How Are Managers Making Tree Species Selection Decisions in the Pacific Northwest of the United States?

LITERATURE CITED

1. ↵
   1. Albright WL,
   2. Peterson DL

   . 2013. Tree growth and climate in the Pacific Northwest, North America: a broad-scale analysis of changing growth environments. Journal of Biogeography. 40(11):2119-2133.

   OpenUrl
2. ↵
   1. Alvey AA

   . 2006. Promoting and preserving biodiversity in the urban forest. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 5(4):195-201.

   OpenUrl
3. ↵
   1. Arbor Day Foundation

   . 2016a. Oregon Tree City USA Summary. [Accessed 2018 April 20]. https://www.arborday.org/states/documents/Oregon.pdf
4. ↵
   1. Arbor Day Foundation

   . 2016b. Washington Tree City USA Summary. [Accessed 2018 April 20]. https://www.arborday.org/states/documents/Washington.pdf
5. ↵
   1. Arbor Day Foundation

   . 2017. Tree City USA Standards. [Accessed 2017 April 19]. https://www.arborday.org/programs/treecityusa/standards.cfm
6. ↵
   1. Armstrong JS,
   2. Overton TS

   . 1977. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research. 14:396-402.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
7. ↵
   1. Lamp J

   1. Atif A,
   2. Richards D,
   3. Bilgin A

   . 2012. Estimating non-response bias in a web-based survey of technology acceptance: a case study of unit guide information systems. In: Lamp J, editor. ACIS 2012: Proceedings of the 23rd Australasian Conference on Information Systems. December 2012; Deakin University, Geelong. Geelong (Australia): Deakin University.
8. ↵
   1. Butler KF,
   2. Koontz TM

   . 2005. Theory into practice: implementing ecosystem management objectives in the USDA Forest Service. Environmental Management. 35(2):138-150.

   OpenUrlPubMed
9. ↵
   1. Carlson C

   . 1995. Urban forestry and arboricultural advancements in Ohio, USA. Arboricultural Journal. 19(4):377-400.

   OpenUrl
10. ↵
    1. Chalker-Scott L

    . 2015. Nonnative, noninvasive woody species can enhance urban landscape biodiversity. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 41(4):173-186.

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Clark JR,
    2. Matheny NP,
    3. Cross G,
    4. Wake V

    . 1997. A model of urban forest sustainability. Journal of Arboriculture. 23:17-30.

    OpenUrl
12. ↵
    1. Cohen J

    . 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale (NJ, USA): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. ↵
    1. Conway TM,
    2. Vander Vecht J

    . 2015. Growing a diverse urban forest: species selection decisions by practitioners planting and supplying trees. Landscape and Urban Planning. 138:1-10.

    OpenUrl
14. ↵
    1. Dwyer JF,
    2. McPherson EG,
    3. Schroeder HW,
    4. Rowntree RA

    . 1992. Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture. 18:227-234.

    OpenUrl
15. ↵
    1. Elmendorf W,
    2. Watson T,
    3. Lilly S

    . 2005. Arboriculture and urban forestry education in the United States: results of an educators survey. Journal of Arboriculture. 31(3):138-149.

    OpenUrl
16. ↵
    1. Escobedo FJ,
    2. Kroeger T,
    3. Wagner JE

    . 2011. Urban forests and pollution mitigation: analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environmental pollution. 159(8-9):2078-2087.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. ↵
    1. Field A

    . 2013. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Thousand Oaks (CA, USA): Sage Publications Ltd.
18. ↵
    1. Green T

    . 2002. Arborists should have a central role in educating the public about veteran trees. Arboricultural Journal. 26(3):239-248.

    OpenUrl
19. ↵
    1. Hagerman C

    . 2007. Shaping neighborhoods and nature: urban political ecologies of urban waterfront transformations in Portland, Oregon. Cities. 24(4):285-297.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
20. ↵
    1. Heynen N,
    2. Perkins HA,
    3. Roy P

    . 2006. The political ecology of uneven urban green space: the impact of political economy on race and ethnicity in producing environmental inequality in Milwaukee. Urban Affairs Review. 42(1):3-25.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
21. ↵
    1. IBM corp

    . 2016. IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
22. ↵
    1. Kenney WA,
    2. Idziak C

    . 2000. The state of Canada’s municipal forests—1996 to 1998. The Forestry Chronicle. 76(2):231-234.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    1. Kenney WA,
    2. Van Wassenaer PJ,
    3. Satel AL

    . 2011. Criteria and indicators for strategic urban forest planning and management. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 37(3):108-117.

    OpenUrl
24. ↵
    1. Kirkpatrick JB,
    2. Davison A,
    3. Daniels GD

    . 2012. Resident attitudes towards trees influence the planting and removal of different types of trees in eastern Australian cities. Landscape and Urban Planning. 107(2):147-158.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
25. ↵
    1. Koeser AK,
    2. Gilman EF,
    3. Paz M,
    4. Harchick C

    . 2014. Factors influencing urban tree planting program growth and survival in Florida, United States. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 13(4):655-661.

    OpenUrl
26. ↵
    1. Kuhns MR,
    2. Bragg HA,
    3. Blahna DJ

    . 2002. Involvement of women and minorities in the urban forestry profession. Journal of Arboriculture. 28(1):27-34.

