Email from David Barkley, Manager – Forestry Services, Ottawa

[See also a Memo from staff to Council, 23 April 2012]

24 April 2012

Mr. Shuster,

The 2008 Report is the Strategy that set out the high level approach for EAB in Ottawa, each year since then at Committee staff have updated Councillors on actions being taken, much of this information is found on the City’s web site at http://www.ottawa.ca/en/env_water/tlg/trees/preservation/eab/index.html. I have also attached for reference the last presentation to the Environment Committee last October 2011 [1.46 MB].

The strategy as approved by Council in 2008 (report ACS2008-COS-SOP-0012) is laid out in 5 steps or approaches:

Regulation of wood movement and disposal;
Tree removal;
Selective tree injections;
Proactive tree planting and replacement tree planting; and,
Public Consultation / Outreach.

Each year we have worked on various pieces within each of these areas to help mitigate the impact of EAB on our Community. There are a number of pieces that we have to consider when we are examining next steps with Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), the actual location in which we are finding populations of the insect and the trends for the spread, it makes no financial sense to inject trees that are not currently under pressure from the insect, and expansion is based on a the reality of funding we have available, and the information we can gather in the field. Ottawa has been working since 2009 on the trial/pilot with Treeazin, it has been exactly that a trial product still does not have full registration in Canada, but shows very good results. From early on in when this insect made entrance into the USA and Canada there were only 2 research papers on this insect in its home territory in Asia, 5 years later when it reached Ottawa in 2008 and still to today the research in all aspects is underway not complete, our goal is that other solutions will be found over the next 10 to 20 years to help ensure the Ash is still around for future generations in some form.

The City of Ottawa’s EAB strategy includes tree injection as mitigation measures to minimize the impact on the forest cover. Ash trees located on City property are assessed before deciding if it is a good candidate for treatment. Some trees may be too infected to be treated, in poor condition due to other health factors, or in a poor location. To date, the City has injected over 20,000 cm or 750 ash trees with TreeAzin, and the program will be expanded again this spring to 55,000 cm or 1500 ash trees. If the management strategy adopted by the City of Oakville is followed, the City of Ottawa would require $10M per year until the end of the ash trees life cycle or until another solution is found through the ongoing research as the cost of TreeAzin treatment is directly related to the size of the tree.

To date Council has been funding the approved EAB Strategy, which in most circumstances when faced with tough challenges typically you can arrive at more than one solution, with EAB there are only a couple of options inject the tree, do nothing, or remove the dead trees and plant new ones to help diversify species in Ottawa. When it comes to injection we have taken a gradual increase approach for the first couple of years as it was a trial being undertaken by the Canadian Forest Services looking at if the injection worked or not, three years in it looked promising and we started to increase the amount of injection being done, in that trial period the insect was still reproducing and spreading this means we have to remove dead and dangerous trees as a result. At the same time staff are setting criteria and reviewing candidate trees for injection, with in that we have found that there are a lot of Ash in very poor condition(just think back to the 1998 ice storm), bad locations(e.g. under hydro wires) and trees that some residents have tolerated but hated for a number of reasons we have looked at all those factors in determining what to invest in a long term treatment program and what is not a good use of tax dollars. The injection needs to be done every other year for how long we are not certain, a note of interest we are still injecting the remaining American Elms from the 60 and 70’s injection program, so we are not against injection just have benchmarks for how long we could be into injecting these trees once we start.

As for costs on average at this time the tree size is about 40cm in diameter, this is down from previous years of 50cm, the City’s cost is around $6.00 per centimetre, therefore $240.00 on an average tree, it was $300.00. That would mean we would need roughly 10 million dollars a year to go City wide immediately just for street trees no woodlots, ravine edges along backs of homes. Up to now the estimates that have been quoted by the City have consisted of average market costs so that in fairness to residents and the contractors that supply the services they had an average price, what we know is that a resident will pay anywhere from $6-$10 per cm, so to then give people a ball park we have used a cost of $8.50cm on a 40cm tree that is $340 to $425 based on our average sizes in our program. When it comes to cost comparisons for removal and injection removal and replacement of a 40cm tree(lots of variables in tree removal but using averages) $1000.00. I can commit to you that we are always looking at options, solutions and research to ensure the best use of the City’s resources.

