Timely. We just, as in a few hours ago, wrapped up our season as owners of a u-cut tree farm. It's relatively small, just under 30 acres. But our family was just doing a post-mortem on what went well, what we need to change and making fairly detailed plans for next year and even several years out. I can tell you more then you want to know about the growing, spring/summer and fall care. The shaping. The labor to trim, drill, bag, etc. It's fascinating to see the impact 2008 had on planting and the resulting shortage of trees these past couple of years. I don't have any real point other than, been there, doing that, have the t-shirt, ask me anything. Oh, and this part of the farm is basically a side hustle to my normal 9-5 infosec job. Merry Christmas!
Are attractions at tree farms (that is to say, everything aside from trees) typically first-party (you) or external contractors?
I'd be fascinated in the experience value-add economics.
Said as someone who today bought a U-Cut 8' cypress ($56) at a local tree farm, a train ride (2x $2), baling ($2), three drinks + brownie + boiled peanuts (~$12). Thankfully, letting two quarantine-bored teenagers ride in the back of my truck around the farm was free. ;-)
Our place currently has limited attractions with several planned for next year. There is a gift shop that drives significant revenue, but was closed this year due to COVID. We offer free hot chocolate (small disposable cup). For the gift shop we have a multifaceted approach which includes buying things wholesale, making items in our shop, and partnering with other makers. Drilling and bailing is included in the price of the tree.
We are currently running the numbers to prepare for things like food/drink truck, sleigh rides, reindeer petting zoo, and some events.
Thanks for responding to all the questions her. Fascinating business!
And fwiw, the narrow-gauge railroad got a lot of attention from the kids. Not sure on the maintenance (especially per track-foot), but the engine appeared to have been homemade -- if you've had a burning desire to repurpose a small diesel.
We actually discussed a small train and decided to go with horse and sleigh next year, mostly because of upkeep and the ability to reuse that portion of the property for other things in the off season.
What's the strategy (both logistically and financially) for dealing with the 8-10 year maturity cycle of the trees? Also, I'd imagine it provides some moat for preventing new competition into the market.
For us, the biggest issue is trying to forecast what additional non-agricultural projects we may be starting in the near future that would be adversely impacted by a specific piece of land being tied up for 10 years. For example, we're building an event center (weddings, meetings, etc) that will also include outdoor space. As we work through what that will be like, we have to anticipate how that outdoor space would be used if there are trees there or not. Other than that specific example, we try to anticipate sales volumes and then map out the experience...then order, plant and maintain new trees accordingly.
By the way if you're looking for additional income streams, I know a place that does huge business with "pumpkin picking" (they buy commercial pumpkins and throw them on the ground in their property) as well as easter egg hunts (sample principle, with eggs with toys inside). It could work for you.
This gets into a bigger conversation about business models. For us, we are selling an experience that includes a tree. Artificial trees will not be able to replace that. But selling an experience is a low volume game and the revenue has to either be made up in price or via the addition of alternative revenue streams.
Is theft/security an issue for you? Mature Christmas trees must be one of the highest-value crops you can steal from a farm, and one of the easiest to fence.
There are pros and cons to the different business models, but in this case, if you think of it as a matching/sorting type of problem, it's inefficient and wasteful, in a logistical/Nash equilibrium sort of way.
Which doesn't always mean it's the wrong way, from a business perspective. But if you're charging by height, it's leaving money on the table.
It's not an issue on our farm. We have eyes on most of the property most of the time. We also don't stock any precuts, so a thief has to come on the property and do some amount of work to steal a single tree.
>Mature Christmas trees must be one of the highest-value crops you can steal from a farm
If you have the equipment/motivation to steal christmas trees, you probably could be stealing animals too. Those are proabbly worth even more than christmas trees, probably several hundred dollars each.
Harder to dispose of, though. You'll need to be in league with a crooked farmer, slaughterhouse or livestock mart if you want to sell the animal alive. You can sell Christmas trees on the side of the road, no questions asked.
