DOCSLIB.ORG

California Urban Woody Green Waste Utilization

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
California Urban Woody Green Waste Utilization Urban Wood/0.0.& 1.0. Introduction/TP 5/19/99 CALIFORNIA URBAN WOODY GREEN WASTE UTILIZATION By 1 Tim R. Plumb 2 Marianne M. Wolf 3 John Shelly Urban Forests Ecosystems Institute California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo In Cooperation with California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Riverside, CA May, 1999 Technical Report No. 8 ___________ 1Professor Emeritus, Natural Resources Management Dept., California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA. 2Associate Professor, Agribusiness Dept., California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA. 3Head of the Information Services Center and Research Associate, U. of California Forest Products Laboratory, Richmond, CA. Urban Wood/0.0.& 1.0. Introduction/TP 5/19/99 A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S Financial backing for this project was provided by an Urban Forestry Grant from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection with technical support from the Natural Resources Management Department, Urban Forest Ecosystems Institute, and Cal Poly Foundation, Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo, California. We especially thank the following individuals: Eric Oldar, Uban Forester, Calif. Dept. of For. & Fire Protection, Riverside, Calif. Will Senerchia, Past Mill Manager, Institute for Sustainable Forestry, Piercy, Calif. Tom Larsen, President, Integrated Urban Forestry, Inc. Laguna Hills, Calif. Craig Linquist, Service Line Mgr., Arbor Care, San Jose, Calif Guy Hall, Owner (Retired), Cal Oak Lumber Co., Oroville, Calif. Cindy McCall, Parks & Urban Forester, Lompoc, Calif. Martin Fitch, Parks Superintendent, Sacramento, Calif. Mill Owners George Hessenthaler, Urban Forest Woodworks, Inc. Logan, Utah Dave Faison (Deceased), Into the Woods, Peteluma, Calif. Warren Wise, The Woodsman, Stockton, Calif. Peter Lang, the Peter Lang Co., Santa Rosa Calif. Dave Parmenter, California Hardwood Producers, Aurburn, Calif. Don Seawater, Pacific Coast Lumber, San Luis Obispo, Calif. Paul Mueller, Native Woods, Covina, Calif. Cal Poly State University Richard Thompson, Ph.D., NRM Dept. Jeff Reimer, Technician, NRM Dept. Tim O’Keefe, Ph.D., NRM Dept. Joyce McAlexander, Grants Analyst David Yun, Student Assist. NRM Dept. Sharon Ledbetter, Sec., College of Business Cal Poly Students Daren Cliff, Agribusiness Dept. David Snakenborg, Agribusiness Dept. Janna Swanson, Agribusiness Dept. Paul Benedix, Agribusiness Dept. Jeromy Lowney, NRM Dept. Assistance was also provided by many individuals and organizations via telephone and personal interviews who are too many to acknowledge individually. Thank you all. ii Urban Wood/0.0.& 1.0. Introduction/TP 5/19/99 P R E F A C E When urban trees are damaged or dead, their disposal can be a big financial burden for a homeowner or responsible governmental agency. Traditionally viewed as waste, much of this material has been historically dumped in landfills. Some of the larger material has been used for firewood, and some has been chipped or ground for mulch. More recently, there has been a growing awareness of the tremendous potential value of the larger woody material (sawlogs) for lumber production. Although concern about reducing the amount of solid green waste going to landfills was the major catalyst for conducting this study, identifying the size and potential value of this urban tree resource for solid wood production may be even more