28 Grado et al.: Status, Needs, and Knowledge About Urban Forestry the communities (48.4%, n = 77) felt budgetary restrictions were the most important need, whereas 4.4% (n = 7) did not. However, 18.2% (n = 29) did not respond to this question. This study examined whether communities felt staffing limitations impacted their adoption of urban and commu- nity forestry programs. While 32.7% (n = 52) of surveyed communities felt this was the greatest hindrance to program adoption, 10.7% (n = 17) indicated it was somewhat of a hindrance, and 2.5% (n = 4) said it had little effect on program adoption. Several (20.1%, n = 32) did not respond to this question. The perception of staffing limitations by communities as a problem was clearly an issue: 39.6% (n = 63) of the communities viewed it as very important, while 19.5% (n = 31) felt it was somewhat important. Only 3.8% (n = 6) did not view it as a hindrance. Approximately 18.0% (n = 28) did not respond to this question. Breaking down the response data by community size indicated that 55.2% communities with fewer than 2,000 inhabitants found it more difficult to adopt an urban and community forestry program compared to 25% of communi- ties with more than 10,000 people. This trend was consistent for responses by community size for budget restrictions and staffing limitations. Whether communities have an urban and community forestry program or not, approximately 72% of communities with more than 2,000 people indicated that funding had the greatest impor- tance. Although the importance placed on budgetary restrictions followed a similar pattern, staffing limitations showed little difference in importance across community size. Awareness of Urban and Community Forestry Resources and Funding Opportunities Surveyed communities responded to general questions regarding their awareness of urban and community forestry resources. A majority of surveyed communities were aware of Arbor Day (67.9%, n = 108) and the Mississippi Forestry Commission (MFC) (57.9%, n = 92). A portion of this awareness has come from their association with MUFC. Earth Day was identi- fied by 55.3% (n = 88) of the surveyed commu- nities. Other resources or programs highly identified were the Tree City USA program (49.1%, n = 78), the Transportation Enhance- ment Tree Planting program (T-21 money) (30.2%, n = 48), and the Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Challenge Grants programs (23.3%, n = 37). Other programs or resources such as Champion Trees, the Mississippi Urban Forestry Council, the National Urban Forestry Council, and the National Tree Trust were not ©2006 International Society of Arboriculture Unaware Did not answer Unaware Did not answer Unaware Did not answer Unaware Did not answer Other funding Aware Unaware Did not answer well known. Although the MUFC was not well known throughout the state, survey respondents indicated that its presence was becoming known through a variety of means such as contacts with foresters or participation in urban and community forestry–related events. Also, for many years, the MUFC was tied to the MFC (they have been operating independently for only a few years). When examining responses by community size, munici- palities with more than 10,000 persons were, unsurprisingly, very familiar with these programs, whereas smaller commu- nities were less so. Interestingly, small- to mid-sized commu- nities lacked much awareness of the Tree City USA, T-21, and Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Challenge Grants programs. Surveyed communities responded to questions regarding their awareness of potential urban and community funding sources (Table 4). More than one-third of respondents (35.8%) were aware of funding opportunities through the Transportation Enhancement Tree Planting program (T-21 money), and 28.9% knew of the Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Challenge Grants. Disaggregating the data by community size indicated that larger communities were better informed than smaller communities about funding availability for programs such as Table 4. Awareness of funding sources for urban and community forestry projects or programs as indicated by community leaders in Mississippi by community size during 2004 (n = 159). < 2,000 Inhabitants 11 (12.6) 75 (86.2) 1 (1.1) 9 (10.3) 77 (88.5) 1 (1.1) 2,000–10,000 > 10,000 Total count (%) count (%) Federal Cooperative Forestry Assistance Grants Aware 7 (17.5) 33 (82.5) 0 (0.0) 14 (35.0) 26 (65.0) 0 (0.0) 18 (45.0) 22 (55.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (2.5) count (%) count (%) 8 (25.0) Urban and Community Forestry Assistance Challenge Grants Aware Transportation Enhancement Tree Planting Program (T-21) Aware 14 (16.1) 72 (82.8) 1 (1.1) Partnership Enhancement Monetary Grants Aware 3 (3.4) 83 (95.4) 1 (1.1) 2 (2.3) 84 (96.6) 1 (1.1) 39 (97.5) 0 (0.0) 1 (2.5) 39 (97.5) 0 (0.0) 24 (75.0) 132 (83.0) 0 (0.0) 23 (71.9) 26 (16.4) 1 (0.6) 9 (28.1) 112 (70.4) 0 (0.0) 25 (78.1) 7 (21.9) 101 (63.5) 0 (0.0) 3 (9.4) 29 (90.6) 151 (95.0) 0 (0.0) 2 (6.3) 30 (93.8) 153 (96.2) 0 (0.0) 46 (28.9) 1 (0.6) 57 (35.8) 1 (0.6) 7 (4.4) 1 (0.6) 5 (3.1) 1 (0.6)
January 2006
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Search Text Block
Page #page_num
#doc_title
Hi $receivername|$receiveremail,
$sendername|$senderemail wrote these comments for you:
$message
$sendername|$senderemail would like for you to view the following digital edition.
Please click on the page below to be directed to the digital edition:
$thumbnail$pagenum
$link$pagenum
Your form submission was a success. You will be contacted by Washington Gas with follow-up information regarding your request.
This process might take longer please wait