We cut our season off early due to the number of mature trees available. We're rebuilding and playing catchup. It was more important, particularly this year, that we were open rather than how many days. We get families that have been coming here for 30 years. If we miss a year being open, we risk losing them from coming back in the next few years. Our second metric was number of trees sold per day. We did meet or exceed both measurements.
My family tree farm has been closed over 20 years, and people still just show up looking for trees. About an hour drive from the (major) city. Sometimes while we're in the middle of Thanksgiving dinner.
Childhood memories are a strong psychological force.
This is really interesting. There seems to be a significant difference between the US Christmas Tree economy and the one in Germany.
We got our tree for this year a week ago directly from a grower in the local area where we always buy our trees. It is of average size (the 6'-7' size is also what we mostly consider a good size over here) and it only cost us 30€, so our prices here seem to be significantly lower than in the US. Also, I don't know anybody here who has a fake plastic tree - these aren't really a thing here, basically people either don't have a tree at all, or they get a real one.
The price from a grower (with 20-30% margin) is $30-35 or about the same. It's the fact that retailers (like always) have a 100% markup (50% margin) so if you go to a random convenience store it'll cost double and they'll make the money. No different from most consumer items.
Fake trees last forever... until you throw them away, and then they still last forever.
About half of the US doesn't have an economically workable species/breed of tree unless they charge those higher prices. Virgina Pine grows well in the south (was the historical staple crop until 20~25 years ago), but doesn't naturally grow in cone shaped, and requires trimming/shaping and spraying multiple times a year for the 4-8 years it takes to get a marketable tree. Most southern tree farms have replaced V.P. with Leland Cypress (not really a cypress) or a similar/derivative breed of tree with promises of low/no required tending, but they also ended up having pretty high maintenance costs and don't market as well. (They look more like privacy bushes to me, and are also sold for that purpose at nurseries.)
So it ends up being cheaper/more profitable to ship trucks of harvested firs/etc from where they grow almost naturally, and "export" them clear across the country.
Also, the actual/current market for locally grown trees (at least in the south) is sustained 99% by people who still want the experience of choose-and-cut. And that also costs more to run than a commoditized crop.
It's been more than a decade, but in Florida sand pine was usually an indigenous option even at Home Depot. The needles are soft and they are wonderful trees.
Soft is pretty (and beats the hell out of pointy and prickly and sticky), but soft can't hold heavy ornaments- which is a deal breaker to most people.
It's one of the downsides of Lelands and other fast growing breeds, meaning ~3 years to mature instead of 5-6.
Timber has similar issues- fast growth is softer and weaker than old growth.
That said, there are some amazing and beautiful types of xmas trees being bred these days, but when it comes to holiday sentiment, different doesn't always sell.
Which sucks to find out after 6 years of invested time, labor, and cash. (Likely with 5 younger years of crop already planted, growing, and committed to.)
For most of these types of trees, soft needles usually goes with soft/weak branches. Not sure how universal that is, but seemed to hold for most marketed types.
I remember one type that solved that "problem" and others, but the trade off was it absolutely stunk. But only to some people.
There always seemed to be a major compromise in traits.
This is becoming less true with pre-lit trees. We paid an astounding $700 for a tree and the stupid incandescent bulbs burned out and within a couple years the lights didn't work anymore (replacing bulbs did nothing). I was furious that Pottery Barn did not use LED lights in 2016 on a tree that expensive.
I ended up buying light strands and wiring them myself and I gotta say the final product, while eye bleeding expensive, is amazing. Unlike built in lights mine run all the way through the whole tree, into the middle. There are also a lot more lights now than there were before, and they have different plugs for colored lights verse white, so I can use smart plugs to toggle remotely for example. All in all a great end result, but it was probably $1,300 and 8 hours of labor to get there.
