Donald Trump anti-DEI push strips communities of $75 million to plant much-needed trees
In New Orleans' Lower 9th Ward, Arthur Johnson has witnessed firsthand the vital role trees play, from filtering pollution to providing respite from the scorching summer sun.
But two decades after Hurricane Katrina decimated 200,000 trees across the city, including many in Johnson's own neighborhood, efforts to restore the tree canopy face a significant setback.
The US Forest Service's recent decision to terminate a $75 million grant to the Arbor Day Foundation has dealt a blow to communities struggling to afford tree planting initiatives.
The program, designed to bring green spaces to underserved neighborhoods, has become the latest casualty of the Trump administration's campaign against environmental justice.
The grant termination has had a direct impact on organizations like Sustaining Our Urban Landscape (SOUL), an environmental group working in New Orleans' historically Black communities. Having already planted over 1,600 trees, SOUL has now been forced to halt plans for an additional 900, leaving a void in the ongoing effort to restore the city's green spaces.
Those are trees that largely low-income residents otherwise couldn't afford to plant or maintain, said the 71-year-old Johnson, who runs a local nonprofit, the Lower 9th Ward Center for Sustainable Engagement and Development, that has helped SOUL with its work and done some tree plantings of its own in the area.
'You're not just cutting out the tree, the environment' with such cuts, said Johnson. If those trees aren't replaced and more aren't continually added, 'it really takes a toll on the sustainability of the Lower 9th Ward and its community.'
The benefits of trees are vast. They capture stormwater and replenish groundwater. They help clean the air in polluted areas, improve mental health, and cool air and surfaces of the built environment, especially during heat waves that are growing more intense and frequent with climate change.
One study by the UCLA Luskin Center found that shade can reduce heat stress on the human body from 25 percent to 35 percent throughout the day. And much research shows that low-income and communities of color have fewer trees — and are hotter — than better-off neighborhoods.
The Arbor Day Fund's grant was part of former President Joe Biden 's signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, which sent $1.5 billion to the forest service's Urban and Community Forestry program. In a Feb. 14 email canceling the grant, the Forest Service wrote that the award "no longer effectuates agency priorities regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and activities.'
But Dan Lambe, the Arbor Day Foundation's chief executive, said the projects weren't just going to serve disadvantaged people. They were going to benefit every member of the community, he said. In total, 105 nonprofits, municipalities and Indigenous organizations — from Alaska to Florida to Maine — have lost funding for critical environmental projects, the foundation said.
'This was an opportunity to make a really meaningful impact on people's lives, so it's been disappointing," Lambe said.
The Forest Service didn't say if other recipients of the $1.5 billion forestry investment also had grants terminated. In a statement, its parent agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, said the agency was following directions to comply with Trump's executive orders.
'Protecting the people and communities we serve, as well as the infrastructure, businesses, and resources they depend on to grow and thrive, remains a top priority for the USDA and the Forest Service,' the agency said.
For SOUL in New Orleans, losing the grant means they don't have the money to water trees already planted, and they've had to drop plans to hire three people. Another $2.5 million grant is on hold due to the federal funding freeze, and founder and executive director Susannah Burley said the nonprofit's survival is uncertain. Its annual budget is a little more than $1 million.
'We kind of are lost because we don't know if we should be planning to close our doors or if we should be planning for next season,' she said.
For others who were set to get Arbor Day Foundation money, the loss is not existential but still devastating. In the city-county of Butte-Silver Bow in southwest Montana, forester Trevor Peterson was going to use a $745,250 grant to buy chain saws, rigging gear and other essential tools, remove up to 200 dead or dying cottonwoods and plant as many as 1,000 trees as part of a decades-long effort to replenish trees cut to make way for copper mining. He wanted to help organize large community events focused on education, hoping to impart the knowledge necessary for future stewardship of the urban forest.
'We will now have to go back to the drawing board to determine where to go from here,' he said.
Jackson County, Oregon, was awarded a $600,000 grant to replant trees after wildfires in 2020 destroyed thousands of homes and charred more than 60,000 trees. The town of Talent lost two-thirds of its trees.
The nonprofit Oregon Urban Rural and Community Forestry, founded in the fires' aftermath, fought for years to get a single dollar, recalled Mike Oxendine, the group's founder and director.
The grant money from the Arbor Day Foundation was being used to help low-income and disadvantaged mobile home park residents — among the hardest-hit by the fires — identify and remove hazardous trees badly burned or killed, and replant trees for shade and cooling.
'This is a rural red area that needs it badly,' said Oxendine. 'We hit temperatures that exceed 110 degrees every summer now. We go through massive droughts and we're always prone to wildfire here.'
