Advocacy is often described as the art of persuasion. But more often, real progress comes from finding common interests between people who may see the world very differently.
As obvious as that may sound, it can be surprisingly difficult in today’s political environment. Everyone arrives at an issue with different priorities, experiences, and perspectives. If the conversation starts with the thing that divides us, it often ends there as well.
The most effective advocates look instead for the things people agree on.
For TCIA, that often means focusing on outcomes rather than labels. Most people, regardless of political affiliation, want the same things. We want healthy trees and healthy communities. We want urban forests that make neighborhoods cooler, cleaner, safer, and more attractive places to live. We want trees that manage stormwater, improve air quality, provide habitat, and contribute to local economies. And we all benefit when invasive insects, diseases, and plants are identified and managed before they cause significant ecological and economic harm.
Those shared goals create an opportunity for common-ground conversations about climate resilience, invasive species management, and tree health.
Historically, much of our industry’s pesticide advocacy has focused on the importance of consistent, science-based regulation. Tree care companies, particularly small businesses, benefit from clear rules and predictable standards. When regulations vary significantly from one jurisdiction to another, it becomes more difficult to train employees, plan treatments, manage compliance, and serve customers effectively.
That message continues to resonate. But the political landscape is changing.
Federal pesticide preemption is becoming a less viable legislative objective, and there is increasing discussion among policymakers about climate resilience, forest health, and environmental sustainability. Rather than viewing those conversations as separate from our advocacy priorities, this provides us with an opportunity to connect them, particularly as newly elected lawmakers begin establishing their policy priorities and looking for trusted voices on emerging issues.
After all, our members are experiencing these challenges firsthand. As temperatures, weather patterns, and growing conditions change, so do the pressures facing trees. Invasive insects are expanding their ranges. Established pests are surviving in areas where they once struggled. New invasive plants are appearing in regions where they were rarely encountered before.
These are not theoretical concerns. They are operational realities for tree care companies across the country. They also create an opportunity to discuss the tools, resources, and regulatory frameworks needed to address them effectively.
When policymakers talk about climate resilience, TCIA can talk about tree health. When lawmakers discuss protecting urban forests, TCIA can discuss invasive species management. When communities look for ways to preserve tree canopy, TCIA can explain why science-based management tools and consistent regulations remain important parts of the solution.
Common ground matters if we are to build on the progress we have made.
No matter where someone falls on the political spectrum, healthy trees require effective management. Effective management requires science-based decision making. And science-based decision making works best when tree care professionals can operate within clear, consistent regulatory frameworks that protect public safety while allowing them to respond to new and emerging threats.
Sometimes successful advocacy is not about changing the subject. It’s about finding a new way to start the conversation. Climate resilience, invasive species management, and tree health may provide exactly that opportunity.
