Reconstruction of Urban Forests: Post World War II and the Bosnian War 3030649377, 9783030649371

Citation preview

Joe R. McBride ·Judith Stilgenbauer · Igor Lacan · Sheauchi Cheng · Scot Medbury · Deborah L. McBride

Reconstruction of Urban Forests Post World War II and the Bosnian War

Reconstruction of Urban Forests

Joe R. McBride · Judith Stilgenbauer · Igor Lacan · Sheauchi Cheng · Scot Medbury · Deborah L. McBride

Reconstruction of Urban Forests Post World War II and the Bosnian War

Joe R. McBride University of California Berkeley, CA, USA Igor Lacan University of California Cooperative Extension Half Moon Bay, CA, USA Scot Medbury Quarryhill Botanical Garden Glen Ellen, CA, USA

Judith Stilgenbauer School of Architecture University of Hawai‘i at M¯anoa Honolulu, HI, USA Sheauchi Cheng Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture Riverdale, MD, USA Deborah L. McBride Samuel Merritt University San Mateo, CA, USA

ISBN 978-3-030-64937-1 ISBN 978-3-030-64938-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64938-8 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Preface

This book grew out of a decade of research into the restoration of urban forests destroyed by warfare. The initial studies examined cities in Europe and Japan that were bombed during World War II. Subsequently, an additional chapter on the restoration of the urban and peri-urban forests of Sarajevo was added. Seven of the eight cities in Europe and Japan were heavily impacted with concussion and incendiary bombs. Hiroshima was destroyed by an atomic bomb. Sarajevo was subjected to artillery fire and some limited aerial bombing during a nearly 4 year-long siege in the Yugoslav War. Its urban and peri-urban forests were cut down for firewood by local citizens deprived of fuel supplies during the siege. The purpose of the investigations upon which the book is based was to learn the history of the destruction of urban forests during warfare and their restoration following the war. It was assumed that by exploring this history, one could identify factors and experiences, which would be relevant to postdisaster restoration of urban forests following both natural and human caused urban forest destruction in the future. Berkeley, USA Honolulu, USA Half Moon Bay, USA Riverdale, USA Glen Ellen, USA San Mateo, USA

Joe R. McBride Judith Stilgenbauer Igor Lacan Sheauchi Cheng Scot Medbury Deborah L. McBride

v

Acknowledgements

This book is the product of combined efforts of the coauthors in research and writing. Each coauthor joined the senior author in studying the following cities: London and Coventry—Deborah McBride; Hamburg and Dresden—Judith Stilgenbauer; Stalingrad (Volgograd) and Leningrad (St. Petersburg)—Scot Medbury; Tokyo and Hiroshima—Sheauchi Cheng; Sarajevo—Igor Lacan. Without their insights, scholarship, language skills, and hard work, this book would not have been possible. An important contribution to our understanding of urban forest restoration following warfare came from interviews with local planners, arborists, professors, and individuals. In particular, those individuals who lived through the bombing and had personal knowledge of the urban forest restoration provided invaluable insights. In some cases, these interviewees directed and participated in tree planting following the war. We are indebted to the following individuals for the knowledge they conveyed during these interviews: London and Coventry: P. Hall, Professor of Planning, University College, London P. Akers, Arboricultural Manager, City of Westminster Hamburg: D. Schubert, Professor of Urban Planning, University of Hamburg L. von Ehren President of the Lorenz von Ehren Nursery, Hamburg Dresden: R. Schroder, Director of the Dresden Botanical Garden H. Seiche, Urban Forestry Department, Dresden Tokyo and Hiroshima: F. Hirata, Professor, Landscape Planning and Horticulture Academy, Awaji K. Fukunari, Landscape Consultant, Tokyo T. Kobayashi, City Planning Bureau, Hiroshima Y. Shinohara, Green Promotion Department, Hiroshima M.Maeda,

vii

viii

Acknowledgements

T. Ishikawa S. Nishiyama Stalingrad: V. V. Cepebryanaya, Professor of Architecture, University of Volgograd Leningrad: M. Ivanovna, Professor of Forest Botany, Forestry Academy, St. Petersburg Sarajevo: F. Mekic, Professor and Dean, Faculty of Forestry, University of Sarajevo M. Avdibegovic, Professor, Faculty of Forestry, University of Sarajevo V. Beus, Professor, Professor, Faculty of Forestry, University of Sarajevo S. Vojnikovic, Professor, Faculty of Forestry, University of Sarajevo O. Delic, Director, Park-Sarajevo, Sarajevo S. Heco, Technical Director, Park-Sarajevo, Sarajevo J. Basic, Forester, Sarajevo-Forests, Sarajevo D. Arnaut, Member, Cabinet of the Presidency, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Contents

