash trees in Bozeman, which comprise 47% of the urban forest.
This plan will work with the 10,000 ash tree number until the tree inventory is completed. These
10,000 trees have an importance value of 60% because many of the ash trees are mature. The
tree genus that has the second highest importance value is maple, which has a 15% value. As can
be seen in the figure below, there are a disproportionately large number of ash trees.
The vast majority of the mature trees are in the
downtown area, as reflected in “Percent of Species
that are >12 inches” pie chart. This means 83% of
Bozeman’s mature trees are ash, leaving Bozeman in a very tenuous position. Ash trees provide more
than $1.4 million in annual benefits, with the
average individual tree providing $145 in annual
benefits to the Bozeman community. Figure 3
details the value of Bozeman’s ash trees.
Ash
83%
other
17%
Percent of Species
that are >12"
Figure 4
Figure 5
12
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Figure 6
The cost of removing ash trees is substaintial. The City of Kalispell is seeking bids to remove
the above-ground portion of 24 elm street trees killed by Dutch Elm Disease. They budgeted
$24,000 for this, or $1,000 per tree. In the end, they ended up paying $750 per tree for the
removal of the above-ground portion. Using the budgeted numbers of Kalispell, Bozeman would
spend $10 million to remove its 10,000 ash trees, not including stump griding and replanting.
Management of Ash Trees 10 Inches in Caliper and Over
Fifty percent of Bozeman’s ash trees have a caliper over 10 inches. For the sake of calculations,
this report will assume the cost of removing an ash tree, including a stump with a caliper over 10
inches, is $850. The cost of removing an ash tree with a stump with a caliper under 10 inches, will be $125. Note that this is a one-time cost.
Economically, treating trees with a caliper over 10 inches that are in good condition and in
an appropriate location are worth treating for the service life of the tree or the duration of the
outbreak. Trees with a caliper smaller than 10 inches most likely are not worth treating because of the long lifespan ahead of them and the number of years the tree will need treatments. Also,
these smaller trees do not offer the benefits the bigger ones do, and they can be replaced with a
tree requiring less maintenance and offering similar benefits. The city should use the 10-inch
caliper number as a general rule. There will be property owners with public ash trees with a
caliper of 9 inches or smaller in front of their properties who may want their ash trees treated. In these cases, technically, it would be the property owners’ responsibility to treat the trees if they
do indeed want to retain them. The city will want to adopt smaller publicly owned ash trees that
present merit for treating. There will be costs if the trees die, and the benefits lost may outweigh
the cost of treating the tree. These trees will be considered on a case-by-case basis by the
city official. Coordination and communication will be crucial between the entities. If the city budgets $100,000 per year for the removal of ash trees, this will remove approximately
118 trees every year. There will also be a cost associated with purchasing replacement trees and
installing them. This cost will not be calculated into the cost of EAB scenarios because it is
unclear who will assume that cost.
13
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Preventative treatment is a viable option for saving an ash tree. With the correct timing and
chemical, one treatment will last for two years. (More on this topic in “Treatment Options.”)
Treating a tree with a caliper over 10 inches will cost $52. This application is administered every
two years for a cost of $26 per tree per year. Figure 7 shows the management options available to the city. As can be seen, the more healthy
trees that are treated, the less money will be spent over time. This is because the removal cost is
more than treating the trees, even over time. Moreover, the benefits of the city’s mature trees
are retained by treating every mature ash tree that is in good condition and in an appropriate location. The green line shows the benefits of ash trees minus the cost of treating them through the life of the tree or the duration of the outbreak. Seven percent of Bozeman’s
mature ash tree population is either in poor health or a poor location; these trees will not be
treated. By treating the remaining 93% of mature ash trees, Bozeman comes out ahead by $42
million over 44 years.
Figure 7
The example scenarios below take into account the cost for managing EAB though its infestation cycle. The following are taken into account:
Treatments are calculated for 12 years in every scenario.
The removals will not all happen in one year, so treatments will need to be administered to all trees except for the trees scheduled for removal. In other words, the city is dictating when the
tree dies, not EAB.
Only trees with a caliper of 10 inches or greater are tabulated
Tree benefits are experienced until a tree dies and are calculated at $223 per tree per year because only the mature trees are taken into account.
Tree costs and benefits are calculated for 44 years in every scenario because in the “no trees
retained” scenario, that is the length of time it would take to remove all of the city-owned ash
trees at $100,000 per year.
*Charts of maintenance schedules are in the appendices.
