2008.12.07
Discuss Trejbal's column on holiday trees
The holiday tree doesn't need to die
By Christian Trejbal
It's ironic that the burning Yule log originated with the Pagans. Pagan groups today tend to attract the greenest adherents, yet one of their big contributions to winter solstice-based celebrations involves burning a huge hunk of wood. They kill a tree and add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. That's not very green.
RSS feed 
Sorry, Christian, but they're called Christmas trees...not Holiday trees. Remember Christmas, Christian? It existed before you and the rest of the PC group decided to be perpetually offended by everything.
And most of the pre-cut Christmas trees you see on Christmas tree lots are grown on Christmas tree farms for the very purpose of being cut down for the holiday. You make it sound like bands of marauders raid the forests of Virginia in order to make a buck without concern over global warming.
Comment by Patrick — December 8, 2008 @ 6:50 am
Even though I'm most definitely not a Christian, I am really tired of the PC junk of calling a Christmas Tree a Holiday Tree. No one calls a Menorah a Holiday Candle-Holder, after all, nor would anyone be expected to. I don't necessarily have a problem with saying Happy Holidays to a stranger because I do not know what their beliefs are, but if I know a person celebrates Christmas, I wish them a Merry Christmas. Likewise I would wish a Muslim a Blessed Ramadan, a Jew a Happy Chanukah, etc.
As to the root of the tree issue raised, my wife was talking about this with a friend of hers. We would love to be able to buy a balled and burlapped tree to use for the season, then plant it in the yard every year so we wouldn;t be contributing to the stacks of dead Christmas Trees every year. But around here, you'd have to dig the hole in October. It wopuld be nice, but after about 4-5 years, most families would run out of room to plant them since most fir, spruce, and pine trees need a fairly large amount of space to properly mature. Thje better option would be to manufacture artificial Christmas Trees using recycled and renewable materials that last for many, many years.
That to me would seem to be the more sensible solution, global warming aside since there is also a significant amount of science backing up the claims that the GW folks have vastly overstated the impacts because of faulty data and bad modeling. It's the old garbage in, garbage out reality of scientific research. When climate data is coming from weather stations located next to air conditioning exhaust vents, runway tarmac jet-wash areas, and on large parking lots...you really have to question the validity of the data when those show huge temperature increases in the past 20 years, but satelite data shows very minimal warming to minimal cooling in the same areas (and scientists are using ground data). Just food for thought. Let's get some better data pulled in and see what's really going on, there is way too much on the line for us to be wrong on this.
Comment by Other John — December 8, 2008 @ 8:21 am
Please don't tell Christian that newspapers are made from trees. It will crush his spirit.
Comment by Henry — December 8, 2008 @ 8:44 am
Imagine, the very idea of "making a buck without concern for global warming"? What is ironic is that in this day of enlightenment we still have not only pagan rituals (no matter how co-opted) and people who can insult a point you weren't even making. It is hypocritical to be part of a problem then mock others for noticing, and the wasteful nature of our society has, is, and will continue to, harm us as a whole. Keeping a "tradition" to the last man standing won't mean so much to that "last man standing", I'll wager.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — December 8, 2008 @ 8:53 am
Christian, could you provide us with a picture of a holiday tree? I've always had a Christmas tree and I'm curious what the difference is.
Anyways, I don't say "happy holidays" because I'm not sure of someone's beliefs, I say it because this time of year has multiple holidays... Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, Kwanza... all of it. It's a holiday season.
Comment by Jack — December 8, 2008 @ 8:58 am
No one is forcing any of you to call your tree a holiday tree. Christian simply decided to call it a holiday tree here. I believe he can call it whatever he likes no matter what the majority calls and no matter how long the majority has called it that. He can call it what he wants and you can continue to call it what you want.
Now to the topic at hand - after reading this I thought, how silly of me to have gone and chopped down that tree without thinking about this! I do love having a tree though and the idea of buying a tree ready to be planted is a great idea. I will probably look into that next year...I did after all spend $35 on our tree and it sure would be nice to enjoy it longer that 2-3 weeks!
Comment by HCS — December 8, 2008 @ 9:28 am
Christian has raised a valid point for discussion - is there a better alternative to cutting down all of these trees ?