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 5

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7 15

3 Bombing of Urban Areas During World War II and the Bosnian War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17 25

4 England: London and Coventry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reconstruction Planning During the War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Factors Affecting Urban Forest Reconstruction Following the War . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29 31 32 34 35

5 Germany: Hamburg and Dresden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Destruction of the Urban Forests of Hamburg and Dresden During World War II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Urban Planning Before the End of World War II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Urban Planning and the Reconstruction of the Urban Forests of Hamburg and Dresden After World War II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hamburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dresden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

6 Russia: Leningrad (St. Petersburg) and Stalingrad (Volgograd) . . . . . Bombing of Leningrad and Stalingrad in World War II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reconstruction Planning During the War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Factors Affecting Urban Forest Reconstruction Following the War . . . . . .

39 41 45 47 49 52 53 55 57 59 59

ix

x

Contents

Reconstruction of the Urban Forests of Leningrad and Stalingrad After the War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60 61 62

7 Japan: Tokyo and Hiroshima . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prewar Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tokyo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hiroshima . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Postwar Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tokyo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hiroshima . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Surviving Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

63 66 67 68 69 69 71 73 77 79

8 Sarajevo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Siege of Sarajevo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effects on the Urban Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effects on Peri-Urban Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tree Planting in Sarajevo During the War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Urban Tree Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peri-Urban Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

81 85 86 87 88 88 91 93 94

9 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Chapter 1

Introduction

Abstract Archaeological evidence indicates the presence of defensive walls around early human settlements. Walls were relatively effective in protecting settlements until aerial assaults occurred. Initially, projectiles were shot over walls to destroy structures. Kites and bamboo rockets were used in the tenth century in China to carry incendiary bombs over city walls. Aerial bombing from unmanned hot air balloons was introduced during the First Italian War of Independence in 1840. In the ItaloTurkish War (1911–12), aerial bombing from fixed-wing aircraft was first occurred. The continued use of fixed-wing airplanes for bombing took place in WWI. Manned dirigibles were also employed for bombing in WWI. Significant advancements in the development of equipment and techniques for bombing occurred between WWI and WWII. The capacity for destruction by aerial bombing peaked in the last year of WWII with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with atomic bombs. The destruction of urban areas during warfare included the destruction of urban forests. The reconstruction of urban forests in war-damaged cities is the subject of this book. The history of warfare in nine cities and how these cities responded to the destruction of their urban forests is presented.

Permanent human settlements evolved in response to the development of technologies for the production and storage of food (Adams 1960; Mumford 1961). It is evident from archaeological excavation of early permanent settlements that defense was an important factor in the location and design of the settlements. The ancient Chinese village of Pan-po-ts’un, built around 5000 BC near the present city of Xian, was surrounded by a moat and defensive wall (Chang 1986). Neolithic cities built in the Middle East were surrounded by walls constructed for defensive purposes of mud bricks and stone (Kenyon 1957; Negev and Gibson (July 2005). Paintings and drawings by early European explorers of North America show defensive palisades of logs surrounding Native American villages (Lorant 1946). These walls and palisades attest to the need for defense of early human settlements. Fire was used to attack early walled settlements. Brush was often stacked against the walls and set on fire where wooden walls protected settlements. Flaming arrows and other burning projectiles were shot over stone and mud-brick walls protecting ancient cities. The intent was to ignite the roofs and walls of the buildings inside the © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. R. McBride et al., Reconstruction of Urban Forests, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64938-8_1

