# data[].attributes.body
Screen shot (image file)

# data[].attributes.body
Interactive - opens in ArcGIS.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
JNCC and a wide partnership of bodies have commissioned research into the Greenhouse Gas and carbon (C) fluxes associated with UK peatlands. Two research reports (No's. 442 and 443) are now available reviewing the existing evidence for peatland emissions, and another report provides improved knowledge of peatland types, their distribution and status.

Peatland ecosystems are important habitats recognised under international and national legislation. As well as having unique biodiversity, over time natural peatlands can capture and store carbon, removing greenhouse gasses (GHGs) from the atmosphere. Carbon is laid down in the form of partially decomposed plant and animal remains, as decay is limited by waterlogged conditions. Over the past 10,000 years, UK peatlands have sequestered around 5.5 billion tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere, which dwarfs the 150 million tonnes stored in our woodlands. Peatlands therefore contain over half the ~10 billion tonnes of carbon stored in UK soil.

Undamaged peatlands accumulate carbon in peat material much faster than it is naturally lost. However, human activities can alter the balance between accumulation and loss, turning the peatland into a source of carbon. Peatland ecosystems have been extensively degraded in recent times through a variety of activities, such as drainage and cultivation. Many of these processes lower the water level, producing more aerobic conditions, which encourages decomposition and rapid release of greenhouse gases (GHGs) to the atmosphere. These activities can also increase the amount of dissolved or suspended carbon lost to adjacent water bodies and represent significant environmental concerns.

Efforts to restore damaged UK peatlands are increasing with a focus on restoring the natural waterlogged conditions, usually for biodiversity, archaeological and hydrological reasons. However, re-wetting peat produces methane (CH ₄), which is a considerably more powerful greenhouse gas than CO ₂, and the short to medium-term effects of restoration on the GHG flux from peatland is poorly understood. Restoration aimed at conserving or enhancing carbon stocks and mitigating climate change may require different approaches to biodiversity restoration which have, until recently, been secondary or low priority aims.

With recognition of the effects of climate change and the UK entering its second carbon budget period, the ecosystem services provided by peatlands for regulating carbon stocks have become increasingly important to understand. Long-term restoration could produce a significant reduction in UK carbon emissions, but a greater understanding of the GHG effects of different management strategies is needed for peats to contribute effectively to the UK's carbon reporting. The extent of peatlands under different management regimes and the amount of GHG/carbon that is stored or lost under these needs to be confirmed. This will allow the production of emission factors to quantify the GHG/carbon flux. The same information will support practical decisions about how to manage peatlands for maximum benefits for all interests - from biodiversity to climate change mitigation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JNCC and a wide partnership of bodies have commissioned research into the Greenhouse Gas and carbon (C) fluxes associated with UK peatlands. Two research reports (No's. 442 and 443) are now available reviewing the existing evidence for peatland emissions, and another report provides improved knowledge of peatland types, their distribution and status.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The National Trust's Malham Tarn Estate in Yorkshire is having its peatlands protected with a wooden revetment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Plant communities in European peat bogs are affected by environmental change, but their ecological functioning remains intact.
If all peat bogs in the world were to disappear, the amount of CO ₂ in the atmosphere would increase by two-thirds. An international group of scientists from the EU-funded PEATBOG project, headed by CEH's Professor Nancy Dise, has studied how bogs react to climate change and increased levels of nitrogen and sulphur deposition.

In a survey of 56 bogs across Europe led by team members Dr Bjorn Robroek and Jos Verhoeven from the Netherlands, the scientists made the surprising conclusion that, although climate change and air pollution may cause plant species to decline or disappear, within the range of conditions studied, these may be replaced by others with similar ecological functions. The results of their study are published in Nature Communications today (Friday 27 October).

Peat bogs cover only 3 percent of the earth's surface, but metre for metre they store more carbon than any other terrestrial ecosystem: around 500 billion tonnes of it, or 67 percent of the amount of carbon in the earth's atmosphere.

"Ecosystems such as acid grassland and heathland can be highly sensitive to air pollution and climate change and, since bogs are similar low-nutrient habitats, we suspected that they too would be sensitive," said Dise. "This is of concern since long-term loss of even a few centimetres of peat globally due to climate change or air pollution would mean a significant increase in atmospheric CO ₂."

