DOCSLIB.ORG

Understanding the Value of Southampton's Urban Trees

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Understanding the Value of Southampton's Urban Trees Understanding the value of Southampton’s urban trees (WC, 2017) Forest Research is the Research Agency of the Forestry Commission and is the leading UK organisation engaged in forestry and tree related research. The Agency aims to support and enhance forestry and its role in sustainable development by providing innovative, high quality scientific research, technical support and consultancy services. Treeconomics is a social enterprise, whose mission is to highlight the value of trees and woodlands and to understand how trees improve our towns and cities. Treeconomics works with businesses, communities, research organisations and public bodies to achieve this. i-Tree is a state-of-the-art, peer-reviewed software suite from the USDA Forest Service that provides urban and community forestry analysis and benefits assessment tools, including i-Tree Eco. The Forest Service, Davey Tree Expert Company, National Arbor Day Foundation, Society of Municipal Arborists, International Society of Arboriculture, and Casey Trees have entered into a cooperative partnership to further develop, disseminate and provide technical support for the suite. In association with: Citation This report should be cited as: Mutch, E.M., Doick, K.J., Davies, H.J., Handley, P., Hudson, M.D., Kiss, S., McCulloch, L., Parks, K.E., Rogers, K. and Schreckenberg, K. (2017) Understanding the value of Southampton’s urban trees. Results of the 2016 i-Tree Eco survey. University of Southampton, Forest Research, Treeconomics and Southampton City Council. Southampton. 81pp. ISBN 978-0-85432-004-2. 2 Technical Report | i-Tree Eco survey of Southampton’s urban trees | Nov 2017 Contents Key definitions ............................................................................................................................. 5 Executive summary ...................................................................................................................... 6 Key results ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Key conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 8 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 9 Natural capital ................................................................................................................................... 11 Southampton studies ........................................................................................................................ 11 What i-Tree can and cannot do ........................................................................................................ 12 Policy context .................................................................................................................................... 12 Opportunities .................................................................................................................................... 14 Links .................................................................................................................................................. 14 Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 16 Description of amenity value ............................................................................................................ 19 Pests and diseases ............................................................................................................................ 19 Habitat provision ............................................................................................................................... 19 Calculations ....................................................................................................................................... 19 Comparison with other UK i-Tree Eco Studies .................................................................................. 20 Results and discussion ................................................................................................................ 21 Canopy cover .................................................................................................................................... 21 Ground cover .................................................................................................................................... 21 Urban forest structure ...................................................................................................................... 22 Species composition ...................................................................................................................... 22 Species diversity ............................................................................................................................ 23 Size class distribution .................................................................................................................... 26 Tree condition ............................................................................................................................... 28 Leaf area and “dominance value” ................................................................................................. 30 Amenity value ................................................................................................................................... 