Follow

• 

  City of Montebello Tree Canopy Prioritization

  Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and Gateway Cities Council of Governments

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  The Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments partnered to conduct tree canopy prioritization in the City of Montebello. This process utilized high resolution, high accuracy tree canopy data as a foundation to engage the public in identifying their priorities for tree planting in the city. Analysis of tree canopy data showed that the City of Montebello has 13% existing tree canopy cover, which the lowest tree canopy cover in all of Los Angeles County. The analyses also found that Montebello has great opportunity to increase its tree canopy, with 48% of the land area of the city shown to be Possible Tree Canopy.

  The project partners held a series of planning meetings with the City of Montebello and conducted outreach to engage City staff, residents, and other stakeholders of Montebello. One event was a “Montebello community roundtable,” which took place on June 16, 2022 a via Zoom. Participants were presented with the numerous ways that their city could benefit from increased tree canopy, engaged in a discussion and interactive activities about their personal experiences and values around trees, and were invited to take a survey to choose their top ten priorities for tree planting.

  There were 36 respondents to the Montebello Tree Canopy Survey, with 83% of respondents indicating that they were residents of the City of Montebello, and 50% indicating that they work in the City. Respondents had the opportunity to vote to prioritize 20 specific tree benefits across seven categories. Participants identified Beautify Neighborhoods and Promote Outdoor Activities (34%) and Improve Air Quality and Reduce Noise (30%), and Increase Equity for Residents (16%) as their top priority categories for tree planting. Among the specific benefits, the highest priorities were Air Quality, Low Tree Canopy, Park Improvement, Reduced Heat, and Access to Green Space. Each of the benefits voted on by participants was associated with a spatial variable (e.g., “Heat” was associated with high-resolution surface temperature data available through NASA).

  Using the results from the survey, priority weightings were calculated for each spatial variable at the parcel level. These rankings were mapped to provide a visual of where participants’ combined priorities are located. The results revealed that the highest tree planting priority areas for Montebello were in the the central parts of the city. The lowest priority areas were mostly located in the northeastern part of the city. In addition to the maps, tables were produced to provide rankings for each individual parcel in the Possible Tree Canopy boundaries. This dataset includes a comprehensive listing of over 13,000 parcels in the City of Montebello, along with their priority score and percent of existing tree canopy.

  The survey also asked participants about their perceptions of tree planting and care in Montebello. There were 94% who agreed that planting more trees is a priority, though 61% believed there are barriers to planting and 64% recognized that there are barriers to taking care of the trees in Montebello; in particular, barriers related to City Policies & Responsibilities, Community Knowledge & Responsibility, and Infrastructure/Physical Environment.

  This project can help guide the City of Montebello in future urban forestry strategies. The City may look to focus their tree planting efforts in high priority locations that are on public lands, especially in conjunction with the Montebello Parks Master Plan. The City may also consider educational campaigns and incentives to reach out to specific landowners to increase tree canopy on private lands. Finally, the City may wish to develop new urban forestry policies and could consider pursuing funding programs to support a Montebello Urban Forest Management Plan.

• 

  City of Vernon Tree Canopy Prioritization

  Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and Gateway Cities Council of Governments

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  The Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments partnered to conduct tree canopy prioritization in the City of Vernon. This process utilized high resolution, high accuracy tree canopy data as a foundation to engage the public in identifying their priorities for tree planting in the city. Analysis of tree canopy data showed that the City of Vernon has 2% existing tree canopy cover, which is the lowest tree canopy cover in all of Los Angeles County. The analyses also found that Vernon has great opportunity to increase its tree canopy, with 51% of the land area of the city shown to be Possible Tree Canopy. However, given Vernon’s unique designation as an industrial city, much of the possible area is in places with impervious surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, that would require modification to be a good place for trees.

  The project partners held a series of planning meetings with the City of Vernon and conducted multiple forms of outreach to engage City, business and community participation. One event was a hybrid “Vernon community roundtable,” which took place on March 16, 2022 at Vernon City Hall and via Zoom. Participants were presented with the numerous ways that their city could benefit from increased tree canopy, engaged in a discussion and an interactive activity about their personal experiences and values around trees, and were invited to take a survey to choose their top ten priorities for tree planting.

