Toronto's Strategic Forest Management Plan 2012-2022

SUSTAINING AND EXPANDING THE URBAN FOREST:
TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
2012-2022
Parks, Forestry and Recreation
Acknowledgements
The Parks, Forestry and Recreation Division would like to extend our sincere thanks to the representatives
from City divisions, agencies and organizations who provided technical and strategic input into the
development of Torontos Strategic Forest Management Plan. We also thank all of our community partners
who helped make this project possible. Their support and insight have added tremendous value to this plan.
Toronto City Council adopted this Plan at its meeting of February 20 and 21, 2013.
For reference purposes, this document should be cited as follows; Sustaining & Expanding the Urban
Forest: Torontos Strategic Forest Management Plan. Toronto, Ontario. City of Toronto, Parks, Forestry
and Recreation, Urban Forestry, 2013.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................. vii
Vision .............................................................................................................................................viii
Strategic Goals...............................................................................................................................viii
Challenges to Sustaining and Expanding Torontos Urban Forest.................................................. ix
Measuring Performance and Progress...........................................................................................xiii
Conclusion......................................................................................................................................xiv
1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................... 1
2. OVERVIEW OF THE STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN...................................................... 5
2.1 Guiding Plans and Strategies..................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Role of the Urban Forestry Branch ............................................................................................ 7
2.3 Stakeholder Engagement in Plan Development......................................................................... 8
3. VISION & GOALS..................................................................................................................................... 9
Vision................................................................................................................................................9
Strategic Goals................................................................................................................................. 9
4. CONTEXT FOR THIS PLAN................................................................................................................... 11
4.1 Policy Context........................................................................................................................... 11
4.2 Historical Context..................................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Biophysical Context ................................................................................................................. 14
5. STATE OF THE FOREST RESOURCE.................................................................................................. 17
5.1 Urban Forest Biodiversity ........................................................................................................ 17
5.2 Urban Forest Structure ........................................................................................................... 18
5.3 Urban Forest Distribution.......................................................................................................... 19
5.4 Analysis of Plantable Spaces................................................................................................... 20
6. KEY URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS........................................ 23
6.1 Forest Health Threats............................................................................................................... 23
6.1.1 Forest Health Threats: Current Practices and Challenges............................................. 23
6.1.2 Forest Health Threats: Solutions..................................................................................... 26
6.2 Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations................................................................. 26
6.2.1 Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations:
Current Practices and Challenges........................................................................................... 26
6.2.2 Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations: Solutions...................................... 29
6.3 Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban Forest.......................................... 30
6.3.1 Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban Forest:
Current Practices and Challenges........................................................................................... 30
6.3.2 Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban Forest: Solutions................ 35
6.4 Climate Change Impacts.......................................................................................................... 38
iii
6.4.1 Climate Change Impacts: Current Practices and Challenges......................................... 38

6.4.2 Climate Change Impacts: Solutions................................................................................ 40
6.5 Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest........................................................................... 42
6.5.1 Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest: Current Practices and Challenges.......... 42
6.5.2 Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest: Solutions................................................. 43
6.6 Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the Urban Forest ...................... 45
6.6.1 Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the
Urban Forest: Selected Current Practices and Challenges..................................................... 45
6.6.2 Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the
Urban Forest: Solutions........................................................................................................... 48
7. MONITORING PROGRESS AND MEASURING SUCCESS CRITERIA AND INDICATORS OF
FOREST SUSTAINABILITY.........................................................................................................................................50
8. CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................ 55
9. GLOSSARY OF TERMS......................................................................................................................... 56
APPENDIX 1 URBAN FOREST SPECIES COMPOSITION .................................................................. 58
APPENDIX 2 DEVELOPMENT OF PRELIMINARY PLANTING TARGETS .......................................... 61
iv
PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION
List of Figures
Figure 1 Torontos Brickworks in the Don River Valley, 2006.................................................................. 13
Figure 2 Construction of the Bloor Viaduct, 1917.................................................................................... 14
Figure 3 College Street near Yonge Street, Toronto Archives, 1912....................................................... 14
Figure 4 City of Torontos urban forest canopy in relation to its parkland................................................ 15
Figure 5 Place of origin of tree species within Torontos urban forest..................................................... 18
Figure 6 Composition of the urban forest with the 10 most common species within Toronto.................. 18
Figure 7 Percent of total tree population by stem diameter (dbh) class within Toronto........................... 19
Figure 8 Average tree cover by Toronto neighbourhood (Spatial Analysis Laboratory,

University of Vermont and USDA Forest Service)..................................................................... 19
Figure 9 Satellite imagery (left) and related land cover classification imagery (right)............................. 20
Figure 10 An example of land cover change in the High Park area of Toronto, Bloor Street West........... 22
Figure 11 Urban Forestry and Asian Long-horned Beetle management team of

municipal partners and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency................................................ 24
Figure 12 Ash lined Toronto street before Emerald Ash Borer infestation................................................. 25
Figure 13 Same Toronto street after Emerald Ash Borer removals........................................................... 25
Figure 14 Detail inspection map for hazard tree pilot................................................................................ 27
Figure 15 Forestry data collectors using mobile technology for data entry on site.................................... 28
Figure 16 Urban Forestry staff at work...................................................................................................... 29
Figure 17 Example of large scale removal of natural soil during site development................................... 32
Figure 18 Parkland naturalization.............................................................................................................. 32
Figure 19 Street tree planting.................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 20 Open planting beds on Bloor Street east of Avenue Road........................................................ 33
Figure 21 Roncesvalles Boulevard during sidewalk reconstruction and after........................................... 34
Figure 22 Soil cells. Queensway pilot project in collaboration with Toronto Water. Water from

road and sidewalk diverted to soil cells from storm sewer and analyzed for quality.................. 34
Figure 23 Kimbark Coldstream ravine slope prior to restoration works in fall 2005 (left), and

following restoration works in spring 2011 (right)...................................................................... 36
Figure 24 Detailed view of high heat vulnerability mapping with forest canopy, residential land

use (light blue square hatching) and priority neighbourhood area (diagonal stripe)................. 39
Figure 25 Urban Forestry crews planting trees grown from seed sourced from

natural areas in Toronto............................................................................................................. 41
Figure 26 Glen Stewart Ravine with impacts from intensive use on unsanctioned paths......................... 42
Figure 27 Glen Stewart Ravine boardwalk and staircase designed to limit user impacts

on seepage area and sandy slopes.......................................................................................... 44
Figure 28 Aerial view of different canopy cover in different land uses:

residential (top) and industrial (bottom)..................................................................................... 46
Figure 29 Crothers Woods Trail................................................................................................................. 47
Figure 30 High Park black oak savannah management prescribed burn............................................... 48
Figure 31 Parkland Naturalization Program planting event - Trees Across Toronto.................................. 49
List of Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
A summary of information about Torontos urban forest.............................................................vii

Benefits of the urban forest......................................................................................................... 4
Toronto`s urban forest................................................................................................................. 5
Potential canopy expansion by land use category.................................................................... 21
Examples of the ways urbanization can impact canopy cover and tree health......................... 30
Criteria and indicators of urban forest sustainability for Toronto................................................ 51
View of downtown Toronto from Crothers Woods
vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The urban forest includes all the trees within the citys boundaries. The trees in this forest provide a wide
range of environmental, ecological, social, cultural and economic benefits. The benefits from air pollution
filtration and energy savings (i.e., related to temperature moderation by trees near homes and buildings)
alone have been valued at more than $28 million per year. This value does not include the physical health
benefits related to natural cooling and air quality improvement, or the documented mental health benefits
of simply having trees in our neighbourhoods. This forest is a shared resource that benefits the entire
community.
Currently, Toronto has approximately 17,000 to 18,000 hectares of urban forest canopy cover provided by
approximately 10.2 million trees. This equates to a range of 26.6% to 28% tree canopy cover. Of the 10.2
million trees, about 6% (600,000 trees) are City-owned street trees, 34% (3.5 million trees) are in City
parks and natural areas, and 60% (6.1 million trees) are on private lands. The citys urban forest contains
at least 116 different tree species, with a high proportion (68%) being less than 15.2 cm in diameter.
Despite the many challenges of
Table 1 - A summary of information about Torontos urban forest
growing in an urban environment,
MEASURE
RESULTS
81% of Torontos tree population is
Number of trees in Toronto
approximately 10.2 million
estimated to be in good condition.
Toronto has long recognized the
importance of the urban forest and
the benefits it provides and over
the past decade has improved
tree-related policies, by-laws and
guidelines to better support the
protection and enhancement of
its urban forest. With City Council
adopting the goal of increasing
tree canopy cover across the city
to between 30% and 40% in July
2004, there was a firm commitment
to growing the citys urban forest to
maximize the potential ecological,
social and economic benefits
derived from urban trees.
Canopy cover
26.6% to 28%*
Canopy cover target
40%
Number of trees on public lands
approximately 4.1 million (40%)
Number of trees on private lands
Characteristics of the trees that

make up the urban forest
68% are less than 15.2 cm diameter

18% are between 15.2 cm diameter
and 30.6 cm diameter
14% are greater than 30.6 cm
diameter
predominance of native species (64%)
Structural value of the urban forest
Approximately $7 billion
Ecological services** provided

by the urban forest
valued at $28.2 million annually
Carbon storage
valued at $25 million
*Canopy cover estimates for the city have been generated using different methods and results
have varied from 19.9% to 28%, but the most current assessment indicates the range is between 26.6% and 28%.
**This valuation only includes an estimate for: air pollution removal, energy savings, avoided
carbon related to energy conserved and carbon sequestration.
The City of Toronto has been called a city within a park in recognition of its extensive parks, treed and
natural areas. However, there are threats to the urban forest that must be addressed and managed
if it is to continue to provide benefits to the community. Sustaining & Expanding the Urban Forest:
Torontos Strategic Forest Management Plan (referred to as the Plan in this document) was developed
as a means to identify the efforts required to achieve a healthy, sustainable urban forest with a goal of
providing 40% canopy cover. Although most of the recommended actions are to be implemented by the
Urban Forestry branch, the Plan identifies issues that are city-wide in scope and are of interest to other
City divisions, external agencies, residents, businesses, other stakeholders and the community-at-large.
Successful implementation of the actions identified in the Plan can only be achieved in partnership and
cooperation with all of these parties.
The City of Toronto continues to invest in many activities and initiatives that support both the sustainability
vii
and the expansion of its urban forest in support of this big picture goal. The Plan is meant to provide
the context and direction for these activities and initiatives over the next 10 years. Direction is provided,
at the highest level, through the vision and strategic goals for the Plan. More specific direction for
implementation is provided through a series of actions as well as a monitoring plan with specific indicators
of success against which progress in meeting the goals and objectives of the Plan will be measured.
Vision
The long term vision for the urban forest and strategic goals for this Plan were developed in consultation
with City staff from various divisions, external stakeholders and the community.
Long Term Vision

Torontos diverse urban forest is the vital green infrastructure that creates
healthy neighbourhoods, supports habitat and biodiversity, promotes clean air
and water, offers opportunities for recreation and education, fosters economic
prosperity and enhances quality of life for everyone in the city.
Vision for the 10 Year Life of this Plan

The 10 year vision was also developed in consultation with others and provides a vision that has been
tailored to the time frame of this Plan.
A healthy and expanding urban forest, incorporating sound urban forestry

practices and community partnership.
Strategic Goals
1. INCREASE CANOPY COVER
Protect, maintain and expand the urban forest to achieve a healthy, sustainable forest with a canopy
cover of 40%.
2. ACHIEVE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION
Achieve an equitable distribution of the urban forest, increasing canopy where it is most needed.
3. INCREASE BIODIVERSITY
Increase biodiversity to improve urban forest resiliency and respond to climate change.
4. INCREASE AWARENESS
Increase awareness of the value of trees, the natural environment and the sensitivity of these
resources.
5. PROMOTE STEWARDSHIP
Promote stewardship and education of the multiple benefits of the urban forest and build collaborative
partnerships for expanding the forest.
6. IMPROVE MONITORING
Improve information management systems and enhance the ability to inventory, monitor and analyze
the urban forest.
viii
The Urban Forestry branch of the Citys Parks, Forestry and Recreation division plays an integral role in
managing Torontos urban forest. This branch has led development of this Plan and will be responsible for
ensuring much of its implementation. It is through the performance of Urban Forestrys core programs and
functions organized under four service pillars that the goals of the Plan will be brought to fruition.
Four Service Pillars

1.
2.
3.
4.
Maintenance of the Urban Forest

Protection of the Urban Forest and Natural Heritage
Planting to Expand the Urban Forest
Planning to Ensure Strategic Advancement of Forest Management Objectives
Challenges to Sustaining and Expanding Torontos Urban

Forest
The Plan identifies six key challenges currently being faced by the City in sustaining and expanding its
urban forest. A description of each of these challenges, including current practices and actions is included
in the Plan and has been summarized below.
Forest Health Threats

Through integrated pest management, Urban Forestry monitors and treats pests using the most
appropriate method of control. Urgent forest health issues are addressed in partnership with other
agencies. Currently, the most significant threat to the urban forest is Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) (Agrilus
planipennis). As previously reported, Toronto could lose approximately 8.4% of the tree population, or
860,000 ash trees (Fraxinus spp.) (2.2% to 2.3% canopy coverage) worth an estimated $570 million in
structural value. It is necessary to focus on implementation of the EAB management strategy in order to
mitigate the impacts extensive tree mortality will have on the tree canopy.
While there is no way to eradicate this pest,
individual trees may be protected through tree
injection with products registered in Canada for
use against EAB. The tree injection program
using the pesticide TreeAzin against EAB has
been expanded in Toronto. In 2012, over 4,000
ash trees (in select parks and street trees) have
been injected. Thousands of additional candidate
trees have been identified for potential injection in
subsequent years. However, the City of Toronto
will be required to remove thousands of dead and
dying ash trees on streets, in parks and in natural
areas. All street trees and a significant number of
park trees lost to EAB will be replaced.
The European Gypsy Moth (Lymantria dispar) is
an introduced defoliating insect that is considered
a widespread pest in North America. The caterpillar (larval stage of the insect), eats the leaves of trees
making them more susceptible to disease and damage from other insects.
Injection of an ash tree with TreeAzin
ix
In 2007 and 2008, the City of

Toronto undertook an integrated
pest management program to
control the European Gypsy Moth
outbreak. This included aerial and
ground spray programs to control
the outbreak levels in selected
areas of the city. Other control
measures such as tree banding
and vacuuming of egg masses
with portable vacuum cleaners
were also used.
European Gypsy Moth will always

be present in the landscape at
varying levels, with populations
rising and falling in cycles
Removing European Gypsy Moth egg masses with portable vacuum cleaners
dependent on natural controls
and the weather. In 2012, levels of European Gypsy Moth were seen to rise in some areas of the city.
Control measures, including ground based and aerial spraying of the biological control agent Bacillus
thuringiensis subspecies kurstaki (Btk) have been implemented successfully in the past and will be
utilized in the future to control high population levels of this insect.
Actions to address forest health threats include among other things, continued communications and
outreach programs; maintenance of consistent funding to a city-wide forest health care program;
monitoring the effectiveness of pest management programs; and refining strategies going forward.
Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations

Urban Forestry is responsible for maintaining approximately four million trees in a healthy and safe
condition. Maintenance of this important resource has largely been done on a reactive basis where
members of the public request maintenance services when trees are suspected to be in need of attention.
This type of complaint-based, reactive service is not efficient and does not adequately meet public
expectations. Reactive maintenance reduces the opportunity to
perform corrective pruning or other preventative maintenance
activities thus resulting in more frequent storm breaks and
shortened tree life spans. A proactive systematic maintenance
regime for trees based on geographic area is a best practice that
enables operational efficiencies to be realized and provides tree
maintenance that will mitigate risk and improve the long term
health of trees. Urban Forestrys practice is currently in transition
from reactive based maintenance to proactive area tree
maintenance.
Tree maintenance requirements and expectations will be addressed in part through progressive
implementation of a city-wide proactive area tree maintenance program to bring the average pruning
cycle to approximately 7 years; reducing tree service delay from the current 6 to 9 months, to 3 to 6
months; reducing tree mortality in new street tree plantings; and improving public awareness of proper
tree care and maintenance techniques.
Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban Forest

Urbanization continues to have impacts on trees and the natural environment. Briefly summarized, some
of the impacts are as follows:

increased development pressure results in fragmentation of available habitat for the growth of
trees and other vegetation,
increased density of development results in less soil volume for root growth and less aerial space
for tree crown spread and development,
salt levels in soils are increased as a result of de-icing salt use in winter months, causing
dehydration in trees,
conflicts with utilities and other service infrastructure result in less area for tree growth,
increased urbanization also contributes to stream bed erosion and erosion of forest soils caused
by increased volume and intensity of run-off, and
expanding areas of development also limit permeability and soil moisture available to support the
growth of trees
Efforts to grow trees along city streets

as well as in new subdivisions can be
hampered by the severely altered soils
following site development. The typical
result is site conditions that may limit the
growth of large-stature shade trees and
many sensitive native species that support
biodiversity in the city.
As stated in the Citys Official Plan,
protecting the natural environment and
urban forest should not be compromised
by growth, insensitivity to the needs of the
environment or neglect.
One of the fundamental aspects of
increasing tree canopy coverage across
the city is protection of the existing resource. Tree protection is currently accomplished through
implementation of various tree and natural feature protection by-laws which provide opportunities to
educate the public on the benefits of trees. Efforts to protect trees need to be improved.
Some of the actions identified for addressing this challenge include: developing mapping systems that
support planting activities; monitoring change in canopy coverage; identifying strategic planting areas;
increasing compliance with tree protection requirements through enhanced monitoring; and working with
green community organizations to realize canopy targets in communities and neighbourhoods.
Climate Change Impacts

According to Natural Resources Canada, some of the predicted impacts of climate change in the coming
decades include warmer winters and longer growing seasons, changes in the seasonality of precipitation
and extreme events such as droughts and heavy rainfall, expanded ranges of insects and increased
over-winter survival rates, and increased frequency and severity of storm events including increased wind
velocity.
xi
Though the exact nature of the impacts of

climate change on the citys urban forest are not
clear, certain management implications and
related effects on required resources can be
anticipated and strategies to adapt to climate
change must be implemented.
Actions to be taken for climate change

adaptation include: increasing and adapting tree
species planting lists to include more species;
developing a database with mapping of robust
populations of native species for seed collection;
promoting new standards for tree planting in hard landscapes that accommodate adequate soil volume;
and collaborating with Toronto Public Health on achieving common objectives such as reducing heat
vulnerability in low canopy areas.
Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest

Torontos ravines and the citys natural heritage system are exceptional assets that support a diversity of
wildlife and native plant species. However, increasing recreational pressures on the natural areas have
degraded the natural environment
and are impacting sensitive native
species. Some of the challenges
inherent to the effort to minimize or
prevent degradation of parks and
natural areas include:

lack of public awareness of

the sensitivity of these areas,
limited opportunities for
public recreation in some
areas of the city, leading
to misuse and overuse of
certain parklands, and
insufficient recreation/trail
infrastructure to direct activity
appropriately outside of
sensitive sites to minimize
disturbance impacts
The effects of high recreational use

in natural areas can include soil
compaction from repeated human,
bike and pet traffic. Tree saplings
and groundcover vegetation are
trampled, resulting in a loss of forest
regeneration, disturbance to wildlife
(especially during breeding season)
and increased dispersal of invasive
xii
species. Habitat loss and the introduction of invasive species threaten native biodiversity in Toronto.
Urban Forestry staff, together with other City divisions and stewardship groups, are currently involved
in the stewardship of many ecologically sensitive sites with a view to supporting and encouraging
native biodiversity, restoring the natural integrity of sites and maximizing habitat connectivity. Volunteer
involvement is critical to increasing public awareness of natural environment sensitivity.
Examples of actions for managing recreational pressures on the urban forest include: working with a
range of partners to expand vegetation management in natural areas; maintaining existing stewardship
programs and working with others to expand stewardship to enable more volunteer stewardship in public
natural areas; developing policies to restrict inappropriate uses and prevent further habitat fragmentation
in significant natural areas; and engaging the public through programs supporting private land and garden
naturalization and education.
Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the

Urban Forest
Historically, there has been a lack of tools to evaluate and assign value to trees in the urban environment.
This resulted in a lack of awareness of the value that the urban forest provides to the well-being of a city
and its residents. This resource is not limitless. Everything humans do can have an impact on trees and
natural features resulting in a reduction of the ecological services they provide.
Through existing initiatives
such as volunteer planting, trail
building and other stewardship
events, volunteers and the diverse
communities at large are educated
about the natural environment
and gain an understanding of the
importance of restoration and
how such activities contribute to
enhancing the ecological value of
the citys natural environment.
Actions presented in the Plan to
improve awareness of the value
and sensitivity of the urban forest
resource include: increasing
public education regarding natural area management activities, trail systems and appropriate user
conduct through a co-ordinated communication strategy; proceeding with a natural surface trail study;
encouraging the stewardship of privately owned sites adjacent to public sites by private partners; and
continuing to make data available to the public to facilitate studies of local forest conditions.
Measuring Performance and Progress

This Plan covers a period of 10 years, following which time a review will be conducted to determine if the
City is meeting its goals, ensure that any new issues affecting the urban forest are sufficiently addressed
and revise the Plan as necessary to continue work towards achievement of the long term vision.
xiii
Progress towards forest sustainability and success of the Plan will be evaluated and measured through a
monitoring plan (included in Section 7) that includes a series of criteria and indicators that are aligned with
the three components understood to be the foundation for achieving urban forest sustainability (i.e., the
vegetative resource, appropriate management of the resource, and a strong community framework). The
objectives and indicators with targets have all been tailored to the Citys current challenges and goals.
Factors such as simplicity, cost effectiveness, reliability and objectivity were also considered in selecting
the criteria and indicators of success.
Conclusion
Toronto has large connected natural areas that provide the core of the forest system, as well as small
groupings of trees and individual trees along its streets, in its parks, as well as among a variety of private
land use types including residential, commercial and industrial areas. This urban forest represents a
tremendously valuable resource to the city and the people who live, work and play here.
In an urban setting a range of management strategies are required to deal with the various challenges
faced by trees and the urban forest as a whole. As a result of these challenges, this extensive natural
resource requires management in order for it to be sustained and enhanced, in accordance with City
Councils direction. Some of the approaches and tools used by the Urban Forestry branch are innovative
and precedent setting. It is important to the people who live and work in Toronto that this resource be
protected, maintained and expanded to enable continued enjoyment of shady streets, parks and natural
areas. Trees are a big part of what makes Toronto a very livable city; a city within a park.
Although this Plan will be led by the Urban Forestry branch, its full and effective implementation depends
on the support and cooperation of other City divisions and partners in the public and private sectors,
including local businesses and members of the community. With approximately 40% of the resource in
public ownership and the remaining 60% of the resource in private ownership, partnerships, internally and
externally, are fundamental to making progress towards the goal of expanding the quality and quantity of
the urban forest across the city.
xiv
1. INTRODUCTION
What is the Urban Forest?
The urban forest includes all trees, other vegetation and their habitat within a citys boundaries. This
includes: trees along city streets; trees in parks, ravines and natural areas; trees in front and back yards;
and trees in landscaped open spaces associated with health care facilities, academic institutions, golf
courses, cemeteries and local businesses. It is a shared resource that benefits the entire community.
Why is the Urban Forest Important?

Toronto is the fifth largest municipality in North America with a population of 2.6 million people. The
extensive ravine and green space system within Toronto sets it apart from other North American cities of
similar size. This includes approximately 17,000 to 18,000 hectares of urban forest and approximately
10.2 million trees. Torontos forest resource is estimated to have a structural value of approximately $7
billion and provides ecological services worth more than $28.2 million to the community every year in
pollution removal, carbon sequestration and energy conservation alone. The urban tree canopy and
associated green spaces contribute significantly to the citys consistent ranking as one of the most livable
large urban areas in the world1.
It is well documented that urban forests provide significant environmental and community benefits and
thanks to evolving research tools, trees are being increasingly recognized as valuable municipal assets.
If properly managed, the urban forest can support a variety of environmental functions, provide a range
of economic benefits and make significant contributions to human health and community well-being. As
articulated in Toronto Public Healths report, Healthy Toronto by Design2, trees, forests and natural areas
are an essential element of a healthy city that supports and promotes the health and well-being of its
citizens. Some of the documented benefits are summarized below.
Environmental and ecological benefits:

trees improve local air and surface water quality, make urban environments more hospitable and
contribute to improved public health and well-being in very tangible ways,
the citys urban forest helps mitigate the impacts of climate change by sequestering and storing
carbon. It is estimated that the value of this carbon storage is about $25 million in Toronto,
trees help with storm water management by stabilizing steep slopes and taking up water through
their roots helping to control erosion and improve surface water quality. These benefits are
particularly relevant in the citys ravine areas, and
trees and natural areas provide habitats for a wide range of resident and migratory species of
wildlife, as well as hundreds of native plant species
Human health and community benefits:

open space and forests provide opportunities for exercise, physical activity and relaxation.
Contact with nature is associated with health benefits such as lower blood pressure and
cholesterol levels, enhanced survival after a heart attack, more rapid recovery from surgery, fewer
http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html, http://www.citymayors.com/environment/eiu_bestcities.html
http://www.toronto.ca/health/hphe/pdf/healthytoronto_oct04_11.pdf
minor medical complaints and lower self-reported stress3. Contact with, or playing in nature can
improve concentration and enhance mental development and creativity4. There is also evidence
to suggest that well treed areas reduce crime, encourage better neighbour relationships and
reduce aggressive behaviour5,
trees can also provide indirect health benefits by promoting physical activity by making walking
and cycling routes aesthetically pleasing. Physical inactivity has been clearly linked to increased
risk of chronic diseases such as colon cancer, type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis and heart disease.
Studies have demonstrated that people walk and cycle more if routes have less air pollution
(more trees) and are convenient and safe6,
large urban centres, such as Toronto, are subject to high levels of pollution which can create
and aggravate health issues in the population such as respiratory illnesses and severe allergies.
Torontos trees filter the air, removing small particulate matter from the air and releasing oxygen in
return,
the presence of trees and green spaces have been specifically linked to better health in urban
residents. Studies in various locations in the United States and Britain found that children from
green neighbourhoods were less likely to gain weight and had lower asthma rates than their
counterparts in less green neighbourhoods7. In Britain, health disparities between high and low
income populations were also less among families who lived in neighbourhoods with green
surroundings,
trees provide protective shade. Over-exposure to the ultraviolet radiation (UVR) in sunlight
increases the risk of skin cancer, cataracts, premature skin aging and wrinkling. Skin cancer is
the most common cancer diagnosed in Canadians yet it is largely preventable. Children are at
greater risk of UVR over-exposure because they generally spend more time outdoors and have
more sensitive skin than adults8, and
trees can literally save lives by reducing outdoor air temperatures, providing shade and cooling
buildings. Large urban centres get hotter and retain heat longer during heat waves because the
heat is absorbed and stored in concrete and pavement. Toronto Public Health and Environment
Canada have estimated that heat contributes to about 120 deaths per year in Toronto and these
numbers are expected to increase with climate change9. In 2011, Toronto Public Health released
a report, Protecting Vulnerable People from Health Impacts of Extreme Heat, which identified
both the areas of the city where temperatures are the highest and the areas of the city where
residents are most vulnerable to high heat10.This information will be used for developing future
strategies for mitigating this risk
Economic benefits:

it is no coincidence that some of the areas of highest property value in the city are associated
with ravines and other treed green spaces. Research has shown that appraised property
Dannenberg, Andrew, Howard Frumkin, and Richard Jackson. Making Healthy Places: Designing and Building for Health, Well-being, and Sustainability. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2011.
5
Kuo, F.E., and Sullivan, W,C., Environment and Crime in the Inner City: Does Vegetation Reduce Crime?. Environment and Behavior 33.3, (2001):
343-367. Print.
6
Marshall, J.D., Brauer, M., and Frank, Lawrence D. Healthy Neighbourhoods: Walkability and Air Pollution. Environmental Health Perspectives
117.11, (2009):1752-1759. NCBI. Web. 20 July. 2009.
Liu, G.C., Wilson, J.S., Qi, R., and Ying, J. Green Neighborhoods, Food Retail and Childhood Overweight: Differences by Population Density. American
Journal of Health Promotion 21(4 Suppl), (2007):317-325. Print.
7
8
http://www.toronto.ca/health/resources/tcpc/pdf/shade_guidelines.pdf
http://www.toronto.ca/health/hphe/air_quality/pdf/protecting_ppl_in_extreme_heat.pdf
10
values of homes that are adjacent to parks and open spaces are typically higher than those of
comparable properties elsewhere11,
the benefits of trees in commercial areas are also well-documented. For example, in one study
rental rates of commercial office properties were about 7% higher on sites having a quality
landscape, which included trees12. Other studies show that consumers claim they are willing to
pay more for products in downtown shopping areas with trees versus in comparable districts
without13,
trees that are at least 6 m tall and within 18 m of a residential or small building provide direct
energy savings by reducing cooling costs in the summer as well as reducing heating costs in the
winter (particularly coniferous trees). These savings are linked to shading, windbreak effects, and
local microclimate moderation14, and
trees, if properly maintained, can help support the function and extend the life of grey
infrastructure (such as sidewalks and roads) in urban areas
Currently, over 80% of

the Canadian population
lives in urban areas15.
This trend is expected
to continue and as a
result it is anticipated that
Torontos population will
continue to rise over the
next several decades.
To ensure that Toronto
remains one of the most
livable cities in the world,
the size and health of
the urban forest must be
increased to an extent
that is both sustainable
and practical within a
major international urban
centre. This Plan sets
out a vision, goals and a
series of actions for progressively improving the quality and quantity of the urban forest so that all those
who live, work and play in the city can continue to derive the full range of benefits that the urban forest
provides. The future sustainability and expansion of the urban forest will require the support of the entire
community.
11
Anderson, L.M., and Cordell, H.K. Influence of Trees on Residential Property Values in Athens, Georgia (U.S.A.): A survey based on actual sales
prices. Landscape and Urban Planning 15.1-2 (1988): 153-164. Print.
12
Crompton, John L. The Proximate Principle: The Impact of Parks, Open Space and Water Features on Residential Property Values and Property Tax
Base, Ashburn, VA: National Recreation and Parks Association, 2004.
13
Wolf, Kathleen. Trees Mean Business: City Trees in the Retail Streetscape. Main Street News 263 (2009): 1-9. naturewithin. Web. August. 2009.
14
TRCA. Town of Ajax Urban Forest Study, Part A. 2009.
15
Statistics Canada. http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo62a-eng.htm
Table 2 - Benefits of the urban forest
ENVIRONMENTAL
Helps mitigate the effects of climate change
Improves local and regional air quality
Reduces summer air and stream water temperatures
Reduces urban heat island effects
Improves local soil and surface water quality
Reduces storm water runoff
Reduces stream channel erosion
Provides habitat for terrestrial and aquatic wildlife
COMMUNITY
Improves quality of life
Improves health and well-being
Provides cooling, shade and blocks UV radiation
Buffers wind and noise
Promotes outdoor activities
Provides aesthetic value
Supports educational and recreational opportunities
ECONOMIC
Decreases heating and cooling costs
Enhances tourism and viability of business areas
Reduces demand on storm water treatment operations
and valley infrastructure repair
Increases property values
Positively influences consumer behaviour
2. OVERVIEW OF THE STRATEGIC FOREST

MANAGEMENT PLAN
This Strategic Forest Management
Plan for the City of Toronto is a
functional document that provides
regional context, outlines current
practices and defines future
direction for local urban forest
management. The Plan builds on
the technical information about the
urban forest gathered through the
following two studies:

Every Tree Counts: A Portrait

of Torontos Urban Forest16,
and
Assessing Urban Forest
Effects and Values, Torontos
Urban Forest17
The key findings from these studies

are presented in Section 5 of this
Plan and are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3 - Torontos urban forest
MEASURE
RESULTS
Number of trees in Toronto
approximately 10.2 million
Canopy cover
26.6% to 28%*
Canopy cover target
40%
Number of trees on public lands
Number of trees on private lands
Characteristics of the trees that

make up the urban forest
68% are less than 15.2 cm diameter

18% are between 15.2 cm diameter
and 30.6 cm diameter
14% are greater than 30.6 cm
diameter
predominance of native species (64%)
Structural value of the urbanforest
Approximately $7 billion
Ecological services** provided

by the urban forest
valued at $28.2 million annually
Carbon storage
valued at $25 million
*Canopy cover estimates for the city have been generated using different methods and results
have varied from 19.9% to 28%, but the most current assessment indicates the range is between 26.6% and 28%.
**This valuation only includes an estimate for: air pollution removal, energy savings, avoided
carbon related to energy conserved and carbon sequestration.
A successful plan must identify a thoughtful, disciplined approach to achieving goals and objectives while
being sufficiently flexible to enable adaptation. The key question over the next several years will be how
best to allocate available resources to sustain and expand an urban forest that is healthy and supports
all life in the city. This Plan provides such direction and defines the path for the City and particularly for
the Urban Forestry branch. It also considers the important role of private landowners, businesses and all
residents of Toronto in this effort, the importance of effective outreach to promote the significance of the
urban forest and the use of new tools for further refining the success of programs.
This Plan provides direction for forest management over the next 10 years through the vision, (both longterm and for the 10 year time frame of this Plan), strategic goals and a series of actions that address the
key management challenges identified for Torontos urban forest.
A key aspect of the Plan is that it is intended to be adaptive to enable timely response to new research,
technological advancements and changes in current and future urban forest threats. It also includes a
detailed monitoring plan (see Section 7) with specific success criteria to allow for the ongoing assessment
of the state of Torontos urban forest. While this Plan is for a ten year period, it is understood that the
urban forest is a long-lived resource that will require additional plans to direct ongoing future management
and monitoring.
16
Parks, Forestry & Recreation, Urban Forestry. Every Tree Counts: A Portrait of Torontos Urban Forest, Toronto: City of Toronto, 2010.
17
Nowak, David. J., et al. Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values: Torontos Urban Forest, Newtown Square, PA: US Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, 2012 in press.
This Plan identifies both long term and short term actions for achieving goals. Short term actions include:

actions for outreach, expanding awareness of the urban forest,

establishment of best standards for tree maintenance, tree planting and establishment,
enhanced coordination between programs for sharing best practices,
refinement of planning tools/methods that further enable:
detailed urban forest analysis for proactive maintenance planning,
identification of environmental priorities for management, canopy gaps and planting
opportunities, and
use of defined performance measures
Longer term actions are based on a systematic planning framework centered on urban forest health and
sustainability and include such deliverables as:

increased canopy cover and the equitable distribution of tree canopy,

increased biodiversity of trees and other vegetation, and a reduction in non-native invasive
species, and
uneven tree size class distribution with a shift in the tree size class distribution towards an
increase in the number of mid to large sized trees
The longer term actions will need to be addressed as part of this, as well as future Plans.
Implementation of this Plan will be achieved through the core programs and functions of the Parks,
Forestry and Recreation division (through annual operating plans as well as the multi-year Service Plan),
as well as in cooperation with other City divisions and agencies, external stakeholders, the community
and through special projects resulting from the strategic planning process.
2.1 Guiding Plans and Strategies

The Plan is informed by the vision and policies for green spaces, clean air and water, tree lined streets
and protecting the natural environment expressed in Torontos Official Plan18. The Plan includes strategies
that help address a number of City Council adopted environmental initiatives. Key plans, strategies and
guidelines that have been considered in the development of this Plan are:

18
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/official_plan/introduction.htm
19
http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=972bab501d8ce310VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD
20
http://www.toronto.ca/changeisintheair/pdf/clean_air_action_plan.pdf
21
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2008/pe/bgrd/backgroundfile-12950.pdf
22
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/Toronto-Potential-ESA-Report-2008.pdf
23
http://www.trca.on.ca/dotAsset/26746.pdf
24
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2011/hl/bgrd/backgroundfile-39469.pdf
25
Torontos Wet Weather Flow Master Plan19

Climate Change, Clean Air and Sustainable Energy Plan20
The Climate Change Adaptation Strategy21
Identification of Potential Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs) in the City of Toronto22
Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) - Terrestrial Natural Heritage System Strategy23
Toronto Public Health - Protecting Vulnerable People from Health Impacts of Extreme Heat24
Shade Guidelines25
http://www.toronto.ca/health/resources/tcpc/pdf/shade_guidelines.pdf
Toronto Streetscape Manual26

The Walkable City: Neighbourhood Design and Preferences, Travel Choices and Health27
2.2 Role of the Urban Forestry Branch

