Welcome to 2021, where trees are now racist

| June 23, 2021

One of those slave trading Dutch elm trees

It’s really getting hard to differentiate between the fake, satirical news and what’s actually being reported now. Like this example. Fox9 says;

Researchers find ‘tree inequity’ for communities of color

There’s a new research tool that shows how the number of trees planted in neighborhoods is a direct reflection of income and equity.

Researchers from American Forests found that with few exceptions, trees are disproportionality planted in wealthier and whiter neighborhoods. Redlining in the 1930s is what laid the groundwork for this inequality resulting in communities of color hit the hardest by a lack of trees.

“We’re not talking about scenery here. We’re talking life and death infrastructure,” said Jad Daley, president and CEO of American Forests.

He says not having the right number of trees in neighborhoods is just as dangerous as not having stop signs or traffic lights.

“When you compare BIPOC neighborhoods to majority-white neighborhoods, ethnic minority neighborhoods have 33 percent less tree canopy on average and that’s transcending income as I’m not talking about lower-income communities of color. I’m talking communities of color at large,” he said.

When you add the income factor and compare the top 10 percent income in a city with the bottom 10 percent, the lower-income neighborhoods have 41 percent less tree cover, according to Daley.

That’s why Daley and his team put together what they call a tool to fix this problem in a map showing communities that have proper tree cover through the True Equity Score (TES) Project. The TES examines more than 150,000 neighborhoods and 486 municipalities in urban America with at least 50,000 people.

Using a 0-to-100-point system, each score on the tool indicates whether there are enough trees planted in the community so people can experience what analysts call the health, economic, and climate benefits that trees provide.

Health experts say areas with more trees tend to be cooler and healthier.

“When you have trees, you can bring your temperature down somewhere between 2 and 10 degrees just by having tree canopy,” said Suzanne Hansen, an environmental sustainability specialist for Allina Health.

She says urban trees help to lower energy use in buildings and filter out air pollutants.

“The connection between health and air pollution is very strong. The health impacts in places that have a lot of air pollution impact children, elderly, low-income communities, and on people of color […] you tend to see more asthma and allergies, which are all made worse by air pollution”

Dr. Zeke McKinney is a physician in the Health Partners Occupational and Environmental medical residency program and has researched this topic for several years. He says the health risks without proper tree coverage are dire.

“You’ll have a lot of associations with increased health events whether it’s cardiovascular or cerebral vascular, which things involving blood vessels or brain vessels like strokes, for example,” he said. “Of course, you’ll see more heat-stress events such as heat stroke, people becoming more dehydrated.”

In addition, Dr. McKinney says the lack of tree coverage can impact food safety in areas that are not as cool.

“Things like salmonella are more common with warmer temperatures, you’re going to see more vector-borne illnesses from mosquitos because mosquitos tend to thrive in warmer temperatures so, you’re going to more collection of those.”

Experts like McKinney say planting more trees in vulnerable communities is critical to health.

“Historically, we’ve seen more development of highways and industrial areas in communities of color and lower socio-economic areas. I think we need to do more to reclaim some of those areas and plant trees there because having more trees is going to help with some of these issues,” he adds.

American Forests hopes communities nationwide will use the data to get more trees planted in areas that need them most. Jad Daley says his team of experts plan to update the TES map as jurisdictions invest in tree planting to keep track of the progress.

Trees are “life and death infrastructure.” I find it fascinating how the left now thinks every single thing in the world is “infrastructure”, perverting the word past the point it’s now unrecognizable. Looks like this is another problem (is it though, some people just don’t like trees) that only massive amounts of government funding can resolve. If people want trees, they’re easy to get. Hell, you can get them all over the place for free. Just put it in the ground, add water, and pretty soon you’ll be reaping the massive infrastructural benefits of better health, cooler weather, and less contaminated foods.

If you haven’t had your fill of injecting racism into everything, here’s another one. Car accidents are racist. 

Category: "Teh Stoopid", "Truth or fiction?", Dumbass Bullshit, Get woke, It's science!, Liberals suck, WTF?