1

2

1 Introduction

city walls. Catapults were developed to throw stones as well as flaming material over the walls of cities (Bradbury 2004). During the Late-Song Dynasty (1127–1279) the Chinese developed rockets made of bamboo to send explosives and incendiary powder over city walls (Needham 1986). The history of aerial bombing of cities dates back to the Song Dynasty (960–1279 AD) in China (Wonning 2005). Kites were used to fly incendiary material over city walls. Once the kites were above a city the incendiary material was released and fell to the ground. The kites carried incendiary powder, a fuse, and a burning stick of incense. The object of the bombing was to set fire to the city in order to divert the attention of the defenders who now had to put out the fires. In some cases, cities were destroyed by the conflagration the firebombs caused. The first aerial bombing of a city using unmanned hot air balloons occurred in 1849 when Austrian forces attempted to bomb Venice during the First Italian War of Independence (Millbrooke 2006). Two hundred balloons, each carrying one bomb, were launched from a ship outside of the city. The bombs were released from the balloons by time fuses. Fortunately, only one bomb fell on the city due to a shift in the wind. In 1911, during the Italo-Turkish War, an Italian pilot dropped four hand grenades from his airplane on Turkish troops in the village of Ain Zara near Tripoli (De Groot 2005). This was the first aerial bombing from an airplane. In the following year, Bulgarian forces bombed Adrianople (now Edirne, Turkey) from airplanes during the First Balkan War (Grant 2004). The bombs were grenade-like devices modified to carry heavier payloads and dropped by hand from airplanes. World War I (1914–1918) saw the use of dirigibles to bomb cities. The Belgian city of Liege was bombed from a German Army Zeppelin on August 6, 1914 (Boyne 2003). The first bombing of English towns by German Zeppelins occurred on the night of January 19 and 20, 1915 when the towns of Great Yarmouth, Sheringham, King’s Lynn, and surrounding villages were attacked from the air (Madison 2005). Fifty-kilogram high explosive bombs and three-kilogram incendiary bombs were used in the air raid. London was initially bombed in May 1916. In that year Germany made 23 Zeppelin raids on England. The number of raids dropped to 17 in 1917 and 11 in 1918 because the zeppelins proved too costly compared with airplanes. They were also large, slow, and filled with hydrogen gas that was flammable. This made them easy targets for English airplanes armed with incendiary bullets. In 1917 heavy bombers were introduced by German forces to bomb England. These planes were used to bomb industrial and port facilities as well as government buildings, but the air raids were often not effective and the bombs fell on civilian targets (Cole and Cheeseman 1984). The German strategic bombing of England was largely ineffective from a military standpoint. About 300 tons of bombs were dropped causing approximately 3 million British Pounds in damage. However, the bombing disrupted the civilian population with over 300,000 Londoners having to take shelter during the air raids. Industrial production fell due to the destruction of factories, infrastructure and the disruption of civilian life (Madison 2005). Aerial bombing by allied forces of cities in Germany during the First World War was initiated in 1914. Zeppelin bases in Cologne and Dusseldorf were targeted