  Approximately 35 people attended the community tree roundtable, and many others were reached through TreePeople’s presentations at the Green Vernon Commission and Vernon Business Breakfast, a fruit tree distribution event, and direct email outreach. A small number (12) of those reached chose to participate in the survey, with the majority (83%) of respondents indicating that they were employees of the City of Vernon. Respondents had the opportunity to vote to prioritize 16 specific tree benefits across seven categories. Participants identified “Reduce Heat,” “Beautify Neighborhoods and Promote Outdoor Activities,” and “Improve Air Quality & Reduce Noise” as their top priority categories for tree planting. Among the specific benefits, the highest priorities were Heat, Low Tree Canopy, Air Quality, Pedestrian Routes, and Schools. Each of the benefits voted on by participants was associated with a spatial variable (e.g., “Heat” was associated with high-resolution surface temperature data available through NASA).

  Using the results from the survey, priority weightings were calculated for each spatial variable at the parcel level. These rankings were mapped to provide a visual of where participants’ combined priorities are located. The results revealed that many of the highest tree planting priority parcels for Vernon were in the southwestern, and north and south central parts of the city, as well as east of the LA River. Many of the lowest prioirty parcels were found in the northeastern and central parts of the city. In addition to the maps, tables were produced to provide rankings for each individual parcel in the Possible Tree Canopy boundaries. This dataset includes a comprehensive listing of nearly parcels in the City of Vernon, along with their priority score and percent of possible area for increasing tree canopy.

  The survey also asked participants about their perceptions of tree planting and care in Vernon. All but one participant agreed that planting more trees is a priority, though 1/3 believed there are barriers to planting and taking care of the trees in Vernon. Participants named concerns about existing infrastructure and industrial operations, such as: big rig trucks, power lines, underground utilities, too much concrete, and small sidewalks. Barriers to tree care included: lack of watering, trash/pollution, and overall lack of care.

  This project can help guide the City of Vernon in future urban forestry strategies. The City may look to focus their tree planting efforts in high priority locations that are near to existing, new, or planned residential developments. The City may also consider educational campaigns and incentives to reach out to specific landowners to increase tree canopy on private lands. Finally, the City may wish to pursue funding programs to help replace some of the impervious surfaces with tree canopy.

• 

  LA RIVER STEW-MAP: The Los Angeles River Stewardship Mapping & Assessment Project

  Michele Romolini and Alyssa Thomas

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  The Stewardship Mapping and Assessment Project (STEW-MAP) was applied in the Los Angeles River Watershed to answer the questions: Who are the active environmental stewardship groups in my area and where, why, and how are they caring for the land? STEW-MAP defines a “stewardship group” as a civic organization or group that works to conserve, manage, monitor, transform, educate on and/or advocate for the environment.

  Leveraging national expertise and previous regional investment in Los Angeles County STEW-MAP, the Los Angeles (LA) River STEW-MAP provides detailed information on the geographical footprint and collaborative relationships of organizations working in the Los Angeles River watershed. LA River STEW-MAP researchers developed an inventory of 535 environmental stewardship organizations working in the LA River Watershed; and collected survey data from 107 of those organizations. Some highlights of the resulting data analysis included:

  • The majority of groups (57%) were 501(c)3 nonprofits, with less than ten percent representing other legal designations. The next largest group was city/local government, chosen by just nine percent of respondents.
  • The government was identified as providing funding to over two-thirds of responding stewardship organizations; and the network results showed that government agencies were often identified by respondents as groups that they go to for collaboration, knowledge, and funding related to environmental projects. This may reflect the historical development, land ownership, and current political climate of the LA River—all of which are largely led by agencies at all levels of government.
  • Responding groups tended to be younger and smaller, and heavily reliant on volunteer labor. Most groups had been founded since the 1990s, with nearly a quarter of groups founded in just the past ten years. The median number of staff reported by the responding organizations was 9 full-time and 3 part-time. Notably, the average hours respondents reported from occasional volunteers was 152 hours/month, the equivalent of almost a month of full-time work.
  • Education is a focus of stewardship organizations. Education-related responses were prominent throughout the results. LA River stewardship groups are playing a key role in educating their communities about the watershed and broader environmental issues.
  • Stewardship groups support local environments AND communities. “Community” was prevalent in mission statement analysis, “community improvement and capacity building” was among the most chosen focus areas, and “community organizing” was identified by nearly half of respondents as a service they provide.
  • LA River STEW-MAP results reflected the watershed approach of the study, with “stream/river/canal,” “stormwater management,” and “watershed/sewershed” representing three of the top five most chosen stewardship site types, and water quality/water conservation among the top three most chosen focus areas. However, when asked to consider the influence of eight water-related plans and programs on their work, LA River Watershed plans were not influential to the average responding organization. This dilution of influence of any one plan or program may be attributed to the large number of ongoing planning efforts within the watershed. It also may highlight a need for even greater engagement with stewardship groups in watershed plan implementation.
  • The highest geographic concentration of stewardship was found in downtown Los Angeles around the LA River. Other areas of high stewardship concentration were the northeastern area of the watershed, within the Angeles National Forest.
  • Groups identified over 1200 collaborative, knowledge, or funding relationships related to environmental stewardship. Since respondents were able to write in their responses, this provided the opportunity to add new groups not included in the initial inventory of stewardship organizations.
  • The “hubs” of activity in the stewardship network were mostly 501(c)3 nonprofit groups, and government agencies from the local to the federal level.

  These results are reported in detail in this report. The project also produced two publicly available online mapping tools where users can further explore the geographic and social network data.

  The summary statistics, initial maps and network analyses provided here offer an extensive look at stewardship across the LA River Watershed. There is great potential across the data types for more intensive examination. Future analyses may include spatial, social network, or other explorations of this rich dataset to better understand environmental stewardship in the Watershed. The results and mapping tools have numerous possibilities for application in practice. Examples from previous STEW-MAPs include using the spatial data to help guide prioritization of urban forestry efforts to meet sustainability goals; and searching the STEW-MAP database in a particular area to help mobilize a community network in response to a specific issue. These are two of many examples compiled by the national STEW-MAP Community of Practice, which the LA River Watershed organizations may participate in and use as a resource.

  It is important to note that the LA River STEW-MAP survey only reached about 20% of the initial list of organizations. Thus, follow-up work could include on the ground outreach to increase the response rate. LA River STEW-MAP has the potential to be a dynamic, regularly updated database and map that provides a current view of stewardship across the watershed rather than a snapshot in time. The LA River Urban Waters Federal Partnership may be a good place to discuss possibilities for further development and ongoing maintenance of the database and mapping tool.

• 

  City of Culver City Coyote Management Report

  Melinda Weaver, Michele Romolini, and Eric G. Strauss

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  The scientific staff at the LMU Center for Urban Resilience, along with affiliated scientists, collaborators and students conducted a three-year management study in order to assist the City of Culver City and its residents in managing the dynamic challenge of coexisting with resident and transient coyotes. Despite the considerable social and logistical upheaval caused by the Covid-19 outbreak, CURes staff and collaborators collected and analyzed data continuously through the various phases of the pandemic. The goals of the project were to: 1) Gather appropriate ecological, technical and human social data with regard to coyote ecology and human-wildlife conflict, 2) analyze these findings in comparison with other studies conducted across North America and 3) develop durable management interventions linked with formal and informal education to reduce the negative impacts of the expanding coyote population in Culver City and beyond.

  
  The study employed various data collection methods including remote camera traps, radio-telemetric collars, dietary analysis, direct observation, molecular analytics, and a survey of residents. During the three-year study, we collected nearly 2 million photos, radiocollared two male coyotes, collected nearly 200 scat samples, surveyed 377 residents, and developed educational resources and a backyard study that can help residents determine the coyote risk in their backyard. Some key findings are as follows:

