I.

Introduction

January 14, 2015

Street and park tree inventories provide information for the

planning, design, planting, maintenance, and removal of
community trees. It provides facts that can be used to justify
starting and funding a community tree program.

An inventory of trees and planting spaces is a prerequisite in planning for

and making sound management decisions including budget strategies and
priorities. An inventory can provide the locations of trees that require
pruning or removal to reduce risk, the number of trees located within the
public right-of-way, the value of ecosystem services trees provide, and the
number of available planting sites. In addition, an inventory can help to
identify insect or disease problems or young trees that require irrigation,
pruning, and other maintenance.

With this information, tree commissions can annually plan, prioritize, and
budget tree removals, maintenance work, and plantings. They can also
determine the value of their community’s trees for increasing property
values and stormwater management which helps emphasize a tree
program’s importance to community leaders. Over the years, changes in a
community forest can be seen in the number, age, and species of trees. A
well maintained inventory can be used in cases of liability to demonstrate
there was no negligence in the inspection or care of public trees. An
inventory will also improve the chances of receiving grants and other
assistance by documenting the condition of and care for the community
forest.

Inventory Process
The process to conduct a tree inventory can be divided into four phases:
planning, implementation, application, and maintenance.

Planning
 Identify the types of information needed and how that information will
be used.
 Assess the availability of computers and software and people to
maintain the inventory.
 Determine the method of data collection (drive or walk).
 Assess the requirements for labor, equipment, and funding.

Implementation
 Training people for gathering data.
 Collect data and check accuracy of data collectors.
 Input and maintain data in a computer or GIS system.

Application
 Analyze data and use information.
 Establish objectives for tree removal and planting that increase species
and age diversity.
 Prepare annual work plans and budgets for removal, planting, and
pruning.

Maintenance
 Re-inventory the trees to maintain the information at a current level; or
 Continuously update the information when permits are issued and tree
work is completed.

Collecting Data
The only way to acquire needed data is by inspecting individual trees and
recording the information on handheld computers or other electronic
devices. Recent inventories of Harrisburg, Lancaster, and other cities have
used Trimble Nomad handheld computers running ESRI ArcPad. Those
conducting the inventory must decide how much of the community will be
inventoried, which areas will be completed first, who will collect the data
(volunteers, interns, staff, or consultants), and what information is needed.
Once these decisions are made, municipalities must determine how to use,
maintain, and analyze the information. Tree inventory data can be placed in
Excel, Access, and other software. The most commonly collected and used
data fields in a tree inventory are:
  The location of the tree (by GPS and street name and building number);
 The name of the tree species or abbreviation;
 The diameter of the tree’s trunk;
 The condition of the tree (good, fair, poor, dead/dying);
 Any trees that require urgent pruning or removal;
 Any tree that requires maintenance in a timely fashion;
 The location and quality of potential planting sites for new trees;
 Potential constraints on planting spaces such as utility wires and narrow
tree lawns; and
 The location and extent of tree damage to sidewalks and curbs.
Another important decision is whether to walk or ride when collecting data.
Driving in a car with one person driving and one person recording data is
faster and more comfortable, but a thorough and accurate inspection
requires walking. A driving or “windshield” inventory does not allow the
recorders to notice all the indicators of tree health or structure. The
windshield method is better used for a general overview of trees and quick
estimates of tree numbers, planting vacancies, or special problems like
topped trees and Emerald Ash Borer. Regardless of whether they walk or
ride, data gatherers must have good knowledge and training to identi

II. Statement of the problem

Inventory of trees with as perceived by the community Importance/ Values and rank of the
different species of trees.

Table I: Survey- Community

Name of the species Numbers

1.Mahogany 30
2.Ipil-Ipil 9
3.Coconut 8
4.Mango 5
5.Pine Tree 5
6.Gmelina 5
7.Narra 3
Table II: List of trees with ecological significance as perceived by the key informants

Scientific Name Local Name Plants Part Ecological Significance

1. Toona calantas Mahogany Trunk For shade
2.Leucaena leucocephala Komkompitis,samsampi Branches, leaves Food for goat, pig, cow
ng,
3.Cocos nucifera Coconut,Niyog trunk, leaves Making nipa hut ,broom
4.Mangifera indica Mangga Fruit,leaves,trunk Food for birds ,shade
5. Pinus kesiya Pino trunk Furniture
6. Gmelina arborea Gmelina Trunk,fruits Foood for goat,furniture
7.Pterocarpus indicus Narra trunk Furniture

Table III: List of trees species perceive as therapeutic medicine by Key Informants

Scientific Name Local Name Plants Part M/T Use of the tree

Cocos nucifera Coconut, Niyog Fruit,oil Diuretic,massage

purposes
Mangifera indica Mangga Fruit,leaves,trunk Healing wounds,anti-
inflammatory

Table IV: Tree Species with cultural significance to the people

Scientific Name Local Name Plants Part Ecological Significance

Leucaena leucocephala Komkompitis,samsamping, Branches, leaves Food for goat, pig, cow

Mangifera indica Mangga Fruit,leaves,trunk Food for birds ,shade,

Compost purposes

Table V: Trees Species with miscellaneous uses

Scientific Name Local Name Plants Part Uses

1. Conservation Practices

According to the people this are the differents wys on how to preserved trees.