Comments (67)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Fyrfighter says:

    I’m curious, are people of color prohibited from buying / planting trees? Is some nefarious group going around and uprooting trees that the “disadvantaged” are planting? Or is this just more leftist horseshit designed to divide us as a nation?

  2. Roh-Dog says:

    “We’re not talking about scenery here. We’re talking life and death infrastructure”
    “says not having the right number of trees in neighborhoods is just as dangerous as not having stop signs or traffic lights”
    ” BIPOC”

    How high does this individual get on their own farts?

    But forreal, if you add forest/trees ‘infrastructure’ to the under served non-white areas…where are you going to put the solar panels for the minorities to have cheap power, cuz i KNOW electric companies be raysiss too! (that hurt typing)

  3. rgr769 says:

    Except for a couple of trees given me by a local electric district, every damn tree in my yards was purchased and planted by me. A sapling can be purchased for less than a pack of smokes, so give me a break. Some people are too cheap and lazy to plant a tree, and it has nothing to do with skin color.

    • RGR 4-78 says:

      About 10 years ago, every fall I would drive down and visit with my brother who has the old home place where we grew up. We would fill numerous horse feed sacks full of black walnuts, hickory nuts (scalley bark and hill) and pecans. I would bring them home and dump them out in a big pile and all the neighborhood squirrels would have a field day with them.

      Every spring I would select the newly sprouted trees I liked and marked them with white metal pipes so I wouldn’t mow them down.

      Planted improved loblolly pines down both sides between me and the neighbors. Some of those are 75′ tall now. IIRC they were $20.00 per 500, better than any privacy fence you could ever buy.

      • UpNorth says:

        Did the same thing, we purchased pines from our Soil Conservation District and planted them on the West and North property lines. They’re about 60-70 ft tall now, and they added a lot of value to the property when we sold it.

        • RGR 4-78 says:

          Cuts down on the lawn mowing a lot.

          Starting back in the 1980’s, I have planted them at every home we have owned.

  4. Sapper3307 says:

    Bird names are very Razzest,

  5. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    YEAH, and if you have plenty of trees in a locale prone to being hit by Hurricanes, Tornadoes or Ice Storms you’re going to have power lines taken down by falling tree branches as well as homes damaged by the same. “Racist” my ass!

  6. David says:

    I must be a real racist SOB… quick count says 53 here when we moved in worth noticing, and an additional 21 fruit trees we grew from seeds which vary from 2 to 10 feet tall. Most of ’em under 50 feet tall but a few taller. I will say that trimming around trees is a major part of my lawn mowing cycle. Only been here two years, the goal is to eventually forest the whole place. Except for the range lines of sight. Don’t remember any government assistance digging the holes for every damn one we planted.

  7. KoB says:

    Reckon I better cut down those White Oak Trees, huh? Or plant more Black Walnuts? Funny thing about my trees, the squirrels don’t discriminate. They’ll snag the White Oak Acorns just as fast as the Black Walnuts…or pecans…or persimmons…or the hickorys.

    Don’t like the (“Plantation”) neighborhood you’re living in? Can’t stay cool with the free rent, free food, free utilities that are being provided? OK, get off your azz, use some of the massive amounts of other free stuff thrown your way (read free education) get you a decent job, quit having multiple babies by multiple baby mamas and make something of yourself.

    And on the car accident thing? Learn how to drive! And quit walking with the traffic in the street…at night…in dark clothes. Worked many a “Road Move Project” relocating utilities for widening of roads and putting in sidewalks. Brand new, wide sidewalks, with controlled crossing points, and they’re still walking in the street and crossing where ever they want, daring people to hit them. Two of the largest industries in the little big town up the road (demographics are nearly 70% POC now)? Title Pawn Shops and Personal Injury Lawers.

  8. bmorgan says:

    Ikea tried to serve employees Fried Chicken and Watermelon to celebrate Juneteenth. Employees were outraged, saying it was insensitive and demeaning.

    The most interesting part of this story is that they removed the watermelon, but kept the Fried Chicken.


    • Mason says:

      Would people be outraged if they served tacos on Cinco de Mayo?


      Who the hell DOESN’T like fried chicken and watermelon???