  1. While coyote densities did not change much during the three years, densities of their prey species, particularly rabbits, did. These declines could be attributed to decreased rainfall during the study, which has been linked to declining levels of rabbits in the Sonoran desert as well.
  2. Studies in other cities, such as Chicago and North Carolina, where cats make up a very small percentage of coyote diet, found that cats avoid areas where coyotes are common. Our study did not find this. Locations where cats were recorded and time of day when they were spotted overlapped significantly with coyote locations and time of day, increasing risk of predation on cats.
  3. There are seasonal patterns to when coyotes spend more time within the City rather than the oilfields. There also appears to be a seasonal pattern to when cat appears in coyote diet. Cat appears in greater quantities in summer and fall and is rare in the diet during the winter. Based on this, we recommend a social media schedule that could help inform residents when their cats are at greater risk. Educational outreach utilizing some of the findings of this study may help residents change behavior on how they manage their outdoor cats.
  4. DNA analysis from scat samples show that there are likely two packs of coyotes entering Culver City. The first is a pack that ranges from 6-8 near Marycrest Manor and the oilfields. The second does not appear to live within the Culver City limits but enters the City from Ballona Creek, where they appear to travel but not den.
  5. Dry scat analysis shows that the Marycrest Manor pack does not prefer cat as their top prey and typically has less than 5% cat in their diet. However, as rabbit density decreased, we saw a change in the coyote diet. In the first year of the study, more than 50% of coyote scat contained rabbit, and very few scat contained cats. However, in the second year, rabbit decreased dramatically from the diet, and cat increased to nearly 20% in October.
  6. The survey of residents showed 64% of respondents agreeing that they understand coyote behavior and activities, and 53% agreeing that they know where coyotes frequent. This perceived knowledge goes against previous research and our own experience, suggesting a need for further outreach and education. More than one-fourth of respondents indicated that they are unaware of the City’s coyote management efforts, thus we suggest that the City use a multi-faceted outreach approach.

  The findings suggest that coyotes in Culver City are responding to a variety of ecological conditions, including drought, prey availability, adjacency to the Ballona Creek and other naturalized patches of habitat. The behavior of coyotes in Culver City is both similar to that of coyotes in other cities, but also expresses novel characteristics that are likely shared by coyotes exploiting the urbanized habitats of Southern California.

  
  Predation on domestic cats was not evenly distributed spatially across Culver City, temporally across seasons or equally among coyote subpopulations foraging in Culver City habitats. These variations are likely the result of dynamic prey availability in Culver City and provide insight into future management solutions. Risk of predation of domestic cats by coyotes is impacted by these factors and also by human factors as revealed by our backyard safety surveys and social surveys: in particular, residents’ perceived knowledge of urban coyotes and domestic cats.
  Core interventions implemented by Culver City officials and local resident stakeholders are informed by the following set of management suggestions:

  
  Recommendation 1.
  Increasing specialized education for stakeholders with regard to reducing coyote risk.
  

  Recommendation 2.
  Implementing a suite of interventions at the individual parcel level that can decrease the potential threat from coyotes.
  

  Recommendation 3.
  Following a tiered response to coyote management with respect to documented incidences.
  

  Recommendation 4.
  Introducing a palette of strategies that can be applied to residential pet owners as they try to find a balance between pet safety and outdoor activities.

  Each of these interventions have detailed elements in the following report that allow for a tiered response to coyote conflicts with humans and their domestic pets. The success of these approaches is contingent upon the creation of effective feedback loops among the stakeholders so that gaps in the response do not occur and the management interventions are geared to the existing and future threats.

• 

  City of Paramount Tree Canopy Prioritization

  Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and Gateway Cities Council of Governments

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  The Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments partnered to conduct tree canopy prioritization in the City of Paramount. This process utilized high resolution, high accuracy tree canopy data as a foundation to engage the public in identifying their priorities for tree planting in the city. Analysis of tree canopy data showed that the City of Paramount has 15% existing tree canopy cover. The analyses also found that Paramount has great opportunity to increase its tree canopy, with 45% of the land area of the city shown to be Possible Tree Canopy. However, 32% of the possible area is in places with impervious surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, that would require modification to be a good place for trees.

