' C DO TREEPLANTERS LIVE ON THE EDGE?: HEALTH RISK-TAKING AMONG REFORESTATION WORKERS IN NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA by Jocalyn Clark B.Sc., University ofVictoria, 1994 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE m COMMUNITY HEALTH SCIENCE © Jocalyn Clark, 1996 THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1996 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ¥ \ lf, ABSTRACT The nature of the treeplanting business as a seasonal, high-income opportunity for employment attracts 3,000 young people from across Canada to Prince George, British Columbia every year. Treeplanters typically work in campsites located in remote areas surrounding Prince George and travel to the city for recreation on their days off. Despite treeplanters ' key role in the maintenance of forestry activity in B.C., and recognition of the work as grueling and unglamourous, these workers are often regarded negatively by the broader community. Their summer planting tenures are said to be characterized by heavy alcohol and drug use and sexual promiscuity. Within northern B.C. treeplanters are widely regarded as a "breed of their own" and as representing a "distinct culture". Participant observation and in-depth interviews were conducted to gain insight into the perceptions, attitudes, and behaviour oftreeplanters in the context ofthe subculture in which they live and work. Treeplanters reported physical rather than social aspects of treeplanting as posing health risk. Social health risk-taking did emerge as an issue, however, and elements oftreeplanting subculture are reported that demonstrate its obvious distinctiveness from the home environment. Membership in treeplanting subculture provides powerful incentive for young people entering the business but also provides an environment where more permissive norms, feelings of anonymity, greater tolerance for otherwise unacceptable behaviour, and little information regarding health and safety exist. A strong social organization bestowing power based on number of years of experience and gender reinforces group norms. Risk-related social activities maintain an integral place within the subculture and promote a sense of camaraderie and collectivity. Determinants oftreeplanters' health risk-taking are identified as: the intensity ofthe working conditions creating a need for release and physical closeness, the hierarchy promoting full participation in the subculture as a means to 11 gain status within the group, and the remote setting lending itself to feelings of anonymity. Additional study is required that will collect prevalence and incidence data of risk-related behaviour and further explore the social context of treeplanting work, paying attention to both the physical and social health risks. lll TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ....... .. .. ... ... ...... .. ... ..... .. . .. ... . ....... ..... iv ACKNOWLEDGMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ......... . .... . ...... .... . .. ..... .. .... ......... . 1 My Personal Experience and This Study ........................................... 4 Community Health and This Study ................................................ 6 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................... 10 Silviculture in British Columbia .... .. ................ . ..... .... ...... .... . .. .... 11 Review ofTreeplanter-Related Literature ..... . ...... .... .... ....... ... . .. . .... .... 12 The Work ofTreeplanting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Requirements for Treeplanters . .... ...... . ........ .. .... . .. .. . ........ ........ 13 Health and Safety Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Fatalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Injuries .... .. . ..... . . .......... .. ..... ... .. . .. ... ........ ... ........... 16 Sickness and Stomach Disorders .. .. .. . .... .. ... .. ........... . ..... ........ . 17 Environmental Pollutants ... .. .......... ... .. . .. ....... ........ .. .... . .. . .. 17 Burnout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Worker Advocacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Current Industry Health Standards ........................................... 21 Review of Risk-Related Literature: College Students ... .. .. ....................... .. 22 Alcohol Use .... .. ........... .. .... . ................ . .. .. .. ... .......... .. 23 Drug Use ................................................................. 24 Sexual Behaviour ..... . ..... .... .................... ........ .. ............. 25 Risk-Taking and Risk Reduction ....... . ........ . .... .. ......... . . . .... . ...... 27 Sexual history ........................................................... 28 Perceived peer norms ..................................................... 28 Alcohol consumption ... . ... .. ..... .. ............................. . ....... 29 Knowledge about HIV/AIDS ........ .. .................. . ............ .... .. 29 Perception of risk ....... .. .. ... . ......... . ...... ... . . ........ . ... . ....... 30 Unique Subpopulations of College-Age Young Adults ............................. 31 Summary .................................... . ...... .... ... . .. ... ......... 33 IV CHAPTER 3: METHODS ...... .. ....... . .. . .... ........ .. .... ..... . .... ...... 34 Methodology . .......... ...... . .... . .... ... .. ........ . ......... .. . . . ... . .. ... 34 Quantitative Versus Qualitative .. . . .. .... . .. ... . .. ... .. . ... ... . .. .... ......... 34 The Influence of Feminist Methodology ... .. .. . .. .. . .. ... ..... .... .. ..... ... ... 37 A Social Group Unstudied . .... ... . ....... . .... .. . .... .. .. . .. ..... . .... ...... 39 Information and Data Gathering .. . ..... .. . .... . . ... . . .... ... . . . . ..... . ......... . 40 Participant Observation . . ... . .......... . ... . .. . ... .......... . .............. .. 40 Interviews ................................... . . .. . . . . ........... .... ..... . 42 Sampling and Recruiting .... .. .. .... . . ....... . . .... .... . . .. .. . . . ...... .. ... . . . . 43 The Interviews .......... . .. .. .. .... . .. ........ .. . . ....... ........ . .... ... .. . 45 Analysis .......... . ....... . ...... . ....... . .... .. . .... .... ....... ....... . ... . 49 Electronic Communication and This Study . . ... . ... . . . ...... .. . ... ..... . .... .. .... 49 Limitations and Strengths ...................................................... 50 CHAPTER 4: ELEMENTS OF A SUBCULTURE .................................. 55 Diversity ..... . ... ........... .. . .... ... .. .... ................... ....... ...... 56 Stereotypes .......... ... ... ........ .. ...... ... .... ... .......... . .... ... . .. 56 Motivations ............................................................... 58 Break from school ........................................................ 59 Challenge .... . ......... ............ . ... .... .. .... ... .... .... . .... . ... .. 59 Camaraderie .... ... ..... ..... .. .. . .......... .... .. ...... . ...... .. .. .... . 60 Travel ................................................................. 61 Money ................................................................. 62 Social Organization . . .... ....... .... . ... . .... . ..... .. .......... . . . .... ... . . ... 63 Hierarchy ................................................................. 64 Foremen ............................................................... 64 Highballers ........ .. . ... ..... . ... . .. . . . . . ..... . .. ... .. ...... . ...... . .. . 66 Rookies ................................................................ 68 Gender ... .. .. .. ..... ..... . ...... ... ... .. . .. .............. .. .......... .. . . 69 Gender and the issue of respect ... . . .... . .. ...... . . ... ... .... . ... . ... . . . ..... 70 Gender and the issue of harassment ......... . . . .. .... .. ... ........ . . ....... .. 73 Social Activities ....... . . ..... .. .. .... ... .. . . .... . .. . ............. . .... .. .. 76 Alcohol and drug use ... . .. . .. ... ... ..... . . . .. . . .... . . .. .. .. . ... . ...... . .. 77 Sexual behaviour . .... . . .... ..... . ........ .. .. . ... . .. . .. .. ........ .. ...... 78 Going to town .. ... . ...... . ... .. . . . .. . ........ .. .... . . .... ........... . ... 80 Camplife . .. ...... .. ... . ... .. . ... . ..... . .. . ... ... . .. .. ... ... . ........ . .. 80 CHAPTER 5: TREEPLANTING AS RISKY BUSINESS: PHYSICAL HEALTH RISKS ... 86 Physical Health Risks: Lack of Health and Safety Information ......................... 86 Muscular and Joint Injury .. . .. ... .. . ..... .... ......... . . .. . ... ........... .... 87 v Environmental Hazards ...................................................... 87 Pesticide Exposure ......................................................... 88 Insufficient Supply of Water .................................................. 89 Mental and Emotional Health Issues ........................................... 90 Motor Vehicle Risk ............... .... . .. . ... ........... ... ............ .. ... 91 CHAPTER 6: TREEPLANTING AS RISKY BUSINESS: SOCIAL HEALTH RISKS ..... 95 Social Health Risks: Subcultural Context .. . .. . . .. ... .. ...... .................. .... 95 Social Activities as Risk-Taking . ............ ... ..... .......... .......... ..... . 96 Social Determinants ofTreeplanters' Risk-Taking ................................ 96 Intensity: a need for release .. . .... ... .... ... ... . ............ .. ..... .. ... .. 100 Intensity: a need for physical closeness ...................................... 103 Hierarchy ................ ...... .... . . . .... ... .... ...... ... ... . ...... ... 105 Remote setting .......... ... . ................................. ........ .. 108 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION ................................................. 112 Limitations of Present Study and Implications for Future Research ............ . . . ..... 116 Policy Recommendations .................... ..... ... ..... .................... 11 7 Summary .................................................................. 118 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................... 120 APPENDIX 1: GLOSSARY OF TERMS . . ................... ...... .. ... ..... ... 127 APPENDIX 2: DEMOGRAPHICS OF PARTICIPANTS ... ...................... .. 128 APPENDIX 3: SAMPLE OF CONSENT FORM . ... ............. . .. . .... .. ... .... 129 APPENDIX 4: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ...................................... 130 Vl ACKNOWLEDGMENT Acknowledgments are due first and foremost to my thesis supervisor, David Fish, for his support and guidance throughout this research project and my studies at the University of Northern British Columbia. I learned a great deal from his expertise and wisdom, not to mention his idea of treeplanters as an interesting group of study. I gratefully credit him for my decision to study at UNBC and I thank him for the encouragement he has given me to continue studies in health promotion research. Julia Emberley and Barbara Berringer, since I began my programme of study at UNBC, have been a valued source of encouragement, guidance, support, and solidarity, and I thank them very much for their kindness and friendship . For love and friendship and memorable times in Prince George, I gratefully acknowledge Johanna Ens, Olive Godwin, and especially Grayson Lloyd. Gray and Kai were my number one supporters/distractors during my thesis writing and I thank them dearly for their companionship and support. Thank you to my parents for love and support. Many thanks also to Catherine Fester for expert technical assistance and to Lois Lochhead for her friendship and hospitality. This research was made possible in part by the financial support of the British Columbia Health Research Foundation through a Studentship award. I gratefully acknowledge their assistance. Finally, thank you very much to the many treeplanters who shared their stories and experiences with me and allowed this thesis idea to become such an interesting and rewarding project. Vll CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION British Columbia' s 650 million dollar forestry industry relies heavily upon reforestation activity to allow for the continual harvest of trees (Ministry of Forests [MOF], 1994). Reforestation workers, colloquially known as treeplanters, are hired to manually plant tree seedlings for forestry companies in order to fulfill the legal requirement of reforestation of logged areas. During the ten year period, 1986 to 1995, trees annually planted in B.C. increased from 112 million to 250 million (MOF, 1995a) requiring a labour force expansion of over 50% (see Smith, 1987 for 1986 statistics). In 1995, approximately 11,000 young men and women from across Canada worked as treeplanters in British Columbia (D. Brinkman, personal communication, April 3, 1996). The nature of the treeplanting business as a seasonal, high-income opportunity for employment attracts approximately 3,000 workers alone to Prince George, B.C., where much of the provincial reforestation and sil viculture activity is coordinated. Typically, these treeplanters live and work in treeplanting campsites located in remote areas surrounding Prince George, traveling to the city for recreation on their .. days off'. T reeplanters are paid according to the number of trees they plant, that is, on a piece work basis, with the rate depending on the terrain and competition for reforestation contracts (Canada Employment Centre, 1992). Workers are not paid for camp set up and take down, travel time, camp chores, nor time lost due to poor weather or unforeseen work delays (Trites, Robinson, and Banister, 1993). Furthermore, in addition to being expected to possess physical fitness, workers are required to provide their own planting gear and camping equipment and to pay a daily fee to the reforestation company for meals and other expenses, a fee that ranges from 18 to 32 dollars (Bruin, 1996; Canada I Employment Centre, 1992; B. Loster, personal communication, July 7, 1996). Treeplanting has traditionally attracted university or college students because it offers employment in the summer months ("A dirty job ... but someone has to do it", 1996; Jahn, 1996; Tsuga, 1996). Nevertheless, its unique characteristics of employment model a "love-hate relationship" (Richard, 1989). On the one hand, it is seen an opportunity to make a great deal of money while, on the other, it is acknowledged that long work hours in sometimes appalling physical conditions are required. Insights into the attractions and challenges of the treeplanting job are provided by various British Columbia radio and print media reports. For example, a treeplanter interviewed on CBC Prince George ' s "Daybreak" radio program in 1992 commented: You can make big money if you plant properly. I made 350 dollars 2 days ago and I made 100 dollars yesterday because I was replanting my stuff I made, when I made the big money. And for an experienced planter and in the first two months of spring planting you make anywhere from 8 to 10 to 12 thousand bucks I guess. That' s clear. (Provost, 1992) Experienced treeplanters can maintain very high planting production, apparently motivated to make the most of a high-income opportunity: To be a highballer.. .like the best planters in the camp are called highballers, you have to basically have an attitude that says, you know, you don't want to be clean, you don't want to, you don't care if you eat lunch, you don't care ifyou're starving, you don't care if it's raining, you just kind of . .. The best planter I knew who planted the last two years was, he didn't bring rain gear out and he didn't eat lunch. He'd go swimming when it was snowing outside, and he ' s just a psycho and he made like incredible amounts of money, about 12 thousand bucks in 2 months or something. (Provost, 1992) The trade off for a lucrative return is the requirement that treeplanters work long and hard despite the tough physical conditions: The time .... here in the bush is no picnic. The first few weeks are cold and wet. Sometimes it snows. In summer the sun bums your flesh, swarms of mosquitos and black flies eat you alive, your fingers are cut to shreds from shoving seedlings into the rocky soil. That' s apart from the back breaking work. You go through this 12 hours everyday ... (Schwabe, 1992) 2 Similar sentiments were expressed by another treeplanter who poetically described his feelings toward reforestation employment in a local treeplanting trade magazine, Screef: Go directly to hell, Do not pass the tree stash, without bagging up. Do not collect full payment. Donate your mind to silviculture. Run your body to the ground. Take orders from slave drivers. Become paranoid about every tree. Become obsessed with money. Become a vegetable on your one day off. Work in heat, rain, snow, and sleet. Crawl and hack through blasted slash. Knife your co-workers in the back. Risk life and limb on crummy roads. Work up to 14 hours a day including travel. Your reward at day's end? A cold shower... Say this is your last season, and die laughing. (Grey, 1989, p. 21) Living and working on a treeplanting crew with other young people sharing similar experiences reportedly promotes a sense of collectivity: "They ' re out there together in the bush, you're all going through the same hell, you all ache, and at night you all get together at the camp and party" (Schwabe, 1992). This sense of collectivity provided consolation to the following treeplanter who preferred to remember the good times rather than the bad times: We had a good camp, made a lot of good friends I'm still friends with and we just had a lot of nights where we 'd sit around, we made a custom firepit that had like seats and benches made out of dirt and we'd sit around the fire pit and play guitar and drinks lots of beer. ..our crew is called "Turnbull' s Ultimate Shotgun Planters". We 'd all have to stand up and do this shotgun and then sit down and toss a beer over your shoulder and the next guy would try to 3 perfect it and we drank about I don' t know how many cases of beer trying to get shotguns down, down right that night. It' s good times like that that you remember, like with all the boys. (Provost, 1992) One may wonder why treeplanters continue to return to a job that requires such commitment and tolerance and was rated the "most physically demanding job" by the Worker' s Compensation Board ("The world ofthe treeplanter", 1991 , p. 46). Some clues are offered by the following excerpt from a Screef editorial : (Treeplanters) submit to it as a defence against even more brutal and monotonous forms of labour, or as a means of manoeuvering toward a more comfortable economic niche, or some combination of these, but nowhere is it considered to be an activity to be pursued for its own sake. We ' ll do it for as long as we have to, no longer. ("World domination through silviculture", 1988, p. 30) Markus Schwabe, in a conclusion to his 1992 series of treeplanter interviews for CBC Radio Prince George, described the attraction by one of his interviewees to the business: (He) slogs through days, parties at night. And he wakes up every morning thinking about the money. But it's the camaraderie and camplife that keep him going. In the words of the interviewee himself: The old traditional saying: Live to plant, plant to live. (Provost, 1992) My Personal Experience and This Study My familiarity with treeplanting began while an undergraduate on B.C.' s Vancouver Island when, at the end of each school year, I witnessed the spring migration of numerous classmates and friends "up north" in pursuit of respite, adventure, and hard-earned money. The mystery and romance attached to the treeplanting "lifestyle" during their summer tenures in the "bush" was a source of fascination and curiosity to me. 4 Shortly after my arrival in Prince George, I learned that treeplanters make a considerable impact on the community: It's that time of year again ... nothing as aptly represents spring in the Prince George area like the daily influx of treeplanters, that brave and hardy breed of largely university students intent on earning another year' s tuition in one summer ("A dirty job ... but someone has to do it", 1996) Treeplanters' annual descent upon the city is met with both anticipation and suspicion. While treeplanters generate considerable income for local restaurants, hotels, and stores, they maintain a reputation for excessive "partying", violence when drunk, and conflict with the local population. Further, the treeplanters ' mystique that I was familiar with in the South became more apparent following my move up north where they are widely regarded as a "breed of their own" and as representing a "distinct culture" ("Endure hypothermia, sunburn, and bears, for the love of money", 1994). Treeplanters constitute a "subculture" based on their community maintaining distinctive cultural elements that set them apart from the broader population (see Teevan, 1982). Treeplanting subculture is characterized by hard work and even harder partying. Life in the bush performing strenuous, albeit well-paying, work requires character and determination as well as membership in a reportedly close knit social group. Despite treeplanters ' key role in maintenance of forestry activity in British Columbia, and recognition of treeplanting as grueling and unglamourous work, these workers are often regarded negatively by the broader community. Stereotypes exist that describe treeplanters as "rowdy", "out of control", and "insolent". Anecdotal reports of the behaviour of treeplanters during their time off work are particularly significant in revealing community perceptions. Treeplanters are held responsible by the "locals" for bar fights , public 5 drunkenness and disturbances, property damage, and disrespect toward citizens during their time in Prince George. It is perceived that treeplanters' time spent in the remote areas in which their camps are located, in addition to their days off in the city, is characterized by heavy alcohol and drug use and sexual promiscuity. The job is reportedly a "break" from regular life and where greater acceptance of usually unacceptable behaviour is tolerated. It is described as an environment where little or no social supervision exists, thus providing an opportunity for motivated young people to "let loose and have fun". Needless to say, the reputation that treeplanters held among the broader community intrigued me. Personally, I had a great deal of respect for the hard work and living conditions they endured and I recognized the importance of their work to the future of the forest. However, the anecdotally shared stories and experiences of treeplanting lifestyle, particularly the widespread accounts of risky social behaviour, heightened my level of curiosity. As I began my inquiry it became obvious that, despite these anecdotal reports and apparently widely held stereotypes, little research had been conducted regarding this unique group of workers. I was motivated to begin my own study. Community Health and This Study Within the context of community health, my interest in treeplanters stemmed from the recognition that health and health behaviour result from complex and interrelated influences. The determinants of such behaviour include a variety of factors that bear little predictive value or causal relationship (Health and Welfare Canada, 1986). Health is no longer defined as the absence of disease or a state that is determined by the trappings and technology ofthe health care system (Hayes et al. , 1994), but rather as the outcome of varied and interrelated factors such as the physical environment, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, age, gender, geography, cultural expectations, social norms and networks, and 6 the social systems in which these variables are embedded. Hence, the study of the determinants of health behaviour and health risk behaviour is central to the development of health promotion activity that aims to "enable people to increase control over, and to improve, their health" (Rootman, 1993, p. 4). Health promotion requires the investigation of the determinants of health behaviour and risk behaviour for two reasons. First, to ascertain to whom the health promotion program should be addressed. Secondly, to establish the socially and culturally appropriate content of the program (Health and Welfare Canada, 1986). While this may suggest that research should seek to identify groups to be targeted for health promotion or education, current health promotion perspectives have abolished the traditional focus on "risk groups" in favour of a less stigmatizing, more integrated focus on "risk behaviours". Research, then, should highlight the broader context ofhealth behaviour that requires social, community, and structural change rather than individual responsibility and determinism. Health promotion research itself is undergoing evolution and change. Current debates focus on epistemological and methodological issues, specifically the relative use and value of qualitative compared to quantitative methods, and on the potential for integrating both methodologies. Traditionally, health promotion research has operated within a positivist paradigm, relying on quantitative epidemiologic data to identify the social determinants of health and health behaviour. More recent contributions to the debate have highlighted the need for a critical and interpretative research stance to take the "new public health" into the 20th century (Baum, 1994; Eakin and Maclean, 1992; Poland, 1992). Further, there has been a call for the use of sociological theory to inform a new health promotion research methodology (Poland, 1992). These perspectives have 7 advocated the use of qualitative methods in the development of a critical health promotion, methods that would best serve the goal of determining the complex factors influencing health and risk behaviour. Qualitative methodologies have guided the development and accomplishment of this research process. Such methodologies are appropriate because little is known about treeplanters ' health and risk behaviour. In addition, the stereotypes commonly held about their living and working environments suggest that a broad and complex group of influences are key, regardless of the validity of the stereotypes. In fact, the anecdotal reports and community perceptions indicate the significance of the social context of treeplanting to health behaviour and health outcomes. This context encompasses: the close knit relations among treeplanters, the experience and attraction of camaraderie, the social significance and the extent of the partying, the grueling nature of the physical work, the labeling of workers based on level of planting production, the "love-hate" relationship planters have with their jobs, the domination of the work force by university students, and the social interaction among workers from across Canada. In this exploratory study oftreeplanters' behaviour and attitudes related to health risk-taking, qualitative methods were chosen explicitly to allow treeplanters to speak for themselves. Their picture of their subculture can then be viewed in light of the common stereotypes regarding their social behaviour that involve risks to their health. Their insights will allow me to understand their attitudes and behaviour and to identify their key concerns with respect to health. I hope that this research will lead to further studies of treeplanters that will provide definitive guidelines to protect and promote their health, without reinforcing or promulgating the current stereotypes of treeplanters in this community. 8 Chapter 2 begins with an overview of the place of silviculture in British Columbia' s forestry industry, the place of treeplanters within its labour force, and a review of a variety of literature specific to reforestation workers and treeplanting. A review of current literature regarding health and risk behaviour among college and university students follows to place the behaviour of the treeplanters in a comparative context. Chapter 3 describes the influences that guided my choice of methods to fulfil my objectives in this study and specifies the data collection and analysis. The results are presented in Chapters 4, 5, and 6. In these chapters, data gleaned from the interviews is presented and the data is analyzed for themes and patterns. Chapter 7 concludes by summarizing key findings of this study, drawing links between the health promotion literature and the results of this study, revisiting the call for critical and interpretative perspectives in health promotion research, and discussing the implications of this study for future research and policy development. 