$0.00
$5,000,000.00
$10,000,000.00
$15,000,000.00
$20,000,000.00
$25,000,000.00
$30,000,000.00
$35,000,000.00
$40,000,000.00
$45,000,000.00
No trees
retained
10%
retained
50%
retained
93%
retained
Management Options
Costs to City
Benefits-Costs
14
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
* After the ash tree population has been reduced to the goal number, the remaining ash trees are
treated for eight years to starve the remainder of the EAB population and eradicate the insect.
There are some variables to be considered with the outcome of these options:
With the “no trees retained” option, we are left with no ash trees and 10,000 open planting spots. The replacement trees will eventually offer benefits that are not calculated here. There is no
guarantee the replacement tree population will have a greater species diversity. A mass
public education program must be undertaken to prevent Bozeman from being in the same
predicament when the next disease outbreak or insect infestation occurs.
With “10% retained,” we are left with
500 ash trees and many of the same
considerations as with “no trees
retained”
With “50% trees retained,” Bozeman
still faces a major replanting effort. The
ash tree population changes from
approximately 50% to 33%.
With “90% of ash trees retained,” we are
left with canopy cover. It is understood
that Bozeman is retaining the 90% that
are in the best condition and retaining
much of its mature tree population.
As can be seen in the scenarios
presented, by far the least expensive way
to manage EAB is to retain 90% of our mature tree population. Moreover,
retaining 90% of our current mature ash
tree population retains the benefits our
urban forest provides. The 10% of
Bozeman’s mature ash tree population that would be removed is represented by trees in poor condition or inappropriate locations. Losing mature ash trees that are in good condition and
planted in appropriate locations is not an option for Bozeman from an economic and liability standpoint.
Management of Ash Tree 9 Inches in Caliper and Under
The management of ash trees with a caliper of nine inches and smaller is largely a removal
schedule as they are infested or if they are infested. (The picture to the right is a 7-inch caliper
ash tree inserted to give the reader a reference for the trees being described in this section.) The
reasoning for this approach is that ash trees with smaller calipers:
15
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Do not offer the same benefits larger trees do
Have a life expectancy that is much longer, and potentially treating the trees for that
amount of time is not desirable
Do not present as large of a public hazard upon death
It is not realistic for the city to treat more than 5,000 trees for many years
Ash trees with smaller calipers that die will still need to be removed and replaced in a timely
manner; however, the city’s liability is more manageable. After the city removes the tree, the
homeowner or HOA responsible for replacing the tree can then take appropriate actions.
The potential exists for the city to lose all of its 5,000 smaller-caliper ash trees; however, at this
point in EAB theory, the potential is small. There are many reasons for this theory.
First, some percentage of homeowners will decide the publicly owned ash tree in front of their
property is worth treating and preserving through the outbreak or for the lifespan of the tree. In
these cases they can petition the city to adopt their tree into the treatment cycles, and the city can
accept their tree or determine the tree does not fit into their goals of managing EAB. More than
likely, it will be in the city’s best interest to treat the tree because it will avoid animosity and be
cost effective. The alternative is that if the tree did indeed die, the city would be left with the cost
to remove the tree and stump, a loss in tree benefits, and possible problems with replanting.
Second, a management program exists entitled Slow Ash Mortality (SLAM), whereby treating a
percentage of the ash trees leaves the remaining ash trees at minimal risk of being infested.
SLAM is a project involving many state and national organizations and makes the case that by
treating around 20% of the entire ash tree population, EAB cannot establish a critical bug
population to cause tree mortality. This is because ash trees can survive a very low level of EAB
infestation. The amount of damage done to the vascular system is not enough to kill a tree. In
implementing this management program, there is the variable that you do not know what
percentage of the privately owned ash tree population will be treated. Bozeman’s EAB Plan
recommends treating approximately half of its ash tree population, and this would equate to
approximately 25% of the entire ash tree population in the city. Some property owners will treat
their ash trees, but the percentage of privately owned ash trees to be treated is difficult to
determine. Also, how consistent and diligent property owners will be as to treating their trees
over time is hard to predict. Using these numbers, SLAM management principles would be
applicable and losses would be minimal. This report does not employ SLAM management
practices for a variety of reasons but mainly because too much is at risk with not treating some of
Bozeman’s large-caliper ash trees and it is not the most current management approach. However,
if SLAM management principles are valid, it’s all the better, and Bozeman’s losses will be
minimal to non-existent by employing this plan’s recommendations.