Growing up, my parents were allergic to most types of the trees sold as christmas trees, so they gave up and bought a fake tree. They spent a decent amount on it (definitely stretched our christmas budget), and it was actually a really great tree that we enjoyed for over a decade. "Not very inspiring" is a bit of a grinchy, scroogey way to think about it... really lacks imagination.
Now I get a real tree, and honestly sometimes I miss the fake one. Keeping the real tree watered and dealing with it shedding needles all the time is a pain. And you'll rarely find the "perfect" tree that doesn't have some odd misshapen-ness or branches missing in key areas. Sure, you can say that's what gives them their charm, but I guess I just got used to having a fairly symmetrical tree.
I also feel a bit bad about feeding an industry that grows a tree only to cut it down so I can stick it in my house for a 6 weeks and then throw it away. This year I learned about companies that will deliver a potted tree and then take it back and keep it alive during the off season. Might give that a try next year.
We went with a fake tree this year for this reason. I wanted a real one but the excessive amount of needles and the fake one looks real enough. I do miss the smell. Have to find some candles or something...
When we move and no longer have carpet I will go back to a real tree. We will probably have two, the fake one and the real one.. lol.
Edit: Someone corrected me, I quoted the survey wrong. But here‘s another source (YouGov survey, 2012), saying that 43% had a real tree and 17% an artificial one: https://statistik-dresden.de/archives/5195
> Also, I don't know anybody here who has a fake plastic tree - these aren't really a thing here, basically people either don't have a tree at all, or they get a real one.
The question has to be translated as "Could you imagine using an artificial tree" or maybe "would you consider using an artificial tree", not "do you prefer an artificial tree".
We got our 1,7m large Christmas tree in Germany for 13 Euros, I simply don't understand how it could have been worth to let it grow for many years at this price.
Perhaps grown in e.g. Poland where land and manpower is lower priced, compared to Germany?
Ikea Sweden used to sell similar-priced christmas trees "farmed" in Denmark, but they stopped doing that after accusations that they were undermining local suppliers of non-herbicide-grown christmas trees. (In Sweden christmas trees tend to be expensive in cities and cheap/free in the countryside.)
Yeah, many “Christmas tree” species can grow in highly acidic soil that’s otherwise only good for blueberries, which are tasty, but usually not much else.
At the end of the Christmas season, you can still compost the tree or turn it into wood chips.
I’ve lived in NC piedmont area (a couple hours drive from tree farms) since 2004 and basically paid $65-75 for a 6-7 ft tree every year. Every year but one we’ve gotten our tree from whatever corner lot was convenient. (One year we were late and only Home Depot had any trees left.)
There is either a shortage of trees this year or people shopped early. We got our tree earlier today and it was the last of two. They gave it to us for half off ($37 for a 6 ft tree) since it’s a somewhat sad (but fitting for 2020) tree. Once we decorate it it will look fine.
I think more people shopped and more of them shopped early. My neighbor in Massachusetts has a Christmas tree farm and they opened a week early (weekend before Thanksgiving) to try to spread out the crowds. Ha!
It was very busy that first weekend. I actually notmally get a wreath from them but they were mobbed. I was going to go over early the day after Thanksgiving (the day they normally open and the next day they were open) before I went paddling later and it was just a complete mob scene. I'm not actually sure how they dealt with the crush given that they, like me, have a long one lane driveway and cars were backed out to the road. They sold out that day apparently.
Oregonian here. The prices at Ace Hardware yesterday were $40 for a Doug Fir, and $65 for a Noble Fir. A couple years ago I think I paid $60 for a Doug Fir. But you can also just pay $5 to get a permit from the Forest Service and go cut down your own tree. There are some restrictions (no trees over 12', and there must be other trees within 20' for example) but it's fun to hunt your own tree down--even if the tree that you get isn't a perfectly triangular cone shape like you may get at a tree lot
I live in Portland Oregon and paid $40 for a 6’ noble fir yesterday at a small retail lot. Normally, you can bargain down the price (and judging by his tentative price quote, he was expecting me to) but I was happy with that price and didn’t bother.
