CCR2005159.
.
..
COMMON COUNCIL - CITY OF MUSKEGO
RESOLUTION #159-2005
RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE
URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDA TE
WHEREAS, The City of Muskego adopted an Urban Forestry Management Plan in July
of 2000; and
WHEREAS, The City retained Ranger Services., Inc. to prepare an UrlJan Forestry
Management Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, The Conservation Commission reviewed the Urban Forestry Management
Plan Update and recommended approval on June 21, 2005.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED That the Common Council of the City of
Muskego, upon the recommendation of the Conservation Commission, does hereby
adopt the attached Urban Forestry Management Plan Update.
DATED THIS 9th DAY OF AUQust
---l. 2005.
SPONSORED BY:
Mayor Charles Damaske
This is to certify that this is a true and accurate copy of Resolution #1 ~)9-2005 which
was adopted by the Common Council of the City of Muskego.
8/05jmb
~~a~~~;/ '47
v
þ
.
. CITY OF MUS,KEGO
U:RBAN FOlffiSTRY
MANAGEMENT PLAN IJPDATE
.
Prepared By: Ranger Services Inc.
Appleton, Wisconsin
July 2004
.
CITY OF MUSKEGO
URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE
.
Table of Contents
Contents Page No.
Funding Statement ......................................................................
3
Introduction: Purpose and Scope ..................................................
4
Executive Summary 5
Tree Inventory Criteria 6
I. Inventory Results ................................................................... ....
7
Street Tree & ROW Tree Maintenance Assessment.......... ...
7
Park Tree Maintenance Assessment.................................... 10
Parks: Analysis and Recommendations................................ 11
II. Management Strategy ..............................................................
18
Administration............................................................. ..... ....
19
Staff
Training
Equipment
Conclusion
City Tree Maintenance and Removal.................................... 21
Tree Removal
Risk Tree Survey
Stump Removal
Park Trees ... ... ... '" ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ........22
Street Trees ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .,. ... ... ... ... .., ... ... ... ...27
.
III. 5 Year Budget Summary .........................................................
33
IV. Ways and Means .....................................................................
37
Budgeting ........................................................................ .... 38
Other Sources ......................................................................
38
Public Awareness .................................................................40
Appendix
A: Street, ROW, Park Tree Maintenance Field Sheets................ 43
References ........................................................................
47
Biography............................................................................... ... ....
51 .
2
. Funding Statement
This document was funded in part by an Urban Forestry grant from the State of
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Forestry Program as authorized under
WIS. Stat. 23.097.
The City of Muskego is located in Waukesha County, Wisconsin. The original Urban
Forestry Management Plan was developed in 1999. This plan is to serve for an update
on recommended tree maintenance.
.
.
3
2004 City of Muskego Urban Forestry Management Plan Update .
Introduction
During the spring of 2004, Ranger Services Inc. of Appleton, WI completed a public tree
survey to update the Urban Forestry Management Plan. The survey focused on the
current condition of public trees found along the streets and Rights of Way in the City
and trees maintained in the Park System. A complete park and street tree inventory
and management plan was completed in 1999.
In the last five years, the City of Muskego has greatly expanded its Park and Street tree
management. The limited opportunities for increasing the street tree population, allows
Muskego to focus efforts on improving the urban forest within the park system. Proper
tree pruning and mulching of park trees has improved the health and aesthetics of the
trees. An active tree planting program has increased the number of park trees and has
focused on increasing the number and diversity of native tree species. ' Efforts to
educate the public on urban forestry topics have been well attended and partially
funded through Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Urban Forestry Grants.
Muskego should be commended for its efforts in building its urban forestry program in
such a short time.
Purpose: The purpose of the City of Muskego Urban Forestry Management Plan
Update is to assess the success of the program to date and provide continued
guidance in the management of the maintenance, planting, and removal of City park
and street trees. This update is to improve and insure the safety, condition, value, and
well being of the City's public tree population.
.
Scope: This Plan update will make recommendations based upon the results of a
public tree inventory update conducted during the spring of 2004. The Plan will address
the aspects of public tree maintenance needs. It will include estimated annual budgets
for 5 years and recommendations for managing the trees found in Muskego's park
system and other public areas.
- Develop a plan of action to continue to improve the overall condition of the City
tree population.
- Develop schedules and procedures to remove and prevent risk trees and high
risk situations on public lands caused by trees.
.
4
.
.
.
Urban Forestry Management Plan Update Executive Summary
During the spring of 2004, Ranger Services Inc., Appleton, Wisconsin conducted a public tree
inventory and management plan update for the City of Muskego, Wisconsin. The purpose of the
inventory was to collect data to assess the current state of the public tree population and
determine the progress of recommended tree maintenance from the original management plan in
1999.
City trees were inspected and categorized into management units. High risk trees were
identified. Muskego does not have many typical street tree plantings or available planting sites
due to the existence of a storm water conveyance system in the Right of Way (ROW). The
Muskego Park system provides the largest and most valuable tree resource on public property.
Tree Management Categories
Public trees were evaluated using the original managt~ment categories found iIJl the original
management plan.
Seventeen park/green space and City Building sites were evaluated. Trees were evaluated for
maintenance in the next 5 years and risk tree assessment. Individual tree data was not recorded.
Street and ROW trees were evaluated for risk tree considerations and projected removals over the
next 5 years. Planting sites in these areas were not idl;:ntified due to the existence of the storm
water conveyance system and lack of terrace areas.
Park Tree Data
· Twenty-one trees were identified for risk tree maintenance needs in the Muskt:go parks system.
o 2 risk tree removals
o 13 trees recommended for safety pruning
o 6 recommended removals in the next 5 years
o 70 trees are recommended for clearance pruning in the next 5 years
o 172 trees are recommended for training pruning in the next 5 years
· 25 trees are recommended for planting in the Muskego parks system.
Street Tree and ROW Road Tree Data
· 20 trees were identified for risk tree maintenance needs along the streets and Rights of Way in
Muskego.
o No risk tree removals were identified during the inventory
o 9 trees with safety pruning needs were identified
o 3 trees with clearance pruning needs identified
o 8 trees recommended for removal in the next 5 years
5
City of Muskego Tree Inventory Criteria
All trees inspected during the 2004 tree maintenance survey are categorized into three
classifications.
Park Trees - Trees located in maintained areas of the Muskego Parks System.
Trees located at the City Hall and Police Department buildings are included in
this category.
Street Trees - Trees located in terrace areas where curb and gutter are present.
Right of Way Trees (ROW) - Trees located along the streets of Muskego where
curb and gutter are not present but the trees are located within the City Right of
Way.
Tree maintenance for individual trees is prioritized on a three point sca1e.
Priority 1 - Tree maintenance of the highest priority is recommended to be
completed within 1 year.
Priority 2 - Tree maintenance recommended to be completed in years 2 or 3 of
the 5 year timeline.
Priority 3 - Tree maintenance recommended to be completed in years 4 or 5 of
the 5 year timeline.
.
.
.
6
. I. Inventory Results
During the Spring of 2004, data on trees recommended for maintenanoe over the next 5
years was collected. Other observations relating to tree size/age distribution and
species composition support the findings of the management plan conducted in 1999.
A.Street Tree and Right of Way Tree Maintenance Assessment
Due to the storm water conveyance system used in Muskego, the street tree and Right
of Way portion of the urban forest is not as vast as the park tree portion. After
assessing street and right of way trees, very little has changed in the ne~eds of tree
maintenance for these trees. Clearance pruning of these trees has beem excellent.
This area of the program the City has excelled in.
Risk tree situations need to be the first priority of any urban forestry program.
Eliminating known risk trees or parts of trees reduces the liability to the City for potential
damage or injury to the public. Risk tree and recommended removals do need to be
addressed in a more timely manner. Only four street trees have been removed since
the last inventory. Currently, five of the six trees identified for removal during the 2004
survey, were also indicated in the 1999 survey as priority removals. If City personnel
are unable to perform these removals, contracting a tree service is a viable option to
removing these tree liabilities from the community.