9 CHAPTER2 LITERATURE REVIEW Forestry in British Columbia is the resource industry on which a large part of the province's economy depends. Hence, reforestation of logged areas is a crucial activity essential for the maintenance of the forest and continual harvest of trees. Despite the scale and economic significance of reforestation involving a substantial labour force of treeplanters, little research has been undertaken on the occupation of treeplanting itself. During my literature search, I identified some material that discussed health and safety aspects of treeplanting from the perspective of both treeplanters and worker advocacy groups, although this was largely in government documents and industry-related magazines and literature. This material, however, did not take into account the social context of treeplanting as a contributing factor to the potential for health and safety issues. In addition, a selective review of health risk-related literature was undertaken to place the findings of this project in context. Specifically, in order to compare the unique group oftreeplanters and young adults of comparable age and backgrounds, current knowledge and research regarding health risk-taking among college-age young adults was reviewed. Since anecdotal reports and treeplanting company information indicated that the majority of treeplanters were college or university students (Tsuga, 1996; see also Jahn, 1996), a review of risk-taking behaviour among North American college-age students was justified. This chapter will begin by discussing the place of silviculture in B.C. ' s forestry industry. With respect to the treeplanters themselves, job descriptions, working conditions, occupational characteristics, worker advocacy, and identified health and safety risks will be covered. Following the treeplanter-related literature, the review of current literature regarding health 10 and risk behaviour among college and university students will be presented. Levels of alcohol, drug, and sexual behaviour are highlighted, as well as factors associated with young adults' risk-taking in these domains. Silviculture in British Columbia Silviculture is the "science and art of cultivating the forest" (Turner, 1987, p. 31 ) and its labour force includes those employed in forest renewal, site preparation, stand tending, or nursery operations (Rugo, 1991). Forest renewal workers, colloquially known as treeplanters, are key workers in the forestry industry' s effort to maintain the forest to ensure a continuous harvest of trees. The annual tree plantings in British Columbia have doubled over the last ten years to reach 250 million in 1994-95, with plantings expected to remain at this level for years to come (P. Rehsler, personal communication, April 19, 1996). The forest renewal labour force has increased dramatically from 7,000 British Columbia planters employed in 1986 (Smith, 1987) to approximately 11 ,000 treeplanters employed in 1995 (D. Brinkman, personal communication, April 3, 1996). Reforestation work is currently coordinated by both the B.C. Ministry of Forests (MOF) and the forestry industry but the actual treep1anting is handled by private contractors through a competitive bidding system. The contractors hire treeplanters during the planting seasons which extend from late Spring to early Fall. The average treeplanting season has been reported as twelve weeks (Fraser and Howard, 1987), In the Central Interior, where the present study was conducted, most of the active reforestation takes place in a period of 8 to 10 weeks during late April to July of each year. The B.C. Ministry of Education, Skills and Training (MOEST) has designated silviculture 11 as an industry with "much faster growth than average" for job prospects in British Columbia (MOEST, personal communication, April8 , 1996). Further, the recent development ofthe Forest Practices Code, a code that strictly regulates reforestation of harvested areas, means that silviculture is a burgeoning industry that will sustain labour force needs over the long term (P. Rehsler, personal communication, April19, 1996; see also MOF, 1995b). Additionally, the reality oftreeplanting as a manual task with limited potential for technological advance suggests " .. .in a very literal sense .. . the future of the B.C. forest industry is in the hands of the treeplanters" (Smith, 1987, p. 16). Review ofTreeplanter-Related Literature The treeplanter-related literature was derived largely from government documents, reforestation company recruitment material, the monthly magazine of a silvicultural contractors' association, and a sporadically published magazine of the now defunct reforestation workers' association. Although these sources yielded limited information regarding the health risks oftreeplanting specifically, their contents are central to understanding the work involved with treeplanting, the characteristics of treeplanters, and the potential for health and safety problems. The Work ofTreeplanting Treeplanting work is described as "carrying seedlings to a planting site, making a hole using a mattock or shovel, placing seedlings in the hole and tamping soil around it" (Canada Employment Centre, 1992, p. 1). Wages are paid as piece work, based on the number oftrees that are planted. The Treeplanters Handbook asserts that there is potential for treeplanters to attain an exceptional financial return for their labours if they are willing to work hard and maintain a positive attitude during the learning period (Turner, 1987). The amount of money a treeplanter can make depends largely on his or her level of experience. During a typically 5.0 day planting season, first time 12 planters average $6,300, with a few reaching as high as $10,000. Experienced planters average $9,300 (Bruin, 1996; Tsuga, 1996). One treeplanting company reported that their best planter in 1995 grossed $12,500 although its best planter in the last three years reached $17,000 (Bruin, 1996). Gross income includes bonuses that are paid on top of the piece rate to provide a financial incentive to strive for high quality production. Bruin Reforestation (1996) recently introduced a "performance and loyalty based incentive program" enabling many of their planters to augment their regular wages and recover camp costs that typically deduct 18 to 25 dollars per day from their paycheques (p. 7). In order to achieve these figures a treeplanter works an average of7.8 to 10.5 hours a day, with reports of 12 hours days not uncommon, six days a week (Banister, Robinson, and Trite, 1990; Bruin, 1996; Fraser and Howard, 1987; Rugo, 1991 ; Smith, 1987; Tsuga, 1996). The number of seedlings that treeplanters plant is estimated as 1,000 to 3,000 seedlings per day (Bruin, 1996; Tsuga, 1996; Turner, 1991 ), while specific studies reported ranges of 870 to 1400 trees per day (Fraser and Howard, 1987; Smith, 1987). Requirements for Treeplanters High levels oftreeplanting production and income are not easily achieved. Turner (1987) described treeplanting as: A job for people with positive youthful attitudes. A treeplanter must be healthy, hard working, conscientious, self motivated, capable of making continuous judgement decisions and able to live and camp outdoors even in in (sic) adverse conditions. This is not a job for most people as it demands a rare combination of physical, mental and emotional capabilities. (p.1-2) The demanding job requirements are reinforced by the contracting companies in their recruitment material. For example, Tsuga Forestry (1996) states that treeplanters are expected to maintain a high 13 level of physical fitness and mental determination, to maintain high production rates with "quality" planting, to work every day regardless of weather conditions, and to live cooperatively in a group with 3 5 to 40 other people in remote camps. Bruin Reforestation ( 1996) emphasizes the maintenance of strict quality standards, stating that statistics are maintained for each worker and that " ... substandard planting was remunerated on a sliding scale according to actual quality achieved" (p. 3). This reforestation company also requires its planters to " ... motivate themselves and be willing and eager to work at their most productive level at all times, taking and following instructions from their supervisors, while living cooperatively in a group situation" (p. 3). Physical fitness, mental determination, motivation, and adaptation to group living appear to be key requirements of any potential treeplanter: To merely survive as a treeplanter takes more personal fortitude than most people are willing to exhibit. To really succeed requires skills, ability, and a certain attitude as well. Planters must be willing to make sacrifices and endure hardships to reach goals. They must be willing and eager to learn at every phase and able to be happy but not satisfied with the level they have achieved. Planters must have the natural ability to rise above circumstances rather than succumb to substantial obstacles. It' s easy to become exhausted and depressed, but to succeed at treeplanting, individuals must maintain an even mental/emotional keel and convince their bodies there is energy somewhere in the reserve. (Bruin, 1996, p. 3-4) Smith has identified specific skills required to withstand the considerable performance demands, demands that underscore " . .. the point that treeplanting work should be treated with respect and dignity" (p. 12). He noted that physical strength is required for carrying heavy (average weight, 14.5 kg) tree bags along steep slopes. Stamina is required to perform the repetitive tasks of planting hundreds of times each day. Perceptual skills are required to select appropriate planting spots, maintain proper tree spacing, and select the appropriate tree for the conditions during mixed stock planting. Motor skills are required for coordinating the planting movements in one smooth, efficient 14 motion. Psychological commitment is needed to cope with the repetitive monotony, the remote location and living conditions, and often adverse weather conditions (Smith, 1987). Many reforestation companies market treeplanting as an excellent summer job for students due to the seasonal time frame and earning potential. Contractors are known to recruit for workers exclusively at student employment centres and Tsuga (1996) claims 95% of its planters are university or college students. One study has shown that 70% of planters were under 30 years of age and 37% were students, 25% ofwhom had earned at least one university degree (Fraser and Howard, 1987). Ruga (1991 ), in a similar study in Ontario, found 90% of treeplanters surveyed were between the ages of 15 and 34, and 38% had completed college or university. The skills and training possessed by treeplanters appear to represent a diverse range of experience. Thirty-three percent to 45% reported no prior experience with treeplanting (Fraser and Howard, 1987; Ruga , 1991 ). Health and Safety Concerns The literature focuses on the occupational hazards and health outcomes associated with treeplanting. In this section, concerns with respect to fatalities, injuries, sickness, environmental pollution, and psychological "burnout" are addressed. Fatalities. According to Brinkman (1995b ), vehicle accidents and bears pose the two greatest threats for fatalities. Vehicle accidents using all-terrain vehicles (ATV s) and trucks have caused more fatalities than any other aspect of treeplanting. In 1991 there were 11 vehicle-related deaths in Western Canada (Brinkman, 1995b; see also "People before trees", 1988). In June of 1990, eight treeplanters were involved in an accident near Prince George that killed four ("Four missing in washouts and 15 mudslides", 1990). Earlier that spring, 7 of 12 occupants of a van on its way to northern B.C. were killed when the sleeping driver lost control of the vehicle (Johnston, 1990; "Seven die in van crash", 1990). Two more treeplanters were killed and several others seriously injured in two other vehicle accidents in 1994 and 1995 in northern B.C. (Parker, 1995). Over the years, several treeplanters had been mauled by bears, including deaths in each of 1986 and 1988 and two serious attacks in 1990 and 1995 (Brinkman, 1995b; Johnston, 1990). Brinkman expects this safety issue to intensify with increasing numbers of treeplanting camps covering more wildlife space and limited response from wildlife officers to remedy potential bear problems. Injuries. Eighty-eight percent oftreeplanters had reportedly suffered an injury during their current planting season and 9 out of 10 planters were claimed to "likely suffer a work-related injury at some point" (Smith, 1987, p. 13). Hand or finger, wrist, back, upper leg, and knee were the top six sites for reported injuries (Brinkman, 1995b). Smith argued that the exertions required, the load bearing, and the repetitive movements contributed to the frequency of musculoskeletal injuries, while the hazards ofthe planting environment contributed to falls, contusions, and lacerations. The common injuries that arise during the planting season are argued to be largely preventable. Muscle, ligament, and joint injuries resulting from frequent falls, repetitive strain, twists, wrenching, and fatigue while treeplanting can be prevented. For example, additional ergonomic research needs to be conducted so that the design and use of reforestation tools can be improved to reduce repetitive strain. Slips, falls, and pokes occur commonly due to poor footwear and poor training. Snags that remain after logging are responsible for minor problems and have the 16 potential to create serious problems (Brinkman, 1995b). Snags can, however, be removed as a risk by careful cleaning of logging sites. Sickness and stomach disorders. Stomach disorders are reported as a frequent illness among treeplanters (Brinkman, 1995b). Smith has cited provincial health officials as identifying the specific diseases as giardiasis, salmonella and campylobacter, although undoubtedly many other agents are also involved. These problems were attributed to a lack of clean drinking water, inadequate food refrigeration and food handling, unsanitary toilet facilities, tents with dirt floors, and significant fly infestations (Smith, 1987). Clearly, many of these illnesses could be prevented by the development and implementation of standards governing food handling, provision of safe water, and sanitary toilet conditions and camp sites. Environmental pollutants. It is believed that visible and invisible irritants encompassing a wide variety of environmental agents, most notably pesticides, contribute to a potential for allergies, eye infections and possible long term effects such as cancer, emphysema and gene damage (Brinkman, 1995b). Smith (1987) also noted that dust and chemical exposures created problems with mucus membrane irritation (see also Banister, Robinson, and Trite, 1990). Burnout. In addition to the risk of injury associated with strenuous conditions of treeplanting, the energy expenditure required contributes to a potential for chronic fatigue, stress and "burnout" (Banister, Robinson, and Trite, 1990; Smith, 1987). Burnout has been defined as "increased fatigue, apathy, non-specific illness leading to an overall disinclination to continue working and increasing accident 17 proneness" (Banister, Robinson, and Trite, 1990, p. 9). This condition was also supported by Smith's findings of back problems among older planters and irregular menstruation in over half the female subjects: Also suggestive are the reported prevalence of nontobacco smoking, the prevalence of depression among female planters and the link between depression and alcohol use ( p. 15) Chronic fatigue and stress associated with the treeplanting job undoubtedly contribute to labour instability. Other factors that contribute to labour instability include characteristics of the environment such as working in the rain, extreme temperatures, insect bites, and the monotonous nature of the work (Rugo, 1991 ). Rugo reported that the remoteness ( 10% ), wages (9% ), and work hours (8%) were not significant concerns among his sample of treeplanters. Worker Advocacy Two organizations have had an interest in, and influence on, the well-being of treeplanters. The Pacific Reforestation Workers ' Association (PR WA) was established with a mandate to promote " ... stability within the B.C. silviculture contracting industry and (improve) working conditions and professional opportunities for silviculture workers" ("What is the PR WA?", 1990). It published a magazine, Screef. between 1987 and 1992 as part ofthat mandate. Much ofthe material published in Screef was treeplanter-written and presented in regular columns such as "Sound Off' and "Out of the Bush". It represented a medium for treeplanters to address their concerns and provide advice to other treeplanters in a forum of their own. For example, one treeplanter described the advantages to attaining peak physical fitness before commencing " ... very likely the hardest work you ever do" (Pink 1988, p. 17). He advised that " ... climbing up mountains and bending over 10 to 12 hours a day with 40 pounds of trees strapped 18 around your waist" was best accomplished by taking seriously the physical demands involved and maintaining physical fitness during the work season (Pink, 1988, p. 17). Many Screef stories dealt with concern over exposure to pesticides used on tree seedlings. Richard (1989) described his experience with " ... an intense headache, followed by muscular cramps all over my body" that also occurred among members of his crew, purportedly due to pesticide exposure (p. 7). With increased use of pesticides and fungicides and the Ministry of Forests ' refusal ofPRWA' s 1988 request to place warnings on boxes containing the tree seedlings ("Editorial note", 1989), treeplanters were becoming concerned about their rights to protection from known hazards. All treeplanters were called upon to become informed about the risks of pesticide exposure, to take care when handling treated seedlings, and to report all unspecified flu-like conditions to their supervisor. Screef magazine also provided an opportunity for treeplanters to react to popular misconceptions of their work. For example, a forestry industry council had produced advertisements that showed reforestation workers as "fresh-scrubbed young planters romping across grassy meadows, all pink and beaming, and doing it with joy" (Cranston, 1989 p. 8). Cranston objected to the claim that success in effective forest management was due to the efforts of politicians and forestry industry executives: But then they have the balls to say "we ' re planting millions of trees", and that' s a crock of shit because bureaucrats and admen don't plant trees; treeplanters plant trees. The people who are so enthusiastic about "reforestation" - economists, politicians, liberals -are generally not the ones to be seen sweating their guts out in the snarb (p. 8). He went on to criticize the lack of employment standards that led to irregular payment for work, poor working conditions, and a lack of job security. Such exploitation of treeplanters as "the 19 flunkies of the forest industry" provides no protection for the workers: How many (unpaid) three-hour joyrides have you taken on the way to work in the back of overloaded crummies, without seat belts or radios, as the driver plays chicken with loaded logging trucks? (p. 8) The Western Silvicultural Contractors' Association (WSCA) is a voluntary organization of silvicultural contractors whose mandate involves advocacy, coordination, and regulation of the industry. It has had some success in promoting health and safety concerns for treeplanters. The WSCA's Past President, Dirk Brinkman, described the long standing struggle with the Ministry of Forests to establish consistent silviculture camp standards (D. Brinkman, personal communication, April 3, 1996). The struggle began in 1986, following an epidemic of giardiasis ("beaver fever"), when the Ministry ofF orests worked with the WSCA, the PRWA, and the Ministry of Health to develop sanitary and safety standards for silviculture camps, the monitoring of which fell under the Ministry ofForests' jurisdiction. In 1987, an act was passed in the B.C. legislature that placed the responsibility for reforestation of harvested areas on the forestry companies rather than on the Ministry. This privatization of the industry resulted in difficulties in enforcement and regulation of the camp standards (Brinkman, 1995a; D. Brinkman, personal communication, April 3, 1996; Silviculture Subcommittee, 1993). In fact, only planting contracts administered by the Ministry of Forests, currently representing approximately 20% of reforestation in B.C., are subject to compliance with the 1986 camp standards (D. Brinkman, personal communication, April3 , 1996; P. Rehsler, personal communication, Aprill9, 1996). The remaining 80% of reforestation contracts are administered by private companies which do not come under Ministry jurisdiction and are not required by law to adopt the camp standards. 20 In 1992, the WSCA turned to the Workers ' Compensation Board (WCB) to assist it in the development of mandatory, province-wide camp standards. A Silviculture Subcommittee was formed and it produced a report outlining regulations for accommodation, sanitary, and safety conditions in and around silviculture camps for the protection of workers ' health and well-being (WCB, 1993 ). The report of the subcommittee was published in the Spring of 1993 and its recommendations were expected to be implemented by the Worker' s Compensation Board within as little as six weeks (Silviculture Subcommittee, 1993). Four years later, this set of regulations has still not been adopted by the WCB and there are no mandatory regulations in place for all silviculture camps (D. Brinkman, personal communication, April 4, 1996). Thus, ten years after Smith (1987) described treeplanting as employing "no standards governing working conditions, wage rates, and benefits" (p. 12), little has changed. Work by the WSCA and the PRWA to create changes in working conditions to protect health and safety of treeplanters has now stalled. Currently, most silviculture camps maintain work and camp conditions that pose significant health and safety risk to treeplanters (D. Brinkman, personal communication, April 4, 1996). Current Industry Health Standards It seems clear that proper education and regulation of work standards would encourage the maintenance of safety practices, promote the health and well-being of treeplanters, and enhance the stability of the work force (Brinkman, 1995b; D. Brinkman, personal communication, April4, 1996). The Ministry of Fcrests has continued its work to highlight health and safety issues in the silviculture industry despite its lack of legal mandate to regulate silviculture camp standards. In 1995 the B.C. Silviculture Practices Branch and the Ministry of Forests published a booklet, Minimum Safetv Guidelines for Tree Planters (MOF Silviculture Practices Branch, 1995). This 21 guide targeted British Columbia treeplanters and provided information for workers regarding the conditions they can expect, their rights and responsibilities for safety and health, and their employers ' responsibilities for safety and health during their planting tenures. Review of Health Risk-Related Literature: College Students There is an abundance of research that explores the alcohol, drug, and sexual activities of college and university students. The new-found freedom and autonomy of college life and the freedom from parental and moral supervision may result in experimentation, exploration, and adjustment, all of which have implications for health risk-taking behaviour. This transition from adolescence to adulthood is clearly of interest to researchers, particularly because risk-taking may cross many "domains" and establish behaviour patterns for the future (Nezlek, Pilkington, and Bilbro, 1994; Traeen and Lewin, 1992). Of particular concern have been sexual, alcohol, and drug-related risk behaviours that may have immediate and future health consequences. Such behaviours contribute to the potential for assault and aggressive behaviour, social and psychological problems, and unplanned and unsafe sex (Wechsler. Dowdall, Davenport, and Castillo, 1995). Further, alcohol and drug use is associated with homicide, suicide, and accidents (mostly vehicular) and accounts for 85% of mortality among teenagers in the U.S. (Schneider and Morris, 1991). With regard to sexual behaviour, the prevalence of AIDS among 20 to 29 year olds, although not well documented, is undoubtedly high enough to place generations at risk (King et al., 1988). The study of college-age students, therefore, is particularly relevant because they represent a group of young people becoming sexually active, starting to experiment with drugs and alcohol, becoming more assertive with their freedom, and taking more health risks. 22 Alcohol Use King et al. ( 1988) reported that, among Canadian college students, 15% drank two or three times per week, with 57% of students consuming more than three drinks at one time. Gender differences were reported by King et al. for weekly use and heavy episodes of drinking. Forty-eight percent of males and 28% of females consumed alcohol regularly, while 38% of males and 18% of females consumed five or more drinks at one time. Carroll and Carroll ( 1995) reported that, during the previous 12 month period, 66% of males and 75% of females "got drunk" and 31% of men and 27% of females had awoken "from a party and not remembered anything" (p. 725). Desiderata and Crawford (1995) reported that 89.9% oftheir sample consumed alcohol and 56.1% ofmales and 40.8% offemales were "heavy" drinkers, defined as five or more drinks at one time (p. 59). Wechsler, Dowdall, Davenport, and Castillo (1995) defined the consumption of five or more drinks for males and four or more drinks per episode for females, as "binge drinking". Pointing to the "pervasiveness of binge drinking in the college experience", they described hinging as the primary public health hazard and source of avoidable morbidity and mortality among American college students. Fifty percent of males and 39% of females had binged at least once in the previous two weeks; one-fifth reported hinging three or more times during that time period; and of those who had binged three or more times and only 22% of males and only 8% of females described themselves as "heavy or problem drinkers" (Weschler, Dowdall, Davenport, and Rimm, 1995, p. 984). Correlates of college student binge drinking include: race, gender, residence in a fraternity or sorority, and engagement in other risk-taking activities including multiple sexual partners and smoking cigarettes. Condom use was not found to be predictive of binge drinking (Weschler, Dowdall, Davenport, and Castillo, 1995). 23 Jones, Harel, and Levinson (1993) investigated living arrangements, knowledge of health risks, and stress as determinants of alcohol-related risk behaviour. They found that knowledge of risks associated with alcohol use was significantly correlated with alcohol risk reduction behaviour. However, alcohol consumption was not correlated with level of stress and drinking was seen as a social activity rather than a coping mechanism. Indeed, drinking has been shown to be an encouraged social behaviour within the college or university setting where group norms have a significant impact on individuals' choices (Jones, Harel, and Levinson, 1993; Lo and Globetti, 1993 ; Nezlek, Pilkington, and Bilbro, 1994). Perkins and Berkowitz ( 1986) had earlier reported that the influence of peer norms may result from perceptions rather than actual attitudes suggesting that college students actually have moderate attitudes regarding drinking but may "misinterpret the normative values of their environment" (p. 970). Drug Use Schneider and Morris ( 1991) reported 27% of students had used marijuana and 4% had used cocaine at least once in the previous year, with no significant gender differences. Campbell and Svenson (1992) stated that marijuana was the most frequently reported drug of choice among their sample, with a significant gender difference. Among college students under 22 years of age, 23 .9% of males and 12.6% of females had used marijuana in the past year and, among students over 22 years of age, 35.1 % of males and 15.3% offemales reported marijuana use in the last year (p. 1040). According to King et al. (1988), 27% of college and university students sampled had used marijuana. A significantly higher percentage of males used drugs compared to females and males were consistently "more frequent and heavier users" (p. 31 ; see also MacDonald et al. , 1990). 