D.C. tree canopy: The city planted nearly 80 trees a day to reach a target, but its running out o
A District arborist parked his truck alongside a tidy row of goose cherry trees on a recent afternoon, logging their conditions into a tablet. They are in good health one year after planting, he said, but the redbuds across the street — they are struggling.
“This one is just not really looking good,” said John O’Neill, spraying the ailing tree with orange paint that marked it for removal.
O’Neill is one of nearly two dozen arborists who are deployed daily across the District to tend to the city’s trees. They plant new trees, remove dying ones and scout out homes for future saplings.
As part of a concentrated, six-month effort that began in October, crews planted more than 8,500 trees in an attempt to shroud 40 percent of the city under tree canopy by 2032. But midway through a years-long tree campaign, the same economic successes that ushered in new residents and transformed neighborhoods across Washington are threatening to stymie the city’s woodland progress.
Change in D.C. tree canopy coverage
Percent of the District covered by tree canopies.
2032
target
40.0%
Sources: Casey Trees; District
Department of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Change in D.C. tree canopy coverage
Percent of the District covered by tree canopies.
2032
target
40.0%
Sources: Casey Trees; District Department of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Change in D.C. tree canopy coverage
Percent of the District covered by tree canopies.
2032
target
40.0%
Sources: Casey Trees; District Department of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Change in D.C. tree canopy coverage
Percent of the District covered by tree canopies.
2032
target
40.0%
Sources: Casey Trees; District Department of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Change in D.C. tree canopy coverage
Percent of the District covered by tree canopies.
2032
target
40.0%
Sources: Casey Trees; District Department of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
The Washington Post analyzed data for each of the 165,000 trees along the city’s streets. The database helps to guide arborists as they determine where to plant trees, which species are thriving and when trees need to be replaced. What’s not shown is the increasing difficulty of maintaining and expanding the tree population in the nation’s capital.
More trees, city officials and advocates say, mean lower energy costs, less air pollution and higher property values. The District has added about 100,000 residents in the past decade and planted a similar number of trees, part of an ambitious plan to grow a healthy urban tree canopy, but it’s running out of space.
The tree tug-of-war is also likely to become enshrined in city policy.
A draft of the District’s comprehensive plan, scheduled for a vote of the D.C. Council this spring, includes efforts to expand the canopy and protections for trees. That same 1,532-page document also prioritizes using land for other purposes, particularly those that generate tax revenue for the city, such as housing and office development.
Andrew Trueblood, director of the D.C. Office of Planning, acknowledged the contradiction, saying the document serves as a framework for city leaders. The challenge will be determining how to prioritize its recommendations.
“The comprehensive plan is really meant to set out all of our priorities and recognize that sometimes they may be competing,” he said.
The D.C. Office of Planning expects the city will add 247,100 jobs over the next 25 years. Such growth will require 50 million to 94 million square feet of office and retail space, according to city estimates.
The draft of the city’s comprehensive plan suggests the District plant 10,500 trees annually, while encouraging zoning and building regulations that promote the growth of trees. But the city is in a race against time — and against the development that threatens to keep its goals from taking root.
Dominic Eddy, center left, prepares to plant a tree as Marcus Pinkney digs. City crews plant about 100 trees each weekday in order meet their goal. (Will Newton for The Washington Post)‘It seems like this elusive goal’
A healthy canopy captures carbon dioxide like nothing else on earth, making trees a valuable tool that environmentalists say can help to combat climate change. Years before President Trump joined the Trillion Tree Campaign and climate activist Greta Thunberg became a household name, District officials came to a consensus: The geographically small city could have an outsize impact on environmental issues.
It takes decades for new trees to cover neighborhoods with lush treetops, but District leaders have dedicated millions of dollars to the effort. From now through 2025, more than $100 million is earmarked for the maintenance and planting of trees, on top of $32 million spent since 2014.
“We’ve been given a big mandate because the need is that great,” said Earl Eutsler, a forester at the city’s Urban Forestry Division. “People describe trees as being on the front line of climate change, and the reality is trees are the single most effective tool for making cities livable.”
[Environmentalists face challenges trying to plant in less-green neighborhoods]
Trees help to guard against a changing climate, improve water quality and provide habitat for wildlife, the U.S. Forest Service says. Reaching a canopy of 40 percent means District businesses and residents would lower their annual energy costs by more than $3.5 million, according to a District Department of Transportation report. District officials say reaching the goal would stave off the threat of environmental instability — striking a balance between urban development and nature.
The biggest obstacles to reaching the goal are growth and development, which pour millions of tax dollars into city coffers but also bring more concrete, more buildings and more people.
Tree canopy coverage
By Ward in 2016
Source: Casey Trees
THE WASHINGTON POST
Tree canopy coverage
By Ward in 2016
Source: Casey Trees
THE WASHINGTON POST
Tree canopy coverage
By Ward in 2016
Source: Casey Trees
THE WASHINGTON POST
“Since I’ve been on the council, we’ve been running after 40 percent tree canopy and we can’t get there — we can’t get there. I just don’t understand it,” D.C. Council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3), who chairs the council’s Committee on Transportation and the Environment, said during a committee meeting last year. “It seems like this elusive goal — but we’ll keep working at it.”