The Urban Forestry branch of the Citys Parks, Forestry and Recreation division plays a critical role in
the maintenance and management of Torontos urban forest. This branch has led development of this
Plan and will be responsible for ensuring much of its implementation. Therefore, an overview of Urban
Forestrys key responsibilities is provided below.
Urban Forestrys mandate is based on the following four service pillars:
1. Maintenance of the Urban Forest
Maintaining trees and managing forests is critical for establishing a mature, sustainable urban forest
where public safety is assured. Tree maintenance includes among other things, pruning, tree risk
management, tree removal, and treatment to manage pests. Management of forested and natural
areas also includes silvicultural activities such as prescribed burns and invasive species control.
2. Protection of the Urban Forest and Natural Heritage
In order to improve and expand the urban forest it is imperative that the existing resources and the
opportunities for expanding it in the future are protected. Torontos various tree protection by-laws
(Street Tree, Private Tree, Ravine & Natural Feature Protection, and Parks By-laws) have proven
to be effective tools in achieving this goal. By-law enforcement provides opportunities for education
and increasing awareness about the importance of trees. Continued implementation of these by-laws
must remain a priority. Protecting the conditions and habitats that support tree growth is a priority.
Natural areas define Toronto as a unique city on an international scale. These areas span the
boundaries of both private and City-owned property. Restoration and stewardship of the publicly
owned portions of these areas is a fundamental service provided by Urban Forestry. Management of
privately owned natural areas is achieved by educating property owners and through implementation
of the Ravine and Natural Feature Protection By-law. This work serves to restore, maintain and
enhance these important natural heritage assets for both the short term benefits of current residents
as well as long term benefits for future generations of Toronto residents.
3. Planting to Expand the Urban Forest
Toronto has adopted the goal of increasing tree canopy coverage across the city. One of the primary
ways of achieving this goal is through the planting of new trees, with a focus on planting large canopy
species for maximizing shade wherever space permits. Urban Forestry works with a wide range of
partners internal and external to the City to ensure that all tree planting opportunities are utilized.
Extensive efforts are made to improve planting conditions in order to provide newly planted trees with
the elements required to support mature growth i.e., quality soil, water, oxygen and room to grow both
above grade and below.
Urban forests need to be diverse in species composition to ensure they have the required
resiliency to meet the challenges of the urban environment, ie., insect pests, exotic invasive plants,
development pressures, poor growing conditions and pollution. The Urban Forestry branch advocates
maximizing species diversity through its planting programs.
26
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/urbdesign/streetscapemanual.htm
27
http://www.toronto.ca/health/hphe/pdf/walkable_city.pdf
4. Planning to Ensure Strategic Advancement of Forest Management Objectives

Good planning, including co-ordination with other City divisions and external partners, is a
cornerstone of providing Urban Forestry services effectively and efficiently. This includes
incorporation of new technologies and innovations to increase efficiencies and facilitate education and
knowledge transfer. It also includes the ongoing development and implementation of standards and
policies, as well as coordination of studies, planning and analyses aimed at supporting a consistent
approach to urban forest management issues.
These four service pillars maintain, protect, plant and plan as they relate to Torontos urban forest
represent the four overarching actions for sustaining and enhancing the urban forest. These are provided
by working regularly with various divisions in the City as well as TRCA, particularly with respect to
protecting and managing the citys natural heritage system (which includes woodlots, forested ravines and
other treed areas).
2.3 Stakeholder Engagement in Plan Development

Throughout the planning process, in addition to extensive consultations with representatives from various
City divisions, efforts were made to engage stakeholders and the community in the development of this
Plan. Consultation included:

three facilitated stakeholder workshops in November 2009 and May 2012,

four public and five stakeholder workshops conducted as part of the Parks Plan Consultation
Process during November and December of 2011, and
coordinating with stakeholder groups such as Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests
(LEAF), Trees For Life: The Urban Tree Coalition (for Toronto and surrounding areas), Toronto
District School Board and TRCA to share information and discuss common initiatives
3. VISION & GOALS

Vision
The long term vision for this Plan was developed in consultation with City staff in City Planning, Toronto
Public Health, Transportation Services and Toronto Water. Input was also received from the Clean Air
Partnership, LEAF, and TRCA. The input received from other stakeholders and the community during the
Parks Plan consultations was also carefully considered.
The 10 year vision was also developed and has been tailored to the time frame for this Plan.
Long Term Vision for Toronto`s Urban Forest

Torontos diverse urban forest is the vital green infrastructure that creates
healthy neighbourhoods, supports habitat and biodiversity, promotes clean air
and water, offers opportunities for recreation and education, fosters economic
prosperity and enhances quality of life for everyone in the city.
Vision for the 10 Year Life of this Plan

A healthy and expanding urban forest, incorporating sound urban forestry
practices and community partnership.
As the primary City branch responsible for the implementation of this Plan, Urban Forestrys vision has
direct relevance for and aligns closely with both the 10 year and the long-term vision for this Plan. Urban
Forestrys mission statement is as follows: Through shared commitment and stewardship Urban Forestry
plans, protects, plants and proactively maintains the urban forest. Urban Forestry works with partners
to expand the urban forest and in so doing, progressively improves the quality of life within Canadas
largest city. This statement embodies the Citys commitment to support a wide range of management and
stewardship activities intended to achieve the vision statements provided above.
Strategic Goals
The strategic goals of this Plan are as follows:
1. INCREASE CANOPY COVER
The City is committed to increasing the tree canopy cover as much as is practical and feasible, while
still recognizing the importance of growth and development. A target of 40% has been set to ensure
that the City of Toronto remains one of the most livable cities in the world and that people throughout
the city benefit from the full range of environmental, economic and community services that trees can
provide.
2. ACHIEVE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION
Healthy communities are associated with healthy tree populations for all the social, economic and
ecological benefits they provide. For these reasons, the City and its partners will strive to ensure that
areas with less tree canopy are prioritized for tree planting. This will increase equitable distribution of
the forest and benefits for all communities.
3. INCREASE BIODIVERSITY
Healthy forests are diverse forests. Toronto aims to maximize species diversity as much as possible,
as this provides increased resiliency when certain species are threatened. Supporting, sustaining and
encouraging native biodiversity through management of natural areas helps maintain the integrity of
Torontos natural systems for all life forms that depend on these areas. Ensuring diversity of street
and park trees helps build up resilience to climate change and pests that target certain tree species
over others.
4. INCREASE AWARENESS
Educating the community about the tremendous environmental, economic and social and community
value of the urban forest is also essential.
5. PROMOTE STEWARDSHIP
Sixty percent of the citys urban forest resource is located on private property. Therefore, the
engagement of residents, neighbourhoods, community groups and landowners in tree and forest
stewardship is key.
Issues that have an impact on urban forest expansion are city-wide in scope. Collaboration within
Parks, Forestry and Recreation as well as with other City divisions, agencies and partners to share
information, exchange ideas and leverage resources will be critical to successfully achieving the
goals of this Plan.
6. IMPROVE MONITORING
In order to effectively manage the citys forest resource; a comprehensive and ongoing understanding
of the current state of the forest is required. The urban forest is dynamic and subject to change,
therefore measurement of its composition, structure, size and health must be routinely undertaken.
Enhancing inventory practices and improving data management systems used to store information
about the urban forest, will enable forest managers to analyze and monitor change over time.
10
4. CONTEXT FOR THIS PLAN

The direction provided in this Plan has been shaped by the applicable policies and legislation, the history
of the citys forests and trees and the current biophysical conditions that occur in the city. These are
described briefly below.
4.1 Policy Context

Unlike the United States, where the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service
is extensively involved in urban forest research and partnerships across the country, urban forestry in
Canada remains primarily the responsibility of the municipality (with the exception of the Canadian Food
Inspection Agency (CFIA), as described further on). It is up to each municipality to decide how best to
address the wide range of issues related to its urban forest.
Municipal Policies and Legislation

In Toronto, high level policy direction for urban forestry is provided by the Citys Official Plan. The Official
Plan, which is in the process of being updated, lays out the framework for orderly development in the City,
with consideration for the natural environment as represented by the citys ravines, parks, natural areas,
lake front, watersheds, street trees and other components. The Citys current Official Plan includes
policies to protect Torontos natural heritage system for the long term and includes protection for remnant
forests and trees (i.e., sections 2.3, 3.2, 3.4 and 4.3).
Torontos Official Plan Supports the Urban Forest

Official Plan policy 3.4.1(d) identifies the need for preserving and enhancing the urban forest by:
i. providing suitable growing environments for trees,
ii. increasing tree canopy coverage and diversity, especially of long-lived native and large shade
trees; and
iii. regulating the injury and destruction of trees.
Official Plan policy 3.4.1(b) also identifies the importance of protecting and restoring the health
and integrity of the natural ecosystem, supporting bio-diversity in the city, and targeting ecological
improvements, paying particular attention to:
i. habitat for native flora and fauna and aquatic species;
ii. water and sediment quality;
iii. landforms, ravines, watercourses, wetlands and shoreline and associated biophysical
processes; and
iv. natural linkages between the natural heritage system and other green spaces.
Toronto has also developed a comprehensive set of by-laws and specifications that protect trees in the
city28. These include: the Street Tree, Private Tree and Ravine and Natural Feature Protection By-laws.
The Parks By-law also includes provisions for the protection of trees in parks. All infrastructure works and
development, whether private or public sector, are subject to the provisions of these by-laws.
28
http://www.toronto.ca/trees/bylaws_policies.htm
11
There are trees within Toronto that are also protected under the Ontario Heritage Act or are acknowledged
as heritage trees by Trees Ontario.
The City has acknowledged that climate change is a challenge that needs to be addressed. The
Climate Change, Clean Air and Sustainable Energy Action Plan identified 64 recommendations aimed
at helping to achieve targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas and smog causing pollutants. The
recommendations, which were unanimously adopted by City Council in July 2007, included an affirmation
of Councils commitment to increasing the tree canopy. In July 2008, City Council also unanimously
adopted the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy29 which identified both short and long term actions to
manage the impacts of extreme weather on the Citys services and infrastructure, among other things.
The strategy acknowledged that actions aimed at expanding the tree canopy through maintenance,
protection and planting activities will provide shade, lessen the urban heat island effect, and reduce storm
water runoff and other effects of climate change.
Other City policies and guidelines that influence and affect urban forestry in Toronto include:
the Toronto Green Standard30 for building which includes mandatory requirements for tree
planting as part of project design and approvals, and
the Design Guidelines for Trees in Surface Parking Lots31 recommend a minimum number of
trees per parking space in new developments
These and other policies are implemented through the planning process in consultation with Urban
Forestry staff.
Provincial Policies and Legislation

Many of the trees within the citys urban forest are also part of the citys natural heritage system. These
include trees in forested ravines or valley lands, upland
forests, meadows, swamps and shorelines. These
resources are protected through provincial policies, as well
as the municipal policies cited above. At the provincial
level, one of the key vehicles for implementation of a
natural heritage protection system in Ontario is the
Planning Act. Section 2 (a) of the Planning Act requires
that planning approval authorities have regard to matters
of provincial interest including, the protection of ecological
systems, including natural areas, features and functions,
as well as natural hazards for which conservation
authorities have commenting authority on behalf of the
province. The provincial interest in natural heritage is
further outlined in Section 2.1 of the Provincial Policy
Statement32, which sets out protection requirements for
identified natural heritage features and areas. Specifically
in relation to the terrestrial natural system, Section 2.1.2 of
the Provincial Policy Statement states: The diversity and
connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long29
http://www.toronto.ca/teo/adaptation/index.htm
30
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/environment/greendevelopment.htm
31
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/urbdesign/greening_parking_lots.htm
32
12
Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Planning Act. Provincial Policy Statement, 2005.
term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or,
where possible, improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas,
surface water features and ground water features.
Provincial statutes like the Endangered Species Act are also in effect and protect certain species of
trees that occur in the city of Toronto. A recent example is the listing of butternut (Juglans cinerea) as an
endangered species so that removal of butternut trees is now regulated by the Ontario Ministry of Natural
Resources (OMNR).
Role of the Federal Government

Two agencies of the federal government have mandates related to urban forestry issues - the Canadian
Forest Service of Natural Resources Canada and the CFIA of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. The
Canadian Forest Service is a science-based policy organization that produces and shares knowledge
through research and outreach or technology transfer. The CFIA develops policy and programs aimed at
preventing the introduction and spread of regulated pests in Canada. Through the Plant Protection Act33
the CFIA seeks to detect, control and eradicate designated pests. The City of Toronto, through the Urban
Forestry branch has been and continues to be, a partner with both federal organizations on issues related
to pest management.
For example, the City partnered with the Canadian Forest Service in the development of a branch
sampling technique now widely utilized in the detection of EAB, an invasive insect known to attack ash
trees. Since 2003, the City has also been a partner with the CFIA in an effort to eradicate an Asian
Long-horned Beetle (ALHB) (Anoplophora glabripennis) outbreak in Toronto and Vaughan. To date, the
eradication effort has been successful with no viable life stages of the insect being detected within the
regulated area since 2007. Systematic surveying and monitoring will be discontinued in 2013 unless new
positive detections are made prior to that time.
4.2 Historical Context

The City of Toronto was built on an area once largely covered by forest. In a little more than 200 years it
has become the fifth largest metropolis in North America.
Torontos Ravines
The development of Toronto was greatly influenced by the
citys extensive ravine system. The system of deep river
valleys that divides Torontos geography on a north-south
axis played an important role in trade and commerce prior
to and after European settlement. Ravines influenced the
citys growth, with the steep-sided river valleys creating
physical barriers to development as the city expanded in
the late 19th and early 20th centuries. For about a century
and a half, Torontonians did their best to bury the ravines,
with varying degrees of success, by overlaying them with
sidewalks, streets, bridges, highways and rail lines.
33
Figure 1 - Torontos Brickworks in the Don

River Valley, 2006.
Plant Protection Act SOR/95-212 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-95-212/page-1.html
13
Several small rivers and creeks in the

downtown area were routed into culverts
and sewers and the land was filled in
above them. This is related to the
historical use of these smaller tributaries
as open sewers and dumping grounds,
which led to a serious public health issue.
The burying and covering of tributaries
also included the removal of trees in many
of the ravines in the downtown area.
Today, ravines are no longer seen as

technological obstacles. Today the ravines
are celebrated as natural assets that
Figure 2 - Construction of the Bloor Viaduct, 1917.
provide meandering green corridors in an
otherwise predictable city grid. Citizens of
Toronto are fortunate to be able to experience the solitude of urban wilderness within a few minutes walk
of many of Torontos neighbourhoods and business areas.
Torontos Streetscapes
Many of the trees that lined Torontos streets 80 to100 years ago were remnant trees from the original
forest, planted hedgerows from agricultural uses, or were purposely planted to line streets. Some of these
large trees still define neighbourhoods like the Beach. On main streets like University Avenue, Jarvis or
College Streets, trees were removed as a result of road widenings needed to service a fast growing city.
Street tree removals were compounded by the loss of most of the citys mature elms to Dutch Elm
Disease (Ophiostoma ulmi) in the 1960s and 1970s.
The nature of development in the city following the
Second World War reflected changes in technology
associated with construction. Large earth moving
equipment was able to grade sites easily and stripped
much of the native vegetation and soils. During this
period, transportation and servicing was the major
concern for City planners and engineers and trees
were considered an encumbrance to road construction
and maintenance, as well as potential hazards in
relation to utilities. Where permitted, trees were
typically planted in raised concrete planters, so they
could be moved easily if required.
Figure 3 - College Street near Yonge Street,
Toronto Archives, 1912
Much has changed since the 1960s exclusive focus

on infrastructure as the benefits of trees in urban areas
are now well documented and understood.
4.3 Biophysical Context

Torontos climate is influenced by Lake Ontario and the many valleys and ravines that cut through the
area (Etobicoke Creek, Mimico Creek, Humber River, Don River, Highland Creek, Taylor Massey Creek
14
and Rouge River). The city is bordered on the north by the Oak Ridges Moraine and on the west by the
Niagara Escarpment. It lies in an ecological transition zone between two forest regions, the Great LakesSt. Lawrence region to the north, and the Carolinian region to the south. Terrestrial natural cover is mainly
deciduous and mixed forest, interspersed with tracts of wetland, native meadow and Great Lakes coastal
habitats.
Prior to European settlement and the clearing of forests for agriculture, approximately 90% of southern
Ontario is estimated to have been covered with forest. Recent analyses indicate that the Toronto area has
experienced one of the highest deforestation rates in the province as a result of the high levels of urban
development34.
Toronto Urban Forest Canopy

Canopy area = estimated between 16864 and 17752 hectares
Toronto area = 63412.5 hectares
Toronto parkland = 8205.3 hectares
Canopy within parkland = 52.4%
Legend
Urban Forest Canopy
Parks
Toronto Limits
5,000
20,000 Meters
10,000
Figure 4 - City of Torontos urban forest canopy in relation to its parkland
The current terrestrial natural heritage system is largely confined to the valley systems of the urban
landscape. Several remnant natural places shape the character of the urban landscape, including:

the rivers and their tributaries whose valley lands function as vital green corridors within the
urbanized area,
Rouge Park, Canadas largest and one of the largest urban natural heritage parks in North
America,
34
Ontarios State of the Forest Report 2006 (Chapter 4: Indicators of Forest Sustainability Criterion 4)
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Forests/2ColumnSubPage/STEL02_179267.html
15
the shoreline of the post-glacial Lake Iroquois, a major rise in elevation that extends from east to
west across the region inland from and parallel to Lake Ontario,
the Scarborough Bluffs, Toronto Islands, and other Lake Ontario beaches and bluffs,
forests and wetlands that are large and intact enough to support species and communities
characteristic of the region before European settlement, some of which are now regionally
uncommon or rare such as black, red and white oak forests, and
tallgrass prairie and oak savannah communities, such as those in High Park which are rare in
North America
Today, the remaining treed areas are largely concentrated in the citys valleys but also include some
upland woodlands as well as wetland and shoreline habitats. In terms of land ownership, the majority of
Torontos urban forest is found in the citys parklands, on residential properties and along city streets.
Each of these management components of the urban forest have different management requirements
that are addressed under a variety of programs provided by the City.
16
5. STATE OF THE FOREST RESOURCE

The baseline data used in the preparation of this Plan comes from two current documents:

Every Tree Counts: A Portrait of Torontos Urban Forest which provides a comprehensive
assessment of the forest resource within Toronto, and
Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values, Torontos Urban Forest, a further tree canopy
analysis conducted by the USDA Forest Service and to be published later in 201235, provides an
additional in-depth look at the state of the forest resource in the City of Toronto, including a review
of canopy estimating methodologies and a canopy change analysis over a 10 year time frame
These analyses found that Torontos urban forest has approximately 10.2 million trees. About 40% of
these are on City lands (i.e., 34% or 3.5 million trees are located in City parks, ravines and natural areas
and 6% or 600,000 trees are on City streets with the remaining 60% (6.1 million trees)) located on private
property.
The structural and functional values of Torontos urban forest have been estimated by the USDA Forest
Service researchers based on the study data, as follows:

the structural value of the urban forest, which represents the value of the trees themselves, is an
estimated $7 billion with an associated carbon storage value of $25 million,
the annual functional value (which represents the combined environmental benefits accrued
from air pollution removal, energy savings through heating/cooling associated with temperature
moderation from trees adjacent to buildings, avoided carbon related to energy conservation and
carbon sequestration) is $28.2 million
The USDAs study also highlighted some concerns. For example, despite the Citys stated objective to
expand its tree canopy, the net effect of current policies and programs has been that tree cover only
increased marginally between 1999 and 2009 from about 25.3% to about 26.6%. An additional concern
is that a high proportion of the forest leaf area is composed of species, particularly maple (Acer spp.)
and ash, that are currently under immediate threat from invasive insect pests. Efforts to eradicate ALHB,
which presents a threat to maple, among other species of trees, have been successful to date in the
Toronto area, however this pest still represents an ongoing forest health care concern. EAB is killing ash
trees within the city and could eliminate 8.4% of the citys trees (i.e., the total ash tree population) within
the next decade.
The value of Torontos urban forest combined with the identified challenges in enhancing the current
canopy cover provides important justification for the Urban Forestry programs of maintenance, protection,
planting and planning (described in more detail in Section 6).
5.1 Urban Forest Biodiversity