16
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
The third reason the City probably will not lose its entire small ash tree population is that it is
possible that property owners will choose to hire privately owned tree care companies to treat the
publicly owned trees near their property. This scenario might occur if the city chooses not adopt
the tree in to their treatment cycle and the property owner still deems the trees worth the
investment. The city might choose to adopt the tree into their treatment cycle in future years if
the tree reaches the caliper requirement.
If the city did indeed need to remove its entire 5,000 small-caliper ash tree population, it would
cost the city almost $700,000. This number spread
out over 15 years averages to be almost $45,000 per
year. If the City implements the updated Bozeman
Urban Forestry Management Plan and proactively
implements this EAB Plan, this report does not
recommend extra budgeting for the removals of ash
trees with smaller calipers. This is due to the reasons
stated above. It is possible losses will be minimal
and efficiencies created by the Bozeman UFMP will
better equip the Bozeman Urban Forestry
Department to “do more” with the allocated funds.
Removals
Ash trees in poor condition or in bad locations do
not fit into the criteria for treating and will most
likely be infested, die and need to be removed upon
the arrival of EAB. Efficient and timely
implementation of the removal component of the
EAB plan is crucial for reasons of public safety and also for controlling the EAB infestation.
Dead ash limbs are particularly susceptible to failure because of their grain. Many reports of limb
failure exist where seemingly no weather event played a role in triggering the failure. This is
alarming in the fact that dead ash trees may fail at any time with no warning. For this reason,
from a liability standpoint, dead ash trees that present hazards must be removed immediately.
The City of Bozeman Urban Forestry Department currently has 78 mature ash trees slated for
removal due to poor condition and an additional approximately 400 ash trees that are in poor
condition and/or bad locations. These trees will eventually be on the schedule for removal, and
keeping current or ahead of schedule on the existing removals will prepare Bozeman for the
arrival of EAB. On average 1 to 2% of a tree population will phase from fair condition to poor
condition and the service life of the tree will be over. This would represent approximately 100
ash trees per year. Anticipating ash tree removals due to poor condition should be accounted for
17
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
when managing a tree population. This is especially true in light of preparing for the arrival of
EAB.
EAB will prefer to attack already stressed trees. Herein lies an element of strategy. Once EAB
arrives, Bozeman will want to delay the planned removal schedule of dead or dying ash trees
until late summer and fall, when EAB has bored into the trees it will attack for the year. This
way, if the wood is disposed of properly, the city will be killing off all these bugs that have bored
into trees in poor condition. These trees are known as “sink trees.” Some ash tree population
managers have intentionally girdled ash trees slated for removal in hopes of attracting EAB, then
killing them with removal of the tree. This is not necessarily recommended in this plan because
Bozeman will have enough work without creating potentially more removals. Ash trees already
in poor condition should be considered sink trees. Of course, public safety will take precedent
over strategy, and dead trees that pose a risk should be removed immediately, no matter the time
of year.
Quarantine
Wood from removed, infested ash trees should be dealt with in a coordinated way. When the city
removes an infested tree, a yard should be designated for storing this material. Branches and
smaller-caliper brush are chipped and should be aged before considered safe for repurposing or
disposing of normally. Trunks containing EAB larvae also carry the risk of spreading the bug, so
a single spot is chosen to limit further dispersal of EAB. The city may want to open this yard for
homeowners and tree services to dispose of infested logs.
Transporting ash firewood or logs becomes a major concern. Gallatin County will need to
implement a “no transportation of ash wood” outside of the county. The city will coordinate with
the county to execute such actions. Fines could be implemented for violating such quarantines.
Bozeman may want to partner with Belgrade to coordinate the disposal of ash tree trunks.
If EAB was to move into Montana but not Bozeman, the city will want to establish added
measures of monitoring transported ash wood. Many of these actions have more to do with
“community engagement.” One step might be licensing all firewood dealers selling wood within
city limits. Again this would require a community engagement aspect to inform the community
to buy firewood from a safe source.
Contracting Out Removals vs. Keeping Removals In-House
Contracting out removals will likely present a cost-efficient approach to dealing with EAB-
related removals. These are removals that might be unplanned, due to an EAB loss, or that do not
fit into the department’s already increased workload. Contracting out removals will also enable
18
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
the Urban Forestry Department to keep up with their pruning rotation and normal workload
activities.
Ash trees that will inevitably be removed or are scheduled for removal prior to the arrival of
EAB will fit into the normal workload of the Forestry Department and will likely be best kept in-
house.
