"Am I young enough to believe in Revolution
Am I strong enough to get on my knees and pray
Am I high enough on the chain of evolution
To respect myself, and my brothers and my sisters
And perfect myself in my own peculiar way."Pilgrim's Progress Kris Kristofferson
July 1: A room full of earnest, caring people deeply involved in urban forestry. Tree company owners, municipal arborists from other cities, consultants, engineers, citizen activists, planners from the City, and nobody thinks it's OK the way it is. Tree canopy in Seattle is about 23%. Everyone wants it to be more.
But that's where our agreement ends.
The better part of the 4 hours is spent discussing four goals:
- Better understand the tree resource and improve management tools
- Improve tree maintenance and management
- Better engage the community in stewardship of the urban forest
- Enhance tree preservation and planting through regulations and incentive
What I am reflecting on now is why we are convinced that trees are so great, when it isn't obvious to the general public. We know that people don't like trees for various reasons: they fall down; they block views; they drop leaves; the block sunlight; they cost money to maintain.... And then there's the benefit side. Trees trap air pollution, cool urban microclimate, buffer storm water and reduce erosion on slopes. They improve property values, encourage recreation, speed healing in clinical settings, and reduce neighborhood crime. But the research on these benefits is debatable. Right now, many tree advocacy groups are touting the CO2 sequestering power of urban trees. I have looked at the data provided by the US Forest Service, and I find little evidence that urban trees would make a dent in the drastic reductions that are needed in atmospheric CO2.
I think it is reasonable to conclude that trees provide benefits, and that these probably are greater over the course of the tree's life than the costs. There is no single dramatic benefit that trees provide, so the average person is not likely to get upset about a gradual decline in urban forest canopy.
Us tree advocates are probably stuck in our strident ways partly because we feel despair about the loss of trees, and what that means for the world and it's future. The loss of a magnificent tree in Seattle reminds us that magnificent trees are being cut by the shipload everyday around the world. The thoughtlessness that is manifest in the big picture we project on to the specific instance. Sometimes it is justified. Trees are removed in the city for stupid reasons, but that is not the rule in my experience.
But to save trees on a global scale, we will need more than regulations and incentives. We will need to raise children who love this place as much as we do. This place, the earth, is only perceived after the first "this place" - the home. That's where trees come in. For the benefits assigned to trees, such as property value, recreation, aesthetics and community building, there is a subtext about how we feel about the place we live. Do we feel connected or not? Do we feel a sense of permanence and heritage? Do we find wonder and beauty there?
And the problem with urban forestry is that not everyone finds their sense of place the same way. The business executive that cherishes his view of Elliott Bay is connecting with his sense of place. The retiree who cherishes her vegetable garden is connecting with her sense of place. The father who coaches little league and wants a ballfield is connecting with his sense of place. They are all finding place in their own way. I also see the limitations in these manifestations, just as there are limitations on making the focus of place the trees.
I would like us as, as urban environmentalists, to be more respectful of the way others are trying to realize their visions for the way they'd like to see our city work. I'd like us to focus less on trees and more on the ecosystem, which includes humans. I would like us to see where people are trying to manifest "love of place" in their own way, even if it differs from ours. I think this is the common thread that could make the whole discussion of the urban landscape more expansive and inclusive.
