News   Apr 03, 2020
 5.7K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 7.4K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 4.4K     0 

Trees in Calgary

I think full on sugar maples won’t grow here because of the freeze and thaw cycle if I recall correctly. Plus, I think it’s too dry as well.

There’s one that’s a Japanese maple or something like that that has red leaves as well I believe.
There are cultivars of sugar maple that will tolerate zone 3 (Fall Fiesta Sugar Maple)
 
Does anyone know what kind of tree/shrub this is? Love the bright red leaves.
View attachment 511708
I posted this on Reddit, and it looks like it's a Burning Bush (Euonymus alatus) Apparently they a re quite invasive, at least in warmer climates.They sure look nice in the fall though.
 
Does anyone know what kind of tree/shrub this is? Love the bright red leaves.
View attachment 511708
I posted this on Reddit, and it looks like it's a Burning Bush (Euonymus alatus) Apparently they a re quite invasive, at least in warmer climates.They sure look nice in the fall though.
 
You can see how much of an effect watering an maintaining trees can have.

In this aerial view over a period of 10 years from 1969 to 1979, trees in people's yeards grew much faster than the trees left in the middle of an open space and not watered.

1969, there are no trees anywhere really. They had planted a few small trees in the area shown in green.
1699049978425.png


10 years later, trees in people's yards are maturing nicely, but the trees in the green area were hardly changed.
1699050062088.png
 
I would have thought that Nose hill had a lot more tree growth over the years. It seems like that tree area shown has tripled since I was a child.
It has grown outward to a fair degree, but also upward. I remember the trees being shorter when I was a kid, and the foresty area is also a lot denser. were at a point, where I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot more growth in the next 20 years.
 

Interesting motion. I'm not sure how well this will work, but having something like this in place might come in handy for those owners who clear a lot full of trees and then leave it empty for 20 years.
 
I'm not sure how well this will work
In different cities it can be pretty annoying. Toronto uses it to enforce zoning and make development harder, in Vancouver it means any permit requires an assessment by an arbourist, and sometimes multiple ones.

For the same effort, a generous tree planting scheme and education on how to maintain would be great.
 
Those are good points. The lack of trees in Calgary seems to be mostly on city land anyways, especially along boulevards or roadways.
 
I actually work for an arborist and I have to say that needing a permit to remove trees is a dumb idea. We do a lot of work in a community where permits are needed to remove trees and it's literally dumb how much bureaucracy is involved just to remove a dead or dangerous tree.

That being said, grants for homeowners to plant trees is a great idea, especially if those trees where good canopy trees and long living.

I gotta say the cities urban forestry program is pretty weak overall. They should be planting 3x the number of trees they are and we really should be creating more space for trees in how we design streets and sidewalks regardless land use.
 

Interesting motion. I'm not sure how well this will work, but having something like this in place might come in handy for those owners who clear a lot full of trees and then leave it empty for 20 years.
That's dumb. Maybe the city should lead by example and start planting / maintaining / actually watering street trees in the downtown and Beltline.
 
I actually work for an arborist and I have to say that needing a permit to remove trees is a dumb idea. We do a lot of work in a community where permits are needed to remove trees and it's literally dumb how much bureaucracy is involved just to remove a dead or dangerous tree.

That being said, grants for homeowners to plant trees is a great idea, especially if those trees where good canopy trees and long living.

I gotta say the cities urban forestry program is pretty weak overall. They should be planting 3x the number of trees they are and we really should be creating more space for trees in how we design streets and sidewalks regardless land use.
Calgary is challenging because so many trees die from lack of water, chinooks and road salt. Are homeowners going to need permits to remove dead trees? If they won't, some may be incented to poison trees to avoid permitting
 
Dead trees aren't typically excluded from permitting. It's another tax revenue source. If it discourages someone from removing a healthy tree than that's a good thing. It's been a bad decade for urban tree canopies with changing climates and it can't all be on public property.

Most major improvments on private property require permits as a source of tax revenue and also to make sure it's done properly. Homeowners have cause lots of damage tackling tree removal themselves.
 

Back
Top