We're fortunate to live near a national forest here in Oregon where we can get a $5 permit, and go cut our own tree. They're not so 'perfect' looking, but it's a fun family experience.
So, I was fascinated by that video and kept asking myself "wait, that's a thing?". I found this great article by the pilot of the video that talks about the practice and economics of cherry drying: https://blog.aopa.org/aopa/tag/cherry-drying/
I was just discussing tree farm economics with the guy who runs the farm we bought from this year. Our normal place was closed this year, and he told me a number of his local competitors only opened for one weekend. The trees this year we’re on the short side because of supply issues from the previous years.
Also was just musing about this since we cut a tree for Christmas yesterday.
I was feeling a but guilty harvesting a tree every year, wondering if fake was the way to go.
Reading the article made me wonder if neither choice was a good one.
It does look like "U-Cut" trees are cutting out the middleman(person) and putting money straight into the farmer's pocket. At $65 that's a much healthier profit margin than the $8-$10 they get selling to wholesalers.
And I suppose if there were made-in-the-USA fake trees that too could stimulate the local (U.S.) economy ... but that doesn't appear to be the case.
I do wonder how the expert in the article came up with the assertion that fake was now environmentally friendly than real. Surely shipping a pile of plastic from China is worse for the environment than growing a real tree for 10 years.
Even if the plastic lasts for a decade, and the alternative is to buy 10 real trees over that same time period, I'd have thought the natural option would be better for the planet.
I haven't made the math... but those plastic trees are much smaller and lighter than the real ones (and have a very standard size in a box that can be very well optimized), so shipping them from China on a container boat + container train + keeping them 10 years might not be that bad comparing to what is required to transport those natural trees every single year on trucks often across borders (lots of tree farms in Canada shipping to the US) + complicated transport OUT at the end of the season. Obviously you have to add the positive impact of having a tree growing and the CO2 they process. Just wanted to chime that it might not be that obvious what is really more eco-friendly.
I'm speaking as someone who would obviously prefer the plastic-free solution.
I am going to buy a replantable pottgrown tree this year. I've read plastic trees needs to be used 14 years in order to be more eco friendly than cutting a new tree every year.
In practice, it's just a different environmental impact. You have to weigh plastic production against more shipping, and depending on what you care about, which is "better" will change.
Even if you're not burning it the day after Christmas, it'll get chipped and composted. Some of the carbon is released in composting, some wood will remain, but with how people use mulch, I wouldn't expect it to capture carbon long enough to be interesting.
You would need to either bury it in a way that it won't be decomposed by microbes. Anaerobic digestion produces methane which is ~83x worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.
The alternative is to gasify it, and produce biochar (a.k.a terra preta), a form of carbon that is mixed with the soil to improve it's nutrient and water retention, friability and microbial activity. Biochar is theorized to be stable for 10k years in the soil.
Same way you dispose regular garbage, which has same challenges.
I went to the tour of recycling plant, and as part of the tour they told us what happens with Seattle garbage: they excavate a pit, line it up with plastic, put garbage in, cover it with plastic, put soil on top. Without supply of oxygen it basically stays there almost forever. They cut a carrot with was in such pit for 10 years. It was black on the outside, but still orange inside!
Anyway, put trees in such pits, and you have carbon capture!
Every single thing you buy has the same economics. It's not really a moral thing to worry about. Retailers are not evil for taking a cut, they have a very competitive business as well.
Plus the farms are quite sustainable, there's no risk of overfarming Christmas trees.
I believe it’s actually more related to the economic depression/recession ~2008. Fewer buyers in 2008 meant less space to plant new trees, which means fewer trees reaching maturity for this season. Coupled with a bad few years means more farms closing, meaning fewer trees available for a larger customer base.
