1. Campus Trees for Science Education, Cost Savings, and Community Relations Samuel Clay Wallace Assistant Professor of Geography Montgomery County Community College SWallace@mc3.edu

2. Campus Trees: Trees provide beauty, and home for squirrels and many bird & insect species. But trees also save energy by shading & sheltering buildings, they store carbon, give off oxygen, absorb pollution, and reduce runoff from storms. An Honors Colloquium studied our Blue Bell campus trees last semester.

3. i-Tree: The Honors Colloquium sampled the campus trees and used a National Forest Service database software package to estimate:  forest cover,  [allergen production],  carbon storage,  energy savings, &  risk from major pests.

4. UFORE: The results we hoped for were:  age, health, & diversity,  allergen production,  carbon storage & annual carbon sequestration,  particulate matter removal rate, &  building energy conservation amounts. i-Tree’s Urban FORest Effects model has five components:  Anatomy / structure,  Biogenic VOC emissions,  Carbon storage & sequestration,  Dry pollution deposition, &  Energy conservation. Nowak, David J., Crane, Daniel E. (USFS, NRS) & McHale, Patrick (SUNY-ESF).

5. A QuickBird satellite image of the Blue Bell campus was obtained. GIS was used to orient the image and identify the map scale. This became the background for our geographic work.

6. An (older & larger resolution) LandSat analysis of ground cover was obtained so we could apply the sampled trees and ground cover to the entire campus. Notice that some buildings do not show in the land cover grid.

7. The 30 meter land cover grid cells within the campus border were used to create a grid of sample locations (one at the center of each land cover cell). Twenty-five foot radius sample areas were drawn around each center.

8. This allowed field maps that we could use to identify sample areas. Some sample areas were completed from the map, alone. Sample areas 229 & 230, within College Hall, are 100% impervious surface– building. Morris Road ATC College Hall Parkhouse

9. The Honors students used handheld field computers to record sample data in the field. It was then uploaded to the National Forest Service database for analysis. When complete, the results were downloaded in text & in graphic formats so that the College can plan better plantings.

10. So, Why Campus Trees? observation & analysis hypothesizing & testing sharing & critiquing field & laboratory techniques

11. Science Education:

12.  Benson, E. (December 2002) “Learning by Doing: four keys to fostering undergraduate learning in your laboratory,” Monitor on Psychology, v. 33, n. 11, pp. 42-45.  Firestone, G.L. (1997) “Undergraduate Research: an integration of discovery and education,” Science, v. 21, n. 1, pp. 9-10.  Jones, J.L. & Draheim, M.M. (1994) “Mutual Benefits: undergraduate assistance in faculty scholarship,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, v. 5, n. 2, pp. 85-96.  Kinkead, J. (2003) Valuing and Supporting Undergraduate Research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.  Schwab, J. (1962) The Teaching of Science as Enquiry. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

13. Science Education:  Benson, E. (December 2002) “Learning by Doing: four keys to fostering undergraduate learning in your laboratory,” Monitor on Psychology, v. 33, n. 11, pp. 42-45.  Firestone, G.L. (1997) “Undergraduate Research: an integration of discovery and education,” Science, v. 21, n. 1, pp. 9-10.  Jones, J.L. & Draheim, M.M. (1994) “Mutual Benefits: undergraduate assistance in faculty scholarship,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, v. 5, n. 2, pp. 85-96.  Kinkead, J. (2003) Valuing and Supporting Undergraduate Research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.  Schwab, J. (1962) The Teaching of Science as Enquiry. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.  Shellito, C., Shea, K., Weissman, G., Mueller-Solger, A., & Davis, W. (2001) “Successful Mentoring of Undergraduate Researchers,” Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 30, n. 7, pp. 46-464.

14. Science Education:  Benson, E. (December 2002) “Learning by Doing: four keys to fostering undergraduate learning in your laboratory,” Monitor on Psychology, v. 33, n. 11, pp. 42-45.

15. Science Education:  Benson, E. (December 2002) “Learning by Doing: four keys to fostering undergraduate learning in your laboratory,” Monitor on Psychology, v. 33, n. 11, pp. 42-45.  Firestone, G.L. (1997) “Undergraduate Research: an integration of discovery and education,” Science, v. 21, n. 1, pp. 9-10.  Jones, J.L. & Draheim, M.M. (1994) “Mutual Benefits: undergraduate assistance in faculty scholarship,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, v. 5, n. 2, pp. 85-96.  Kinkead, J. (2003) Valuing and Supporting Undergraduate Research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

16. Science Education:  Benson, E. (December 2002) “Learning by Doing: four keys to fostering undergraduate learning in your laboratory,” Monitor on Psychology, v. 33, n. 11, pp. 42-45.  Firestone, G.L. (1997) “Undergraduate Research: an integration of discovery and education,” Science, v. 21, n. 1, pp. 9-10.  Jones, J.L. & Draheim, M.M. (1994) “Mutual Benefits: undergraduate assistance in faculty scholarship,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, v. 5, n. 2, pp. 85-96.  Kinkead, J. (2003) Valuing and Supporting Undergraduate Research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.  Schwab, J. (1962) The Teaching of Science as Enquiry. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.  Shellito, C., Shea, K., Weissman, G., Mueller-Solger, A., & Davis, W. (2001) “Successful Mentoring of Undergraduate Researchers,” Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 30, n. 7, pp. 46-464.