.
Table 1 Recommended Strel~t Tree & ROW Tree Maintenance
TOTAL
# of Trees Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3
0 0 0 0
9 4 5 0
3 0 3 0
8 5 3 0
20 9 11 0
Maintenance Needs
Risk Tree Removal
Safety Pruning
Clearance Pruning
Projected Removal
No significant insect or disease problems were identified.
In comparison to the maintenance requirements identified in the first inventory,
the number of trees requiring immediate attention has decreased by 50%. This is
a result of an increase in awareness of street tre,e maintenance and implementation of
the management plan.
.
7
The ROW road trees are volunteer species that were mainly present prior to .
development of the area. Actual maintenance by the City on these trees is not
necessary beyond addressing risk trees or street clearance. In the past 4 years, the
City of Muskego has removed 26 trees from the ROW. Pruning needs for ROW trees
has been addressed very well. As a result, only twenty trees were identified for current
maintenance needs in this inventory.
Table 2 ROW Road Trees Recommended for Tree Maintenance
Street Name Address DBH Species Maintenance Priority
Timber Ct Cui de sac 15" White Safety Prune, 2
Oak Dead limbs
Holz Dr W136 28" White Safety Prune, 2
S8368 Oak Dead limbs
Holz Dr. W136 25" White Safety Prune, 2
S8381 Oak Dead limbs
Holz Dr. W136 20" White Recommended 2
S8427 Oak Removal,
Evaluate vearlv
Kirkwood Dr. S70 22" Siberian Safety Prune, 2
W17235 Elm Dead limbs
Lentini Dr. W180 20" Siberian Clearance Prune 2
S6428 Elm
Lentini Dr. W180 22" Siberian Clearance Prune 2
S6428 Elm
Muskego Dr. W179 26" White Safety Prune, 1
S6714 Oak Dead Limbs
Muskego Dr. W179 18" White Safety Prune, 1
S6700 Oak Dead Limbs
Muskego Dr. W180 23" Red Oak Recommended 2
S6848 Removal
Preigel Dr. None 36" Bur Oak Clearance Prune 2
.
.
8
. Table 3 Street Trees Recommended for Tree Maintenam:e
Street Name Address Site # DBH Species Maintenance! Priority
Erin Ct. Cui de sac 1 15 Silver Maple Evaluate for 2
Removal
Lannon Dr. Blvd. 10 6 Silver maple Recommended 1
Removal
Lannon Dr. Blvd 14 16 Burr Oak Recommended 1
Removal
Lannon Dr. Blvd 15 17 Burr Oak Prune Deadwood 1
Lannon Dr. Blvd. 18 16 Burr Oak Prune Deadwood 1
Lannon Dr. Blvd. 19 17 Burr Oak Recommended 1
Removal
Ryan Rd. Blvd. 3 10 Green Ash Recommended 1
Removal
Ryan Rd. Blvd. 8 14 Green Ash Recommendled 1
Removal
Ryan Rd. Blvd. 14 22 Green Ash Prune Deadwood 2
.
Tree maintenance recommendations that include! "evaluate" are used on trees that are
in decline and removal is in the near future. It is recommended that these trees be
evaluated yearly to determine if the condition of these trees is getting worse or staying
the same. The completion of this maintenance may be delayed or hastened depending
on the trees condition.
Insect and Disease
No major insect activity was observed during the inventory process. No Gypsy moth
activity, nor egg masses, were found during the inventory. The only noted insect
activity was in Jensen Park on some of the Austrian Pines. Some of the pines have
pine needle scale present on them. Treating these trees with a dormant oil application
in the spring would help control this pest.
.
9
B. Park Tree Maintenance Assessment .
Maintenance needs were assessed concentrating on public safety for all park trees.
These needs include: Risk Tree Removal, Safety Pruning, Clearance Pruning, and
Projected Removals. A total of 21 trees are recommended for safety related tree
maintenance. Eight of the 21 trees are recommended for removal over the next 5
years, however, only 2 of these trees are considered risks at this time. Training pruning
needs were identified for young trees found throughout the Muskego park system.
Although training pruning is very important to increasing the longevity of young trees, all
safety related tree maintenance should be completed before training pruning takes
place. Table 4 summarizes the recommended public safety park tree maintenance.
Table 4 Recommended Park Tree Maintenance
Maintenance Needs # of Trees Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3
Risk Tree Removal 2 2 0 0
Safety Pruning 13 9 4 0
Projected Removal 6 4 0 2
TOTAL 21 15 4 2
The success of the park tree maintenance program is evident when current
maintenance needs are compared to the needs in the original inventory. A decrease of
nearly 50% in the number of trees that require maintenance over the next 5 years is the
major indicator that the park tree maintenance has been effective.
.
Muskego has had an aggressive park tree planting program over the last 4 years.
Every park in Muskego has a good representation of trees in the 1-8" dbh size class.
Areas that would benefit from additional tree planting are addressed in those specific
park descriptions. Training pruning of young trees is the best maintenance practice to
increase the benefits of trees, and will decrease the amount of maintenance a tree will
require as it ages. Pruning young trees to improve their structure will also decrease the
probability that safety concerns will arise with the tree while it reaches maturity. It is
recommended that training pruning begin on young trees in the third year after planting.
This 3 year cycle should be repeated until the tree reaches an approximate size of 8"
dbh. Although precise pruning records of young trees are not present, it is evident that
training pruning on trees planted within the past 4 years has occurred.
.
10
. C. Individual Parks: Analysis and Recommendations
City Buildings
. Seventy-three trees present
. Twenty-one species represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 5 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Remove Crabapple in front of City Hall, to right of entry way
o Training prune all deciduous trees iless than 6 inches dbh within the next
three years (45 trees)
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
o Potential removal of Black Locust trees near northeast corner of City Hall
building to control invasive species on public property
.
o Potential removal of Russian Olive tree from southwest corner of City Hall
building to control invasive species on public property
Comments
.
Through recent plantings the City has done well in diversifying the tree population
around the City buildings. Young tree training pruning and refreshing mulch rings will
help young trees establish themselves in the landscape. Planting spaces are still
present around both buildings. Priority for planting more trees at this time is low.
Old Settlement and Veterans' Memorial Park
. Thirty-eight individual maintained trees pnasent
. Twelve species represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 5 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Training pruning needed for 8 trees in the next 2-3 years.
o Clearance pruning needed for 3 tre~es to provide clearance for mowers
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
o Remove 2 Large Cottonwoods with top die-back near historical structures
o Remove 2 Green ash with top die-back located on north edge of woodlot
northeast of the historical schoolhouse structure
o Remove Dead Elm on south edge of wood lot northwest of Police
Department
o Potential removal of Black Locust trees east of Old Town Hall Building to
. control invasive species on public property
11
.
Comments
Planting of diverse species in this park has increased the diversity of tree species from
6 to 12. This representation is a healthy mix of species; future plantings may consist of
more of these species or include additional large shade tree species. Plenty of planting
space is still present; planting priority for this park is average.
Horn Park
. Ten individual maintained trees present
. Six species of trees represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 6 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Training prune needs for 6 trees in the next 2-3 years
o Evaluate trees along walking path between Horn Park and Veteran's Park
for safety pruning needs. Inspections should be done annually at a
minimum.
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting .
Comments
Due to limited open space in this park, planting priority is low. Plantings around the
outside of the baseball diamond outfield have helped to increase trees in this park.
There are more planting sites available but at a low priority. Re-mulching of tree rings
around young trees will help to retain soil moisture and establish young trees sooner.
Manchester Hills Park
. Forty-eight trees present
. Eighteen species represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 2 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Training prune 27 young trees during the next 2-3 years
o Two trees have clearance pruning needs for mower clearance
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
.
12
.
.
.
Comments
The species diversity of deciduous trees is excellent in this park. Futun3 planting
projects should include evergreen species to provide color and habitat in the park
during the winter months. Evergreens are present around the parking liOt but sparse in
the park itself. Planting priority for this park is aVlerage with plenty of space to plant
additional trees.
