Townsend’s Community Forest Part 7
 | Author:
Patrick Plantenberg, Tree Board Chair
Townsend Tree Board Chair, Townsend Rotary Club |
Townsend’s Community Forest Part 7 Patrick Plantenberg Tree Board Chair Note: This is the seventh in a series of articles from the Townsend Tree Board reporting on the status of the community forest in Townsend.
Last week, we discussed urban forestry guidelines for genera and families and how Townsend is doing in meeting those guidelines.
Townsend has made significant progress in 33 years to achieve proper tree genera planting guidelines. We have no genera exceeding the 20% guideline in Townsend. The only family exceeding the 20% guideline in 2020 was the diverse small tree-dominated rose family (represented by hawthorns [Crataegus spp.], apples [Malus spp.], cherries and chokecherries [Prunus spp.], pears [Pyrus spp.], and mountain ash [Sorbus spp.] genera).
This week, we will discuss how we have enhanced the condition of the trees in our urban forest in Townsend over the last 33 years.
Condition of Townsend Public Trees
In 1990, the relative health and vigor of each tree was mainly used to group trees into four condition classes: good, fair, poor, and dead/dying. In addition, physiological appearance and tree maintenance was also considered in determining the condition class. In the 1990 inventory, the author noted that in April 1986, Townsend trees suffered from a two-day major frost which killed the upper third of many tree canopies. As a result, in 1990, of the 336 trees inventoried, 23 trees or 7% were in good condition; 50 trees or 15% were in fair condition, and 263 trees or 78% were labeled as in poor condition or were dead or dying (Figure 1)! The poor condition trees were generally Zone 2 hardy but older, larger diameter Siberian elms (Ulmus pumila) and white poplars (Populus alba). Most size classes of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) were also in poor condition. The hardy Zone 2 green ash also suffered during the two record frosts (10 and 11 degrees) in April 1986.
In 2005 and 2011, the amount of deadwood was mainly used to group trees into four condition classes (<15%- good, <40%- fair, <60%- poor, and <85%- dead or dying). As in 1990, physiological appearance and tree maintenance was also considered in determining the condition class. Many of the hardy trees damaged in the 1986 frost had recovered by 2005 although many dead limbs remained on the trees.
In 2005, of the 808 trees inventoried, 359 trees or 44% were in good condition; 271 trees or 33% were in fair condition, and 181 trees or 23% were in poor condition or were dead or dying (Figure 2). Townsend started actively removing, pruning, and planting trees in 2006.
The resiliency of the hardy, large, first-generation trees became more and more obvious over time. As noted above, many trees damaged in the 1986 frost had recovered by 2005. Then, many hardy trees including Siberian elms, ashes, white poplars, hybrid cottonwoods, and other trees in Townsend (and other Montana cities) were damaged by another record-setting 5-degree temperature in October 2009. As in 1986, many of the same first-generation trees lost up to a third of the canopy again.
Because of major pruning and tree removal efforts from 2006-2011, even with the loss of canopy from the frost of 2009, overall tree condition had improved (Figure 13). In 2011, 777 of the 1,001 trees inventoried or 78% had less than 15% deadwood; 142 trees or 14% were in fair condition, and 82 trees or 8% were in poor condition or were dead or dying. After 15 years of pruning and tree removal efforts from 2006-2020, overall tree condition continued to improve (Figure 4). In 2020, 920 of the 1,140 trees inventoried or 81% were in good condition; 169 trees or 15% were in fair condition, and 47 trees or 4% were in poor condition or were dead or dying. Figure 4. Condition of Townsend Public Trees Over Time
Tree condition has declined since 2020 as many members of the rose family have contracted fireblight as mentioned in last week’s article. An abnormally high number of trees also died over the winter of 2022-2023. The Tree Board is replacing them as fast as possible. The Tree Board is actively trying to maintain Townsend’s public trees in good condition to minimize the city’s liability in case of a tree failure. Next week, we will discuss the value of Townsend’s urban forest.
Article Images
Click on Image Thumbnail(s) to view fullsize image
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