1 Introduction

3

(Madison 2005). Subsequent attacks were directed against Zeppelin factories in Friedrichshafen and Ludwigshafen. A major bombing raid by the Royal Air Force using four-engine Handley Page V/1500 carrying 7,500 lb of bombs was planned with Berlin as the target in 1918. Fortunately, the raid was canceled when the Armistice ending the First World War was signed (Gregory 2016). The British dropped 660 tons of bombs on Germany during the war, primarily on manufacturing facilities. No broad-scale bombing of German cities took place. France, Italy, Russia, and Austria-Hungry also conducted aerial bombing raids during the First World War (Madison 2005). They concentrated their bombing on military, industrial, and infrastructure targets. However, Austria-Hungarian forces bombed Venice, Italian aircraft bombed Innsbruck and Bolzano, and the French bombed Freiburg im Breguet. The French used lightweight, modified reconnaissance aircraft for bombing, while heavy-weight bombers were used by Italy, Russia, and Austria-Hungry. Destruction of urban housing and loss of civilian life was limited in the cities targeted in Europe during World War I. Significant advancements occurred in the development of aircraft in the years between the First and Second World Wars. This included the development of heavyduty bombers designed to carry large numbers of bombs or single bombs weighing more than 1000 lb. Regrettably, these new aircrafts along with newbombing strategies were .tested during the Italian-Ethiopian War by Italian forces against targets in Ethiopia (Barker 1971) and by Spanish Nationalist and German forces in Spain (Hart 1937). The bombing of Guernica (Fig. 1.1), Barcelona, Madrid, and Valencia were, in retrospect, forewarnings of the horrific bombing of cities by both the Axis and Allied forces that occurred in the Second World War. Damage to cities by aerial bombing during the Second World War was beyond any previous experience in terms of the destruction of property and the loss of lives (Humble 1975). Bombing strategies were developed not only to cripple military installation, industrial facilities, infrastructure, urban housing but to also terrorize civilian populations. Prominent among these strategies was the firebombing of cities and the development and use of the atomic bomb. Details of the bombing of eight cities in Europe and Japan during the Second World War will be presented in the following chapters, along with information of the siege of Sarajevo during the Yugoslav War. The use of both concussion bombs and firebombs took a deadly toll on trees growing in urban areas during the Second World War (Cheng and McBride 2006; Stilgenbauer and McBride 2010). This impact was far greater than in previous wars because of the extent of the bombing, the type of bombs used, and improvements in targeting bombs. Although aerial bombing did not play an important role in the destruction of the urban and peri-urban forests of Sarajevo during the Yugoslav wars, the forests there were largely cut down for firewood by the people of Sarajevo during the siege of the city (Lacan and McBride 2009). Urban greening through the development of parks in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in European cities along with the incorporation of tree-lined boulevards had increased tree density prior to the beginning of World War I (McBride 2017). Very little damage occurred to trees during the aerial bombing in World War I, because of

4

1 Introduction

Fig. 1.1 Ruins of Guernica, 1937 (Used with permission from the Bundesarchiv—Federal Archives)

the general failure of incendiary bombs and the concentration of bombing on military and industrial targets where trees were not common. The use of carpet bombing to initiate firestorms, destroy urban housing and terrorize urban populations during the Second World War resulted in greater damage to tree populations. The impact of aerial bombing on tree populations in eight cities in Europe and Japan is described in the following chapters as is the cutting down of the urban and peri-urban forests of Sarajevo. The destruction of portions of many cities in England and Germany during World War II prompted the development of plans for reconstruction even before the war ended, as was also the case in Sarajevo. These plans, for the most part, were not implemented after the war, but were replaced by new post-war plans. Sarajevo was an exception as the plans prepared during the war were implemented, with some modifications after the war. Implementation of plans was often delayed by the lack of tree nursery stock since many nurseries were converted to the production of vegetables to feed urban populations after the war. The reconstruction of the urban forests of war-damaged cities is the focus of this book. Cities in England (London, Coventry), Germany (Hamburg and Dresden), Russia (Leningrad [St. Petersburg], Stalingrad [Volgograd]) and Japan (Tokyo and Hiroshima) and Sarajevo in Bosnia

1 Introduction

5

and Herzegovina are discussed. Information concerning the destruction and reconstruction of the urban forests in each city was developed through a review of publications, reports in urban archives, and interviews in each city with current urban planners and survivors of the bombings who were involved in urban planning and the reconstruction of the urban forest after the war. It is hoped that an understanding of the problems faced in the reconstruction of urban forests following war can assist urban planners, arborists, and urban foresters faced with the reconstruction of urban forests following natural and man-made disasters in the future.