In the past decade, the city’s population has surged more than 17 percent. Within that same time period, from 2013 to 2017, the District lost more than 140 acres of land to development, a Post analysis found. In a 68-square-mile city where land is scarce, that would be enough to decrease tree coverage by three percentage points if the acres were covered by trees, according to city and federal reports.
In 2006, 35.1 percent of the city was covered by trees. By 2011, the canopy had grown by two percentage points, before plateauing at 38.7 percent in 2016 — the most recent data available before a new assessment later this year.
“D.C. is less than two percentage points away from its goal,” said Jessica Sanders, science and policy director at Casey Trees, a D.C.-based nonprofit committed to restoring the city’s canopy. “Trees take time to grow and mature, which is why the last few points will be the hardest to reach.”
Cheh said the city should redouble its efforts to reach the goal if the 2020 assessment shows a lack of progress. The office of Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) did not respond to requests for comment.
According to Casey Trees, the city needs to add more than 8,600 trees annually — taking into account aging trees that will need removal — to reach its goal by 2032. Falling short of the goal would be a setback for the D.C. Council, which recently approved a six-year plan that calls for about $16 million to be spent annually through 2025.
Dominic Eddy, left, Steve McKindley and Delonta Wyatt prepare trees for planting outside Eastern High School. The city maintains 165,000 trees along streets in the city, as well as an additional 50,000 on the property of city parks and schools. (Will Newton for The Washington Post)Property owners removing more trees
O’Neill, a lead arborist for the District, has spent 13 years trying to expand the city’s urban forest. That’s not long enough to see trees he planted transform his Ward 8 territory, but he finds solace in knowing future generations will benefit.
“You get to make a mark on the city,” he said. “You're choosing and selecting different tree species that are going to become a permanent part of the city public space for decades to come.”
City officials say the District can reach its canopy goal by utilizing public spaces, but that hinges on not losing mature trees on private property. D.C. law requires that homeowners obtain a city permit before removing trees with a circumference between 44 and 99.9 inches. (Larger trees, known as heritage trees, that are in healthy condition cannot be removed.)
An analysis of city data shows the number of permits issued for tree removal on private property is rising.
In 2013, the District issued 713 such permits, resulting in the removal of about 990 trees. By 2019, there were more than 1,500 permits issued, resulting in about 3,200 trees being removed.
In total, more than 14,000 trees on private property have been removed by landowners with permits since 2011. Money collected from those permits has netted the city more than $12.3 million since fiscal 2012, according to city data. That money is plowed back into the city’s tree-planting fund.
Trees managed by
Other institutions
District Department
of Transportation
Rock
Creek
Park
National
Arboretum
National Mall
Source: District
Department
of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Rock
Creek
Park
National
Arboretum
National Mall
Trees managed by
District Department
of Transportation
Other institutions
Source: District
Department
of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Rock
Creek
Park
National
Arboretum
National Mall
Trees managed by
District Department
of Transportation
Other institutions
Source: District Department
of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Rock
Creek
Park
National
Arboretum
National Mall
Trees managed by
District Department of Transportation
Other institutions
Source: District Department of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
Rock
Creek
Park
Trees managed by
District Department of Transportation
National
Arboretum
Other institutions
National Mall
Source: District Department of Transportation
THE WASHINGTON POST
The city has planted roughly 8,000 to 10,000 trees annually in recent years, but about half that many are removed by city arborists or private landowners. Work orders show that the city removes about 2,500 trees each year, usually because they are in poor health or have become a hazard.
The removals make it increasingly difficult for the city to gain ground, Sanders said.
Delonta Wyatt, left, digs a hole for a new tree. According to a D.C.-based nonprofit, the city needs to add more than 8,600 trees annually — taking into account aging trees that will need removal — to reach its 2032 goal. (Will Newton for The Washington Post)An uneven canopy of 2 million trees
The District's relationship with trees runs deep.
Washington has about 2 million trees, with the city government maintaining 165,000 along city streets and an additional 50,000 in places such as city parks and schools. The rest are on federal land and under the control of the U.S. Forest Service.
In the early 1950s, the District was one of several cities to adopt the monikers “City of Trees” and a “City Within a Park.” About half of the city was covered by trees. But with little in place to protect the canopy and no effort to replace dying trees, the city lost between 2 and 3 percent of its coverage each decade before bottoming out near 35 percent in 2006. (The U.S. Forest Service says the bottom was closer to 28 percent, based on its own study.)
Arborists now are armed with technology to examine each tree and update its status in real time.