31 Avoided surface water runoff ........................................................................................................... 34 Air pollution removal ........................................................................................................................ 36 Carbon storage .................................................................................................................................. 40 Carbon sequestration ....................................................................................................................... 42 IMD analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 43 3 Technical Report | i-Tree Eco survey of Southampton’s urban trees | Nov 2017 Habitat provision ............................................................................................................................... 46 Risks of pests and disease ................................................................................................................. 49 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 53 Main findings .................................................................................................................................... 53 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 54 Limitations ........................................................................................................................................ 55 The authors ............................................................................................................................... 56 Acknowledgements.................................................................................................................... 57 References ................................................................................................................................. 58 Appendix I. Detailed methodology ............................................................................................. 64 Field measurements and i-Tree Eco Models ..................................................................................... 64 Monetising carbon and pollutant capture ........................................................................................ 67 CAVAT Analysis.................................................................................................................................. 68 Appendix II. Species dominance list ............................................................................................ 70 Appendix III. Non-traded values for carbon stored in Southampton’s trees .................................. 74 Appendix IV. Pests and diseases ................................................................................................. 77 Glossary..................................................................................................................................... 81 4 Technical Report | i-Tree Eco survey of Southampton’s urban trees | Nov 2017 Key definitions Urban areas: are often defined by the presence of buildings, roads and railways; a centre of commerce, industry and entertainment; a preponderance of concrete and tarmac; atmospheric pollution; and a population which does not engage in agriculture. In England, urban and rural land use is defined by population density: Rural areas: settlements of less than 10,000 people. Urban areas: settlements of 10,000 or more people (RUC, 2011). Southampton: is classified as ‘urban with city and town’ (class 4 of Defra’s 2011 Rural-Urban Classification system) (Defra, 2014), with a population of 254,2751. It covers an area of 14,174 ha (Bibby & Brindley, 2013). For this study, we used an area of 5,019 ha for the core area of Southampton City. Southampton
Load more

Recommended publications
  • D-Day Marshalling and Embarkation Areas
    SECOND WORLD WAR - D-Day Marshalling and Embarkation Areas 1. Operation Overlord From April 1944, the east-coast, the south and west coastal areas of England and parts of south Wales were divided into a number of concentration areas known as Marshalling Areas (MAs). One or more MAs served an Embarkation Area (EA). Preliminary planning as regards to the layout of each area had been worked out the previous year, such as exercise 'Harlequin' – carried out within the Sussex District and Central Sussex Sub- District during August and September 1943. By mid-March 1944, the Overlord Marshalling & Concentration Area plans were being finalised, this was called the 'Sausage Plan' on account of the shape given to the MA boundaries when identified on a map. Command Responsibilities Eastern Command was required to provide concentration areas for all troops passing through Tilbury and London Docks. This included an infantry division plus accumulated residues totalling 104,000 troops. Felixstowe and Tilbury Docks were each to be allocated one reinforcement holding unit of 1,600 troops and one reinforcement group of three units of 4,800 troops within the concentration area. Southern Command's primary responsibility was to provide concentration areas for US Forces by direct arrangement with SOS ETOUSA. This was in addition to two British armoured brigades located in the Bournemouth /Poole Area, and 21 Army Group. One reinforcement holding unit was also required to be accommodated in each of the Portsmouth and Southampton MAs. British Airborne Forces required tented accommodation for 800 (all ranks) at certain airfields within the command from which the forces would operate.