The studies completed to date have reported that Toronto maintains a reasonably healthy and diverse
complement of tree species despite increasing urbanization and development. Although Toronto has
many exotic invasive species issues to contend with, Torontos urban forest is primarily composed of
species native to North America with a large percentage of species native to Ontario (Figure 5).
35
Nowak, David. J., et al. 2012 in press.
17
Norway maple (Acer platanoides), is a

common invasive species that has been
planted in urban areas throughout eastern
North America. Norway maple still dominates
the tree canopy in some parts of Toronto
and has a significant presence across the
city (Figure 6), however, its numbers are
decreasing because of the Citys concerted
efforts to limit the planting of Norway maple,
combined with targeted removals in natural
areas and the education of residents.
80
Percent of Total Population
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Area of Native Origin
Figure 5 - Place of origin of tree species within Torontos

urban forest
Institutional and low-density residential areas

were found to have the highest ratio of native
to invasive species as compared to
industrial, commercial and utility and
transportation land uses.
Eastern white cedar

(Thuja occidentalis), 15.6%
sugar maple
(Acer saccharum), 10.2%
other species, 42.3%
Norway maple
(Acer platanoides), 6.5%
white ash
(Fraxinus americana),
5.3%
European crabapple
(Malus spp.), 2.3%
Siberian elm
(Ulmus pumila), 2.7%
Manitoba maple
(Acer negundo), 5.0%
green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica),
3.6%
white spruce
(Picea glauca), 3.3%
ironwood
(Ostrya virginiana), 3.2%
Figure 6 - Composition of the urban forest with the 10 most common species within Toronto
5.2 Urban Forest Structure

Torontos urban forest includes a significant population of young trees that, with the appropriate
maintenance and care, will mature into the citys future tree canopy. However, the current size structure is
less than ideal (Figure 7), with a small percentage of large trees. Large trees provide exponentially more
benefits than small trees and from an urban forestry perspective, a healthy proportion of large diameter
trees is desirable. This understanding of the forest size structure within Toronto also helps further
emphasize the need for tree protection by-laws.
18
50
Percent of Total Population
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
D.B.H. Class (cm)

Figure 7 - Percent of total tree population by stem diameter (dbh) class within Toronto
5.3 Urban Forest Distribution

University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Laboratory assisted in the Every Tree Counts study by using
remote sensing techniques with satellite imagery to map the urban forest. This technique created land
Figure 8 Average tree cover by Toronto neighbourhood (Spatial Analysis Laboratory, University of Vermont and
USDA Forest Service).
19
cover classifications, with one of these classifications being tree cover. Tree cover is shown to be highly
variable across the city, with much of the tree canopy cover (approximately 10%) located in the citys
valley systems and ravines.
The land cover analysis found, for example, that:

up to 3% of the open space available for tree planting is within the Citys road right-of-ways, and
the parks land use had over ten times more tree cover on average (at 48% to 52%) than industrial
land use areas (at 4.1%)
5.4 Analysis of Plantable Spaces

The University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Laboratory detailed canopy cover mapping city-wide also
allows for planning strategic canopy expansion by land use type. This is based on a review of the existing
canopy by land use and considering the potential for increased canopy cover. As shown below, dark
green illustrates where there is current canopy, light green illustrates where there is open space (that is
not paved or a building) that could potentially accommodate one or more trees and red represents
impermeable surfaces. Notably, this mapping has some limitation as it does not take into account
planning considerations (i.e., future development) or site-specific limitations (e.g., the presence of
underground infrastructure or above ground wires).
Toronto, ON Landcover Mapping Phase 1 Examples
UVM Spatial Analysis Laboratory, Contact: Keith Pelletier ([email protected]) or

Jarlath ONeil-Dunne ([email protected])
Figure 9 - Satellite imagery (left) and related land cover classification
imagery (right)
20
These recent analyses specifically identified some of the areas of opportunity for increasing tree canopy
in the city based on an analysis of available open area for tree planting.
Table 4 illustrates how, on a coarse level, the recent analysis supports the possibility of a 40% canopy
cover and identifies in which types of land uses the potential opportunities are greatest for canopy cover
expansion. 36
Table 4 - Potential canopy expansion by land use category
Estimated Existing
Canopy Coverage
Estimated Possible
Additional Canopy
Coverage
Total Possible
Canopy Coverage
Single Family Residential
31%
10%
41%
Multi-family Residential
18%
2%
20%
Commercial
6%
2%
8%
Industrial
4%
3%
7%
Institutional
17%
3%
20%
Utilities & Transportation
11%
1%
12%
Other
15%
1%
16%
Open Space 1 (Parks & TRCA lands)
52%
3%
55%
Open Space 2 (Commercial

Landscaped Areas/ Recreation/
Agriculture)
26%
2%
28%
TOTAL36
28%
18%
40%
Sustaining the urban forest and expanding tree canopy coverage to 40% over the next 50 years has been
modeled by the USDA Forest Service to require the annual establishment of 570,000 trees, considering
an estimated 3% average mortality rate37. This includes planting on all lands (private and public property)
and natural regeneration. Appendix 2 provides an example of how this information was used to develop
preliminary annual planting targets for the City. Simply using the quantity of trees planted is not a
preferred performance measure because it does not measure the number of successful plantings, or
the size or type of plantings. However, until better measures are available to track progress, generalized
planting numbers assist in providing part of the story of meeting canopy goals.
Continued GIS mapping using data layers for land uses and forest canopy, as well as other land cover
types, will progressively enable more detailed analyses of areas to be considered for planting and the
development of canopy targets by land use, in consultation with City Planning.
36
Total is calculated by using 2008 Satellite imagery GIS layers and calculating by land use area total area and summed. The potential canopy is
based on same methods with other canopy cover layers used (pervious and imperviouss except roads and buildings)
37
Nowak, David. J., et al. 2012 in press.
21
Methodologies to Identify Planting Opportunities and Monitor Forest Cover Change

One of the key indicators used by municipalities to assess the state of the urban forest resource
is tree canopy cover. Measuring forest cover change over time helps managers assess the
effectiveness of forestry programs as well as the Citys policies for supporting the goal of expanding
the urban forest.
As part of a comprehensive tree canopy study, the City has collaborated with the USDA Forest
Service to develop a methodology that uses available city aerial imagery to conduct an assessment
of forest and land cover change over time. The sample uses 10,000 geo-referenced random sample
points and successive years of imagery to assist managers in developing trend information. Tree
canopy levels are expected to fluctuate over time as there are many factors (e.g., insect infestations)
that will affect Torontos canopy in the short-term and long-term. Repeated monitoring and evaluation
is key to establishing reliable long-term trend data. This methodology provides a simple and costeffective tool for tracking the urban tree canopy in Toronto. It also adds value to other program areas
as it provides a measure of relative land cover (e.g., impervious to pervious surface ratio) for City
planners and further stratifies change by general land use categories.
Figure 10 - An example of land cover change in the High Park area of Toronto, Bloor Street West.
top - 2002 (City of Toronto), 2009 (Bing Maps)
22
6. KEY URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT

CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS
There are many complex issues affecting the long-term sustainability of the urban forest that must be
addressed as part of this Plan. Everyday decisions made by City planners and individual property owners
can have serious implications for the future of the citys urban forest. In this context, recognizing the
tension between urbanization and preservation of the urban forest in Toronto is a useful first step toward
finding solutions. Other emerging forest management issues include invasive pests, climate change, and
impacts related to recreational activities (such as the introduction and spread of invasive species). These
challenges can, however, be addressed through sound and proactive tree maintenance practices and
improving community awareness and engagement of a wide range of partners in stewardship activities
that help sustain and enhance the urban forest. These examples illustrate the range of issues affecting
the long-term sustainability of the urban forest that this Plan addresses.
The following issues are the key challenges that the City of Toronto is currently facing in achieving a
healthy, sustainable urban forest:
1. Forest Health Threats
2. Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations
3. Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban Forest
4. Climate Change Impacts
5. Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest
6. Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the Urban Forest
These challenges and the recommended actions identified to address them over the next ten years are
described in more detail in the following sections.
6.1 Forest Health Threats

6.1.1 Forest Health Threats: Current Practices and Challenges
The Urban Forestry branch identifies and manages forest health issues through integrated pest
management which includes monitoring and treatment using the most appropriate method. Pest
infestations often spread across political boundaries, therefore partnerships with other agencies on urgent
forest health issues are maintained to allow for collaboration. Where applicable, property owners receive
information and advice on the treatment of common tree pests and diseases.
Forest health issues are classified based on the level of risk to the urban forest.

LOW: forest health issue represents a cosmetic nuisance and generally does not cause tree
mortality, e.g., Eastern Tent Caterpillar (Malacosoma americanum) or maple tar spot (Rhytisma
acerinum),
MEDIUM: forest health issue may cause mortality through repeated impacts on tree health if not
controlled, e.g., European Gypsy Moth (Lymantria dispar), and
23
HIGH: forest health issue may cause rapid and widespread tree mortality if not controlled, e.g.,
ALHB, EAB
The Urban Forestry branch deals with a number of medium and high risk forest health issues on an
ongoing basis. In addition to the anticipated threat of EAB, the Urban Forestry branch continues to deal
with an ALHB infestation in northwest Toronto and has had outbreak conditions of the European Gypsy
Moth within the past five years. Examples of integrated forest health care responses are described below.
European Gypsy Moth
The European Gypsy Moth is an introduced defoliating insect that is considered a widespread pest in
North America. The caterpillar, or larval stage of the insect, eats the leaves of trees making them more
susceptible to disease and damage from other insects.
In 2007 and 2008, the City of Toronto undertook an integrated pest management program to control the
European Gypsy Moth outbreak. This program included aerial and ground spray programs to control the
outbreak levels in selected areas of the city. Other control measures such as tree banding and vacuuming
of egg masses with portable vacuum cleaners were also used. The program involved extensive public
consultation to inform residents of the purpose and safety of the methods being used. The ability of
the City to carry out an aerial spray program in a highly populated urban area speaks to the value of
community support for forestry programs in the city.
European Gypsy Moth will always be present in the landscape at varying levels with populations rising
and falling in cycles dependent on natural controls and the weather. In 2012, levels of European Gypsy
Moth were seen to rise in some areas of the city. Control measures, including ground based and aerial
spraying of the biological control agent Bacillus thuringiensis subspecies kurstaki (Btk) have been
implemented successfully in the past and will be utilized in the future to control high population levels of
this insect.
Figure 11 - Urban Forestry and Asian Long-horned Beetle management team of municipal partners and the Canadian
Food Inspection Agency. (photo: CFIA)
24
Asian Long-horned Beetle (ALHB)

The ALHB eradication program that began in September 2003 in the Greater Toronto Area is an example
of exceptional cooperation between all levels of governments to achieve a common objective. The CFIA,
Canadian Forest Service, OMNR, USDA, Regional Municipality of York, TRCA, City of Vaughan, City of
Toronto and others have worked together to implement an aggressive eradication campaign.
A comprehensive database to research the beetles biology and ecology has been established through
intensive data collection. Research focused on development of new information supports the eradication
effort and serves as a guideline for potential future infestations. The City of Toronto, as part of the
Collaborative Science Group for Insect Eradication, received the Ontario Federal Council Leadership in
Science and Sustainable Development Award in 2006.
Emerald Ash Borer (EAB)
The number one forest health threat facing Toronto today is EAB, which was first confirmed in the city in
2007. EAB is a beetle native to Asia that was accidentally introduced to the United States. Since its
introduction, EAB has killed millions of ash trees in southwestern Ontario, Michigan and the surrounding
states. EAB attacks and kills all species of ash and poses a major economic and environmental threat to
urban and rural forested areas in both Canada and the United States. Federal regulations currently
prohibit the movement of specific materials including any ash material and firewood of all species from
specific areas of Ontario and Quebec.
Unlike the recent ALHB infestation, which is now
being controlled, there are no known control
methods to prevent widespread EAB damage. It
is expected that ash tree mortality in Toronto will
approach 100% within the next decade. To put it
in perspective, Toronto will potentially lose all of its
ash which represents 8.4% of its tree population
(about 860,000 trees) as a result of EAB. This is
estimated to reduce the canopy cover by 2.2%
2.3% (based on current estimates of total canopy
cover).
Urban Forestry is mobilizing the resources needed
to mitigate public risk, protect selected trees, plant
replacement trees and inform Toronto residents
of concerns. Toronto continues to work in
cooperation with other agencies and researchers
to identify best practices in forest health care
management.
While there is no way to eradicate this pest,
individual trees may be protected through tree
injection with products registered in Canada
for use against EAB. The City of Toronto has
expanded its tree injection program using
TreeAzinTM against EAB in selected park and
street trees; injecting over 4,000 ash trees in
Figure 12 - Ash lined Toronto street before Emerald Ash

Borer infestation
Figure 13 Same Toronto street after Emerald Ash

Borer removals
25
2012 and identifying thousands of additional candidate trees for potential injection in subsequent years.
However, the City of Toronto will be required to remove thousands of dead and dying trees on streets,
in parks and in natural areas. All street trees and a significant number of park trees lost to EAB will be
replaced.
6.1.2 Forest Health Threats: Solutions

In response to forest health care challenges, the City is mobilizing resources to manage public risk and
protect as many trees as reasonably possible. The Urban Forestry branch is also educating and informing
residents about steps they can take to improve the health of their trees and to protect against forest pests
and other health care threats.
Actions for Addressing Forest Health Threats:

communicate comprehensive pest management strategies as needed through media, meetings

and outreach programs,
obtain required funding to maintain an appropriate response to EAB, including monitoring and
mapping EAB tree removals, and
maintain consistent funding to city-wide forest health care and pest management programs and
initiatives and refine the forest health care strategy going forward based on the effectiveness of
current programs and initiatives and industry best practices
6.2 Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations

6.2.1 Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations: Current Practices
and Challenges
The Urban Forestry branch is responsible for maintaining approximately four million trees growing along
City streets and within the Citys parks, ravines and natural areas. Maintaining these trees in a safe and
healthy condition is a primary concern for staff and represents a significant proportion of Urban Forestrys
workload. Trees in streetscapes and parks generally have different maintenance requirements than trees
in natural areas. Maintenance and management involves a wide range of activities, described briefly
below:

38
26
maintenance pruning of street and park trees is performed to eliminate dead or hazardous limbs
or branches to encourage good form and healthy growth, and to maintain the structural integrity
of the tree,
management of forested and natural areas includes silvicultural forestry operations such as
prescribed burns and invasive species control,
tree risk assessment is a tool for scheduling and prioritizing work, allowing for a greater degree
of workload management efficiency and flexibility. Tree risk assessment involves examining a
tree for structural defects, associating those defects with a known pattern of failure and rating
the degree of risk. This involves consideration of three components: 1) a tree with the potential
to fail, 2) an environment that may contribute to that failure, and 3) a person or object that would
be injured or damaged (i.e., a target should the tree fail). By definition, a hazardous tree requires
the presence of both a defective tree and a target38. The Urban Forestry staff understand the
Methany, P.N., and Clark, R.J. A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas. Illinois:International Society of Arboriculture,
tremendous benefits to the urban environment of larger trees and therefore do not take removing
a mature tree lightly. Trees are only removed when they are dead or can no longer be maintained
in safe condition, thereby creating a safer environment and reducing liability to the adjacent
property owners,
other essential activities includes the clean-up of failed tree limbs and other tree debris following
severe weather, and
new tree maintenance to support proper establishment through structural pruning, watering and
mulching is extremely important for the short and long term success of young trees
These wide ranging maintenance and management activities require co-ordination with others. For
example, Urban Forestry works in collaboration with Parks staff through the Hazard Tree Abatement
Program to identify and remove the most extreme risks identified within the highest use areas. A Parkland
Tree Risk Management Policy and Procedures Guide for staff use will be completed to support this work.
Some examples of innovative programs and best practices in progress are highlighted below.
Parkland Tree Risk Management
The task of managing trees within large parklands where the trees are not individually identified in the
existing tree maintenance management system can be difficult, particularly when considering the
expansive area of Torontos parkland system (over 8000 hectares). A pilot program was launched in 2010
to develop a method of identifying hazardous trees in these areas and mapping their locations so work
crews could easily find and eliminate the hazards (as shown in Figure 14). City arborists inspected areas
and gathered the required data. An evaluation form was developed to assist inspectors in assessing risk
and to prepare maps as needed. As a result of the pilot project, efficient and effective procedures have
been developed and refined. As part of this process over seventy staff were trained in tree risk
assessment during a one day intensive class held in June 2010.
High Park Northwest Corner Tree Maintenance Map
Figure 14 - Detail inspection map for hazard tree pilot
1994.
27
Staff in Urban Forestry work in collaboration with Parks staff to identify and remove the most extreme tree
risks identified within the highest use areas of individual parks as part of a parkland tree risk management
strategy. Urban Forestry will be finalizing a parkland tree risk management policy and procedures guide
for staff use.
Area Tree Maintenance
Prior to 2009, maintenance of the citys urban forest had largely been done on a reactive basis whereby
trees are maintained in response to requests by members of the public. Although the backlog (service
delay) in performing required tree maintenance in this way has been significantly reduced over the last
few years, the Urban Forestry branch has
found that this type of complaint-based
reactive service is not efficient and does not
adequately meet public expectations.
Reactive maintenance also reduces the
opportunity to perform corrective pruning or
other preventative maintenance activities,
resulting in more frequent storm breaks and
shortened tree life spans.
A proactive maintenance approach has been
used by the Urban Forestry branch in selected
areas of the city since 2009. It provides staff
with geographic areas (city sub-grids) to systematically assess and maintain on a regular cycle. This
approach has been shown to be more efficient, result in well maintained trees, reduce the risk of tree
failure, reduce complaints, and improve customer service.
Although the proactive approach is known to be more effective and efficient, the resources needed
to implement such a program on a city-wide basis are not currently available. As a result most tree
maintenance is still done reactively with a significantly smaller portion of maintenance completed
proactively.
Integrating Technology in the Field and Office:

Notebook Computers and GPS
Until recently, information from tree inspections was tracked on paper
forms while in the field and later manually entered into the forestry
work management database. Not only was this process inefficient
but it created a delay in information transfer and introduced added
opportunity for human error.
In 2009, the Citys Urban Forestry branch started to deploy laptop
computers to forestry field staff. Data is now collected on the job site
and a wireless connection permits live updates to the forestry work
management database. This has improved management efficiencies
and eliminated the lag time between inspection completion and
reporting and thus helped to improve customer service. In ongoing
work, Urban Forestry is planning to add a spatial dimension to the
current tree inventory and database to integrate with improved
mapping technologies and tools as they become available.
28
Figure 15 - Forestry data collectors

using mobile technology for data
entry on site.
6.2.2 Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations: Solutions