  The project partners held a series of planning meetings with the City of Paramount and conducted multiple forms of outreach to engage community participation in a virtual “tree summit,” which took place on June 10, 2021. Participants were presented with the numerous ways that their city could benefit from increased tree canopy, engaged in a discussion and several interactive activities about their personal experiences and values around trees, and were invited to take a survey to choose their top ten priorities for tree planting.

  There were 37 surveys collected, with the majority (73%) of respondents indicating that they were residents of Paramount and a smaller number (39%) indicating that they work or study in Paramount. Respondents had the opportunity to vote to prioritize 20 specific tree benefits across eight categories. Participants identified “Improve Air Quality and Reduce Noise,” “Beautify Neighborhoods,” and “Increase Equity for Residents” as their top priority categories for tree planting. Among the specific benefits, the highest priorities were Air Quality, Low Tree Canopy, Park Improvement, Heat, and Toxic Release Sites. Each of the benefits voted on by participants was associated with a spatial variable (e.g., “Heat” was associated with high-resolution surface temperature data available through NASA).

  Using the results from the survey, priority weightings were calculated for each spatial variable at the parcel level. These rankings were mapped to provide a visual of where participants’ combined priorities are located. The results revealed that the highest tree planting priority areas for Paramount were in the the central eastern, southeastern, and northwestern parts of the city. Many of these areas border the I-710 or I-105 freeways, reflecting priorities to improve air quality and reduce noise. The lowest priority areas were mostly located in the central southern part of the city. In addition to the maps, tables were produced to provide rankings for each individual parcel in the Possible Tree Canopy boundaries. This dataset includes a comprehensive listing of over 7,000 parcels in the City of Paramount, along with their priority score and percent of possible area for increasing tree canopy.

  The survey also asked participants about their demographics and their perceptions of tree planting and care in Paramount. Responses to the demographics questions showed that some groups were not represented or under-represented in the survey results. For the perceptions questions, there were 90% who agreed that planting more trees is a priority, though 60% believed there are barriers to planting and 92% recognized that there are barriers to taking care of the trees in Paramount; in particular, Land Ownership, Land Availability and Water-related barriers.

  This project can help guide the City of Paramount in future urban forestry strategies. The City may look to focus their tree planting efforts in high priority locations that also rank high on the Possible Tree Canopy - Vegetated scale. The City may also consider educational campaigns and incentives to reach out to specific communities and to increase tree canopy on private lands. Finally, the City may wish to pursue funding programs to help replace some of the impervious surfaces with tree canopy.

• 

  City of Lynwood Tree Canopy Prioritization

  Center for Urban Resilience, TreePeople, and Gateway Cities Council of Governments)

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  The Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience (CURes), TreePeople, and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments partnered to conduct a tree canopy prioritization in the City of Lynwood. This process utilized high resolution, high accuracy tree canopy data as a foundation to engage the public in identifying their priorities for tree planting in the city.

  Analysis of tree canopy data acquired through a previous project between CURes and TreePeople showed that the City of Lynwood has 16% existing tree canopy cover. The analyses also found that Lynwood has great opportunity to increase its tree canopy, with 41% of the land area of the city shown to be Possible Tree Canopy.

  The project partners held a series of planning meetings with the City of Lynwood and conducted multiple forms of outreach to engage community participation in two virtual “tree summits,” which took place in December, 2020. Participants were introduced to the numerous ways that their city could benefit from increased tree canopy, engaged in a discussion and several interactive activities about their personal experiences and values around trees, and were invited to take a survey to choose their top ten priorities for tree planting.

  Overall, 120 surveys were collected, with the large majority (86%) of respondents indicating that they were residents of Lynwood and a smaller number (24%) indicating that they worked in Lynwood. Respondents had the opportunity to vote to prioritize 22 specific tree benefits across eight categories. Participants identified “Improve Air Quality and Reduce Noise,” “Beautify Neighborhoods,” and “Increase Equity for Residents” as their top priority categories for tree planting. Among the specific benefits, the highest priorities were Air Quality, Replacement Trees, Reduce Heat, Low Tree Canopy, and Schools.