24 Sexual Behaviour A number of studies have investigated the extent of sexual risk-taking among college students and determined factors, including perceived risk and vulnerability, correlated with this risk behaviour. Sexual risk-taking includes: casual sex (engaging in sex with a partner who is either anonymous or only somewhat known, or to whom no commitment is made); engaging in sex with multiple partners; and unprotected sex (usually denoting no condom use). Variables related to risk reduction include: condom use, knowledge ofSTDs/HIV and their transmission, and limiting casual sex and/or multiple partners. Young, sexually active students constitute a population that is potentially at risk for sexually transmitted diseases due to their "sexual and drug activities" (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988). In 1988 in Canada, young Canadian females (ages 15 to 19) had the highest reported rate of gonorrhea (357.5 per 100,000) and, among sexually active adolescents and university students, reported chlamydia} infection rates were 5 to 20% (MacDonald et al. , 1990). Although the rate of HIV infection among sexually active heterosexuals has been difficult to measure (King et al., 1988), a sexually active college and university population would appear to be at increased risk of transmission of the virus. Additionally, the presence ofSTDs has been shown to increase risk of acquiring HIV when exposed to the virus (King et al., 1988). A ten year study of premarital sex among American college students showed a significant decrease in age at first sexual experience, significant increases in premarital sex, and in the number of partners since 1970 (Earle and Perricone, 1986). Among more recent research findings, the percentage of sampled college students that were sexually active ranged from 66 to 91% (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988; Carroll and Carroll, 1995; Desiderata, 1995). Desiderata ( 1995) reported that, 25 in the previous 11 week period, 66% of her subjects were sexually active and 37% had had more than one sexual partner during that time. Other recent research reported that the average age at first intercourse is 17 (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988; Poppen, 1995; Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992). The average number of lifetime partners of college students (average age = 20 years) have been variously reported as 7 to 8 (Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992), 6.6 for males and 4.4 for females (Poppen, 1995), and 2 per year (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988). Simkins (1995) reported that, among his sample of college students, the number of sexual partners in the previous three years ranged from 1 to 100 with an average of 4.3. Thirty-one percent had had multiple partners. Based on their research investigating sexual risk-taking among college students, Baldwin and Baldwin ( 1988) predicted that prior to marriage, college students could "easily accumulate 15 to 20 partners" (p.188). Increasing incidence of casual sex has been reported, with 42% of men and 31% of women responding "no affection required" to a question regarding their standards for coitus (MatickaTyndale, 1991, p. 48). Carroll and Carroll ( 1995) reported that 25% of men and 16% of females had had anonymous sex, 56% of males and 65% of females had had unprotected sex, and 13% of males and 11% of females had had more than one sexual partner within the past year. College students have been shown to be practicing unsafe sex. In one study of college students, 66% had never used condoms in the previous three months and only 13% used condoms "always" (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988). Other studies report that 25 .6% and 48% "never" use condoms compared to the 13.7% and 18.9% who "always" use them (Simkins, 1995 and Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992 respectively). Cumulatively, these findings suggested that this sub-population does indeed represent a group at risk. What then are the factors associated with risky sexual behaviour and levels of risk 26 perception among college and university students. Risk-Taking and Risk Reduction A review of the current literature showed that factors associated with risk-taking or risk reduction include: sexual history such as age at first intercourse and number of partners (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988; Gerrard and Warner, 1994; Maticka-Tyndale, 1991 ; Traeen and Lewin, 1992); gender (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988; Poppen, 1995); perceived peer norms (Maticka-Tyndale, 1991 ; Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992); alcohol use (Simkins, 1995; Traeen and Lewin, 1992); lifestyle habits such as seatbelt use and smoking (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988; Traeen and Lewin, 1992); and level of STD/HIV knowledge (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988; Maticka-Tyndale, 1991; Simkins, 1995; Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992). A review of literature investigating an association between risk perception and risk behaviours yielded research findings with less consistent results than other predictive factors . Baldwin and Baldwin (1988), Weinstein and Nicholich (1993), and Gerrard and Warner (1994) reported that college students engaging in risky sexual activities were more likely to have a higher perception of risk but that their perceived susceptibility was not a good predictor of risk reduction. Poppen (1995), however, reported that those engaging in sexual risk-taking were most likely to practice condom use as risk reduction, suggesting a positive relationship between risk perception and reduction ofrisk behaviour. Additionally, Maticka-Tyndale (1991) and Simkins (1995) found that college students underestimated their vulnerability, suggesting that they may participate in sexual risk -taking because they do not recognize the risks. Gerrard and Warner ( 1994) have suggested that those practicing risk reduction are less likely to be sexual risk-takers. 27 Sexual historv. In one study, "sexual conservativeness", defined by age at first intercourse and average number of partners per year, was found to be the most reliable predictor of cautious sexual behaviors (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988). Earlier studies had suggested that there were non-significant gender differences regarding sexual experience (including age at first intercourse) but significant differences between men and women with respect to attitudes toward casual sex (Earle and Perricone, 1986). Poppen (1995) reported that males engaged in more risk-taking than females including casual sex, multiple partners, and lack of condom use. Maticka-Tyndale ( 1991) also investigated the predictors of risk reduction among Canadian college students by examining variations in students' incorporation of safer sex guidelines into their sexual practice. Her survey results indicated that prior sexual activity and use of oral contraceptives were the most significant predictors of risk reduction. In fact, oral contraceptives were concluded to be the greatest barrier to condom use because condoms, even in casual encounters, were used during sex only until the female "went on the pill" (Maticka-Tyndale, p. 62). Perceived peer norms. Perceived peer norms reportedly influence condom use as risk reduction (Maticka-Tyndale, 1991 ; Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992). Peer support for initiating discussion on condom use and purchase of condoms was significant (Maticka-Tyndale, 1991 ). On the other hand, perceived peer norms have been shown to correlate with participation in unprotected casual sex (Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992). College students who perceived their peers had engaged in AIDS-related risk behaviour were more likely to engage in those behaviours themselves, as well as be more likely to resist modifying their behaviour to adopt safer sex guidelines. 28 Alcohol consumption. The consumption of alcohol as a factor influencing sexual risk-taking among college students has been extensively explored. Simkins (1995) found that 23% of his sample of single and married students always used alcohol during sexual activity and that there was a correlation between alcohol use and condom use. This latter finding implicated alcohol use as a risk factor since it may "impair judgement and be responsible for impulsive behaviour"(p. 788). Desiderata and Crawford ( 1995) acknowledged that little is known of the complex relationship between alcohol consumption and condom use but reported that, in their study of sexually active college students, the frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption was significantly associated with number of sexual partners. The use of alcohol preceded sexual activity for 53.2% of their subjects and 41% were less likely to, or had not used condoms, when they consumed alcohol prior to sex. Additionally, 16% of males and 10% of females had become drunk and had sex with a stranger during the past year. Traeen and Lewis ( 1992) reported that smoking and higher levels of drinking were strongly correlated with sexual experience. Together with sexual risk behaviour, smoking and drinking were suggested to " form a group of variables which to adolescents to a high extent function as transition markers .... marking a change in status from childhood to adulthood" (p. 263). Knowledge about HIV/AIDS. Much of the current literature has focused on young adults ' knowledge of STD/HIV as an influencing factor in their sexual risk behaviour. Baldwin and Baldwin (1988) found that students scored high on knowledge ofHIV/AIDS transmission but did not significantly reduce their level of sexual risk taking. Level of AIDS knowledge did not predict the number of partners the college students had had in the previous three months, participation in casual sex, or their use of condoms. 29 Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang (1992) also reported that knowledge was not correlated with unprotected casual sex, number of partners, or adoption of behavioural change. Additionally, Simkins (1995) asserted knowledge of HIV IAIDS transmission was not predic;tive of changes in sexual risk-taking behaviour. Perception of risk. Maticka-Tyndale ( 1991) reported that a high level of knowledge of HIVI AIDS did not influence college students' perception of their own risk of infection. As well, those students who engaged in risky sexual practices were most likely to perceive themselves at low risk and were least likely to engage in risk reduction. On the other hand, Gerrard and Warner (1994) described a sample of college students who perceived their risk as low but engaged in risk reduction by using condoms. This sample engaged in less frequent intercourse and less casual sex. The same authors also studied a different sample of female students, students who were attending university in a Marine recruiting college. This group had more sexual partners, more frequent intercourse, and less commitment to their sexual relationships than the college students. These women were greater risk takers, had a greater perception of susceptibility, but were not as likely to engage in risk reduction using condoms (Gerrard and Wamer, 1994). Baldwin and Baldwin (1988) also reported findings supporting the suggestion that those with higher perceived susceptibility engage in riskier sexual behaviour. In addition, Simkins (1995) found that those engaging in sexual activity with multiple partners had a perception of higher risk although the perceived risk was attached to their future partners rather than their current partners. These findings suggest that perceived susceptibility may not be a good predictor of risk reduction and appear to run counter to the perspective commonly held by health behaviour theorists 30 who claim risk perception motivates behavioural change for risk reduction (Rutter, Quine, and Chesham, 1993 ). Since educational programs may be based on such theories, there is a need to examine more closely the relationship between risk perceptions and risk behaviours, particularly in the context of sexual practices and STD/HIV risks where the precautionary health behaviours are complex, and the risks are serious (Gerrard and Warner, 1994; Weinstein and Nicholich, 1993). This view is reinforced by the study cited above (Gerrard and Warner, 1994) that compared sexual risk behaviours, perceptions of vulnerability, and risk reduction of two groups of women, one group from a college and another from a Marine training institution. Specifically, Gerrard and Warner called into question the generalizability ofthe majority ofknowledge about the sexual behaviour of young people because it was based on research of college students. By comparing two subgroups of young women and determining differences in sexual attitudes, behaviour, and risk reduction, they concluded that, as earlier suggested by Weinstein and Nicholich (1993), "the relation between risk perceptions and risk behaviours can be very different for different groups of people" (p.976). Unique Subpopulations of College-Age Young People Two studies were identified that examined sexual risk-related behaviour among college-age young people who are removed from the "mainstream" of society. Both studies reinforce the need for an increased focus on unique subpopulations that may require different interventions than the young adults who have been the subjects of much of health risk research. King et al. (1988) in their Canada-wide "Youth and AIDS" study included a sample of 656 "street youth" to compare its health risk-taking attitudes and behaviour with those of school youth. The street youth were of interest because this group " ...belong to an adolescent subculture characterized by sexual promiscuity and substance abuse" (King et al. 1988, p. 108). Given that this 31 sub-group of young adults may have a different set of risk-related attitudes and behaviours: Traditional intervention methods seem to be inappropriate for this population of transient young people, suspicious of and alienated from "straight" society. (p. 109) Street youth are believed to seek solace in the streets among like-minded youth dissociating themselves from traditional lifestyles (King et al. , 1988) . For example, a strong relationship has been reported between street youths ' alcohol and drug use and that of their friends (Sommers, 1984 in King et al. , 1998). The Canada Youth and AIDS Study found that street youth are likely to be swayed by friends "to do drugs" and were heavy users of drugs and alcohol. About a half of the sample had daily or weekly drug or alcohol habits compared with 15% of college youth who used alcohol two to three times per week and 3% of college youth who used drugs two to three times per week. Twelve percent of the street youth drug users had injected drugs such as heroin or cocaine and half of these had shared needles with others. Ninety-four percent of the street youth were sexually active compared to 71% of the college/university sample. Two-thirds had had five or more partners and the average number of lifetime partners was 21. Twenty-one percent of the street youth and 15% of the college youth had experienced anal sex. Although the percentage of gay and bisexual-identified individuals in both samples was low ( 1% of college youth and 2% of street youth identified as homosexual; 1% and 4% of college youth and street youth, respectively, identified as bisexual), 15% of the street youth had had a same sex partner. King et al. (1988) stated that bisexuality was encouraged in the street youth subculture. Twenty percent of the street youth had had an STD (gonorrhea and chlamydia most commonly) compared with 8% of the non-street youth sample. Nineteen percent of street youth used condoms "always" compared with 14% of the college youth, but 53% of street youth "never" used 32 condoms compared to 28% of the college students. Another study conducted that investigated risk-related attitudes and behaviours among a unique group was Mewhinney, Herold, and Maticka-Tyndale's (1995) study of Canadian university students on Spring Break in Daytona Beach, Florida. Acknowledging the lack of studies on risktaking of specific sub-groups of young adults in "potentially high-risk sexual situations", their research was largely exploratory, focussing on gaining insight into the attitudes, behaviours and perceptions of risk of university students within a specific and different context than the home environment (p. 273). Spring Break was known to involve more casual sexual behaviour due to the combination of alcohol and permissive norms. Their findings reported that contributing factors to . increased likelihood of casual sexual behaviour include a feeling of freedom from responsibilities and home constraints, a sense of anonymity, normative acceptance of casual sex, and increased alcohol consumption. Given the implications for risk-taking among this group of young people, they suggested that "generic risk-reduction models which assume that sexual behaviour is consistent across various situations do not apply with the specific context of Spring Break" (p. 287). Summary The review of the literature exploring determinants of risk-taking among college and university students and age-related social groups has been helpful in providing background information regarding relevant issues. In addition to demonstrating significant research findings, the literature review served to highlight gaps in the dominant health research agenda and suggest areas that could profit from further research. In addition, the knowledge gained about the reforestation industry and risk-taking among college and university students not only informs my current project but provides an appropriate context in which to view its findings. CHAPTER3 METHODS My objective in undertaking this project was to gain insight into the perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours of treeplanters in the context of the subculture in which they live and work. The purpose of my research was largely exploratory, as defined by Babbie (1989), to "provide a beginning familiarity with (the) topic ... (and to examine) a new interest", especially since "the subject of study is itself relatively new and unstudied" (p. 80). Indeed, my motivation corresponds to Babbie' s claim that exploratory research can "satisfy the researcher' s curiosity and desire for better understanding" (p. 80). Because the objectives were exploratory, I chose to pursue my investigation using qualitative methods and performing field research. My main data gathering technique was the use of open-ended, unstructured interviews but I also employed participant observation and drew on the numerous informal interactions, conversations, and reactions that I experienced. 1 While I used components of ethnographic and participant observation methods, I relied most heavily on the use of formal in-depth interviews with treeplanters. Methodology My choice of methods was influenced by the review of health risk-related literature, an assessment of quantitative and qualitative methodologies in the context of health risk research, feminist social research, and the recognition of treeplanters as a unique and largely unstudied social group. Quantitative Versus Qualitative The review of the literature, with respect to treeplanting specifically and to health risk-taking among young adults, demonstrated the tendency of researchers to use quantitative methodology in their health research studies. Among the treeplanter-related research, occupational and ergonomic 34 characteristics of the job were assessed using various physiological measures such as heart rate, blood chemistry analyses, physical work capacity, and statistical analysis of questionnaire responses (Banister, Robinson, and Trites, 1990; Robinson, Trites, and Banister, 1993 ; Smith, 1987; Trites, Robinson, and Banister, 1993). Similarly, investigation of health risk-related behaviours, attitudes, and perceived vulnerability among young people has led to the development of empirically-based risk reduction models in the hope of explaining and anticipating behavioural patterns (Baldwin and Baldwin, 1988; Catania, Kegeles, and Coates, 1990; Gerrard and Warner, 1994; MacDonald, et al. , 1990; Maticka-Tyndale, 1991 ; Poppen, 1995; Traeen and Lewin, 1992; Simkins, 1995 ; Valliant, 1995; Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang, 1992). However, the generalizability of such models and the research findings on which they are based have been called into question because much of the research reflects the experiences of exclusively mainstream college students (Gerrard and Warner, 1994). Such models do not address differences in risk reduction among different populations (Weinstein and Nicolich, 1993) nor do they present a group-specific assessment of health behaviour (Fisher and Fisher, 1992). In addition, criticism has been directed toward the prevailing public health discourse and policy development that support their claims on mainly quantitative research (Baum, 1995; McKie, et al. , 1993 ; see also Eakin and Maclean, 1992 and Poland, 1992). Health research methodology is traditionally modeled on that of the "natural sciences" and has operated within a positivist perspective, a paradigm claiming objectivity, generalizability, and quantification of the topic of study (Clarke, 1992). Typically, correlates of health and health behaviour have been investigated using quantitative epidemiological methods that assume rational, universal meanings in the determination of causal relationships (Elliott and Baxter, 1994). McKie et al. (1993), however, argue that traditional epidemiologic research would benefit from the use of 35 qualitative methods as a " ... useful means of exploring the social and cultural context of risk behaviour"(p. 1911 ), a context lacking in the mortality and morbidity data that are relied upon to determine the incidence and prevalence of risk-related and health-related behaviour. Tripp-Reimer and Cohen (1987) have described qualitative methods as suitable for exploring " .. .ways in which individuals experience health and health promotion situations or the meanings they give to these experiences", particularly in health-related areas unstudied or areas well researched but requiring a new perspective (p. 121). McQueen, cited in Maclean and Eakin (1992), has argued that, as part of the questioning of the positivist research paradigm, development of alternative health promotion perspectives must " ...integrate the broader social, psychological and cultural influences on health behaviour" (p. 5). Likewise, Baum (1995) has argued that an edectic choice of methods, including interpretative or qualitative approaches, would best serve public health researchers because the issues stem from complex social, environmental, economic, and political causes. She acknowledges that qualitative methodology is often mistakenly rejected on the basis of its association ·with epistemologies unacceptable to health researchers and argues that methodologies and epistemologies are not mutually exclusive. Baum asserts that untangling this confusion can lead to a "new public health .. advocating flexible, multi methods, of which qualitative tools are key, to the study of health: Social science ... offers a range of investigative tools that have evolved precisely to deal with the type of messy background noise that it has become crucial to take into account in contemporary public health studies. (p. 459) In contrast, Eakin and Maclean (1992) argue that the debate concerning the distinction between paradigmatic differences in quantitative and qualitative methodology must not be abandoned in public health discourse since such a debate is vital in the adoption of a critical stance for the evolution of health promotion research and practice. Similarly, Poland (1992) suggests that, despite 36 recent recognition of qualitative approaches as relevant to exploring the social context of health, " .. .we have yet to properly articulate a 'new' research methodology to accompany the new health promotion" (p. 31 ). He argues that an integration of sociological theory with current health promotion methodology will enable interpretative and critical perspectives to " ... bear on our understanding of social reality as it affects health" (p. 31 ). In support of the development of an integrative, critical stance in evolving health research and practice, I agree with the proponents of a more flexible, interpretative approach to health promotion efforts. To the extent that this approach would encourage more socially or culturally specific needs assessments of particular sub-groups of our population, I believe the use of qualitative methods, either alone or in combination with other methods, would significantly increase our knowledge of the determinants of health and risk-related behaviour. The recognition of the need for the use of a wide range of research methods has influenced my choices during this research project. Additionally, my study of feminist social science has been influential and further supports the argument that qualitative methodology is valuable to public health research. The Influence of Feminist Methodology Although the postpositivist movement emerged in the late 1950s and must take much credit for the establishment of qualitative research as an opponent to traditional, non-interpretative approaches in social science (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994), feminism has been instrumental in its criticism ofthe politics and methods of positivism. The study of social science research methods from a feminist perspective has influenced my current methodological choices. This is not to claim that my research project is a feminist study; indeed the debate around feminist social science is beyond the scope of my project. It is necessary, however, to assert the importance of the intersection of feminism, 37 sociology, and health research methodology and their contributions to this research project. Feminist research is not exclusively linked to qualitative methods, but represents in its diversity an opposition to traditional, positivistic, often male-centred approaches (Reinharz, 1992). The objectives of feminist methodology, though by no means uncontentious, have variously been described in the following terms: as representing "change" (Clarke, 1992); "absolutely and centrally research by women", (Stanley in Reinharz, 1992, p. 3), or "by, for, and about women"(Fiske, 1995); insisting on the "value of subjectivity and personal experience" (Black in Reinharz, 1992, p . 3); and to conduct critique of existing and traditional methodologies (Stanley and Wise, 1990). Reinharz (1992) describes three goals mentioned frequently by feminist researchers: 1) to document the lives and activities of women, 2) to understand the experience of women from their own point of view, and 3) to conceptualize women's behavior [sic] as an expression of social contexts. (p. 51) Clarke (1992), in her essay critiquing a seminal Canadian government public health report, describes the purpose of feminist methods in health promotion research to emphasize "the empowerment of women along with the transformation of patriarchal social structure" (p. 56). Hunt (1996) states that feminist perspectives on health promotion can serve to deconstruct the notion of personal responsibility that "lies at the heart of many health (education) messages and (focuses) on lifestyle rather than the social context of ill-health", effectively overlooking the diversity and interconnected nature of women' s health (p. 1). Feminist methodology, then, does not simply influence the choice of research tools but embodies a philosophical and political orientation committed to transforming structural oppression and changing women' s lives. It recognizes the need for an equitable relationship between researcher and participants and values the use of a highly reflexive method that allows continual evaluation of 38 the research process and enables the researcher to be flexible in the field. My current work does not fit all the criteria of feminist social science research, but nevertheless represents leanings toward a feminist approach that I both value and support. The influence of feminist methodology in my work is best summarized by Reinharz (1992): Whether or not women are more likely to do fieldwork than are men, and despite the complexity of a particular feminist's motivation for undertaking field-work, it seems to be the case that the written text that emerges from the study is a blend of writing about the self, the group studied, and the methods by which that group was studied, or as I previously put it, "person, problem and method." (p. 74) As a woman doing fieldwork, it is the case that this text is a combination of my personal experience, interactions with treeplanters, and development of a methodology that acknowledges the importance of my social relationship to the treeplanters studied. In addition to these influences, the study of feminist methodology has resulted in an awareness of gender as an analytical variable, an awareness that demonstrates, for example, the important implications for sexual harassment as health risk, as discussed in Chapter 4. A Social Group Unstudied My exploration oftreeplanters' health risk-related attitudes, perceptions, and behaviour encompassed aspects of their work that directly relate to the social environment in which the risk-taking occurs. The social context that influences and determines health risk behaviour, and engenders stereotypes of treeplanting subculture, was a key part of this exploration suggesting the use of sociological methods. For the purpose of uncovering the " ...subjective meanings and motivations" of human behaviour, sociologists advocate the use of participant observation of social groups or subcultures (Teevan, 1982, p. 106). Participant observation involves asking "the individuals what they are 39 feeling and let(ting) the subjects speak for themselves" (Weber in Teevan, 1982, p. 106). Cultural studies have been described as "interdisciplinary, trans-disciplinary and sometimes counterdisciplinary ... crosscut(ing) the humanities and the social and physical sciences" (Nelson et al. , 1992 in Denzin and Lincoln, 1994, p. 3), and as a means to "give a voice to society' s underclass" (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994, p. 8). To the extent that treeplanters were an largely unstudied and ignored social group, yet a source of such speculation and curiosity, the influence of sociological cultural studies was significant in this project. Indeed, my decision to use qualitative methods in this health-related project was motivated in large part by recognition of the utility of sociological methods in exploring the social and cultural contexts in which health is constructed. Information and Data Gathering I have stated earlier that my field work encompassed components of participant observation and ethnographic methods to inform and augment the data gathering process that primarily relied upon in-depth interviews. In fact, while my descriptive and interpretative analyses and discussion are based largely on the formal interviews, the participant observation aspect served to both inform the research process in its preliminary phase and reinforce the findings from the interviews to provide a broader context for interpretation. Field work, ethnography, participant observation, and unstructured interviews are terms that are often used interchangeably (see Babbie, 1989; Baron, 1988; and Reinharz, 1992) but I consider the participant observation and the interviews, albeit interconnected, as separate methods. Participant Observation ) Participant observation as a data gathering technique was useful in the initial stages of the project because it allowed me to gain familiarity with the treeplanting community and provided the basis 40 for the development ofthe interview stage. My use ofthis method corresponds to Babbie' s ( 1989) definition of" observer-as-participant" on a continuum of participation that can range from "complete participant" to "complete observer". By definition, this role involves the researcher identifying " ... himself or herself as a researcher and interact(ing) with the participants in the social process but mak(ing) no pretense of actually being a participant" (p. 266). My initial plan was to spend time in locations commonly frequented by treeplanters, observe their behaviour and interactions during this time, make contact with some of the workers, and engage in casual conversation. These interactions led to information about how best to proceed with recruiting treeplanters, setting up interviews, and developing the interview schedule and questions. Additionally, I conducted four pilot interviews (recorded with note taking) with five planters. This participant observation part of the project continued throughout the field work process, but its use in the initial information gathering stage was exciting and interesting. I had developed the field work component of this project with the intention of accessing treeplanters during their days off rather than in their immediate work setting. Therefore, much of the participant observation stage was spent "hanging out" in coffee shops, restaurants, and other locations in downtown Prince George. Accessing treeplanters during time off work allowed a wide range of contacts and less restriction on time for participation in an interview. The decision to not conduct participant observation in the camp locations resulted from the need to observe and interact with treeplanters during a time when they were removed from the immediate and intense work environment. It was thought that the reporting of social behaviour taking place in the immediate location in which it occurs is subject to bias. In other words, my choice indicated a desire to allow the participants "distance" from their immediate work location to reflect on their experiences. 