The data shows that Ward 3 has the city’s most mature canopy, but less tree diversity because those saplings were planted at a time when the city had a palette of six species, rather than the 200 it has today. Neighborhoods east of the Anacostia River have benefited most from the expanded choice of species and have the youngest and most diverse canopy, O’Neill said.
[Save eight old trees? Or build more affordable housing? A D.C. development dilemma.]
But because the trees are younger, canopy coverage east of the river is sparser than in other areas of the city, making it a target for arborists. The area accounts for about 45 percent of the city’s new trees since 2016, according to The Post’s analysis.
“It's like an arboretum down there,” O'Neill said. “You will see a lot of other species that you don't see anywhere else in the city.”
Despite maintaining less than 11 percent of the city’s trees, District arborists say reaching the canopy target can be accomplished by expanding the program along the city’s streets — where 97 percent available greenspace is full — to other public spaces, such as parks and schools, while subsidizing tree planting on private property. (Through a partnership with Casey Trees, property owners can apply for a rebate of up to $100 for each tree planted.)
“That we have been able to grow our tree canopy steadily since 2006, despite the boom in redevelopment that has swept across the city, leaves me confident that we can continue to expand the canopy,” Eutsler said.
Federal officials — who maintain 58 percent of the city’s canopy, more than five times the amount the city oversees — say it won’t be simple. A U.S. Forest Service report from 2018 concluded that if the District is to meet its goal, most tree growth will need to occur on private and residential property.
Marlon Bryant spreads mulch around a newly planted tree. “D.C. is a tough place for a tree to live,” said Earl Eutsler, a forester at the city’s Urban Forestry Division. (Will Newton for The Washington Post)‘What kind of city it wants to be’
Making up for tree loss has become a priority for jurisdictions across the country as more open space is covered by concrete. According to the federal Forest Service, the nation’s urban areas are losing tree coverage at a rate of about 175,000 acres each year, an area about four times the size of the District.
[For D.C. students, lessons in growth, of the garden variety]
That’s about 36 million trees annually, said David Nowak, a Forest Service scientist. The federal agency said in a report that the trend is likely to continue “unless forest management and urban development policies are altered, particularly given the threats to urban trees associated with development, climate change, insects and diseases and fire.”
Within the Washington area, tree removal far exceeds tree planting, according to a report from the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, which estimated that the region is losing 28 acres per day of open space. That could accelerate: The organization also predicted the region will add about 1.5 million people through 2045.
The city of Baltimore and Arlington County are bucking the national trend with slight expansions in their canopies.
Arlington has 41 percent coverage when excluding Reagan National Airport and Arlington National Cemetery — up from 40 percent in 2011. Baltimore went from 27 percent in 2007 to 28 percent in 2015, which is a small step in the right direction, said Morgan Grove, a research forester and team leader in the Forest Service’s Baltimore field station.
The city of Alexandria, Fairfax County, Montgomery County and Prince George’s County have canopy coverage of 35, 50, 50 and 52 percent, respectively, and each jurisdiction has plans to expand it.
In the District, Nowak said, reaching canopy coverage of 40 percent is a laudable goal, but his federal agency and the city’s forestry division clash on current tree coverage levels.
While Eutsler says the city has coverage of 38.7 percent, the Forest Service says it is closer to 35 percent. Nowak said Forest Service methods rely on aerial photos and using trained photo interpreters to analyze “before” and “after” images to survey changes. The District’s method, he said, relies on a computer algorithm to detect changes.
Despite the disparity, both agree that meeting the goal is a herculean task as the city grows, forcing a tug of war between arborists and developers battling over the District’s finite space.
“D.C. is a tough place for a tree to live,” Eutsler said. “Many times we have to plant our trees between either a curb and a sidewalk, and that’s difficult, but that’s where most of the program lives.”
The tree assessment later this year — the first since 2016 — will shed new light on perennial competing forces: The city has spent millions to boost the canopy while simultaneously permitting hundreds of new buildings that threaten those results.
“D.C. will need to make a decision and decide what kind of city it wants to be,” Nowak said. “Development is great, but you have to find the right balance.”
Designed by J.C. Reed. Edited by Tim Richardson. Photo editing by Mark Miller. Copy edited by Jamie Zega. Graphic reporting by Aaron Steckelberg.
Newly planted trees are illuminated in the early morning sunlight at Eastern High School. District arborists are on track to meet their goal of planting 10,000 trees from October to March. (Will Newton for The Washington Post)Read more:
An aged tree, witness to history, falls near the Washington Monument
It’s bad enough D.C.’s trees were gouged. But why did it take so long for people to notice?
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7uK3SoaCnn6Sku7G70q1lnKedZLGkecydZK%2BZX2d9c3yOaWpoamdkwbDBxqFkqaSRmLJuwNGenGakmauybrDCZqelmZ6psqV5zZ6Yq6SpYoVxedOrnJ6rXZmuunnRnpicoF2Yrq%2B7z7JkrZminLK1ecitqmaqpaO7qrrGZqaurF2ovaKvxGg%3D