| Overall Rating | Gold - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 70.07 |
| Liaison | Andrew Horning |
| Submission Date | June 30, 2015 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
University of Michigan
OP-10: Landscape Management
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
1.42 / 2.00 |
Kenneth
Keeler Senior Sustainability Rep Office of Campus Sustainability |
Figures required to calculate the total area of managed grounds::
| Area | |
| Total campus area | 3,265 Acres |
| Footprint of the institution's buildings | 658 Acres |
| Area of undeveloped land, excluding any protected areas | 484 Acres |
Area of managed grounds that is::
| Area | |
| Managed in accordance with an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan | 1,049 Acres |
| Managed in accordance with a sustainable landscape management program that includes an IPM plan and otherwise meets the criteria outlined | 374 Acres |
| Managed organically, third party certified and/or protected | 700 Acres |
A copy of the IPM plan:
The IPM plan :
The Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan for the University of Michigan Grounds and Waste Management Department has a three-pronged approach which includes:
•Inventory of the University's woody and herbaceous plants and identification of pest problems.
•Monitoring of areas and organisms that have been pest problems in the past.
•Remediation using management tactics in the context of the particular pest and plant host.
Inventory
Our inventory is a database catalog of all the campus landscape trees. Every landscape tree is tagged with a unique identification number. This database identifies specific trees by their species, size, and other inventoried data. There are approximately 15,000 landscape trees.
Monitoring
We use the tree inventory together with our knowledge of the University landscape to monitor for insect and disease occurrences and environmental stresses (e.g., leaf and bark scorch, girdling roots, nutrient deficiencies, etc.) before these occurrences become problems.
In cases where the insect or disease occurrence is a problem, we use monitoring as a technique to measure population size and to determine if and when we need to use remediation measures. An example of this technique is using insect pheromone traps to monitor the elm bark beetle population.
We observe and collect weather related data to estimate when certain insects will hatch their eggs and anticipate the outbreak of certain fungal diseases. An example of weather data monitoring occurs in the management of elm leaf beetles using degree-day monitoring. A degree day is a unit based on accumulated heat to measure physiological time.
Remediation
Before applying pest management control measures we determine what action is needed and whether that action is likely to be effective. The majority of our landscape pest problems are minor or do not threaten plant health and therefore no action is taken. When action is needed, we use more than one method in combination to provide more effective control. As a part of our Integrated Pest Management Plan we use cultural, mechanical, physical, biological, and chemical control measures.
We base our pest management program on cultural control. Cultural controls begin with selecting healthy specimen of pest resistant species, properly planting them, and maintaining their vigor with the necessary irrigation and fertilization. Providing plants with the proper care is our foremost consideration and the best line of defense against pests. In addition to proper installation and establishment, we give a lot of time and effort to pruning appropriately to minimize pest problems.
We are attempting to use physical controls, e.g., barriers to prevent plant pests from doing repeated damage. Examples of this kind of control are bands around particular trees to discourage gypsy moth invasion or barriers around the trunks of young trees to prevent damage from dogs and squirrels.
Our biological control attempts have been limited to successful use of Bacillus thuriengensis for the management of eastern tent caterpillar. We are exploring the use of predaceous insects, but have not worked with any species yet.
Annually, we will utilize chemical means for controlling landscape pests such as weeds, insects, and diseases. The use of chemicals on campus is a last resort tactic. We will use the least toxic chemicals available and have had great success using horticultural soaps and oil. All the staff who apply pesticides are certified by the Michigan Department of Agriculture and we heed all of the occupational and environmental precautions and suggestions in addition to ecological common sense.
A brief summary of the institution’s approach to sustainable landscape management:
The University’s two golf courses follow sustainable landscape management principles, and have been recognized for their efforts by environmental organizations such as:
Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf Courses www.acspgolf.auduboninternational.org/
The Groundwater Guardian Green Site www.groundwater.org/gg/greensites.html
Michigan Turfgrass Environmental Stewardship Program www.mtesp.org/
Community Partners for Clean Streams www.ewashtenaw.org/cpcs
A brief description of how the institution protects and uses existing vegetation, uses native and ecologically appropriate plants, and controls and manages invasive species:
The University of Michigan's Matthaei Botanical Gardens and Nichols Arboretum, are involved in several important initiatives to help restore and protect our natural areas such as invasive species removal, prescribed burns, native plant propagation, and erosion control and storm water management. For more information go to: http://www.lsa.umich.edu/mbg/about/NaturalAreas.asp
A brief description of the institution’s landscape materials management and waste minimization policies and practices:
The compost used in planting beds is made on campus from yard waste. Any mulch used is made from UM-generated wood waste.
A brief description of the institution’s organic soils management practices:
Organic soils management restores and maintains the natural nutrient cycling system and is at the heart of any organic landscape program. The benefits of this natural approach include improved nutrient and moisture availability and retention, disease suppression, aeration, and degradation of harmful pollutants. One example is the University’s Compost Tea program, designed to use organic fertilizers to enrich existing soil.
A brief description of the institution’s use of environmentally preferable materials in landscaping and grounds management:
The University's Grounds department emphasizes the use of native plants in all landscape installations. Additionally, our metal trash cans contain 98% post-consumer recycled content, our metal benches contain 58% post-consumer content & 31% post-industrial content, our metal tables contain 59% post-consumer content & 31% post-industrial content while our metal edging contains 6% post-consumer content & 49% post-industrial content.
A brief description of how the institution restores and/or maintains the integrity of the natural hydrology of the campus:
Naturalized shorelines, or buffer zones, are maintained around Fry Pond and Fleming Creek. These areas add habitat for wildlife and serve as a buffer for any potential contaminates (i.e. fertilizers, pesticides, road salts) before they reach the water surface. Computerized irrigation systems greatly increase efficiency of water use.
A brief description of how the institution reduces the environmental impacts of snow and ice removal (if applicable):
In 1995, U-M established the Salt Use Improvement Team (Salt Team) to research alternative ways to melt snow and ice in conjunction with salt and sand, without jeopardizing pedestrian safety and the environment. The team was comprised of representatives from Building Services, Grounds and Waste Management (G&WM), the Office of General Counsel, Risk Management, Plant Operations, the School of Natural Resources and Environment, and Occupational Safety and Environmental Health (OSEH). Using the input from all these groups, G&WM has started to implement the alternative methods discussed and created by the team. G&WM and OSEH continue to look for alternative de-icing practices and improving the implementation of these practices.
The team developed Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order to help snow removal crews to use salt and sand more efficiently, reduce its overall use, and minimize its undesirable effects. BMPs currently used include: closing areas that are not frequently traveled; initiating night time snow removal crews; training snow removal crews in effective salt and sand application; alternative de-icing products; anti-icing techniques; and innovative application equipment.
A brief description of any certified and/or protected areas:
Is the institution recognized by the Arbor Day Foundation's Tree Campus USA program (if applicable)?:
The website URL where information about the institution’s sustainable landscape management programs and practices is available:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.