[CANUFNET] Tree "Sexism" in Canada: Call for information & thoughts

[Sadia Butt]

Hi Ally, I am sure you may have received enough. Based on the definition
below, I was going to focus on the part that says unjust distinction based
on sex. So I am concerned that the word sexism can be too heavy when
describing the bias society has when making tree selections and implies
some level of criminality. When it comes to tree attributes, there are
clearly some tree characteristics that people do not like as they damage
property, cause smells (ginko biloba), aggravate those who have allergies,
etc. These disservices are what people use to discriminate against trees
for certain planting sites. So discrimination does happen, but is it
unjust? From my experiences from listening to homeowners and the tree
planting department and experts urban forest managers, these planting sites
are close to driveways (where people are averse to damages to their car
from sap or fruiting bodies or damage to their driveway),  pools, roofs,
roads, parking lots and even backyards where pets could be at danger (there
was a call to our office regarding a walnut tree, where an owner was
concerned it would drop its seed onto its dog). I have learned these
preferences for trees are based mostly on property protection. I believe we
also tend to become highly risk averse and do not open ourselves to enjoy
many species because of the reputation they may get that leads to those who
grow trees to avoid. So a simplistic business approach to producing only
trees that are 'safe' could also contribute to reducing the choices we have
to plant trees in places where they may not cause damage to property.  I
certainly hope that there isn't an insidious movement to discriminate
against female trees, just because they are 'not male'. That would imply
utterly disingenuous characters who make those decisions and frankly would
be disheartening.
Further to this topic, there is a researcher named Darren Patrick who does
discuss our biases towards trees. Below is an excerpt from an introduction
of  "Urban Forests, Trees, and Greenspace: A Political Ecology Perspective",
It might help the exploration of social constructions and how they may
influence our notions of non-human groups.
Best regards, Sadia

"Darren Patrick questions the conventional view of one particular tree, the
Tree of Heaven (*Ailanthus altissima*), as an invasive weed species by
considering the species in three different relationships. In one case, the
High Line greenspace in New York City, where the Tree of Heaven was once
abundant and existing in harmony with particular human ecologies (a gay
cruising area), developers and city planners replaced the tree with an
ordered and disciplined ecology as the neighbourhood gentrified. In the
case of Detroit’s Tree of Heaven Woodshop, the creators found ways to
create a mutualist relationship with the tree, acknowledging its beauty and
utility by finding ways to cure its wood for different ways of wood-making.
In a third case, the “Ghetto Palm”, two Moldavian artists use the now
ubiquitous and cursed yet resilient Tree of Heaven to challenge its
monikers as bad species and imagine it as a challenge to alien species and
invasive biology concepts globally. Patrick uses the term “queer” both as a
noun to denote marginalized humans and non-humans, and as a verb to reveal
the social constructedness of their marginalization and the possibilities
to re-imagine that position."

Definition of sexism

Main Entry: *sex·ism*
Pronunciation: [image: primarystress]sek-[image: secondarystress]siz-[image:
schwa]m
Function: *noun*
*:* distinction and especially unjust distinction based on sex and made
against one person or group in favor of another; *especially* *:* distinctions
made against women
- *sex·ist*  /[image: primarystress]sek-s[image: schwa]st/ *adjective or
noun*

On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:11 AM Naomi Zurcher via CANUFNET <
canufnet at list.web.net> wrote:

> In addition to “plant females that flower” please emphasize that the
> flower is a single and not a double. Doubles use the nectaries to create
> the larger blossom, thus offering pollinators confusion and enticement but
> nothing edible.
>
> On Mar 4, 2020, at 7:46 PM, owen croy via CANUFNET <canufnet at list.web.net>
> wrote:
>
> of course!  I wrote that when I was recovering from a minor procedure, so
> it all needs to be checked thoroughly!  Thanks for that.  Owen
>
> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 14:08, Gerard . <gerard at fortrees.com> wrote:
>
>> Owen,
>> Plants with both sexes on the same tree are monecious. Diecious trees
>> have been only one sex or the other. Female poplar or willow trees can
>> create issues that with  all the fluffy seeds that are produces, which can
>> also become a fire hazard, in areas where they are common. Other trees,
>> such as crabapples, have perfect flowers, with male and female parts in the
>> same flower.
>> Gerard Fournier
>>
>> Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the TELUS
>> Network
>> *From:* canufnet at list.web.net
>> *Sent:* March 4, 2020 1:45 PM
>> *To:* canufnet at list.web.net
>> *Reply-to:* canufnet at list.web.net
>> *Cc:* urbanforestryguy at gmail.com; rseltzer at treecanada.ca
>> *Subject:* Re: [CANUFNET] Tree "Sexism" in Canada: Call for information
>> & thoughts
>>
>> Most trees used in urban hard surface areas do not produce enough fruit
>> to be bothersome in the way that has been described.  e.g. elms, maples,
>> oaks, iron-wood, ornamental cherries and plums, beech, hornbeam, Korean
>> dogwood etc
>>
>> Many ornamental trees that produce fruit can and should be used in park
>> settings and people's where there are no hard surfaces to become
>> sticky/slippery/smelly, as they provide food for birds and look gorgeous
>> when in bloom. Examples would be hawthorns, crab apple, some dogwoods, etc
>>
>> Nut-bearing trees should also be considered for park spaces and yards, as
>> they can provide food for both animals and humans, and don’t impact people
>> negatively when planted away from hard surface areas.
>>
>> Edible fruit-bearing trees should be planted by home-owners  and in
>> community garden areas to be ‘slow’ food sources that do not have to be
>> transported and can be picked ripe and consumed fresh.
>>
>> Most conifers planted as ornamentals have both sexes on the same tree
>> (dioecious) so sex selection is not an issue.  However, those that produce
>> large cones should be planted in garden beds to prevent nuisance issues
>> from arising.
>>
>> Here in the coastal areas of British Columbia, pollen from native trees
>> such as black cottonwood, growing in ravines and other natural areas, fills
>> the air in the spring, probably in greater volumes than produced by
>> non-native urban trees.
>>
>> We want to encourage pollinators, not discourage them, so plant females
>> that flower!  As always, plant trees that are suitable for the spaces in
>> which they will grow to maturity.
>>
>> Owen Croy
>>
>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 07:04, Rebecca Seltzer via CANUFNET <
>> canufnet at list.web.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We at Tree Canada just received some questions from a reporter at the
>>> Guardian, and I thought it would be good to share with the wider urban
>>> forestry community. Please do contact Ally Hirschlag directly with your
>>> comments.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Context:*
>>>
>>> “Male trees are cleaner and easier to manage than female trees. Unlike
>>> their female counterparts, distinctly male plants produce pollen but do not
>>> produce seeds, pods and fruit, which fall to the ground and create mess.
>>> Female trees also attract pests, including bees, because they provide a
>>> source of food.” Source
>>> <https://globalnews.ca/news/5403667/botanical-sexism-climate-change-asthma-allergies/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Commercial horticulture produces vast numbers of all-male clonal
>>> selections from dioecious plants […] Close to 100% of all the ash (
>>> *Fraxinus)*, poplar (*Populus), *pistache *(Pistacia), *bay laurel *(Laurus),
>>> *junipers* (Juniperus), *willows* (Salix), *gingko tree *(Gingko), *
>>> Griselinia* (Griselinia), *mulberries* (Morus), *yellowwood*
>>> (Podocarpus), *locust* (Gleditsia) *and logwoods *(Xylosma) *sold are
>>> clonal males.” Source
>>> <https://books.google.ca/books?redir_esc=y&id=pAJCDwAAQBAJ&q=clonal+males#v=snippet&q=clonal%20males&f=false>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *The questions:*
>>>
>>>    - In Canada, has there been a significant proportion of entirely
>>>    male trees or male clones planted in urban areas? Why has this trend been
>>>    perpetuated?
>>>    - Has this caused an uptick in pollen dispersal in urban communities?
>>>    - Do you know of specific communities in Canada looking to lower
>>>    their pollen count by adding more female trees and/or less allergy-causing
>>>    pollinators?
>>>    - What else are communities in Canada doing to combat worsening
>>>    allergies in urban or suburban areas due to high tree pollen counts?
>>>
>>> *Contact information:*
>>>
>>> Ally Hirschlag
>>>
>>> ally.hirschlag at gmail.com
>>>
>>> 2013144322
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you all!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: TreeCanada Logo]
>>>
>>> *Rebecca Seltzer*
>>>
>>> Program Assistant | Assistante de Programme
>>> treecanada.ca  arbrescanada.ca
>>>
>>> [image: Like Us On Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/TreeCanada/>[image:
>>> Follow Us On Instagram] <https://www.instagram.com/treecanada/>[image:
>>> Follow Us On Twitter] <https://twitter.com/treecanada>
>>>
>>> *Donate*
>>> <https://cause2give.unxvision.com/EDMWeb/DonationForm.aspx?FormID=5&LanguageID=1>*
>>> | **Plant  with Tree Canada* <https://treecanada.ca/plant-with-us/>
>>> *Faites un don*
>>> <https://cause2give.unxvision.com/EDMWeb/DonationForm.aspx?FormID=5&LanguageID=2>*
>>> | **Plantez avec Abres Canada*
>>> <https://arbrescanada.ca/plantez-avec-nous>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.web.net/pipermail/canufnet/attachments/20200305/8d64e578/attachment-0001.htm>