Denoon Park
. One hundred and twenty-three (123) maintained trees are present
. Sixteen species of trees represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 6 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Eight young trees would benefit from training pruning in ~he next 2-3 years
o Twenty-nine other trees have clearance needs for mowin!~
o Along the road to boat landing, safety prune large deadwood from poplars
o Annual risk tree inspection to evaluate oak trees on steps leading from
boat landing road
o Remove 2 red oaks and safety prune 5 white oaks, 1 swamp white oak
along steps from road
o Remove Green Ash leaning over boardwalk at base of steps
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
Comments
All trees benefit from mulch rings. There are a number of trees that ne.ed mulch rings
replenished or do not have mulch rings. Plantin~~ sites will always exist in this park.
Priority sites would include along the walking trails and surrounding the! athletic fields.
Planting priority for the park is average.
13
Schmidt Park .
. Forty trees are present in this park
. Ten species represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 8 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Five trees for training prune in the next 2-3 years
o Twenty-four trees with clearance needs for mowing
o Remove staking and guying material from trees 2 years after planting
Comments
Species diversity is improving in this park; however, Norway maple still comprises 58%
of the park population. Many of these trees have trunk wounds associated with them
that could pose problems in the future. Planting priority for this park is ,high. Planting
more of the species already present, aside from Norway maple, including evergreen
species, would improve the composition of the park tree population. Planting trees
around the playground equipment will increase the amount of shade in this area.
Placing mulch rings around all trees will help improve their vigor.
Kurth Park .
. Twenty-four trees present
. Nine species represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 10 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Clearance prune 6 trees for mower clearance
o Training prune 1 tree in the next 2-3 years
o Recommended removal of 3 trees. Two trees located in the fence row on
the south edge of park, the third tree is located in south tree line along
walking loop.
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
Comments
Planting priority for this park is high. Many of the recent planting efforts have been
concentrated on the screening from the adjacent neighbors. Planting trees in the park
and along the walking loop is recommended to add more appeal to the park. The
screening plantings were not included in the maintained park tree count. Little if any
maintenance will be necessary on these trees to serve their purpose.
.
14
.:
.
.
Marian Meadows
. Seven trees are present in the maintained portion of this park. Marian Meadows
is a mixed hardwood forest Six species are represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 7 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Recommended removal of basswood to the south of the pump house, the
tree has a dead top and has large Golumn of hollow trunk
o Safety prune dead limbs from bur oak next to basswood
Comments
Planting priority for this area is low, space and use of this area is limited.
Jensen Park
. Fifty-three trees present in this park
. Sixteen species of trees represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 10 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Due to park use, tree species and placement, clearance ;and training
pruning needs are not needed
o One red oak, located behind the Park building, is recommended for safety
pruning: remove large dead limbs
o One cottonwood, located behind the Park building, is recommended for
removal: this tree is in decline and has a large amount of deadwood
present.
Comments
This park has a good tree population. The park tree population increased by three
trees over the last 4 years. Although there are planting sites available" planting priority
for this park is low. Refreshing mulch rings around individual trees will help improve
tree growth and vigor.
15
Lions Park i.
. Eleven trees are present in this park
. Seven species of trees are represented
. Average condition class is good
. Average diameter is 2 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Eight trees are recommended for training pruning in the next 2-3 years
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
Comments
Past planting efforts in this park has doubled the tree population in the last 4 years.
Planting sites are present throughout the park and planting priority is average. Young
trees have ample mulch rings present.
Bluhm Park
. Seventy-six trees are present in this park
. Sixteen species of trees are represented
. Average condition class is good
. Average diameter is 2 inches .
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Forty-six trees would benefit from training pruning in the next 2-3 years
o Six oak trees along the path connecting to the A TC R-O-W recreation trail
are in need of safety pruning to remove large dead limbs over the path.
o Annual evaluation of all trees within 50' of this path should be inspected
for tree risk situations.
o One silver maple located north of the pavilion along the road, is in need of
safety pruning to remove large dead limb.
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
Comments
This park has received the most new trees in the past 5 years (42 trees). Planting sites
are nearly endless at this park. Priority of planting in this park is average even though
many more trees could be planted without affecting open space needs for recreation.
.
16
.
.
.
Idle Isle Park
. Eighty-six trees are present in this park
. Eighteen species of trees are represented
. Average condition class is fair
. Average diameter is 14 inches
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Eighteen trees would benefit from training pruning in the next 2-3 years
o Six trees are recommended for clearance pruning for mowing clearance
needs
o Seven trees are recommended for safety pruning to remove dead limbs
o One sugar maple tree is recommended for removal due to a substantial
stem canker that could weaken the trunk of the tree. The size and
location of the tree does not make this a high priority removal, however
the removal is recommended to be completed within the next 5 years.
o Potential removal of 2 Siberian elms (low priority) for native species
considerations
'
o Remove staking and guying material from young trees 2 years after
planting
o An annual risk tree inspection of alii trees greater than 12 inches in
diameter should be conducted
Comments
Plantings in this park have increased the park population by 11 trees. Planting sites are
limited in this park and the priority for planting is low. Mulch rings will benefit all trees'
health and vigor.
Little Muskego Lake Access Sites
. These sites have a diversity of trees including many older and volunteer trees -
many of these are less than desirable and weak-wooded species such as
weeping willow and box elder.
. Recommended tree maintenance
o Annual risk tree inspections should be conducted
o Although there are many potential planting sites they are of very low
priority compared to the maintenance of existing trees
17
Management Strategy
.
.
.
18
.
.
.
II. Management Strategy
A. Administration
The Urban Forestry Committee is an ad hoc committee of the City of Muskego. It is
responsible for recommendations in the administration and review of the Urban Forestry
Plans. The City Common Council ultimately makes decisions on urban forestry
management. The City's Conservation Coordinator also serves as the City Forester.
- Staff
Public Works Department personnel currently provide basic tree maintemance and
removal of street trees. The City Forester, Conservation Technician and Parks
Maintenance staff provide tree maintenance and removal for park trees. Subdivision
tree planting is contracted by the subdivider.The City Forester and Conservation
Technician investigate public inquiries regarding tree health and safety" The City
Forester reviews Subdividers' street tree and landscape plans and monitors installation
and survival.
'
The division of tree care responsibilities to date is adequate. Both departments have
done a somewhat adequate job of removing hazardous trees. The big!~est limitation,
which is typical in most communities, is the time constraints for Public 'Norks and Park
Department staff to spend on trees. As demands for a tree program increase, reliance
on contractual services or allowance of additional City staff time will become necessary.
A good foundation for a program has been established based upon recognition of a
valuable urban fórestry resource and concern for the City of Muskego ~lreenspace. As
a result, Muskego is a Tree City USA recipient.
- Training
City staffs associated with the care or decision making with trees are encouraged to
attend related conferences, workshops, etc. Thl3re are sessions available through the
DNR Urban Forestry, Wisconsin Arborist Association and UW-Extensicln. Notice of
these meetings can be found in DNR Urban Forestry newsletters. Urb<an Forestry
workshops described in the Strategic Plan is another avenue of trainin!~ for City
personnel. Contractual training classes can also be provided to City staff.
Equipment, knowledge and technique are continually being improved upon within the
tree care industry. Proper tree care allows for safer, longer-lived, healthier, and more
valuable tree resource. Tree work can be a high risk and dangerous field without the
proper training on equipment and tool use (e.g., chainsaws). Training and education
will reduce the risk and allow for safer, sounder, and more efficient opE~rations.
19
- Equipment .
Present equipment available for tree work includes: brush chippers, dump trucks, front
end loader, chainsaws and hand tools. The Public Works Department periodically
borrows a bucket treuck from the Town of Norway to complete tree operations. If time
and personnel constraints limit City staff from tree care, then contractual services can
be an option. This is especially necessary when tasks require equipment the City may
not have access to (e.g., bucket truck, stump grinder). With the majority of
recommended tree maintenance for younger trees, hand and pole saw, pole pruners
and hand shears would be the main equipment necessary.
