Peeking Beneath the Canopy

Insights from using i-Tree Eco to monitor Burlington’s urban forest

James Duncan, Aswini Cherukuri and Emily Van WagonerDecember 12, 2013

i-Tree Eco

• Detailed plot-based survey to assess overall state of urban forest

• 200 random points across city

• Tree condition and physiology, plot cover mixes, building interactions

Involving UVM students through service-learning

Tree health

• 1026 trees on 159 plots surveyed

• Estimated 68.8 trees/acre and over 180,000 trees in Burlington

• Around 30% canopy cover (slightly low)

Land use and tree density

Ecosystem Services - Air pollution mitigation

Carbon Monoxide, $513

Nitrogen dioxide, $1,082

Ozone, $61,496

Medium particulate

(10um), $241,988

Small particulates (2.5um), $198,46

0

Sulfur dioxide, $63

Ecosystem Services - Carbon sequestration

Courtesy of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Sugar maple

sequesters 21.7% of

all carbon taken up by

Burlington trees

Red oak stores the

most, holding 16.5% of

Burlington’s tree-bound

carbon

Courtesy of City of Augusta, GA

Outline

• Data from the class

• Data from all classes

• What it tells us

• What we’ll do next

•

Next Steps

• Build out ability to use i-Tree Eco as a monitoring tool

• Develop better year-to-year plot system

• Develop change analysis products

• Improve customization for students

Exploring sampling along forest gradient

VMC Intensive Site at Mt. Mansfield

• Ecological communities

• Development pressure

• Elevation

• Others?Current i-Tree

Survey

Exploring statewide monitoring using i-Tree Eco methodology

• Possible integration with Forest Inventory and Analysis plots

Thank you!

Contact: james.duncan@uvm.edu