"Long-term loss of even a few centimetres of peat globally due to climate change or air pollution would mean a significant increase in atmospheric CO ₂." Professor Nancy Dise, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology

Sphagnum: the architects of the bogs

The plants and animals that live in bogs are adapted to these unique conditions and are indispensable for the continued survival of the bog ecosystem. That applies especially to peat mosses ( Sphagnum spp.), which are the architects of the bog, storing vast amounts of carbon and retaining water like a sponge. If the peat mosses disappear due to climate change, pollution, or combinations of stresses, that would mean the end for peat bogs.

"We know that changing climate and increases in nitrogen and sulphur in the atmosphere can cause certain plant species to disappear from areas. That may also have strong consequences for important biological functions, like carbon sequestration," Robroek explained.

56 Peat bog areas

The scientists studied the effects of climate change and the increase in airborne nitrogen and sulphur by comparing 56 peat bogs across Europe. In each bog, they inventoried which plant species occurred in the area. They then analysed the relationships between the species composition, the local climatic conditions and the atmospheric deposition of nitrogen and sulphur. This indicated that there are clear differences in vegetation between individual bogs, but remarkably they all displayed similar numbers of species.

Opposing preferences

Further analysis showed that two clusters of plants can be identified that usually grow together. The difference between the clusters is that they have opposing preferences for certain conditions. One group thrives under higher temperatures and precipitation, while the other prefers lower temperatures and less precipitation. The data showed that the absence of species with certain functions is compensated by the presence of species from the other cluster with the same functions. In this way, the bog can continue to function properly even if the plant species composition shifts as a result of environmental change. Or, as Dise puts it, "Bogs are tougher than we thought."

500 billion tonnes of carbon

That is good news, considering the estimated 500 billion tonnes of carbon that lie sequestered in peat bogs around the world. However, it is important to recognize that the species in the European bog communities are adapted to long-term conditions, and also that the conclusions of the study only apply over the climate and pollution range studied. Rapid changes in climate or pollution, or changes outside the normal range for European bogs, may overwhelm this inherent resilience. And it is important that species are able to migrate, so bogs must have a certain level of connectivity. However, most European peat bogs have either disappeared or been seriously affected by human activity.

"It is therefore vital that the existing peat bogs are not damaged by drainage or other major interventions," Verhoeven said.

The PEATBOG project was financed under the ERA-net project BiodivERsA(I), within the European Union's 6th Framework Programme for Research. The UK contribution to BiodivERsA(I) was funded by NERC and DEFRA.

Additional information

Full paper reference: Bjorn J M Robroek, Vincent E J Jassey, Richard J Payne, Magalí Martí, Luca Bragazza, Albert Bleeker, Alexandre Buttler, Simon J M Caporn, Nancy B Dise, Jens Kattge, Katarzyna Zając, Bo H Svensson, Jasper van Ruijven, Jos T A Verhoeven. Taxonomic and functional turnover are decoupled in European peat bogs. 2017, Nature Communications. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-01350-5 (open access)

Bjorn Robroek is now with the University of Southampton. He was formerly with Utrecht University, who issued a news release for this story.

Jos Verhoeven is also with Utrecht University

Vincent Jassey is with Laboratoire d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Environnement who issued a news story here
Staff page of Professor Nancy Dise, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Plant communities in European peat bogs are affected by environmental change, but their ecological functioning remains intact. If all peat bogs in the world were to disappear, the amount of CO 2 in the atmosphere would increase by two-thirds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Well over half the UK's small woodlands are neglected, overlooked and undervalued. Therefore our vision is to see small woodlands valued for the many benefits they bring to a sustainable society and to help achieve their better management to make the most of those benefits.
We do the following:

Provide support and advice to the hands-on woodland owner, manager and enthusiast.

Train a new generation of people to work in small woodlands through our apprenticeships and courses.

Deliver woodland-related projects that promote woodland management, coppice restoration, social forestry, health & wellbeing in woodlands and community woodland support.

Promote and support the sustainable management of small woodlands for the benefit of wildlife and people.

Undertake research to improve the understanding, awareness and sustainability of small woodlands.

Small Woods is the organisation for everyone who is involved in hands-on management of small woodlands, whether as owners, managers, volunteers, woodland and coppice workers or community woodland members.
As a member of Small Woods you will receive a wide range of benefits, including:

Quarterly 'Smallwoods' magazine, aimed at both the experienced forester and those new to woodlands, packed full of articles on doing the right thing by your woodland whether your main interest is wood fuel, timber, wildlife or recreation.