important. This study is to be accomplished in three phases. This report deals with Phase I which involves: 1. determining the volume of sawlog-size material currently being removed from urban sites, 2 determining the amount of woody green waste going to landfills, 3. identifying key milling operations currently using urban saw logs, and 4. presenting the costs and methods of milling urban sawlogs. Phases two and three involve the identification of new and existing niche products and the marketing of these products, respectively. Although effective marketing of this material is an important key to successful economic utilization of urban sawlogs, the production of value-added products is equally important. Two conclusions from this study are that: 1. It’s very difficult to get quantitative information about the volume of sawlogs being harvested because neither arborists nor governmental agencies track woody green waste as sawlogs per se, nor are they familiar with sawlog requirements and/or specifications; and 2. A high proportion of the large woody green waste never gets to a dump or landfill, consequently it’s disposal is little impacted by AB 939, the 1989 Waste Management Law that mandates a 50% reduction of waste going to landfills by 2000. Finally, it is hoped that the information in this report will: 1. Encourage municipalities to establish a program to use sawlog-size woody green waste for solid wood production, and 2. Encourage new entrepreneurs to get into the business of milling urban sawlogs. DISCLAIMER Trade names, commercial brands, and equipment sources and costs mentioned in this report are solely for information. No endorsement by the authors or any sponsoring agency is implied. Indicated equipment sources and costs may no longer be available. iii Urban Wood/0.0.& 1.0. Introduction/TP 5/19/99 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Page A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S i i P R E F A C E i i i SUMMARY x v i i 1.0. INTRODUCTION . 1 2.0 . BACKGROUND . 2 2.1. PROBLEM STATEMENT. 3 2.2. PROJECT SOLUTION AND PLAN. 3 2.3. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF P HASE 1 METHODOLOGY. 4 2.3.1. Estimate of Resource Size. 4 2.3.2. Estimate of Economic Feasibility of Utilizing Urban Sawlog- 4 size Green Waste. 2.3.3. Dissemination of Final Report 5 2.4. FACTORS THAT MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO QUANTIFY URBAN SAWLOG VOLUME. 5 2.5. DEFINITIONS. 7 2.5.1. Published Definitions. 7 2.5.2. Other Definitions. 8 2.6. CONVERSION FACTORS. 9 2.6.1. Tons to Pounds per Cubic Yard. 9 2.6.2. Cubic Yards to Board Feet. 10 2.6.3. Tons of Logs to Board Feet. 10 2.6.4. Cubic Feet of Wood per Cord. 10 2.6.5. Conversion Tables. 10 3.0. PAST WORK . 12 3.1. SOLID WASTE VOLUME IN CALIFORNIA. 12 3.1.1. Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (SRRE). 12 3.1.2. Disposal Cost Fee Study Final Report. 12 3.1.3. Toward Securing Adequate Landfill Capacity. 13 3.1.4. Non-yard Wood Waste Report. 14 3.2. VOLUME AND DISPOSAL OF URBAN WOODY GREEN WASTE. 15 3.2.1. Number of Trees. 16 3.2.2. Reasons for Tree Removal. 17 3.2.3. When Trees Are Removed. 19 3.2.4. Number of Trees Removed. 19 3.2.5. Volume of Sawlog-size Urban Green Wood. 21 iv Urban Wood/0.0.& 1.0. Introduction/TP 5/19/99 3.2.5.1. Larsen estimate. 21 3.2.5.2. Sacramento estimate. 21 3.2.5.3. NEOS Corporation estimate. 22 3.2.6. Disposal of Tree Waste. 25 3.2.7. Cost of Disposing of Green Waste. 36 3.3. BENEFITS OF UTILIZING SAWLOG- SIZE URBAN WOODY GREEN WASTE. 27 3.3.1. What Is a Tree Worth? 