Stand Up for Asheville’s Publicly Owned Trees

Stop the proposal to cut down 157 trees on the Asheville Municipal Golf Course.

The City of Asheville is planning to cut down 157 trees at the Asheville Municipal Golf Course. Sixty-three of these trees are mature canopy trees that have stood tall for decades, providing critical habitat and food for migratory birds and other wildlife, cooling our urban core, and sequestering carbon to mitigate climate change. Now, Commonwealth Golf Partners, the new golf course operator, wants to circumvent Asheville’s Zero-Net Loss Urban Tree Canopy Policy in order to grow grass quickly and cheaply. 

Josh Kelly, MountainTrue’s Public Land Biologist, has emailed City Council asking them to correct course (read his letter). Now we are urging you to email Asheville City Council and ask them to reject this overly broad plan and to hire an independent arborist to provide a prioritized list of tree species to be retained at the Asheville Golf Course before moving forward. A majority of these beautiful trees can and should be saved. 

Take action today and stand up for Asheville’s Publicly Owned Trees.

Letter from MountainTrue’s Josh Kelly to Asheville City Council

MountainTrue’s Public Lands Biologist, Josh Kelly, sent the following letter to Asheville City Council on Monday, December 5, 2022.

Dear Asheville City Council,

MountainTrue has become aware of a proposal to remove 157 trees from municipal land on the Asheville Golf Course. The justification for removing the trees – to increase sunlight to the grass on the golf course – is not convincing. We believe the benefits provided to the City and local residents by the trees far exceeds any benefits associated with removing the trees.

First, we want to be clear that some of the trees on the list may be worthy of removal. Trees causing clear and imminent danger to the public and non-native trees are examples of categories that make sense for removal. Such trees are the minority of the 157 trees on the chopping block. Other reasons provided, like trees shading grass or trees that lean one way or the other, are not persuasive. 

While shade may be a nuisance to lawn managers, it is, in fact, one of the major benefits provided by trees. They provide passive cooling and help mitigate the urban heat island effect. Removing so many trees would increase local temperatures and damage the aesthetics of the golf course and the surrounding neighborhoods.

In addition to the thermal downsides of removing the trees and the damage to the forested aesthetic of East Asheville neighborhoods, removing trees would also increase runoff, decrease carbon sequestration, destroy valuable wildlife habitat, and remove noise buffering provided by the trees. Both Highways 70 and 74A are busy roads, and the position of the golf course in between these roads, combined with the noise blocking and absorption of the trees on the golf course, provides great benefit to the City and local residents. Removing 157 trees would noticeably increase traffic noise and reduce the quality of life in surrounding neighborhoods.

Most concerning, from an ecological perspective, is that 42 of the trees listed for removal are mature white oaks (Quercus alba). Of that number, the vast majority are proposed for removal because they are shading grass or leaning. Many of these trees exceed 30″ in diameter and 100 years in age. White oak is well known to frequently exceed 200 years in age and has been documented well over 400 years of age, so these trees likely have many decades of life left in them. Additionally, white oak is a preferred food source for caterpillars, which mature into pollinating moths and butterflies — a key food source for songbirds. White oak acorns are a preferred food for wildlife because they are low in tannins compared to other oak species. I would lump post oak in with white oak here, and I am shocked and dismayed at the proposal to cut down a post oak 42″ in diameter to remove shade from the golf course. A tree like this has special value as an exemplary specimen of an increasingly uncommon tree. Removing these trees will remove tons of food annually for local wildlife, and there is no evidence that the golf course manager or the City Arborist has considered this loss.

While the list of trees does provide some reasoning for why the trees should be removed, there is no corresponding ledger for the benefits the trees provide and no clear priority in what types of trees should be retained. For these reasons, we believe independent arborists should provide a second opinion for every tree on the list. We are also disheartened to learn that the City Arborist has not been more of an advocate for tree retention on this piece of public land.

We believe an independent arborist should create a prioritized list of tree species to be retained at the Asheville Golf Course before moving forward. If we were to author such a list it would look something like this:

Priority List for Tree Retention at the Asheville Golf Course

*All trees provide carbon sequestration, shade, and stormwater retention

**Avg lifespan is considered to be the half-life of maximum age. Trees like black cherry and white pine often perform poorly in urban environments.

In summary, Asheville City Council should reject the proposal to remove 157 trees from the Asheville Golf Course. There is a need to remove hazardous trees and to care for some trees that are in decline, but removing 157 trees from the golf course would cause far more harm than it would remedy. Please stand up for Asheville’s publicly owned trees and send this proposal back to the drawing board.

Sincerely,
Josh Kelly
Public Lands Biologist
MountainTrue

* The above letter includes some minor edits for clarity.