References Adams RM (1960) The origin of cities. Sci Am 171:153–168 Barker AJ (1971) The Rape of Ethiopia 1936. Ballantine Books, NY Boyne WJ (2003) The influence of air power on history. Pelican, Gretna, LA Bradbury J (2004) The Routledge companion to medieval warfare. Routledge Publishing, London Chang K (1986) The archaeology of China. Yale University Press, New Haven Cheng S, McBride JR (2006) Restoration of the urban forests of Tokyo and Hiroshima following World War II. Urban Forests Urban Green 5:155–168 Cole C, Cheeseman EF (1984) The Air Defense of Britain, 1914–1918. Putnam, London De Groot G (2005) The bomb. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA Grant RG (2004) Flight—100 years of aviation. Dorling-Kindersley Limited, London Gregory A (2016) Imperial capitals at war: a comparative perspective. Lond J 41(3):219–232 Hart BHL (1937) Military Lessons from Spain. The New Republic, August 4, 1937, 358p Humble R (1975) War in the Air 1939–1945. Salamander, London Kenyon KM (1957) Digging up Jericho: the results of the Jericho excavation. Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT Lacan I, McBride JR (2009) War and trees: The destruction and replanting of the urban and periurban forest of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Urban Forest Urban Green 8(3):133–148 Lorant JE (1946) The new world: the first pictures of America. Duell, Sloan, &Pearce, NY Madison R (2005) Air warfare, strategic bombing. In: The Encyclopedia of world war I: a political, social and military history. ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, CA McBride JR (2017) The world’s urban forests. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland Millbrooke A (2006) Aviation history. Jeppesen, Denver CO Mumford L (1961) The city in history. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, NY Needham J (1986) Science and civilization in China: volume 5, chemistry and chemical technology, Part 7, military technology; the Gunpowder Epic. Caves Books Ltd., Taipei Negev A, Gibson S (2005) Archaeological encyclopedia of the Holy Land. Continuum International Publishing Group, NY Stilgenbauer J, McBride JR (2010) Reconstruction of Urban Forests in Hamburg and Dresden after world war II. Landsc J 29(2):144–160 Wonning PR (2005) A short history of kites. Mossy Feet Books, Batesville, IN

Chapter 2

Urban Forests Prior to World War II

Abstract The earliest planting of trees in urban areas took place in Egypt and the Middle East as early as the twenty-sixth century BC. Early tree planting enhanced private gardens and marked processional routes leading to temples and tombs. The Renaissance ushered in innovations in urban design along with new ideas for the incorporation of trees into cities. These innovations resulted in the creation of treelined boulevards, large urban parks, and wooded suburbs that were developed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Examples of these are the tree-lined boulevards designed by Haussmann in Paris, Central Park designed by Olmsted and Vaux in New York City, and various English suburbs influenced by Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City Concept. At the beginning of World War II cities in Europe and Asia contained to various degrees city parks, public and private gardens, cemeteries supporting trees, and tree-lined boulevards and waterways. Their suburbs were characterized by tree-lined streets and small wooded parks. Commonly used species in temperate zone cities included London plane, common lime, rowan, English elm, field maple common lime, Norway maple, Silver birch, Carolina poplar, horse chestnut, ginkgo, zelkova, camphor tree, and black locust.

Tree planting occurred in cities of Egypt and the Middle East as early as the twentysixth century B.C. (Cowell 1978). These early plantings were to enhance private gardens and to line processional routes leading to temples and tombs. Trees continued to be incorporated into urban landscapes throughout history, but major changes in these landscapes involving tree planting occurred following the Renaissance. Large city parks, tree-lined boulevards, and new residential developments enhanced by trees emerged in Europe and in the Western Hemisphere in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Lawrence 1993; McBride 2017). In the nineteenth century, developments in Europe and the USA solidified the place of trees in urban environments. Most precedents for the incorporation of trees into urban areas predated the nineteenth century. However, in the nineteenth century, the remodeling of Paris, the establishment of large public parks in Germany and England, and the development of wooded suburbs in both England and the USA stimulated the incorporation of trees in urban area at a scale previously unknown.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 J. R. McBride et al., Reconstruction of Urban Forests, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64938-8_2

7

8

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II

Fig. 2.1 Boulevard de la Madeleine, Paris 1890–1900 (Used with permission from the Library of Congress, ppmsc.05201)

The tree-lined boulevard had its origins in the tree-lined processionals of the ancient world, the country roads lined with trees as early as the third century AD in Japan, the allees and avenues of the Italian Renaissance gardens of the fifteenth century, trees planted on city walls in the sixteenth century, and the malls and promenades of the seventeenth centuries in European cities (Girouard 1985; Lawrence 1988). However, the transformation of Paris during the reign of Napoleon III, under the direction of Haussmann, codified the tree-lined boulevard as an essential requirement for cities in the latter half of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (de Moncan and Heurteux 2002). Much has been written about the motivations for the creation of the boulevard system in Paris (Alphand 1868; Pinkey 1958; Kostof et al. 1979; Girouard 1985; Jacobs et al. 2002). The remodeling of Paris may have been stimulated by the ambitions of Napoleon III to demonstrate his power, stimulate economic development, and for military control over rebellious local populations but it also had at its roots a desire to improve the city and the health of the urban population. Key to this improvement was the increased width of the new thoroughfares, provisions for sidewalks, proper paving and drainage, and the incorporation of trees. Haussmann’s plan envisioned dozens of new boulevards radiating out from Place d’ Etoile, Place d’ Trocdero, Place d’ Bastille, and Place d’ Italie (Fig. 2.1). In