A Technical Information email and telephone line, giving you answers from experienced and qualified foresters to all manner of queries.

Our 70-page Small Woods Information Pack covering everything from finding a woodland, setting objectives, marketing timber and enhancing biodiversity.

Invitations to attend our Members' visits and training events, giving you the opportunity to learn about woodlands and meet other enthusiastic Members.

20% off all training courses at the Green Wood Centre in Shropshire, home of Small Woods.

Access to our Mentor Scheme, matching experienced members with those new to woodland management.

The chance to attend our annual Skill Share event and the Small Woods AGM.

The benefit of our policy work with national and regional bodies, ensuring that the interests of our small woodlands and those caring for them are not forgotten.

A regular e-newsletter on our activities and news from the woodland sector.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Well over half the UK's small woodlands are neglected, overlooked and undervalued. Therefore our vision is to see small woodlands valued for the many benefits they bring to a sustainable society and to help achieve their better management to make the most of those benefits.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The UK’s largest woodland conservation charity. We want to see a UK rich in native woods and trees. For people. For wildlife. We can’t achieve our vision without you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
All Geography starts with someone going into the field to find out what's there. This section will help you to gather the primary data (data you collect yourself) and secondary data (data collected by someone else) that will support your analysis and conclusions.

Carbon cycle in woodlands

1. Estimating tree carbon content

For each tree, you need to measure the circumference of the trunk and the height of the tree. You can use these fieldwork results to calculate the biomass of the tree and its carbon content. This is explained more fully in the Data Analysis section.

Looking for the Tree Carbon Content spreadsheet? Download it here.

(a) Measuring the circumference of the tree

Measuring tree diameter by Louise Parker.

Use a tape measure to measure the circumference of the tree at 1.5m from the base.

If the tree trunk grows out of the ground at an angle, measure the circumference at right angles to the trunk at 1.5m along the centre of the trunk axis, so the height is the average of the shortest and the longest sides.

If the ground is sloping but the tree trunk is straight, measure the circumference at 1.5m along the centre of the trunk axis, so the height is the average of the shortest and the longest sides.

If the trunk splits less than 1.5m from the ground, measure the smallest circumference below the lowest branch.

(b) Measuring the height of the tree

You need a tape measure and clinometer for this method. Start next to the tree trunk and walk away until you can see the top of the tree. Use a clinometer to measure the angle of elevation from your eye to the top of the tree. use a tape measure to record the distance along the ground from the tree trunk to where you took the clinometer reading. Also record your own height. Make sure that all distance measurements are recorded in metres.

You can calculate the height of the tree as follows

\(\mathsf{Tree\;height = distance\;along\;ground\;\times\; tan (angle\;of\;elevation)\;+\;height\;of\;observer}\)

As a quick rule of thumb, remember that tan 45° = 1. If you can walk far enough away from the tree that the angle of elevation from your eye to the top of the tree is 45°, the height of the tree will be equal to the distance along the ground from the tree trunk to where you took the clinometer reading plus your own height.

2. Estimating tree density: plotless sampling

How many trees are there in an area of woodland? If they are planted in regular rows in a plantation it might be possible to count them, but for a natural woodland where the trees are randomly distributed this will not work. Quadrats cannot be used. Instead you will need to use plotless sampling.

Use random numbers to generate x and y co-ordinates.

(a) Nearest individual method

Measure the distance from the x,y co-ordinates to the nearest tree.

Calculate the mean distance.

\(\mathsf{Density\;of\;trees} = \frac{1}{(2 \bar D)^2}\)

where \(\bar D\) is the mean distance.

(b) Point-centred quarter method

Measure the distance from the x,y co-ordinates to the nearest individuals in each quadrant.

Calculate the mean distance

\(\mathsf{Density\;of\;trees} = \frac{1}{(\bar D)^2}\)

where \(\bar D\) is the mean distance.

Repeat the method until you have sampled enough trees (50 is a minimum).

Carbon cycle in peatland

3. Measuring peat depth

Partially vegetated peat bog. Kinder Scout by Peer Lawther / CC BY.

Peat depth is measured by pushing a narrow rod into the ground. Specialist peat probes are available commercially, or you can make your own. The depth to which the rod sinks indicates the local peat depth.