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer.Doc Revised from 10/03/02
    Save No. 91 Printed 10/03/02 10:33 AM Gazetteer.doc Revised From 10/03/02 Gazetteer compiled by E J Wiseman Abbots Ann SU 3243 Bighton Lane Watercress Beds SU 5933 Abbotstone Down SU 5836 Bishop's Dyke SU 3405 Acres Down SU 2709 Bishopstoke SU 4619 Alice Holt Forest SU 8042 Bishops Sutton Watercress Beds SU 6031 Allbrook SU 4521 Bisterne SU 1400 Allington Lane Gravel Pit SU 4717 Bitterne (Southampton) SU 4413 Alresford Watercress Beds SU 5833 Bitterne Park (Southampton) SU 4414 Alresford Pond SU 5933 Black Bush SU 2515 Amberwood Inclosure SU 2013 Blackbushe Airfield SU 8059 Amery Farm Estate (Alton) SU 7240 Black Dam (Basingstoke) SU 6552 Ampfield SU 4023 Black Gutter Bottom SU 2016 Andover Airfield SU 3245 Blackmoor SU 7733 Anton valley SU 3740 Blackmoor Golf Course SU 7734 Arlebury Lake SU 5732 Black Point (Hayling Island) SZ 7599 Ashlett Creek SU 4603 Blashford Lakes SU 1507 Ashlett Mill Pond SU 4603 Blendworth SU 7113 Ashley Farm (Stockbridge) SU 3730 Bordon SU 8035 Ashley Manor (Stockbridge) SU 3830 Bossington SU 3331 Ashley Walk SU 2014 Botley Wood SU 5410 Ashley Warren SU 4956 Bourley Reservoir SU 8250 Ashmansworth SU 4157 Boveridge SU 0714 Ashurst SU 3310 Braishfield SU 3725 Ash Vale Gravel Pit SU 8853 Brambridge SU 4622 Avington SU 5332 Bramley Camp SU 6559 Avon Castle SU 1303 Bramshaw Wood SU 2516 Avon Causeway SZ 1497 Bramshill (Warren Heath) SU 7759 Avon Tyrrell SZ 1499 Bramshill Common SU 7562 Backley Plain SU 2106 Bramshill Police College Lake SU 7560 Baddesley Common SU 3921 Bramshill Rubbish Tip SU 7561 Badnam Creek (River
    [Show full text]
  • Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation Sincs Hampshire.Pdf
    Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) within Hampshire © Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre No part of this documentHBIC may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recoding or otherwise without the prior permission of the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre Central Grid SINC Ref District SINC Name Ref. SINC Criteria Area (ha) BD0001 Basingstoke & Deane Straits Copse, St. Mary Bourne SU38905040 1A 2.14 BD0002 Basingstoke & Deane Lee's Wood SU39005080 1A 1.99 BD0003 Basingstoke & Deane Great Wallop Hill Copse SU39005200 1A/1B 21.07 BD0004 Basingstoke & Deane Hackwood Copse SU39504950 1A 11.74 BD0005 Basingstoke & Deane Stokehill Farm Down SU39605130 2A 4.02 BD0006 Basingstoke & Deane Juniper Rough SU39605289 2D 1.16 BD0007 Basingstoke & Deane Leafy Grove Copse SU39685080 1A 1.83 BD0008 Basingstoke & Deane Trinley Wood SU39804900 1A 6.58 BD0009 Basingstoke & Deane East Woodhay Down SU39806040 2A 29.57 BD0010 Basingstoke & Deane Ten Acre Brow (East) SU39965580 1A 0.55 BD0011 Basingstoke & Deane Berries Copse SU40106240 1A 2.93 BD0012 Basingstoke & Deane Sidley Wood North SU40305590 1A 3.63 BD0013 Basingstoke & Deane The Oaks Grassland SU40405920 2A 1.12 BD0014 Basingstoke & Deane Sidley Wood South SU40505520 1B 1.87 BD0015 Basingstoke & Deane West Of Codley Copse SU40505680 2D/6A 0.68 BD0016 Basingstoke & Deane Hitchen Copse SU40505850 1A 13.91 BD0017 Basingstoke & Deane Pilot Hill: Field To The South-East SU40505900 2A/6A 4.62
    [Show full text]
  • BITTERNE AFTER the ROMANS. DOMESDAY Book Is Usually
    148 : HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB BITTERNE AFTER THE ROMANS. By O. G. S". CRAWFORD, B.A., F.S.A. OMESDAY Book is usually regarded as a measure of antiquity, conferring the hall-mark of authentic age upon such places D as are there mentioned. Bitterne is not mentioned by this name in Domesday, but the history of the manor can be traced back to before Domesday. In the year 1045 King "Edward the Confessor gave land at Stanham to the monastery of St. Peter and Paul at Winchester, that is to say, to the Cathedral. The bounds of this land are given ; their identification is not at all easy, but one thing is quite certain, namely, that they include a portion- of South Stoneham ; for an earlier grant of land (in 932).to-the new Minster at Winchester can be identified by the bounds with part of North Stoneham. We must therefore exclude all the land included in that earlier grant from the present one (of 1045). We may also exclude all manors known to exist at the time of Domesday, for it is highly improbable that any such would be included in the grant of a manor made only 41 years previously. That cuts out the manors of Allington, Woolston, Shirley and Chilworth. Unfor- tunately the exact extent of these manors is unknown, but the possible extent of the Stoneham grant is to some extent defined. The bounds begin at Swaythlihg well, which must have been somewhere near Swaythling. The " old Itchen " and the " new river " (niwan ea) are then mentioned, and then, after a number of unidentifiable bound-marks (loam-pits, Wadda's stoc, white stone) we come to " wic hythe." This last must mean the hithe or quay of the old Saxon town of Southampton, whose alternative names were Homwic and Horn- or Ham-tun.
