88 Sydnor et al.: Economic Impact Potential of Emerald Ash Borer (Agrilus planipennis) Table 6. Potential region-wide losses in millions of dollars (to the nearest million) giving mean and median values for landscape value, tree removal costs, and replacement costs. Street, park, and private trees are provided separately as are totals. Landscape Values Street Trees Park Trees Private Trees Total (median-based) $1,852 $252 $5,625 $7,729 (mean-based) $2,162 $899 $11,952 $15,013 placement costs including street, park, and private trees varies between $2,664 (median-based) and $5,201 (mean-based) mil- lion. While tree replacement costs are smaller than landscape val- ues and tree removal costs, they still will need to be covered in public and private budgets (assuming replacement of lost trees). A final appreciation for the impact of EAB in this four-state region can be obtained by looking at grand totals. Total median- based cost estimates including landscape, removal, and replace- ment costs are $13.4 billion. Using means to calculate the grand total yields $26 billion as a potential loss due to EAB. Previ- ous research estimated that under the worst case scenario (i.e., mean-based estimates of the complete loss of urban ash in Ohio), a $7.5 billion dollar loss was possible (Sydnor et al. 2007a). SUMMARY AND LIMITATIONS Readers are reminded that several assumptions, discussed throughout the paper, were behind the estimates presented. The biggest assumptions related to the ability of managers to estimate ash densities in their respective communities (particularly for ash on private lands), that ash densities generally are similar across the states in the region, and that reasonable estimates of costs could be developed for the four-state region, especially during a time of economic recession. Size estimates as solicited were based on street trees only (34 cm), as urban foresters were judged to be more familiar with trees under their control. Industry size ranges used for removal cost estimates were for 31 to 61 cm trees, thus re- moval costs would be valid for trees up to 61 cm in diameter. With these limitations in mind, the results can help communities begin planning for the impacts of EAB, and the paper presents a frame- work whereby different prices or densities can be inserted and recalculated by others if new or different information is available. The present study found a similar mean-based total urban ash density (including street, park, and private ashes per 1,000 resi- dents) for the four-state region as a previous survey-based study of Ohio (Sydnor et al. 2007a). Also, the overall result for ash quantity in the four-state region appears comparable to that derived by oth- ers using secondary data sources for ash on developed land within communities, but is lower than estimated regional ash quantities on all developed lands (inside and outside communities) in the four states (Kovacs et al. 2010). Given that the present survey was aimed at community foresters, the “within community” esti- mate might be a more direct comparison, but it is unclear to what extent some respondents might have included adjacent but unin- corporated developed lands in their responses. This distinction is important to consider in conducting future survey-based studies. By any measure, the results of this and other studies suggest that EAB poses a substantial financial threat to community forests. Tree Removal Costs (median-based) $718 $94 $2,179 $2,991 (mean-based) $838 $335 $4,631 $5,804 Replacement Costs (median-based) (mean-based) $634 $104 $1,926 $2,664 LITERATURE CITED Anonymous. 2009. Cooperative EAB Program. Accessed 08/28/2009. Burns, R.M., and B.H. Honkala, technical coordinators. 1990. Silvics of North America: 2. Hardwoods. Agriculture Handbook 654. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. vol. 2, 877 pp. Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers (CTLA). 2000. Guide for Plant Appraisal, ninth edition. Champaign, IL. 143 pp. D’Amato, N.E., T.D. Sydnor, and D. Struve. 2002. Urban foresters iden- tify Ohio’s tree needs. Journal of Arboriculture 28:291–301. Herms, D.A. 2002. Strategies for deployment of insect resistant orna- mental plants, pp. 217–237. In: M.R. Wagner, K.M. Clancy, F. Lieu- tier, and T.D. Paine (Eds.). Mechanisms and Deployment of Resis- tance in Trees to Insects. Kluwer Academic Publishing, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 332 pp. Herms, D.A, D.G. McCullough, and D.R. Smitley. 2004. Under attack: the current status of the emerald ash borer infestation and the program to eradicate it. American Nurseryman. 200(7):20–27. Herms, D.A., D. Smitley, P. Bonello, and D. McCullough. 2005. Evalua- tion of resistance of Asian and North American ashes to emerald ash borer, p. 43. In: K .Gottschalk (Ed.). Proceedings, XV USDA Inter- agency Research Forum on Gypsy Moth and Other Invasive Species 2004. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-332. 98 pp. Kovacs, K.F., R.G. Haight, D.G. McCullough, R.J. Mercader, N.W. Sieg- ert, and A.M. Liebhold. 2010. Cost of potential emerald ash borer damage in U.S. communities, 2009–2019. Ecological Economics 69:569–578. Landers, J. 2005. Emerald ash borer and controversy spreads in and around Michigan. Tree Care Industry 26(2):66–70. Malhotra, N.K. 1996. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 890 pp. Schaar, C. 2008. Personal communication. Urban Forester, City of To- ledo, Ohio. Sydnor, T.D., M. Bumgardner, and A. Todd. 2007a. The potential eco- nomic impacts of emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) on Ohio, U.S., communities. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 33(1):48–54. Sydnor, T.D., R.F. Gooding, and B.L. Bishop. 2007b. Guide to Plant Ap- praisal of Trees and other Plants in Ohio, seventh edition. Ohio Chap- ter, International Society of Arboriculture, Columbus, OH. 40 pp. Sydnor, T.D., and S.K. Subburayalu. 2009. Results of a survey of twenty- two Ohio urban foresters. City Trees 45(2):32–37. U.S. Census Bureau. 2000. Accessed 09/28/2009. USDA Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS). 2003. Emerald Ash Borer; Quarantine and Regulations. Federal Register 66(198); 59082-91. USDA Forest Service. Forest Inventory and Analysis Mapmaker 4.0. [Database]. Accessed 09/08/2009. $740 $369 $4,092 $5,201 ©2011 International Society of Arboriculture
March 2011
| 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