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II

9

Fig. 2.2 Olmsted and Vaux plan for Central Park, New York City, 1865 (Used with permission from the David Rumsey Historical Map Collection)

all 57, miles of wide streets were constructed, 700 miles of sidewalks installed, and the number of trees along the streets of Paris doubled (Pinkney 1958). The new boulevards and widened streets were primarily planted with London plane tree (Platanus x acerifolia). To a lesser extent horse chestnut (Aesculus carnea), big leaf linden (Tilia platyphyllos) and European ash (Fraxinus excelior) were also used. These four species were no doubt chosen because of their large stature and arching form that provided shade for both the sidewalks and streets. The tree-lined boulevards in Paris were copied in numerous cities throughout the world in the latter half of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Lawrence 1988). The origin of public gardens and parks dates back to Ancient Greece and Rome (Cowell 1976). Many parks came into being when private gardens were opened to the public (Shakespeare 1623). Two factors may be credited with the acceleration of public park establishment in the nineteenth century. The first was the enclosure of residential squares, thus preventing access to the public. Residential squares were initiated in London in 1630 with the construction of what is now known as Covent Garden. It was a paved square open to the public. In 1661, Leicester Square in London was the first residential square in which trees were planted (Lawrence 1988). The enclosure of these squares reduced the amount of public open space for most Londoners. Many expressed their desire for access to parks in the city. A Parliamentary committee convened to investigate this problem called for the admission of the general public to Regent’s Park (Committee on Public Walks 1833). By 1840, Regent’s Park was fully opened to the public. The opening of Regents Park was followed by the creation of Victoria Park in the east end of London to provide additional park space for the public (Chadwick 1966). Similar large urban parks were created in other English cities, notably Birkenhead Park near Liverpool that served as a model for Central Park designed in New York City (Fig. 2.2). London public parks inspired the redesign of the Bois de Boulogne in Paris and the Tiergarten in Berlin. The development of public parks in China and Japan was stimulated by the construction of parks in British and French port concessions in Shanghai and Yokohama in the late nineteenth century. An important factor stimulating the establishment of urban parks in the last half of the nineteenth century was the perception that they would contribute to the health of the urban populations (Crompton 2012). In 1842, the Great Britain Poor Law

10

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II

Commission published Report on the Sanitary Conditions of the Labouring Population of Great Britain (Great Britain Poor Law Commissioners 1842). It was soon followed by similar reports in New York City and Boston (Griscom 1845; Commissioners for the sanitary survey of the state of Massachusetts 1850). These reports explicitly embraced urban parks as part of the solution to the sanitation problems contributing to ill-health in the poorer sections of large cities. The Scientific American in 1859 noted, in reference to New York City, that “In all the cities of Europe, there are large public parks which form huge lungs for the pent-up streets. As a means of promoting the public health, they have been considered invaluable and indispensable” (Scientific American 1859). Stimulated by these reports Birkenhead Park, Victoria Park, Central Park, Boston Public Garden and other large urban parks were constructed in the nineteenth century. The “City Beautiful Movement” of the early twentieth century encouraged the planning of parkways and the establishment of new parks in many cities in the USA (Wilson 1989). The influence of the “City Beautiful Movement” on European city planning in the early twentieth century was limited (Freestone 2007). The Kingsway project in London and Cathays park in Cardiff are two of the few examples of adoption of the concepts of the movement in the UK. A greater influence of the “City Beautiful Movement” occurred in urban planning projects in Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, the Philippines, and China. In all of these projects, trees were important components of the redesign of urban landscapes. In the early part of the nineteenth century, rural cemeteries were laid out in the USA with tree-line curving roads. Mount Auburn cemetery on the outskirts of Boston built in 1831 was the first of these new rural cemeteries to break with the traditional grid pattern of earlier American and European cemeteries (French 1975). Mount Auburn and other rural cemeteries served as inspirations for suburban development in the second half of the nineteenth century in the USA. The Olmsted and Vaux plan for Riverside, a suburb of Chicago, is often cited as the premier example of a suburb inspired by the rural cemetery movement (Fabos et al. 1968). In the Riverside project, Olmsted envisioned curving tree-lined streets as well as open space areas adjacent to a creek where trees would be planted (Fig. 2.3) (Rybczynski 1999). Each residential lot also provided space for the homeowners to plant additional trees. Suburbs developed around London toward the end of the nineteenth century as rail transportation provided a means of moving workers in and out of the city. Semidetached houses were typical of the English suburbs. The appeal, in part, of these suburbs was the opportunity for homeowners to have space for a garden. As in the American suburbs, street trees were planted in these new English suburbs. Schein (1993) makes the argument, based on the paucity of street trees in older towns and villages in Europe, that the street tree is an American invention. The common planting of street trees in American towns and villages after the turn of the nineteenth century (Jackson 1970) may have proceeded the planting of street trees in European suburbs; however, ample evidence has been presented by Lawrence (1988) for much earlier origins of tree-lined streets in Europe. English suburban development in the early twentieth century was also influenced by Ebenezer Howard’s “Garden City Concept” (Howard 1898; Stern et al. 2013). Although Howard’s concept was for the