Preliminary results from an analysis of the recently implemented Area Tree Maintenance Program confirm
that there are cost efficiencies, as well as forest health benefits to be derived from a systematic approach
to tree care and maintenance. Ongoing research about the benefits of maintaining green infrastructure in
cities will also help inform decision making to assist Toronto in achieving its ambitious environmental and
growth objectives.
Proactive tree maintenance and forest management must continue to be prioritized and advanced in
order to ensure the health and sustainability of the urban forest today and into the future. While some
requests for reactive maintenance will always be a reality because trees are living, changing entities and
the extent of the resource in the City of Toronto is so vast, an overall proactive approach is considered
the most effective and efficient approach and the best practice to which the City should be aspiring. A 5
to 10 year maintenance cycle is an acceptable industry standard for tree maintenance. As Urban Forestry
transitions to full implementation of an area maintenance service, the number of service requests from
the public will be reduced. This will result in a decreased number of site inspections and work backlog,
allowing Urban Forestry to progressively meet resident expectations.
Actions for Managing Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations:

continue to progressively implement city-wide proactive area tree maintenance, a program which
is estimated to bring the average pruning cycle to approximately 7 years,
continue implementation of the newly planted tree maintenance program to provide early and
proactive maintenance to protect the Citys tree planting investment and the potential benefits
these trees bring to the community,
Figure 16 - Urban Forestry staff at work.
reduce mortality in new street tree plantings by:

completing a detailed mortality survey of newly planted street trees with a goal to identifying
key factors causing mortality,
reviewing and revising stock sourcing procedures to improve planting stock, and
reviewing and revising planting and early maintenance procedures to improve survival,
reduce tree service delay for reactive maintenance from the current 6 to 9 months, to 3 to 6
months,
develop and implement a parkland tree risk management policy and program city-wide, and
improve public awareness of:
proper planting, watering, mulching and tree protection techniques, and
tree risk situations (e.g., under specified weather conditions, high traffic areas)
29
6.3 Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban

Forest
Current Practices and Challenges
The city of Toronto continues to grow and redevelop previously urbanized areas to their highest and
best use. While this puts pressure on the Citys treed resources (Table 5), land use intensification and
achieving the citys tree canopy objectives should not be considered as necessarily conflicting or mutually
exclusive. They can be successfully integrated through cooperation and coordination between property
owners/developers and various City divisions (City Planning, Toronto Water, Transportation Services and
Parks, Forestry and Recreation) to implement policies and practices that are supportive of tree canopy
objectives.
Urbanization, even in an established major city, is continually progressing resulting in a variety of impacts
on the urban forest.
Table 5 - Examples of the ways urbanization can impact canopy cover and tree health
CONCERN
EFFECTS
Forest Fragmentation
1.
Increased development pressure results in fragmentation of suitable available habitat for tree
growth, (resulting in fewer trees planted and those planted not able to reach their maximum
potential size).
Soil Quality and Volume
2.
Increased density of development (resulting in less soil volume for root growth and less height/
width for crown spread).
3.
Increased salt levels in soils as a result of de-icing roads with salt in winter months (causing
dehydration in trees).
4.
Increased soil pH as a result of lime based aggregate used for sidewalks, roads and paths.
5.
Conflicts with utilities/infrastructure (resulting in less area for tree growth, poor conditions and
stress for trees in close proximity).
Air Quality
6.
Increased particulates and volatile organic compounds near roads and development sites.
Storm water
7.
Stream channel erosion and erosion of stream valley slopes and forest soils caused by increased
volume and intensity of run-off from increased urbanization.
8.
Reduce the amount of surface water available for infiltration.
Tree By-laws
The City of Toronto has various by-laws in place39 to protect and preserve trees, as well as associated
natural land features. These by-laws have been developed in response to a growing understanding of
how trees are damaged, as well as an increasing awareness of the loss of benefits that result from tree
damage.
These by-laws are implemented primarily within an education/compliance model, rather than a regulatory/
enforcement model. This means that Urban Forestry and other City staff, together with the private tree
care industry, use these by-laws primarily as opportunities to advise homeowners, developers, and
builders on how best to protect trees and natural areas. This has resulted in the preservation of trees that
may otherwise have been injured or destroyed. Where preservation is not possible, the by-laws require
replacement planting, ensuring the maintenance of canopy cover along with its many benefits.
39
http://www.toronto.ca/trees/bylaws_policies.htm.
30
The Urban Forestry branch will continue to collaborate with City Planning on the merits of using satellite
imagery in monitoring land cover change to better understand the implications of city growth on various
land use types and neighbourhoods. Land cover classification mapping at regular intervals will provide
Urban Forestry and City Planning with an essential tool for reviewing changes to the urban forest and
integrating growth strategies.
Citys Existing Canopy Cover
The overall target for city-wide canopy coverage for Toronto is 40%. Urban foresters recommend tree
cover for urban areas of between 30% and 40%, to maximize the social, economic and ecological benefits
derived from trees. The range (rather than a fixed number) is appropriate because urban forests are
dynamic systems composed of a diversity of tree species that will naturally go through periods of growth
and decline and also respond differentially to stressors such as pest infestation. As a result, the percent of
canopy cover will fluctuate.
Tools for assessing canopy cover have been evolving very rapidly over the past few years and in Toronto
three different methods and sources of imagery were used to try and get the most accurate value ((1)
leaf-off aerial imagery random point sampling, (2) leaf-on aerial imagery random point sampling and (3)
city-wide land cover classifications developed from leaf-on satellite imagery). More details are provided in
Every Tree Counts40, but the bottom line is that the results ranged from 19.9% to 28% tree canopy cover,
depending on the method used. In Every Tree Counts, the most conservative value of 19.9% canopy
cover was chosen as the baseline measure of tree canopy cover for the city against which progress could
be measured in the future.
Palmerston Avenue 1908 (left) and 2002 (right)
Through this exercise Urban Forestry staff gained a better understanding of the advantages and
disadvantages associated with the different methods of estimating tree canopy. The different methods
of estimating tree canopy have been compared and Urban Forestry has concluded that leaf-on satellite
imagery will be utilized to develop city-wide land cover classification on a go forward basis to analyze long
term trends in canopy change within the city. Using leaf-on satellite imagery with sufficient resolution to
allow accurate land cover classifications is the emerging standard set by municipalities in the GTA that
have completed urban forest canopy studies. Adopting this methodology in Toronto allows for regional
comparisons and regional collaboration towards canopy expansion. The baseline tree canopy cover for
Toronto is 28% using this methodology.
40
Every Tree Counts: A Portrait of Torontos Urban Forest, 2010. Appendix 4: Methodologies for Estimating Canopy Cover.
31
Expressed as a range, tree canopy cover for the City of Toronto is 26.6% to 28%. This estimation is based
on analysis of leaf-on aerial and satellite imagery.
The tree canopy expansion goal of reaching 40% canopy coverage is achievable but over the term of
this strategic plan canopy expansion will be delayed. Resources for planting are not anticipated to be
progressively increased to respond to the 8.4% tree population mortality anticipated due to the impact
of EAB. It is expected that nursery stock and contracted tree planting services will be in limited supply,
resulting in a longer period of time to achieve canopy replacement. Funding for EAB related planting must
also increase to achieve replacement targets, (see Appendix 2).
Working Towards the Citys Canopy Cover Targets
While the desktop analyses are very useful for planning purposes, they do not address the challenges of
successfully establishing trees in urbanized environments on the ground. Efforts to grow trees along city
streets as well as in new subdivisions
can be hampered by the severely
altered soils following site
development. The expanding areas of
development limit permeability and
soil moisture available for tree growth.
Site preparation generally involves the
complete removal of remaining natural
topsoil profiles. The typical result is
site conditions that may limit the
growth of large-stature trees and
many sensitive native species that
support biodiversity in the city.
In addition to protecting as many of
Figure 17 - Example of large scale removal of natural soil during site
the trees and forested areas that occur
development
within the city as possible, replacing
trees removed through development, as well as trees removed as a result of disease, injury or condition
is also critical for sustaining the urban forest. In an urbanized setting, extensive efforts must be made to
(a) utilize available planting spaces, and (b) improve planting conditions in order to provide newly planted
trees with the elements required to support mature growth (i.e., quality soil, water, oxygen and room to
grow) both above grade and below.
A consideration in natural areas is that invasive tree
species, such as Norway maple or Manitoba maple
(Acer negundo), are likely naturally regenerating (and
contributing to canopy cover) more rapidly than some
of the native plantings. To improve the long term
sustainability and quality of the urban forest, as well
as to preserve the ecological functions associated
with natural areas, continued management of invasive
species, including replacement plantings, is required.
Figure 18 - Parkland naturalization
32
Many areas of the citys landscape are covered with

hard, impermeable surfaces, reducing opportunities
and presenting challenges for tree planting. For planting in hard surfaces to be successful, the design
must provide:

a sufficient volume of un-compacted, good

quality soil for each tree (the quantity of soil that
is considered sufficient is the amount required
to grow a 40 cm diameter, large canopy shade
tree)41. The scientific data available on the
relationship between tree size and soil volume
indicates that 30 cubic meters of soil is required to
support growth of a large canopied tree,
a method of supporting the sidewalk that does not
result in compacting the soil,
easy access for maintaining or installing a new
utility service, and
a method of repairing the sidewalk while restoring
the uncompacted soil conditions
Figure 19 - Street tree planting
There are three design solutions that the City of Toronto is currently employing to address these design
requirements: (1) open planting beds, (2) continuous soil trenches with reinforced concrete panels, and
(3) continuous soil trenches with soil cells. A general description of each illustrated with an example from
a recent project in the city is provided below.
(1) Open Planting Beds
The easiest, most cost effective way of providing good growing conditions for trees is to plant them in
open planting areas. Unfortunately, there is usually too little space within a typical city sidewalk to provide
all the soil required to successfully grow
a mature tree using an open planting
bed. However, an open planting bed can
be used in conjunction with either of the
designs described below and is feasible
for very wide sidewalk areas (Figure 20).
A shared solution whereby the tree is
planted within a smaller planting area
within the public right of way but has
access to additional soil volume located
on private property can also work. This
requires an agreement between the City
and the adjacent property owner to
create a solution that is mutually
Figure 20 - Open planting beds on Bloor Street east of Avenue Road
beneficial.
(2) Continuous Soil Trenches with Reinforced Concrete Panels
To construct a sidewalk that provides a safe and reliable walking surface capable of supporting snow
removal equipment, while still maintaining uncompacted soil below, requires structural engineering
solutions. This approach involves constructing a trench filled with good quality, uncompacted soil that is
spanned with a reinforced concrete slab which rests on footings on either side of the trench (Figure 21).
41
A 40 cm diameter tree provides some of the many benefits that trees can contribute to the urban environment
33
Figure 21 - Roncesvalles Boulevard during sidewalk reconstruction and after
This design allows for an air-space under the concrete. This continuous soil trench allows trees planted
along its length to share soil volume and for the tree roots to intersect with each other, as trees tend to do
in a forest or a park setting.
Because the reinforced slab spanning the 2 metre wide soil trench is made of precast concrete, it is
possible to remove and restore individual concrete panels in the event that access is required for the
installation or repair of a utility. It also allows for the replacement of soil in the trench as well as the
sidewalk surface, potentially eliminating the need for temporary asphalt patches to accommodate a utility
installation or repair.
(3) Continuous Soil Trenches with Soil Cells
Figure 22 - Soil Cells. Queensway pilot project in collaboration with Toronto Water. Water from road and
sidewalk diverted to soil cells from storm sewer and
analyzed for quality.
34
A soil cell is the generic term used for products

made of a strong plastic with voids or spaces
that can be filled with soil. Soil cells support the
sidewalk so that good quality un-compacted soil
can be used. The individual soil cell units are
easy to handle and can be vertically stacked and
arranged horizontally to create an area of good
quality soil below hard surfaces such as sidewalks
(Figure 22). The cells collectively make a structural
matrix filled with soil that is strong enough to
support vehicles. The finished surface over the soil
cells can be concrete, unit pavers or asphalt.
The City has undertaken a multi-divisional project
that details best practices for urban redevelopment
of streets to enable optimal tree growth. A final report on the project is anticipated to be released in 2013.
The Urban Forestry branch is working with City Planning and other City divisions to assess and monitor
the effects of development policies and infrastructure projects on the tree canopy, as well as the success
of trees installed using these new technologies.

Solutions
City growth and urban forest canopy expansion are not mutually exclusive. Continued progress in
planning and a supportive regulatory framework are absolutely critical for supporting the citys natural
heritage resources, including the urban forest. This includes:

protecting the existing urban forest through appropriate policies and by-laws,
identifying canopy expansion areas,
collaborating with a wide range of appropriate parties to ensure trees are planted in those areas
wherever possible,
working towards targets for tree planting that will result in canopy expansion rather than
maintenance of the existing canopy coverage, and
maintaining (or in some cases recreating) healthy soils and site conditions that can support largestature tree growth in the urban environment
As noted above, one of the fundamental aspects of increasing tree canopy cover across the city is the
protection of existing resources. Currently, this is being accomplished through implementation of various
tree and natural feature protection policies and by-laws. The by-laws in particular serve as opportunities
to educate the public on the benefits and importance of trees within an urban setting.
City Planning and Urban Forestry staff continue to consult on establishing canopy targets based on land
use. Currently there are significant differences in tree cover, tree sizes and tree species between land
use types which can be minimized with collaborative planning. The Urban Forestry branch also continues
to work on identifying opportunities for replacing (as needed) and enhancing the current canopy cover.
These initiatives need to be continued.
Sustaining canopy and maximizing expansion will involve planting trees not only by the City and its many
tree planting partners, but by private property owners as well. The responsibility for achieving canopy
goals is a collective goal to be understood and implemented by private landowners as well as other
public land owners in combination with the City. Public lands (including TRCA lands, institutional lands,
provincial lands and school boards, as well as City owned lands) account for less than half of the land
area in the city and not all of this land area is suitable for planting as some of it comprises hard surfaces
(e.g., roadways, buildings).
It is estimated that between 57,000 to 114,000 trees need to be planted annually on publicly owned land
(with an equivalent number planted on private land), to achieve about a 10% increase in canopy cover
over the next several decades (see Appendix 2). This number includes large shrubs as well as trees.
Large shrubs are included in the urban forest canopy and natural cover within Toronto and are particularly
relevant for natural slope stability and habitat for birds and other wildlife. The Urban Forestry branch will
continue to monitor the progress of planting achievements through a combination of measurements taken
annually, including planting numbers and area planted.
Parks, Forestry and Recreation will also be continuing ongoing management in many natural areas to
35
increase biodiversity and improve slope stability by removing invasive non-native species (Figure 23).
Areas prioritized for management include those identified by City Planning as Environmentally Significant
Areas or potential Environmentally Significant Areas.
The Urban Forestry branch may also shift from natural area plantings to more road allowance and
parkland plantings with larger stock sizes in smaller numbers over the next several years as part of the
EAB tree replacement strategy to try and offset some of the canopy cover losses related to this pest.
Additionally, as trees require access to adequate amounts of quality soil to support mature growth, Urban
Forestry will collaborate with others on opportunities for developing policy related to soil conservation on
development sites.
Slope Enhancements Support Storm Water Management, Water Quality, and Biodiversity
Across the City of Toronto, storm water run-off travels down steep ravine slopes to water courses.
The storm water can cause significant soil erosion over time and steepen these slopes. This is most
prominent in areas where native vegetation has been eliminated and understory trees, shrubs, herbs
and grasses no longer exist as a result of competition with invasive, non-native species such as
Norway maple.
Management of these slopes involves removing the invasive trees and allowing any suppressed
native trees the opportunity to flourish. Tree removal is also followed by planting a dense combination
of native, large-growing tree species, understory trees, shrubs and ground level grasses and herbs.
The resulting slope has more biodiversity and functions as an anchor for existing soils.
As a result, the biodiversity of the ravine itself is improved (thereby providing habitat for a wider range
of species), and the water quality in the nearby water course is improved due to a reduction in
sediments from erosion (thereby protecting the habitat for fish and other aquatic fauna). This type of
restoration also helps proactively resolve the need for expensive structural solutions which are
typically required when slopes are eroded to the point where they can no longer support vegetation,
and contributes to effective storm water management in the city.
Figure 23 - Kimbark Coldstream ravine slope prior to restoration works in fall 2005 (left), and following restoration
works in spring 2011 (right).
36
Actions for Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban Forest:

42
increase compliance with tree protection requirements through interaction with the development
industry and enhanced monitoring of tree by-law applications,
improve tree by-law effectiveness by tracking and measuring key performance indicators, to
inform by-law and implementation improvements,
work with the relevant City divisions to complete a review of land use, planning and zoning
policies to identify regulatory constraints to achieving canopy expansion and a sustainable urban
forest,
utilize all available tree planting locations and where possible strive to improve planting
conditions, providing adequate soil, water and oxygen to support mature growth,
develop mapping systems that:
support planting activities
ensure the currency of data recording
facilitate effective communication of information to stakeholders,
assess the state of the forest every 10 years through analysis of leaf-on satellite imagery and field
sampling to:
verify the urban forest species composition
verify the urban forest size composition
monitor change in overall city canopy coverage,
undertake strategic planting prioritized in the areas of most need, as follows:
residential boulevards where trees have been removed
public lands outside of planned infrastructure work areas and within priority storm water
management areas identified by Toronto Water
parkland and on streets in neighbourhoods where the canopy is significantly lower than the
city average
where ash trees occur in relatively high concentrations
areas of high heat vulnerability (as identified by Toronto Public Health)42,
collaborate with City divisions and agencies (e.g., TRCA) on opportunities for developing policy
related to soil conservation on development sites,
continue to collaborate with Toronto Water and Transportation Services to identify strategic
planting areas that:
increase storm water management (by providing water uptake by trees)
shade streets and bikeways
reduce erosion and improve the stability of ravine slopes through naturalization,
use land cover data in cooperation with City Planning, TRCA and other agencies to assess
impacts on canopy goals by:
tracking land use and forest cover change city-wide
monitoring change in canopy by land use, watershed or neighbourhood,
centralize tree planting functions and pilot new models for planting services in residential areas,
assessing a variety of stock types,
market the Citys free residential tree planting program for front yards,
cultivate new relationships with green community organizations with a focus on realizing canopy
targets in communities and neighbourhoods, and
design and implement a pilot study in cooperation with Urban Design, Business Improvement
Areas and private businesses to increase tree cover in selected commercial and industrial areas
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2011/hl/bgrd/backgroundfile-39469.pdf
37
6.4 Climate Change Impacts

6.4.1 Climate Change Impacts: Current Practices and Challenges
According to Natural Resources Canada, climate change is expected to have some of the following
impacts in the coming decades43.