      Southern style fried chicken has taken root everywhere it has been introduced for a very good reason….. it’s freaking delicious!
      What is better than a cold slice of watermelon on a hot day?
      Those Ikea employees should show some damn gratitude!

      • Roh-Dog says:

        “Who the hell DOESN’T like…watermelon???”

        Never have, really don’t see the appeal. That ain’t to say I don’t eat it as its got a good spread of vitamins and stuff.

        And they make great targets.

  9. Hack Stone says:

    “When you have trees, you can bring your temperature down somewhere between 2 and 10 degrees just by having tree canopy,” said Suzanne Hansen, an environmental sustainability specialist for Allina Health.

    Hack Stone was in North Dakota, zero trees, cold as hell.

  10. Mustang Major says:

    Do 22 inch chrome rims on a car parked on the front yard count as landscaping?

  11. Poetrooper says:

    None of those multiple-degreed geniuses thought to consider the rent-versus-own factor before formulating their theory? How many renters, even white renters of single-family dwellings, plant trees in their yards? Young Poe never planted anything in our yards until we purchased our first home, six years into our marriage.

    How much greater percentage of POC’s live in urban, government-owned or subsidized public housing where the only available cultivable ground is in the green commons areas where it’s likely forbidden by housing authority rules for residents to plant anything?

    Lastly, how much of this lack of ornamental shrubbery and trees is cultural? Poe’s been on many Indian reservations from New Mexico to North Dakota and on up to Alaska and have observed that siting of houses in totally barren clearings, devoid even of a blade of grass, is very commonplace, if not the norm, with many tribes. Yard decorations tend more to be rusty trucks up on blocks and piles of bald tires.

    So much for following the science, hmm?

    • Ret_25X says:

      and how many live in government subsidized housing where the gov cut down all the trees to allow more free room for firefights…errr…recreation.

    • rgr769 says:

      Isn’t it shocking how living in apartments or in on-base housing results in the tenants/occupants not planting trees. Dats racyiss! Right?

      • Hack Stone says:

        If you are lucky enough to have a Base Housing Unit on Edgar Court in Wire Mountain Camp Pendleton, and that House has an avocado tree in the backyard, you can thank Rosetta Stone. Hack’s lovely bride planted that avocado seed back in the mid 1990’s. About three years ago, The Stone Family was in Southern California and did a drive by of what was once Stately Stone Manor West, and the tree was in full bloom.

  12. Drag Racing Maniac says:

    Oh no…. not the trees!

  13. 11B-Mailclerk says:

    Rush already covered this sort of thing in their song “The Trees”. 40 years ago.

    “There is unrest in the forest. There is trouble with the Trees. For the Maples want more sunlight and the Oaks ignore their pleas.”

  14. 26Limabeans says:

    In my younger days I cut wood behind a cable skidder.
    It was tough dangerous work but I had no idea there
    was racism among the trees thst I saw only as Dollars.
    And many years later while hunting I came across a group
    of El Salvador workers trimming newly planted trees for
    the wealthy paper companies. Cheap foriegn labor that
    smacks of racism by the rich corporations owned by white men.

    Yeah trees are all about racism and rich white people using
    them for profit. And with lumber prices the way they are you
    had better keep an eye on that 200 year old pine tree in the park.

  15. Prior Service says:

    I’m confused. I bought a house in Leavenworth, KS, back in 2005. Came with a single tree out in the front yard. I don’t see it very often since it’s now a rental but I don’t believe it’s grown more than about two feet since then and I definitely don’t get any shade from it. Am I racist for having the tree? Or anti racist because it won’t grow? (I just want to be “equitable”…)

  16. RetiredDevilDoc8404 says:

    Right now all the perpetually offended morons and those who have racism delusions about everything need to immediately plant 10 trees and write letters of apology to every tree and plant on the planet they have caused to be over worked by their existence and the theft of oxygen from the rest of us. Seagull, you need to plant 20 just because you need something productive to do.

  17. Claw says:

    As it turns out, I have determined that the Mountain Ash trees in my backyard are both racist and sexist. The nestlings that have been produced for the past couple of years eventually mature to adults that will have bare uncovered RED BREASTS./s

    But I will admit that it’s a lot of fun watching Mommy and Daddy arrive with fresh caught Class A Rations and having Scooby under the tree supervising the goings-on with appropriate doggy commands, and for that he at times receives a strafing run from the carry out droppings.