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II

11

Fig. 2.3 Olmsted, Vaux & Company Plan for Riverside, Illinois, 1869 (Courtesy of Riverside Historical Museum)

design of new towns, it stimulated an interest of greenbelts that were incorporated into the margins of existing towns and new suburbs (Hall and Ward 1998; Hall 2002; Stern et al. 2013). Urban development in the first half of the twentieth century in England (e.g., London: Hampstead Garden Suburb, Bedford Park), Germany (e.g., Berlin—Frohhau, Dresden—Hellerau), Russia (e.g., Moscow—Zelenograd), France (e.g., Suresne—Garden City, Suresne, Pre-Saint-Gervais—Garden City, Pre-SaintGervais), Japan (e.g., Tokyo—Den-en-chofu), and China (Hong Kong—Kowloon Tong) was significantly influenced by Howard’s “Garden City Concept” (Ward 2005). The history of the development of urban greenery followed a somewhat different course in Sarajevo than the one above described primary for England and northern Europe. Sarajevo was part of the Ottoman Empire from 1453 until 1918. During this period, it absorbed little of the ideas coming out of the Renaissance, which had influenced urban design in Europe. As with other Ottoman cities, it was organized into to neighborhoods each defined by its own Mosque. Parks were not part of the design of the city at that time. Nor were tree-lined streets or boulevards. Poplar trees (Populus nigra var. italica) were often planted in the courtyards of mosques, some cemeteries were partially planted with trees, and a variety of fruit trees were commonly planted in the gardens of private homes. In 1878, the occupation of Sarajevo by Austria-Hungary began. With this occupation, new concepts of urban design common in Europe were