    [Show full text]
  • Saxon Charters and Landscape Evolution in the South-Central Hampshire Basin
    ProcHampsh Field Club ArchaeolSoc 50, 1994, 103-25 SAXON CHARTERS AND LANDSCAPE EVOLUTION IN THE SOUTH-CENTRAL HAMPSHIRE BASIN By CHRISTOPHER K CURRIE ABSTRACT THE CHARTER EVIDENCE Landscape study of the South Central Hampshire Basin north of Methodology Southampton has identified evidence for organised land use, based on diverse agricultural, pastoral and woodland land uses in the The methods used to eludicate the bounds of the Saxon period. Combined study of the topographic, cartographiccharter s discussed below are based on a long­ and charter evidence has revealed that the basis for settlement standing knowledge of the areas under patterns had largely developed by the tenth century. Highly consideration. This was combined with organised common pasturing is identified within gated areas as topographical information given on the earliest being the origin of English commons in the later historic period.Ordnanc e Survey map (one inch, 1810 edition, Evidence for possible river engineering is discussed. sheet XI), particularly with regard to the parish Charter evidence suggests that this developed landscape, boundaries shown thereon. In some cases this was underwent reorganisation in the Late Saxon period, with ecclesiastical bodies at Winchester being the major beneficiaries.supporte d by knowledge of earlier documents. It Although dealing with a small geographical area, this study is accepted that much of the boundaries of these raises implications for the nation-wide study of the origin of estates will be conjectural. Where the boundary land-use traditions and settlement in England. appears to follow close to the earliest known parish boundary, it has been assumed this is the course of die charter bounds, unless there is good INTRODUCTION reason to think otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. the Honour You Have Done Me By
    PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. By O. G. S. CRAWFORD, F.B.A., F.S.A. HE honour you have done me by electing me as your President for the forthcoming year is one that I appreciate highly and Tfor which I thank you. Like our retiring President, I am a Hampshire man, and we both have a particular affection for the lower reaches of the Test valley, where we live. I shall try, during my term of office, to emulate him and to be present at as many of our Field Meetings as possible ; and I hope that we shall often see him there too. These peregrinations through the country are, in my considered opinion,, of very great value not only to ourselves, but to the County and country. They show people that there are quite a number of people who obviously take an interest in things old and things beautiful, in the physical structure of our country and the earlier forms of life that inhabited it, in the birds and plants that now live here. Without such occasional demonstrations their existence is in danger of being overlooked by those whose eyes have not been opened to the interesting tilings that swarm around them, if they only knew it. To take antiquities only : In the course of my own field-work I have come across several instances outside Hampshire where people have refrained from damage or destruction not from any interest of their own, but simply because they know that others are interested in them; and because they are decent people they respect that interest, even without sharing it.