The loss of funding will create a 'tremendous burden' for the organization, he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
2 days ago
- NBC News
Celebrity breast cancer announcements highlight rising rates in young women
Several young celebrities have announced breast cancer diagnoses in the past year — a public reminder that rates are rising among women under 50 in the U.S. Pop singer Jessie J, 37, revealed this week on Instagram that she has early-stage breast cancer and plans to undergo surgery later this month. Katie Thurston, former star of 'The Bachelorette,' has documented her journey with Stage 4 breast cancer on social media after being diagnosed earlier this year at age 34. And actor Danielle Fishel, known for her role on the '90s sitcom 'Boy Meets World,' revealed her diagnosis at age 43 to fans last summer. New breast cancer diagnoses in young women have gone up considerably in the last decade. From 2012 to 2021 — the most recent decade of data — the rate increased 1.4% annually in women under 50, compared with 0.7% annually in women 50 and up. The trend applies to all racial or ethnic groups, particularly Asian American and Pacific Islander women under 50, for whom diagnoses have risen nearly 50% since 2000. Black women have the highest rate of breast cancer before age 40 and are most likely to die of the disease. Women under 40 generally aren't advised to get mammograms unless they have a strong risk factor for breast cancer, such as a family history or genetic mutation. In that case, the American Cancer Society recommends mammograms starting at age 30, plus an annual breast MRI. Several breast cancer doctors said younger patients and their clinicians should be careful not to dismiss symptoms such as a lump or nipple discharge. 'The thought was always, if you had a change in your breast but you were a young woman, it was probably nothing,' said Dr. Rani Bansal, an assistant professor at the Duke University School of Medicine. 'As we're seeing more and more younger women get diagnosed … we need to take these cases seriously.' Dr. Oluwadamilola Fayanju, chief of breast surgery at Penn Medicine, said her youngest patient diagnosed with cancer was just 17. She recommended that young women with symptoms go to a center that's experienced in breast imaging. For women with an elevated risk of breast cancer, she said, 'it may be better for you to be connected with a dedicated breast provider who can keep a close eye on you and do regular exams even well before 40.' Breast cancer in young women is often more aggressive As treatment options for breast cancer have improved, the overall mortality rate among younger women with the disease declined from 2010 to 2020, according to research presented in April at the American Association for Cancer Research meeting in Chicago. But young women are still more likely to be diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer compared with older women. One reason could be that they're not getting screened as much, so it's harder to catch cases early. Young women are also more likely to be diagnosed with triple-negative breast cancer, which tends to spread fast and has fewer treatment options. Dr. Virginia Borges, a professor of medical oncology at the University of Colorado Cancer Center, said all women diagnosed with breast cancer before age 35 have a higher likelihood of the cancer spreading to the rest of their bodies, for reasons doctors don't fully understand. 'It's like this great big puzzle of all these different factors that can contribute to why we see these cancers behave the way they do,' Borges said. Bansal said doctors are hoping to learn more about which treatments are better suited to women under 50. 'We need more data to better tailor our treatments towards younger women,' she said. 'A lot of the studies that are done are in older women.' Lifestyle, environment, hormones There are several mysteries as to why younger women are diagnosed with breast cancer at higher rates. Doctors generally agree that multiple factors are at play, including lifestyle, hormones and environmental exposures. Diets high in ultra-processed foods or a lack of physical activity can lead to obesity, which in turn elevates one's cancer risk. Women in their 30s and 40s have also increased their alcohol consumption in recent decades, and drinking alcohol is linked to breast cancer. Exposure to environmental toxins such as air pollution, forever chemicals or microplastics could also play a role. 'By the time women now in their 40s were babies, every single baby bottle had BPA. Everyone had Teflon pans in their home. Everyone was spraying Scotchgard around their home,' said Suzanne Price, CEO of Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, a nonprofit that works to eliminate exposure to toxic chemicals. Several researchers said more data is needed to definitively draw that link. 'Hopefully within the next few years, we should be having more insight into how those early life exposures drive the risk of breast cancer,' said Dr. Adetunji Toriola, a professor of surgery at Washington University School of Medicine. Some studies have suggested that chemical hair straighteners, which are predominantly used by Black women, may be associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Fayanju said the straighteners 'can potentially have effects on our ability to process hormones in our body and how those hormones then interact with cells in our breasts, which have receptors for those hormones.' Changes in women's reproductive lives might have some effect as well. Girls in the U.S. are starting their periods slightly earlier in life compared with decades ago. That may increase the length of time in which they're exposed to higher levels of estrogen — a hormone that in some cases can feed cancer cells. A study last year found an increase in the number of women ages 20 to 49 diagnosed with breast cancer that was responsive to estrogen. Many women are also delaying childbirth until their 30s and 40s, which increases the risk of postpartum breast cancer — cancers that occur within five to 10 years of giving birth that appear to be linked to changes in the breasts during that time. Borges estimated that there are about 18,000 new cases of postpartum breast cancer each year. 'How do you get from the millions of women who are having children without ending up with one of these breast cancers to the 18,000 or so who are going to get one of these breast cancers?' she said. 'We're still working on figuring that out. Age is important.'