27 3.3.1.1. Healthy, urban landscape tree full of life. 27 3.3.1.2. Dead tree. 29 3.3.1.3. Felling the tree. 29 3.3.1.4. Tree removal to a landfill. 29 3.3.1.5. Trunk value for firewood. 30 3.3.1.6. Trunk value for chips. 30 3.3.1.7. Trunk value for green lumber. 30 3.3.1.8. Trunk value for kiln-dried lumber (7% M.C.). 31 3.3.1.9. Trunk value for bookmatch billets. 31 3.3.1.10. Trunk value for pen/pencil stock. 32 3.3.2. Community Benefits. 32 3.3.3. Environmental Benefits. 33 3.3.4. Benefits to the Woodworking Community. 34 4.0. SIZE OF URBAN WOODY GREEN WASTE RESOURCE (ARBORIST & LANDFILL SURVEYS). 35 4.1. OVERVIEW OF SURVEY METHODOLOGY. 35 4.1.1. General Comments. 35 4.1.2. Survey Administration. 35 4.1.3. Data Management and Analysis. 36 4.2. LANDFILL SURVEY 36 4.2.1. Landfill Sampling Frame. 36 4.2.2. Landfill Questionnaire Development. 37 4.2.3. Landfill Survey Administration and Response 37 4.2.4. Landfill Survey Results 38 4.2.4.1. Waste going to landfills. 38 4.2.4.2. Size of the woody green waste. 40 4.2.4.3. Seasonality of waste disposal. 40 4.2.4.4. Species of trees. 41 4.2.4.5. Utilization and diversion of green waste. 42 4.2.4.6. Summary of landfill survey results. 43 4.3. ARBORISTS SURVEY. 44 4.3.1. Arborist Sampling Frame. 44 4.3.2. Arborist Questionnaire Development. 44 4.3.3. Arborist Survey Results. 45 4.3.3.1. Volume and size of woody green waste. 45 4.3.4.2. Type of work done by tree care firms. 47 4.3.3.3. Methods of processing woody green waste. 48 4.3.3.4. Seasonality of tree work. 48 4.3.3.5. Species of trees trimmed or removed. 49 4.3.3.6. Disposal of woody green waste by tree care companies. 49 v Urban Wood/0.0.& 1.0. Introduction/TP 5/19/99 4.3.3.7. Summary of commercial tree care firm (arborist) 51 survey. 5.0. MILLING OPERATIONS USING URBAN SAWLOGS . 53 5.1. CALIFORNIA LOGGING HISTORY. 53 5.2. HARDWOOD HISTORY -- BACKGROUND AND LIMITING FACTORS. 53 5.2.1. Negative Attitudes. 54 5.2.2. Logging Logistics. 54 5.2.3. High Logging Costs. 55 5.2.4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pije 14 Jeffrey Pine-Incense
    PIJE 14 JEFFREY PINE-INCENSE-CEDAR/HUCKLEBERRY OAK Pinus jeffreyi-Calocedrus decurrens/Quercus vaccinifolia PIJE-CADE27/QUVA (N=13; FS=13) Distribution. This Association occurs on the Applegate and Ashland Ranger Districts, Rogue River National Forest and the Galice and Illinois Valley Ranger Districts, Siskiyou National Forest. It may also occur on the Ashland and Grants Pass Resource Areas, Medford District, Bureau of Land Management. Distinguishing Characteristics. This is a relatively high elevation Jeffrey pine association and is the coolest of the Jeffrey pine associations. Huckleberry oak and incense-cedar are usually present. Soils. Parent material is serpentine, with one occurrence of peridotite. Surface gravel and rock content averages 26 and 36 percent cover, respectively, while exposed bedrock cover averages 5 percent. Based on two plots sampled, soils are deep (greater than 40 inches) and well drained. Surface texture is silty clay loam, with 8 to 25 percent gravel, 35 to 50 percent cobbles and stones, and 32 percent PIJE 15 clay. Subsurface texture is silty clay loam, with 5 percent gravel, 40 percent cobbles and stones, and 32 to 35 percent clay. The soil moisture regime is probably xeric and the soil temperature regime is probably frigid. Soils classify to the following subgroups: Dystric Xerochrept and Typic Xerochrept. Environment. Elevation averages 3990 feet. Aspect is variable, although generally not northerly. Slope averages 33 percent with a range of 5 to 68 percent. Slope position ranges from ridgetops down to the middle one-third of the slope. Vegetation Composition and Structure. Total species richness is low for the Series, averaging 27 species.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the 56 Annual Western International Forest Disease Work
