|
Medford is developing its first Urban Forest Master Plan, a long-term strategy to guide how Medford plants, cares for, and protects its trees. The first step was a report by Weston and Sampson that gathered and synthesized information on the status of trees in the city and analyzed the commitment that would be required to maintain the canopy at the 2021 level. A summary of the status report can be found here. The next several issues of the TreesMedford newsletter will present pieces of that summary. The report will be basis for the Master plan, to be completed in the coming months. What is our target for % tree canopy? The answer depends on Medford’s goals, on its existing infrastructure, and on the willingness of the city, its residents and commercial interests to participate in improving the canopy. Various groups have worked to estimate how much canopy is needed in cities. If cooling is the goal, upwards of 40% canopy is desirable, and reducing impervious surface is also very important. Another approach that integrates additional benefits of trees suggests that individuals should see three trees from their dwelling, have 30 % tree canopy in their neighborhood, and live within 300 m of a high-quality green space. The Weston and Sampson report states that in 2021 (the last date for which data was available) the % canopy in urbanized areas of Medford was about 21%, and was diminishing at a rate of 1.2% per year. Medford clearly has a long way to go to even stay in place with regard to its tree canopy. We will discuss some of the reasons for this problem in future issues of the newsletter. Tree Canopy Analysis – Findings of the Weston and Sampson Report Using remote sensing mapping, the City measured changes in tree cover over the 6-year period from 2015 to 2021. The major findings were: • Citywide canopy (including the Fells) declined slightly — from 34.99% in 2015 to 33.78% in 2021, an average loss of 0.6% per year. • In urban neighborhoods (excluding the Fells and other DCR lands), 2021 canopy was 21% and canopy loss was nearly double — about 1.2% per year. Thus, over that period, the city lost 7.2% of its canopy. • These changes are highlighted on the map below.
|