Though I can’t speak regarding the fires impact on farms.
I run a Christmas tree farm at a small scale. I wonder if real Christmas trees are actually worse for the environment than fake trees as many real Christmas trees are burned rather than sent to a landfill?
In Houston, Christmas trees are collected, taken down to Galveston ~50 miles away, and piled on beaches to serve as anchors for sand dunes, which is good for the shoreline. As noted elsewhere in this subthread, the carbon trapped in the trees takes years to be released into the atmosphere through the decay of the wood and needles.
As I was tossing my dead tree onto the disposal pile a few years ago, a couple other guys were gathering trees from the pile. I asked them what they did with the trees, and they said they put them at the bottom of their pond. They're great for creating a fish habitat, apparently.
Does it really make a difference to burn wood than to throw it away? I guess that after decomposition of the wood, all its carbon goes back to the atmosphere. It is just slower than if you burned it.
The biosphere is a closed cycle, we cannot probably use it to store carbon away by means of its own mechanism. Main problem is that we are adding new fossil carbon into it every day.
I've heard the opposite for global warming - burial is excellent for carbon capture (delays carbon release for a long time), burning is awful (releases carbon into the atmosphere instantly).
If you're buying a tree that would have otherwise not been grown (such as if buying Christmas trees wasn't a thing and that land was used for something else instead), I'm not sure it's so bad though. That carbon came from the atmosphere over the last 10-15 years, so putting it back is "even" within a child's lifetime.
Interesting, it makes sense. Do you know what are the involved timescales here? How long before the buried wood is decomposed and has released most of its carbon back? Is it 50 years or 5000? Maybe it depends a lot on the type of soil?
EDIT: as the sibling comment observes, burning the tree cannot be "awful", as all the carbon from that tree came from the atmosphere. Growing and burning a tree is the epitome of carbon-neutral thing to do. Now, burying a tree may have a positive (non-neutral) effect.
It really depends on the local conditions. A log on the surface, in an area with things that will eat it (e.g. fungi, bacteria, termites, and other decomposers) will fairly readily give up its carbon.
If it gets covered, and spends time in a cold, anaerobic environment, there will be nothing to return it to the atmosphere. Decomposition can eventually stall out entirely, allowing it (given enough time and compression) to form coal or oil.
I'm very interested in wood gas pyrolosis, a process that pulls burnable fuel from wood and produces almost pure carbon as a byproduct. The gas could be used to generate electricity or heat, and the carbon could be buried in old mines. I suspect the economics just aren't there for it yet, (or the process doesn't scale to the numbers we'd need for large scale de-carbonization).
Based on the listed sales numbers it appears a majority of fake trees are a one-year deal (maybe two). You can’t sell 25m fake trees a year if people are keeping them for next year.
My Parents still have the same artificial tree from when I was a kid, it has lasted 30+ years.
Here in Australia I think Artificial Trees are the norm, I've never really thought about it before, Possibly because Christmas is in Middle of summer and real trees would be difficult to keep looking fresh.
I always felt a lot of cognitive dissonance around Christmas growing up all the songs and decorations are about snow and winter but the weather here is oppressively hot.
We stopped using our artificial tree because many of the branches are broken, probably from the weight of all the decorations. It too lasted over 30 years.
We have the same kind of disconnect around here (Brazil): all these people dressed as Santa Claus (heavy-looking winter clothing) in the middle of 40 degree Rio de Janeiro summer has always been an odd juxtaposition.
We had fake trees growing up. We had two over the entire time I lived with my parents. We have a fake tree in my house now. We bought it in 2007 before having kids and I expect that will be the only tree my kids will see. I can't imagine discarding a fake tree after less than 10 years, let alone 1 or 2.
I think a lot of these trees being disposed of has to do with the integrated lighting strings going out and folks not dealing with debugging/fixing them when a new tree is $200.