Conclusion
The update of the City tree inventory and Tree Management Plan, along with the other
urban forestry achievements, reveals the City's commitment to the urban forestry
program. Current programs in Muskego have proven to be effective. Most young tree
maintenance can be done by City staff or by trained volunteers.
'
Risk tree assessment and remediation has improved over the past 5 years. Conducting
yearly inspections of all Park, Street, and ROW trees is recommended. Included with
the inspections is the need for timely remediation of any risk tree situations identified.
Conducting the inspection and not fixing risk tree situations, allows for more liability
exposure to the City. If City personnel cannot complete these tasks, contractual
services will be needed to eliminate these known risk situations. .
.
20
B. City Tree Maintenance and Removal
. 1. Tree Removal
All City trees will require removal at some point in their life. An objectivE~ of an Urban
Forestry program is to maintain a healthy tree population, thus delaying the eventual
removal, and in turn provide the community with the greatest benefit. The underlying
factor determining tree removal is the comparison between the benefits provided and
the liability of the tree.
Trees are generally removed for three rea80ns:
1. Trees that are deemed "Risk Trees" need to bE! removed to provide public safety.
2. Trees affected by construction or environmental changes such as site or land use change, or
losses in root systems or tree crowns often require removal.
3. Trees in poor health and decline may require mmoval. Trees in this classification should be
removed before they reach the hazardous statE~. Earlier removal of these trees will allow for
replanting which allows for the continuation of a healthy tree population.
,
Trees recommended for removal during the inventory process need to be addressed in
a timely manner to reduce potential risks to the public of Muskego. If City personnel
are not able to remove these identified trees in such a manner, it is recommended that
contracted services be utilized to remove those trees. It is estimated that 1 - 2% of the
City's tree population will need to be removed annually due to normal attrition, planting
. mortality and weather conditions.
Additional details regarding tree removal are included in the maintenance
schedule.
2. Risk Tree Survey
City trees located along streets, right of ways, and in Parks require, at a minimum, an
annual inspection to evaluate their condition regarding public safety. Inspections can
often identify repairable problems that, left unchE~cked, could lead to tree decline or
failure. Inspecting can be accomplished during regular Public Works and Park
operaUons or performed as a separate task. When a street or Park ha:s been inspected
it should be documented. The documentation can be as simple as a paragraph
indicating all City trees were inspected, or as detailed as listing each street, park, etc.,
and results. The documentation should be signE~d and dated by inspecting personnel
and supervisor. The age, species, and condition of a tree may deem it necessary to
provide more frequent inspections to specific neighborhoods or to areas affected by
storms. The few risk trees that were detected during the inventory indicate that current
procedures have been relatively effective.
3. Stump Removal
. Existing stumps were not found to be a problem during the inventory. The current
situation for stump removal is effective. Purchase of a City owned stump grinder is not
recommended at this time.
21
Year 1 - 2005
Park Trees
Risk Tree Removal: 2 Trees
dbh Class # of Trees
6 _12" 1
12 - 18" 1
Total 2
Safety Pruning: 13 Trees
dbh Class # of Trees
12 - 18" 5
18 - 24" 5
24 - 30" 1
30 - 36" 1
36 - 42" 1
Total 13
Scheduled Tree Removal: 4 Trees
dbh Class # of Trees
6 _12" 1
12 - 18" 0
18 - 24" 2
24 - 30" 0
30 - 36" 1
Total 4
Clearance Pruning: o Trees
dbh Class
Total o.
0.5 Days/3 Person Crew .
Estimated Total Work Hours
3
9
12
2.6 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
10
20
4
4
4
42
1.9 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Tótal Work Hours
3
o
24
o
18
45
.
0.0 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
Training Pruning: 45 Trees
Stump Grinding:. 0 $tUI11PS
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
5
Ranoe in Inches
0- 3
3- 6
6 -12
12-18
18 - 24
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
Ranoe in Inches
24- 30
30- 36
36- 42
42+
.
22
.
.
.
Risk Tree Removal: 0 Trees
Year 2 - 2006
Park Trees
dbh Class # of Trees
o
Safety Pruning: 0 Trees
Total 0
dbh Class # of Trees
o
Scheduled Tree Removal: 0 Trees
Total 0
dbh Class # of Treesi
o
Clearance Pruning: 10 Trees
Total 0
dbh Class #OfTree!i
10
Training Pruning: 168 Trees
dbh Class
Stump Grinding: 0 Stumps
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
5
Total 10
0.0 Days/3 IPerson Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.0 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.0 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.9 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
15
15
5.3 Days/2 Pe.rson Crew
Total
Ranae in Inches
0- 3
3- 6
6-12
12-18
18 - 24
Estimated Total Work HOurs
84
84
0.0 Days/1 .Person Crew
Estimated Toted Work Hours
o
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
Ranae in Inches
24 - 30
30- 36
36- 42
42+
23
Risk Tree Removal: 2 Trees
Safety Pruning: 1 Tree
dbh Class
12 - 18"
18 - 24"
Year 3 - 2007
Park Trees
Total
# of Trees
1
1
2
dbh Class # ofTrees
12 - 18" 1
Scheduleci Tree Removal: 2 Trees
dbh Class
6-12"
12 - 18"
18- 24"
Clearance Pruning: 10 Trees
dbh Class
TrainingPruping: 147 Trees
Total 1
Total
# of Trees
1
o
1
2
Total 10
dbh Class # of Trees
147
Total 147
0.9 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
12
21
0.1 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
2
2
0.6 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
3
o.
12
15
0.9 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
15
15
4.6 Däys/2 P~rsonCreYl..
Estimated Total Work Hours
74
74
0.8 Days/1 Person Crew StlimpGrinding:4Stul11PS
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
5
Ranoe in Inches
0- 3
3- 6
6-12
12-18
18 - 24
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
Estimated Tbtal Work Hours
6
.
Ranoa in Inches
24 - 30
30- 36
36- 42
42+
.
.
.
24
.
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
5
# ofTreesl
162
162 Total
Ranoe in Inches
0- 3
3 - 6
6 - 12
12-18
18 - 24
0.9. Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
12
21
0.1 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
2
2
0.0 Days/3 IPerson Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
a
a
2.3 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
37.fi
37.fi
5.1 Pays/2 Person Crew.
. Estimated Total Work Hours.
81
81
0.4 Days/1 Person Crew
Estimated Totål Work HoÜrs
3
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
Ranoe in Inches
24 - 30
30- 36
36 - 42
42+
25
Risk Tree Removal: 2 Trees
dbhClass
12 -18"
18 - 24"
Safety Pruning: 1 Tree
Year 5 - 2009
Park Trees
.
0.9 Days/3 Person Crew
# of Trees
1
1
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
12
Total 2 21
0.1 Days/2 Person Crew
dbh Class # of Trees
12 - 18" 1
Estimated Total Work Hours
2
Scheduled Tree Removal: 0 Trees
Total 1 2
0.0 Days/3 Person Crew
Total 0
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
dbh Class # of Trees
o
Clearance Pruning: 25Trees
dbhClass
Tr~iningPruning: 188 Trees
dbh Class
Stump. Grlnding: 2 Stumps
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
5
2.3 Days/2 Person Crew
.
Total
# of Tr'ees
25
25 37.5
Total
Ranae in Inches
0- 3
3- 6
6 - 12
12 - 18
18 - 24
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
Ranae in Inches
24- 30
30- 36
36 - 42
42+ .
26
.
.
.