I still call the trees "Christmas Trees", but I don't get upset when someone calls them something else. Christian has every right to call them "Holiday trees" as we have every right to refer to them as "Christmas trees". Insulting Christian certainly does little to show "Christian values". (Christian, do you have a nickname we can use when discussing religions? This can be so confusing!)
Some town coordination of where people can donate live trees would be a great way of using those trees. Here is one of many articles out there pointing out pros and cons of different options: http://www.mercurynews.com/homeandgarden/ci_11148282
Another is http://www.christmastreeassociation.org/Article%20Pages/christmas-tree-buyers-guide
and http://www.christmastreeassociation.org/Article%20Pages/christmas-tree-buyers-guide
So, once again a number of factors must be considered - not only the tree , but the fuel to transport it, how the tree was raised, how the land is being managed, the fate of the tree... So, Happy Holidays and happy Christmas tree hunting.
Comment by Joe (not the plumber) Merola — December 8, 2008 @ 10:01 am
My third link in post # 6 should be: http://scottstake.blogspot.com/2008/12/christmas-trees-and-global-warming.html
Comment by Joe (not the plumber) Merola — December 8, 2008 @ 10:03 am
The Roanoke Times prints on recycled paper and uses a soy-based ink.
Comment by c. trejbal — December 8, 2008 @ 11:06 am
Christian,
Thanks for clearing that up. I had always been under the impression that recycled paper once came from a tree. I learn something new every day.
Comment by Jack — December 8, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
Jack, is your point that only people who don't live in a glass house can throw stones? If the only people qualified to discuss an issue are the people who are doing everything else on the planet correctly, well that might mean that Christian and the RTEB should not discuss ways to think about our own involvement in pollution, but what would it allow YOU to discuss, pray tell?
Comment by Sandi Saunders — December 8, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
Yeah, well, my tree came from recycled pine seeds.
Comment by Henry — December 8, 2008 @ 12:57 pm
Patrick said: "And most of the pre-cut Christmas trees you see on Christmas tree lots are grown on Christmas tree farms for the very purpose of being cut down for the holiday."
Just to piggy-back on something Patrick said, because what he said was one of the first points to come to my mind..
If there was not a draw for Christmas trees, and therefore no market for planting trees in tree farms...there likely would not be these large groups of trees (to absorb carbon) to begin with.
Comment by Ed S. — December 8, 2008 @ 1:22 pm
Ed and Patrick, someone would still need to grow the live trees to meet demand every year. The only difference would be how they are harvested. Either they are cut down (current system) or they are dug up (better system). The tree farms aren't going to go out of business.
Comment by c. trejbal — December 8, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
CT, do you know what the price difference might be between a fresh cut tree and one with the root ball attached? From experience, I would have to say that they would be significantly more expensive because of the added weight for shipping, plus the added manpower and equipment costs in digging up the root ball. Also, the way conventional tree farms are done would likely have to change because you'd have to space the trees out further to get the equipment in to dig them out and not damage neighboring trees in the process, rather than simply cutting them down in a long, closely spaced line of trees with a chainsaw. It would be interesting to find out what the differences in cost and farming techniques are...since I'm not privy to that information.
Comment by Other John — December 8, 2008 @ 2:22 pm
I visited one of the tree sales spots in Christiansburg last week to look at options. They offered both cut and live trees. The live trees were more expensive, but I don't recall the exact price difference.
Of course, that's not surprising. It's usually cheaper to do things in a destructive way. If we're going to get serious about doing the right thing for the environment, we're going to have to pay for it.
Comment by c. trejbal — December 8, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
It would seem to me then that the only way to really make a difference would be to charge more for fresh cut trees to discourage people from buying them...since folks naturally gravitate to the cheapest acceptable option. Make the balled trees the cheaper option, even if it's through inflating the cut tree price, and you might get people to buy them in bigger quantities. However...I would really wonder how many people would go through the hassle of planting them after Christmas. I would, but I also love trees and enjoy adding to my landscape when I can. My main problem would be that i just planed 11 spruces last year for arbor day, so I don't really have any room left on my lot. The balled trees would also be for nought for city dwellers, since they lack places to plant them as well. I'm still a big fan of artificial trees, provided they can be made of recycled or renewable materials. And if you've been to Lowes lately, for example, they have some trees that are absolutely remarkable in their accuracy compared to real spruce and fir trees.