I'm hopeful that with the advent of LED lit trees reliability goes up and there is less early waste of perfectly good plastic with a few busted lightbulbs.
I wonder what percentage of that is businesses. E.g. all the fake trees in a shopping mall: Do they buy and trash them? Do they rent them from someone who stores them? I kinda doubt they store them themselves, but maybe?
Where do you live that does that? In my area, students and Boy Scout troops do fundraisers where they come around and pick up the trees. They take the trees to landscaping suppliers, who in turn them through a wood chipper to make mulch.
The parks department in our town always threw a bunch of old christmas trees in the local lakes, since submerged trees make good shelter for young fish, tadpoles, etc.
I still very much enjoy my $20 fold-up tree from Walgreens with built-in lights. Just set up the stand, unfold it, and plug it in. And stores conveniently back in the original box, which even has a little plastic handle on it.
I was pretty surprised that Quarter Pine was featured in this article. We get our tree from them every year. I paid $60 for the tree and gave the guy who loaded it $5 tip.
The cool thing about Quarter Pine is they suspend the tree and drill a hole in the bottom of the trunk. They sell a special stand with a peg you put the tree on. It’s the slickest experience I’ve had with a real tree stand.
> At an average retail price of $75 a pop, these trees make up a $2B+-per-year business.
Good lord, is this true? Why are they so bloody expensive south of Canada? We paid $25 for a Christmas tree from IKEA, and we got a $25 coupon to spend in the new year, which essentially made it free.
I mean, you can pay $75 for a tree if you want.. the local youth art theater does this as a fundraiser, and you can go direct to the farm and pay this as an "experience", but that price at a big box store, wow...
I normally hunt my own to cut in the hills, but a forest fire burned everything for miles... so we bought a spruce still in its pot from the nursery. It costs more and it’s smaller than our usual, but we’ll plant it outside in the spring when the ground unfreezes (note you can’t plant it after xmas because the temperature shock from coming out of dormancy while inside will kill it).
I bought a tree farm in Oregon in '98 after it had been clearcut. I debated between replanting it with christmas trees vs. timber and I couldn't see how christmas trees penciled out so I'm growing timber. The article mentions $60 for a tree, but here in Oregon I see many lots featuring $35 - $45.
> don't make sense in Australia.
That comment make me smile. After moving out of Australia to Germany, those crazy things (hot turkey dinners in 45 degC days) started to make sense for me. Enjoy your the Aussie Christmas!
While much Xmas themed stuff doesn't really apply to Australia, thankfully at the moment neither does COVID! So we're pretty well off even before we get to Xmas fun.
Enjoy your hot turkey in the colder north! Best wishes for staying safe, well and having a great time with family and friends!
So it takes 8-10 years to grow a tree to maturity, and the profit margin for the farmer is $8-10 per tree. A farmer grows a tree for me to make a dollar per year. This is staggering to think about to me. Unreal.
Presumably, the revenue is paying folks' wages, including the farmer if they do a share of the work. The profit in that sense is a return on investment, rather than the farmer's compensation. They business could make no profit but still give the farmer a healthy living.
At 6x6 spacing that is 1200 trees per acre. A 40 acre farm would give you nearly $50k a year in income. You can do this on fields that would not be suitable for most other crops, the startup costs are not out of reach for many. Trees used for lumber generally take 25+ years to harvest, the returns are generally lower.
A Christmas tree here in Bermuda will cost North if $200 and come with an 8 hour queue so sadly this year we've passed. I would have paid $300 though to avoid the queue.
If I recall, Hawaii has a similar situation, where residents wait for “the Christmas tree boat” to arrive with all the Christmas trees for the whole island.
Why not go for an artificial one, then?! They look just the same, and will last many years, without annual waste and cost, and are less of a fire hazard.
This is a good question. I could say, "an artificial tree won't make the house smell as nice", but I think this would be dishonest.
Ultimately it's because I like the tradition, if we had children I would have queued up for 8+ hours to get one as decorating the tree is one of my fondest memories from childhood.