Risk Tree Removal: 0 Trees
Year 1 - 2005
Street Trees
0.0 Days/3 Person Crew
dbh Class # of Trees
o
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
Safety Pruning: 4 Trees
dbh Class
12 - 18"
18 - 24"
24 - 30"
Scheduled Tree Removal: 5 Trees
dbh Class
6 _12"
12 ~ 18"
Total
Clearance Pruning: 0 Trees
dbh Class
Training Pruning: OTrees
dbh Class
Total 0 o
0.8 Days/2 Person Crew
# of Trees
2
1
1
Estimated Total Work Hours
4
4
4
12 Total 4
1.6 Days/3f'erson Crew
# of Trees
1
4
Estimated Total Work Hours
3
36
5 39
0.0 Days/2 PerSon Crew
Total
Estimated TotalWork Hours
o
o
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
5
Ranoe in Inches
0- 3
3 - 6
6 - 12
12 - 18
18 - 24
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
RamIe in Inches
24 - 30
30-36
36- 42
42+
27
Year 2 - 2006
Street Trees
.
Risk Tree Removal: 2 Trees 0.9 Days/3Person Crew
dbh Class
12-18"
18- 24"
# of Trees
1
1
2
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
12
21 Total
Safety Pruning: 5 Trees 1.1 Days/2 Person Crew
dbh Class
12 - 18"
18 - 24"
24- 30"
# of Trees
1
2
2
5
Estimated Total Work Hours
2
8
8
Total 18
Scheduled Tree Removal: 3 Trees 1.4 Days/3 Person Crew
dbhClass
12 - 18"
18 - 24"
# of Trees
1
2
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
24
Total 3 33
.
dbh.Class
0.3 Days/2 Person Crew Clearance Pruning: 3 Trees
Total
Estimated Total Work Hours
4.5
4.5
Training Pruning:
"
0.0 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
.
0
Total o
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
6
Ranae in Inches
0- 3
3- 6
6 - 12
12 - 18
18 - 24
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
Ranae in Inches
24 - 30
30- 36
36- 42
42+
.
28
.
.
.
Risk Tree Removal: 2 Trees
dbh Class
12 - 18"
18 - 24"
Safety Pruning: 3 Trees
dbh Class
18- 24"
24 - 3D"
Scheduled Tree Removal: 1 Tree
dbh Class
12 - 18"
Clearance Pruning: 25 Trees
Year 3 - 2007
Street Trees
# of Trees
1
1
Total 2
# of Trees
2
1
Total 3
# ofTrees
1
Total
dbh Class # of Trees
25
Training. Pruning: Q. Trees
dbh Class
Total 25
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
7
# ofSturn[)s
3
Ranoe in Inches
0- 3
3- 6
6 - 12
12-18
18 - 24
0.9 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
12
21
0.8 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
8
4
12
0.4 Days/3 IPerson Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
9
2.3 Days/2 IPerson Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
37.5;
37.5;
0.0 Days/2 lPersonCrew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.6 Days/1 IPerson Crew
EstirnatedTotal WorkHburs
4.5
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
RancJe in Inches
.24 - 30
.30- 36
36 - 42
42+
29
Risk Tree Removal: 2 Trees
dbh Class
12 - 18"
18 - 24"
Safety Pruning: 3 Trees
dbh Class
18 - 24"
24 - 30"
Scheduled Tree Removal: 1 Tree
dbh Class
12 -18"
Clearance Pruning: 0 Trees
Year 4 - 2008
Street Trees
Total
# of Trees
1
1
2
# of Trees
2
1
Total 3
# of Trees
1
Total 1
dbh Class # of Trees
o
Training Pruning: 0 Trees
Total 0
dbh Class # of Trees
o
Stump Grinding: 3 Stumps
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
8
Total 0
# of Stumòs
3
Ranoe in Inches
0- 3
3 - 6
6-12
12 - 18
18 - 24
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
0.9 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
12
21
0.8 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
8
4
12
0.4 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
9
0.0 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.0 Dêlys/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.6. Days/1 Person.Crew
Estimated Total WorkHours
4.5
Ranoe in Inches
24 - 30
30- 36
36- 42
42+
30
.
.
.
.
.
.
Risk Tree Removal: 2 Trees
dbh Class
12 -18"
18 - 24"
Safety Pruning: 3 Trees
dbh Class
18 - 24"
24 - 30"
Scheduled Tree Removal: 1 Tree
dbh Class
12 - 18"
Clearance Pruning: 0 Trees
Year 5 - 2009
Street Trees
# of Trees
1
1
Total 2
# of Trees
2
1
Total 3
# ofTrees
1
Total
dbh Class # of Trees
o
Training Pruning: 0 Tråes
Total 0
.
dbh Class # óf Trees.
o
Stump Grinding: 3 Stumps
Key for Diameter Classes: dbh Class
1
2
3
4
9
Total 0
# of StumD~i
3
Ranqe in Inches
0- 3
3- 6
6 - 12
12 - 18
18 - 24
0.9 Days/3 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
12
21
0.8 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
8
4
12
0.4 Days/3 F'erson Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
9
9
0.0 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.0 Days/2 Person Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
o
o
0.6 Days/1 F'erson Crew
Estimated Total Work Hours
4.5
dbh Class
6
7
8
9
Ranq,r] in Inches
24-30
30- 36
36- 42
42+
31
.
5 Year Budget Summary
.
.
33
III. Budget Summary
.
Budget estimates can be intimidating to a new program. Many of the management plan
actions are budgeted for Public Works and Parks Departments. Many of the risk and
routine removals and safety pruning costs are based upon speculation that they will
occur. The first 2 year figures are known directly from the inventory. Subsequent years
are based on forestry knowledge and projections from the inventory.
Labor rates for contracted tree services vary widely from company to company and
region of the state. The labor rates used in the budget pacing tables for contracted tree
services are rates expected of a professional tree service with a staff of certified
arborists in the southeast region of the state. This will allow for comparisons in using
City staff to accomplish tasks. If City staff is qualified, capable and has the allotted time
and equipment, they may perform many of the maintenance and removals.
Estimated costs over a 5 year period equate to roughly $5.52/residenV5-years for Street
Tree and Park Tree Programs.
Contracted Services
Street Tree Program:
Park Tree Program:
$1.49 per person
$4.03 per person .
There is flexibility in many maintenance activities as to when they are completed. Risk
trees and conditions do not have that flexibility and must be accomplished based on the
threat to public safety. The flexibility offered in maintenance activities will be factored
by available funds, staffing, other priority tasks, and contractor (if used) schedules.
Many activities only need be preformed during the year they're scheduled and can be
scheduled around other seasonal priorities. The exact timing is generally not vital for
non-risk tree maintenance. This does not imply that these activities are not priorities
but they have flexibility in their scheduling.
.
34
... Q\ ~ on Q
;;.. ~
... QO
~..,Q ;;.. ~
... r- ~r'lQ ;;.. ~
... 'D ~ N Q
;;.. ~
:; on
4>....
Q
;;.. ~
CJI
=
.~
to:
~
.... ~
CJI
"0 =
=
; -; ~ ~ 'ı ;;.. Eo-<
lTl
"ii t:i ~ 8 <A
;>.
'1: ll>
::s ~ fA :i: ..:
'*" ~.M
u'"
~ 'ë.
:::J 0 E
o E- 0
::c u
'"
'*"
'l3 ë
E-
"æ ~
~8'"
>.
-g~fA
~..:
~ ll>
~ ~.~ u'"
~ t:>.
:::J 0 E
o E- 0 ::r:: u
'"
..... ll>
:;t: a e
E-
s ~~ ,;:U
>. '1: ll>
::s ~ EA ~..:
~ "
::;t: ~.~ uCl)
'" -
s 0 ~
o E- 0 ::r:: u
'"
::;t: ~ ë
E-
"'a ~ ~ 8 <A
>. ] ~"'" ~..:
~ ll>
=#: e.~ uCl)
~ Q.
5';: g
::r:: u
'"
~ ~ ~
f-<
s ~ fA ,;:u
>. '1: ll>
::s ~~ :i: ..:
'*" ~.~
uCl)
~ t:>.