  18. gitarcarver says:

    I actually like the idea of trees in urban areas.

    The question is “where to plant them?” “Who to plant them?” “What to plant?”

    In the cities in which I have lived, there have been street after street after street of row homes (now more fashionably called “townhomes.”)

    In these homes, a person walks out of their front door onto their marbled stoops, down to the sidewalk and then to the curb and street.

    There is often no place for trees and even if there were, the City would have to plant them in the right of way because the homeowner couldn’t.

    The other thing to consider is what to plant? Trees like maples and oaks have root systems that are incredibly destructive. Other tree root systems will get into waste pipes and clog them.

    You also have the issue of maintenance as places like Charleston, SC won’t allow the trimming of any tree without a permit and a survey by a licensed arborist. Who pays for the trimming of a tree that is going to have to be planted by the government?

    As a side note, I have always done landscaping on the places which I have rented. Granted, these are smaller complexes or single homes and not a sprawling apartment complex, but the landlords have always allowed trees, bushes, flowers, etc to be planted. (It is amazing what you can find in Lowes or Home Deport on their “sick plant / tree” section for $5.00)

    Not only that, but I can remember growing up the national drive to plant more trees. In school we were given a “Bicentennial Pine Tree” which was just a little sprig. The idea was that kids would come home, plant the tree and viola! I just did a GoogleMaps satellite image of my old back yard and the tree is still there. Would such a program work in inner cities where the back yards are concrete? No, it wouldn’t and therein lies another problem.

    However, most of these rowhomes were built to accommodate factory workers within the cities. The neighborhood and the design of the neighborhood was not in and off itself “racist” in any manner. Any assertion to the contrary denies history.

    In sum, I would love to see programs to plant more trees in the cities and I don’t care of the race, creed, sex or religion of the person or people living there. Trees would help with some issues, but with the incompetence of municipal governments, there is no way to pull it off.

    • 26Limabeans says:

      I remember the majestic Elm trees planted by the cities
      in the Boston suburbs many decades earier. Unfortunately
      Dutch Elm disease took them all.
      They replanted Maples after that and I recall them doing
      very well. Race had nothing to do with it.
      Until now.

      • gitarcarver says:

        I had maples in my neighborhood. The roots lifted up sidewalks which the city demanded that citizens repair. When the trees were hit by a disease, the city tried to fine anyone who cut the tree down before it’s hollowed out core fell on cars and or people.

        Like you said, trees and the planting of trees is not racist.

        If anything, the lack of trees shows the incompetence of governments.

  19. 26Limabeans says:

    Next up….Racist birds only feed at affluent peoples feeders.
    While minorities have to put up with Pigeons the affluent are
    awash in song birds.

  20. Roh-Dog says:

    But pigeons are ingrained with urban culture…

  21. SgtBob says:

    A few years back, national parks were racist because the vast++ majority of visitors were white. Stories at the time said black people do not camp. So, maybe there is an inherent distrust or dislike of trees among POCs? Or, maybe presence of trees in not-white neighborhoods reminds people of lynchings. Handcuffs remind people of when a great-great X5 grandparent was chained? White-designed clothing reminds people of the clothes slaves were made to wear? On and on and etc.

  22. Commissar says:

    Your title is bullshit.

    There is nothing controversial about the study. There is nothing controversial about the notion that there are less trees in urban areas with higher concentrations of minorities.

    Also, landscaping is infrastructure. Most trees in urban areas are “built environmental features”; they were planned and planted according to urban planning and resourced accordingly…therefore infrastructure. Low income areas tend to get fewer urban landscaping dollars.

    The reason the word infrastructure has no meaning to you is because you willfully choose to be stubbornly ignorant about damn near everything.

    You couldn’t take a second to google “are trees infrastructure?”

    Of course not, because you are just a propagandist. Dutifully regurgitating one of the daily right wing narratives.