Comment by Other John — December 8, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
OJ - when I was reading through this I at first thought "we won't have room forever to plant these year after year" but I like C's idea of donating them to parks, schools, or whoever might have some extra land that could take trees if you no longer have room (or didn't have it in the first place!)
Comment by HCS — December 8, 2008 @ 2:54 pm
I also like your fake trees made from renewable/recycled materials because not everyone wants a real tree in their house...we for example, had to shake our tree a lot before we got rid of most of the bugs that came with it this year! lol
Comment by HCS — December 8, 2008 @ 2:55 pm
Our cats like to climb our tree and they also like chewing & scratching logs before we through them in the fireplace...so having a real tree would be a very bad idea in our house. Not that the cats chewing on a plastic tree is all that better for their health, but it doesn't taste too good so they leave it alone after a while.
Comment by Other John — December 8, 2008 @ 3:06 pm
yes...I am interested to see what shape our tree is in after our cat has been left alone with it all day...and it's her first tree...
Comment by HCS — December 8, 2008 @ 3:09 pm
I haven't looked at "real" trees, dead or alive, for many years. If I brought one of those in the house, I'd "kill" one of the dramatic occupants.
Have they improved upon the appearance of the balled trees? From what I recall they weren't as tall or graceful in appearance and cost much more. I did have one once, but it failed to take once planted.
I plan to recycle the same, old ratty looking tree once again.
OJ, the first year our cat came to live with us, we took him to be neutered a couple weeks before Christmas. When I brought him home from the vet, he immediately climbed the Christmas tree. He became tangled in the beaded garland in a most painful way and has never bothered a tree since.
Comment by Luanne T. — December 8, 2008 @ 3:15 pm
My cats prefer to play jai-alai with the ornaments, so needless to say, we use non-breakable types and NO tinsel...verrry bad for felines!
Comment by Nick — December 8, 2008 @ 3:19 pm
Wait a minute: the people who grow the holiday x-mas trees have plenty of room: just rent the trees from them, then return them at the end of the holiday season. In fact, maybe they could do it like a library system: you check out a tree for a month, then bring it back until the next year.
Of course, at some point the trees would grow too large for the average household, but maybe they can be genetically engineered to only grow 4-8 feet (or larger for those who like 'em big.)
But I gotta tell you, I would definitely miss the end-of-year ritual some friends of mine and I have of taking all the old, holiday x-mas trees we can find and having a big bonfire with them.
Comment by Rob Miles — December 8, 2008 @ 3:22 pm
You can use a Dwarf Alberta Spruce. They grow to about 5-6 feet in height, maybe a little more with the right grooming, and have a very nice conical shape to them. They can be grown in containers actually, so they would lend themselves well to that idea and can tolerate some pretty harsh temperatures and soil conditions. I've got one in my front yard, and when it gets to be a bit bigger (less than 2' tall at the moment), we're going to decorate it like our fake tree inside.
Comment by Other John — December 8, 2008 @ 3:37 pm
C-
Yes. My point was more that nothing is likely being "destroyed" right now as the tree farms are replenished. Likely no net loss (or little), but yes, balled trees may realize a net gain. Though I think the logistics make it too difficult for most people to want to bother.
This does give me a neat idea, though. Give newlyweds a living container tree (somewhat small). It's the "family tree". Keep it year round, decorate it every year. Annual gifts could include a special ornament of some sort. In that way, the tree (and ornaments) grow with the family. After a few years, when it's too large to keep in a container, plant it somewhere. Neat idea.
Comment by Ed S. — December 8, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
That, Ed, is an excellent idea.
Comment by c. trejbal — December 8, 2008 @ 6:31 pm
Christian, you used an amount of "hundreds of pounds of carbon from the atmosphere annually." How much is this? How about some research on the amount of Carbon that humans put in the atmosphere annually, and how much is naturally put in the atmosphere annually. If everyone on Earth, 6 billion people didn't cut down a tree, what kind of difference would that make? If this is the "greatest threats" facing the world then why aren't we using that $700 Billion dollars to fight global warming? Apparently not everyone thinks it’s the greatest threat facing the world. Do evergreen trees clean more of the atmostphere than hard woods? If there wasn't a market for them would people grow extra evergreen trees?
However, you have done your job by writing on a controversial topic, giving only part of the facts, to get readers fired up. Congratulations and Merry Christmas.
Comment by Daniel — December 11, 2008 @ 10:53 am