University of Michigan is a "Tree Campus"

I didn't know what I wanted to write about this week in my blog entries, but I was looking at the Ann Arbor News online, and came across an editorial that sparked my attention. It was titled, Editorial: U-M is a natural for "Tree Campus" honor and can be found at this website: http://www.mlive.com/annarbornews/opinion/index.ssf/2008/11/um_is_a_natural_for_tree_campu.html. Growing up in Ann Arbor, and now going to college at the University of Michigan, I was always aware that this city had a lot of pride for the numberous trees it contained. I had no idea, however, what a "tree campus" even was. In reading this editorial, I learned that "The Arbor Day Foundation has introduced a new program for colleges called Tree Campus USA." The University of Michigan has met the requirments for becoming a "Tree Campus" and was awarded such standing last Thursday, November 13.


This recognizes U of M's contribution and awareness of the importance of trees in developed settings. "This recognition helps to highlight the interaction of the city and the campus into a broader urban forest." The author of the editorial makes the argument that since the Tree Campus program is open to any two or four year accredited university, the University of Michigan serves as a good model for other universities to adopt the program.


Although this is a good argument, I think it could be much stronger if it was supported with more evidence that adopting the "Tree Campus" program is important for our environment. It is stated within the editorial that "trees absorb carbon dioxide and generate oxygen; they help protect soil and water; they provide wildlife habitat and food; they offer a connection to the natural world; and so on." This information is not cited, however, as coming from a credible source (no extrinsic proof). If it were, the argument that trees serve as great importance to our environment would be stronger and also more persuasive.


I am in an environment class right now that discusses ecological issues occuring in the world today, and we have actually learned a lot about urbanization and deforestation. I have learned about numerous issues that come from urban sprawl and deforestation, one of them being that with less and less trees, we are releasing more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Of course, the editorial states that trees absorb CO2, but goes into no detail about how this actually effects us when trees are not in abundance. From what I learned in class, when a tree is cut down, carbon dioxide is then not only not absorbed by where that tree used to be, but more CO2 is released into the atmosphere from what was once being stored in the tree that was cut down.

Many people might know this, but they might now know the effects increased CO2 in our atmosphere has on the environment. It leads to global warming, which in turn changes weather patterns, precipitation levels, sea levels, and much more, as I learned in my environment class. Stating some of these effects in the editorial would help make a stronger argument that more universities need to be conscious of trees.

When I read about "Tree Campuses," I thought that it was a great program that should certainly be adopted at more universities than just U of M. I think this is a very good idea that deserves more attention, because it brings us one step closer to making more people environmentally conscious.