    Proceedings of the 56th Annual Western International Forest Disease Work Conference October 27-31, 2008 Missoula, Montana St. Marys Lake, Glacier National Park Compiled by: Fred Baker Department of Wildland Resources College of Natural Resources Utah State University Proceedings of the 56th Annual Western International Forest Disease Work Conference October 27 -31, 2008 Missoula, Montana Holiday Inn Missoula Downtown At The Park Compiled by: Fred Baker Department of Wildland Resources College of Natural Resources Utah State University & Carrie Jamieson & Patsy Palacios S.J. and Jessie E. Quinney Natural Resources Research Library College of Natural Resources Utah State University, Logan 2009, WIFDWC These proceedings are not available for citation of publication without consent of the authors. Papers are formatted with minor editing for formatting, language, and style, but otherwise are printed as they were submitted. The authors are responsible for content. TABLE OF CONTENTS Program Opening Remarks: WIFDWC Chair Gregg DeNitto Panel: Climate Change and Forest Pathology – Focus on Carbon Impacts of Climate Change for Drought and Wildfire Faith Ann Heinsch 3 Carbon Credit Projects in the Forestry Sector: What is Being Done to Manage Carbon? What Can Be Done? Keegan Eisenstadt 3 Mountain Pine Beetle and Eastern Spruce Budworm Impacts on Forest Carbon Dynamics Caren Dymond 4 Climate Change’s Influence on Decay Rates Robert L. Edmonds 5 Panel: Invasive Species: Learning by Example (Ellen Goheen, Moderator) Is Firewood Moving Tree Pests? William
    [Show full text]
  • Psme 46 Douglas-Fir-Incense
    PSME 46 DOUGLAS-FIR-INCENSE-CEDAR/PIPER'S OREGONGRAPE Pseudotsuga menziesii-Calocedrus decurrens/Berberis piperiana PSME-CADE27/BEPI2 (N=18; FS=18) Distribution. This Association occurs on the Applegate, Ashland, and Prospect Ranger Districts, Rogue River National Forest, and the Tiller and North Umpqua Ranger Districts, Umpqua National Forest. It may also occur on the Butte Falls Ranger District, Rogue River National Forest and adjacent Bureau of Land Management lands. Distinguishing Characteristics. This is a drier, cooler Douglas-fir association. White fir is frequently present, but with relatively low covers. Piper's Oregongrape and poison oak, dry site indicators, are also frequently present. Soils. Parent material is mostly schist, welded tuff, and basalt, with some andesite, diorite, and amphibolite. Average surface rock cover is 8 percent, with 8 percent gravel. Soils are generally deep, but may be moderately deep, with an average depth of greater than 40 inches. PSME 47 Environment. Elevation averages 3000 feet. Aspects vary. Slope averages 35 percent and ranges between 12 and 62 percent. Slope position ranges from the upper one-third of the slope down to the lower one-third of the slope. This Association may also occur on benches and narrow flats. Vegetation Composition and Structure. Total species richness is high for the Series, averaging 44 percent. The overstory is dominated by Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine, with sugar pine and incense-cedar common associates. Douglas-fir dominates the understory. Incense-cedar, white fir, and Pacific madrone frequently occur, generally with covers greater than 5 percent. Sugar pine is common. Frequently occurring shrubs include Piper's Oregongrape, baldhip rose, poison oak, creeping snowberry, and Pacific blackberry.