warmer winter temperatures and longer growing seasons,

changes in the quantities and seasonal timing of precipitation,
increased frequency and severity of storm events, including increased wind velocity, and
more extreme weather events such as droughts and heavy rainfall
The Toronto Environment Office recently commissioned a study (Torontos Future Weather and
Climate Driver Study)44 to support the Citys climate change policies. In addition, improving the level of
understanding and certainty about climate related weather changes will help to guide the Citys decisions
with respect to investment in infrastructure and service provision. Among other things, the study was
aimed at providing the City of Toronto with a better understanding of what drives Torontos current
weather and climate and what weather and climate can be expected in the future.
The study went beyond existing global and regional climate models and used a new, innovative approach
to understanding localized climate and weather. The result is a model that is capable of operating at fine
spatial resolution and allows climate and weather projections to be established for small areas within
Toronto. The model also provides new information about such things as the future extremes of weather
rather than the future means of climate. Some of the changes Toronto is predicted to experience in the
time period 2040-2049 include:

marked rainfall increases in July (80%) and August (50%)

extreme rainstorm events will be fewer in number but more extreme
average annual temperatures increase by 4.4oC
the projected average winter temperature increase by 5.7oC
the projected average summer temperature increases by 3.8oC
Although the exact nature of the impacts of climate change on Torontos urban forest are not known,
certain management implications and related effects on required resources can be anticipated. These
include the following:

increased operating resources (or dedicated reserve funds) to deal with extreme weather events
and storm response,
expanded forest health care monitoring and control programs in response to a greater diversity of
and more persistent pests,
increased need for watering and maintenance of drought-stressed and heat-stressed trees, and
expanded education and emergency planning
Maintaining a diverse and resilient urban forest, as well as the management flexibility to respond quickly
to change, are key elements in being able to adapt to the anticipated impacts of climate change.
Decision-makers at all levels of government, locally and around the globe are increasingly recognizing
that cities are highly vulnerable to climate change and that it is time to put adaptive measures in place
43
Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations: A Canadian Perspective. Natural Resources Canada. http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca.
earth-sciences/files/pdf/perspective/pdf/report_e.pdf
44
38
Torontos Future Climate: Study Outcomes. http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/pe/bgrd/backgroundfile-51552.pdf
Identifying Planting Priorities in Relation to Heat Vulnerability

As part of the canopy cover analyses
completed for the City, land cover classes
for forest canopy, such as turf and bare soil
were extracted from the satellite image and
can be used as GIS layers to locate planting
priorities where turf and bare soil exist in
parklands that have high heat vulnerability.
In the example (Figure 24), the pink areas
indicate where high heat vulnerability exists,
square hatching indicates residential land
use and the turf and tree canopy are visible
under the transparent heat vulnerability
layer. This information is being shared with
partner organizations and is being used
by the City to encourage tree planting and
retention on private property. Similar maps
will be created for parklands to prioritize
planting in areas that have been identified
as having highest heat vulnerability.
Figure 24 - Detailed view of high heat vulnerability mapping

with forest canopy, residential land use (light blue square
hatching) and priority neighbourhood area (diagonal stripe)
including rethinking urban design and the enhanced role the urban forest and green spaces play in
reducing the impacts of climate change. Urban forests are extremely valuable in this regard because they
both mitigate some of the impacts of climate change (i.e., through carbon sequestration and storage)
and support human adaptation to it (e.g., provision of shade, temperature moderation). The cooling,
air pollution reduction, and storm water management control functions that the urban forest provides
all contribute to making Toronto a healthier, more livable city. These functions have an even more
pronounced role in the context of climate change.
Examples of City initiatives that make connections between sustaining and enhancing the citys urban
forest and addressing impacts related to climate change include:

Torontos Green Standard45 and the Toronto Green Roofs initiative46, which will help to reduce
urban heat island effects and promote vegetated (rather than paved) surfacing, tree canopy, and
soil preservation, and
the Toronto Public Health initiated Shade Guidelines Summary and the Shade Guidelines
Supplement which promote health in the context of climate adaptation47
An example of an adaptive strategy that has multiple benefits for the city is the redirection of storm water
runoff for use in watering trees. The Queensway Sustainable Sidewalk Study, which was implemented in
2009, highlights this type of innovative application for irrigation through filtered storm water. Trees were
planted within a continuous soil trench which used soil cells to maximize soil volume. Prior to storm water
uptake by tree roots a majority of the larger and smaller solids and contaminants are removed through
catch basin and weeping tile distribution pipes. The soil and microscopic organisms filter out even smaller
45
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/environment/index.htm
46
http://www.toronto.ca/greenroofs/index.htm
47
http://www.toronto.ca/health/resources/tcpc/pdf/guidelines_supplement.pdf; http://www.toronto.ca/health/resources/tcpc/pdf/guidelinessummary.pdf
39
solids and contaminants. Benefits include improved water quality and reductions in velocity and volume of
storm water reaching streams during storms. Monitoring to assess the benefits of this design is ongoing.
6.4.2 Climate Change Impacts: Solutions

Solutions to mitigate climate change involve all levels of government (i.e., municipal, provincial and
federal) as well as other stakeholders and special interest groups. For example, the Green Infrastructure
Ontario Coalition recently released a report which advocates using green infrastructure for its many
benefits including energy savings48.
The Urban Forestry branch is collaborating on climate change solutions as they relate to the urban forest
and needs to continue to do so as the nature and extent of the impacts become more apparent. While
many of the other actions in this Plan align well with climate change mitigation and adaptation, the Urban
Forestry branch must ensure that these actions explicitly consider the anticipated effects of climate
change in identifying appropriate measures to increase the resiliency of the urban forest and are revised
in response to new information as it becomes available.
For trees outside of natural areas, generally recommended species diversity targets are to have no more
than 5% of Torontos trees of one species, no more than 10% one genus and no more than 20% one
family. The intent of this target is to increase the urban forests resilience to stressors such as species
or genus-specific pests, as well as climate change that may affect some species more than others. A
number of the actions related to climate change will be working towards achieving this target.
Actions for Addressing Climate Change Impacts:

continue to work with other agencies (e.g., TRCA, Natural Resources Canada, OMNR) to
highlight and address information gaps with respect to urban forests and climate change (e.g.,
tree species response to climate change in the urban environment) by:
monitoring species composition over time (through the urban forestry database system and
i-Tree Eco permanent sample plots)
evaluating planting success by species in different settings (e.g., naturalization areas, parks
and streets)
adapting species mix based on diversity criteria and planting success (as per the monitoring
plan)
using monitoring data to refine species planting lists
pursuing partnerships with research institutions or other organizations to refine planting lists
with a focus on climate change adaptation,
promote new standards for tree planting in hard landscapes that accommodate adequate soil
volume and moisture retention, mature tree growth and facilitate required utility access,
continue to refine watering programs as needed to respond to prolonged droughts that are
anticipated in future,
continue to increase and adapt tree species planting lists to include more species, particularly
those that have demonstrated urban resilience to extreme conditions and native species from
slightly warmer climates, and
develop a database with mapping of large, robust populations of native species for seed
collection and continued biodiversity
48
http://www.greeninfrastructureontario.org/sites/greeninfrastructureontario.org/files/Health,%20Prosperity%20and%20Sustainbility_The%20Case%20
for%20Green%20Infrastructure%20in%20Ontario_printable%20version.pdf
40
A number of the actions in the preceding section under Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining
the Urban Forest also directly address climate change, particularly those that speak to species diversity
selection and monitoring, as well as focused plantings in identified urban heat island areas.
Tree Seed Diversity Project

Currently, much of the tree planting stock available in Toronto consists of commercial cultivars
or clones, which when overused reduce the genetic diversity and long-term health of the urban
forest. As cloned trees are genetically identical, stands of clones are highly vulnerable to threats
from insects and disease. In addition, the selection of clones from the same climate zone further
increases vulnerability. Recognizing this, Trees Ontario and the Urban Forestry branch developed
an innovative pilot project whereby locally adapted seeds of native species are propagated and the
young trees are used in tree planting projects to increase the genetic diversity of the urban forest.
The program has planted a total of 1,300 trees over the past three years.
Specific Project Goals:

increase the genetic diversity of native trees planted in Torontos natural areas,
produce 1,500 seedlings annually from seed collected from healthy native trees in Torontos
parks and ravines, and
expand the seed bank for Torontos native species to help ensure that seed will be available
in poor seed years (as per natural cycles of good seed crops)
Partnership Agencies:
Toronto Hydro, City of Toronto Urban Forestry, Trees Ontario, the Forest Gene Conservation
Association, and OMNR
Figure 25 - Urban Forestry crews planting trees grown from seed sourced from natural areas in Toronto
41
6.5 Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest

6.5.1 Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest: Current Practices and
Challenges
Within urban areas, public parks and green spaces provide an important refuge from the busy built
environment. Vegetated areas and in particular treed areas are shown to contribute to the improved
physical and mental health of city residents (see Section 1 of this Plan). Torontos ravines and natural
heritage system are exceptional compared to many large cities, as many of these green spaces continue
to support a diversity of wildlife and native plant species. However, increasing pressures on the citys
natural areas have degraded the natural environment, including many of the treed natural areas.
It is expected that uncontrolled recreational uses in these areas will continue to be a serious and
widespread issue as the citys population increases.
The City plays a key role in protecting urban natural areas. The effects of sustained and intensive use of
natural areas in urban centres include:

soil compaction from repeated foot traffic,

trampling of ground cover species and tree saplings (resulting in a loss of vegetation and forest
structure),
disturbance to wildlife (particularly in the breeding season), and
the introduction and increased dispersal of invasive species
Examples of the soil compaction and trampling effects can be seen in many local ravine areas (Figure
26), where sustained human and pet traffic on steep ravine slopes has led to high levels of erosion and
habitat disturbance.
Figure 26 - Glen Stewart Ravine with impacts from intensive use on unsanctioned paths
42
Invasive species also pose a significant threat to the native biodiversity of Toronto and many parts of
southern Ontario. Examples of significant losses to native forest diversity as a result of introduced pest
species include:

the loss of American chestnut (Catanea dentata) to Chestnut Blight (Cryphonectria parasitica),
the loss of American elm to Dutch Elm Disease (Ophiostoma ulmi), and
the imminent loss of ash species to EAB
The sustainability of the citys forested natural areas is under threat as a result of invasive plants. On the
forest floor, garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), dog strangling vine (Vincetoxicum rossicum) and European
buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) continue to displace the native flora in Torontos forested areas. The recent
Every Tree Counts report indicated that approximately 22% of the total leaf area of shrub species in Toronto
is accounted for by invasive species. Invasive species spread aggressively and can out number native plant
species, impacting a wide range of ecological functions in the natural areas in which they occur.
Urban Forestry staff works with agencies such as TRCA, OMNR and other City divisions such as City
Planning to implement habitat restoration and improvement projects in natural areas throughout the
city. Ideally, every natural area should receive regular management intervention. However, budgets are
limited and resources are allocated based on known priorities and threats. Locations for rare species
(identified and mapped through work undertaken by the City, TRCA, or OMNR) are used to help screen
the most important areas for continued management. For example, High Park is identified as an
ecologically significant area and requires intensive management to maintain the existing complement of
rare species49. Crothers Woods, Earl Bales Park, Glen Stewart Ravine, Marie Curtis Park, Milne Hollow,
Sherwood Park and Taylor Creek Park are examples of other areas where restoration management plans
provide guidance for restoration of the forest, enhancement of infrastructure for recreational uses, and
protection of the forest resources.
Some of the challenges inherent to efforts to minimize or prevent degradation of parks and natural areas
include:

lack of public awareness of the sensitivity of these areas,

limited opportunities for public recreation in some areas of the city, leading to misuse and overuse
of certain parks, and
insufficient recreation/trail infrastructure to direct activity appropriately outside of sensitive sites
6.5.2 Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest: Solutions

Recreational impacts on the urban forest are a direct result of misuse or overuse of the citys forested
natural areas. Therefore, the primary solution lies in expanding outreach to the natural area users
and engaging them in proper stewardship of these areas. The other important part of this solution is
implementing management strategies to prevent, minimize and mitigate the various stressors.
Urban Forestry staff are currently involved in the stewardship of many ecologically sensitive sites across
the approximately 4,000 ha of City managed natural heritage lands. Efforts are focused on:

49
maximizing habitat connectivity,

supporting and encouraging native biodiversity, and
working with stewardship groups and other City divisions to undertake various restoration and
naturalization activities
http://www.toronto.ca/trees/pdfs/HighParkMgmtPlan.pdf
43
Staff work with stewardship groups at key restoration sites and with contractors to complete invasive tree
management projects. In addition, Urban Forestry staff who administer the Ravine and Natural Feature
Protection By-law work closely with property owners to ensure that the ravine and natural heritage system
has net gains regarding ecosystem management wherever possible this often includes enhancement
plantings.
Design Solutions for Improving Resource Protection and Increasing Accessibility

Torontos ravine and natural area system is increasingly required to support recreational uses as the
citys population grows and more people choose to spend time in proximity to nature. This benefit,
however, places added pressure on sensitive areas which, by their very nature, have limited carrying
capacities and are vulnerable to the effects of overuse. One way to respond to the demand for
increasing use and access is through design solutions that minimize user impacts and direct users
away from the most sensitive portions of a site.
Implemented in 2012, the Glen Stewart Ravine project provided a boardwalk for more inclusive
access for pedestrians over a ground water seepage area, while enabling unimpeded flow of water
between the seepage area and the groundwater-fed Ames Creek. The railings encourage users to
remain on the boardwalk, thus minimizing impacts on the sensitive vegetation. The boardwalk helps
improve water quality, minimize soil erosion, and enhance user access and safety, while still
protecting sensitive vegetation. Cedar post and paddle fencing also keep users on the main path
system, protecting sensitive slopes that have highly erodible sandy soils.
Figure 27 - Glen Stewart Ravine boardwalk and staircase designed to limit user impacts on seepage area and
sandy slopes.
Actions for Managing Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest:

44
develop policies aimed at restricting inappropriate land uses and preventing further habitat
fragmentation in significant natural areas,
collaborate with the Parks branch and TRCA to create a natural environment framework that
identifies, selects and prioritizes natural area management sites, with a focus on improving
habitat size and shape, use of native species, and improving linkages between habitats,
explore options for securing strategic land acquisitions with a view to improve key linkages
between parkland sites and protect natural areas from future development,
continue to develop and implement projects to mitigate invasive species and recreational impacts
in cooperation with partner agencies in consideration of these key actions:
selecting native species for planting using locally propagated trees and shrubs from native
seeds collected within Toronto parkland, (e.g., expanding Tree Seed Diversity Project)
protecting and managing natural areas through the strategic placement of trail systems,
design solutions for resource protection and by-law enforcement
continuing to work internally and in cooperation with other agencies to ensure species
selection is consistent with the species diversity targets for Toronto
eliminating existing invasive plants utilizing a combination of manual or chemical control
methods,
use Environmentally Significant Area mapping:
to prioritize management of natural areas based on levels of risk/threats
as a basis for future mapping updates (in coordination with City Planning and TRCA),
continue engagement of the public through programs supporting private land and garden
naturalization and education by Tree Protection and Plan Review staff,
maintain existing stewardship programs (in particular invasive plant management) to support
investments in past restoration projects on flagship and other sites. Expand stewardship and work
with the Parks branch to enable more volunteer stewardship in public natural areas
6.6 Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and

Sensitivity of the Urban Forest
6.6.1 Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the Urban
Forest: Selected Current Practices and Challenges
Increasing Awareness
One of the greatest challenges for urban forest managers in Toronto to date has been communicating
the value of trees as public assets to not only the public, but to policy and decision-makers in the City as
well. In part, this has to do with the historic lack of tools to evaluate and assign value to trees in the urban
landscape.
In Ontario and across Canada, forest resources are widely recognized as having immense commercial
value as lumber, pulp, value-added products like furniture and more recently, biofuels. Historically, forests
have been a significant part of what drives the resource-based economy of this country and in many parts
of the country forests continue to provide an important source of income today. However, the substantial
value of a mature, living tree is often overlooked. Many people do not recognize the significant dollar
value of the services provided by a mature tree, or the more intangible values related to trees such as
aesthetics, recreation, shade, and community health (as described in Section 1 of this Plan). Different
cultural perspectives on trees as either liabilities or assets also influences how much they are valued.
Initiatives being undertaken to expand the current levels of awareness include information posted on the
Citys website, various public outreach and education events (such as the Colonel Sam Smith Spring
Bird Festival), and various tours, talks and workshops for schools and community groups. The Urban
Forestry web site and publications are continually improving by providing the public and decision-makers
with better information about forest values and the community benefits they provide. Various stewardship
initiatives, described below, also play an important part in increasing awareness.
45
Increasing Stewardship
Toronto has by-laws to protect the existing forest resources on City and private property. However, the
extent to which the City can influence maintenance and replacement of trees on private property is
limited. At the same time, residential areas present some of the greatest areas of opportunity for
maintaining and expanding the citys tree canopy because of the extent of yard space. Industrial areas, by
comparison, tend to be more extensively paved.
The benefits of trees in commercial areas are also well-documented
(see Section 1 of this Plan). Recognizing the value of a welcoming
urban streetscape, some Toronto Business Improvement Areas (BIAs)
have successfully partnered with the City to improve commercial
business areas. Additional opportunities for improving the growing
environment in commercial areas may arise during the course of
infrastructure renewal projects and improved coordination has begun
between City divisions, BIAs and the Urban Forestry branch to take
advantage of these opportunities as they arise.
The Urban Forestry branch is tasked with meeting the increasing
demand within the city for public outreach and stewardship related
to urban forestry issues. This is typically done through two program
streams: (1) the Parkland Naturalization Program and (2) the
Community Stewardship Program. Both programs operate on public
land, typically throughout Torontos ravine and natural environment
parks.
(1)The Parkland Naturalization Program
The Parkland Naturalization Program implements various restoration
projects with the engagement of volunteers and other partners. The
signature event of this program is Trees Across Toronto, an annual
volunteer tree planting event held in the early spring. This large-scale
event is supported by Parks, Forestry & Recreation and other divisions
including Social Development, Finance & Administration (Communications), and the City Clerks Office.
Thousands of native trees and shrubs are planted at multiple sites across Toronto at this one event
through the assistance of volunteers and with the financial support of various corporate partners.
Figure 28 - Aerial view of different canopy cover in different
land uses: residential (top) and
industrial (bottom)
(2) The Community Stewardship Program

The Community Stewardship Program engages volunteers through meaningful and on-going
maintenance, monitoring and restoration activities at identified sites. Activities include invasive plant
removal, watering planted vegetation, collecting litter, planting native vegetation, putting up and
maintaining bird boxes, creating habitat brush bundles and monitoring specific conditions of the site.
The purpose of the Community Stewardship Program is to involve the community in the long-term
stewardship of naturalization sites throughout the city and to support these sites in becoming functional
ecosystems within the natural environment parklands system. This program plays an important part in
educating the community about the natural environment while also training them in proper restoration
techniques. A knowledgeable, skilled base of volunteers is invaluable, as they are capable of maintaining
sites independently by using best management practices.
46
The main objectives of the program are to:

provide meaningful educational opportunities to community volunteers

promote the importance of restoration and naturalization
restore native plant communities
manage invasive plants
enhance habitat features
monitor vegetation and wildlife
The work completed through the program has contributed to improved natural habitat and enhanced
the ecological value of the Citys natural environment parklands. It also uses an effective and innovative
feedback system, so that the program can continue to grow and strengthen. Annual feedback shows great
dedication and satisfaction with involvement in the program and most importantly high volunteer retention.
Since 2008, the program has also made gains in engaging the diverse cultural communities of Toronto.
Best practice examples of other stewardship initiatives currently in place in the city are highlighted in the
following text boxes.50
Crothers Woods Trail Management Strategy

