Study reveals attitudes about lack of trees in South Los Angeles

One way to address the uneven distribution of trees in Los Angeles is to plant more in places that don’t have a robust canopy, such as East and South LA.

But a new study led by USC and the South LA Tree Coalition suggests the solution will have to be more multifaceted after decades of environmental injustice.

And with the city’s Urban Forestry Division budget cut by more than $1 million this year, progress toward equity could be slowed.

Participants in the study, “Rooted Connections: Understanding South Los Angeles Community Leaders’ Relationship with the Urban Forest,” expressed awareness of the damage caused by tree disparity and the value of a canopy of refrigeration

But they also raised complex concerns about how urban greening fits with other pressing issues like homelessness and gentrification and called for proper planning and maintenance.

“Our lack of trees is not an accident or a coincidence. It’s the result of historical patterns of discrimination, disenfranchisement and racist planning practices,” said one South Los Angeles community leader. “And so there’s no easy fix. I think this is the first challenge. And I think because it’s such a big problem, it’s going to take a big solution.”

Participants were not named in the study.

Previous research has uncovered large disparities in tree cover in Los Angeles.

Five areas within the census tracts, one in Pacific Palisades, one in Los Feliz, two in Brentwood, and one in Shadow Hills, contain 18% of the city’s total tree cover, but less than 1 % of residents live in these areas, according to a 2019 assessment.

While LA’s average roof coverage is 21 percent, that of South Los Angeles is 13 percent, falling to just 5 percent in some areas, the authors of “Rooted Connections” report.

The new study aims to represent the views and perspectives of South LA community leaders and stakeholders, or those who might be affected by a sparse canopy.

Tapping leaders “is what makes this really unique,” said Theresa Maysonet, co-founder of the South LA Tree Coalition.

One of the overall aims was to raise the voices of the affected community to inform future policy and planning, including the Coalition. The area examined in the study included the neighborhoods of Athens, Compton, Crenshaw, Florence, Hyde Park, Lynwood, Paramount and Watts.

“What can sometimes happen at the community level is that things can be ruled out, right? Because an elected official can say, “Oh, okay, you’re the only one with this problem,” and try to see it as a one-time thing. Or maybe they don’t take it that seriously,” said Santina Contreras, assistant professor at USC’s Sol Price School of Public Policy and lead author of the study.

The researchers interviewed 34 people via Zoom and distilled their responses into three key findings.

1. Trees in South LA play an important role in community leaders’ perceptions of neighborhood identity and environmental conditions, as well as public health and safety.
2. Competing priorities, limited resources, and lack of awareness present barriers to tree-related planning efforts in the community.
3. Community leaders value a healthy tree canopy in South LA and envision a future with equitable, intentional green supported by community initiatives and proper maintenance.

A section breaking down the first key finding notes that participants highlighted adverse health effects due to the lack of trees, illustrated by a comment: “So you also have long-term impacts, which is more heat, which can have physical and mental impacts on people in South Los Angeles, as well as the long-term impacts of not being in an environment where there is necessarily an improvement in anxiety and stress.”

Researchers in the same section point to connections between gentrification concerns and tree planting, including one participant’s observation: “I’ve also heard (people) say, ‘When we see white people coming in and planting trees , we know that rentals sell out. up.’ So the trees, on some level, represent gentrification, and gentrification means they’re going to have to go.”

Contreras highlighted the notion of how trees compete with other priorities in under-resourced areas as an important aspect that is often not discussed.

“Communities definitely want trees and they deserve trees, but they’re also looking at how to advocate for them when there’s a lot of different issues and challenges that they’re facing, in terms of trying to build their cities in the most effective way.”, he said

“To some extent, we’d like to talk about just trees and, you know, that’s the No. 1 priority. But that’s not necessarily the reality for communities … at least for the people we interviewed.”

The South LA Tree Coalition, which secured a grant for the study, worked side-by-side with its academic partners, identifying participants and shaping the interview. Contreras said he was guided “really, truly by what the communities want.” The USC Dornsife Public Exchange, which links university researchers with public and private sector leaders, was also a partner.

Maysonet, a West Adams resident who serves on the United Neighborhoods Council of Neighborhoods, said she hopes every member of the LA City Council sees the report because it “affects the whole city.” According to the recent study, nine of the 15 municipal districts have tree cover of less than 25%, which is below the 30% recommended by experts.

“We would like (Mayor Karen Bass) to see the report and understand the importance of funding to correct some of these historic and systemic planning practices,” Maysonet said.

However, funding is being withdrawn amid a poor budget year. StreetsLA, which handles sidewalk repair, street sweeping and tree maintenance, among other things, saw its budget cut by $21.4 million for the 2024-25 fiscal year, according to a July presentation by StreetsLA’s Ana Tabuena-Ruddy, Assistant Director and Director of Sustainability. to the city’s Community Forestry Advisory Committee.

StreetsLA’s urban forestry division, which manages approximately 700,000 street trees along 6,500 miles of public roads, lost $1.1 million.

“Budget challenges have impacts on tree preservation, the ability to provide tree establishment, care, enforcement and respond to tree-related emergencies throughout the year,” which have increased due to of climate change and lack of maintenance, Tabuena-Ruddy told the committee that includes community representatives from each council district, as well as a representative of the mayor. Maysonet is an alternate for Council District 10.

“Due to dwindling resources for planting, our planting strategy must take a targeted approach, emphasizing equity,” Tabuena-Ruddy said later in the presentation.

The forestry division has identified the areas most in need of canopy cover assistance. Council District 9, which stretches from the south end of downtown LA to the USC campus to South LA, “needs a lot of focus in terms of tree planting,” he said.

Tabuena-Ruddy said the forestry division will provide an equal amount of money to municipal districts, but a portion of the funding will have to be used for an equity-based approach.

“There’s not much to do,” he said.

Dan Halden, senior external relations advisor for StreetsLA, said the city has invested in technology to guide its equity-focused efforts, including TreeKeeper8 and what he described as an “up-to-date and up-to-date asset management system to identify available planting opportunities in historically underserved areas.”

In a statement, he said partnerships with community and nonprofit organizations are necessary for the city to achieve its “goal of a healthy and maintained tree canopy that provides much-needed shade, especially in underserved communities.”

“The city looks forward to continuing and expanding its partnerships with community organizations like the South LA Tree Coalition, and to helping grow the tree canopy in South LA and beyond,” he said.