Yet again, we are listening to chainsaws. The Power Company is having the trees around our power lines trimmed. As the men work their way up our road; they saw, they chip and they grind. The noise is definitely reaching into that loudness zone determined by studies to cause human distress. Nonetheless these noisy folks are doing a good job, trimming selectively rather than cutting down whole trees. We don’t like the noise, but we understand that the power company wishes to keep the lines open. Because the trimming crew is doing a good job, we don’t think it necessary to talk to them about being respectful of our particular trees and keeping their cutting along our road frontage to a minimum. We cover our ears and try to think of other things.

This turns out to be a mistake. Something changes in the mind-set of the work crew and a maple tree on our property that has withstood the trimmers blades for more than forty years is cut down. Not trimmed, eliminated. This mature tree was fourteen feet from the utility pole and had a trunk about twenty inches in diameter, as well as a few dead branches. It easily could have been trimmed. If it had been treated like the other trees along our road, it would still be standing, minus a few branches. It would still be providing shade and sequestering carbon, slowing the winter winds and providing habitat for birds and other creatures. But it is not.

We are upset and call the power company to discuss what has happened, knowing the tree cannot be replaced, but wanting to express our concern about this unwarranted action. We think it is important to advocate for appropriate trimming. We think often something weird happens to us humans when we get power tools in our hands. We’ve felt it ourselves. VVVVvvrrrr, we rev the motor. It’s loud. We feel powerful. We feel a desire to go into scorched earth mode and hack down everything in sight. At the present moment however, as we consider our fallen tree, we want to offer some balance to this power tool affliction. If we, who care so much about preserving vegetation, remain silent, then who do we think is going to come forward on behalf of the green and growing ones?

As always the people at the power company are polite. We make an appointment to have their arborist come and view our downed maple. He arrives on the scene and agrees the tree might better have been trimmed, that we should have been consulted before the crew cut it down. We come to agreement that he will speak to the crew and, at the arborist’s suggestion, the same crew will come back and prune another maple on our land, one growing close to the road. This tree is old and dying from the top down. It has several rotting limbs at its center. Pruning will extend its life, possibly by quite a few years.

Although we would have preferred the first tree were still standing, there is a symmetry to this we like. One tree is killed before its time, another has its life extended, at least for a while. It turns out there are bees and a flying squirrel living

in one of the dead branches, so we elect to leave it on the tree. The pruning is compromised, but it definitely seems the right thing to do and we are particularly happy to know about the bees.

CMP in Maine has a registry for property owners who would like to have advance notice of when trimming work is scheduled in their neighborhoods. To be listed, a person may call the power company and ask for customer service. Ultimately the call will be referred to the arborist responsible for their area. This person will eventually return their call and begin the listing process. It’s that easy. Check with your local power company for their specific policies. Forewarned of possible impending tree-doom, we can then request reasonable moderation of the trimmers when they do arrive, before something irreversible is done.

Beyond shade and basic aesthetics, why all the fuss? It’s the carbon thing. Trees, in particular older trees, sequester carbon. Many in the forestry industry believe that young and rapidly growing trees capture carbon more efficiently than older trees. However recently developed measurement technology, commonly referred to as eddy flux measurement, is proving this assumption to be incorrect. Re-sprouting clear cuts often emit carbon for as long as 20 years, despite the rapid rate of the new tree growth. In part, this is because microbes in the soil, which release carbon dioxide as they break down dead branches and roots, work more quickly after an area is logged, thus countering the young trees’ sequestering capacity.

In addition, most ecological models indicate temperate forests stop their net carbon uptake after about fifty years of growth. Eddy flux measurement data has shown this assumption is simply not true. Steven Wofsy of Harvard University began the world’s first long term eddy flux study at Harvard Forest in 1989. At the beginning of the study, when the trees were about 50 years old, the forest was absorbing .8 tons of carbon per acre yearly. After 15 years, the carbon uptake had not diminished as had been expected. Instead it had doubled, proving the models to be inaccurate.

This forest related ecological ageism is unscientific. Mature trees, mature stands of trees and the soil beneath them act as carbon sinks and regulate the atmosphere of our world. They are an indispensable part of the planetary ecology and need to be treated as such.

For more information on eddy flux measurement: check Ameri Flux on line. For compact information on trees and carbon uptake: NRDC’s magazine On Earth, Spring 2008 or www.onearth.org

© Pat Foley, 2010