    [Show full text]
  • Jul to Dec 2013
    Butterfly Conservation Hampshire and Isle of Wight Branch Page 1 of 33 Butterfly Conservation Hampshire and Saving butterflies, moths and our environment Isle of Wight Branch HOME ABOUT » EVENTS » CONSERVATION » SPECIES » SIGHTINGS » PUBLICATIONS » LINKS » ISLE OF WIGHT » MEMBERS » Wednesday 31st July Judith Frank reports from Byway stretch between Stockbridge and Broughton (SU337354) where the following observations were made: Holly Blue (2 "didn't settle long enough for me to be sure but seemed most likely to be hollies."), Peacock (1), Meadow Brown (2), Large White (9), Ringlet (9), Brimstone (1), Comma (2), Green-veined White (4), Gatekeeper (5). "On a day of only fleeting sunshine, I was interested to see what there might be on a section of byway through farmland not particularly managed for butterflies. A large patch of brambles yielded the most colour with the commas, gatekeepers and blues.". Speckled Wood Comma NT Owen reports from Roe Inclosure, Linwood (SU200086) where the following observations were made: Large White (2), Large Skipper (1), Gatekeeper (3), Small Skipper (1), Silver-washed Fritillary (4 "Including one Valezina form female"). Silver-washed Fritillary f. valezina Steve Benstead reports from Brading Down (SZ596867) where the following observations were made: Chalkhill Blue (5), Painted Lady (1), Clouded Yellow (1). "Overcast but warm". Gary palmer reports from barton common (SZ249931) where the following observations were made: Large White (2), Small White (3), Marbled White (3), Meadow Brown (20), Gatekeeper (35), Small Copper (1), Common Blue (1), vapourer moth (1 Larval "using poplar sapling"), peppered moth (1 Larval "using alder buckthorn"), buff tip moth (49 Larval "using mature sallow").
    [Show full text]
  • Southampton Common: the Legal Regime
    Proc. llampsh. Field Club Archaeol. Soc. 41, 1985, 261-268. SOUTHAMPTON COMMON: THE LEGAL REGIME By ALEC SAMUELS ABSTRACT inhabitants of Southampton and persons A brief outline of the history of Southampton resorting thereto. It has to be equipped with Common and a survey of relevant legislation forms such statues, fountains, seats, and other the framework for a discussion of contemporary ornaments and conveniences for public use problems arising from conflicts of public interest and and not more than five lodges on the Common of different conceptions of amenity. The current as the corporation from time to time think fit. legal position is explained and recommendations are made for the reform of the law to meet modern needs. No other structures or buildings were authorised and no parts of the Common may be taken or used for any other purpose (28 & 29 Vic cl62 s72). Under the Southampton THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK Corporation Act 1910, the Common became a Southampton Common, now about 350 park or pleasure ground under the public acres, belongs to the City of Southampton health acts, which together authorised the under a grant oi 1228 (Thomson 1979, 1-49). provision of places for public recreation, The Common has been reduced by enclosure prescribed powers regarding open spaces, and and encroachment, notably the sites of the authorised limited closure, the making and Cowherds inn and Southampton Zoo, which enforcing of byelaws. It reiterated that 'Noth­ are now no longer part of the Common. Land ing contained in this Act or in the Public was also taken in the nineteenth-century for a Health Acts shall authorise the erection of cemetery and reservoirs (now disused).
    [Show full text]
  • Hollins-2010
    WILDLIFE DIARY AND NEWS FOR DEC 27 - JAN 2 (WEEK 52 OF 2010) Highlights Red-throated Divers moving along the coast in exceptional numbers Shags have begun nesting and Cormorants are in breeding plumage There are more Bitterns at more sites in southern England than usual On Dec 31 a herd of maybe 100 Bewick's Swans blazed a trail across the Sussex skies from Worthing to Rye Bay - it must have been an impressive sight and sound but left no clue as to its origin or destination The White Tailed Sea Eagle which disappeared near Southampton Water on Dec 12 may well have re-appeared on Jan 1 in the Hordle (New Milton) area The Great Bustard first seen in the Portland/Weymouth area from Dec 23 to 27 has re-appeared in the Avon valley/Christchurch Harbour area from Dec 30 to Jan 1 Christmas entertainment by escaped birds was in the form of a singing Budgie on the Isle of Wight and a Golden Eagle in Sussex The Raven night roost in Dorset had 147 birds on Dec 31 and Dorset also has a single winter Dipper near Dorchester Two sightings of Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers in Hampshire show they are not extinct in the county and four reports of Great Spotted Woodpeckers drumming since Dec 14 shows they think spring has come - also showing that Tawny Owls are not yet extinct within the Havant builtup area was a sighting in a Netherfield Close garden BIRDS Red-throated Diver: From Dec 25 to Jan 1 very large numbers have been moving along the south coast (sometimes east, sometimes west).