41 Participant observation in town rather than in the work locations also resulted from difficulty in securing permission to access the camp sites as a visitor. Nevertheless, I feel my choice provided an ideal opportunity to observe treeplanters in one aspect of their "natural environment". Participant observation differs from other methods in that it is both data gathering and theory building (Babbie, 1989). By using the participant observation stage to inform my interviews and employing a self-reflexiveness throughout the process, I gained considerable knowledge and understanding about this unique social group. This kind of understanding, pursued in an exploratory way, could not have been accomplished using a questionnaire. As Baron (1988) described in his study of punk rock subculture in Victoria, British Columbia: This approach is indicated because the subcultural situation is not conducive to normal data gathering techniques. It is unlikely that the members of the subculture would look favourably upon a researcher entering their domain with questionnaires in hand. (p. 42) My methodological choices reflect the view that questionnaire surveys are an inappropriate tool of investigation in subcultural studies. Interviews I chose interviews to obtain the rich detail required for a full understanding of the characteristics and requirements of the treeplanting job, including those of the social environment. In-depth, unstructured interviews were an appropriate method in this study based on the following definition: Interaction between an interviewer and a respondent in which the interviewer has a general plan of inquiry but not a specific set of questions that must be asked in particular words and in a particular order. (Babbie, 1989, p. 270) Additionally, my approach was such that it valued the stories, perspectives, and perceptions of the members of the community and allowed them to speak for themselves. Using open-ended questioning gave power to their words: 42 (It is) essentially a conversation in which the interviewer establishes a general direction for the conversation and pursues specific topics raised by the respondent. Ideally, the respondent does most of the talking (Babbie, 1989, p. 270). As questions within each interview led to subsequent ones, so too did each interview inform the next: You need to ask a question, hear the answer, interpret its meaning for your general inquiry, frame another question either to dig into the earlier answer in more depth or to redirect the person' s attention to an area more relevant to your inquiry (Babbie, 1989, p. 272) Each formal interview was related to previous interviews but still allowed room for each treeplanter' s individual story and experience to be told. Sufficient time was allowed between formal interviews to enable me to contemplate the experience, adjust my assumptions and biases, and prepare for the next. 2 This process was important to validate the treeplanters ' experiences in the context of an arguably "sensitive topic", recognizing that some participants may find the interviews " ...(intrude) into the private sphere or (delve) into some deeply personal experience" (Renzetti and Lee. 1993. p. 6). The choice of in-depth interviews enabled me to gain rich detail and maintain a researcher-participant relationship that was sensitive to questions of personal experience. Sampling and Recruiting Qualitati ve research, according to Babbie (1989), does not employ a definitive sampling strategy because its objective is to " .. .observe everything within (the) field of study" (p. 268). However, some sampling methods have been identified as conducive to qualitative research (Babbie, 1989; Miles and Huberman, 1994). In selecting the participants, I employed a combination of these, including quota, convenience, and snowball strategies, to access a relevant sample of the treeplanting community that would portray an appropriate account of its experiences without laying claim to either representativeness or generalizability. 43 Decisions about sampling strategy and the process of recruitment resulted from knowledge gained during the participant observation stage of this project of "hot spots" that treeplanters frequented within the city. These included specific coffee shops, motels, restaurants, and the municipal campground, and were common venues for planters on days off. During the planting season of April to September, with the main spring plant occurring eight weeks iri May, June, and July, planters were always available because each crew or treeplanting camp maintained different working schedules and thus different days off. My sampling strategy was simple in principle : I wished to speak to equal numbers of males and females, with varying levels of working experience (e.g. rookies and veterans), and with some variation among their place of origin. The rationale for the sampling "rule" or quota strategy was that anecdotally I had learned several important things about treeplanting that I wished to explore including the existence of a strong hierarchy that is influential in organizing roles and expectations of treeplanters based on their level of experience and gender. Also, the increasing numbers of women entering the field and a comment heard in passing that attributed women' s success to "nimble fingers" intrigued me. Further, reports oftreeplanters coming to the "wilds of B.C." from all over Canada to participate in a notoriously wild and lucrative job provided a topic of interest. I managed to accomplish my objectives by conducting interviews with four men and four women who represented diversity in their collective work experience, backgrounds, and motivations. I made my initial contact with treeplanters from two different sources. First, planters who were known to me or were referred by friends and colleagues. Secondly, I met a wide range of planters during the participant observation stage of the study. This created a pool that continued to grow as the research progressed. However, the ultimate control over sampling came from the 44 contacts' availability and willingness to participate in an interview. Hence, while the accumulation of a potential sample was governed by snowball and quota strategies, the sample was ultimately a convemence one. Recruitment was at times frustrating. Many planters, understandably, were short on time during their days off and unable or unwilling to make a commitment to interview for one to two hours. By the end of the spring season I had completed three formal interviews. The remaining five subjects were recruited either during their inter-season break (i.e. before returning to work on a new contract), during the summer season, or during the early fall when treeplanting was complete. I found their removal from the immediate work setting ideal - it allowed them the time and space to reflect upon their experiences with "distance" between them and the intense context of treeplanting. The Interviews The eight participants, four men and four women, were interviewed during seven sessions; all but one session involved just one treeplanter at a time. All were current or former university or college students between the ages of 22 and 26. Among the four males, three had more than two years experience and one had been a rookie planter. Among the four females, three had two or more years experience and one was a rookie. All had worked in treeplanting camps during the 1994 or 1995 treeplanting seasons in the central interior of British Columbia (Refer to Appendix 2 for description ofthe participants). Each interview began with a discussion of informed consent, a topic I placed a great deal of importance on. Each treeplanter was required to sign a consent form (Refer to Appendix 3 for copy ofthe consent form used) . In effect, the form described the objectives of my research project, my affiliation with the University of Northern British Columbia, and their rights with respect to their 45 participation. I assured them that the interviews would be kept strictly confidential and that their identities would never be revealed in any aspect of the research project. They were advised that they could withdraw from the interview at any time, and if questions arose after the completion of the interview, they could reach me with the contact information I provided on the consent form. Although the consent discussions preceding the actual interviews proceeded quickly and there was little hesitation on the participants' part to agree to participate, I felt that the issue of confidentiality was important to all of the treeplanters. In addition, I felt responsible to ensure a comfort level when they responded to my questions, particularly on such topics as drug and alcohol use, sexual relationships, and health and safety. Confidentiality was maintained by several mechanisms. I removed all names and identifying features (including reforestation company descriptors and names of friends) from the transcripts. I kept all audiotapes, transcripts, field notes, and related materials stored in my home office and I refrained at all times from talking about my research project and its participants other than to discuss its main objectives and report my progress. Following the discussion of consent, I utilized time to seek general demographic information such as their age, level of experience, place of employment, and hometown. This initial enquiry served to "break the ice" and establish rapport, much like Yeandle (1984 in Reinharz, 1992) had, reflective of her feminist approach to interviewing: This first phase of the interview (was) important both for the data collected and for its function "as an ' ice-breaker', enabling women to relax and talk about themselves. All the questions asked invited respondents to disclose information which was very well known to them, thus putting them at their ease, and convincing them that the interview had relevance to them as individuals". (p. 25) The interview then continued with an inquiry about the nature of their experience as a treeplanter 46 as well as the question "What unique opportunities does the treeplantingjob offer?" which allowed for an assessment of motivations and attitudes toward the occupation. Other themes were addressed in this general order: young people's attraction to treeplanting work; each participant's description of a "typical treeplanter"and what makes for a successful treeplanter; description of the working conditions; description of the "camp life"; common activities during days and nights off; each participants opinion of the health risks involved with treeplanting; each participant's opinion of described social activities as posing health risks; and a description of the kind of information regarding health and safety that was provided by treeplanting companies and supervisors (Refer to Appendix 4 for a description of the interview questions). During the interviews I encouraged the participants to ask me questions and remained open when they expressed curiosity about my research and motivations. This contributed to the establishment of trust and rapport and also allowed me to gather more information regarding their concerns and attitudes. I also chose to downplay the often implied academic "interviewer-as- authority" role - a strategy that I hoped would serve to create an equitable relationship between my participants and myself. 3 This approach is supported by feminist sociologists (Bart 1972 and Bronstein 1982 in Reinharz, 1992) who described their attempt to foster trust by downplaying status differences between themselves and their participants, emphasizing respect and appreciation. As a result of these strategies, the interviews were more like conversations than directed question and answer sessions, and there was an informality about the process that created a desirable comfort level. Similarly, the time and location for the interviews were made based on convenience to the treeplanter. Time was in short supply for many planters who had just hours to enjoy a break from 47 their demanding work schedule. Most often the interviews took place in locations that would provide a comfortable atmosphere without inconveniencing the planter or creating an artificial situation. Three were conducted in coffee shops, two at the university campus, one at the treeplanter' s home in Prince George, and one using telephone and electronic communication. The length of each interview varied from one hour to three hours, a range that reflected the interest level and needs of the participants and reinforcing the process as interviewee-guided (see Reinharz, 1992). A small tape recorder was used to record the interviews. There was no difficulty in choosing to use a tape recorder, as opposed to written notes, because the length of interviews and volume of material would have prohibitively altered the data gathering had I not relied on recording equipment. It also allowed me to give my full attention to the participant and the process I used to choose questions throughout the interview. Note taking would have been distracting to me and the participant. Furthermore, the tape recorder posed no obstruction to the conversation/interview and allowed for a uninterrupted interaction. No difficulties were experienced in the recording of material and the transcription proceeded smoothly. I transcribed three of the audio tapes and a hired transcriber recorded the other four interviews. In keeping with the informed consent agreement with the treeplanters, my arrangement with the professional transcriber followed prescribed confidentiality guidelines. I recorded the interview that took place using electronic communication on audio tape, speaking both mine and the treeplanter's responses. Our subsequent telephone conversations were recorded by note taking. Each interview with the treeplanters had a conversational feel and maintained a relaxed, friendly mood while addressing the primary subject of interest, health risk-taking. Nevertheless, my investigation of the subject required an exploration of all aspects of the treeplanting job, particularly 48 the social context within which risk behaviour took place. A wide range of questions were posed to illuminate aspects of both the working and social experiences oftreeplanters that influence and determine their health risk-taking behaviour. Analysis Analysis of the data was ongoing throughout the project by continually creating information that benefited future interviews and adjusted assumptions and expectations. I looked for commonalities among the experiences shared by the treeplanters that led to themes. To facilitate the analysis I used highlighter and coloured pens that enabled me to identify key words, important points, and interesting and representative stories. Listening and reviewing (several times) the audiotaped interviews and their accompanying transcripts (and stopping frequently to take notes) allowed the eventual patterns and themes to emerge. This approach to analysis, often referred to as inductive logic, was supported by Babbie (1989); Denzin and Lincoln (1994); Neuman (1991); and Wolcott (1990), among others. Consistent with Babbie' s (1989) suggestion for qualitative data analysis, I also looked for differences among the data. These themes are descriptively presented in the results sections by identifying a common pattern and then displaying quotes that support the theme. The words and stories of the treeplanters are considered central. Quotes are used extensively with minimal interpretation since the treeplanters as participants provided their own interpretation of their experiences. My interpretation focused on those experiences that can be placed within a health risk context. Electronic Communication and This Study Electronic communication was an integral part of this research project. The use oflntemet-based electronic mail (e-mail) allowed me to keep in touch with the academic advisors, colleagues, and 49 friends who were involved with my research project when I moved away from Prince George. I used the internet to access information about reforestation companies and the extensive recruitment material from two Western Canadian treeplanting companies, in their "Frequently Asked Questions" (F AQ) link, provided valuable information about job requirements, expectations, and financial issues. Two authors who had studied the occupational characteristics oftreeplanting almost ten years ago were contacted through the internet. Through this process, I found articles that had since been published but were not accessed in literature search. Additionally, my library catalogue and journal database searches were performed online from my horne computer, as were my interlibrary loan requests and related literature review. Finally, a highlight of my use of electronic communication was my interview with a treeplanter who had returned to Ontario. After two telephone conversations, we hooked up and conducted an interview using the "talk" function of Unix-based e-mail, carrying on a conversation using typed words rather than spoken words. Two follow-up phone calls ensued. It was a fascinating and interesting experience. Internet-based technology impacted my study in many ways but its effect is far greater than j ust this proj ect alone. I anticipate electronic communication to be integral to my future research endeavours as well. Limitations and Strengths There were several limitations to the methods chosen to pursue this research project. I made a choice to access treeplanters during their days off in the city of Prince George rather than in their camp location. While I am satisfied that this approach enabled me to reach my objectives, it would have been interesting to have visited the camp setting and "go where the action is" as Babbie (1989) 50 describes (p. 270). It is a matter of speculation if accessing treeplanters in their work camps would have resulted in opportunities to interview. Not only is time limited while working in the bush, but potential participants may not have been willing in the company of their peers and fellow workers. Further, my sampling strategy would have needed modification since it would have required traveling to several remote camp locations to interview one subject at each location. It should be noted, however, that participating and observing directly the lives and experiences oftreeplanters in their work setting constitutes a different study, maintaining different objectives and goals than this current study. My sample of eight treeplanters was small and constitutes a limitation to this study. In particular questions of generalizability, reliability, and validity pertain to qualitative researchers (Babbie, 1989; Denzin and Lincoln, 1994; Miles and Huberman, 1994). Qualitative methodology, however, is often described as valuing subjective meaning and personal experience rather than the objectivity and generalizability of data. Nevertheless it remains an important area of consideration in the reporting of my research findings. Providing valid results is less of a concern among these perceived limitations because conducting field research generated detailed accounts and insights into actual experiences and behaviour. In this way, accuracy was optimized by allowing my participants to speak for themselves as to their experiences. Reliability, as defined by positivist researchers, on the other hand, was a more difficult criterion to uphold due to the fact that subjective and reflexive approaches that are valued by qualitative methodology guided this research process. Insofar as methodological choices were based on personal judgements, and the direction evolved continually throughout the life of the project, the "dependability" or potential for the results to be duplicated, is limited.4 However, given 51 the exploratory nature of the research project and the recognition oftreeplanters as unique, and not benefitting from the generalizations of any other related research, I believe the trade off to the volume and richness of the material generated by the qualitative methods used was merited. The choice of in-depth interviews enabled me to gain rich detail in my data. The data collected reflects the experiences of a small number of individuals and clearly does not permit generalization. The objectives of this study, however, were not to provide broad, universal generalizations about the treeplanting community. I wanted to use the information to identify and establish trends that would be appropriate for further exploration and testing perhaps among a larger sample. The findings of this exploration are clearly not quantifiable in the sense that they will fit nicely into a theoretical model of risk reduction. Qualitative methodology prohibited a large-scale, survey type investigation but highlighted the rich experiences of a select few participants. For these reasons and others, this project cannot purport to make claims regarding the habits and characteristics of all treeplanters that influence health risk-taking. It cannot, then, offer definitive recommendations for required action in the promotion and protection of health among this unique group. What it can do, however, is to identify issues that warrant further investigation and perhaps highlight gaps in the research agenda. The strength in this project is its commitment to allowing the participants of interest to speak for themselves as to their experiences and attitudes. Using qualitative methods most appropriately facilitated this commitment and generated a large volume of material rich in detail. There was also a certain advantage for me as a researcher to be of similar age and academic experience as many of my subjects in addition to sharing similar interests, experiences and goals; I felt there was common 52 ground between myself and the interviewees that benefited the project greatly. Another aspect of this research I am particularly proud of is its focus on a topic relevant to "the north" . Few people in this relatively northern and less urbanized center, in which my supporting university is situated, would disagree that much of the academic and other research activity takes place in more populated areas. There are arguably different and unique needs in nonurban and/or remote areas, needs which are reflected in the assumption that treeplanters represent a distinct group from other young adults. This project contributes to research "by, for and about" the "north" . My research also provides an example of how health research and sociological methods can influence one another and perhaps contributes to the growing literature on multi method use in qualitative health research. Particularly significant in light of increasing recognition that recent health promotion and education programs have had little impact on risk-taking, a more specialized, targeted approach may be required to elucidate key issues. In dealing with youth issues specifically, different sub-groups of this population are argued to have different needs and attitudes; needs and attitudes that operate within a subcultural context created by distinct and unique social characteristics of their community. I believe this project strengthens this argument. 53 1. One particularly significant "reaction" was the media coverage following the announcement of granting of funding to support my project (including Strickland, 1995). Letters to the editor of the local daily newspaper, the Prince George Citizen, suggested a lack of support for a study of treeplanters. One respondent expressed her disappointment by stating, "I'm quite sure there are other more important areas to invest $21,000 of our taxpaying dollars besides studying the social, sex life and risky behavior (sic) of our treeplanters of B.C. It seems to me there is a desperate need to continue research on other areas such as cancer, AIDS, etc. I mean who really cares about a treeplanter' s sex life anyhow?" ("Mom thinks treeplanter study a waste", 1995). Another asserted that my study "will do nothing more than reinforce the negative stereotype of treeplanters just as the front page article on her study has already done" and that I "should do as most of the treeplanters who have read the article posted in our office say: Get a real Job" ("Treeplanters just like other young people", 1995). Needless to say, some community members took offence to the front page (mis)reporting ofthe nature and level offunding support of my thesis research. I also took offenceto the ironically worded headline that accompanied the news story: "Why do treeplanters live on the edge?" (My emphasis), hence, the title of my thesis. 2. Examples of some assumptions and biases that I held early in the research process involved the demographic, make up, and structure of treeplanting crews. Camp and employment standards, quality of meal preparation, and the personnel management an organization demonstrated were shown to differ among reforestation companies both within the private and governmental sectors. 3. Treeplanters, by virtue of their strong sense of community and collectiveness, have been known to maintain a certain antagonism toward "the locals". This antagonism is no doubt reinforced by the reportedly negative stereotypes some people hold. Implication in the "us versus them" dichotomy was not an interest of mine, therefore, I downplayed my academic/" interviewer as authority" role to minimize the potential for discomfort or conflict: To level the playing field, so to speak. I also maintain that the treeplanters were participants in my study, not merely "respondents" or "subjects"distinctions that imply a lack of respect or value for their participation. 