Contracting Out Tree Treatment vs. Keeping Treatments In-House
Thousands, if not tens of thousands, of ash trees will be treated for EAB prevention every year
once EAB arrives. Bulk pricing will inevitably be an important cost-saving measure. The City of
Bozeman has historically contracted out its pesticide applications. This would be an acceptable
and possibly cost-saving approach for treating the public ash trees. This is because contractors
will likely be treating private trees and can create an efficiency by treating public trees while
already in the area. If the city does contract out treating ash trees, it will want to make sure the
contract has the ability to be flexible to add or subtract trees from the stated amount. This allows
for the possibility of some trees becoming infected in that timeframe and becoming not worth
treating while other trees may be incorporated into the criteria of trees to treat. Also, if treatments
are contracted out, it is essential the timing of the treatments be correct. The city will want to
ensure the work is completed in defined start and stop dates.
Some time will be saved if the city decides to treat its own trees because the department will set
out to treat certain streets and sections of town, and they will not need to put much time into
coordinating these efforts. If the work is contracted out, the city will need to spend a certain
amount of time marking the trees to be treated, the trees’ calipers, and locations. These details
will be important for writing the RFP.
If the city does plan on treating its own trees a couple considerations need to be addressed:
The Urban Forestry Department will need to get one of its arborists or its urban forester
licensed by the State of Montana to apply pesticides.
Injection equipment and the appropriate insecticide will need to be purchased.
The city will need to allocate three two-person crews for four weeks to treat 2,250 trees
every year in the middle of summer. This presents a loss in productivity in the heart of
the working season for the department.
It is likely there will be homeowners who have publicly owned ash trees in front of their property
and want them saved but the trees don’t fit into the criteria of trees the city is planning on
treating. In these cases, three options are presented here: the homeowner must have them treated
by a private company and pay for the service out of pocket, the city assumes responsibility for
treating the tree, or the tree is left to be infested. If the tree dies, it is the city’s responsibility to
remove it. A decision must be made, most likely on a case-by-case basis, whether or not to treat
19
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
it. If the tree is close to the 10-inch caliper, in a good location and in good condition, the tree will
likely be a good candidate for saving to preserve the benefits of canopy cover and avoid the costs
of removing the tree. The city will most likely have to remain flexible and have the ability to
adjust to situations like these with a possible added workload.
Insecticide Treatment Options
Treating ash trees to prevent attacks or further attack from EAB is an effective approach to
controlling the spread of EAB and saving the tree. There are different methods of treating trees
including soil drenches, basal trunk sprays and trunk injections. Ll methods are applied in the
spring after leaf out but before the female’s eggs have hatched. Each method requires two to four
weeks for uptake to protect the entire tree against EAB. All methods are systemic and effective
for protecting an ash tree from an EAB infestation; each has positives and negatives.
There are three chemicals that can be injected into a trunk: azadirachtin, emamectin benzoate,
and imidacloprid. This report does not address the technicalities of each chemical; rather, it gives
recommendations as to the most effective and cost-conducive approach. During periods of low
infestation, any treatment application can be considered with an emphasis towards efficiency and
the cheapest method. Trunk injections of emamectin benzoate (EB) are the safest and most
• Applied directly into ground
• Should not be applied to excessively wet ground as can
result in poor uptake due to dilution
• Should not be applied to excessively dry ground because of
resulting poor uptake
• Should not be applied where flowers are present to prevent
injury to pollinators
•Should not be applied where the water table is shallow or
there is risk of contaminating bodies of water
Soil drenches
• Soil conditions are not a factor in the effectiveness
• Drilling is required to administer chemicals, creating injury
to trunk
•Requires specialized injecting equipment
• Absorbed and distributed around the tree more quickly
Trunk injections
• Spray the lower 5-6 feet of trunk
• Easy and quick to apply
• Does not wound the tree
• Does not enter the soil
• Sprayer must be calibrated to ensure proper dosage.
Basal sprays
20
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
effective way to treat ash trees and should be used during heavy periods of infestation. Recent
studies show no long-term damage has resulted from drilling sites where chemicals have been
administered. A trunk injection of EB is the only method of protecting ash trees for two years,
and in some recent studies, EB was effective for three years. Emamectin benzoate has shown to
provide the highest level of control in side-by-side studies. This treatment option could be used
through all stages of the EAB infestation and most likely will be the cost-effective approach
considering it can be applied once every three years during low infestation periods. Emamectin
benzoate is derived from a bacterium and has a low toxicity to mammals. It is not considered
hazardous to bees and pollinators because ash trees are wind pollinated and not a source of nectar
for bees. Emamectin benzoate is immobile in soil and has a low potential to bioaccumulate.