    [Show full text]
  • Phytophthora Ramorum Sudden Oak Death Pathogen
    NAME OF SPECIES: Phytophthora ramorum Sudden Oak Death pathogen Synonyms: Common Name: Sudden Oak Death pathogen A. CURRENT STATUS AND DISTRIBUTION I. In Wisconsin? 1. YES NO X 2. Abundance: 3. Geographic Range: 4. Habitat Invaded: 5. Historical Status and Rate of Spread in Wisconsin: 6. Proportion of potential range occupied: II. Invasive in Similar Climate YES NO X Zones United States: In 14 coastal California Counties and in Curry County, Oregon. In nursery in Washington. Canada: Nursery in British Columbia. Europe: Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Poland, Spain, France, Belgium, and Sweden. III. Invasive in Similar Habitat YES X NO Types IV. Habitat Affected 1. Habitat affected: this disease thrives in cool, wet climates including areas in coastal California within the fog belt or in low- lying forested areas along stream beds and other bodies of water. Oaks associated with understory species that are susceptible to foliar infections are at higher risk of becoming infected. 2. Host plants: Forty-five hosts are regulated for this disease. These hosts have been found naturally infected by P. ramorum and have had Koch’s postulates completed, reviewed and accepted. Approximately fifty-nine species are associated with Phytophthora ramorum. These species are found naturally infected; P. ramorum has been cultured or detected with PCR but Koch’s postulates have not been completed or documented and reviewed. Northern red oak (Quercus rubra) is considered an associated host. See end of document for complete list of plant hosts. National Risk Model and Map shows susceptible forest types in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • American Materia Medica, Therapeutics and Pharmacognosy
    American Materia Medica, Therapeutics and Pharmacognosy Developing the Latest Acquired Knowledge of Drugs, and Especially of the Direct Action of Single Drugs Upon Exact Conditions of Disease, with Especial Reference of the Therapeutics of the Plant Drugs of the Americas. By FINLEY ELLINGWOOD, M.D. 1919 Late Professor of Materia Medica and Therapeutics in Bennett Medical College, Chicago; Professor of Chemistry in Bennett Medical College 1884-1898; Author, and Editor of Ellingwood's Therapeutist; Member National Eclectic Medical Association; American Medical Editors' Association. Abridged to include only the botanical entries, and arranged in alphabetical order by latin names Southwest School of Botanical Medicine P.O. Box 4565, Bisbee, AZ 85603 www.swsbm.com ABIES. Abies canadensis Synonym—Hemlock spruce. CONSTITUENTS— Tannic acid, resin, volatile oil. Canada pitch, or gum hemlock, is the prepared concrete juice of the pinus canadensis. The juice exudes from the tree, and is collected by boiling the bark in water, or boiling the hemlock knots, which are rich in resin. It is composed of one or more resins, and a minute quantity of volatile oil. Canada pitch of commerce is in reddish-brown, brittle masses, of a faint odor, and slight taste. Oil of hemlock is obtained by distilling the branches with water. It is a volatile liquid, having a terebinthinate odor and taste. PREPARATIONS— Canada Pitch Plaster Tincture of the fresh hemlock boughs Tincture of the fresh inner bark. Specific Medicine Pinus. Dose, from five to sixty minims. The hemlock spruce produces three medicines; the gum, used in the form of a plaster as a rubifacient in rheumatism and kindred complaints; the volatile oil—oil of hemlock—or a tincture of the fresh boughs, used as a diuretic in diseases of the urinary organs, and wherever a terebinthinate remedy is indicated; and a tincture of the fresh inner bark, an astringent with specific properties, used locally, and internally in catarrh.