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin of Southampton Water
    1 THE ORIGIN OF SOUTHAMPTON WATER. WITH SOME ACCOUNT OF ITS EARLIEST NAVIGATORS. By T. W: SHORE, F.G.S., Hon. Organising Secretary. I do not propose in this Paper to discuss the commercial • advantages of Southampton Water or its great capabilities as a trade channel, or to enlarge .upon its natural beauties; but I wish to describe the origin of this remarkable estuary, and the geological conditions connected with it; and. as J cannot fully describe its origin without some references to "early man,:I must also give a brief account of the primitive , inhabitants of this neighbourhood, some of whom were here before Southampton Water existed, while others probably witnessed its formation, and were its earliest navigators, •• Again, the historical events connected with this estuary . are of great interest, and form part of our national history, butthey do not come within the scope of this Paper. I intend to deal as simply as I can, apart from geological technicalities, with far earlier circumstances than those which history records, viz., with those geological conditions which led to the origin of this remarkable estuary, as proved . by modern engineering work, and by scientific observation, seeing that these circumstances and events must be regarded as the remote cause of all the maritime facilities of Southampton, and of all the great commercial possibilities in- the future which its situation on this estuary may have in store for it. What Southampton was as a great port in the Middle Ages, what it is now, or what it may become in the future, is due for the most part to those geological conditions by which this great estuary, part of Hampshire's lowest valley,.was formed.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulation Assessment Screening Report
    Eastleigh Borough Council Issues and Options Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Habitat Regulations Assessment Screening Report November 2015 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 5 1.1 Legislation ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 This Report ..................................................................................................................... 5 2 Methodology .................................................................................... 7 2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 A Proportionate Assessment .......................................................................................... 7 2.3 The Process of HRA ....................................................................................................... 8 2.4 Evidence gathering ......................................................................................................... 9 Physical scope of the HRA ............................................................................................................ 10 2.5 Task 1: Likely Significant Effects (Screening) ............................................................... 11 Other plans and projects ................................................................................................................ 11 3 Pathways
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Mammals in the Southampton Area
    - -- - - t STATUS OF MAMMALS IN THE SOUTHAMPTON AREA INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS LAGOMORPHA The Southampton-Wildlife Link has Rabbit 8 decided to produce a report on the INSECTIVORA Hare 8 mammalian 'fauna of the Southampton Hedgehog 2 area' because, to our knowledge, Mole 2 RODENTA nobody has done so previously and it Common Shrew 2 Grey Squirrel 9 was thought that it would be a useful Pygmy Shrew 3 Red Squirrel 9 exercise ,to do sa. We consider that the Water Shrew 3 Dormouse 9 main purpose of this report is to bring Harvest Mouse 10 together information on 'the distribution CHIROPTERA Wood Mouse 10 of mammal species currently available Greater Horseshoe Bat _ 3 Yellow-necked Mouse 10 to the Link and in so' doing, inform both Daubenton's Bat • 4 House Mouse 10 the general public, and those with the Whiskered Bat 4 Black Rat 11 responsibility over the green areas of Noctule Bat 4 Brown Rat 11 the city, of the diversity of mammal Leisler's Bat 4 Bank Vole 11 species present. In addition we hope-to Serotine Bat 4 Field Vole 11 promote more interest and further Pipistrelle Bat 5 Water Vole 12 recordinq of mammals, and other Brown Long-Eared Bat 5 wildlife, within the city boundaries. Grey Long-Eared bat 5 ARTIODACTYLA .. Red Deer 12 AUTHOR CARNIVORA Fallow Deer 12 Mr Philip Budd Fox 5 RoeDeer 13 Stoat 6 Muntjac 13 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Weasel 6 Dr 'A. J. Barker Mr C. Boulton European Mink 7 PINNIPEDIA Mr J. Buckley Mr G .. C}ay American Mink 7 Common Seal 13 Mr P.
    [Show full text]