4. Poland (1992) expressed the following sentiment regarding the "limitations" of qualitative methods in health research to meet reliability and validity criterion: In other words, the usual (e.g. epidemiological) focus on reliability in health research decontextualizes information by forcing (survey) responses into a predetermined standardized format that is not sensitive to variations in people's perceptions, so that ultimately validity is sacrificed for reliability (a case of misplaced emphasis?) (p. 34) 54 CHAPTER4 ELEMENTS OF A SUBCULTURE Introduction The following discussion describes results of the research I undertook during the period May 199 5 to October 1995 and represents six months of studying the work and the life of selected treeplanters in a community in Northern British Columbia. Its purpose was to gain insight into the perceptions, attitudes, and behaviour of treeplanters relating to health risk-taking. Unstructured, in-depth interviews with eight treeplanters, four women and four men, form the basis for the following discussion, informed by the periods of participant observation in the social setting. In the context of community health, my discussion describes the characteristics of treeplanting that influence and determine health and risk-related behaviour. It is guided by recognition of the importance of the social determinants of health, health behaviour, and risk-taking. It also acknowledges the sociocultural specificity of risk-taking. As a result, my intent is to interpret treeplanters' perception of risk associated with their work and their risk-related behaviour as a function of the unique and specific context that typifies this community of workers. The findings of my research will be presented by describing the elements of treeplanting subculture that characterize this unique lifestyle and work. Diversity includes a discussion of treep1anter stereotypes held by the broader community and the motivations expressed by my participants. Social Organization focuses on the hierarchy that exists among treeplanting crews, gender issues related to increasing numbers of female treeplanters, and common social activities chosen by treeplanters. These elements will frame the discussion in Chapters 5 and 6 of the health risks associated with treeplanting and include: treeplanters' perceptions of physical aspects rather 55 than social aspects of their work as posing health risks, the identification of a lack of health and safety information and support provided by treeplanting companies, the identification of common social activities as risk-related behaviour, and the construction of risk-taking as normative in the subcultural context of treeplanting. Diversity Many stereotypes exist among the broader community that have created generalizations about the behaviour of all treeplanters. Despite these commonly held ideas, however, collectively treeplanters represent a diverse group of individuals. Their varied interests do in fact challenge stereotypical ideas about the treeplanting business and attest to the range of backgrounds and experiences these workers maintain. Stereotypes Treeplanters are often regarded as a "monolithic" group. This is most evident in the negative stereotypes that exist regarding the types of people that are attracted to the treeplanting business and the lifestyle that is thought to exist for all treeplanters. Widely understood as fact, stereotypical ideas about treeplanters come in many forms, all of which are perceived by planters as deeply entrenched and extremely negative: modern day hippies, rough and dirty, wildly adventurous, sexually promiscuous, rowdy party animals, heavy drinkers and drug users, and earning an exorbitant wage. Negative perceptions of planters have resulted in discrimination by local townspeople . Reported discrimination includes poor or no service from hotel and restaurant proprietors, poor treatment by community members in the form of insults and threats, and targeting by RCMP and police officers who consider treeplanters trouble-makers. The planters I spoke to expressed disappointment and resentment toward local people who had treated them with disrespect, and they held strong opinions 56 about the discriminatory treatment they have experienced during planting seasons: Yeah, some people have a real attitude, a real attitude about planters and what they are, what they mean. That' s really a generalization to me, it can really hurt somebody. It' s just not right, you know, to overgeneralize like that. To put us down as a whole, people that are working .. . (1) There are a lot of stereotypes about treeplanters. There are a lot of stereotypes that they ' re rough, dirty people, that they ' re aggressive, that they ' re mean. That they are the cause of many problems. And it's just a stereotype. You know, "treeplanters are dirty". Well, treeplanters are discriminated against. It' s difficult to get a hotel room, it's difficult to get on a plane. And people in this community fail to realize that this is discrimination. (3) Not all treeplanters found the time spent in local towns particularly intimidating. In fact, one male planter described community interaction as entertaining rather than threatening: That' s the thing- we thought of it as comical. That it was this foreign display. It was very much like stepping into animal kingdom.(4) Treeplanters shared stories of confrontations with local people that occurred during nights or days off. Misbehaviour by a small number of treeplanters leading to fighting, particularly in bar settings, does occur and many participants acknowledged that these incidents, albeit rare, contribute to the stereotypes that people maintain regarding treeplanters as a group. Given that most incidents are mediated by alcohol or drugs, these confrontations do little to enhance community perceptions of treeplanters' lifestyles: We had the whole bar in uproars- there was probably 60 people fighting. I was right in the middle of it, swinging my big walking stick, bashing people in the head. It was really bad.(l) They looked like treeplanters, they acted like treeplanters. Maybe it wasn't the most ideal thing having their day off fall on a Saturday night when the locals didn't really appreciate having the population of their bar doubled. (2b) (Treeplanters) think they ' re pretty cool, they can be a little bit over hippie dippie about things, knowing that this is making them stand out. (2a) 57 I don' t think they understand that when they go to a small town, when they go to a small town bar, that these people have probably been going to this bar for 10, 20, 30 years -they think of the bar as their own. And treeplanters sort of come in and take it over. I presume people see it like people coming into their own homes and sort of taking it over ... all of a sudden into the bar comes 30 kids who could give a shit, throwing twenty dollar bills around like nothing. (2b) But generally, I mean, a lot of treeplanters do misbehave. They don' t act like civilized human beings. They act more like chimpanzees. You know, they get drunk, they puke on the floor. They have no respect for people ' s possessions, their homes, their property. (5) Clearly, the misbehaviour of some treeplanters has influenced people ' s ideas of the treeplanting community, creating common stereotypes that seem to promote rather than restrain the activities of a few "bad apples". In a kind of "us" against "them" scenario, treeplanters insisted that stereotypes held by non-treeplanters contribute to antagonistic attitudes on the part of both communities: I've known a lot of people that are arrested. A lot oftreeplanters have been arrested in past years, for you know misbehaviour, rowdiness, drunk in public places, noise disturbances. Minor violations. But there' s still that tendency for RCMP to pick up treeplanters. And treeplanters get called in a lot because they look rough and people are scared of them. They' re pretty scared of their dirty rough appearance.(3) Undoubtedly, the negative stereotypes by the larger community contribute to the collective experience of community building and camaraderie with fellow workers that planters report. Among the collective group, its members maintain varied and diverse interests, backgrounds, attitudes, and motivations. Motivations As I progressed through my research, it became increasingly more apparent that treeplanting was considered a business that could offer an experience like no other. The treeplanters displayed a great deal of pride and enthusiasm for their job and the unique opportunities it provides. These unique opportunities, both occupational and social, are often reflected in planters' decisions to return for 58 subsequent seasons. As described by the treeplanters I interviewed, many workers share similar motivations for entering treeplanting: a break from school, the challenge it offers, the potential for camaraderie, the opportunity to travel, and the money. Break from school. Given that many treeplanters are university students, the planting season is ideally situated during the summer months when most college and university students are out of school. The potential to make an excellent income is attractive to university students who need to maximize their summer earnings over a short employment season to pay for rising school costs. Treeplanting offers an opportunity to travel to a remote area to "get away" from the school setting and its pressures, while maintaining employment in an increasingly unfavourable job market: A lot of treeplanting companies go to things like university professional days and they advertise for summer work for students. You know, "this is how you make the money", and they show you all these pretty pictures. (3) (There ' s) a lot of freedom involved. Many jobs, especially in the modem age require you to be indoors, behind a desk, subservient, being nice to people. Sometimes it just gets grating after a while being in the service industry ... university graduates themselves, it's impossible to get a job. (5) I love being all alone all day and not having to deal with customers, or whatever stress comes with other summer jobs. Plus you get to be outside all the time. I can't wait to go back. It' s an excellent job to have during school because you get to mull over all the stuff you crammed into your head all year. (6) Challenge. Many treeplanters described the incredible challenge that their summer job offers, both physically and mentally. Long work days (often spent working alone), adverse environmental conditions, and high expectations to maintain superior planting production are examples of the demanding work a treeplanter endures. Although these challenging conditions are a source of frustration and pain at 59 times, the sense of accomplishment that results from completing the planting season was described as unmatched by other working experiences: It is more than just a job. It' s an experience. (4) For most university students it' s the first time they have to go into a situation where they have to rely on themselves to get through. It's physical labour which most people in this day and age never have had to work that hard ... I think a lot of people see it as just trying to make it through ... I mean it's not hard to put together an essay that you could get a good mark on with a computer, a library. Up here, it ' s just you, your shovel and your trees. (2b) I would say that people who stick it out, that get support from other individuals, still - people break down all the time. You know, people have fits, throw things around or people break down and cry. It' s a mentally stressing job. At the same point in time, people gain from working through it and learn skills to cope with it. And learning to cope with each other. (3) People who' ve done it for a few years, they' re the best ones to say, "yeah, when you get out of here, after a little while back home, you realize that your outlook has changed toward a lot of things. " Perhaps in some ways they' ve perceived it as a challenge to just make it through the season. (2a) Camaraderie. Coping with the physical and mental demands oftreeplanting is a significant aspect of the job that promotes a feeling of community among planters. All of the treeplanters described the collective experience of challenging working conditions as bringing people together for support and mutual understanding. Consequently, this summer job offers its workers an opportunity to meet a diverse group of people and form new friendships and relationships: They tend to come from similar backgrounds, a lot of them have been or are students. So there' s common ground to begin that sense of community. (3) I always remember the money and the good times, you know. The whole lifestyle is attractive to a lot of people. You get the outdoors a lot. You can make a lot of money. I think there ' s a lot of camaraderie between people. I personally have a whole set of friends that I only see in the summer when I'm treeplanting. And you get to travel, especially if you' re from out east or whatever. (5) 60 I loved all the leisure time at night when we all sit around the camp fire and talk about future plans and upcoming events. Really fun people! (6) In planting camp you are stuck in the middle of nowhere with this group and you depend on each other so you get to know each really well. I think that's the main reason I'm still so close with everyone. Another is that we shared a common experience which is frustrating and hard at times but also a lot of fun so you have a big chunk of time that serves as a common ground on which to build relationships.(6) The potential for camaraderie is a major motivator for treeplanters returning to the job and contributes to the "subculture prestige" associated with treeplanting crews. Membership in the treeplanting subculture represents an escape from the demands of real life, provides freedom from rules, and promotes pride and enthusiasm for a lifestyle that is notoriously unrestrained, uninhibited, and unsupervised: They thought it was for Generation X. Treeplanting was for Generation X what Woodstock would have been to a hippie movement except for a smaller scale. "That' s what' s left for Gen X". (2a) Sometimes I even think it' s a sort of Generation X thing. Because you' re tired of taking the subservient line. (5) Being a treeplanter... they usually don't fit in anywhere. So treeplanting, you'd fit in better than anywhere else. ' Cause everyone has been brought to a common denominator. Everyone is wearing those gross, ugly, dirty clothes. No one ' s really clean ... Everyone gets the same food. You know, everyone is treated in pretty much the same way. (5) Travel. Reforestation companies' recruitment promotes their business as a opportunity for young people to travel to different, often remote or isolated, parts of Canada and/or British Columbia. As a result, and reinforced by the shortage of summer employment for students, more and more young people with well-rounded and diverse interests and skills are joining treeplanting. These youth may or may not be motivated by the "party" reputation maintained by treeplanting. However, the opportunity 61 to travel away from home to work in the treeplanting business is viewed as an attractive aspect of the job for many: I kind of wanted to be in the bush instead of in a big city. (7) Some of them get right into that thing of being out into the bush ... suddenly they are in the woods of BC, the Frontier Land, and they're roughing it, they have sort of images of the Mountain man, Pioneer man, stufflike that ... there are some of them that really get into the camp life. (1) They are getting a lot more of those people who are interested in travel, interested in seeing BC and different part of Canada. And being in the outdoors, .. hiking, climbing. As opposed to people who are just coming out for money. ·so when you have people coming out to a job because it's trendy, it's also the location- they get to see BC. (3) Money. It was clear that money is a key motivator to work as a treeplanter and its centrality ran as a common thread throughout many of the treeplanters' stories. The opportunity to make a relatively high wage in a relatively short period is a source of pride and enthusiasm on the part of planters: (What attracted me to the job was) money, money, money ... the fact that I could be outdoors and stufflike that but mostly money. Cause I needed money to get through school. (5) Treeplanters also described money as a key concern of the reforestation companies that hired them. Much resentment was expressed regarding companies' overemphasis on financial issues, an emphasis that functions to the detriment of their workers, in spite of companies' reliance on productive planters to perform the work. Both quality planters and high production planters are important to reforestation companies because, the more quickly a company completes its contract at a high quality level, the more effective that company becomes when bidding on subsequent contracts. An efficient and responsible treeplanting crew benefits the treeplanting company, affording the company advantage in the bidding process, enhancing its reputation, and increasing 62 its attractiveness to forestry companies that may contract with them. In view of massive changes within the treeplanting industry (e.g. the introduction of the British Columbia Forest Practices Code) that are increasing competition between companies to unprecedented levels, the pressure for the individual treeplanter to perform is extremely high. In addition, increased industry regulation is argued to yield costs that ultimately bear upon planters' net wages and impact on workers ' level of satisfaction with their jobs. In spite of these changes, money remains a strong motivating aspect of the treeplanting job. All the treeplanters I spoke to acknowledged that a romanticized notion of treeplanting exists. The romance about treeplanting includes ideas of huge money, strong community building, and a social environment that promotes freedom rather than rules . Treeplanters recognized that these factors may provide the initial impetus for many first time planters to join the industry. They insisted, however, that treeplanting is not "summer camp" but an extremely challenging job with a high drop out rate in the first few days of the planting season each year. Additionally, the industry continues to change, yielding less opportunity to make the very large sums of money of the past but with more pressures to perform and stricter regulations that structure the work as never before. Social Organization The collective gathering oftreeplanters takes place in a treeplanting crew, a group of approximately twenty treeplanters who work together on reforestation contracts under the leadership of a crew foreman. During the interviews, much of the discussion regarding treeplanting life centred on the specific experiences and activities of the crews as social groups. Usually, crews live and work together for the entire planting season - 8 to 16 weeks of interaction and shared experience that creates a unique social and working environment. The organization of treeplanting crews is 63 characterized by several salient features including their hierarchical structure, gendered expectations, and choice of social activities. Hierarchv The workers I interviewed described the existence of a hierarchy within treeplanting crews that is based on treeplanting performance and experience. In charge of the entire crew, and at the top of the hierarchy, is the foreman. The foreman's job involves hiring, supervision, administration, and overall management of the group. As leaders, foremen hold a great deal of power in terms of employee management, production evaluation, and distribution of land, and their decisions directly affect planters' working experiences, specifically their potential to make money. 1 Among the treeplanters, planting performance is the yardstick by which workers are measured, influencing their position within the hierarchy that both determines land allocation and their social value. Treeplanters with the highest performance (though not always the highest quality), and often the most experience, are labeled "highballers". "Lowballers", less prolific planters including first-timers, are expected to take instruction from the highballers and abide by the unwritten rules typifying the social structure oftreeplanting crews. In the words of one experienced treeplanter, " ... your worth is based on those trees··: You get into the truck at the end of the day and the foreman calls for your numbers and your worth is based on those trees. To be there to put trees in the ground. And if you are not fulfilling that as well as everybody else, you really feel like an outsider, that they've got something you don' t. (2a) Foremen. There are usually one or two foremen per crew and most are former treeplanters. Their placement at the top of the hierarchy results from years of experience and direct accountability to company 64 owners. Foremen's work carries considerable responsibility and high pressure, and their work style " ... can be what ever they want. They hold a lot of power" (5). Many foremen were criticized by planters for their unrelenting expectations, hard line attitudes, and tendency to use harassment as a tool to motivate. Along with the challenging mental conditions oftreeplanting, the tough, unyielding work ethic of many foremen causes more grief and frustration than any other aspect of the job: They push you, oh definitely they push you. Because their earnings are dependent on your earnings. So they spend a lot of time doing what they call motivating. What do you call it? Really just pissing me off. (5) I certainly had more than my share of verbal battles with the foreman. Telling me to get up off my ass and telling me to fuck off. (4) Foremen differ in terms of their management skills and personal philosophies. Some are more successful than others at promoting and maintaining crew morale and negotiating tree prices with the company owners on behalf of their workers: In some ways it becomes sort of ideology. That you are there and that' s what you're there for. A good foreman will develop a certain attitude like that. Whereas a bad foreman will just be repressive. So slap you on the wrists. Which wears off as soon as they ' re out of sight. (4) Production not going well is a good way of determining that (the crew) have a problem, when nobody 's planting any trees. People are sitting around, not paying attention ... Even fighting , not physical fighting but verbal disputes start happening in camps. And some foremen are really good at picking up on it and stopping it. And having little group meetings and saying, "Okay, I know this is a problem and this is what I've done: I've called the company ... we're renegotiating it." Where other foremen just let it fly . They don't know how to cope. They're not the type of individual to start to deal with the problem.(3) If you see your foreman helping you make up your cache, come out and plant a few bundles for you every day to help you work on your speed and stick to the job. That is way more valuable to you than when you get back to the truck and (hearing) "Yeah, well, when I was a rookie, I was ... blah blah blah". (2a) Within a particular company 's group of foremen, years of experience and attitude are key to a 65 foreman's placement within the organization of the company: Your first year as a foreman you don't make any money. Because no intelligent (veteran) would go in with the first year foreman. Cause they get the shitty contract. Cause it's a hierarchal status right. The more, the longer you've been with the company the better the contract you get. (5) In spite of most foremen ' s past expenence as treeplanters, they are criticized for their uncompromising attitudes and lack of appreciation for the demands of the job: We had the same problem with that asshole because it' s been so many years since he 's planted that he comes up there and walks along your line and says "I'm not fucking impressed with this". And it's like, "look you asshole, why don't you just strap on the bags and show me." You get this all the time, where these guys just forget, you know, that' s it 's a hard job- it's not easy. (1) It is more than likely, the foremen I've met, their first opportunity to be in control... you drive these people around, you can determine what they do on their days off, and also for planters, if they're not doing well, the foreman's not making any money. And for many rookie foremen they're not making as much money as they did when they were planting so I think they want to make money and they want their planters to start planting more. And if they have rookie planters they sometimes don't take that into consideration how long it takes people to get along. And a lot of these foremen don't know how to be in charge and trying to motivate. (2b) Highballers. Highballers are relied upon by the crew and its foreman to plant a large number of trees and in doing so are valuable and highly regarded members of the crew. Their ability to maintain extremely high production was thought to result from " ... the technique they use, the motivation that they have, they're quite strong mentally, they just go" (7). Another planter stated: Driven, driven usually is the word I use. A lot of times I wonder about what makes someone a highballer. And I look at all the people that make a lot of money and a lot of them are nasty and mean. That' s one of the questions that I think of a lot, what drives people? (5) I guess for me I respected them more because I was in awe of their minds of steel which. could overcome all obstacles. I saw it as a quasi-enlightened state because I would get flustered by physical obstacles whereas they were oblivious. (6) 66 The benefits to highballers include the choicest land to plant and avoidance of the "checks" that are periodically undertaken to evaluate crew performance: 2 Some foremen give their highballers good land because the highballers give them good numbers. And personally ifl were a foreman I would do that because I want to make money so I'm gonna give the good planters the good land so they can make oodles of money. (5) If you ' re a highballer it's very rare that they' ll ever make you replant (poor quality trees). Because you' re the one- you' re bringing in all the money. And they get all those other people to plant the quality trees to make up for yours. Plus, in camp, they ' re the ones that are sort of at the top of the hierarchy. They can sort of tell other people what to do , they get the best spots in camp, stuff like that ... (2b) Highballers ' prestigious planting performance affords them admiration and respect from other planters. Their reputations are often known to others within the treeplanting community and result in a kind of celebrity status: They're respected. Before you've even met them there ' s already "Is so-and-so going to show up? Remember last year they planted so many trees?" So, by the time the highballer shows up they can stride into the compound like a rock star because it's already known that they can walk with a bit of a swagger. They get the job done. They' ve been there and they' ve been successful at it. That' s what everybody wants. They have what others are aspiring to.(2a) Aside from being revered, highballers are known to hold definite expectations of appropriate treatment by other planters, particularly inferior ones. As described by an experienced male highballer, disobedience by rookie planters is cause for considerable tension and irritation: There can be a lot of tension because the first day I was there, the foreman stuck a rookie on this piece of land I was on, because I had a huge piece of land and this was a rookie that fancied himself a highballer because he was putting in some high numbers. So he started to cream me out - like take all the nice land on my piece and sort of not follow my instructions for what I wanted him to do. I wasn't trying to send him into crap pieces because the whole piece was pretty nice but he wanted to do the easy stuff. And leave the harder stuff for me. And at that point in time it wasn't like two treeplanting buddies having a good time planting trees, it was like get this fucking kid off my land or I'm gonna snatch [sic] him over the head with my shovel; because he ' s costing me money. And he' s giving me a big headache and I don't need it. I just had a hard-on for this guy from that day on. I just didn't like him. And 67 it was like, "Get out of my way, stay off my land, don' t come near me because I don't need you around, you' re a rookie .. . If you weren't a rookie we ' d have a big problem" . I mean, you just don' t do that. There are unwritten rules. (1 ) Other highballers are known to encourage friendships with rookies and go so far as to offer assistance, advice, and information to those rookies identified by the highballer as hard working (worthy): Highballers who plant well, not just numbers but the quality, I would say tend to give advice. The highballer will watch what they' re doing and say "well, this is what I do" or "this is why .. .". And I would say that relationship only begins to produce after a week or two in after highballers see who puts the effort in and who doesn' t. For those people who don't put the effort into planting I would say that relationship never develops ... . The highballers don' t have the time of day for them. (3) One highballer stated that she: Can look at someone and say either they' d be a good or bad treeplanter. It' s not even just the planting that makes someone a good planter. You have to be able to deal with not knowing what's going on, being kept in the dark a lot. Just be able to relax. (5) Highballers possess extra-ordinary status within treeplanting crews as a result of superior planting production, years of experience, and a driven attitude. Their elevated status allows them to exercise power within all aspects of treeplanting life and demand respect from other workers, especially rookies. Rookies. Rookies generally have a more difficult time adjusting to the treeplanting work and lifestyle than experienced treeplanters. Their financial return is low during the first few days or weeks as they became familiar with the job, but those who persevere improve considerably over the duration of the season. According to the planters I spoke to, many first time treeplanters underestimate the demands of the job and, in particular, the mental challenge it poses. In fact, of the hundreds ofrookies that 68 do not complete their first treeplanting season, most quit due to underestimation of the mental toughness that is required to achieve high eamings. 