FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W577504284> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W577504284 abstract "This study was conducted fo r the Urban Forest Division o f the Missoula Parks and Recreation Department fo r use and guidance in the Urban Forest Master Plan. Online and mailback surveys were completed by a random sample o f 407 Missoula residents in spring, 2014. Results show that Missoulians are profoundly supportive of public trees. Residents agree tha t the ir utilitarian purposes (e.g. shade, helping decrease pollution) are o f value to the community. The aesthetic purposes tend to make the ir neighborhoods more enjoyable and Missoula a nicer place to live. Public trees provide a quality o f life tha t Missoula residents appreciate. The m ajority o f Missoula residents are willing to support the removal of hazardous trees, pruning, planting, and basic maintenance of public trees. While slightly less than half (47%) of Missoula residents would support increasing the ir taxes, 53% to 56% would support a separate revenue source fo r maintenance or planting o f public trees. Executive summary Results o f the Missoula urban forest study show tha t Missoula residents have a high regard fo r the value o f trees, are willing to take personal responsibility fo r the trees, and possess a strong belief tha t the city has a responsibility to maintain the public trees. • The top five aspects of why Missoula residents value the public trees are fo r the ir beauty (95%); making neighborhoods more enjoyable (93%); shade (92%); the ability o f trees to improve air quality (91%), and; because it makes Missoula a nicer place to live (90%). • When asked what they would do fo r Missoula s public trees, residents were in most agreement w ith watering the trees in fron t o f the ir house (79%); encouraging adequate funding for maintenance of trees (76%), and; willingness to call the city about problem trees (72%). • Residents see a need fo r the city to remove hazardous public trees (93%); prune trees to reduce fu ture hazards (90%); replace dead/dying trees w ith young trees (88%), and; ensure new trees are planted and cared fo r properly (87%). • Personal responsibility toward public trees decreased slightly in regards to funding. The support is high when it is simply requiring one to encourage funding (76%). As it gets more specific as to how to fund public trees, such as separate revenue sources (53% 56%) or higher taxes (47%), the number of residents, while still supportive, decreases. • All respondents were very supportive of public trees, but those residents w ith boulevard trees in fron t o f the ir home showed a slightly higher level of agreement to all but one statement. • Many Missoulians suggested tha t the urban forest master plan focus on tree species diversity to discourage an insect or disease plague tha t could w ipe out too many trees at one tim e and to emphasize native trees as much as possible. Management Implications The Missoula Urban Forest Master Plan needs to stress the maintenance of Missoula s public trees removing hazardous trees, replacing dead and dying trees w ith young trees, and pruning trees. Focus needs to be on the variety of tree species when planting new trees as well as native species. The city of Missoula should study the implications of requiring all new development (residential and commercial) to build boulevards as well as planting and maintaining trees w ith in the boulevard. Residents want Missoula to fund the maintenance of public trees but are cautious about developing separate revenue sources fo r the urban forest and even less likely to support a separate tax. This means tha t education about the physical and emotional benefits of trees as well as the cost of maintaining trees should be a section w ith in the Urban Forest Management Plan. The Urban Forest Division could work w ith the MSU extension services on an education plan. '" @default.
• W577504284 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W577504284 creator A5061521422 @default.
• W577504284 date "2014-01-01" @default.
• W577504284 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W577504284 title "Missoula Urban Forest Interest Study 2014" @default.
• W577504284 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W577504284 type Work @default.
• W577504284 sameAs 577504284 @default.
• W577504284 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W577504284 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W577504284 hasAuthorship W577504284A5061521422 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C108010975 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C110269972 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C144027150 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C2776426263 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C2780977904 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W577504284 hasConcept C97137747 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C108010975 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C110269972 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C144027150 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C18903297 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C205649164 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C2776426263 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C2780977904 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C86803240 @default.
• W577504284 hasConceptScore W577504284C97137747 @default.
• W577504284 hasLocation W5775042841 @default.
• W577504284 hasOpenAccess W577504284 @default.
• W577504284 hasPrimaryLocation W5775042841 @default.
• W577504284 hasRelatedWork W118650231 @default.
• W577504284 hasRelatedWork W1557639854 @default.
• W577504284 hasRelatedWork W1986784602 @default.
• W577504284 hasRelatedWork W2234420050 @default.
• W577504284 hasRelatedWork W2393999366 @default.
• W577504284 hasRelatedWork W332964495 @default.
• W577504284 isParatext "false" @default.
• W577504284 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W577504284 magId "577504284" @default.
• W577504284 workType "article" @default.