:::J 0 E
o E- 0 ::r:: u
'"
..... ll>
=It 0 ~
E-
<Il ~
~
'"'
E-c
.... ~
~
'"'
....
iJ1
g
..,f
N
'" ~
N
N
1-,
-
o
o
N
00
""
I-
N
N
N
1-,
-
o
o
N
00
""
I-
N
o
00
"',
-
o
o
Ó
00
""
I-
N
o
00
"',
-
o
o
Ó
00
""
I-
N
o
o
o
Ó
00
""
o
o
~ '"@
.... >
t-< 0
~ S ~ ~
g
N
'" ""
.,..'
'" '" '"
o
o
N
00
N
.,..
""
'" '" '"
o
o
N
00
N
.,..
""
o
.,.. '"
o
o
Ó
00
N
.,..
""
o
.,..
.,..,
-
o
o
Ó
00
N
'"
'"
o
'" '"
o
o
Ó
00
N
'"
.,..
OIJ
þ.S ~ 9
ro ...
C/) Cl..
g
o
"" 00 ..,f"
g
Ó
N
on
",,'
00
"" I-
o
o
N
00
""
""
00
"" I-
o
o
N
00
""
""
o
N
I-
o
o
Ó
00
""
""
o
.,.. '" N'
o
o
Ó
00
""
::
""
o
SJ
,..;
o
o
Ó
00
""
~
on. o
"d
..2 ~
.g >
~ S
~ ~
o
o
o
N
00
N
o
o
o
o
o
N
00
N
o
o
o
.,.. o
",,'
o
o
Ó
00
N
'" -
on N
o
00
.,..
o
o
Ó
00
N
""
""
o
o
o
Ó
00
N
o
~
<>
OIJ æ S a' ~ ê
u Cl..
g
ó
o
o
o
N
00
N
o
o
o
o
o
N
00
N
o
o
o
o
o
Ó
00
N
o
o
o
o
o
Ó
00
N
o
o
o
o
o
Ó
00
N
o
o
OIJ OIJ .S S 'ê"ê
t-< Cl..
g
N
"" N
,..;
o
o
Ó
00
00
o
o
.,.. '"
o
o
Ó
00
00
o
o
.,.. '"
o
o
Ó
00
00
o
~
v
S
~ ~
~ ~
v '" ::r:: <c
'" '" '"
o
o
N
00
00
o
'" on
'"
o
o
N
00
00
o
o
.,.. '"
g g g
o -q: ci o
"" N'
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Ó
o
o
o
o
o
o
Ó
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
I=i
o .~
./:l
'" :13
.ê
<c
N
I- ""
o
o
N
'"
N "
"
@~
.,,~ ,,0 _ a- -:rg ;; .s
o
""
""
N
I- ""
o
o
N
'"
N "
"
@~
13 ı
3~
","" oS
o
""
""
o
'" ""
o
o
o
Ó
'"
N "
"
@~
." '" ~~
-"" .s
o
""
""
o
o
'"
o
o
o
o
'"
N "
"
@~
.,,~ " '"
::::J 00 ~- ",""
.s
o
on
'"
o
o
'"
o
o
o
o
'"
N "
"
@~
~~
5~ .s
o
'"
on
'" p.. ~
C/)
OIJ
.S ~
ı::
g
o
00 '"
",,'
o
o o
00 '" ,..;
o
o
o
00
'" .,..
+-> = (\)
v ~
Ei "d
(\) p.. ~o æ æ
~ ı::
g
00
.,..
00,
""
trl
C""I
.,..
:!
.,..'
.,.. N
00
r-:
o
00 o
r-:
o
00
.,..
1-'
o
N
""
.,;
'"@
+-> o
Eo-<
.. 0\
:l1fi 0
~ ~
.. QC)
:I "1'
0
~ ~
.. r-
:II") 0
~ ~
.. \Q
:I f'I
0
~ ~
; Ifi
., _ 0
~ ~
~
=
.ü
~
~
-
~
~
"0 =
~
; -; ~ vt Ö >< E-o
lI'l
'3 'gj
.... ~Ü
;>..
-;: '" ~ "';i &q.
j!~
~ 13
=t:l: e.- ü'"
~ ë..
::l 0 e
of-< 0
:r: Ü
'"
:;t: ~ ë
f-<
'ii t; ~8""
;>..
"i: .B
::s .;.... j!~
'lIo ~.~
ü'"
~ "i5..
g ~ ~
:r: Ü
'"
:u: 'ı ~
f-<
s ~~ ~Ü
;.,
1i~EA o ~
:r:
'lIo
~ 13
Ur.i3
'" ı. 3 0 e
j!f-<8
'"
.... '"
=t:l: 0 e
f-<
~ ~~ f-<Ü
;>.. ] ~.... j!~
'lIo ~.M
Ü '"
~ 0 ]- j!"f-<8
'"
:;t:
1:i ë
f-<
~ ~ wq
f-<Ü
;>..
-;: '" 5 ~ {A
:r:
'lIo ~.~
ü'"
'"
-
3 0 â
o.f-< 0
:r: Ü
'"
:;t: 1; ë
f-<
8
.f 00
<::>
~
N
N
r-"
-
rn ~
~
.. ~
~
.. =
~
8
00
... 00
'"
<::>
<::>
N
00
'"
r-
N
N
N
r--:
-
<::>
<::>
N
00
'"
r-
N
<::>
00 ~
<::>
<::>
o
00
'"
r-
N
<::>
<::>
<::>
o
00
'"
<::>
<::>
<::>
"" 0\
<::>
<::>
o
00
'"
...
N
3 ~
..... > f-< 0
~ s
2~
8
o
<::>
00
..,;
~
-
<::>
<::>
N
00
N
... '-0
<::>
<::>
N
00
N
<::>
:=:
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
<::>
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
<::>
<::>
<::>
'-0 '" '"
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
-
N
'" -
OJ)
þ.s ~ 5
<<:l .....
r/1 0...
8
N
0\ r-
oo.
<::>
<::>
<::>
N
00
'"
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
N
00
'"
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
N.
<::>
<::> o
00
'"
Irl
N
<::>
<::>
<::>
o
00
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
"" '"
<::>
<::>
o
00
'"
Irl -
...
'"Cl
<!)~ :g ~
] S
~ ~
8
N
'" '" oê
N
"" -
-
","
<::>
<::>
N
00
N
~
V) N
:=:
'"
<::>
<::>
N
00
N
'" -
V) N
<::>
00
~.
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
00
;::
<::>
00 ~
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
00
<::>
-
<::>
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
<::>
<::>
<!) ~ OJ) ðJ
8
o
... <::>
....
00
<::>
r- t..:'
<::>
<::>
N
00
N
r- ...
00
00
-
... N
r- ~
<::>
<::>
N
00
N
;;
N
""
<::> N
'" .,;'
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
r- '"
r- ~
<::> N
r- ~
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
N
...
00 :=:
<::>
N
~
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
N
-
Irl ...
OJ) OJ)
.s s .~ 'ê
þ ä:
<::>
N
00
<::>
<::>
N
00
;::
<::>
<::> N
00
<::>
<::>
N
00
;::
<::>
<::>
<::>
00
o
<::>
o
00
;::
<::>
<::> o
00
o
o
o
00
;::
<::>
o
o
00
<::>
o
o
00
<::>
-
o
..... ~
<!) S
~ ~
<!) ~
:r: ~
8
o
o
<::>
<::>
o
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
o
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::>
<::> o
o
<::>
<::>
<::>
o
<::>
o
o
<::>
o
o
o
<::>
o
<::>
<::>
<::>
~
.9 ~
.þ
'" :5
~
8
00
00 r-
8
o
Irl N
'" N
... ~
<::>
Irl r- ..,;
o
<::> N
""
N
"
"
@~
II c;
-0- s- 0>'" oS
N
Irl N
... N
<::>
Irl r- ....
o
<::> N
""
N
"
@þ
II c;
'3 ~
.s '"
Irl N
N
o
00
-
Irl N
'-0
...
<::>
<::>
o
""
'"
"
"
@~
1S ~
3~
.s '"
Irl N
'"
o V) N
""
....