Upon detection of EAB, treatment should begin with the trees in the immediate area first and
spread out from the point of detection. Treatments may be administered to trees showing less
than 30% dieback. In these cases, the tree’s vascular system is only partially damaged and
limiting further infestation will result in a viable tree.
Biological control
The USDA has tested and developed protocols for the introduction of three biological control
insects to help slow the population increase of EAB. (EAB Management Plan for Boulder
County, 2015) Oobius agrili, Spathius agrili and Tetrastichus plannipennisi, are insects known to
exist in EAB’s native range and parasitize either the EAB eggs or larvae. These insects vary a bit
in their efficacy, but complete multiple lifecycles in one year’s time, helping to reduce EAB
either during the egg or larval phase of development.
Funding/Budget
Trees not showing signs of infestation and those showing signs of minor infestation will be
treated to prevent infestation or further damage. Bozeman must have the proper budgeting in
place for treating trees. The city will not be able to keep up with removals if EAB dictates when
the tree dies. By treating the trees not showing signs, the city determines when or if the removal
is to take place, depending on the management decision for the individual tree. This proactive
approach preserves the budget and dramatically lessens the liability of having dead ash trees
without the capacity to remove them.
The City of Bozeman is fortunate to be planning for EAB ahead of its arrival; many towns in the
Midwest did not have this luxury. As detailed above, by far the most economically beneficial
approach to dealing with EAB is to preserve as many ash trees that are 10 inches in caliper and
over, in good condition, and growing in appropriate locations. This approach will cost the least
and offer the most benefits. In Bozeman’s case, they will come out ahead some $40 million.
21
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Ash trees in poor condition can be removed as soon as they fit into the work schedule. It is
prudent to remove problem ash trees rather than waiting until EAB necessitates it. This will
lessen the budgeting and workload impacts once EAB arrives. It will also address species
diversity problems and create new planting spots, as this is good management for any urban
forest.
In planning for EAB, all of the actions fit into the recommendations made in the Bozeman Urban
Forestry Management Plan. These actions focus especially on maintaining the appropriate
removal schedule of ash trees in poor condition or in bad locations, completing the inventory,
detection efforts, and planting new trees with appropriate species diversity. Implementing
Bozeman’s UFMP will lessen the immediacy of this plan because it will create a healthier and
more sustainable urban forest. Moreover, implementing Bozeman’s UFMP could save Bozeman
millions of dollars by creating a sustainable urban forest by the time EAB arrives, and
accordingly, the full scope of this plan would never need to be implemented. Bozeman’s UFMP
recommends creating a superintendent position in the Urban Forestry Department and filling it
appropriately. This step is crucial to the implementation of the Bozeman UFMP and to the
implementation of this EAB plan, especially for executing the community engagement
component. This position also will coordinate with Montana State University and Bozeman
School District to aid in detection efforts and community awareness. Lastly, a single person must
be responsible for coordinating and executing EAB activities. The one line item for budgeting in
anticipation of EAB is in detection efforts. It is essential to secure funds to implement this plan
prior to EAB’s arrival in Bozeman. Again, this plan is executed assuming the UFMP has been
adopted and funded. With the Bozeman UFMP fully executed, it is possible and likely that the
budget recommended in the EAB plan will never need to be fully implemented.
Action Anticipated expense
Detection $500/year
Implementation of BZN UFMP See BZN UFMP
Once EAB is detected in Bozeman, additional funding will be needed to implement the EAB
plan. This includes treatments, removals, and community engagement. A year-by-year
breakdown and totals are available in the appendices.
Action Anticipated expense
Monitoring $750/year during infestation and beyond
Treatment cycle Avg. $100,000/year for 12 years
Removal of trees >10 inches caliper $100,300/four years and $23,800 on the fifth year
Removal of trees < 9 inches caliper $6,250/year for duration of outbreak
Community engagement $3,000/year for duration of outbreak
22
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Response Plan
Upon detection of EAB, a response plan should be implemented immediately. Many of the steps
will happen simultaneously. For example the community awareness component and determining
the size and severity of the infestation will occur first and at the same time.
Proposed response plan:
1. Determine size or area of infestation and relative severity. If population is very low and
detection is in year one, continue to two. If population is detected in more than one
location of Bozeman and is beyond year one, continue to step three.
Sample trees using a variety of tools to determine which trees are infested and the
intensity. Do this in all trap locations and inform all detection partnering
organizations.