    • SFC D says:

      “There is nothing controversial about the notion that there are less trees in urban areas”. You should’ve stopped right there. That’s where you ran out of facts. Trees are not, never were, and cannot be infrastructure. They can be decorative, productive, or harvested, but infrastructure? Nope. Infrastructure has no meaning because your progressive / liberal / democrat fellow travelers are once again shifting definitions to suit their purposes.

      “Of course not, because you are just a propagandist. Dutifully regurgitating one of the daily right wing narratives”. You really wrote that? Do you not read what you write? Your projection skills are as as good as your reading comprehension skills. You’re a fraud.

    • USMCMSgt (Ret) says:

      Then there’s this: https://youtu.be/ElJFYwRtrH4

    • Poetrooper says:

      Lars, here’s the dictionary definition of infrastructure, which I wouldn’t expect you to know, in spite of all your “education”:

      “…the basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e.g. buildings, roads, power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise.”

      Does your fevered brain understand the meaning of the word “needed”? Here’s the dictionary definition of that term:

      “…require (something) because it is essential or very important.”

      Notice that word “essential”? Do I have to give you the definition of that?

      The presence of trees may make the human living experience more pleasant but they are anything but essential, except as construction materials.

      As someone who spent many years in West Texas, not far from a community called Notrees, I can attest to the accuracy of this. While trees may provide shade, serve as windbreaks or provide aesthetic enhancement, they are anything but essential, and therefore not infrastructure.

      Once again, your overeducated mouth overloads your constantly overexposed ass…

      • SFC D says:

        The only way trees become “infrastructure” is if you cut them down, remove all the branches, treat them (Penta post treat, yuck!) relocate them, and hang power or communications lines from them.

    • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

      Here you go again Major Moonbat, you can never turn down an opportunity to make a 24K Idiot of yourself, can you?

    • Mason says:

      So I put “Are trees infrastructure?” into the Google machine like you suggested.

      Top result is the definition;

      Like soil and other vegetation, trees are an element of the built environment typically associated with the landscape. It makes sense. They are land-based organisms that dominate the natural world. They certainly are nothing like pipes, sewers and other grey infrastructure.

      That comes from https://www.deeproot.com/blog/blog-entries/is-a-tree-landscape-or-infrastructure which is an article that, like you, makes the idiotic claim that trees are “infrastructure.”

      They’re trees. They aren’t infrastructure. Quit trying to redefine words.

      According to the New Oxford;

      the basic physical and organizational structures and facilities (e.g. buildings, roads, power supplies) needed for the operation of a society or enterprise.
      “the social and economic infrastructure of a country”

    • RetiredDevilDoc8404 says:

      I was wrong, Lars you empty headed dingus. You need to be planting 30, maybe 40 trees and immediately get writing those letters. Unless the person who reminds you to breathe stops reminding you, so the CO2 levels can get lower.

    • ChipNASA says:

      Annnnnnndddd here comes our local Pigeon to strut around and shit all over the place.
      How apropos.

  23. USMCMSgt (Ret) says:

    Trees are racist because, by extension, the names of some birds are racist as well.

    Birds are known to reside in trees, which possibly makes trees twice as racist than any other plant, since there is an association between racist trees and racist birds.

    (Strike that… perhaps THREE times as racist as any other plant, because the father of John James Audubon (who gained notoriety for painting North American birds) was a planter, merchant, and SLAVE TRADER, so by extension of that, Audubon himself was racist).

    Based on all that “logic”, the National Audubon Society needs to be disbanded and all of its property sold off to cover reparations.

  24. Poetrooper says:

    Having trees is just more white privilege and yet here we have a black community in an area where trees are sparse, demanding that a whole row of mature trees be cut down cause they’re rayciss:


    Lars better get his know-it-all ass down to Palm Springs and tell all those black folk how wrong they are…

    • Poetrooper says:

      Oh, and having once lived on a golf course, I can advise those black folk they better get prepared for the window/windshield breaking barrages from errant golf balls that those trees now protect them from.

      • USMCMSgt (Ret) says:

        You’re absolutely right, Poetrooper.

        Adding to that, most golf balls are white…which means they are racist.

        We all know what that will lead to.

        (I haven’t formulated an argument for the colors of other golf balls (e.g., neon yellow, blue, orange, etc.,)