Rhyl Journal
4 days ago
- Rhyl Journal
Stark inequalities in cancer rates across Wales revealed
The report by Public Health Wales' Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit (WCISU) found that people's housing, job, and ethnicity impact cancer incidence rates. To conduct the study, researchers linked all-Wales cancer registry data to Census data, using anonymising techniques to maintain confidentiality. The researchers then analysed the data to determine how cancer rates differed across the Welsh population based on ethnicity, housing type, and job. They found that people living in overcrowded housing had a cancer rate seven times higher than those with two or more spare rooms. Similarly, residents living in social housing had cancer rates nearly three times higher than those owning their homes outright. The study also revealed variances in cancer rates among different ethnic groups. The White population showed the highest overall cancer rates, partly due to the older age of this group. However, people from Mixed ethnic backgrounds were generally diagnosed at a later stage, which could potentially hinder cancer survival. The study also showed that Black men and Asian women were more likely to be diagnosed with prostate and breast cancer, respectively. The study shed light on the type of jobs and their connection with cancer incidence. People in lower-paid and manual jobs, such as process, plant, and machine operatives, had the highest cancer rates. They were also more likely to receive a late-stage cancer diagnosis compared to those in professional roles. Professor Dyfed Wyn Huws, director of the Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit, said: "This is the first time we've been able to look at unfair inequalities in cancer rates through this level of detail using individual data across the whole of the Welsh population. "It's a major step forward in understanding and reducing cancer inequalities in our society. "It has enabled us to get a much greater level of detail of the socio-demographic factors at play, by looking at individual or household measures of inequality, rather than area-level analysis. "It's a strong baseline for future work and a clear call to action to focus on where cancer and other health inequalities start." Professor Huws added that in many parts of Wales, elements crucial to health and well-being, such as healthy homes, good jobs, sufficient income, community connections, education and skills, and safe, clean environments, are either lacking or inadequate. He said: "Up to four in 10 cases of cancer are potentially preventable amongst the population of Wales as a whole. "Preventing cancer and achieving earlier diagnosis is a priority for everyone in the system." The study used linked data from the Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit's national cancer registry and the 2011 Census, via Swansea University's SAIL Databank.
North Wales Chronicle
4 days ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Stark inequalities in cancer rates across Wales revealed
The report by Public Health Wales' Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit (WCISU) found that people's housing, job, and ethnicity impact cancer incidence rates. To conduct the study, researchers linked all-Wales cancer registry data to Census data, using anonymising techniques to maintain confidentiality. The researchers then analysed the data to determine how cancer rates differed across the Welsh population based on ethnicity, housing type, and job. They found that people living in overcrowded housing had a cancer rate seven times higher than those with two or more spare rooms. Similarly, residents living in social housing had cancer rates nearly three times higher than those owning their homes outright. The study also revealed variances in cancer rates among different ethnic groups. The White population showed the highest overall cancer rates, partly due to the older age of this group. However, people from Mixed ethnic backgrounds were generally diagnosed at a later stage, which could potentially hinder cancer survival. The study also showed that Black men and Asian women were more likely to be diagnosed with prostate and breast cancer, respectively. The study shed light on the type of jobs and their connection with cancer incidence. People in lower-paid and manual jobs, such as process, plant, and machine operatives, had the highest cancer rates. They were also more likely to receive a late-stage cancer diagnosis compared to those in professional roles. Professor Dyfed Wyn Huws, director of the Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit, said: "This is the first time we've been able to look at unfair inequalities in cancer rates through this level of detail using individual data across the whole of the Welsh population. "It's a major step forward in understanding and reducing cancer inequalities in our society. "It has enabled us to get a much greater level of detail of the socio-demographic factors at play, by looking at individual or household measures of inequality, rather than area-level analysis. "It's a strong baseline for future work and a clear call to action to focus on where cancer and other health inequalities start." Professor Huws added that in many parts of Wales, elements crucial to health and well-being, such as healthy homes, good jobs, sufficient income, community connections, education and skills, and safe, clean environments, are either lacking or inadequate. He said: "Up to four in 10 cases of cancer are potentially preventable amongst the population of Wales as a whole. "Preventing cancer and achieving earlier diagnosis is a priority for everyone in the system." The study used linked data from the Welsh Cancer Intelligence and Surveillance Unit's national cancer registry and the 2011 Census, via Swansea University's SAIL Databank.