  Each of the benefits voted on by participants was associated with a spatial variable (e.g. “Heat” was associated with high-resolution surface temperature data available through NASA). Using the results from the survey, priority weightings were calculated for each spatial variable, and these priorities were mapped using the Possible Tree Canopy data as a guide. Thus, the resulting maps showed the priority locations for tree planting in the City of Lynwood that were already identified by the tree canopy assessment as Possible Tree Canopy.

  The results revealed that the highest tree planting priority areas for Lynwood are on the eastern and western edges of the city, corresponding with major transportation corridors. In addition to the maps, tables were produced to provide rankings for each individual parcel in the Possible Tree Canopy boundaries. These datasets include a comprehensive listing of nearly 10,000 Residential Parcels, over 6,000 Road Segments, and 12 Parks in the City of Lynwood.

  Together, the products of this tree canopy prioritization project can guide the City of Lynwood in its urban forestry planning. In the near term, TreePeople will use these data to inform the planting of 1,000 trees. In the longer term, the City can use these data to guide future urban forestry strategies. The community-engaged prioritization process served to raise interest and enthusiasm around tree planting in Lynwood, as well as provide the opportunity for community members to provide meaningful input about urban forestry decision-making in their city.

• 

  San Bernardino County Climate Adaptations Organizations Study

  CURes

  With support from Edison International, CURes conducted a study to inventory existing climate change resilience organizations for San Bernardino County, CA. A climate change resilience (CCR) organization is any organization that places emphasis on building a community resilient to the effects of climate change. This includes social equity nonprofits, sustainability research programs, government agencies, and any organization that displays a goal to build community climate change resilience. Climate change resilience can be defined as the community’s ability to withstand the increasingly severe effects of climate change like drought, heat waves, and wildfires. This project identified CCR organizations that are located within San Bernardino or have definitively served and will continue to serve the county from other locations. The results of the inventory were summarized in the San Bernardino Climate Adaptation Organizations Report and displayed on this map.

• 

  City of Commerce Tree Canopy Prioritization

  Michele Romolini, Carlos Moran, Eric G. Strauss, Lisa Fimiani, and Ada Li Sarain

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  In 2019, the Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience (CURes) partnered with TreePeople to conduct a tree canopy prioritization in the City of Commerce. This process utilized high resolution, high accuracy tree canopy data as a foundation to engage the public in identifying their priorities for tree planting in the city.

  Analysis of the tree canopy data, acquired through a previous project between CURes and TreePeople, showed that the City of Commerce only has 5% tree canopy cover. This is in contrast to 25% cover in the City of Los Angeles, and 18% tree canopy cover found countywide. The analyses also found that Commerce has great opportunity to increase its tree canopy, with 51% of the land area of the city shown to be Possible Tree Canopy.

  CURes and TreePeople held two planning meetings with the City of Commerce and conducted multiple forms of outreach to engage community participation in a “tree summit,” which took place in November, 2019. Participants were introduced to the numerous ways that their city could benefit from increased tree canopy, engaged in a discussion about their personal experiences and values around trees, and were invited to take a survey to choose their top ten priorities for tree planting.

  Overall, 33 surveys were collected, with the large majority (88%) of respondents indicating that they were residents of Commerce and a smaller number (42%) indicating that they worked in Commerce. Respondents had the opportunity to vote to prioritize 17 specific tree benefits across seven categories. Participants identified “Improve Air Quality and Reduce Noise” and “Beautify Neighborhoods” as their top priority categories for tree planting. Among the specific benefits, the highest priorities were Access to Parks, Air Quality, Heat, Low Tree Canopy, and Schools.

  Each of the benefits voted on by participants was associated with a spatial variable (e.g. “Heat” was associated with high-resolution surface temperature data available through NASA). Using the results from the survey, priority weightings were calculated for each spatial variable, and these priorities were mapped using the Possible Tree Canopy data as a guide. Thus, the resulting maps showed the priority locations for tree planting in the City of Commerce that were already identified by the tree canopy assessment as Possible Tree Canopy.

  The prioritization map revealed that highest priority areas of Commerce are in the northern and central parts of the City. In addition to the maps, tables were produced to provide rankings for each individual parcel in the Possible Tree Canopy boundaries. These datasets include a comprehensive listing of 2,168 Residential Parcels, 909 Road Segments, and 4 Parks in the City of Commerce.