3 Others quit due to the demands of living and working in a remote location isolated from the amenities and comforts of urban centres that many rookie treeplanters are accustomed to. As experienced treeplanters described: Rookies .. .they think it' s the physical stamina, but it's not really. As long as you're moderately fit you can do it. Even if you're not really in shape you can do it. As long as you have the drive, as long as you have it up stuffed in your head. (5) People quit just because they can't handle not the physical fitness but the mental fitness of the job. Being alone, working alone, and working under those conditions. Being a little too hot, or getting burned, or cool... I would say mental challenge is way more challenging than physical stamina (for rookies). (3) But they leave for reasons involving both physical challenges and the fact that they're living in the bush. And that's difficult for people. (4) Gender With increasing numbers of women entering the treeplanting business, gender is a key variable that influences social organization. Questioning on the impact of the changing gender mix touched all aspects of treeplanting life. In particular, the following questions emerged. First, what levels of success do women achieve and what impact have they had on the social structure? Secondly, what are male planters' attitudes toward women in the business? Thirdly, what difficulties do women face in this type of employment and its social environment? Fourthly, what strategies have women adopted with which to cope with such difficulties? Specifically, it was revealed that the gender of a planter mediated his or her situation within the hierarchal treeplanting crews. In recent years, women have succeeded in attaining high planting production but they do not experience the level of respect and power achieved by a similarly productive male planter does. 69 Gender and the issue of respect The intense mental and social conditions of treeplanting represent additional challenge to the physical demands of the job for women. In particular, for many female planters, entering a primarily male-dominated business was expected to present difficulty ; indeed my participants reported that many rookie planters who quit were women. Many other women, though, were described as having risen to the challenge, demonstrating determination to complete the task despite the obstacles. My participants, both male and female, reported that female treeplanters were experiencing more respect than ever before for this determination. As described by the following male planter: Yeah, our crew was like half women. That's an amazing amount of women ...We had a couple women ... came up and worked on our crew for 3 or 4 days and just pounded trees in like crazy. Just kicked our butts for a couple days. The first day they came, they put in 1,800 or 1,600 trees. I mean, myself! only put in 1,100 or 1,200 trees that day. They just kicked my ass! I had to get over that little mental mindfuck after that.. .Being a man or a woman doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference. (1) Although possessing physical fitness is an advantage, both men and women are equally capable of performing the physical work - carrying trees, digging, bending, hiking. The fact that men are often outplanted by female planters is attributed to women' s hard work and determination, although gender stereotypes were often offered as explanation. An experienced male planters suggests the following : I think it' s just the way women are raised, to do monotonous, tedious, repetitive jobs. Like doing things like chores around the house, stuff like that. ( 1) Similarly, an experienced female planter describes the attributes of successful women treeplanters : They tend to have better production because they ' re perfectionist. Women tend to be perfectionist at this task and I don't know why. They care about how that tree went into the ground. (3) Successful female treeplanters described themselves as " .. .fairly strong individuals" (5), " ... fairl y 70 robust"(6), and " ... really motivated" (7). Women agreed that there is no explicit message that stated " ... because you're a woman you can't plant as well as a man. There's just more men that do it" (7). Indeed, as overall crew production depended upon both quality and quantity of trees planted, women are valued for their contribution in spite of their often lowballer status. One experienced female planter asserted that even " .. .ifthey don't plant fast, they plant good quality. So they're an asset to the crew when the overall quality is taken" (3). Despite women' s capabilities in attainment of similar planting productions to men, women rarely accomplish similar positions of power to men within the social context. One female treeplanter, a highballer, described her unique experience as a highly productive and respected planter and offered the following explanation for her success: I'm recognized in the company, they know who I am. (I) have a certain amount of prestige. That transferred into the social context? Yes, because I knew people and because I knew people I knew what was going on a lot of the times. So I could organize things so that I wouldn't get shafted and all this sort of stuff. The women that stick it out usually know people. (5) Female treeplanters gain special recognition, unlike that of male planters, for their presence in camp, as expressed by the following female participant: In terms of the camplife, women also tend to be more motherly. So women sometimes are respected within the camplife because they can help out. Help out how? They provide support to everything from a Band-Aid to someone who's not feeling well, to emotional support. So now there's more women to support other women. And more women also affect the tone of the camp. Camps are less rowdy when there's women in the camp.(3) Women' s presence encouraging less rowdiness is also supported by the following male planter: I think that the camp would have been different if there had been less women and more guys. There may have been more (sex). (1) According to the treeplanters I interviewed, the social environment has changed considerably as a 71 result of increased women' s presence. It was reported that there is more opportunity for "girls' time" due to greater numbers of women in the field. Additionally, more female planters promotes a greater feeling of confidence on the part of women to participate in previously intimidating activities and an environment more supportive of women' s issues, according to a female participant: As there have been more women hired lately, women, especially women who aren' t partnered up in couples, they tend to form a tight knit group. Just a bunch of women. So although they socialize with the guys, there also seems to be the girls' time. And that's something I've seen only in the last few years. Because there haven't been the numbers of women to pick and choose.(3) Similar opinions were expressed by the following male treeplanters: There is more codified behaviour towards women in the camp we ' re in now. In the other (camp) it was like- getting to know them as people was more the norm. I mean, (women) were definitely respected for who they were ... planting, socially ... (2a) Women in this camp certainly stood up for themselves. The majority of them, if somebody was being an idiot, they would tell them so. (2b) Two women I spoke to asserted that the potential for gender discrimination within treeplanting crews poses far less of a threat than in other settings : As to being discriminated against, I felt very little as opposed to previous jobs. (6) I'd say, especially living in a town like this, you' d probably get more respect out (in the bush) than you would (in Prince George). I mean, like walking down the street .. .yeah, you feel safer out there. (7) Another female planter described her interpretation of recent, more equitable conditions that treeplanters experience: Amongst the planters there's a better understanding of respect towards women. And women aren't given the break now-a-days. I mean, it's not like you had a bad day and you are not expected to perform just as well as everybody else. Everybody is treated as an individual. (3) 72 Gender and the issue of harassment Although women have succeeded in being recognized as hard working and productive treeplanters, according to my participants, they have not yet been able to achieve power and authority. Value continues to be placed on traditional women' s roles as "mother" and "emotional support" . In addition, female planters still face harassment both "on the job" and in the related social setting. All ofthe treeplanters I interviewed suggested that sexual harassment is a "normal" part of the job. They provided descriptions of women' s experiences of harassment and the coping mechanisms they have developed. For example, harassment may be a critical factor in women quitting, according to this female treeplanter: Most of the women people that quit just get really lost. They just can't take the harassment and the day to day grind. (5) Other women were described by a female worker as accepting harassment as part of the life: There was a lot of verbal sexual harassment that comes classed as a joke. And it's not a joke. And it bothers some women, and others put up with it. You know,.. the concept that if you dish it back, it will go away. But it doesn't go away. And (women) just get used to it and live with it. (3) One female participant argued that one method with which to cope is to modify one' s behaviour in the hope of commanding respect: It ' s pretty rough ... There ' s a certain amount of disrespect, a certain amount of harassment. It just really depends on the type of person you are - how you are treated. It' s so hard to act like a lady out there, you know. But the more lady you are the more they treat you like a lady. In terms of, "good " lady. In good ways. Like, they' ll respect you more. In terms of they won't talk down. Well, that's not true. I think every case is a little different. It' s so hard ... (5) A sphere in which sexual harassment appears evident is that of hiring practices . Some foremen, who were typically male, are known to hire women for their own sexual benefit, and for the 73 "benefit" of the crew, according to the following male treeplanters: 4 We have a supervisor that was trying to hit on this rookie treeplanter this spring which to me basically constituted, you know, sexual harassment.. .I thought it was terrible because it put her in a bad situation. I was hearing that he had a rookie treeplanting chick for himself last year. And (she) was kind ofhis conquest for this year, but then he didn't get it. (1 ) Certain foremen hire certain female planters based solely on the fact that they think they will be able to sleep with that person for that planting season. And when that doesn't happen, and perhaps when they see that person looking at other people, they become harder on that person and when that person shows that they obviously have no intention on sleeping with them, in some cases I've seen them just get fired. Get really dumped on, like "Plant this shit, you' re a lousy planter, what the hell is wrong with you? And why don't you just leave? I'll drive you to the bus." I've seen that happen. (2b) Or they' ll justify it by saying, "Well, I knew she would keep morale up ifl had a real looker on the crew." (2a) A female treeplanter described her similar experience: One foreman did try to hire, he hired more women than men. And his concept was then there ' d be a good selection of women for his friends , for himself, for opportunities, for sexual opportunities. (3) It seems clear that the resolution of sexual harassment is considered women' s responsibility. Not only are they faced with discrimination in all aspects of treeplanting, but it is up to the women to resist the harassment directed at them. Women are also criticized for their roles as perpetrators of sexual harassment against men in positions of power. Almost every planter described incidents in which female planters cultivate relationships with foremen or highballers. These women are sometimes labeled "tenthoppers" or "bushbetties", labels that are somewhat misleading in this context because they also refer to women who engage in multiple, casual sexual relationship. Nevertheless, female planters who were attracted to foremen or highballers reportedly exist in almost every camp. The sincerity of these women was interpreted somewhat differently by the planters I interviewed although their perceived motivations are articulated quite clearly. A female treeplanter 74 describes: In my experience, a highballer male is much more likely to have a girlfriend out there treeplanting than a lowballing male. Because they have prestige and certain other status and powers. So highballing males, and foremen- they're much more likely to have girlfriends .. .! think it's the woman wanting to include herself under that power and prestige and status because it' s difficult for a woman on her own to develop this high status position. (5) Two male treeplanters offer the following stories: This guy I knew, the woman came in with him for a week or so and then moved on. He was pretty upset and he kept thinking, "Oh well, she'll come back. .. " What I saw was this woman going to whoever was planting the most trees. How is that to her benefit? Perhaps she was thinking that this person gets better land or can show her how to plant better. Or is she plants with him and he ' s got good trees .. .Ifyou plant along with him and you're planting lousy trees, well his trees make up for your trees when they come to check it. If he ' s a highballer, they' re not going to tell him to replant so if you've planted some lousy trees but you're not gonna have to replant because your trees are mixed in with his. (2a) There's certain foremen that I know that when they meet up with a treeplanter and they're having a relationship that no matter what anybody says, I've seen that foreman give that planter that best land, the easiest ride, that that person always has the trees, that person gets the first pick to where they want to plant. They can deny it all they want but that's the truth. When everyone else has to do the work in the camp I know that that person they' re having a relationship with doesn't. (2b) Another female planter, having stated that " ...certainly, women get a lot of advantages from going out with foremen especially because you can usually get away with stuff you wouldn't normally" (5), described how the social dynamics of a crew can change in such an event: Everyone hated her really. We just called her noodle head. She couldn't possibly have been as dumb as she behaved because she managed to get through two years of university. But she acted really dumb. (Another) person who was really resented, who went out with (the foreman) ... used to bitch and moan and whine about how her land was so bad. And he used to give her good bits of land so he wouldn't have to listen to her go on. Of course, his crew got really pissed off about this. And the next year, none of his veterans came back. (5) Clearly, women's experience in the treeplanting business is a contradictory one. On the one hand, 75 women are accomplishing feats, making money, and gaining "respect" as never before. On the other hand, the threat of harassment still exists. As the business changes and increasing numbers of women continue to enter treeplanting, it was expected by my participants that female treeplanters will find the respect they deserve. However, if one male treeplanter's idea of respect is any indication, realization of gender equity in treeplanting may be a difficult struggle: Living in camp there was sort of this aura of respect. I mean, there was a very small percentage of women in this camp- twenty percent, tops, if that. So, eighty percent guys in the social hide-and-seek. Women are "it" in this game of tag. (2a) Social Activities As described by the treeplanters I interviewed different treeplanting camps have different "social climates". The social environment familiar to the participants in my study largely depended upon company and foreman attitudes and leadership. These factors not only influence the makeup of the treeplanting crew, such as the respective proportions of women, rookies, and highballers, but the foreman' s philosophy and relationship to his or her planters creates the conditions under which the planters live and work and influences the crew' s choices of social activities. The foreman' s goal is to maintain a satisfied and contented, thus productive, crew, one that sustains high morale and a sense of support among its members. Community building reportedly begins with the foreman, as leader, encouraging social activities that will bring his or her crew together. By doing so, the foreman (or highballers in many cases) sets the tone for the camp, establishing appropriate (expected) behaviour and determining limits if required. The treeplanters I spoke to reported that the sense of community develops mostly during their time off work. 5 Certainly those social activities that have gained the most notoriety are thought to take place during days off: 76 I think it's more the days off that really give a sense of community. Because it' s sort of us against them. (5) While foremen encourage social activities that involve the whole crew participating in what may be characterized as bonding rituals, they are conscious of activities that could interfere with maintaining planting production. However, although rules by a foreman are established to prevent partying from interfering with crew production, days off are clearly considered by planters as "off limits" to rules. Days off represent freedom, release, and lack of restraint. "Work hard, play hard" is a popular and common motto. Bonding between treeplanters results from a mutual understanding of days off as time to "let loose": The company or your foreman wasn 't concerned about what you were doing on your day off? Oh no, he was ahead of everyone I think. What do you mean? He ' d be the first up on a beer. He ' d be ... that's part of the bonding, is that hierarchal relationship in terms of foreman and workers. (4) Alcohol and drug use. Alcohol was commonly used on days off as a means to let loose. Estimates of drinkers were reported as 80 percent to "zero abstinence"(4). Although everyday use of alcohol was rare ( reported as 2 to 3 people per crew, or approximately 10 to 15 percent), those participating during days off did so heavily. Treeplanters estimated their consumption to range from 1 to 2 drinks per occasion to ten to twenty-plus. As the season progressed, the frequency of consumption did not increase, but treeplanters increased their level of drinking per episode. Former non or moderate drinkers were said to join their binge drinking counterparts. Getting drunk was clearly regarded as the appropriate release after a hard week in the bush and adopted by the majority of crew members: The night off you go into town, book a hotel room, take a shower, go out, get drunk, come 77 back, see if any romantic possibilities emerge - no - go to bed frustrated. Get up, have a late breakfast, buy some magazines, get your laundry done, maybe go to the pool, have a sauna and a shave, nice meal, maybe take in a movie, go back to camp. Did I miss anything? (2a) The drunk tank. (2b) (The night off is spent) going out, getting drunk, dancing. (Or) hanging out, watching TV. (5) (Nights off are spent) mostly just drinking, pounding beer, smoking lots ofpot. (1) Although drinking was described by the treeplanters as the most common social activity, I also learned that drug use was common among planters during days off. Smoking marijuana was most common, but some treeplanters reportedly used mushrooms or acid. Accessibility and cost appear to be important determinants of the choice of drugs, although acceptability within the group is also significant. For instance, cocaine, heroin, and injection drugs are perceived as "city drugs", difficult to obtain, and prohibitively expensive. Marijuana, on the other hand, was available, affordable, and normative within the treeplanting environment. 6 Unlike alcohol, marijuana is more feasibly used in an " everyday" or "regular use" manner. Ten to 15 percent of treeplanters reportedly smoke marijuana up to several times a day while those using marijuana two or more times per week range from one-quarter to three-quarters of treeplanters on a given crew. The use of marijuana was literally perceived as a "mechanism for survival"(3). Like alcohol use, the number of people smoking marijuana during social activity increases over the duration of the season but an increase in frequency was not reported. Sexual behaviour. The valued group participation among treeplanters gives a sense of collectivity and closeness that enables bonding and community building to take place. This tight community contact also fosters the development of close personal relationships. Under these circumstances, the potential for sexual 78 relationships is significant, a potential enhanced by the fact that treeplanters frequently share hotel rooms to reduce costs while staying in town on their days off. The number of treeplanters engaging in casual sexual relationships with other crew members was reported as one-quarter of workers, although one planter stated she was the only woman (of six) who did not have sex with another planter on the crew. Alcohol and drug consumption play a significant role in facilitating sexual relationships within the treeplanting crews. These relationships were described as ranging from casual or noncommitted relationships to long lasting relationships. Additionally, alcohol and drug use were implicated in the casual encounters that treeplanters engage in with partners who were not members of their crew. Relations with non-treeplanters are rare, resulting from the strong ideology of " .. .treeplanters stick(ing) together"(3). Casual sex between planters of different crews does occur, however, in the form of"one night stands", with little or no potential for continuance. These short-term "inter-crew" encounters constitute the contacts for treeplanters who are known to engage in multiple casual sexual relationships, The opportunity for multiple encounters is not uncommon, as every treeplanting crew maintains a different working schedule which results in a variety of crews traveling into town at different and varied times. Further, contracts change, as do crew membership and camp location. As well, the break between the spring and summer seasons affords additional contact between a wide variety oftreeplanters. No matter what the scenario, treeplanters were said to gravitate towards each other in the context of sexual relationships, rather than into the broader community. 7 79 Going to town. Common venues for socializing on days off include local town bars and hotels. Treeplanters plan their social activities and stayed together as a group during their time off work: I go in bars that I would normally be deathly afraid of setting foot in. Like I' d be going, "Omigod, there' s six pool tables, there' s bills tacked up all over the walls. I'm not going in there. " But with a bunch oftreeplanters we will, it's okay, it's cool. (5) During their days off spent in local towns, treeplanters' presence is not always welcomed by the local communities. If trouble occurs, it is usually attributed to drunkenness and rowdiness on the part of planters. When fighting resulted, planters cited the local community as instigators of the altercations based on unrealistic reactions to their behaviour: Those people that are very decent, that understand - they are not usually hanging around downtown (at two o' clock in the morning). (2b) So, did things ever get out of hand? Yes and no ... That' s very relative. If you were in your sixties and vacationing in the same hotel, yeah it would be out of hand. If you were the hotel operator, you would open your doors to treeplanters (and) come to expect it. Those people are going to be jumping off the balconies, whatever, clowning around. Probably will take you around an hour to clean up the room in the morning. We were pretty good- try to clean everything up. But the furniture certainly would find new homes and stuff, around the facility . But, I never witnessed any sort of gross vandalism, just being malicious for the sake of it. (4) Usually, in my experience, the fights are provoked. You know, because we 're different, we 're coming into the community and upsetting the norm. We 're taking somebody else' s woman, whatever.. .and I've stopped people from fighting . I'm usually the most sober one around and I'm just like, "Hey, don't do this". But they' re still gonna fight. Usually ifl 'm around I try to make them go outside rather than fight in the bar.. .less stuff to grab, less property to damage.