Christmas trees - De-forestation, Crops, or Weeds?

Some people claim that by having no Christmas tree or by using an artificial tree they are saving a tree. Really? Where do Christmas trees come from? Tree farms! When the trees are cut, more are planted in their place. How about saving a wheat stalk and not eating bread?

It isn't as if somebody is clear-cutting vast swaths of pine trees and never replanting. It isn't as if somebody is cutting vast swaths of conifers to build a humongous parking lot.

What many people don't realize is that many trees are weeds. Not that they are useless plants, but they grow all by themselves without human aid. On our property in Brimson we have thousands of balsam, some ideal Christmas trees, most all jammed together. They sprout up in fields. They crowd out firewood trees. Just about everything but the long-gone white pine grows by itself. The only white pines we have we planted, and many of them have served as deer feed or buck-antler scratching posts. Ah! Kill a deer and save lots of trees.

When we first bought the property, we saw dozens of dying birch, a foot or more in diameter. All are gone except the rotting logs bound up in some really good fire-starter. Now twelve years later we have hundreds of birch. We only transplanted four from the power-line right of way. Many of these wild birch are now suitable for firewood.

Where balsam doesn't grow, the predominant trees are aspen. These live about 30-50 years and then come crashing down on other trees. Of course, trees rotting on the ground can spread disease to other trees. Next year we'll have a logger selectively cut some aspen for us. By doing so, we may see moose tracks once again. Moose love aspen shoots. Ah! Kill a moose and save lots of trees.

In addition to the above species, we have red maple, willow, black spruce, white spruce, tamarack, chokecherry, hazel, alder, and others all growing merrily without our help.

Sure, we cut paths through all these and use the cuttings for firewood or chip them for the paths. But guess who uses the paths the most? Wild animals! There are tracks of wolf, deer, bear, squirrel, rabbit, and mouse all over these trails.

Besides wild life habitat and our enjoyment, these trees have another important purpose – carbon sequestration. These trees probably soak up more carbon dioxide than we create driving to our cabin and back and more than we create with our heating fires.

Livability of cities

I sent the following email to a Duluth city councillor who is proposing an amendment to the city's tall grass and rubbish ordinance. I doubt whether the amendment will do any good considering how little money Duluth or any other city has for enforcement.

I appreciate your concern about the livability of Duluth, but as a walker, I wonder if your amendment to the rubbish and tall grass ordinance will have much effect.

Laws and ordinances have three purposes:

to provide guidance to people of good faith (yellow lines to divide streets)
to punish people of bad faith after the fact (burglary laws and so forth)
to make legislators feel good (flag burning amendments)

Given the current financial support of government by citizens, I would say the mowing ordinance comes more under purpose 3 then purpose 2.

My grounds for saying this are the effectiveness of the snow shoveling ordinance and the snow shoveling hot line. It’s not that city employees are not responding to requests in a timely fashion; they do as I recently found out about shrubbery blocking a sidewalk. The problem is that it is rare for citizens to call in about obvious problems.

For example, dozens of students walk to UMD or Woodland Middle School, but often over half of the sidewalks on 19th Ave, E. 8th St., Woodland Ave., or St. Marie St. are not shoveled in a timely fashion after a snow storm. I doubt many students bother calling the snow shoveling hot line.

I could call in dozens of properties in this same area that have shrubbery blocking half or more of the sidewalk or trees hanging over the sidewalk at eye level. Surprise, on Garden St with all of its nice yards or city trees on one of the avenues either side of Lake Ave. just north of Superior St. But, like many people, I’m reluctant to make a “nuisance of myself” or even spend the time calling in with sufficient details for action.

I’m sure that city can’t afford to have a “walkability patrol” when it can’t afford enough police to strictly enforce the speed limits on Arrowhead Road, Snively, or Woodland Ave.

I wrote an article on walkability for the Reader Weekly three years ago:

http://www.cpinternet.com/~mdmagree/walking_2004-10-21.htm

Many of these problems still exist.

In any case, thanks for your concern about the livability of Duluth. I wish I could feel confident that your efforts will make a difference.