It should be noted that residents have the option to inject City owned trees located on their property, at their own cost, if it is deemed reasonable to do so. If residents have questions, they can call 3-1-1 and speak to City staff for advice on whether the tree may be a candidate for injection and how to proceed before engaging a qualified contractor. TreeAzin injections should only be performed by a qualified professional and trees must be re-injected every two years, potentially for the life of the tree.

Forestry Services has been actively consulting with many groups, both internal and external. It was recognized that a made in Eastern Ontario solution was needed and this has been addressed through the formation of a Regional Forest Health working group. The group is made up of the City of Ottawa, City of Gatineau, National Capital Commission (NCC), Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Canadian Forest Services, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), local Conservation Authorities, Mohawk Council of Akwesasne, Ontario Parks, Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), and Forest Industry representatives, all of whom bring various backgrounds and expertises. Since 2008, all partners have been reaching out to educate the public, generate public input and work to mitigate the impact of EAB on Ottawa’s residents.

The City has also actively participated with EAB working groups across Canada and Ontario, to provide advice and to seek expert advice from south western Ontario who have been dealing with the impacts of EAB longer than Ottawa, and have seen the impacts on areas that Ottawa has not yet experienced, specifically forests and riparian areas.

The City has actively worked through local Community Associations across the impacted areas since 2008 presenting at their meetings the City’s EAB Strategy and providing advice and information on EAB. In addition four publicly advertised hands on training sessions focused on the local contract industry on identification of the insect, sign and symptoms for EAB have been done. In the last two years outreach to Ottawa Region Landlords Association (ORLA), Building Owners and Managers Association of Ottawa (BOMA), Ottawa Housing, the Ottawa Hospital and Ottawa Universities occurred to provide them information on what they need to start to consider being large land owners in the Ottawa area. This spring the Environment Committee has hosted two City wide EAB sessions, at Ben Franklin Place and at the Jim Durrell Centre.

In addition, Forestry Services has worked with the private sector on wood handling and processing pilot programs, so that a Request for Proposal (RFP) could be released for competition this spring to achieve two specific goals: (1) value added use of the ash material being produced as a result of EAB; and (2) cost reduction for the disposal of ash wood for both the City and private residents. In addition, information is provided to developers when they are applying for approvals through the Planning and Growth Management Department on the proper handling and disposal of wood when working on sites in Ottawa.

In response to the question on Wildlife, staff review these sites once when determining the work required and again before any work takes place the day they show up on site, observations for nests and activity is key as the City does not want to damage habitat or wildlife in the course of our work, we also consider the time of year and stage the wildlife might be at before scheduling the work. The majority of our staff are trained in Forestry which includes a component of wildlife management in their schooling, as well we have consulted other experts through the course of the development of the EAB strategy which is a living document and will be adjusted as change is needed.

I appreciate that it would appear as though we are justifying our approach or direction, it is more explaining some very specific and large scale differences in strategies, based on the realities we face with geography, tree age, size, number growing, condition and location, Ottawa is over 80% rural and at this time EAB is not into our forests areas but our 20% urban is larger than any other place dealing with this issue. We are very much trying to lead the way on solutions in an attempt to help preserve the City’s trees and help residents make tough decisions on their own property. The difficulty in what has occurred with EAB is that it is a Federally regulated insect that comes with no Federal or Provincial support, funding or policy guidance, so what you see in Oakville, Ottawa, Hamilton, Burlington are strategies that have been evolving by municipalities working together and sharing of ideas to try and help each other deal with what looks to be a slow natural disaster. I assure you my staff nor do I look forward to what we are working on, we all trained to plant, prune and maintain trees and forests for our communities and this is not how we saw or want to see Ottawa’s forest.

I look forward to meeting with you and your group in the next couple of weeks to discuss how we can move ahead together, as EAB is a long term issue and requires active partners to help communicate proper messages to residents so we can all make good decisions.

If you need any more information please feel free to contact either myself or Jason Pollard at 613-580-2424 ext. 16012.

Yours truly,

David E. Barkley
Manager Forestry Services, Gestionnaire, Services forestiers
Forestry Services Branch – Services forestiers
Public Works Department – Direction des travaux publics
City of Ottawa – Ville d’Ottawa
100 Constellation Cres
Ottawa ON K2G 6J8
T: 613.580.2424.21148
F: 613.580.2611
E: david.barkley [at] ottawa.ca

Email with specific information requests to David Barkley

7 May 2012

Dear Mr. Barkley,

Thank you for your April 24th e-mail in which you propose a meeting with our working group. With Emerald Ash Beetles emerging in the next few weeks, we would like to meet with staff and Councillor McRae at the earliest possible opportunity. In order for this meeting to be as productive as possible we would appreciate the information requested below in advance of the meeting.

