Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
  • Log in
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleArticles

A Practical Approach to Assessing Structure, Function, and Value of Street Tree Populations in Small Communities

Scott E. Maco and E. Gregory McPherson
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) March 2003, 29 (2) 84-97; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2003.011
Scott E. Maco
USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Center for Urban Forest Research, c/o Environmental Horticulture, One Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, U.S.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
E. Gregory McPherson
USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Center for Urban Forest Research, c/o Environmental Horticulture, One Shields Avenue, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, U.S.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

LITERATURE CITED

  1. ↵
    1. Anderson, L.M., and
    2. H.K. Cordell
    . 1988. Influence of trees on residential property values in Athens, Georgia (U.S.A.): A survey of actual sales prices. Landscape Urban Plann. 15(1988):153–164.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Bartenstein, F.
    1981. The future of urban forestry. J. Arboric. 7(10):261–267.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    California Air Resources Board. 2000. Emission Reduction Offset Transaction Cost Summary Report for 1999. State of California Environmental Protection Agency.
  4. ↵
    California Air Resources Board 2001. Emission Reduction Offset Transaction Cost Summary Report for 2000. State of California Environmental Protection Agency.
  5. ↵
    California Energy Commission. 1994. Electricity Report. State of California, Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA.
  6. ↵
    City of Davis. 2001. General City Statistics. http://www.city.davis.ca.us/aboutdavis/statistics.htm (accessed 1/19/01).
  7. ↵
    City of Olympia. 1995. Impervious Surface Reduction Study, Final Report. City of Olympia, WA, Public Works Department, Water Resources Department. 207 pp.
  8. ↵
    1. Clark, J.R.,
    2. N.P. Matheny,
    3. G. Cross, and
    4. V. Wake
    . 1997. A model of urban forest sustainability. J. Arboric. 23(1):17–30.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Cochran, W.G.
    1977. Sampling Techniques (3rd Ed.). John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 428 pp.
  10. Department of Finance, CA. 2001. City/County Population Estimates with Annual Percent Change. http://www.dof.ca.gov:8080/html/demograp/e-1table.htm (accessed 1/19/01).
  11. ↵
    1. Jaenson, R.,
    2. N. Bassuk,
    3. S. Schwager, and
    4. D. Headley
    . 1992. A statistical method for the accurate and rapid sampling of urban street tree populations. J. Arboric. 18(4):171–183.
    OpenUrl
    1. McPherson, E.G.
    2000. Expenditures associated with conflicts between street tree root growth and hardscape in California. J. Arboric. 26(6):289–297.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.G., and
    2. R.A. Rowntree
    . 1989. Using structural measures to compare twenty-two US street tree populations. Landscape J. 8:13–23.
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.G.,
    2. D.W. Nowak,
    3. G. Heisler,
    4. S. Grimmond,
    5. C. Souch,
    6. R. Grant, and
    7. R. Rowntree
    . 1997. Quantifying urban forest structure, function, and value: The Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. Urban Ecosyst. 1:49–61.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.G.,
    2. J.R. Simpson,
    3. P.J. Peper, and
    4. Q. Xiao
    . 1999a. Benefit–Cost Analysis of Modesto’s Municipal Urban Forest. Western Center for Urban Forest Research and Education, USDA Forest Service. 43 pp.
  15. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.G.,
    2. D.W. Nowak,
    3. G. Heisler,
    4. S. Grimmond,
    5. C. Souch,
    6. R. Grant, and
    7. R. Rowntree
    . 1999b. Tree Guidelines for San Joaquin Valley Communities. Local Government Commission, Sacramento, CA. 64 pp.
  16. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.G.,
    2. J.R. Simpson,
    3. P.J. Peper,
    4. K.I. Scott, and
    5. Q. Xiao
    . 2000. Tree Guidelines for Coastal Southern California Communities. Local Government Commission, Sacramento, CA. 98 pp.
  17. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.G.,
    2. J.R. Simpson,
    3. P.J. Peper,
    4. Q. Xiao,
    5. D.R. Pettinger, and
    6. D.R. Hodel
    . 2001. Tree Guidelines for Inland Empire Communities. Local Government Commission, Sacramento, CA. 115 pp.
  18. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.G.,
    2. S.E. Maco,
    3. J.R. Simpson,
    4. P.J. Peper,
    5. Q. Xiao, A. VanDerZanden, and
    6. N. Bell
    . 2002. Western Washington and Oregon Community Tree Guide: Benefits, Costs, and Strategic Planting. International Society of Arboriculture, Pacific Northwest Chapter, Silverton, OR.
  19. ↵
    Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, Technical Release 55 (2nd Ed.). United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Conservation Engineering Division.
  20. ↵
    Pacific Gas & Electric Company. 2001a. Schedule E-1— Residential Service. http://www.pge.com/customer_services/business/tariffs/pdf/E-1.pdf (accessed 4/9/01).
  21. ↵
    Pacific Gas & Electric Company. 2001b. Gas Rate History. http://www.pge.com/customer_services/business/tariffs/GRF.SHTML#RESGAS (accessed 4/9/01)
  22. ↵
    1. Peper, P.J., and
    2. E.G. McPherson
    . 1998. Comparison of five methods for estimating leaf area index of open-grown trees. J. Arboric. 24(2):98–111.
    OpenUrl
    1. Peper, P.J.,
    2. E.G. McPherson, and
    3. S.M. Mori
    . 2001. Equations for predicting diameter, height, crown width, and leaf area of San Joaquin Valley street trees. J. Arboric. 27(6):306–317.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Richards, N.A.
    1982/1983. Diversity and stability in a street tree population. Urban Ecol. 7:159–171.
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Sanders, R.A.
    1981. Diversity in the street trees of Syracuse, New York. Urban Ecol. 5:33–43.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Simpson, E.H.
    1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature. 163:688.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    U.S. Census Bureau. 1995. Urban and Rural Definitions. http://www.census.gov/population/censusdata/urdef.txt (accessed 9/12/01).
    1. Wells, F.A.
    1972. Soil Survey of Yolo County, California. USDA, Soil Conservation Service, Woodland, CA. 102 pp.
  27. ↵
    1. Wray, P.H., and
    2. D.R. Prestemon
    . 1983. Assessment of street trees in Iowa’s small communities. Iowa State J. Res. 58(2):261–268.
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    Yolo County Association of Realtors. 2001. Home Sales Report: Single family home in the city of Davis between 7/1/99–6/30/00.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF): 29 (2)
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 29, Issue 2
March 2003
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A Practical Approach to Assessing Structure, Function, and Value of Street Tree Populations in Small Communities
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Arboriculture & Urban Forestry web site.
Citation Tools
A Practical Approach to Assessing Structure, Function, and Value of Street Tree Populations in Small Communities
Scott E. Maco, E. Gregory McPherson
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Mar 2003, 29 (2) 84-97; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2003.011

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
A Practical Approach to Assessing Structure, Function, and Value of Street Tree Populations in Small Communities
Scott E. Maco, E. Gregory McPherson
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Mar 2003, 29 (2) 84-97; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2003.011
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • CONDUCTING THE SAMPLE INVENTORY
    • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • LITERATURE CITED
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Contribution of Urban Trees to Ecosystem Services in Lisbon: A Comparative Study Between Gardens and Street Trees
  • Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in Tree Risk Assessment (TRA): A Systematic Review
  • Identifying Essential Selection Criteria and Program Components to Improve Hawai‘i’s Exceptional Tree Program Based on Expert Consensus
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Urban forest valuation
  • urban forest management
  • street tree inventory

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire