I just opened a survey sent to me by the Arbor Day Foundation. They’re offering free gifts for filling it out, including ten Norway Spruce trees and two lilacs. Both of these are non native. I can’t help but think it’s irresponsible for an organization like this to be sending out introduced species to people who wouldn’t know better. Am I wrong here? I sent them an email explaing this, but I’m wondering if I’m right to think it’s a bad idea. Hopefully I didn’t come off as a know it all that thinks they’re smarter than everyone.
7 Likes
I’m just now actually reading the survey before it goes into the shredder. It really seems like just something where the only point is to make you think it’s important and get you to donate.
1-6 seem like they’re trying to generate positive associations with trees.
7 is just dumb, you’ll find people who care and don’t care in every state, and how can anyone make a judgment like that for the whole state?
8 is just a bullet point list of benefits disguised as a question.
You get the idea. It actually makes me think less of them as a conservation organization, and more of a money making organization disguised as a charity.
7 Likes
this is called push polling. it’s kind of a deceoptive technique for advocacy, but i assume people do it because it works – at least for some target audiences. paired with a solicitiation for money, it might also prime a donor to give more.
is planting trees the same thing as conservation?
any organization needs money to operate. i don’t necessarily fault a non-profit organization for raising funds.
2 Likes
I got the same survey and also wrote them an email pointing out that they should be using native trees. Even if it is just a fund-raising letter in disguise, having a prestigious organization recommend non-native plants encourages recipients to plant them. The more of us who write to say this letter has a negative effect, the more they are likely to embrace natives. To me, your note and concern is an indication of someone who cares about the biodiversity crisis and perhaps even wants to help their organization. Thanks for taking action.
9 Likes
I think so. The point of planting anything would be restoring biodiversity and combating climate change. If you’re planting non native stuff though, that could potentially become invasive. That’s pretty much the oposite of the desired outcome.
1 Like
As someone who grew up in the Great Plains region, I would argue that planting trees does not automatically equal conservation.
Planting trees promotes, well, the proliferation of trees. Humans find trees valuable for various reasons – as providers of shade and fruit, habitat for (some) animals, as sources of wood, and (more recently) as sequesterers of carbon.
One of the common criticisms of carbon offset schemes centers precisely around this – planting trees does not necessary provide a net benefit for the environment, if those trees are being planted in tree farm monocultures and not protecting or restoring damaged ecosystems.
I think one reason that planting trees is often equated with conservation is connected with the historical importance of wood. Where deforestation due to pressure on a limited resource is a continual problem, planting trees is an action that promises to protect the future. But it’s an investment in trees as something useful to humans, not in nature per se.
13 Likes
I understand your point, and it’s similar to my thinking. Planting things isn’t good enough, they have to be the right things.
4 Likes
To me, it depends on where these trees are being planted. Just sending out a few non-natives to random people who answer a questionaire is a bad idea. However, planting those trees in town or around a farm house is usually not actually a bad idea (though it’s not as good an idea as planting natives).
I remember leading a tour for Arbor Day people decades ago. I railed against planting trees in open spaces if those spaces had native prairie plants! The people were startled but sympathetic. (And I wasn’t asked to do it again, but so it goes.)
14 Likes
I completely agree with you
Sometimes they can be unintentionally misleading, too. The Washington Hawthorn is named after Washington, D.C. where it is native. But – at least in the past – the Arbor Day Foundation offered it to residents in Washington State as a tree “adapted to your growing conditions.” At least some people erroneously believed the name meant it was native there, although the Foundation never made any such claim.
4 Likes
A “free gift” that comes in return for a donation of $75 or more isn’t free.
9 Likes
Yes! I hate it when people do that!
1 Like
There’s no way it even covers the cost of the plants. It does say supplies are limited, so technically they could send to one person and fulfill their written commitment.
2 Likes
Plant trees is the silver bullet to solve all problems. Not appreciated when good intentions plant in vegetation rehab. That - was - a re-establishing population of something special! Erica verticillata.
3 Likes
They sent me an email back today. I would argue points 2 and 4. Just because something isn’t listed as invasive now doesn’t mean it won’t become invasive later. “Depending on goals…compromises are important”. So compromise with an alternative native species.
Dear Mike,
Thank you for contacting the Arbor Day Foundation.
We appreciate the concern about the importance of planting native species. The Arbor Day Foundation works closely with many partners and peers including the ISA, the U.S. Forest Service, the National Association of State Foresters, and leaders in academia to best inform tree planters on planting the right trees in the right places for the right reasons. We continually check with experts about appropriate trees to plant. Some fundamentals that we like to share are:
-
Always start with natives, and plant those whenever practical. Native tree species are vital for the food web of insects, birds, and other wildlife.
-
Do not plant invasive species. The Arbor Day Foundation does not plant, offer, or distribute invasive species.
-
Plant a diversity of tree species. Tree diversity helps mitigate the damage that can result from only a few species dominating a landscape. Devastating, widespread tree loss resulting from Dutch elm disease and emerald ash borer, for example, could have been reduced with species diversity. Additionally, a diversity of tree species can often lead to a diversity of songbirds and wildlife. To accomplish diversity, especially in urban landscapes, non-natives should sometimes be included to complement the native species that are available.
-
Depending on goals, compromises with well-adapted, well-behaved, beneficial non-native trees are important. For example, when there isn’t enough space for an American linden, consider a non-native little-leaf linden. It’s a good choice when habitat for pollinators is a goal. And, some of the ecological benefits of the elm genus can often be realized with a non-native lacebark elm, for example, especially in urban environments.
We do our best to offer a diverse selection of trees and shrubs that will serve well in the communities where they’ll be planted. We are always checking with the experts to ensure that the trees we offer are appropriate.
If you have additional questions, please reply to this email or call us toll-free at 1-888-448-7337. Our phone representatives are available Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Central Time.
Thank you again for sharing your concerns. We hope you have a nice day.
2 Likes
The Arbor Day Foundation is not a conservation organization, their goals pretty much are just to promote the planting of trees. In fact, the original purpose of Arbor Day was the eliminate the prairies across North America.
7 Likes
To accomplish diversity, plant non-natives. No, just no.
3 Likes
i think this provides a nice elaboration of your point: https://prairieecologist.com/2013/04/26/a-prairie-ecologists-perspective-on-arbor-day/
5 Likes
Whaaaaat?? Bad Arbor Day!
1 Like
Can you please cite a source for this? I have no idea whether you’re wrong or right, but it’s a big assertion that should come with some evidence.
3 Likes