<::>
<::>
o
""
<::>
o
o
"" '"
o
<::>
o
""
""
""
I
r/1
OJ)
.s ~
li'
8
o
"" r-
Irl"
"
"
@~
..,- " '" ]~ ",'" oS
Irl N
<::>
<::>
V)
..,;
"
"
@~
is 0
~~
1;; '" oS
Irl N
8
.f Irl '" "".
00
c:;
...
00"
-
\0 ~
.
~
r- .,;'
<::>
00 -
"," N
<::>
<::>
o
00
N
r-
Irl ... 00
.,;'
-
.
Irl N
...
:i
<::>
o
Irl
.,;'
-
.
..... ~ <!)
<!) ~ e '"Cl
<!) 0..
~:::>
~ ~
::;s ;:ï:;
]
o
f-<
.
.
IV
Ways and Means
.
37
IV. Ways and Means
.
A. Budgeting
Community Forestry Programs succeed when they receive strong political and public
support. The key to a successful program is to have both the political and public
groups understanding that trees have value and require care. Studies show that
programs identified by the words "Forestry" and/or "Trees" have their own recognition
and stronger local support. (Kielbasa 1982)
Many Community Forestry programs originate with grant money. For a program to
develop internal funding is a necessity. The general tax fund of a Community often
finances much of an Urban Forestry operation. The budget summary figures should be
reviewed and updated annually as operations proceed.
B. Other Sources
Efforts should be made to explore all possible sources of funding to supplement the
Forestry Program. Volunteer support can also supply assistance in projects reducing
labor costs. Outside assistance should not only be viewed as a potential source of
funds but also in goods and services. It is usually easier to obtain assistance (in
whatever form) in tree planting projects than in tree maintenance.
Potential sources:
.
- DNR grants
- Utility Company assistance programs
- The National Tree Trust
- Civic and service organizations
_ Private contributions (business and private)
- Foundations
_ Establish endowment fund for shade trees
- Interested citizens to volunteer
- Youth groups
_ Grocery store round up programs for Forestry
_ Cost sharing planting programs (see planting chapter)
_ Initiate tree care or planting fund that collects off assessments to new
developments or frontage tax
_ Surcharges for various City services or fees
_ Require developers (through ordinance) to meet specifications for tree planting
and preservation in new subdivisions
_ The Dept. of Transportation has been involved in tree planting with some of its
projects
_ Establish Shade Tree Trust Fund that guarantees contributors that funds go to
the preservation of Muskego's Trees
_ A "Change for Muskego" - coin collectors at interested businesses, the City
Hall, etc., where people can put spare change to support tree programs and
plantings.
.
38
. The following four sources were taken from the Wisconsin Urban & Community Forests
Newsletter. Voll,No 4, Winter 1999-2000.
~ A Guide of Financial Tools: Paying for Sustainable Environmental Systems;
Presents information on approximately 340 financial "tools" for l3nvironmental
programs. Info: http://www.epa.gov/efinpage/guidbk98/index.htrn
~ Captain Planet Foundation: Grants are available to promote environmental
issues that focus on students (6 - 18 years old) 1-800-KIDPQWER or
http://www.turner.com/cpfl
~ Environmental Justice Grants: EPA awards grants to community groups. Info
Reginald Harris (215) 814-2988
~ Non Profit Gateway: A website with a network of links to federal government
information and services for non profit or9anizations. http://wwvII.nonorofit.gov/
Other Sources
Arbor Day Foundation - www.arborday.org
. National Urban & Community Forestry Advisory Council- www.treelinlcorg
National Tree Trust - www.nationaltreetrust.org
International Society of Aboriculture - www.isa-arbor.com
.
39
C. Public Awareness
Community education and awareness is essential for the success of any new City
program. Many ideas exist that can be implemented to increase the public awareness
and concern for the Community Forest and its management. Programs that
demonstrate the benefits of planting and maintaining Muskego's trees will enhance
public support and interest. The key is to be creative and involve as many interested
people as possible in all phases of the management plan as often as possible.
It should be noted in all Community Forestry education and awareness programs that
properly managed and maintained trees appreciate in value for the majority of their
lives. Many other community investment projects cannot make this claim. The
following is a list of possible public awareness tactics, remembering that any creativity
in designing education and awareness programs is encouraged.
. Initiate Arbor Day programs with local schools, civic groups, éhurches, etc.
Trees and planting may be able to be donated by local landscapers,
nurseries, garden centers, etc. Media coverage and recognition is very
beneficial during spècial events. Arbor Day is the last Friday in April.
. Make firewood and wood chip mulch available at no cost or for a nominal
fee to residents of the City. Any tree work performed by contractors can
require that they leave the wood chips or wood. The wood and mulch are
by-products of the City Tree Maintenance Program. If a nominal fee is
charged, income can be designated to a partiçular portion of the forestry
program (Le., plantings) or to help subsidize the entire operation. If
wood/mulch is made available at no cost it is a very positive public relations
move. Signs at the pickup site can indicate "Compliments of The City of
Muskego Forestry Program".
. Solicit and ~ncourage particip~tion andfipancial contributions for
community tree plantings and maintenanc.e. Dedication tree plantings with
appropriate recognition for those contributorscan occur at the City streets,
parks, and schools. These can recognize past and new events,
accomplishments and individuals important to Muskego.
. Provide practical tree maintf3nance and planting technique programs for
City residents. The private sector, special interest groups or the community
can sponsor these. Over the past A years, the city has offeredrnany
workshops on various tree. maintenance topics. Thesework~höps have
been sllccessfuLineducating the public on tree. related issues and to
increase. the<awareness and support of the Urban ForestryPrograrn in
Muskego.
.
.
.
40
.
.
.
. Develop Tree Care Fact Sheets for City residents. These can be
developed by a consultant, volunteer company or individual. They are also
available through the International Society of Arboriculture. They could
provide information on home tree care and on the Community Forestry
Program. These could be made available at no cost or a small fee similar
to the firewood/mulch program previously listed.
. Establish a community pride and green space preservation campaign. The
Community Forest is made up of all the trees and plants within the City
limits. Encouraging people to plant treE~S would benefit everyone. A
registry of those people who plant a tree anywhere in Muskego could be
kept on display at the City Hall. Different sections of the City could
compete with each other on numbers planted. An ending date to the
campaign would need to be set.
Catchy slogans and media coverage could be used to generate interest.
(I.e., Be Poplar Plant a Muskego Tree, May the Forest Be With You,
etc.). Planting campaign ideas are limitless and details should be
worked out prior to their debut. They can create great public support
for a Community Forestry Program.
. In all Community Forestry education and awareness programs it is vital to
involve any media. It is recommended that the media be kept informed on
all appropriate aspects of this plan.
A successful Community Forestry operation has built trees into the Community
infrastructure. Trees are as much a component of the community as any other entity.
They are a renewable natural resource, and the oldest, largest, living thing on the
planet.
41
.
APPENDIX A
.
Street Tree
Right of Way
&
Park Tree
Maintenance Field Sheets
.
43
Table 2 ROW Road Trees Recommended for Tree Maintenance .
Street Name Address DBH Soecies Maintenance Priority
Timber Ct Cui de sac 15" White Safety Prune, 2
Oak Dead limbs
Holz Dr W136 28" White Safety Prune, 2
S8368 Oak Dead limbs
Holz Dr. W136 25" White Safety Prune, 2
S8381 Oak Dead limbs
Holz Dr. W136 20" White Recommended 2
S8427 Oak Removal,
Evaluate vearlv
Kirkwood Dr. S70 22" Siberian Safety Prune, 2
W17235 Elm Dead limbs
Lentini Dr. W180 20" Siberian Clearance Prune 2
S6428 Elm
Lentini Dr. W180 22" Siberian Clearance Prune 2
S6428 Elm
Muskego Dr. W179 26" White Safety Prune, 1
S6714 Oak Dead Limbs
Muskego Dr. W179 18" White Safety Prune, 1
S6700 Oak Dead Limbs
Muskego Dr. W180 23" Red Oak Recommended 2
S6848 Removal
Preioel Dr. None 36" Bur Oak Clearance Prune 2
.