An artificial tree just wouldn't spark joy in the same way.
Interesting how this is not very much like the petroleum value chain, where the primary producers (oil+gas exploration companies) reap nearly all of the net profit.
I wonder if it's because retailers hold a lot of pricing power, and it's a quickly expiring asset, and many producers, and localized markets.
here someone as done christmas tree out of wood sticks and rope... she put all sticks in parallel with the longer one starting from bottom to the short one at top all attached together... no Idea if u get the thing... anyway FUCk christmas :)
I wish they explored the ACTA claims that artificial Christmas trees are more environmentally friendly than real trees.
Artificial trees are made from PVC and the by products of PVC manufacturing are highly toxic and historically highly polluting.
In order for that claim to be true under China's lax regulatory environment, either they have some revolutionary new method of producing PVC or farming Christmas trees is highly polluting. Either way, I would love to know the answer.
Sadly it's probably just a lie as the head of the ACTA is an artificial tree mogul.
As a heuristic, the amount you spend is approximately the damage, unless you know a lot about where the money is going. E.g. if there is a retailer involved then 50% of environmental damage is invariant.
> But trees or rotting trees can produce methane. Depends on tree variety, location, transport, and disposal.
What do location and transport have to do with the methane they produce?
If you look at the article, the map of production by states shows that trees are relatively much closer to population centers than anything coming from China. So in addition to the heavy pollution from PVC production, there's also the heavy pollution from transoceanic shipping.
Just how much methane do these rotting trees produce?
That seems an odd claim though I can't disprove it. Why would I buy an artificial tree every year and have to dispose of it every year. I mostly have a small artificial tree (along with a very old pre-decorated even smaller one) because it's a nice thing I can grab from my attic, put up in a few minutes, and stick a few decorations on it.
I did the live tree thing for a while after I bought a house and my neighbor even has a Christmas tree farm now. But, absent kids and not usually in the habit of throwing Christmas parties, I'm just not inclined to put a lot of energy into decorating for Christmas. Having to buy an artificial tree every year would sort of see to defeat the purpose of saving effort.
Every year seems excessive. I know people who've replaced artificial trees every three or so years because they don't take care of their things, but I also know people who use things until they fall apart so I could see 10 years being the average between the two kinds of people.
This process is a great carbon sink opportunity when you think about it so long as the tree is buried. Plastic trees should be disincentivized in that regard.
We need more tree harvesting + landfill themed activities.
My city, Sunnyvale, CA, has "free" tree disposal. I once complained to the City about why I had to subsidize someone else's religion. The answer made sense: the trees would be dumped if the city didn't collect them.
All due respect, but you're free to observe your religion, I'm free to observe mine. Without forcing my opinions down other people's throats. That's what makes America great.
Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
I hate Christmas because Christmas decorations get stored around 10 or 11 months out of the year and I used to end up on antibiotics every year at Christmas. Storing stuff like that tends to leave it covered in mildew.
I spoke once to someone who was allergic to Christmas trees and she was sympathetic. Everyone else typically hates on me for mentioning it. I'm a party pooper for not wanting to be deathly ill.
It also aggravates me to see articles with themes such as celebrating "the most Christmasy town in America!" that really mean the most gaudily decorated every year. No, this does not mean some spirit of giving where homeless people are gifted houses or something like that.
I also find it baffling that strident feminists haven't latched onto the angle that "Christmas promotes an evil patriarchy!."
Christmas used to be a time when poor people and children got gifts. Now it's a time when Americans load up their credit cards to engage in mostly pointless rituals that results in a mini depression every January and a chronic burden of debt on the country.
I'm not a fan and it has little to do with my general aversion to religion, though I found this article interesting enough to read and I posted the link to this HN discussion over on r/UrbanForestry. (Crossing my fingers and hoping no one hassles me about "Why on earth is this here??")