12

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II

introduced in Sarajevo. Tree-lined streets and boulevards were introduced along with tree-covered promenades along the river. During this period, the first city parks were constructed. Following World War I, Sarajevo was annexed by Yugoslavia. A considerable expansion of urban green space occurred during the “Yugoslav Period,” especially from 1945 to 1991. This expansion involved the planting of trees along many streets that had not previously supported street trees, construction of new streets that were also planted with trees, creation of many new city parks, and the planting of trees around new multiresidential buildings (Lacan and McBride 2009). During the Great Depression in the first half of the twentieth century, many European and American cities developed public work programs to provide employment for their citizens. Projects undertaken by these programs often focused on improvements in existing parks (Freedland et al. 2007; Leighninger 2007; Rose 2009). Park roads, water drainage systems, infrastructure improvements and tree planting were among the types of activities undertaken. Central Park in New York City was rehabilitated with the removal and replacement of dead and dying trees and the planting of new groves of trees along with many other infrastructure improvements funded by the federal “New Deal” program (Kinkead 1990; Stern et al. 1987). The characteristics of urban forests in European cities at the beginning of World War II were common in Sarajevo before the Bosnian War (1991–1996). A variety of trees had been used in the planting of these urban environments. The tree-lined boulevards and streets in these prewar cities depended upon a relatively small number of tree species (McBride 2017; Cheng et al. 1999; Cheng and McBride 2006; Stilgenbauer and McBride 2010; Lacan and McBride 2009). The success and appeal of a few species and cultivars in Paris and London in the eighteenth century tended to constrain the adoption of a large number of species. Commonly used trees in London and other British cities were London plane (Platanus x acerifolia), common lime (Tilia europea), rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), English elm (Ulmus campestris) and field maple (Acer campestre). Of these, London plane had a frequency of occurrence of 67% in London (McBride 2017). In Moscow, typical of other Russian cities the most commonly used street and boulevard trees were common lime, Norway maple (Acer platanoides), Silver birch (Betula pendula), rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), Carolina poplar (Populus x Canadensis) and horse chestnut (Aesculus carnea). Common lime was the more commonly used of these species having a frequency of occurrence of 83% in Moscow (McBride 2017). The more commonly planted boulevard and street trees in Tokyo were ginkgo (Ginkgo biloba), zelkova (Zelkova serrate), camphor tree (Cinnamomum camphora), much tree (Ilex integra) and black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia). Ginkgo and zelkova each had a frequency of 33% in Tokyo (McBride 2017). The postwar reconstruction of the urban forests impacted by the war is the focus of this book. The cities studied were London, Coventry (England), Hamburg, Dresden (Germany), Leningrad, Stalingrad (Russia), Tokyo and Hiroshima (Japan), and Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Examples of urban parks, gardens and other open space areas supporting trees in each of these cities are shown in Table 2.1. Tree species richness tended to be greater in parks than along streets and boulevards, especially in larger city parks (McBride 2017). Large urban parks often contained

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II

13

Table 2.1 Five examples of large and small parks, gardens and cemeteries in London, Coventry, Hamburg, Dresden, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Tokyo, and Hiroshima prior to World War II Country

City

Park

Area (acres)

England

London

The Regent’s Park

410

Kensington Gardens

270

St. James Park

57

Highgate Cemetery

37

Coventry

Germany

Hamburg

Dresden

Russia

Leningrad*

Stalingrad**

Japan

Tokyo

Berkeley Square

2.5

War Memorial Park (WWI)

120

London Road Cemetery

64

Charterhouse Field

24

Swanswell Park

4

Lady Herbert’s Garden

2

Olsdorf Cemetery

966

Altonaer Volkspark

5O6

Stadtpark

102

Schanzen Park

25

Spielplatz Boninstrasse

0.5

Grosser Garden

445

Schloss Pillnita

69

Quartierpark Johanngarten

22

Botanischer Garden

8

Westlicher Promenadenring

1.8

Smolensk Cemetery

112

Volkovskoye Provoslavnoye Cemetery

55

Field of Mars

22

Mikhailovsky Garden

18

Ovsyannikovskly Sad

10

Voroshilov Cemetery

79

Garsad Park

20

Geroyev Park

10

Sashi Filippova Park

8

Chekistov Park

4

Shinyuku Gyo-en

144

Meiji Jingu

118

Komaba Park

20

Hamarikyu Garden

6

Sugekari Park

3 (continued)

14

2 Urban Forests Prior to World War II

Table 2.1 (continued) Country

Bosnia and Herzegovina

City

Park

Area (acres)

Hiroshima

Central Park

104

Sarajevo

Ryuo Park

17

Shukkeien Garden

12

Higashisenda Park

8

Fukuromachi Park

0.6

Mijmilo Forest Park

230

Baie Cemetery

70

Vraca Park

11

Zaljabljenib Park

1.2

Ponzionera Park

0.5

*(St. Petersburg); **(Volgograd)

Table 2.2 Species commonly observed in small parks in eight cities in Europe and Japan

Species

Percent of cities studied

Acer palmatum

25

Aesculus hippocastanum

50

Celtis australis

25

Pheonix canariensis

25

Platanus × hispanica

37.5

Prunus serrulata

37.5

Robinia pseudoacacia

50

Tilia cordata

25

arboreta. In some urban parks, different tree species were used to highlight different sections of the park. Many urban parks at this time were reported to have over 150 tree species (Fabos et al. 1968; Montero 2001). The more commonly used species in small city parks (