Given the very serious concerns about the significant economic and environmental impacts that Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) and potential loss of most Ash trees pose for all Ottawa residents, and the fact that many community associations and other stakeholder groups, such as our own, had not been consulted, the Greenspace Alliance of Canada’s Capital decided to form a Working Group on the EAB issue. Our primary concern centers on the present plan to remove the vast majority of Ottawa’s Ash trees rather than treating them.

We appreciate that the City of Ottawa decided on a course in 2008, before it was perhaps understood how far advanced EAB was in this area, how quickly it was spreading, and that it is impossible to stop the demise of Ash trees by removing large numbers of trees. We recognize that Forestry Services is attempting to adapt to these circumstances and want to commend you for the extensive mapping survey your department undertook last year.

We want to stress that we want to work with the City in the most productive ways possible. As a result of our Working Group’s discussions, we are in the process of finalizing a position paper, including objectives and proposed strategies and a workplan in light of the most recent science. For your convenience, we are attaching a brief summary of some of these considerations. In order to complete this work and to have a useful meeting with Councillor McRae and City staff, we are asking that you provide the following information as soon as possible:

General

1. What are the Ash tree counts by ward of City- and privately-owned Ash trees, and estimates of percentage infected?

2. What monitoring of Ash Borer Beetle emergence is being conducted this spring?

3. How are ash trees being assessed and chosen for cutting this year?

What information is gathered and which criteria are used to make that decision?

4. How many ash trees, by year, have been taken down due to EAB, from 2008 to 2011?

5. How many ash trees, by month, have been taken down due to EAB in 2012, and

how many are projected to be cut by the end of the year?

6. How many ash trees on City property have been assessed that fall into the following categories:

a) severely affected

b) moderately affected

c) minimally affected

d) unaffected, and

for which categories is the City scheduling removal, and what are the time frame(s)?

7. How are ash trees being assessed and chosen for treatment this year? What information is gathered and what criteria are used to make that decision?

8. Regarding assessment and decision-making as to the fate of Ash trees:

a) Who assessed/assesses the trees?

b) Who made/makes the decision to wait, to treat, or to cut individual trees?

c) Were private contractor(s) involved along with City staff?

d) If outside expertise was used,

i. Which companies were involved?

ii. What are their qualifications?

iii. What other roles do they and associates play in the fate of the trees (i.e. do they treat trees, cut them…)?

9. Over the next four years, how many ash trees are projected to be:

a) Cut?

b) Injected?

c) Left alone in anticipation that the EAB will not severely affect them?

10. What is the City’s long term treatment program?

What underpinned the strategic reasoning to take the current course of action?

11. What scientific studies were used by staff to guide the City’s current approach?

Appended for your information is a sampling of some recent scientific developments.

Costs and Benefits

1. How much money has been allocated in the City’s budget to respond to the EAB problem for the following?

a) Surveillance for beetles

b) Cost of cutting and average cost per tree for this fiscal year and over the following fiscal years (overall and per tree by staff costs and contractor costs)

c) Removal of trees and stumps and disposal costs (overall and per tree by staff costs and contractor costs)

d) Replacement costs etc. (overall, and per tree, including costs for trees, staff and contractors)

e) Other costs (specify e.g. cost of maintaining newly planted trees, cost of replacing newly planted trees that don’t survive) (overall and per tree by staff costs and contractor costs)

f) Outreach and public education

g) Cost sharing of injection with property owners

2. Which quantitative and qualitative benefits of treatment were identified by staff, such as cooling during the summer, water retention, air pollution reduction, shading for children’s play, wildlife habitat, etc.?

3. What cost-benefit analyses (cutting versus treatment) were carried out, with what results? For example, has the City used the online tool <<[https://glfc72.cfsnet.nfis.org/mapserver/apm/index.php?lang=e&m=m]>> developed by the Canadian Forest Service to calculate the costs and benefits of treating versus removing an Ash trees?

4. Has the City factored in the reduction in the market values of homes due to tree cutting and the resulting reduction in property tax revenues?

Please get back to me as soon as possible to let me know when we can expect to receive the information requested, so we can schedule a meeting.

If you have any questions please feel free to send me an email or call me at 613-276-7496.

Sol Shuster

Chair, Greenspace Alliance EAB Working Group