    [Show full text]
  • Evergreen Trees Agonis Flexuosa
    Evergreen Trees Agonis flexuosa – Peppermint Willow Graceful willow-like evergreen tree (but without the willows voracious root system) with reddish-brown, deeply furrowed bark to 25’-30’. New leaves and twigs have an attractive reddish cast; clustered small white flowers and brownish fruits are not particularly ornamental. Casaurina stricta – Beefwood Pendulous gray branches; resembles a pine somewhat; tolerates drought, heat, wind, fog. Growth to 20’- 30’. Cinnamomum camphora - Camphor Evergreen trees to 40 feet, with 20-foot spread.. In winter foliage is a shiny yellow green. In early spring new foliage may be pink, red or bronze, depending on tree. Unusually strong structure. Clusters of tiny, fragrant yellow flowers in profusion in May. Geijera parviflora- Australian Willow Evergreen trees with graceful, fine-textured leaves, to 30 feet, 20 feet wide. Main branches weep up and out; little branches hang down. Much of the grace of a willow, much of the toughness of eucalyptus, moderate growth and deep non-invasive roots. Laurus nobilis – Grecian Laurel Slow growth 12-40’. Natural habit is compact, broad-based, often multi-stemmed, gradually tapering cone. Leaves lethery, aromatic. Clusters of small yellow flowers followed by black or purple berries. Magnolia Grandiflora – ‘Little Gem’- Dwarf Southern Magnolia Small tree to 20’ in height. Showy white flowers in the summer. Green glossy leaves. Maytenous boaria - Mayten Evergreen tree with slow to moderate growth to an eventual 30-50 feet, with a 15-foot spread, with long and pendulous branchlets hanging down from branches, giving tree a graceful look. Habit and leaves somewhat like a small scale weeping willow.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Trees of Georgia Pub10-14
    Pub. No. 39 October 2016 Invasive Trees of Georgia by Dr. Kim D. Coder, Professor of Tree Biology & Health Care Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources, University of Georgia Georgia has many species of trees. Some are native trees and some have been introduced from outside the state, nation, or continent. Most of Georgia’s trees are well- behaved and easily develop into sustainable shade and street trees. A few tree species have an extrodinary ability to upsurp resources and take over sites from other plants. These trees are called invasive because they effectively invade sites, many times eliminat- ing other species of plants. There are a few tree species native to Georgia which are considered invasive in other parts of the country. These native invasives, may be well-behaved in Georgia, but reproduce and take over sites elsewhere, and so have gained an invasive status from at least one other invasive species list. Table 1. There are hundreds of trees which have been introduced to Georgia landscapes. Some of these exotic / naturalized trees are considered invasive. The selected list of Georgia invasive trees listed here are notorious for growing rampantly and being difficult to eradicate. Table 2. Table 1: Native trees considered invasive in other parts of the country. scientific name common name scientific name common name Acacia farnesiana sweet acacia Myrica cerifera Southern bayberry Acer negundo boxelder Pinus taeda loblolly pine Acer rubrum red maple Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood Fraxinus americana white ash Prunus serotina black cherry Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Robinia pseudoacacia black locust Gleditsia triacanthos honeylocust Toxicodendron vernix poison sumac Juniperus virginiana eastern redcedar The University of Georgia is committed to principles of equal opportunity and affirmative action.
    [Show full text]
  • Cupressaceae Calocedrus Decurrens Incense Cedar