Choose a location which is representative of the surrounding area. Vegetation can raise the ground surface above the actual level of the peat. Make sure that you take enough depth readings.

4. Measuring soil carbon content

Soil carbon content can be measured by taking soil samples, drying them in an oven, reweighing, then burning off the organic content in a soil furnace.

Take a sample of soil from the study area. Find the mass of the fresh soil sample. Dry it thoroughly in an oven, taking care not to put the temperature so high that organic matter is burnt (aim for 105°C if possible). You can tell when the soil is completely dry by weighing it, returning it to the oven for 10 minutes and weighing it again, then repeating until there is no change. Using a pestle and mortar, crush the soil until it is a powder.

Place approx 5g of dried soil from each sample into a crucible. Heat in a muffle furnace for 4 hours. Calculate the difference between mass before burning and mass after burning. This difference is the organic content. Carbon content can be estimated as making up 50% of the organic content.

Links between carbon cycle and water cycle

5. Analysis of stream water

Streams that flow from peatland can be sampled for carbon content.

Peaty water. River Swale by Phil / CC BY.

The simplest way to do this is to make a visual assessment of the colour of the water in the field, using a Secchi disc or a turbidity tube. You could make the assumption that the more turbid the water, the higher the carbon content (not always true!).

Or you can take water samples (a 50ml plastic bottle is useful) for analysis in the lab.

The first stage of lab analysis is to test for solid organic sediments. Pass the water sample through filter paper, making sure that you keep the water for the second stage.

Find the mass of sediment that has been filtered out of the water. Place the sediment in a crucible, and heat it in a muffle furnace. Calculate the difference between mass before burning and mass after burning. This difference is the organic content. Carbon content can be estimated as making up 50% of the organic content.

The second stage is to pass the stream water through a colorimeter, which measures the absorbance of different wavelengths of light by the solution.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Method for Carbon Cycle - Field Studies Council

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All Geography starts with someone going into the field to find out what's there. This section will help you to gather the primary data (data you collect yourself) and secondary data (data collected by someone else) that will support your analysis and conclusions.

# data[].attributes.headline
How to guide - identifying and describing soil

# data[].attributes.subject
How to guide - identifying and describing soil

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
With 90% of the UK's ash trees about to be wiped out, could GM be the answer?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scientists have proposed a radical solution to help trees develop resistance to ash dieback. But critics fear there could be unpredictable effects

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The outbreak of ash dieback disease is set to cost the UK in the region of £15bn, it has been estimated.

Scientists expressed shock at the "staggering" financial burden on taxpayers.

The authors warn that the cost of tackling the fallout from ash dieback far exceeds the income from importing nursery trees.

It was an imported nursery tree that initially brought the deadly disease to these shores.

They added that it was the first time the total cost of the outbreak had been estimated.

"We estimate that the total may be £15bn," explained lead author Dr Louise Hill, a researcher at Plant Sciences at the University of Oxford.

"That's a third more than the reported cost of the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in 2001.

"The consequences of tree disease for people really haven't been fully appreciated before now."

The disease, also known as chalara dieback of ash, was first reported in the UK in a nursery in 2012, and was recorded in the wider environment for the first time in 2013.

Since then it has spread to most parts of the UK.

The Forestry Commission says it has the "potential to cause significant damage to the UK's ash population, with implications for woodland biodiversity and ecology, and for the hardwood industries".

In Europe, the pathogen has caused widespread damage and has killed and infected millions of ash trees.

'Huge impact'

As well as estimating the loss from losing an economically important species, the £15bn figure takes in account the loss of "ecosystem services", such as water purification and carbon sequestration.

Report co-author Dr Nick Atkinson, senior adviser at the Woodland Trust, said: "What we were drawing attention to is that there is this huge financial and economic impact of a tree disease epidemic."

The authors, writing in the Current Biology journal, estimated that the total cost of ash dieback would be 50 times greater than the annual value of trade in live plants to and from Britain.

"What you have to look at is, essentially, the risk we are taking by trading across borders against the benefits, which is the financial gains coming from that market," he told BBC News.

"The £15bn cost that we are now facing is the direct outcome of a trade that was worth a few million pounds."

The researchers said that the majority of the cost will be shouldered by local authorities.

"As we know, local authorities are not well funded and they are certainly not funded enough to deal with an epidemic of this magnitude," observed Dr Atkinson.

"There is this hole in the policy of responding to events like this."