An informal network of trails was created over several decades of use in Crothers Woods, a
52 hectare ecologically significant mature maple-beech-oak woodland located in the Don River
Valley. Unfortunately, most of the Crothers Woods trails were never planned and as a result were
unsustainable and were degrading the environment50.
In response, Urban Forestry developed and
implemented the innovative Crothers Woods
Trail Management Strategy in cooperation and
consultation with trail users and stakeholders. The
Strategy brings together trail enthusiasts and land
managers in an effort to develop an integrated,
responsive plan that addresses the recreational
needs of users and protects the natural features in
this ecologically sensitive area. Interactive mapping
and a brochure is available at the Crothers Woods
website http://www.toronto.ca/parks/projects/
crothers.htm.
Figure 29 - Crothers Woods Trail
50
The lessons learned and partnerships developed

from experiences in Crothers Woods will soon be
applied throughout the city with the development of
a city-wide Natural Environment Trail Management
Strategy in 2012. The strategy will identify the
opportunities, constraints, planning, policies and
management principles required to balance the
protection of the City of Torontos natural areas
with provision of safe and enjoyable recreational
opportunities for all.
http://www.toronto.ca/trees/pdfs/CrothersWoodsTrailManagementStrategy.pdf
47
Regeneration of Sensitive Habitats Using Prescribed Burns in High Park

Urban Forestry undertakes a series of
prescribed burns in the black oak savannah
of High Park each year there are favourable
conditions for doing so. A prescribed burn is a
deliberately set and carefully controlled fire that
burns low to the ground and consumes dried
leaves, small twigs and grass stems but does
not harm larger trees.
Black oak savannahs, a habitat at risk of
extinction throughout North America, are
dependent on fires to control competing
vegetation, enrich the soil and promote growth
and germination of rare species51. Urban
Forestry started this restoration technique in
1997, following the recommendations of a
1992 report that confirmed the black oak trees
in Toronto were approaching 200 years of
age without signs of successful regeneration.
Prescribed burning was proposed as a possible
solution to encourage oak regeneration and to
re-establish the prairie grasses and herbaceous
plants that should be part of the black oak
woodland plant community. Since the first test
plot burns in 1997 and 1998, nine controlled
burns have been successfully completed.
Prescribed burn management, in combination
with native species planting and invasive
species management, has produced
tremendous results. Oak regeneration has
increased and populations of prairie grasses
and wildflowers have expanded. For more
information and answers to commonly asked
questions please see http://www.toronto.ca/
trees/pdfs/Prescribed_Burn_Fact_Sheet_5.pdf
Figure 30 - High Park black oak savannah management

prescribed burn
6.6.2 Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the Urban
Forest: Solutions51
There are already a number of urban forestry initiatives and programs underway for improving awareness
and stewardship of the urban forest, as described above. These programs need to be continued and, in
some cases, improved and expanded.
51
48
http://www.toronto.ca/trees/pdfs/HighParkMgmtPlan.pdf
Actions for Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the Urban Forest:

increase public education regarding natural area management activities, trail systems and
appropriate trail user conduct to protect natural areas. Tools to be investigated for use include:
the production of marketing materials
website education
alignment with Parks branch communication and education
coordinating with the Recreation branch on awareness posters, brochures, and maps in
community recreation centres,
proceed with a natural and paved surface trail study and network with other divisions and
stakeholders to explore the funding potential for the development and management of a multipurpose trail system, including:
interpretive signage
wayfinding signage
trail enhancements,
explore the potential for fund creation by private partners to finance land stewardship of privately
owned sites adjacent to public property where there is opportunity for contiguous canopy benefits,
support staff resources to expand the Community Stewardship Program to meet the demand for
stewardship activities, and
continue to make City street tree data available to individuals and community groups to facilitate
neighbourhood studies of local forest conditions
Figure 31 - Parkland Naturalization Program planting event Trees Across Toronto
49
7. MONITORING PROGRESS AND MEASURING

SUCCESS CRITERIA AND INDICATORS OF
FOREST SUSTAINABILITY
Good urban forest management requires:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
sound information about the resource,

identification of desired goals and objectives,
a roadmap for how to achieve the preferred urban forestry outcome,
programs to educate, inform and engage the community in support of forestry goals, and
a feedback and monitoring framework to measure success.
The vision and desired goals of this Plan are presented in Section 3. A roadmap for how to achieve the
desired urban forestry outcome is laid out in the actions presented in Section 6 of this Plan. Section 6
also includes an overview of outreach and stewardship programs that are already in place, as well as
identification of several actions for improving and expanding these programs.
This section provides the monitoring framework to measure success.
Urban forest sustainability is fundamental to achieving the vision for Torontos urban forest and the
strategic goal of 40% canopy cover. A sustainable urban forest is defined as the naturally occurring and
planted trees in cities which are managed to provide the inhabitants with a continuing level of economic,
social, environmental and ecological benefits today and into the future52. It is generally accepted that
achievement of urban forest sustainability is founded on the following three components:

the vegetative resource (i.e., the trees themselves),

appropriate management of the resource, and
a strong community framework
The monitoring plan as shown in Table 6 incorporates these three components and identifies a
comprehensive set of criteria and corresponding indicators of success that are aligned with these
components and were selected with consideration for the following factors:
SIMPLICITY
Criteria and indicators of success should be understandable to those without formal training in
forestry.
COST-EFFECTIVENESS
Information must be able to be collected under existing management and reporting systems.
RELIABILITY
Indicators selected must provide useful information on progress towards improving the sustainability
of the forest resource.
OBJECTIVITY
Indicators selected must provide an objective measure that is not affected by interpretive bias.
The criteria are designed to assess all aspects of urban forest sustainability and the corresponding
series of easily measurable indicators of success will serve to assess progress towards urban forest
sustainability and evaluate success.
This Plan allows the City to track successes and also allows for the identification of areas where success
has been limited. Monitoring progress and measuring success will allow Parks, Forestry and Recreation
52
50
Clark, J.R., Matheny, N.P., Cross, G. and Wake, V. A Model of Urban Forest Sustainability. Journal of Arboriculture 21, (1997):17-30. Print.
to determine if the actions outlined in this Plan are effective at addressing the challenges facing the urban
forest and are contributing to achievement of the Plans strategic goals. This information can then trigger
the development and implementation of new or revised actions which, over time can better address
challenges and meet strategic goals.
The baseline conditions listed are drawn from 2011 data, as indicated. In some cases the baseline
condition is unknown and will therefore need to be determined as part of future initiatives.
Fiscal restraint has been a reality for the past decade and it is not anticipated that this will change in the
near future. Setting immediate priorities, monitoring of progress and strategic use of available resources
will allow for efficient and cost effective management of Torontos urban forest.
Table 6. Criteria and indicators of urban forest sustainability for Toronto53 54 55
Criterion
Tactical
Objective
Indicator
Baseline Condition
(2011)
Data source/
Frequency of
Methodology/
Measurement
Responsibility
Vegetative Resource (Health of the Forest)

1.
2.
Overall species
composition
Street tree species

composition
A diverse mix of species

including native trees
Species composition
of the urban forest
Increase native
biodiversity and
increase resilience to
pests generally through
increased species
diversity
No species to
represent more than
10% of the tree
population
Achieve the 5-10-2055

rule
No more than 5% of one
species, 10% of one
genus and 20% of one
family
Assessment of
diversity using i-Tree
Eco modeling of
Simpson Diversity
Index54
Species with highest populations:

Acer saccharum 10.2%
Acer platanoides 6.5%
Fraxinus americana 5.3%
Thuja occidentalis 16%
i-Tree Eco permanent

sample plots
Every 10 years to do
sample plots using
i-Tree methods for
random field samples
Simpsons Diversity Index tree

species diversity by land use:
Single Family Res. 23.7
Institutional 17.7
Open Space 10.7
Industrial 8.3
Multi-family Res. 8.3
Utility & Transp. 5.5
Commercial 4.4
Species composition
of City-owned street
trees
Species 5%
Acer platanoides 22%
Genus 10%
Acer 34%
Family 20%
Aceraceae 33%
Urban Forestry
database, GIS mapping
of areas of interest
with species diversity
analysis
Every 5 years to
prepare UF diversity
maps
3.
Native biodiversity
Reduce overall nonnative, invasive tree

and shrub species
populations in Toronto.
Native species are
encouraged
Percent non-native
invasive trees and
shrubs city-wide
Target:
< 10% for trees
< 20% for shrubs
Trees: approx. 12%

Shrubs: 22% non-native invasive
species.

sample plots
Every 10 years
4.
Overall tree size

class distribution
Provide for uneven size

distribution. Increase the
percentage of mid-large
sized trees (30.6 cm+)
Percent of population
within the following
size classes: 0 -15.2
cm dbh
15.2 - 30.6 cm dbh
30.6 cm + dbh
14% of trees are > 30.6 cm in

diameter

sample plots
Every 10 years
0 -15.2 cm dbh
15.2 - 30.6 cm dbh
30.6 cm + dbh
68% = 0 -15.2 cm dbh

18% = 15.2- 30.6 cm dbh
14% = 30.6 cm + dbh
53
Adapted from: Kenney, W.A., van Wassenaer, Philip J.E. and Satel, A.L. Criteria and Indicators for Strategic Urban Forest Planning and Management. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 37.3 (2011):108-117. Print.
54
Simpsons Diversity Index, www.countrysideinfo.co.uk/simpsons.htm
55
Raupp, M.J., Buckelew Cumming, A. and Raupp, E.C. Street Tree Diversity in Eastern North America and Its Potential for Tree Loss to Exotic Borers. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 32.6 (2006):297-304. Print.
51
Tactical
Objective
Criterion
5.
Street tree size

class distribution
0-15.2 cm dbh
15.2 -30.6 cm dbh
30.6 cm + dbh
6.
Overall tree
condition ratings
Indicator
Baseline Condition
(2011)
Data source/
Frequency of
Methodology/
Measurement
Responsibility
Increase the percentage

of mid-large sized trees
(30.6 cm+)
within the following
size classes:
0 -15.2 cm dbh
15.2 -30.6 cm dbh
30.6 cm + dbh
25% of trees are >30.6 cm

47% = 0-15.2 cm dbh
28% = 15.2 -30.6 cm dbh
25% = 30.6 cm + dbh
Urban Forestry
database
Every 5 years, prepare

region size class maps
Increase percentage of
trees in excellent/good
condition
in good excellent
condition
Target: > 80%
81% rated excellent/good

sample plots
Every 10 years
49% rated excellent/good
Urban Forestry
database
Every 5 years or less
in fair - poor condition
Target: < 20%
7.
Street tree
condition ratings
Increase percentage of
trees in good - excellent
condition
in good excellent
condition
Target: > 70%
in fair - poor condition
Target: < 30%
8.
Establishment
of newly planted
street trees
Increase the rate of

survival of trees
15 cm dbh
Percent of street
trees replaced within
3 yrs of planting
Target: < 5%
670 trees 15 cm dbh were

removed
Represents 3.8% of the 17,546
newly planted street trees
Urban Forestry
database
Annually
9.
Establishment of
newly planted trees
in natural areas
High rate of success for

newly planted trees
Percent of tree
survival during first
5 years
Unknown
Urban Forestry
database
Annually
26.6 - 28%56 canopy cover
High resolution leaf-on

aerial and satellite
imagery
Every 10 years Land

cover classification
with leaf-on satellite
imagery
Target: > 75%

As measured through
monitoring on 10%
of planting sites
annually
10.
Tree canopy cover
40% canopy cover

Approximate increase
of 7,600- 8,500 ha of
canopy city-wide
Estimated 57,000114,000 trees to be
planted annually on
public lands
Percent tree canopy

cover for the city
Area of additional
canopy cover
57,000-114,000 trees
planted annually on
public lands
An estimated 16,864 ha 17,752

ha of canopy exists city-wide
Annual average = 100,000 trees
planted (last 5 years)
GIS mapping
Urban Forestry
Database
Annual review of new

planting areas
Management of the Resource (Evaluating Effectiveness)

11.
Street tree
maintenance
Reactive maintenance
service wait times:
3-6 months
Proactive maintenance
service wait times:
7 year cycle
56
Wait times for service

7 year cycle
for proactive
maintenance
Reactive maintenance wait time:

6-9 month
Urban Forestry
Database
Maintenance wait time: 20 year

cycle
Nowak, David. J., et al. 2013.

Every Tree Counts: A Portrait of Torontos Urban Forest. Appendix 4: Methodologies for Estimating Canopy Cover.
52
Annually
Tactical
Objective
Indicator
To increase net trees

protected
Wait times for tree

by-law permits
75% applications
meeting development
review application
corporate standards for
review time frames
Response time frame

for development
review applications
Management of
publicly owned
natural areas,
protection of
significant
ecological features
Management of
significant ecological
features - 10% of ESAs
managed
Percent of the total

area of ESAs actively
managed
GIS mapping layers for ESAs
Comprehensive
inventory of urban
forest resource
Update a city-wide
inventory every 10 years
Availability of current
inventory information
to describe the forest
resource
Street tree
inventory
Update street
tree inventory as
management occurs
continually improve
accuracy of database
Criterion
12.
13.
14.
15.
Tree protection
Baseline Condition
(2011)
Untracked at this time
Data source/
Frequency of
Methodology/
Measurement
Responsibility
Urban Forestry
Database
Annually
City of Toronto
Environmental Planning
ESA criteria
Annual mapping to
determine area
Last city-wide inventory (i-Tree

Eco) completed 2008
Analysis completed and report
published in 2010

sample plots
Every 10 years.
Availability of current
inventory information
to describe street tree
population
Continually updated
Urban Forestry
database
Quarterly
Tracked quarterly
= 71% averaged city-wide
13.4%57 of ESAs managed
Next update to be
completed 2019-2020
Street tree inventory

updated continuously
16.
Spatial distribution
of urban forest
Update a digital forest

cover map every 10
years, available in
the Citys integrated
geospatial environment
Availability of high
resolution forest
cover map for
planning purposes
Last digital cover map produced in

2008 using 2007 imagery
High resolution leaf-on

satellite/aerial imagery
Every 10 years:
Next update to be
completed 2019-2020
17.
Urban forest
management plan
Maintain a publicly
available strategic forest
management plan
Current urban forest

management plan for
the city
First Plan completed in 2012
Various data sources:

Urban Forestry
database, i-Tree Eco,
GIS.
Every 10 years
18.
Operational plan
(service plan)
Annually updated
operational plan (service
plan)
Comprehensive
operations plan with
detailed components
on all areas: Area
Tree Maintenance,
EAB, etc.
Updated each year with budget

request
Approved Operating
and Capital budgets
Annually
Number of requests
under the residential
tree planting program
Untracked at this time
Urban Forestry
database
Annually
Number of and
attendance at Urban
Forestry workshops/
information sessions
Unknown
Urban Forestry
Anually
Community Framework (Community Engagement)

19.
Awareness of
urban forestry
programs
Increase number of
requests for front yard
trees under the Citys
free residential tree
planting program
Promote tree benefits
through tree by-laws
20.
Communication of
forestry information
Increase awareness of
urban forestry programs
and benefits of trees
Number of
educational items
posted on Urban
Forestry website
57
This includes ESAs as per current Official Plan, with ESAs expected to increase significantly with Official Plan revision this percentage would decrease
significantly. Areas managed include plantings and burn areas by staff, City contracts, and partners.
53
Tactical
Objective
Criterion
21.
Community
participation/
coordination with
community groups
Meet demand for the

number of community
groups looking for
stewardship/ forest
education
Number of community
volunteers and/or
groups participating
in stewardship
activities
Conduct systematic
outreach
Number of community
tree planting and/
or maintenance
initiatives
Coordination between
groups and the City to
meet common goals
54
Indicator
Baseline Condition
(2011)
Gap: staff cannot currently meet
demand for groups wanting to
participate in stewardship
Data source/
Frequency of
Methodology/
Measurement
Responsibility
Urban Forestry staff
to track numbers
for both those who
attend programs and
those who cannot be
accommodated
Annual tracking of
participation
On-going informal
review annually
Urban Forestry to
develop a survey for
gaining feedback from
partner groups
22.
Municipal
coordination
Collaborate and
coordinate with City
Divisions and agencies
on a project-specific
basis towards
achievement of the Citys
urban forestry goals and
objectives
Number of mutually
beneficial projects
and initiatives
completed in
partnership
Ongoing partnerships and

collaboration with City Planning,
Transportation Services, Toronto
Water, Technical Services, Toronto
Environment Office and Toronto
Public Health
Urban Forestry
Annual tracking of
participation
23.
Regional
coordination
Collaborate and
coordinate with
municipalities within
the GTA and/or other
municipal jurisdictions on
common urban forestry
goals
Regional planning
and coordination of
management plans,
studies regarding the
urban forest, policies,
best practices and
emerging issues
affecting forest
sustainability
Coordination with TRCA on

various projects including GTA tree
canopy studies.
Urban Forestry
Annual tracking of
participation
Collaboration and partnership with