    Cupressaceae Calocedrus decurrens incense cedar Sight ID characteristics • scale leaves lustrous, decurrent, much longer than wide • laterals nearly enclosing facials • seed cone with 3 pairs of scale/bract and one central 11 NOTES AND SKETCHES 12 Cupressaceae Chamaecyparis lawsoniana Port Orford cedar Sight ID characteristics • scale leaves with glaucous bloom • tips of laterals on older stems diverging from branch (not always too obvious) • prominent white “x” pattern on underside of branchlets • globose seed cones with 6-8 peltate cone scales – no boss on apophysis 13 NOTES AND SKETCHES 14 Cupressaceae Chamaecyparis thyoides Atlantic white cedar Sight ID characteristics • branchlets slender, irregularly arranged (not in flattened sprays). • scale leaves blue-green with white margins, glandular on back • laterals with pointed, spreading tips, facials closely appressed • bark fibrous, ash-gray • globose seed cones 1/4, 4-5 scales, apophysis armed with central boss, blue/purple and glaucous when young, maturing in fall to red-brown 15 NOTES AND SKETCHES 16 Cupressaceae Callitropsis nootkatensis Alaska yellow cedar Sight ID characteristics • branchlets very droopy • scale leaves more or less glabrous – little glaucescence • globose seed cones with 6-8 peltate cone scales – prominent boss on apophysis • tips of laterals tightly appressed to stem (mostly) – even on older foliage (not always the best character!) 15 NOTES AND SKETCHES 16 Cupressaceae Taxodium distichum bald cypress Sight ID characteristics • buttressed trunks and knees • leaves
    [Show full text]
  • Sign. Tree Publication.Pub
    Heritage Tree Classification DISTRICT OF SAANICH OUTSTANDING ~ Age, Size, Specimen. SIGNIFICANT TREES TOUR RARE ~ One or very few of a kind. UNIQUE ~ Unusual in some form of growth HISTORICAL ~ Having been planted by a noted person, age or in some other way connected with a significant event. GROUP ~ Outstanding rows or groups of trees. WILDLIFE ~ Perch or nesting tree. AREA ~ An area with many outstanding individual trees or tree groups. These trees are endorsed by the Significant Tree Program, having been re- viewed and approved by the Environment and Natural Areas Advisory LANDMARK ~ Trees that over time have become Committee (ENA). landmarks. This tour will allow you to view a portion of the trees accepted into the program. Theses are the Criteria for Designation of a Significant Tree. District of Saanich Parks Division T. 250.475.5522 E. [email protected] Page 2 Touring of Saanich’s designated “Significant Trees” as per schedule B of the Interesng Facts Tree Protection Bylaw, starting at the Saanich Municipal Hall. Trees are listed in order of appearance along planned route. Incense Cedar (Calocedrus decurrens) Appears to resemble western red cedar, but not a true cedar. The 2 on Palmer Road were planted about 1900 by Mr. Palmer, head of a disnguished horcultural family. Start of Tour Tag Species Address California Redwood—Giant Sequoia (Sequoiadendron Giganteum) #16 Contorted Perkin Willow (Sakix babylonica) 770 Vernon Ave There is a double trunked coast redwood at 1815 Ferndale , was grown from a burl brought from California in 1952. #35 Austrian Pine (Pinus Nigra) 3891 Carey Rd #177 European Beech (Fagus Sylvatica) 3905 Carey Rd English Oak (Quercus Robur ) The tree located at 1895 Ferndale Rd, the #168 English Oak (Quercus Robur) 993 Columbine Way old McClung estate, was grown from an acorn planted by Nellie #169 Ponderosa (Pinus Ponderosa) 3993 Columbine Way McLung.
    [Show full text]
  • Guideline 410 Prohibited Plant List
    VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 165 DURLEY AVENUE CAMARILLO, CA 93010 www.vcfd.org Office: 805-389-9738 Fax: 805-388-4356 GUIDELINE 410 PROHIBITED PLANT LIST This list was first published by the VCFD in 2014. It has been updated as of April 2019. It is intended to provide a list of plants and trees that are not allowed within a new required defensible space (DS) or fuel modification zone (FMZ). It is highly recommended that these plants and trees be thinned and or removed from existing DS and FMZs. In certain instances, the Fire Department may require the thinning and or removal. This list was prepared by Hunt Research Corporation and Dudek & Associates, and reviewed by Scott Franklin Consulting Co, VCFD has added some plants and has removed plants only listed due to freezing hazard. Please see notes after the list of plants. For questions