2. Population of EAB is very low; implement eradication approach.
Eliminate population by removing infested tree(s) and bringing them to designated area.
Targeted use of insecticides on public ash trees in area. Treatments schedule is on a
three-year rotation.
Alert homeowners in immediate area to treat privately owned ash trees. 3. Community awareness component once EAB has arrived:
Enact preplanned communication strategy.
Prepare for all questions and critics of plan.
Engage news agencies to run stories on EAB.
4. An established population is detected; implement full treatment of ash trees.
Treatment schedule for ash trees
Removal schedule for ash trees
Monitoring schedule: note changes, spread and impacts
5. Beyond infestation
Continued monitoring and detection efforts: address as necessary.
Re-evaluate
One part of the overall strategy is being able to adapt as conditions in the urban forest change
upon the arrival of EAB. The superintendent of the Urban Forestry Department must be able to
revise the strategy based on new information without needing approval from city government.
Some of the practices will work well while others will not be effective approaches to creating a
healthier urban forest. Questions that must be asked, perhaps on a quarterly basis, include:
What is working well?
What needs improvement?
What lessons are being learned?
23
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Most likely, new information and technology will be developed between the time this report is
adopted by Bozeman’s City Commissioners and the arrival of EAB. The plan must be
implemented and budgeted for, and there must be a mechanism to update the plan with
developments in technology and experience.
Management of Tree Infrastructure Recommendations
Issue Recommendation
Tree inventory -Complete tree inventory.
-Add “open planting spots” to inventory.
Detection -Implement a consistent detection effort by designating a point person in
the department to inspect traps and reports from the community.
-Coordinate detection efforts with MSU and State of Montana
Budget -Budget necessary money for detection efforts, removals, and treating
trees.
Who will perform
work
Make decisions as to how much, if any and what work will be contracted
out
Potential loss of 83%
of mature trees
-Upon detection of EAB in Bozeman, treat all ash trees that have a
caliper of 10 inches and over with EB trunk injections.
-Treat trees that are in good condition and are growing in a good location.
-Treat every third year during periods of low infestation and every other
year during periods of moderate to high infestation. -Trees are split into two groups of treatments to keep a consistent budget
and workload.
-Special accommodations will be considered for property owners with
boulevard ash trees that do not fit into the criteria for the city to treat but are close.
Species diversity and
age diversity
-Remove ash trees in poor condition.
-Remove ash trees in bad locations. -Implement sink tree removal techniques. -Plant new trees with good species diversity and do not plant ash.
-Keep current with existing removal schedule.
Planting new trees -Expand city tree planning programs to people who have lost ash trees.
-Plant a new generation of trees with appropriate species diversity using
recommendations in Bozeman UFMP.
Community Engagement
Urban forestry starts with community engagement and culminates in community engagement.
This is because it is the community that builds and supports its urban forest, and it’s the
community that realizes the benefits from the urban forest. It is the community that must be
24
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
informed and educated by the City of Bozeman on ways to build a healthier urban forest and
protect their own ash trees.
In a sense, the city is partnering with the community to manage the ash tree population. Both
must manage their urban forest in concert for either one to be successful in executing their plans.
For example, the city must rely on the public to report suspected beetles or infested trees. Efforts
will be wasted if, for instance, EAB arrives and the city has its goal ash tree population and
implements a treatment cycle but the public does not follow suit. It will be the city’s
responsibility to coordinate and network with all organizations including landowners, MSU,
Belgrade, BSD, interest groups, conservation groups, etc. A clear and common message must be
spread to all entities.
Public Education
In preparing for EAB the public should be educated about the risk of EAB and, maybe more
importantly, the elements of a healthy, sustainable urban forest. By creating a healthy urban
forest Bozeman is preparing itself for EAB and minimizing EAB’s impacts upon detection. This
plan’s immediacy is prevenient for this reason: the work done now will minimize the impacts in the future and create a healthy urban forest for future generations. How to educate the public and
on what topics is the focus of Bozeman’s Urban Forestry Management Plan.
