Vacation-schmacation. Busier than I expected for this time of year. Good problems I suppose.

I’m working on a number of articles simultaneously right now. Inspiration keeps striking for new articles before I finish one. I don’t like to do that, but I don’t want to lose any ideas.

That said, I don’t have any short ideas right now lol. Instead, I’ll share some excerpts from some of the articles I’m working on. These excerpts aren’t in any particular order, I am still trying to untangle these braids of thoughts.

A favorite Ent called Fangorn once said “We never say anything unless it is worth taking a long time to say.”

You might see some of these articles in full soon, you might not. But enjoy for now :)

An opaque and made-up boundary separates nature from us as people, from nature and our properties. Nature isn’t a far away concept, it is everywhere. We are it, and we wield a disproportionate amount of our own will onto it.

This article comes from talking with thousands of people about their trees. From seeing the thousands of trees around me in focus, not like background.

I didn’t land on these conclusions and work backwards. These aren’t the justifications of some tree hugger. These are conclusions that took miles, years, conversations, and countless hours in forests to reach and yet are still evolving.

Our view on nature kinda sucks.

The tree care industry’s acceptance of poor practice is a cultural problem that affects those outside of the industry. While writing for certain industry publications, I’ve been asked to rephrase certain statements because they may turn some readers off. Disliking of my use of phrase “tree-killing” and “people who kill trees”. Indicating to me that the omnipresence of low quality tree care is something “the industry” does not necessarily want to acknowledge.

I reckon acknowledging the commonplace of bad practice might suggest their efforts are in vain. They are not in vain, they just aren’t totally sufficient to eliminate bad practice. I don’t think bad practice will ever be eliminated. But not acknowledging it is condoning it.

Some weeks after our neighborhood received door-hanger flyers from some poachers, I saw a large crew drive through my neighborhood with their banner. Several chip trucks, a bucket truck, one towing a bobcat loader too. A crew equipped for killing trees.

Sometimes trees do need to come down, but I know my area; I know how companies roll here. Around midday I took another walk in the direction that the crew drove to find a favorite white oak of mine was destroyed.

I counted 130-145 rings (kind of hard to keep track with many small rings) on a 4-foot high stump. This oak was not even in its veteran stage yet, it was a massive and gorgeous mature sentinel. Just entering its prime.

I’d admired this tree every single time I walked by it.

And it was poached.

What took 150ish years to grow was defeated in 4 hours.

I can say with frustrated confidence that I looked at the tree more than 100 times. More than whoever hung that door-hanger. While I never did a thorough analysis on the tree, I can say this tree lacked concerning features. It was a low risk tree.

Was this tree removed because someone did not want it? Or was the tree removed because the owners were duped by poachers? I don’t know.

But it is one less impressive front yard tree in my neighborhood. It is one less veteran from that once full forest that used to be here. It is one less habitat for the wildlife here. It is less carbon sequestered. One less amazing tree. It is less. And a tree company is responsible for that.

The main goal behind staying lean is to avoid the bloat that tree care companies often struggle with. When they start out, they think they need certain things to be productive: big wood chipper, chip truck, a few big saws, maybe a loader, a couple guys. You’ve got to pay those things off, and if your wings aren’t fully spread yet, that can be a crippling challenge.

The example set by Big Arb results in most tree companies looking more or less the same: the same equipment, a website full of business-speak, and without anything that really separates them. We found that the tried and true model had some flaws, so we tried a different approach. Not to mention, we think the Big Arb business model is boring. Part of the fun and fulfillment we get as arborists and business owners is figuring things out.

And this is no exception.

Arboriculture is for people who like physical and mental challenges. Climbers especially know that feeling, whether you're pruning or removing trees. It ain't easy, and we love that sometimes.

Do you climb with the heaviest harness possible? Or do you like to climb feeling light and flexible? Tree First is an experiment that applies that philosophy to the tree care business. 

OK, those are some spoilers for some of the articles I’m working on. One of them might appear in March’s issue of the Tree Care Industry Magazine. Which one will it be?

Alright, I’ve got to go pick up Jack and Rachel from the airport now.

Talk to ya later,

TF forever