17. Science Education:  Benson, E. (December 2002) “Learning by Doing: four keys to fostering undergraduate learning in your laboratory,” Monitor on Psychology, v. 33, n. 11, pp. 42-45.  Firestone, G.L. (1997) “Undergraduate Research: an integration of discovery and education,” Science, v. 21, n. 1, pp. 9-10.

18. Science Education:  Benson, E. (December 2002) “Learning by Doing: four keys to fostering undergraduate learning in your laboratory,” Monitor on Psychology, v. 33, n. 11, pp. 42-45.  Firestone, G.L. (1997) “Undergraduate Research: an integration of discovery and education,” Science, v. 21, n. 1, pp. 9-10.  Jones, J.L. & Draheim, M.M. (1994) “Mutual Benefits: undergraduate assistance in faculty scholarship,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, v. 5, n. 2, pp. 85-96.  Kinkead, J. (2003) Valuing and Supporting Undergraduate Research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.  Schwab, J. (1962) The Teaching of Science as Enquiry. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.  Shellito, C., Shea, K., Weissman, G., Mueller-Solger, A., & Davis, W. (2001) “Successful Mentoring of Undergraduate Researchers,” Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 30, n. 7, pp. 46-464.

19. So, Why Campus Trees? select the right students, interests, & abilities value students with credits & your time be prepared & be patient explicit reflection on learning & ethics

20. When complete, the results were downloaded in text & in graphic formats so that the College can plan better plantings. Students then used this, some assigned readings, and their own independent research to craft a written report (article) and a graphic presentation (slide set).

21. Results: From Fall 2012:  Anatomy: Our estimated campus forest structural value is $4,320,000. Trees of diameters < 6” constitute 47% of the sampled population. Climate change may reduce viability of Red Maple, but Eastern Red Cedar (Juniper) & River Birch should continue to thrive. Our over-reliance on Red Oak could put us at risk of monetary loss from Gypsy Moth. Our sampled campus forest was 71% native to North America, and 41% native to Pennsylvania.  Biogenic VOCs: Allergen production was not returned by i-Tree, but was researched by a student, independently. Northern Red Oak, Eastern Red Cedar (Juniper), Red Maple, & Ash, all very common on campus, produce significant allergens. Eastern White Pine & Dawn Redwoods do not.

22. Results: From Fall 2012:  Carbon storage & sequestration: Annual net carbon sequestration estimated to be 23 metric tons. This should be included as a preliminary result in the Campus Carbon Inventory. The trees most beneficial were our Northern Red Oaks.  Dry deposition: In addition to Carbon, the campus trees were estimated to remove an additional 1 metric ton of other pollutants, particularly Ozone and particulate matter. The trees most beneficial were the White Pines and the Dawn Redwoods.  Energy savings: Trees on campus are not situated to reduce building energy use.

23. Suggestions: For Fall 2014:  improved quality maps;  improved training & more time to get familiar with equipment;  meeting earlier in the day;  meeting weekly in the first half of the semester;  using metric tools instead of time consuming conversions;  larger / fewer plot points; &  more students/volunteers. Additionally:  maintain diversity using species also native to our south;  plant in ways to increase forest cover and building protection;  improve survey coverage for more reliable results;  publicize our campus’ benefit to local air quality.

24. Plant to increase building protection:  Energy savings: Trees on campus are not situated to reduce building energy use.  moderate passive solar gain, &  reduce wind effects.

25. Publicize campus benefits to local air quality:  Carbon storage & sequestration: Annual net carbon sequestration estimated to be 23 metric tons. This should be included as a preliminary result in the Campus Carbon Inventory. The trees most beneficial were our Northern Red Oaks.  Dry deposition: In addition to Carbon, the campus trees were estimated to remove an additional 1 metric ton of other pollutants, particularly Ozone and particulate matter. The trees most beneficial were the White Pines and the Dawn Redwoods.  Though political views fluctuate, publicize the benefits of our campus green space to local air quality.

27. Community Savings GreenSpace Alliance & Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (2010) @ www.dvrpc.org/openspace/ value/  improved property values  pollutant filtration  flood mitigation  free recreation & improved health

28. Samuel Clay Wallace Dr. Jerry Coleman Assistant Geography Professor Assistant Biology Professor Daniel K. Barber Matthew R. Bell Kaitlyn E. Croll Jessica F. Franklin James L. Fulop Se-Jin “Seth” Jeong Christopher E. Kahn Hayley Leather Einas M. Madi Ali A. Mohammed Kyra I. Moyer Kristen J. Phillips Hannah L. Smith Lu Xiao Hon 103 Colloquium: “Campus Trees”