Once EAB is detected in Bozeman, the public should be informed with a clear and consistent
message. This public announcement must be completely ready to be broadcast at any moment. The PSA should have the following elements:
Clear and understandable scientific information
What Bozeman is doing and why
Explanation on the low toxicity of the chemical and how it presents virtually no risk to
public
Bozeman should anticipate questions and concerns about the EAB Plan. Surely, whoever is
administering treatments to the trees will have encounters with the public, and this team should have information on the plan and be educated as to how to handle the concerns of the community. The urban forestry department should be equipped with a planned message to handle
potential conflicts with the public. Educating the public now, before EAB’s arrival, can minimize
many of these concerns. Bozeman’s superintendent of urban forestry should be able to synthetize
constructive criticism and make adjustments to the plan. Likewise, this person should be able to
tell the difference when members of the public are not offering hearsay rather than content. Much unfounded information exists surrounding EAB, and there are theories for controlling
EAB that are not realistic or workable. Bozeman should be wary of a “silver bullet” for
controlling or preventing EAB, as no such thing currently exists.
Once EAB is detected in Bozeman, public meetings will be of good use. During the development of this plan, a well-attended public meeting was held and members of the public were very
25
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
engaged. These meetings should inform the public of the dangers of EAB, what the city is doing,
and what management options homeowners have. By engaging the public, the city will also gain
support for the plan and the department. This furthers the goal of creating a healthy urban forest
and maximizing the benefits urban trees provide. Property rental agencies should be informed so they can contact all of their property owners to make management decisions.
The media will be of good use in Bozeman to inform the public of EAB. Public service
announcements (PSAs) should be written and proofed, and a list of all media outlets that can
publicize a PSA should be compiled ahead of time. The news channels and newspaper should be engaged to run stories on EAB, and the superintendent should be ready to respond to media inquiries. Any additional strategies for communication should be planned ahead of time so they
can be executed in a timely and efficient manner.
Management of Private Trees
The public will need to be educated on the city’s plan. This is extremely important because
private owners of ash trees have the ability to help or disrupt the city’s efforts. In any given
management option scenario, the city will reach a desired ash tree population and treat the
remainder of its ash trees on a more conservative treatment cycle for a number of years in hopes
of starving EAB and eradicating the beetle from town. During this period it is extremely
important that privately owned ash trees are treated similarly. This component of the
management strategy has variables and potential for disruption. That is why it is crucial to keep
up on monitoring and detection efforts during this phase of the plan. Problems that could arise
during this period of eradication include:
New property owners may not have ash tree management plans or knowledge of EAB.
Absentee owners or property owners of rental units may not manage their trees.
By this point in the plan, the vast majority of ash trees that have not been managed will most
likely have died and these “variable” trees will be less of a factor. Contacting rental agencies in
Bozeman and alerting them of the management options they have will possibly diminish the risk
of these “variable” trees. Depending on when EAB arrives, it is possible that Bozeman’s skewed
species diversity will have moderated itself through proper proactive management of the urban
forest and EAB will be less of a factor.
There will be privately owned trees in Bozeman that will die as a result of infestation and present
a considerable public hazard. Again, these trees will possibly be on rental lots and on absentee
owners’ lots. This presents a dilemma: should the City of Bozeman be able to enforce the timely
removal of a dead privately owned ash tree? From a public safety perspective, probably. From a
property rights perspective, which is prevalent in Montana, the answer is not so clear. There must
be a balance between public safety and perceived government overreach. The city could run a
survey, accessible from the city website, asking this question prior to the arrival of EAB. Or this
question could be presented to the city commission, and maybe they will have a clear
26
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
understanding of what the appropriate actions should be. If the city does determine a need to
implement an ordinance enforcing the removal of dead ash trees, a subsidy could be created to
help those who cannot afford to have an ash tree removed from their property.
There is an interest to preserve as many mature ash trees as possible, both public and private, that
are in good condition. If Bozeman’s species diversity has not changed by the time EAB arrives, a
cost-share program for treating privately owned trees would be in Bozeman’s best interest. This
would work if Bozeman contracts out its treatments by negotiating a bulk treatment price; or if
conducting its own treatments, these cost-share trees could be incorporated into the treatment
cycle.
Political Support
Decision makers in Bozeman will play a crucial role in the management of EAB. A “State of the Forest” report to the city commissioners will be essential while the EAB plan is being
implemented and its effectiveness is being evaluated. The more the city commissioners know
about the conditions on the ground, the better partners they will be in creating a healthy urban
forest population. This will also help their political goals by being informed on a very important issue in Bozeman that the public will inevitably ask about. Also, the more they are informed by periodic commission briefings, the easier it will be to make management decisions because of
their knowledge of the gravity of the situation.
Online surveys should be conducted during the implementation of the plan to alert the commissioners as to the public’s support and willingness to save our forest through proactive management.
