Who will speak for the trees?

In 1971, Dr. Seuss published the Lorax in which the titular character tries to fight off developers by speaking out on behalf of the trees that they are cutting down in the name of progress. Famously he says, "I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."

In that same year, the US Supreme Court spoke out on who could speak for the trees. In that case, Disney fought the Sierra Club for the right to build a ski resort in Mineral King Valley, CA. The court decided that the Sierra Club had no legal standing to speak on behalf of the trees. But Oyez reports on a very interesting dissenting decision, 

"Justice William O. Douglas wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the standing doctrine should allow environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club to sue on behalf of inanimate objects such as land. There is precedent for inanimate objects to have legal personality for the purpose of lawsuits, and “[t]hose who have that intimate relation with the inanimate object about to be injured, polluted, or otherwise despoiled are its legitimate spokesmen.”"

Despite that dissent, the US moved away from rights for those trees.

Other parts of the world have other views on the matter. More recently, the National Assembly in France has passed a declaration on the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Trees. Despite the name, it may effectively be more about stewardship than legal rights, but it certainly raises a serious question about these important organisms' roles in the ecological balance of the planet and the right ways to promote those relationships. Are these efforts more political/legal or symbolic? 

Inspired by the ideas of the Universal Declaration, a town in Quebec has embraced the rights of their trees. The NY Times reports on Terrasse-Vaudreuil and its newly found recognition of its trees:

"Adopting the resolution was not merely symbolic, Mr. Bourdeau said in an interview. In Terrasse-Vaudreuil, practically, the resolution requires the town to prioritize canopy protection across all municipal planning. The next step is to review existing regulations and strengthen tree protections, the mayor said, followed by plans to plant and distribute trees to schools, businesses and residents in an ongoing effort to protect and diversify what has now been deemed a collective asset." 

I appreciate that instead of treating it like a small one-off story, they provide a context that shows this is emblematic of a much larger perspective that hasn't quite found the right vehicle.