  Together, the products of this tree canopy prioritization project can guide the City of Commerce in its urban forestry planning. In the near term, TreePeople will use these data to inform a planting of over 1,000 trees, most concentrated in parks, streets, and residential giveaways. In the longer term, the City can use these data to guide future tree planting strategies.

• 

  City of Long Beach Coyote Management Project

  Eric G. Strauss, Michele Romolini, and Melinda Weaver

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  Staff from the Loyola Marymount University Center for Resilience, in collaboration with officials from the City of Long Beach conducted a multiyear analysis of coyote ecology, risk, and management options to be implemented. The project was designed to incorporate local data, regional information and national examples to be applied to the challenges of coyote management in Long Beach. The project was initiated in response to increase concern about the safety of coyotes living within the city and their impact on domestic animals, especially cats. The project occurred at a prescient period in urban coyote research as many parallel projects were taking place across the country, with a few focused in Southern California. As such, the project activities morphed during the period of three years to better capture the new information that was being made available by collaborating scientists in the area and by research teams across the country.

  The data from Long Beach and other studies indicate that coyotes in Southern California present an increasing risk to domestic animals, especially cats, when compared to both historical studies and other locations across the country. These findings have been supported by multiple research efforts by other scientific teams and by our additional work that is currently underway in Culver City. As a result of these findings, the management challenges for coyotes in Southern California have increased in scope and complexity. Cities across the region are struggling to find effective and humane interventions that can ameliorate the threats presented by coyotes, especially those directed towards domestic animals and people.

  Our recommendations include: 1) increasing specialized education for stakeholders with regard to reducing coyote risk, 2) implementing a suite of interventions at the individual parcel level that can decrease the potential threat from coyotes, 3) following a tiered response to coyote management with respect to documented incidences, and 4) introducing a palette of strategies that can be applied to residential pet owners as they try to find a balance between pet safety and outdoor activities.

  This report and its appendices contain detailed information and resources that can be used to address these recommendations. As part of this project, we developed a localized formal in-school curriculum that is available online to the Long Beach Unified School District and other schools in the area. We have also developed a backyard safety survey that can be implemented with relative ease. Finally, the report itself provides a wealth of information pulled together from our data collection in Long Beach as well as other cities throughout the US. These resources can be used by themselves or be incorporated into the development of additional outreach materials. While the Covid-19 pandemic has impacted the feasibility of certain in person community engagement and outreach interventions, these materials can still be utilized immediately. The CURes team stands ready to provide virtual workshops, presentations, and professional advice on individual coyote incidents and the options the city might use to reduce risk.

• 

  Los Angeles County Tree Canopy Assessment

  Mike Galvin, Jarlath O’Neil‐Dunne, Dexter Locke, and Michele Romolini

  This project applied the USDA Forest Service’s Tree Canopy Assessment protocols to the City of Los Angeles. The analysis was conducted using imagery and LiDAR acquired in 2016 provided through the Los Angeles Region Imagery Acquisition Consortium program.

  The assessment was funded by a grant to TreePeople and carried out by SavATree in collaboration with the Center for Urban Resilience at Loyola Marymount University, the Spatial Analysis Laboratory at the University of Vermont’s Rubenstein School of the Environment and Natural Resources, and Dr. Dexter Locke.

• 

  Silver Lake Neighborhood Council Reservoir Complex Survey

  Michele Romolini and Eric G. Strauss

  Executive Summary

  In recognition of the critical moment facing the Silver Lake community as it undergoes the development of a new Reservoir Master Plan, the Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience (LMU CURes) was invited by the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council (SLNC) to conduct a study to provide sound information to support these efforts. A comprehensive study would likely span multiple years, and would include wildlife, green infrastructure, and social research to analyze the options available to Silver Lake to plan and implement an open space policy. This report focuses on Phase 1, a pilot survey of individuals intended to collect foundational data about the knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of those stakeholders who currently utilize the area. Conducted in late 2018 and developed in consultation with the SLNC, the pilot survey gathered 249 in-person public intercept surveys and 1014 responses to a publicly available online survey.