Tree Replacement
When the city ultimately loses or removes hundreds or thousands of street trees, whose
responsibility is it to plant replacement trees? City ordinances state the property owner must keep
a certain number of trees planted in their boulevard, so it will be the property owner’s
responsibility to replant. Of course, there are some extending circumstances here:
It is possible that local nurseries will not be able to keep up with demand and there will
not be quality nursery stock.
A property owner might not have the money to replace one or many trees.
The property owner might not be aware of their responsibility to replant.
Public communication will be of particular importance here. The city will play a very important
role in guiding the species diversity of the new plantings. If this is not done, it makes Bozeman
vulnerable to once again being in the position of having low species diversity when the next
forest pest emerges. Certain provisions the city might consider are:
Providing incentives for planting new trees.
27
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
a. Discount or eliminate the tree tax for one year
b. Expand tree planting programs for people who have lost ash trees
c. Expand the use of the city nursery for replanting ash trees.
Making a timeline for when trees must be replanted
a. Extending the timeline for people who cannot afford to replant for one year.
Requirements to qualify for an extended timeline could be that the property owner
is currently on a Medicaid, MHK, WIC or other assistance program.
Community Engagement Recommendations
Issue Recommendation
Detection/Monitoring -Coordinate detection efforts between citizenry, MSU, Belgrade and
other interest groups.
-Implement a strategic and consistent detection effort.
-Respond to community reports of beetles or infestations.
Education of EAB
and elements of a
health urban forest
-Engage public to create a healthy sustainable urban forest in
preparation of EAB.
-Conduct the community engagement program outlined in the BZN UFMP .
Alerting community
of arrival of EAB
-Enact preplanned strategic communication plan.
Planting programs -Enact public planting effort outlined in BZN UFMP.
Additional
precautions
-Consider ordinances enforcing timely removals of dead trees.
-Consider regulating or certifying firewood dealers selling firewood in
Bozeman.
References
Emerals Ash Borer Management Plan for Boulder County Managed Ash trees. 2015
Exploring Connections Between Trees and Human Health, Science Findings, Pacific Northwest
Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Jan./Feb. 2014,
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/sciencef/scifi158.pdf
http://www.emeraldashborer.info/faq.
Management Plan, Rainbow Treecare Scientific Advancements
Daniel A. Herms, Deborah G. McCullough, David R. Smitley, Clifford S. Sadof, Whitney Cranshaw
Insecticide options for protecting Ash Trees from Emerald Ah Borer
28
Gallatin Tree Care, February 2015 Bozeman Emerald Ash Borer Course of Action Plan
Source: McCullough, Deborah G.; Mercader, Rodrigo J.; ―Evaluation of potential strategies to
Slow Ash Mortality
(SLAM) caused by emerald ash borer (Agrilus Planipennis): SLAM in an urban forest,‖
International Journal of Pest. Management, Vol. 58, No. 1, January–March 2012, 9–23
Nathan W. Siegert and Frank W. Telewski3, Deborah G. McCullough. Dendrochronological
reconstruction of the epicentre and early spread of emerald ash borer in North AmericaDiversity
and Distributions, (Diversity Distrib.) (2014) 20, 847–858
Improving detection tools for emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae): comparison of
multifunnel traps, prism traps, and lure types at varying population densities. 2014. Crook, D.J.;
Francese, J.A.; Rietz, M.L.; Lance, D.R.; Hull-Sanders, H.M.; Mastro, V.C.; Silk, P.J.; Ryall,
K.L. Journal of Economic Entomology 107(4): 1496-1501.
Ryall KL1, Silk PJ, Mayo P, Crook D, Khrimian A, Cossé AA, Sweeney J, Scarr T. Attraction of
Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) to a volatile pheromone: effects of release rate,
host volatile, and trap placement. Natural Resources Canada, Great Lakes Forestry Centre, Sault
Ste Marie,ON, Canada. kryall@nrcan.gc.ca
Appendix 1 Cost breakdown of management options
Management
Option
Removal
Cost.
$850/tree,* one time
*Treatment Cost.
$26/tree/year for
duration of EAB infestation
Tree Benefits that
are retained for the
duration of the outbreak. $
Total cost
$
Total
retained
benefits or Cost. $
No trees retained 4,250,000 2,689,596 23,068,458 6,939,596 16,166,262
10% of trees
retained
3,811,400 2,720,276 23,331,598
6,531,676 16,799,922
50% of trees
retained
2,106,300 2,545,868 29,146,992
4,652,168 24,494,824
90% of trees
retained
425,000 1,425,320 42,329,860
1,850,320 40,479,540
*note cost of removal includes stump grinding