Federal and Provincial agencies
regarding forest health care issues
8. CONCLUSION
Toronto has large, connected natural areas that provide the core of the citys forest system. The urban
forest represents a tremendously valuable resource to the city and the people who live, work and play
in it. The structural value of the urban forest is approximately $7 billion, while the ecological services it
provides to the city in terms of air pollution filtration and temperature moderation are estimated at over
$28.2 million. These calculations do not even capture the value of the urban forest in terms of the direct
economic and community benefits it provides (such as increases in property values and mental health)
or the value of its other ecological services (such as habitat for a high diversity of native and migratory
species). Torontos urban forest plays an increasing role in biodiversity conservation while it enhances air
quality, provides shade and reduces local energy consumption.
Although many people may think of trees as being able to essentially take care of themselves, in an urban
setting a range of management strategies are required to deal with the various challenges faced by trees
and the urban forest as a whole. Key challenges faced by Torontos urban forest include: threats to the
resources health from invasive pests, the need for ongoing and proactive maintenance of this extensive
resource, competition with urbanization and related infrastructure for space, stressors associated with
climate change, impacts associated with recreation in the citys natural areas and the need to continually
increase awareness of the value of the urban forest and the importance of its stewardship.
As a result of these challenges, this extensive natural resource requires management in order for it to be
sustained and enhanced. The goals of this plan, to increase canopy cover, achieve equitable distribution,
increase biodiversity, increase forest awareness, promote stewardship and improve monitoring reflect the
direction received from City Council. Some of the management approaches and tools employed by the
Urban Forestry branch places Toronto among world leaders in this sector. The resources to continue to
provide this level of management and to work with various partners in both the public and private sectors
are needed to maintain this status and sustain the resource itself. Furthermore, it is important that this
resource be protected, maintained and expanded to enable continued enjoyment of the citys shady
streets, parks and natural areas. The urban forest is a big part of what makes Toronto a very livable city; a
city within a park.
Through the implementation of this Plan, the City is showing its commitment to effectively maintaining,
protecting, planting and planning to sustain and expand the urban forest so that it can provide the
maximum possible value to the community. The full value of this resource cannot be reaped without
ongoing funding to address the challenges of pest management, proactive maintenance, natural area
management and sustained outreach services.
Although this Plan will be led by the Urban Forestry branch, its full and effective implementation
depends on the support and cooperation of various City divisions as well as partners in the public
and private sectors, including members of the community. With approximately 40% of the resource in
public ownership and the remaining 60% in private ownership, internal and external partnerships are
fundamental to making progress towards the goal of expanding the quality and quantity of the urban
forest across the city.
55
9. GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Area Tree Maintenance a program for providing proactive scheduled tree maintenance on City-owned
trees within a predefined geographic area.
Best Practices innovative techniques that may support more effective management of the resource.
They are not necessarily best management practices, which are a prescribed method for a specific type
of program, however in some instances they conform to best management practices as well.
DBH tree stem diameter measured at breast height, 1.4 metres above grade.
Ecological Land Classification (ELC) a system developed by the Ontario Ministry of Natural
Resources to delineate ecological units on the basis of soil, climate, physiography, and corresponding
vegetation. TRCA staff have used this system to delineate and differentiate natural areas within Toronto.
Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) areas identified by the City of Toronto that have local and
regional environmental significance. These areas are protected by the Citys Official Plan (OP). A map of
Environmentally Significant Areas (map 12) is contained within the OP and further study is underway to
identify additional ESAs across the City.
Continuous Soil Trench a trench where uncompacted soil is continuous under a sidewalk or other
hard surface. These zones can accommodate the root systems of multiple trees and allows for a shared
soil volume over a continuous unobstructed area below grade.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) a system that has been designed to capture, store,
manipulate and analyze geographically referenced data. GIS merges cartography, statistical analysis and
database technology.
Grey Infrastructure traditional built elements found within urban settings constructed from concrete or
asphalt such as roads, sidewalks, bridges, sewers or retaining walls.
Green Infrastructure living infrastructure such as trees, forests, bio-engineered slopes, bio-swales,
and green roofs. Also described as an interconnected network of green space that conserves natural
ecosystem values and functions.
Heat Vulnerability refers to the ability to withstand the effects of extreme heat. Toronto Public Health
has prepared several reports on the topic of heat vulnerability. They conducted a complex weighted
analysis with multiple variables to determine areas of the city where populations were considered at
higher risk for heat related health issues. Factors included age, income, housing type, distance to
shaded parkland and surface temperature. The research was shared with Urban Forestry with the
request of using the data to prioritize tree planting as a way to minimize further heat vulnerability. These
issues are summarized in the July 26, 2011 Board of Health Decision, http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/
viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2011.HL6.3.
i-Tree Eco previously called UFORE, or the Urban Forest Effects model, I-Tree Eco is a modeling
using a combination of field data and GIS analysis to calculate ecological services provided by trees
within a defined area. This tool quantifies the urban forest and can be used for making effective resource
management decisions or developing policy. This system was developed by USDA Forest Service
Northern Research Station http://www.itreetools.org/eco/index.php
Land Cover Classification a system of categorizing land according to the material that covers its
surface. Satellite imagery is used to help determine the area and percentage of land within each category.
For urban areas the categories include buildings, asphalt, concrete, turf, bare soil and tree canopy.
56
Leaf Area Percent a calculation of tree canopy that includes consideration for the volume and density
of leaves and is modeled through the i-Tree Eco method with different values associated with different
tree species. For example in Torontos urban forest there is a greater number of sugar maple trees (Acer
saccharum) by stem counts, but Norway maple exceeds sugar maple in terms of its leaf area percent in
the city.
LiDAR (Light Detection and Range technology) a remote sensing technology that uses light to
determine distance and other feature attributes. LiDAR provides an opportunity to aquire far more
accurate urban forestry data through the capture of tree elevation and volume data. LiDAR requires
extensive point data collection and therefore has a prohibitively high cost based on the specialized
technology and skills associated with it.
Naturalization the process of planting with native species of shrubs, trees and ground covers to
transform an area into a natural landscape. It can also refer to the natural succession of an unvegetated
or sparsely vegetated open space to a more well-vegetated landscape that may include a variety of plant
types, including shrubs and trees.
Restoration the process whereby natural areas that have been degraded (e.g., due to dominant
populations of invasive species) are rehabilitated by managing or removing the immediate source of the
degradation (e.g., invasive species) and planting with native species.
Satellite Imagery an image taken from a satellite containing pixel based data in a grid that can be
analyzed and converted from a raster format to a vector format. Vector format data (of points, lines and
shapes) can be readily analyzed for land use classification.
Stewardship natural area management where native species and native plant communities and habitat
types are managed, often with the support of external partners and/or community groups.
Silviculture the cultivation of trees and forested areas undertaken to control the establishment, growth,
composition, structure and quality of forest vegetation in order to meet predefined forest management
objectives.
Structural Value a replacement value estimated for trees based on their size, species and condition.
The standard used for estimating this value has been established by the Council of Tree and Landscape
Appraisers. For more information refer to http://treelink.org/joa/2002/july/05Nowak.pdf. For the purposes of
this report, field data and aerial imagery estimates have been used to model the structural value for the total
tree canopy.
Tree Hazard a significant defect of size, condition or structure that when coupled with tree species,
location and use level poses a risk of damage or injury requiring immediate action to be taken to eliminate
the perceived threat. A tree hazard must have both a defect and a target. A defect without a target is not a
hazard.
Urban Forest population of trees, shrubs and other flora and their habitat, growing in an urban area. In
Toronto the urban forest includes trees and other vegetation growing along streets, in parks, ravines and
natural areas, in front and back yards of homes, and in landscaped open spaces.
Urban Forest Canopy an area of leaves and branches that provide shade, contribute to energy reduction
and water retention and attenuate and intercept rain fall. It can include large shrubs as well as trees of all
sizes depending on the method used to determine canopy. For a more detailed review of various methods
that have been used to estimate canopy in Toronto see Every Tree Counts: A Portrait of Torontos Urban
Forest.
57
Appendix 1 Urban Forest Species Composition

Urban Forest Species Composition including species, genus and family
information
58
Potential Pest
Genus
Species
Family
Common Name
% Pop.
% Lf.
Area
Abies
balsamea
Pinaceae
balsam fir
0.1
0.1
Abies
concolor
Pinaceae
white fir
0.1
0.1
Acer
campestre
Aceraceae | Sapindaceae
hedge maple
0.1
0.1
Acer
ginnala
amur maple
0.1
0.1
Acer
negundo
boxelder
5.5
Acer
nigrum
black maple
0.5
Acer
palmatum
Japanese maple
0.3
0.1
Acer
platanoides
Norway maple
6.5
14.9
Acer
rubrum
red maple
0.2
0.8
Acer
saccharinum
silver maple
0.9
4.5
Acer
saccharum
sugar maple
10.2
11.6
Acer
x freemanii
Freeman maple
0.1
0.3
Aesculus
hippocastanum
Hippocastanaceae | Ulmaceae
horsechestnut
0.1
0.2
Ailanthus
altissima
Simaroubaceae
tree of heaven
0.7
0.7
Alnus
glutinosa
Betulaceae
European alder
0.2
0.1
Alnus
incana
Betulaceae
grey alder
0.4
0.1
Amelanchier
alnifolia
Rosaceae
western service berry
0.1
Amelanchier
arborea
Rosaceae
downy serviceberry
0.5
0.1
Amelanchier
canadensis
Rosaceae
eastern service berry
0.3
Amelanchier
laevis
Rosaceae
smooth service berry
Aralia
spinosa
Araliaceae
devils walking stick
0.1
Betula
alleghaniensis
Betulaceae
yellow birch
0.2
0.4
Betula
nigra
Betulaceae
river birch
Betula
papyrifera
Betulaceae
paper birch
1.4
2.5
Carpinus
caroliniana
Betulaceae
American hornbeam
0.2
0.1
Carya
cordiformis
Juglandaceae
bitternut hickory
0.3
0.8
Catalpa
speciosa
Bignoniaceae
northern catalpa
0.3
0.3
Celtis
occidentalis
Ulmaceae | Cannabaceae
common hackberry
0.1
Chamaecyparis
lawsoniana
Cupressaceae
Port Orford cedar
1.5
0.1
Cornus
alternifolia
Cornaceae
alternateleaf dogwood
0.1
Cornus
florida
Cornaceae
flowering dogwood
Cornus
mas
Cornaceae
cornelian cherry
Crataegus
calpodendron
Rosaceae
pear hawthorn
0.3
Crataegus
chrysocarpa
Rosaceae
fireberry hawthorn
0.1
0.1
Crataegus
crus-galli
Rosaceae
cockspur hawthorn
0.4
Crataegus
mollis
Rosaceae
downy hawthorn
0.1
0.1
Cydonia
oblonga
Rosaceae
quince
Elaeagnus
angustifolia
Elaeagnaceae
Russian olive
0.1
0.1
Euonymus
atropurpureus
Elaeagnaceae
eastern wahoo
Euonymus
europaea
Elaeagnaceae
European spindle tree
ALB
GM
EAB
DED

information
Potential Pest
Genus
Species
Family
Common Name
% Pop.
% Lf.
Area
ALB
GM
EAB
Fagus
grandifolia
Fagaceae
American beech
0.7
0.5
Fagus
sylvatica
Fagaceae
European beech
0.2
0.2
Fraxinus
americana
Oleaceae
white ash
5.3
2.7
Fraxinus
excelsior
Oleaceae
European ash
0.1
0.2
Fraxinus
pennsylvanica
Oleaceae
green ash
3.6
Ginkgo
biloba
Ginkgoaceae
ginkgo
Gleditsia
triacanthos
Fabaceae
honeylocust
1.5
1.2
Hamamelis
virginiana
Hamamelidaceae
witch hazel
0.1
Hibiscus
syriacus
Malvaceae
rose-of-sharon
Juglans
cinerea
Juglandaceae
butternut
0.2
0.6
Juglans
nigra
Juglandaceae
black walnut
0.2
0.7
Juniperus
chinensis
Cupressaceae
Chinese juniper
Juniperus
communis
Cupressaceae
common juniper
0.1
Juniperus
pinchotii
Cupressaceae
Pinchot juniper
Juniperus
virginiana
Cupressaceae
eastern red cedar
0.7
0.2
Larix
laricina
Pinaceae
tamarack
0.1
Ligustrum
lucidum
Oleaceae
Chinese privet
0.1
Magnolia
acuminata
Magnoliaceae
cucumber tree
0.2
0.1
Magnolia
x soulangeana
Magnoliaceae
saucer magnolia
0.1
Malus
angustifolia
Rosaceae
southern crabapple
Malus
baccata
Rosaceae
Siberian crabapple
0.1
0.3
Malus
coronaria
Rosaceae
sweet crabapple
0.2
0.1
Malus
sylvestris
Rosaceae
European crabapple
2.3
1.5
Malus
tschonoskii
Rosaceae
crabapple
0.2
0.2
Morus
alba
Moraceae
white mulberry
0.5
0.3
Morus
nigra
Moraceae
black mulberry
0.2
0.2
Morus
rubra
Moraceae
red mulberry
Ostrya
virginiana
Betulaceae
eastern hophornbeam
3.2
2.4
Other
species
other species
0.8
0.4
Picea
abies
Pinaceae
Norway spruce
1.2
Picea
glauca
Pinaceae
white spruce
3.3
4.6
Picea
pungens
Pinaceae
blue spruce
0.6
1.4
Pinus
nigra
Pinaceae
Austrian pine
1.4
2.7
Pinus
resinosa
Pinaceae
red pine
1.1
0.3
Pinus
strobus
Pinaceae
eastern white pine
1.5
0.9
Pinus
sylvestris
Pinaceae
scotch pine
0.6
0.4
Populus
balsamifera
Salicaceae
balsam poplar
0.4
Populus
deltoides
Salicaceae
eastern cottonwood
0.3
0.4
Populus
grandidentata
Salicaceae
bigtooth aspen
0.5
0.6
Populus
tremuloides
Salicaceae
quaking aspen
Populus
x canadensis
Salicaceae
Carolina poplar
0.1
0.3
Prunus
americana
Rosaceae
American plum
0.2
0.1
DED
o
o
59

information
60
Potential Pest
Genus
Species
Family
Common Name
% Pop.
% Lf.
Area
ALB
GM
Prunus
armeniaca
Rosaceae
apricot
0.1
Prunus
avium
Rosaceae
sweet cherry
0.6
0.1
0.6
Prunus
domestica
Rosaceae
common plum
Prunus
pensylvanica
Rosaceae
pin cherry
0.3
0.1
0.1
Prunus
persica
Rosaceae
nectarine
Prunus
sargentii
Prunus
serotina
Rosaceae
sargent cherry
0.1
Rosaceae
black cherry
2.3
1.8
Prunus
Pyrus
virginiana
Rosaceae
common chokecherry
1.9
0.9
communis
Rosaceae
common pear
0.7
0.4
Quercus
alba
Fagaceae
white oak
Quercus
macrocarpa
Fagaceae
bur oak
0.2
0.1
Quercus
robur
Fagaceae
English oak
0.1
Quercus
rubra
Fagaceae
northern red oak
0.6
1.3
Rhamnus
cathartica
Rhamnaceae
European buckthorn
1.6
0.5
Robinia
pseudoacacia
Fabaceae
black locust
0.2
0.9
Salix
alba
Salicaceae
white willow
0.3
1.5
Salix
babylonica
Salicaceae
weeping willow
0.1
0.5
Salix
discolor
Salicaceae
pussy willow
0.1
Salix
nigra
Salicaceae
black willow
0.1
0.6
Sorbus
americana
Rosaceae
American mountain ash
0.1
Sorbus
aucuparia
Rosaceae
European mountain ash
Sorbus
decora
Rosaceae
showy mountain ash
Syringa
reticulata
Oleaceae
Japanese tree lilac
Syringa
vulgaris
Oleaceae
common lilac
0.2
0.1
Taxus
baccata
Taxaceae
English yew
0.3
0.1
Taxus
canadensis
Taxaceae
Canada yew
0.4
0.1
Thuja
occidentalis
Cupressaceae
northern white cedar
15.6
2.8
Thuja
plicata
Cupressaceae
western redcedar
Tilia
americana
Tiliaceae
American basswood
1.4
1.5
Tilia
cordata
Tiliaceae
littleleaf linden
0.8
1.1
Tsuga
canadensis
Pinaceae
eastern hemlock
0.2
0.5
Ulmus
americana
Ulmaceae
American elm
1.5
3.7
Ulmus
pumila
Ulmaceae
Siberian elm
2.7
2.3
Ulmus
rubra
Ulmaceae
slippery elm
0.2
0.3
EAB
DED
o
o
Appendix 2 Development of Preliminary Planting Targets

The total area of the city is 63,412.5 ha, of which approximately 45% (28,536 ha) is in public ownership.
Assuming a current canopy cover of 26.6% to 28%, the analyses undertaken by the USDA Forest Service
for the City of Toronto indicates that approximately 570,000 trees are required to be established annually
in order to achieve a 40% canopy goal. This is calculated based on an average tree mortality rate of 3%
and includes estimated impacts associated with EAB.
Preliminary target calculations:
570,000 trees / 63,412.5 ha = 9 trees/ha annually established
570,000 trees x 45% (percentage of land in public ownership) = 256,500 trees on publicly owned land.
Assuming natural regeneration rates are proposed to be 5 to 7 trees/ha, based on Torontos climate zone
and extensive natural system and that estimated land available for planting by the City and other public
partners is 28,536 ha (45% of 63,412.5 ha).
Lower Natural Regeneration Scenario (5 trees/ha):
28,536 ha x 5 trees/ha established through natural regeneration = 142,680 trees/year.
To estimate how many trees the City would be required to plant in excess of natural regeneration:
256,500 (number of newly established trees required on public property)
142,680 (number of trees expected to regenerate naturally on public property)
=113,820 (number of trees to be planted on public property)
or approximately 114,000 trees/year
Higher Natural Regeneration Scenario (7 trees/ha):
28,536 ha x 7 trees/ha established through natural regeneration = 199,752 trees/year.
256,500 (number of newly established trees required on public property)
-199,752 (number of trees expected to regenerate naturally on public property)
= 56,748 (number of trees to be planted on public property)
or approximately 57,000 trees/year to be planted on publicly owned land
Therefore based on the above-noted assumptions, between 57,000 114,000 trees/year would
need to be planted on publicly owned land to achieve a 40% canopy cover goal by 2060.
Additional assumptions:
1. Natural area management would be done in areas of highest priority, recognizing that plantings in
natural areas do not contribute significantly to this general calculation on a city-wide basis.
2. Parks, schools and areas adjacent to roadways would be planted to compensate for the lack of
suitable planting area on roadways, bikeways and other transportation surfaces.
61
toronto.ca/trees

Toronto's Strategic Forest Management Plan 2012-2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toronto's Strategic Forest Management Plan 2012-2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toronto's Strategic Forest Management Plan 2012-2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUSTAINING AND EXPANDING THE URBAN FOREST:

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Parks, Forestry and Recreation

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

6.4.1 Climate Change Impacts: Current Practices and Challenges......................................... 38

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

A summary of information about Torontos urban forest.............................................................vii

View of downtown Toronto from Crothers Woods

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

Canopy cover target

Number of trees on public lands

approximately 4.1 million (40%)

Number of trees on private lands

approximately 6.1 million (60%)

Characteristics of the trees that

68% are less than 15.2 cm diameter

Structural value of the urban forest

Ecological services** provided

valued at $28.2 million annually

valued at $25 million

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Long Term Vision

Vision for the 10 Year Life of this Plan

A healthy and expanding urban forest, incorporating sound urban forestry

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

Four Service Pillars

Maintenance of the Urban Forest

Challenges to Sustaining and Expanding Torontos Urban

Forest Health Threats

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

In 2007 and 2008, the City of

European Gypsy Moth will always

Tree Maintenance Requirements and Expectations

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

Balancing Urbanization Impacts and Sustaining the Urban Forest

Efforts to grow trees along city streets

Climate Change Impacts

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Though the exact nature of the impacts of

Actions to be taken for climate change

Recreational Pressures on the Urban Forest

lack of public awareness of

The effects of high recreational use

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

Increasing Public Awareness of the Value and Sensitivity of the

Measuring Performance and Progress

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

Why is the Urban Forest Important?

Human health and community benefits:

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

Currently, over 80% of

TRCA. Town of Ajax Urban Forest Study, Part A. 2009.

Statistics Canada. http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo62a-eng.htm

TORONTOS STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN

Table 2 - Benefits of the urban forest

PARKS, FORESTRY AND RECREATION

2. OVERVIEW OF THE STRATEGIC FOREST