Table 3 Street Trees Recommended for Tree Maintenance
Street Name Address Site # DBH Species Maintenance Priority
Erin Ct. Cui de sac 1 15 Silver Maple Evaluate for 2
Removal
Lannon Dr. Blvd. 10 6 Silver maple Recommended 1
Removal
Lannon Dr. Blvd 14 16 Burr Oak Recommended 1
Removal
Lannon Dr. Blvd 15 17 Burr Oak Prune Deadwood 1
Lannon Dr. Blvd. 18 16 Burr Oak Prune Deadwood 1
Lannon Dr. Blvd. 19 17 Burr Oak Recommended 1
Removal
Ryan Rd. Blvd. 3 10 Green Ash Recommended 1
Removal
Ryan Rd. Blvd. 8 14 Green Ash Recommended 1
Removal
Rvan Rd. Blvd. 14 22 Green Ash Prune Deadwood 2
.
44
. 2004 Recommended Park Tree Maintenance Table
.
IDE~OONP~~t~RED
IDENOON PARK 1~IOAK, RED
!DENOONPARK TJOAK, WHITE
jDENooN PARKI~ASH, WHITE
IDENOONPAIU< flOAK' RE~
l~~IS~E.w - '.DC~~~N\\'OOD
1:~:~:R~~;7LACK
ImLEIsLE .. []EL~,SmERlAN
lIDLE ISLE.
. _, n.n. .....57'MAP~~LOEW,. .S'.U'~G~AARCK
IIDLE iSLE. ·
. - ..... ....
un. llELM.wH ~SrnER.IAN_'" I~~~.IS~ 1 nl .._
IDLE ISLE 4 WILLOW, BLACK
JENSEN PARK I COTTONWOOD
JENSEN PARK 2 OAK, RED
KURTH PARK 3 ELM, AMERICAN
KURTH PARK 2 ASH, GREEN
SAFETY
PRUNE
112-18J~~o~JI.E~~1
Ji21' l~~~ Il~.DDTRAILREE. ..AlLADAD....LL...,IMBMB. .Oo.VEVE...RR....1 118-24 r~~~ II lTRAIL
\6-12 fRISK II [DECLiNING I jREMOVE I
.. ... tÚ4J~f~
..
_wll~rrnAND
.
13~-36-..J~~Y JI 1~u.1BS
II~.-18_
.
_j~~~ YEIMBS
t8-24 1~~~YI2 EIMBS
112-181~f~Y .'11 EIMBS
Il~~2~.__J~~~ jl.. ._.E~s 16-12 1~~oVEJ3
..1~8-2~w.-~tt~
.. _
11
12-18 ~~~II
30-36 ~i~~oVE-II ---
24_30- J~~ÿJ~
...
I~IMBS.
18~~.~ _l~~C!YE.__nt._ _]~'~~.n
._
18-24 .REC. 3 EVALUATE YEARLY
REMOVE
REC.
REMOVE
_l~t()~_
I~~Y
f::_~~.__.
PUMP STATION
..D~~,.~~~~n..,.-wI6-12.....
I BASSWOOD 18-24
DEAD TREE
PUMP STATION 2 OAK, BUR
.
36-42
. 'Ii-
12
_...J~~~d~f.~.--
_
FlMBS
45
.
. References
.
47
References .
Bedker, Peter J; Joseph G. O'Brien, Manfred E. Mielke. 1995. How to Prune Trees.
U.S.D.A. Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry.
Clark, James, R.; Nelda Matheny. 1993. A Handbook of Hazard Tree Evaluation for
Utility Arborists. ISA, Savoy, III.
Clark, James R.; Nelda Matheny, Genni Cross, Victoria Wake. 1997. A Model of
Urban Forestry Sustainability. J. Of Arbor. 23 (1) 17-30.
Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers: 1992 Guide for Plant Appraisal. ISA.
Eighth Edition. Savoy, III.
Deneke, Fredrick J.; Gene W. Grey, 1978. Urban Forestry. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
New York, 1978.
Dickerhoof, Edward J.; Alan W. Ewert, 1993. Urban Forestry Research: The Forest
Services Perspective. J. Of Arboriculture. 19 (3): 143-151.
Dwyer, John F.; Gregory McPherson, Herbert Schroeder, Rowan Rountree. 1992.
Assessing the Benefits and Costs Of The Urban Forest. J. Of Arboriculture. 18 (5).
227-234.
.
Gartner, Justine 1., Thomas Treiman, and Tim Frevert. 2002. Missouri Urban Forest-
A Ten Year Comparison. Journal of Arboriculture. 28 (2) 76 - 83.
Hasselkus, Edward R. 1980. Street Trees for Wisconsin. UW-Extension.
Hasselkus, Edward R. 1982. Landscape Plants for Wisconsin. UW-Extension.
Int'l. Society of Arboriculture. 1994. New Tree Planting. Savoy, III.
Int'l Society of Arboriculture. 1995. Tree Pruning Guidelines. Savoy III.
Majerus, Kimberly Ann. 1988. Urban Forest Management, Guidelines for Planning and
Administration. University Illinois. Urbana, Illinois.
Matheny, Nelda P.; James R. Clark. 1991. Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas.
ISA, Savoy, Illinois.
Miller, Robert W. Ph.D.. 1988. Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban
Greenspaces. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Miller, R.W. 1993. Managing Street Trees. UW-Stevens Point.
.
48
. The Morton Arboretum 1991. Selecting and Planting Trees. Lisle, Illinois.
.
.
Shigo, Alex L. 1991. Modern Arboriculture. Shigo and Trees, Associates, Durham,
New Hampshire.
Shigo, Alex L. 1994. Tree Failure Risk Evaluations. Arborist News 3 (6) 14-16.
U.S.D.A. 1990. Urban and Community Forestry. Ogden, Utah.
U.S.D.A. 1993. An Introductory Guide to Urban and Community Forestry Programs.
Atlanta, GA.
World Forestry Center. 1993. A Technical Guide to Urban and Community Forestry.
Portland, Oregon.
Zilmer, Ronald E.; Jeffrey L. Boeder, Kevin G. Genich. 2000. A Productivity Timing
System for Tree Climbing Training. Journal of Arboriculture 26 (2). 97-106.
49
.
Biography
.
.
51
Biography .
Ranger Services Inc.
Established:
Located:
Profession:
Education:
Professional
Affiliations:
Education:
Professional
Affiliations:
1988
Appleton, Wisconsin
Ranger Services Inc., is an Urban Forestry and Landscape
Management-Consulting firm providing technical assistance and
service to communities, residential and commercial accounts. The
staff consists of degreed Foresters, Resource Managers and
Certified Arborists providing management and service in:
- Street Tree Ordinance DevelopmenURevision
- Street and Park Tree Inventory
- Tree Maintenance Training Programs
- Urban Forestry Management Plans
- Tree Appraisal
- Tree, Lawn and Landscape Service and Maintenance
Brian B. Pelot
.
B.S. 1995, UW-Stevens Point, WI, Forest Management
Member: International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)
Wisconsin Arborist Association (WAA)
ISA Certified Arborist
New London, WI - Tree Board Chairman
Eric M. Romsos
B.S. 2001, UW-Stevens Point, WI, Urban Forestry
Member: International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)
Wisconsin Arborist Association (WAA)
I SA Certified Arborist
.
52
.
.
.
Education:
Professional
Affiliations:
Daniel R. Traas President - Ranger Services Inc.
B.S. 1981, UW-Stevens Poiint, WI, Urban Forestry, Forest
Management, and Forest Recreation.
Member: International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)
Wisconsin Arborist Association (WAJ'i.)
Board of Directors: 1986 - 1990
Preside~nt: 1989
Wisconsin Forestry/Right-of-WaylTurf Coalition
Board of Directors: 1984 - present
Wisconsin DNR Urban Forestry Review Team
1997 - present
Wisconsin Urban Forestry Council
2000
National Arborist Association
National Arbor Day Foundation
American ForHsts Association
ISA Certified Arborist
53