  Two public meetings informed modifications of the originally proposed study, including the addition of in-person survey locations and the additional online survey option. The in-person surveys were conducted by nine LMU CURes researchers over a period of approximately six weeks at locations immediately surrounding the reservoir complex or other nearby locations that were chosen at SLNC meetings. The online survey link was available on the LMU CURes website, but efforts to publicize the online survey were managed by the SLNC. Given the varying methodologies, the results from the in-person and online surveys were analyzed separately and viewed as different data sources.

  The results showed that both in-person and online respondents were predominantly residents of Silver Lake, though there was also representation from others who are considered part of the SLNC’s broader stakeholder community. Those responding to the survey tended to use the reservoir areas often. Based upon the survey results, respondents from the Silver Lake community had many areas of agreement on the benefits and concerns regarding the reservoir complex, but common themes emerged as points of conflict. These included: the presence of dogs and their related facilities, green space and wildlife, accessibility, traffic, and changed usage concerns. While the average reservoir user self-reports to be fairly informed about environmental topics and processes, education and outreach may be needed moving forward. Demographically, the survey was fairly representative of the resident population of Silver Lake, with some exceptions. The intent of the survey was not to have an identical representation of the demographics of Silver Lake, but to be inclusive of other stakeholder opinions. However, if increased representation across categories is desired, an expanded study with a larger sample size could capture greater participation in certain demographic areas.

  The report details and discusses the results from each survey question, and ends with conclusions and next steps. Possible future directions include recommendations for an expanded survey protocol beyond this Phase 1 pilot, and other areas for analysis and future research based on the findings. These initial findings and recommendations may provide some foundation for the SLNC and the Silver Lake community as they proceed into the planning process for the reservoir complex.

• 

  The Value of Urban Parklands: A User Study of the Baldwin Hills

  Michele Romolini, Eric G. Strauss, Sarah Bruce-Eisen, and Emily Simso

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  This report provides the results of a two-year research study by the Loyola Marymount University Center for Urban Resilience (CURes) to examine park visitation and user behavior and attitudes in the Baldwin Hills Parklands. Supported by the Baldwin Hill Conservancy through California Proposition 84 funding, the goal of this study was to better understand how individuals are using and interacting with the Baldwin Hills Parklands. It is the first large-scale, multi-year, field-based attendance survey and multifaceted analysis of visitors’ experiences in the Parklands, consisting of a pilot and four comprehensive field seasons.

  Building on a pilot phase in 2014, 38 CURes research assistants spent 1,934 hours in the parks over four field seasons from 2015-2017. Researchers conducted 1,747 park user surveys, completed counts of 12,709 parks visitors, analyzed 4,998 images from park entrances, and produced reports and outreach materials. The results show that the Baldwin Hills Parklands:

  • receive high levels of visitation, especially on weekends, with the Kenneth Hahn State Recreation Area serving the largest user population at any one time, and the Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook State Park having the highest visitation on average;
  • have a devoted population of frequent users that tend to visit only one park within the Baldwin Hills Parklands;
  • are visited by people who are highly civically engaged, have a moderate understanding of the local environment, and are very interested in learning more about the environment of the region;
  • are visited by users mostly arriving by car who tend to enter through main park entrances, with no trouble finding parking;
  • receive a substantial number of visitors who would prefer to arrive by foot or bicycle, and even more who would be interested in taking the park shuttle but were not aware of it;
  • support both active recreation and passive enjoyment of nature, with walking and enjoying nature as the top two activities indicated by users;
  • are visited by users who do not often go to the coast, though nearly all indicate a willingness to walk or bike on a recreational trail to visit the beach;
  • serve a diverse population of users from Los Angeles County that are, on average, relatively young, highly educated, and of low to moderate income, which is not entirely consistent with the surrounding population; and
  • receive visitors with highly positive sentiments and attachments to the parks.

  These findings suggest that the Baldwin Hills Parklands are an integral natural resource in the Los Angeles region. They also provide a foundation to guide continued work to better understand, improve, and promote the use of the parklands. This report details the findings of the two-year study, provides interpretations of the results and recommendations for the Baldwin Hills Conservancy.