regarding this list, please contact the Fire Hazard reduction Program (FHRP) Unit at 085-389-9759 or [email protected] Prohibited plant list:Botanical Name Common Name Comment* Trees Abies species Fir F Acacia species (numerous) Acacia F, I Agonis juniperina Juniper Myrtle F Araucaria species (A. heterophylla, A. Araucaria (Norfolk Island Pine, Monkey F araucana, A. bidwillii) Puzzle Tree, Bunya Bunya) Callistemon species (C. citrinus, C. rosea, C. Bottlebrush (Lemon, Rose, Weeping) F viminalis) Calocedrus decurrens Incense Cedar F Casuarina cunninghamiana River She-Oak F Cedrus species (C. atlantica, C. deodara) Cedar (Atlas, Deodar) F Chamaecyparis species (numerous) False Cypress F Cinnamomum camphora Camphor F Cryptomeria japonica Japanese Cryptomeria F Cupressocyparis leylandii Leyland Cypress F Cupressus species (C.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Palette - Trees 50’-0”
    50’-0” 40’-0” 30’-0” 20’-0” 10’-0” Zelkova Serrata “Greenvase” Metasequoia glyptostroboides Cladrastis kentukea Chamaecyparis obtusa ‘Gracilis’ Ulmus parvifolia “Emer I” Green Vase Zelkova Dawn Redwood American Yellowwood Slender Hinoki Falsecypress Athena Classic Elm • Vase shape with upright arching branches • Narrow, conical shape • Horizontally layered, spreading form • Narrow conical shape • Broadly rounded, pendulous branches • Green foliage • Medium green, deciduous conifer foliage • Dark green foliage • Evergreen, light green foliage • Medium green, toothed leaves • Orange Fall foliage • Rusty orange Fall foliage • Orange to red Fall foliage • Evergreen, no Fall foliage change • Yellowish fall foliage Plant Palette - Trees 50’-0” 40’-0” 30’-0” 20’-0” 10’-0” Quercus coccinea Acer freemanii Cercidiphyllum japonicum Taxodium distichum Thuja plicata Scarlet Oak Autumn Blaze Maple Katsura Tree Bald Cyprus Western Red Cedar • Pyramidal, horizontal branches • Upright, broad oval shape • Pyramidal shape • Pyramidal shape, develops large flares at base • Pyramidal, buttressed base with lower branches • Long glossy green leaves • Medium green fall foliage • Bluish-green, heart-shaped foliage • Leaves are needle-like, green • Leaves green and scale-like • Scarlet red Fall foliage • Brilliant orange-red, long lasting Fall foliage • Soft apricot Fall foliage • Rich brown Fall foliage • Sharp-pointed cone scales Plant Palette - Trees 50’-0” 40’-0” 30’-0” 20’-0” 10’-0” Thuja plicata “Fastigiata” Sequoia sempervirens Davidia involucrata Hogan
    [Show full text]
  • DICOTS Aceraceae Maple Family Anacardiaceae Sumac Family
    FLOWERINGPLANTS Lamiaceae Mint family (ANGIOSPERMS) Brassicaceae Mustard family Prunella vulgaris - Self Heal Cardamine nutallii - Spring Beauty Satureja douglasii – Yerba Buena Rubiaceae Madder family DICOTS Galium aparine- Cleavers Boraginaceae Borage family Malvaceae Mallow family Galium trifidum – Small Bedstraw Aceraceae Maple family Cynoglossum grande – Houndstongue Sidalcea virgata – Rose Checker Mallow Acer macrophyllum – Big leaf Maple Oleaceae Olive family MONOCOTS Anacardiaceae Sumac family Fraxinus latifolia - Oregon Ash Toxicodendron diversilobum – Poison Oak Cyperaceae Sedge family Plantaginaceae Plantain family Carex densa Apiaceae Carrot family Plantago lanceolata – Plantain Anthriscus caucalis- Bur Chervil Iridaceae Iris family Daucus carota – Wild Carrot Portulacaceae Purslane family Iris tenax – Oregon Iris Ligusticum apiifolium – Parsley-leaved Claytonia siberica – Candy Flower Lovage Claytonia perforliata – Miner’s Lettuce Juncaceae Rush family Osmorhiza berteroi–Sweet Cicely Juncus tenuis – Slender Rush Sanicula graveolens – Sierra Sanicle Cynoglossum Photo by C.Gautier Ranunculaceae Buttercup family Delphinium menziesii – Larkspur Liliaceae Lily family Asteraceae Sunflower family Caryophyllaceae Pink family Ranunculus occidentalis – Western Buttercup Allium acuminatum – Hooker’s Onion Achillea millefolium – Yarrow Stellaria media- Chickweed Ranunculus uncinatus – Small-flowered Calochortus tolmiei – Tolmie’s Mariposa Lily Adendocaulon bicolor – Pathfinder Buttercup Camassia quamash - Camas Bellis perennis – English
    [Show full text]