 Forestry Management - the art and science of tending forests, woodlots, tree
plantations or agroforestry plantings
 Grass Planting - establishing or restoring permanent, perennial conservation cover
consisting of native or non-native grass mixes.
 Grass Waterway - a type of conservation buffer, designed to prevent soil erosion
while draining runoff water from adjacent cropland.
 Grassland Management - keeps grass stands healthy so they continue to provide long-
term conservation benefits.

2. Maintenance Preservation

 Complete postconstruction tree maintenance, including fertilization, irrigation, soil

aeration, and pruning where necessary.
 In the absence of adequate rainfall, apply at least 1 inch of water per week by deep
soaking methods.
 Fertilize trees with phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, and other macro- and
micro-nutrients as indicated by a soil test, but wait at least 1 year to apply any nitrogen.
 Fertilize lightly with nitrogen after 1 year. If recommended by an arborist, light annual
applications of nitrogen may be made for the next 3 to 5 years.
 Inspect trees annually for at least 3 to 5 years after construction to look for changes in
condition and signs of insects or disease, and to determine maintenance needs.
 Remove trees that are badly damaged or are in irreversible decline if unsuitable for
wildlife habitat.
 Continue to protect not only the large, established trees on the site but also those newly
planted in the landscape..

3. Recommendation

Given the complexities involved in managing ecosystems, there is a continuing need for rigorous
research and public education. The committee offers the following recommendations designed to
enhance understanding of key processes affecting Yellowstone’s ungulate populations, vegetation, and
ecological processes. To the degree possible, all management at YNP should be done as adaptive
management. This means that actions should be designed to maximize their ability to generate useful,
scientifically defensible information, including quantitative models, and that the results of actions must
be adequately monitored and interpreted to provide information about their consequences to guide
subsequent actions. There is insufficient scientific knowledge available to enable us to predict the
consequences of different management approaches. Thus, long-term scientific investigations and
experiments are needed to provide solid scientific evidence for evaluating management options.

4. Conclusion
 Natural resource managers typically try to reduce variation around some desirable ecosystem
state. For wildlife managers, a desirable state usually is defined by a consistent harvest of the target
species, stable vegetation communities, and a small loss of the target animals to severe weather.
Restoration ecologists, on the other hand, try to achieve desired ecosystem dynamics by reducing or
eliminating human perturbations and restoring natural ecosystem processes and the ecosystem
components that drive these processes. Given the inherently dynamic state of most ecosystems, Boyce
(1991, 1998) and others have suggested that a more appropriate management goal for YNP is to follow
the “restoration” approach and maintain or restore ecological processes rather than try to maintain a
particular ecological state. Management for processes would include maintaining or restoring the spatial
and temporal variation that characterizes the natural ecosystem. Holling and Meffe (1996) persuasively
argued that maintenance of natural variation is critical to the functioning of ecosystems and runs
counter to most traditional management prescriptions. Because Yellowstone is influenced by periodic
major events, both natural and human caused, it is probably impossible to maintain a particular state by
active intervention. For example, the fires of 1988 resulted in substantial changes in the mosaic of
vegetation communities, but these changes appear to be an integral component of the system and
within the bounds of disturbances that periodically occurred in YNP (Romme and Despain 1989). Also,
1996 and 1997 floods throughout the GYE altered riparian communities and triggered new riparian
recruitment, as expected from low-frequency, high-magnitude hydrological events (Skidmore et al.
1999). If natural processes in YNP are to be managed or restored, we must change our focus from an
emphasis on specific outcomes (the presence or absence of a species or state) to an emphasis on rates
and variation. Ecological processes include production of crowd-pleasing cohorts of elk and bison calves
in spring, but they also include the interrelationships between all species, including competition,
predation, winter starvation, and changes in vegetation communities. Because ecological processes are
dynamic, ecological communities change in time and space, with or without human intervention.

The need to understand and permit the full range of ecological processes is emphasized by interactions
between disparate elements of the northern range. Frank et al. (1998) compared the grassy rangeland
of the northern range to the Serengeti ecosystem in Kenya and Tanzania, an area that supports a higher
diversity of large herbivores than the northern range. Nonetheless, herbivores have a key role in altering
the transformation of materials in the functioning of both systems. Nutrient turnover rates are high in
herbivore-dominated systems (including Yellowstone), and these grassland systems have rapid cycling of
nutrients driven by high harvesting rates by herbivores. Removal of herbivores would transform the
system into one dominated by detritivores, with slower cycling of nutrients.