(5) Camplife. Social activities involving alcohol, drug and/or sexual behaviour are not restricted solely to the days off when treeplanters have the opportunity to travel to the nearest town. The activities that represent 80 the "camplife" encompass alcohol, drugs, and sexual relations, but these occur with less intensity and frequency than on days off: Most ofthem were interested in smoking up and sitting around camp and that sort of thing. (1) It was definitely ... there was some people who would have a couple beer every night, smoke a little pot. ( 1) ... usually drinking. Staying up a bit later. One night we had a party with the two camps and (another) camp that was with the company as well. (7) There ' d be alcohol, there would be a fair bit of dope. I'd say about a quarter to a third of people would smoke it. The discretion of the camp life is up to them - the planters. That they work, and they socialize as long as they all can get up in the morning. (3) There wasn' t a lot of booze but there was a lot of drugs. There were a fair number of everyday users who would smoke up several times a day on the block to help them relax. As well as whenever we had a bong handy. I would smoke pot about once every two to three days usually in the evenings around the campfire. There were some mushrooms going around too, but it was all soft drugs. Perhaps the lack of alcohol was due to difficulty in transport because we were in a fly-in camp. I wouldn' t say that we as a group were big drinkers but when we went into town at the end of each contract we would drink a fair bit. I don' t drink more than two or three beers but am an exception on the whole. (6) Although not the immediate experience among my participants, some treeplanting companies and foremen have established "dry" camps where no drugs or alcohol is permitted: (My company) has a rule where you're not allowed to do drugs or drink on the block while you're working. And (my old company) did not allow any drugs at all in camp. And there are some camps that don't allow alcohol, they're dry camps. (5) In most other camp settings, drugs are not permitted on the block, and discovery of such activity is grounds for immediate firing. However, many planters spoke of drugs as commonly present and available, and rules rarely enforced: Technically, no. But unless a supervisor came by ... And most of the people that did it were hiballers so they just let them do it anyway. Because they planted well. (5) 81 It's encouraged more at the camp versus while working and sometimes they've said, you know, "no pot smoking on the block", but sometimes that happens. Like, I mean, what' s going to happen if you' re smoking a joint and the foreman's on the other side of the block? (7) The treeplanters I spoke to reported that not all days off activities take place in local towns, and not all social life oftreeplanting involve partying. Many other aspects of camplife were mentioned that involved social activities other than drinking and using drugs, reflecting the changing attitudes of young adults: Some people will just sit around and shoot the shit. Other people played rugby - I don' t know where the energy came from at that point in the day - but, frisbee , hikes and stuff like that. (4) You get people who just eat dinner and go to bed. Or eat dinner and go out and read. And you get others who stay up and, you know, in a group and sit around the campfire. Card playing is a really big thing .... There tends to be at least one or two people who play guitar. (3) I usually stayed in bed until noon, just catching up on sleep. Some people would go on hikes, or take the vans and tour the area. I usually hung out at the sauna- a little makeshift plastic model - or at the beach with a good book. (6) It wasn' t a complete free-for-all on the, well I suppose it was unrestrained havoc on the days off. But it wasn't just looking forward to smoking pot and drinking. It was looking forward to having an ice cream cone. Going out and buying a box of ice cream sandwiches or something. And going through all ofthem. (4) Some treeplanters are changing. I know treeplanters that will see if there' s a hot springs in the area. And go spend the day at the hot springs. I've known treeplanters to go into town, go out to dinner, watch movies in their hotel. Get up first thing in the morning, do their laundry, banking, whatever they have to do and then go hike. Find a short hike and go on a day of hiking. And there is a lot more of that today then there used to be ...so, days off are definitely changing from what they used to be. (3 ) For those treeplanters who do not participate in the "party" activities, the opportunity for alternative activities is seen positively. Many planters expressed sentiments such as " ...you have to stay some way in the social life" (5) and that being a member of the group is more important than just being 82 a "partyer". One treeplanter described two planters in her camp who did not partake in drinking and other related activities, but made efforts to socialize with the crew so as to maintain their positions as members of the community. Their choices not to drink were respected because "they ' re decent enough people" and were accepted as such: There were two very Christian people in our camp. They prayed before every meal. Although they went into town they would usually find something else to do, watch TV , go to the movies, whatever. Instead of drink or go out and party. Or sometimes they would come out and party with us, but they just wouldn' t drink, you know. (5) Their presence in the group' s activities was important because: The whole crew usually goes out to the bar. Whoever' s there, the foreman, the whole gear. And that really begins the socialization. So if you' re not a drinker, and that' s why I think those two Christian individuals came out with us anyways. Because that's where everyone was, you know. There was nothing else to do in this little one horse town except go to the bar. So they come out and hang out with us and do a little dancing kind of thing. (5) Other non-conformists, non-drinkers, or ex-drinkers, gain social value within the group for assuming a very different role : There was this one guy that' s just really, really weird- that doesn' t drink. And we ' re all happy to drink ...We always make him drive though. He's a designated driver all the time. Really good. He probably doesn't mind? In a way I don't think he does. Cause he knows that he's a valuable resource just because he ' s the designated driver, you know. Every time. Drives like three or four van loads. Yeah. So if you choose not to do these things that's fine. But you have to sort of stay someway in the social life, you know. (5) However, another non-drinker described his "valued" experience as designated driver somewhat differently: Yeah, you get your night off, and the night off is usually when everyone gets drunk and then they' ve all got hangovers on their day off. I was designated driver this year so.I got to deal with all the drunks and the fuck-ups. It sucked, a bunch of idiots. (1) Although the social activities of choice take on various forms, their place within the treeplanting 83 experience appears to be central. Most treeplanters interpreted these social activities as integral to community building and central to the maintenance of the subculture of treeplanting. Drinking and using drugs in particular contribute to the idealistic and romantic concepts of treeplanting and influence the nature of the social and sexual relationships with other treeplanters: Yeah, well everybody pretty much does it. But I also think that's part of the romanticism of it all, right? Isn't that what it is? You're out in the bush, hard drinking men, you know. You work hard, you play hard, you' re a gruff, you' re a voyager, you' re a frontiersman, you' re a gunslinger, you know. Yeah, well you' re a bloody treeplanter, you' re socking trees in the ground, fifteen cents a piece, and you' re making no money and you' re getting beat up and sunburnt. ( 1) 84 1. Reforestation contracts cover large areas of land to be planted, therefore the quality of land and the degree of difficulty vary across the contract. Those treeplanters allocated good land, sometimes called "cream", had the greatest potential to make money. Treeplanters were paid based on the number of trees they planted. 2. Both "internal" (i.e. by the reforestation company personnel) and "external" (i.e. by the forestry company or Ministry of Forests personnel) were conducted to evaluate planting performance and ensure optimum quality. 3. The estimated turnover rate ranged from 0% to 80%; sources included anecdotal reports, participants' responses during interviews, Pacific Reforestation Workers ' Association (1987) in Smith (1987), and Vogt (1991 ). 4. Based on anecdotal reports and the data gathered from the participants of this study, treeplanting crew foremen and supervisors were overwhelmingly male. Estimated employment of women in these positions averaged 10% to 20%. 5. By virtue oftreeplanting' s relatively remote setting, treeplanters tended to stay together during time off work because time constraints did not allow them to travel very far from their working location. 6. One treeplanter reported that even known regular users of hard drugs such as cocaine and heroin did not use these drugs during their tenure treeplanting due the fact that they were not appropriate (acceptable) for the bush. 7. As part of the questioning with respect to the types of casual partners treeplanters engaged in sex with. responses to the potential for treeplanters to employ the services of community prostitutes included : .. No way" and "Never known that to happen". 85 CHAPTERS TREEPLANTING AS RISKY BUSINESS: PHYSICAL HEALTH RISKS My intention with this project was to identify health risks associated with treeplanting to highlight those areas requiring promotion and protection of treeplanters ' health. The literature reviewed focuses on the demanding and often grueling physical challenges that pose risks of physical stress or injury to treeplanters. However, in the broader community, treeplanters reportedly demonstrate risk-taking based on stereotypes that exist regarding their "lifestyle" and social behaviour. Therefore, I hoped to explore a variety of health risks associated with the treeplanting business, paying particular attention to those risks that might result from the social activities in which treeplanters are thought to engage. During the course of this research and from the discussions and interviews I had with treeplanters, health risk-taking did emerge as an issue among this community. However, treeplanters perceived the risks as derived from the physical rather than the social aspects of their job. Their stories reflect the experience of those treeplanters who had organized groups like the Pacific Reforestation Workers' Association (PRWA) to promote better working conditions and camp standards for B.C. treeplanters. Overwhelmingly, these concerns had focussed on occupational hazards and environmental risks, many of which were considered avoidable with stricter employment standards and the provision of health and safety information. Physical Health Risks: A Lack of Health and Safety Information The concerns expressed by my participants centred on the occupational hazards of treeplanting such as muscular or joint injury, environmental hazards, pesticide exposure, and insufficient provision of water. Additionally, mental and emotional health issues resulting from the physical demands of 86 the job were reported as concerns, along with the potential for motor vehicle accidents. Muscular and Joint Injury The potential for muscular or joint injury was well acknowledged and included back, knee, shoulder, elbow, and wrist injuries due to the repetitive, physical work. In addition, poor cleaning of areas after logging left stumps, sharp spikes, and other debris creates an obvious risk for physical injury: I was really scared for my life a couple times when I was particularly isolated and I had to walk on these logs that bridged depressions because you could be up to 20 feet in the air balancing with your heavy planting bags. There were also a lot of sharp stumps that you could easily impale your self on. (6) These concerns mirror issues expressed by PRWA treeplanters in their earlier publication, Screef, and by silvicultural contractors fighting for tougher standards for private forestry companies that currently operate under inconsistent regulations. Although the physical demands of the job are not expected to change in the near future, reduction of muscular and joint injuries could be achieved by training in the use of proper form and by the use of appropriate equipment and footwear. Further, prompt first aid and medical assistance, and the provision of rest allowances, would facilitate early recovery and return to work in fit condition . Although these provisions would appear to be an obvious investment to enhance productivity and prevent wage loss and labour force instability, health and safety information and services offered by treeplanting companies were described as minimal: 1 Oh, you have a health and safety meeting once a week- WCB rules. You' ve got to sit around and say, okay does anybody know what happens when this happens? Yes sir, we know. 7 times- Yes sir, we know ... Although it's not always done you know. You just say Hi, this is our first aid meeting, okay, bye. (5) Environmental Hazards Environmentally, weather and animal life were identified by treeplanters as health threats, in addition 87 to the above mentioned terrain conditions. Weather is changeable, varying from one day to the next with a mix of extreme temperatures. Although treeplanters are encouraged to be prepared for adverse weather conditions, they reported that such temperature extremes often result in flu, common colds, heatstroke, or sunburn. Provision of time offto recuperate was again described as less than forthcoming from the employer. Bear threats were reported by just two planters, but most planters acknowledged that the risk of injury by bears is a commonly held perception. In fact, the WSCA maintained for years that bears were a significant issue in terms of risk of fatality . It reported that there was a potential for bear problems to increase because of inadequate support from wildlife officers (Brinkman, 1995b). Some treeplanters saw it differently, though: It' s funny that people worry about bears when there's more chance that you're going to get your ass kicked in town than you're ever going to run into a bear. (2b) Exposure to other kinds of animal life, namely insects, was expressed by treeplanters as a more significant concern than bears. Black flies were reported as an annoying characteristic of the areas where treeplanting took place, and pose a health threat if bug bites lead to infection: You get tons of bug bites, and you get sores and lesions from bug bites. (3) Pesticide Exposure Pesticide exposure appears to be a long-standing and ongoing issue with treeplanters. This issue was the cornerstone of PR WA ' s organization, although its campaign focussed more on the failure of companies to inform their workers of pesticide use than about the use of pesticides themselves. While not all companies use chemicals to treat their tree seedlings, the treeplanters interviewed acknowledged widespread concern over their use: 88 The deer repellent was really bad. It burned your eyes, and your nose burned, and your mouth burned. They use it depending on how many problems they are having with deer. (1) They didn't give us appropriate warnings about the pesticides we were using. Supposedly we were not supposed to have kids for three years after dealing with chemicals on the trees. I heard that from a friend who worked with a northern company. We were pretty much on our own. (6) Insufficient Supply of Water The treeplanters who had been exposed to pesticides and expressed concern over their potentially hazardous effects placed their concerns in the context of larger health and safety issues: poor hand washing practice resulting from insufficient supplies of water. Most treeplanters reported an insufficient supply of clean water provided by their treeplanting companies: I'm really bad with pesticides. I don't wear gloves and I don't wash my hands before I eat, and I smoke without washing my hands. ( 1) And where are you going to find water on the block? You're not going to douse your hands with your drinking water because you want that. You have like two or three litres of it and you want it. So you smoke and eat without washing your hands. God knows where they've been, you know. (5) The lack <;>f clean water was also cited in two other identified health risks: dehydration and giardiasis (beaver fever). This lack caused some planters to drink from potentially infected spring water on the block or risk dehydration: Drinking water on blocks, drinking glacial streams and stuff. The water tastes great and it' s ice cold. But where you have streams you also have animals. People forget that animals their habitats have to be near a water source. And animals don't like to drink stagnant water either. (3) Some treeplanters said that health and safety information offered at the beginning of their work contract includes the need to keep hydrated and maintain proper hand washing practice. However, given the deficient supply of clean water present in some treeplanting camps, one planter described 89 the situation as "ludicrous" : I think they did write it down somewhere that you were supposed to wash your hands after every meal. First of all, meals didn't exist. And secondly, there was no washing water. So, that just became ludicrous. If you wanted to bitch about that I suppose you could. And it was your option to leave. But otherwise we couldn't really do anything . (4) Mental and Emotional Health Issues Although treeplanters emphasized the physical and environmental health risks, their earlier assertion that the work posed a greater mental challenge than physical challenge suggests a potential for risks to mental and emotional health. Indeed, one treeplanter expressed the view that mental health was the "biggest health risk", describing it as follows : It' s what we call a mental mindfuck. And if you get mentally mindfucked out on the block, you are screwed. You just can't plant. What does that mean? It just means you're not thinking, you're thinking too much out there about other things, you're not thinking about planting. And you' re just thinking about everything but planting. And you just can't work like that. You just can't do that job when you are thinking like that. It' s so much easier to do the job when you aren't thinking. (1) Another planter responded to further enquiries about mental health by stating: I don't know. No one's suicided that I know of. Certainly it can be bad for your self esteem because if you're not a very good planter and you're not socially nimble you can get shit upon extremely. (5) There appears to be concerns, though, that, yes, the mental challenge is indeed disturbing at times but some treeplanters insisted that it did not constitute a health risk: "I wouldn't consider that a hazard. I'd call it part of the expectation" (4). As well, company and foreman attitudes are often less than comforting when confronted with treeplanters ' difficulty in coping: Well, the only time they talk about it is if you come to them and you're having a problem and you're really down and they' ll just say to you, oh, you' re mentally mindfucked. Snap out of it. (1) 90 Motor Vehicle Risk Discussions regarding health risks involved with treeplanting usually identified the frequency of motor vehicle accidents or near-accidents. The potential for serious injury or death as a result of motor vehicle collisions was seen as present when driving or riding in a wide variety of vehicles: personal cars or trucks, crew vans ("crummies"), and "quads" (all-terrain vehicles). The location of treeplanting camps necessitates the use of logging roads that are often in poor driving condition. Some planters, although holding the required Class 4 license status, are not familiar with roads of this nature, nor with the types of trucks with which they must share the road: A one way bridge with one posted warning that it's one way. And it's a hundred kilometrean-hour speed limit. And so (the driver) didn't notice the sign and just piled right over the bridge. That was one. And then another woman wasn't competent driving on dirt roadsgot into a dust cloud and steered right off the road and over a cliff. We had a crummy roll over- the shoulder was really soft and this other guy didn't radio when he entered the road. And the crummy just sort of sank and rolled. One guy got pretty badly bruised up .. .(5) And you radio in every couple kilometres saying what direction you're going in, but if its an active logging area and you come around a comer and there's a logging truck coming around and you hit the logging truck, or you go off the road, or if its a day off and the driver' s drunk and he goes off the road, stufflike that ... (1) One treeplanter reported that his crew lodged a formal complaint regarding their foreman's excessive speed while driving the crew in a crummy: The logging roads and driving at high speeds. And we as planters made a formal complaint. That we felt it was unsafe. 'Cause we were doing a hundred and ten and stufflike this. We were going around some corners lifting the wheels off the ground. Who was driving? One of the crew foremen.( 4) Motor vehicle risk associated with treeplanting has previously been reported in the literature. PRWA discussed this issue in the context of workers' inability to ensure safe transportation and adequate motor vehicle training and support (Cranston, 1989; "People before trees", 1988). WSCA also 91 regarded the potential for vehicle accidents as the greatest fatality risk to treeplanters due to poor vehicle safety inspection and maintenance and inadequate driver certification (Brinkman, 1995b). Despite reporting motor vehicle risk as a significant hazard, no mention has been made in the literature regarding the use of alcohol and/or drugs as contributing to motor vehicle-related risk. My participants, however, reported widespread occurrence of impaired driving. Most treeplanters shared stories of fellow workers driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs during days off, but their assessments of the risks involved are complex and replete with rationalizations and contradictions: Drinking and driving- that's one thing that really bothers me. And I don't drive with people that are drinking and driving. But ifi' m not driving and I'm in the vehicle, I'll drink in the van. Even that's illegal (but) the person who ' s driving is sober. I don't like driving with people that are stoned. But a few people will drink and drive still. I don't like that part. I just think it's stupidity. (5) This planter, though, went on to describe a somewhat different scenario after I questioned her about the perception of drinking and driving as "okay": That' s a no-no as far as I'm concerned. Urn, I mean ifi ' m trapped somewhere, I've been drinking, they' ve been drinking, they' re are no cabs, I'll go with them. But generally as a rule I get really pissed ' cause somebody drinks and drives. And people don't like me for doing that but I figure I've saved my skin and a bunch of people's skin a number oftimes.(5) Two additional planters described impaired driving as a common occurrence during the treeplanting season, but conveyed a feeling of indifference or apathy on the part of treeplanters: I would say that drinking and driving is out of hand up here. Sure. Absolutely. From camp, around camp, in town. Not just treeplanters. I've met loggers that, driving down the road, are tossing cans out the window. Treeplanters especially, I've seen them just loaded, just stone drunk, hop into the truck, "I gotta go get some smokes." Why don 't they perceive that as risky? Well, they' re on roads where you can go for an hour and never see another car. Or it' s kind of fun, sliding around on this road. (2b) Of course. You' re coming around a bend on a narrow dirt road, not much traction, and you 92 might have a couple close calls and the adrenaline kicks in and you' re able to avoid it. And then you ' ve got another hour. (2a) The hazard of impaired driving encompasses both the physical risks of being injured and treeplanters' relative failure to perceive their social activities as contributing to health risks. Motor vehicle related risk is known to increase the likelihood of fatalities, yet few treeplanters appear to recognize that its combination with their social behaviour is risky. As the following response illustrates, perception of social health risk is apparently overshadowed by the physical hazards of treeplanting life: I don' t think that' s perceived as trouble, that' s just normal. They 're more worried, when drinking in a group, (about) going to the store by themselves. I think they're more concerned about that. At night, and they' ve been drinking and they head off in P.G. or other towns by themselves at night, that's when you're going to get beat up. We' ve heard lots of stories that everyone up here owns a gun. It' s not just getting beat up.(2) 93 1. A few treeplanters reported pressure from their foremen and supervisors not to claim Workers' Compensation in the event of injury or illness. A recent anecdotal report described an incident where, following a WCB claim, a young rookie treeplanter coincidentally found himself without work mid-way through the season. 94 CHAPTER6 TREEPLANTING AS RISKY BUSINESS: SOCIAL HEALTH RISKS Social Health Risks: Subcultural Context Treeplanters' identification of the health risks associated with their work involves predominantly physical hazards. Social aspects ofthe job, evidenced by my participants' identification of common social activities chosen by treeplanters, were clearly not perceived as involving a similar level of risk. Low perception of risk results largely from the elements of the treeplanting subculture that construct risk-taking as normative and acceptable. This creates a subcultural context oftreeplanters' behaviour that encourages full participation in social activities and prevents recognition of participation as risky. The attractiveness of membership in the treeplanting subculture is a key motivator for young people entering this business. Treeplanters' expression of pride and enthusiasm for their work results in large part from their participation in common social activities that promote collectivity and camaraderie. The liberal environment in which they participate places few restrictions on their behaviour: The attraction oftreeplanting is that you can make so much money. And you don' t have to be nice to anybody, you can be a complete idiot, asshole and they still won't fire you. As long as you plant trees and you plant lots of good trees.(5) A high level of acceptance of normally unacceptable social behaviour and the isolated location of treeplanting characterize the distinctiveness of this work setting from the home environment. Social relations within the work sites reinforce more permissive norms and excuse behaviour as " ... a treeplanting kind of thing" : The mental challenges ofbeing isolated and it's an experience that most people in our culture 95 aren't used to having to do. We're used to having phones, we're used to having tv' s. We're used to having mechanisms of escape from our day to day lives. When you're isolated in that culture, your day life, your evening life- everything is treeplanting. (3) I planted with a woman for like almost a whole month and we spent ten hours a day together. You know, you think about spending ten hours a day with the same person. You think it would drive you insane. But is doesn't you know. But even spending ten hours a day with a friend, for six days a week. That would probably grate on my nerves. (But) that' s fine because it' s a treeplanting kind ofthing. (5) If they're a subculture, it's because of the amount of interaction that they have with each other for the number of hours that they do every day. It' s not like going to a job, or going to school and then going home. And having a different group of friends. These are the only people out there. And take these people (away) and you have nothing. (3) Despite the role of social activities in promoting enthusiasm for treeplanting subculture, the level of risks associated with accepted social behaviours, both within the camp setting and during days off, can be argued to pose definite risk to the health and safety of these young people. Furthermore, the social pressures resulting from the intensity of the physical work, the hierarchical organization, and the remote location of the work setting are identified as social determinants oftreeplanters' risktaking . Social Activities as Risk-Taking The use of alcohol and drugs by treeplanters as a means to relax and let loose is pursued not in a responsible manner but as hinging. Binge drinking or drug use increases the likelihood of accidents or unplanned events involving injury or fatality resulting from impaired judgement or increased impulsiveness. Apart from the risk of motor vehicle fatalities , aggressive behaviour, and physical injury, excessive consumption in a binge context increases the risk of alcoholism and drug dependency, or both, that could lead in the long term to liver cirrhosis or suicide (McKie et al. , 1993). Impaired judgement resulting from intoxication also impacts on treeplanters ' engagement 96 in sexual relationships. Casual sexual encounters, particularly those taking place with a partner outside their immediate social group, were reported as usually mediated by drugs and/or alcohol. The practice of safe sex (condom use) may be further impaired by intoxication, creating risk for sexually transmitted diseases (such as chlamydia, gonorrhea, herpes, hepatitis, and HIV infection), and unwanted pregnancy. The extent of condom use among treeplanters engaging in sex while away working was not readily defined. Common reports stated that condoms were used by treeplanters " .. .usually. Not always though." Questioned regarding the availability of condoms, my participants responded as follows: I' ve seen and heard some foremen (carry them) .. .and I know some cooks who have made it very clear that it's common in camps that couples get together. That if you decide to have sex that condoms can be available. (3) Most foremen carry condoms. For themselves? No. For every one? Yeah. But most people bring their own too. (7) Yeah, I guess so. But they were in shortage because people didn't know ... (6) Are condoms available at camp or from y our foreman? Oh God no . (5) Although considerable opportunity existed for treeplanters to engage in sexual activity with fellow planters, and casual sex was reported as common and accepted, condom use did not appear to be as prevalent or "talked about". The following experience by one of my participants provides evidence for the occurrence of unprotected sex: In terms of my own experience last year, there were two women in camp who were pregnant. They were pregnant when they came up? 97 No, they got pregnant out there. (5) Risk reduction around drinking and driving by treeplanters is also impaired by drug or alcohol intoxication. Although cognizant of the risk of fatality associated with drunk driving, decisions regarding designated drivers often take place after an occasion when most treeplanters are in various stages of intoxication. Therefore, their identification of drinking and driving as "out of hand up here" was not translated into a recognition of participation in impaired driving as risk-taking. This issue of perceived invulnerability has been addressed by studies of factors associated with risk-related behaviour among young people. Findings regarding college age students' perceptions of risk as determinants of risk reduction have been inconsistent. 