And it is something that is very likely to happen again in the near future, they warn, as there are 47 other known tree pests and diseases that could arrive in Britain and cause more than a billion pounds (or more) worth of damage.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The outbreak of ash dieback disease is set to cost the UK in the region of £15bn, it has been estimated. Scientists expressed shock at the "staggering" financial burden on taxpayers. The authors warn that the cost of tackling the fallout from ash dieback far exceeds the income from importing nursery trees.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The joints of meat that do more damage than a long-haul flight

By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 23 rd December 2015

The figures were so astounding that I refused to believe them. I found them buried in a footnote, and assumed at first that they must have been a misprint. So I checked the source, wrote to the person who first published them(1), and followed the citations. To my amazement, they appear to stand up.

A kilogramme of beef protein reared on a British hill farm can generate the equivalent of 643 kg of carbon dioxide. A kilogramme of lamb protein produced in the same place can generate 749 kg. One kilo of protein from either source, in other words, causes more greenhouse gas emissions than a passenger flying from London to New York(2).

This is the worst case, and the figure comes from a farm whose soils have a high carbon content. But the numbers uncovered by a wider study are hardly reassuring: you could exchange your flight to New York for an average of 3kg of lamb protein from hill farms in England and Wales(3). You'd have to eat 300kg of soy protein to create the same impact.

In choosing our Christmas dinner - or making any other choice - we appear to take informed and rational decisions. But what looks and feels right is sometimes anything but. In this case, the very features we have been led to see as virtuous - animals wandering freely across the mountains, tended by horny-handed shepherds, no concrete and steel monstrosities or any of the other ugliness of modern intensive farming - generate astonishing impacts.

The figures are so high because this form of husbandry is so unproductive. To produce one lamb, you need to keep a large area of land bare and fertilised. The animal must roam the hills to find its food, burning more fat and producing more methane than a stalled beast would.

Yes, there are payoffs here. What is good for farmed animals is often bad for the natural world. The cruelties of intensive indoor production are matched by the wreckage of extensive outdoor production. Free range pig and chicken farming, practised on the current scale, can be environmentally disastrous. Nitrates and phosphates sometimes pour from their paddocks and into the rivers. Unless they are kept at low densities or on well-drained fields, pigs tend to mash the soil: a friend describes some of the farming he's seen as opencast pig mining.

You can raise production - which means fewer greenhouse gases per kilo of meat - by dosing your animals with hormones and antibiotics. But this too has a cost. It's now almost too late, the director of Antibiotic Research UK warned this week, to prevent a global superbug crisis. This is partly because unscrupulous farmers have been chucking shedloads of the antibiotic colistin - the last great hope of killing resistant bacteria - at their animals, as it raises their weight.

But of all forms of production, the most attractive is one of the worst. Hill farming not only makes a wildly disproportionate contribution to climate change; it also trashes our watersheds, increasing the chances of dangerous floods, and destroys what would otherwise be our wildlife refuges: the great empty uplands, in which economic activity is sustained only through lavish farm subsidies. It is hard to think of any human activity with a higher ratio of destruction to economic product.

My friends in the industry accuse me of being anti-farmer. It's true that I emphasise the dark side, largely because so few other journalists seem prepared to cover these issues. But I have no visceral dislike of farming - quite the opposite. Visiting a farm on Exmoor last week, I was reminded of all that is beautiful about keeping sheep. The Arcardian idyll, a conception of the shepherd's life (in both Old Testament theology and Greek pastoral poetry) as the seat of innocence and purity, a refuge from the corruption of the city, resonates with us still. But in the midst of a multifaceted crisis - the catastrophic loss of wildlife, devastating but avoidable floods, climate breakdown - entertaining this fantasy looks to me like a great and costly indulgence.

As for eating local food, well in some cases it makes sense. It helps to engender a sense of place and belonging, which should not be lightly dismissed. When we buy seasonal fruit and vegetables from local farmers, it works environmentally as well. But we've tended to over emphasise food miles and to under emphasise other impacts. On average, transport accounts for just 11% of the greenhouse gas emissions caused by the food industry. Pulses shipped from the other side of the world can cause far lower impacts than meat produced here.

