Shaping Baltimore’s urban forests: past insights for present-day ecology

Abstract

Context Land use history of urban forests impacts present-day soil structure, vegetation, and ecosystem function, yet is rarely documented in a way accessible to planners and land managers. Objectives To (1) summarize historical land cover of present-day forest patches in Baltimore, MD, USA across land ownership categories and (2) determine whether social-ecological characteristics vary by historical land cover trajectory.MethodsUsing land cover classification derived from 1927 and 1953 aerial imagery, we summarized present-day forest cover by three land cover sequence classes: (1) Persistent forest that has remained forested since 1927, (2) Successional forest previously cleared for non-forest vegetation (including agriculture) that has since reforested, or (3) Converted forest that has regrown on previously developed areas. We then assessed present-day ownership and average canopy height of forest patches by land cover sequence class.ResultsMore than half of Baltimore City’s forest has persisted since at least 1927, 72% since 1953. About 30% has succeeded from non-forest vegetation during the past century, while 15% has reverted from previous development. A large proportion of forest converted from previous development is currently privately owned, whereas persistent and successional forest are more likely municipally-owned. Successional forest occurred on larger average parcels with the fewest number of distinct property owners per patch. Average tree canopy height was significantly greater in patches of persistent forest (mean = 18.1 m) compared to canopy height in successional and converted forest patches (16.6 m and 16.9 m, respectively).Conclusions Historical context is often absent from urban landscape ecology but provides information that can inform management approaches and conservation priorities with limited resources for sustaining urban natural resources. Using historical landscape analysis, urban forest patches could be further prioritized for protection by their age class and associated ecosystem characteristics.