1 As well, level of knowledge ofSTDs or HIV/AIDS has not been consistently shown to be predictive of risk reduction, although one study did report knowledge of alcohol-related risk as predictive of risk reduction behaviour (Jones, Harel, and Levinson, 1992). Jones et al. reported the importance of group norms in determining engagement in and level of alcohol consurnption.2 Perceived peer norms also significantly impact on risk reduction involving sexual behaviour. Desiderate and Carroll ( 1995) reported that alcohol use not only impairs judgement but is significantly (positively) correlated with number of sexual partners. These findings are consistent with the results of my project. Perceived invulnerability was associated with risk-taking, and although most treeplanters were well educated and reasonably aware of the implications of risk-taking, their behaviours were not consistent with strategies of risk reduction. Alcohol use did impact on treeplanters ' sexual relationships, and group norms appear to be extremely important in engagement in social activities that constitute risk-related behaviour. There are important differences, however, that reflect the unique context of the treeplanting 98 subculture. The information gathered in this study suggests that treeplanters ' level ofrisk-taking is higher than that of mainstream college-age adults. Regarding alcohol behaviour, my participants reported 80% to 100% participation in weekly alcohol use (i.e. on days off), with no gender differences, and alcohol consumption during each episode ranged from 5 or 6 to over 20. Consumption of just "two or three beers" per episode was described as "exceptionally low". Reports of drug use by treeplanters also suggest a higher level of risk-taking than other college-age adults. My participants estimated that one-quarter to one-third of their fellow treeplanters were regular marijuana users, 10% to 15% of whom were everyday drug users (up to several times per day). Consumption of marijuana two to three times per week was described by one planter as constituting "exceptionally low" consumption. With respect to sexual behaviour, my participants reported that approximately 25% of treeplanters engaged in sex with casual and/or multiple partners during their summer planting tenure. Although this reported incidence is similar to that reported for mainstream college students, most casual sexual relations within treeplanting crews were said to involve alcohol and/or drug use that may haw impaired the use of condoms. M y treeplanter participants were similar to mainstream college students in that their perceived susceptibility is low and level of knowledge appears to be non-predictive. While their level of risk-taking and the social context in which risk-taking takes place have unique characteristics, the findings of the study suggest the subculture reinforces the risk-taking behaviours, constructing risktaking as normative and acceptable. Social Determinants ofTreeplanters ' Risk-Taking The elements of the treeplanting subculture that serve to highlight the significance of the social 99 context oftreeplanters' behaviour include: the intensity ofthe physical and mental demands that creates a need for release and physical closeness, a hierarchy that promotes full participation in the physical and social environments as a means to gain status within the crew, and the remote location that lends itself easily to feelings of anonymity. Intensitv: the need for release. Treeplanting has been described as an extremely intense experience. The working conditions require treeplanters to work long hours, often alone, performing repetitive physical work that allows few distractions during the long, exhausting days. The challenge is to occupy one ' s mind but not think "too much": Basically that' s your real enemy out there- is thinking. (7) If you start thinking too much then you become aggravated. And that's a very destructive state of mind to get into. (4) Spending such a large amount of time in relative solitude provides an opportunity to reflect but the reflection can be disturbing. Existing troubles become exaggerated with so much time to think and problems appear that were previously unrecognized: Sure, if you've ever planted and you're up there 10 hours planting those trees by yourself, after a while you are faced with these things. If you had problems or things were worrying you before, you can't help but think about it. You can try all you like but guaranteed they' ll come up again. (2a) You'll be planting in some swamp somewhere, and you've made twenty five dollars all day because the bad luck you got on this land and the bugs are driving you nuts and you remember something that may have happened months ago or years ago, or just the feeling of inadequacy from, like "why the hell am I not planting as much as her? Or him?" (2b) I think that if you have problems before you come up here or whatever, misgivings or anxieties, I think being up here will just intensify it. Because you don't have as many distractions. You know, you're planting 10 hours a day by yourself and it's pretty hard to distract yourself from whatever's worrying you for 10 hours. More than likely you don't 100 have somebody to talk to ... (2a) You bet. I think that's part of why people quit. It would be agony to have all that spare time if you had skeletons in your closet. ( 6) An intense experience results not only from working under isolated conditions and performing strenuous, repetitive work, but also from the close living quarters of a treeplanting camp. Although the closeness promotes unity and a sense of community among planters, the immediacy of most social contact is frustrating at times : I think eight weeks is a good period too where you get to know each other. You don't know each other so you' re pretty friendly and then you get to know each other so then there ' s friendships and then it gets to the point where you're just really pissing me off, I hate seeing you every day. I hate your whining, I hate the way you blow your nose. And so 8 weeks is the period where I just really want to get away from these people. (2b) I think it's people all having to live together and trying to put up with each other and you can do it for a while and it' s okay. But after a month- everyone ' s got their own things that they' re thinking about.. .so I was getting tense. And it was getting to the point that, "Don' t cross me because I'm not happy. And if you cross me I' m going to get very angry". You know. And so that kind of thing would start to happen where people were just on edge. (1) Tension among the members of the crew can lead to fights between planters and disputes involving social dynamics and power: Then on the last night partying there was this dogpile or something and this (one) guy ended up being the last guy on top of this (foreman). And when every one got off the dogpile, the foreman just throttled him. The foreman throttled him. I mean, this kind of seclusion and the kinds of things that are running through your mind, without distraction, all day - it adds up. (2a) We also had some thieving going on in camp where people were stealing from each other. That just causes a lot of tension. There were some fights that happened on our crew. In Clearwater there was a big fight: This guy from Quebec was just having major attitude that day. And he had already gotten into it with me and I just kept my cool and walked away because I was really seriously wanting to just drop him right there on the block. We were trying to clusterfuck this last piece of land - like 8 of us in there trying to plant at the same time on the same piece. We were trying to finish the piece of land so we could move on to another block. This guy was giving - barking, telling everybody what to do and how to do 101 it, just giving everyone a hard time. You know, you can maybe do that with some rookies and get away with it but you don't do that with experienced planters because they' ll just turn around and say "look, mind your own fucking business, plant your own trees, pay attention to your trees, because I' m just doing my job and trying to get the hell out of here just like you." So, anyways, he really ticked this guy off and that caused a lot of tension and there were fights on the nights off. There was a big fight that night with this same guy. (1) Many recognized that treeplanting has the potential to yield very high wages. Attaining the desired level of income requires considerable effort and determination and the pressure to reach exceptional planting production is demanding: You know if you' re making over $150 a day for three weeks straight and you get on to a new block and you' re working just as hard but you're not clearing the money, you question what you' re doing there. And everybody gets these mental problems and they don't discuss them right away. (3 ) I wanted to make as much money as I could and get out of there as quick as I could. And I wasn't making the kind of money that I wanted to make so it kept dragging longer and longer so I was getting tense. (1) And then everything pisses you off. Not making money, this is really pissing me off. So everything kind ofbuilds on top of that really. (5) Personal goals notwithstanding, the pressure imposed by foremen to encourage the development of tough attitudes among the planters is significant: Don' t whine, don't complain, don't bitch, toughen up, be hardcore, be tough, plant, plant, plant. You get that from the foreman and the supervisors ...they just want you to be tough, be there, be hardcore, don' t let down. (1) There ' s always pressure to perform. And it's never ending. You don't take lunch breaks. You eat while walking. You eat while planting. You just keep going. It begins from the foreman. But then it ' s built up momentum from the crew and within yourself. And so it takes over. (4) At times, the pressure is seen as overwhelming: Like I know I'm having a bad day when I just sit down and cry. I' ve done that so many times. I just sit there with my bags on and my shovel in my hand and bawl my eyes out. Bawl my eyes out because you just don't want to do it. I just can't take it anymore. I can't 102 leave because I need the money and I have no where to go. Like I can't plant trees anymore because it' s driving me insane. Or sometimes, usually I just sit down and cry, but occasionally I'll get frustrated enough that'll I'll start to break my shovel. I've never actually succeeded. No, usually I just bash it on the ground a few times. Or fling my shovel. A lot of people are into shovel flinging . But then you just have to walk after it and get it. You know, because you need it. (5) Similarly, description of activities during days off are expressed with equal intensity: Yeah, fight. And just get drunk and disturb people. You know, let out a little tension in town, stufflike that. (1) The grueling working and living conditions are an acceptable part of the job based on the method in which treeplanters pursue their need for release: Yeah, you' ve just had 6 days of going insane or 5 days of going insane and just driving yourself mentally and collapsing at night. And all of a sudden you don't have to do that for a whole day. And you get this overwhelming urge to do something. Something to reassert your freedom. Gotta do something. And a lot of people just lose it. Especially men people. I don' t know of very many women that trash hotel rooms, you know. (5) These dramatic expressions illustrating the intensity of both the physical and social environments of treeplanting give credence to the popular maxim that treeplanters who work hard must play hard. Intensity: the need for phvsical closeness. In addition to the need for release from the mental and physical stress and strain, treeplanters described the challenges as creating a need for physical closeness as well. Community building among treeplanters is strong and immediate; it has previously been described as a valued and important aspect of the job. Given that most treeplanters are current or former university students, between the ages of 18 and 30, and participating in a lifestyle that requires them to live and work in very close quarters, there is considerable group support. This challenging shared experience leads to the establishment of close, personal relationships between planters, some of which were just friendships, others romantic, sexual, casual, or long-lasting. 103 Many treeplanters come to the treeplanting business interested in meeting new people and making friends. Those interests notwithstanding, relationships do develop between treeplanters naturally as a means to cope with the challenging conditions of the work. My conversations with the treeplanters suggested that close relationships are the product of a strong need for support and understanding: It ' s very common for treeplanters to get together. I would say for support, for emotional support... don't have anybody else to rely on so they have to pick and choose with us. And that's what becomes their emotional support. And an intimate relationship is emotionally satisfying. Because you do get support and you do get hugged. (3) It depends on ... you can be motivated to come together through different things, either a feeling of not being terribly secure, or feeling lonely ... (2a) The demanding physical conditions of treeplanting and the intensity of the experience that leave some planters feeling emotionally vulnerable are influencing factors in the development of relationships that were described as equally intense: You get all the same kind of normal feelings as you would with other relationships just in a very compacted frame of time. (7) There' s definitely some intensity ...It's just the set of circumstances that' s going around that just facilitates everything happening a little more quickly maybe. Because you can't really put on too much of a persona, you're pretty much as you are out there. You can't, you don't have your house to retreat to when people haven't seen where you live. Out here, people walk by and they see a whole week's worth of socks piled outside your tent and they know, they see first thing in the morning when you've got bed head or whatever...That kind of acceptance, a lot of the social, the bullshit just sort of drops away. This is who we are, this is as we are. (2a) It' s intensified and the types of relationships you establish happen faster. You have to trust people so much. You have to be open with people sooner, so maybe that is why they get involved in relationships so fast. (3) The intensity of both the physical challenges, and the relationships that develop as a means to cope, are further magnified by the close living quarters, contributing to a potential for multiple sexual 104 relationships to occur between planters: Especially for the girls because we' re so outnumbered. I think I was the only one of the females who didn't have sex with a guy they met at camp. I did have a very close relationship with a planter but we didn' t have enough time together to mesh. (6) People, for couples who go on casual relationships, because of the disappointment at the end they end up entering another one soon. I would say that is the trap that happens ... because it's not just the first mishap that causes emotional pain. It' s that they try to fill it with another...they find themselves in multiple casual relationships. (3) If you get involved in a very close relationship, it' s not a gradual relationship. It happens and it' s very intense and it's there all the time. You see them day and night. You're in very close contact with that person. You become very intimate with that person, especially if it's a sexual relationship. And you see, and you' re living in the tight quarters of the camp. (3) While most treeplanters expressed positive attitudes toward condom use, the frequency of safe sexual practice among treeplanters is difficult to fully understand. However, barriers to condom use do exist that may prevent adequate sexual risk reduction: a) the use of alcohol or drugs, or both, that may impair judgement and inhibition; b) a lack of availability of condoms based on the remote locations of treeplanting camps; c) the immediacy and intensity of most social contact that expedites sexual encounters; and d) reliance on other (unreliable) risk reduction strategies such as immediately trusting fellow treeplanters due to the swift community building process within crews The intense conditions, then, escalate the development of casual sexual relationships and discourage the practice of risk reduction. Hierarchy. While the intense nature of the working and living conditions creates a need for release and physical closeness, the hierarchal structure encourages social activities as a means to gain acceptance or status within the group. The social influence exerted by the hierarchy within treeplanting crews allows higher power planters to determine accepted and expected behaviour and set an example for others 105 to follow. Foremen and highballers encourage community building to maintain a close knit crew with high morale and high planting production. "Work hard, play hard" is again reiterated by those who have the influence in determining group social activities: The foremen drink, the supervisors drink, everyone, everybody drinks. Everybody gets drunk. (1) While the power that foremen and highballers hold influences the group activities and behaviour, it also yields them opportunities to use (abuse) that power in social relationships with other planters. Women, in particular, are not only required to behave in ways to gain acceptance within the group, but also to acquire negotiating power in their relationships with more powerful treeplanters. Male planters with the most power and mystique were reported as attracting women known as "tenthoppers" or "bushbetties". It appears, however, that women treeplanters ' purposeful establishment of sexual relationships with highballers or foremen results more from strategy than seduction. T enthoppers. I think that a lot of them are still girls. Just like a lot of first year planters are still boys. I mean, they' ll come up and they' ll just think, "Neat, we 're going to smoke drugs, and listen to Van Morrison, and make lots of money, and gonna be outside, and I might get a tattoo." And they 're in it for an adventure. (2b) There ' s a sense of, like with bushbetties or whatever, they 're out there for an adventure and some of these guys are pretty wild looking, pretty crazy. They 're real characters. And there ' s something enigmatic about somebody that can live nomadically, come out here, pound that many trees, move on to wherever. It' s an adventurous life. So it holds a lot of mystique. (2a) Women may very well find the adventurous aspects oftreeplanting appealing. The added features of sexual harassment from supervisors and gender inequity within treeplanting crews, however, represent additional pressure for which women have had to develop strategies of coping. In fact, harassment and gender-based discrimination constitute further health risks for women m 106 treeplanting. Quid pro quo harassment applies when a person in a power position makes decisions that affect a person of lower power' s position based on their compliance with certain sexual demands. Hostile environment applies when the harassing behaviour of anyone in the work environment, not only a person in a power position, causes the environment to become hostile, intimidating, or offensive and unreasonably interferes with peoples' work (University of Northern British Columbia, 1995). Both types of sexual harassment are offensive and harmful, and increase the likelihood of sexual violence. Sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and gender-based violence are known to impact on health in significant ways including: increased risk of depression, anxiety, eating disorders, sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancy, suicide, and homicide (Collier, 1995; Heise, 1994). The World Bank (Heise, 1994) reports that the hidden health burden of violence against women includes increased likelihood of alcohol and drug use and "injurious health behaviours" such as smoking and unprotected sex (p. 18). Although sexual harassment as a health risk in treeplanting has not been reported anecdotally nor in the literature prior to this study, its commonality in the stories and experiences of my participants suggests its significance. Additionally, treeplanters perceived sexual harassment as common, yet did not express its prevalence as problematic. Smith' s (1987) earlier finding of"the prevalence of depression among female planters" (p. 15) is the only mention that supports the argument that women in treeplanting are at higher risk of anxiety, stress, sexually transmitted diseases including HIV infection, unwanted pregnancy, and violence as a result of the prevalence of sexual harassment perpetrated by men in treeplanting workplaces : Yes, I would say foremen often abuse their power in terms of harassment. Pushing people too far. Try to urge them to go on. Actually it' s negative for some people- you're pushing, pushing, pushing, you know, push them onwards. And other people you push them too far, 107 they stop, and they internalize it. And unfortunately foremen do tend to, I guess, sexually harass women on the same terms. Discriminate against women in hopes that just verbally - a little anger. Some foremen have a concept that if you anger the women, the women will work harder. And I would say that- that' s a big misunderstanding. Because for most women, if anything, they don' t work harder. They get the job done so they can go home. Or they go (back) to camp and then they try to figure out how to get out of it. Or they go to other individuals for support. And if anything else comes (out of it), they end up blowing up in the foreman ' s face. (3) Remote setting. The location of treeplanting camps as physically and socially remote is a feature that makes this work context unique. My participants insisted, however, that the location of the work setting is not a major issue concerning them and denied that the remote setting allows them to engage in more permissive behaviour. Many planters expressed the remote setting as representing a refreshing break from regular life and as a means of escape from "the daily grind". It was pointed out that camplife was no different than other contexts such as the university residence setting where binge drinking, drug use, and sexual promiscuity is rampant. Therefore, they asserted, the treeplanting environment is not unique in its characteristic activities: And I think people behave the same way as they do in the university residence, you know. There' s always fresh faces and you' re getting drunk all the time. So you probably have a few more sexual encounters than you normally would. But's not just sort of tent, sleeping bag hopping thing that people expect it is. Although I've heard that one too. The other thing is people' s perceptions of what's going on are different because they see everything and hear everything. Back in the world somebody may be sleeping with a new person every weekend but you wouldn't know. But out treeplanting you know. (5) Because, at university it's a temporary setting anyway. So you know that come May, you' re going to go looking for new place to live, or a new job or whatever. Similarly, you know at the end of June you' re going to be leaving treeplanting. (4) I wouldn' t say it's any different than a number of situations, residency in universities . I wouldn't I don' t think. I think it may have something to do with the living conditions, the close quarters. That the community is more intimate. Like, some people know what's going on. Everybody knows everything. People discuss sometimes their problems. (3) 108 Anytime you spend eight weeks with a group of people, you're bound to get relationships starting up. With treeplanting it's just that you're pretty isolated. 8 weeks does seem like a long time.(2) Despite the treeplanters' perception of their treeplanting experience as comparable to life in a university residence, their summer employment context does involve several distinct features that deserve discussion. First, little opportunity exists for treeplanters to remove themselves from the setting. For example, they can't go home at the end of the work day: I can 't just turn around and go home. I'm a long ways from home. (5) It's not like going to a job, or going to school, and then going home and having a different group of friends. These are the only people out here. And ... take these people (away) and you have nothing. (3) Secondly, foremen set clear goals to unite the treeplanters rather than separate them, resulting in little free time alone. Thirdly, "everybody knows everything" due to the close living quarters that prevent treeplanters from having any privacy: Yeah, it's pretty funny just seeing couples come out of a tent in the morning and be the joke at breakfast. But it was in good humour. .. (6) Fourthly, the work setting is generally located in remote areas well outside urban centres, a physical situation that may lead to feelings of anonymity and lack of consequence because the "responsibilities of home don't exist": It' s this thing that' s hanging over your head. It's just that I'm here for 8 weeks and you're anonymous to a certain extent, this little pocket of time where your responsibilities at home don' t exist. For those 8 weeks mom and dad an girlfriend or whoever don' t know really what you're up to and it' s like, it's just 8 weeks. I can go on a little bender up here in the woods. I mean, how bad am I gonna hurt myself out here? (2a) Given the prevailing social structure within treeplanting crews that poses few restrictions on behaviour, positive feelings toward the remote setting oftreeplanting represent sanctioning ofthe 109 context as an opportunity to let loose and have fun. The remote location also provides an appropriate setting for the full participation in the subculture that is expected of treeplanters and reinforces its distinctiveness from the home environment. Displays of pride and enthusiasm for treeplanting are apparent, yet evidence of widespread indifference is also clear. Indifference toward others, a feeling of freedom from responsibilities that promotes a lack of restraint, and pressure to conform to group activities all result from the experience of membership within treeplanting subculture: One fellow that came in, sort of healthy, happy, holistic guy, just put down the Celestine Prophecy, and all that. Was talking about the auras of trees and stufflike that...came in with a full two-month vitamin kit and left with a hangover that will not soon be forgotten. (2) There ' s sort of a romance about treeplanting .. .in the past I've compared it to the romance of motorcycles. That they are appealing, yet when it's cold and raining, neither treeplanting or on a motorcycle become very appealing. (4) Furthermore, the experience creates romantic ideas about the work and life of a treeplanter and encourages pride among its workers, motivating their attraction to the treeplanting job: You just feel this sort of thing, it's the same thing as wanderlust. You gotta keep going, gotta do something, gotta get out. That's what it is for me anyways. In the spring when the ground starts to thaw, oh boy, give me some trees. Gotta go planting. It' s a bizarre effect. But I'll stand in my parent's backyard and screeftheir lawn and stufflike that. I gotta go now. (5) 110 1. See Baldwin and Baldwin (1988), Gerrard and Warner (1994), Maticka-Tyndale (1991), and Simkins (1995) as described in the literature review chapter ofthis paper. 2. See Maticka-Tyndale (1991) and Winslow, Franzini, and Hwang (1992) as reported in the .literature review chapter of this paper. 111 CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION Undertaking a study of treeplanters in Northern British Columbia addressed the obvious lack of research that exists regarding this group of workers. Despite treeplanters ' key role in reforestation activity, little attention has been paid to their valuable work nor to the environment in which they live. Furthermore, stereotypes characterizing treeplanters as "rowdy" and "out of control" during their days off in the city often overshadow the grueling work conditions they endure in the bush. The stereotypes held by the broader community regarding treeplanters' social behaviour provided the main impetus for this research project, specifically the lack of recognition of the behaviour as risk-related. While widespread curiosity and criticism of treeplanters persist, little effort has been made to explore the implications of treeplanters' health-related behaviour portrayed by common stereotypes. As a new member of the broader community, I was intrigued by the characterizations of the treeplanting subculture and treeplanters ' status as a largely unstudied and arguably devalued social group. From a health promotion perspective, I was interested in the characteristics of the treeplanting job that might influence treeplanters ' health risk-taking. Elements of the treeplanting subculture demonstrate its obvious distinctiveness from the home environment of its members. Not only does membership in the subculture provide powerful incentive for young people entering the business, but it also provides an environment where more permissive norms, feelings of anonymity, and little or no information regarding health and safety exist. In addition, greater tolerance of otherwise unacceptable behaviour takes place. Further, riskrelated behaviour is not only accepted and normative within this environment but encouraged as well. 11 2 Motivations to work as a treeplanter expressed by my participants include the money, camaraderie and challenge, the opportunity to travel, and a break from school. These motivations encompass aspects of treeplanting subculture that influence health risk-taking. Pressure to be productive and make m