A paper published a few days ago suggests that switching from meat to green vegetables would be environmentally damaging. Per calorie, growing lettuces produces more greenhouse gases than rearing pork. But all this establishes is that lettuces are low in calories. You would need to eat 15kg of lettuce to meet your daily energy requirement, which might be reasonable if you were a 200kg rabbit. As another study remarks, "20 servings of vegetables have less greenhouse gas emissions than one serving of beef".

As the world's people adopt the Western diet, a paper in Climatic Change estimates, the methane and nitrous oxide produced by farming could rise to the equivalent of 13 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year by 2070. This is more than all human activities combined can safely produce without exceeding two degrees of global warming. Climate breakdown looks inevitable - unless we change our diets.

This, above all, means swapping most of the animal protein we eat for vegetable protein. It's not painful, unless we make it so. Many British people used to eat dhal every day. They called it pease pudding, pease pottage or pea soup. As in South Asia, its ingredients varied from place to place and season to season. It's just one component of a diet that offers plenty of variety - without trashing the great variety of life.

I'm not suggesting that you eat no meat or other animal products. I am suggesting that we should all eat far less. Save the splurge for Christmas. And even then, choose carefully.

www.monbiot.com
1.Durk Nijdam explained his figures as follows:
"The data I used from Edward Jones [sic, though my link] are his averages from table 6 and 7 . As these are per kg live weight at farm gate, and I wanted to present all data per kg retail meat or kg protein I did some calculations:
Culling out factor 53% for beef, 46% for lamb
Carcass factor70% for beef, 75% for lamb
Plus 0.3 kg CO2 for packaging and distribution
Protein content 20%
So the 51.6 kg CO2/kg LW in table 6 becomes (51.6/0.46/0.75)+0.3/)0.2=749 kg/kg protein".
2. When I was researching my book Heat, the figure I obtained from the UK government for long-haul flights was 110 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger kilometre. New York is 5585 km from London. 3. Applying Durk Nijdam's formula, the 17.86 kg CO2e/kg live weight finished lamb this study reports translates into 259 kg CO2e/kg protein.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The joints of meat that do more damage than a long-haul flight By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 23 rd December 2015 The figures were so astounding that I refused to believe them. I found them buried in a footnote, and assumed at first that they must have been a misprint.

# data[].attributes.headline
Forest Research Urban Canopy Cover Survey

# data[].attributes.subject
Forest Research Urban Canopy Cover Survey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Can you help us build an urban canopy cover map for Britain? Trees for Cities, Brillianto and Forest Research are hosting a citizen science project to map out the canopy cover of Britain's towns and cities.

Urban trees are being increasingly recognised for the many benefits they provide, such removing carbon dioxide and pollutants from the air, providing habitats for wildlife, and making our urban areas more attractive, enjoyable and healthy places to be. To help manage and understand this important resource, we hope to build a map of the distribution of tree canopy across urban Britain.

Recently canopy cover for English towns and cities has been assessed. Using the tool i-Tree canopy, Forest Research estimated an average canopy cover of 15.8% for 283 English towns and cities (see full results here).

We want to build on this work to extend it to more urban areas, including those in Wales and Scotland, and break-down canopy cover within urban areas by assessing cover within wards. Examining canopy cover at the ward level allows a more detailed picture of canopy cover to be produced and can help improve management of urban trees and identify which areas within a town or city could benefit from future tree planting.
How is canopy cover assessed?
This project will use a free, online tool called i-Tree Canopy, which provides a scientifically robust and consistent approach to estimating canopy cover. It's an easy and quick approach, allowing a ward canopy cover assessment to be completed in around 45 minutes.
How can you help?
Help us build this canopy cover map for Britain by measuring the canopy cover in your local area.

Download our step-by-step guide (listed at the bottom of this webpage) to help you work through your first canopy assessment

If after reading the guidance and you'd like to get in touch with us with any further questions and/or to request a ward area boundary to conduct your canopy assessment, you can get in touch with us at: canopycover@forestresearch.gov.uk

(canopycover@forestry.gsi.gov.uk e-mail address will no longer be answered)

Send your data back to us to help build a map of urban canopy cover. We'll also add results onto urbantreecover.map.
Visit our interactive web map here!
The map will keep track of progress and average ward canopy cover levels across the country.

As more and more canopy cover assessments are completed, we hope the map will fill up to show the canopy cover levels across the UK.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Can you help us build an urban canopy cover map for Britain? Trees for Cities, Brillianto and Forest Research are hosting a citizen science project to map out the canopy cover of Britain's towns and cities.