    OpenUrl
27. ↵
    1. Matsuoka RH,
    2. Kaplan R

    . 2008. People needs in the urban landscape: analysis of landscape and urban planning contributions. Landscape and Urban Planning. 84(1):7-19.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
28. ↵
    1. McKinney ML

    . 2002. Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation: the impacts of urbanization on native species are poorly studied, but educating a highly urbanized human population about these impacts can greatly improve species conservation in all ecosystems. BioScience. 52(10):883-890.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
29. ↵
    1. McPherson EG,
    2. Maco SE,
    3. Simpson JR,
    4. Peper PJ,
    5. Xiao Q,
    6. VanDerZanden AM,
    7. Bell N

    . 2002. Western Washington and Oregon community tree guide: benefits, costs and strategic planting. Silverton (OR, USA): International Society of Arboriculture, Pacific Northwest Chapter. 58 p.
30. ↵
    1. McPherson EG,
    2. Simpson JR

    . 1999. Carbon dioxide reduction through urban forestry: guidelines for professional and volunteer tree planters. Albany (CA): US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. General Technical Report No. PSW-GTR-171. 237 p.
31. ↵
    1. Millar MM,
    2. Dillman DA

    . 2011. Improving response to web and mixed-mode surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly. 75(2):249-269.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
32. ↵
    1. Mullaney J,
    2. Lucke T,
    3. Trueman SJ

    . 2015. A review of benefits and challenges in growing street trees in paved urban environments. Landscape and Urban Planning. 134:157-166.

    OpenUrl
33. ↵
    1. Nowak DJ,
    2. Walton JT

    . 2005. Projected urban growth (2000–2050) and its estimated impact on the US forest resource. Journal of Forestry. 103(8):383-389.

    OpenUrlWeb of Science
34. ↵
    1. Perkins HA,
    2. Heynen N,
    3. Wilson J

    . 2004. Inequitable access to urban reforestation: the impact of urban political economy on housing tenure and urban forests. Cities. 21(4):291-299.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
35. ↵
    1. Pincetl S,
    2. Gillespie T,
    3. Pataki DE,
    4. Saatchi S,
    5. Saphores JD

    . 2013. Urban tree planting programs, function or fashion? Los Angeles and urban tree planting campaigns. GeoJournal. 78(3):475-493.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
36. ↵
    1. Qualtrics

    . 2017. Qualtrics software. Provo (UT, USA). https://qualtrics.com
37. ↵
    1. Ries PD

    . 2017. Evaluating the outcomes and impacts of the Municipal Forestry Institute Leadership Education Program [dissertation]. Jefferson City (TN, USA): Carson-Newman University. http://www.cn.edu/libraries/tiny_mce/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/Dissertations/Dissertations2017/Paul_D_Ries.pdf
38. ↵
    1. Rines D,
    2. Kane B,
    3. Kittredge DB,
    4. Ryan HDP,
    5. Butler B

    . 2011. Measuring urban forestry performance and demographic associations in Massachusetts, USA. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 10(2):113-118.

    OpenUrl
39. ↵
    1. Roloff A,
    2. Korn S,
    3. Gillner S

    . 2009. The climate-species-matrix to select tree species for urban habitats considering climate change. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 8(4):295-308.

    OpenUrl
40. ↵
    1. Rosenthal R

    . 1991. Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Vol. 6, Applied Social Research Methods. Riverside (CA, USA): Sage.
41. ↵
    1. Roy S,
    2. Byrne J,
    3. Pickering C

    . 2012. A systematic quantitative review of urban tree benefits, costs, and assessment methods across cities in different climatic zones. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 11(4):351-363.

    OpenUrl
42. ↵
    1. Santamour FS Jr.

    . 1990. Trees for urban planting: diversity, uniformity, and common sense. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the Metropolitan Tree Improvement Alliance (METRIA) 7. p. 57-65.
43. ↵
    1. Santamour FS Jr.

    . 2004. Trees for urban planting: diversity uniformity, and common sense. In: The Overstory book: cultivating connections with trees. Hōlualoa (HI, USA): Permanent Agriculture Resources. p. 396-399.
44. ↵
    1. Sawka M,
    2. Millward AA,
    3. Mckay J,
    4. Sarkovich M

    . 2013. Growing summer energy conservation through residential tree planting. Landscape and Urban Planning. 113:1-9.

    OpenUrl
45. ↵
    1. Konijnendijik C,
    2. Nilsson K,
    3. Randrup T,
    4. Schipperijin J

    1. Sieghardt M,
    2. Mursch-Radlgruber E,
    3. Paoletti E,
    4. Couenberg E,
    5. Dimitrakopoulus A,
    6. Rego F,
    7. Hatzistathis A,
    8. Randrup TB

    . 2005. The abiotic urban environment: impact of urban growing conditions on urban vegetation. In: Konijnendijik C, Nilsson K, Randrup T, Schipperijin J, editors. Urban forests and trees. Berlin (Germany): Springer. p. 281-323.
46. ↵
    1. Spittlehouse DL,
    2. Stewart RB

    . 2004. Adaptation to climate change in forest management. Journal of Ecosystems and Management. 4(1).
47. ↵
    1. Sydnor TD,
    2. Subburayalu S,
    3. Bumgardner M

    . 2010. Contrasting Ohio nursery stock availability with community planting needs. Journal of Arboriculture. 36(1):47.

    OpenUrl
48. ↵
    1. Vaske J

    . 2008. Survey research and analysis: applications in parks, recreation and human dimensions. State College (PA, USA): Venture Publications.
49. ↵
    1. Vogt J,
    2. Gillner S,
    3. Hofmann M,
    4. Tharang A,
    5. Dettmann S,
    6. Gerstenberg T,
    7. Schmidt C,
    8. Gebauer H,
    9. Van de Riet K,
    10. Berger U,
    11. Roloff A

    . 2017. Citree: a database supporting tree selection for urban areas in temperate climate. Landscape and Urban Planning. 157:14-25.

    OpenUrl
50. ↵
    1. Young RF

    . 2010. Managing municipal green space for ecosystem services. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 9(4):313-321.

    OpenUrl