CHRISTMAS TREE SAFETY

LITERATURE AND STATUS QUO REPORT

Steve Curtis

This file report was written by Steve Curtis of International Forestsearch (Canada) Ltd. of Prince Albert for the Saskatchewan Christmas Tree Growers' Association. The funding for this project was supplied by Forestry Canada under the Canada-Saskatchewan Forest Resource Development Agreement 1984-89.

DISCLAIMER

The views, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this _ report_are those of the author. The exclusion of certain

manufactured products does not necessarily imply diapproval nor does the mention of other products necessarily imply endorsement by Forestry Canada or the Saskatchewan Christmas Tree Growers' Association.

Additional copies of this report may be available from:

Forestry Canada 101 15 Street East

Prince Albert, Saskatchewan S6V IGI

TABLE OF CON TEN T S

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

FOREWORD

O. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. INTRODUCTION

2. OBJECTIVES

3. LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1 SAFETY TIPS AVAILABLE TO CONSUMERS 3.1.1 Freshness Tests 3.1.2 Indoor Lighting 3.1.3 Tree Storage (Indoor & Outdoor) 3.1.4 Location of Tree Within Home 3.1.5 Tree Decorations & Ornaments 3.1.6 General Tree Care & Maintenance

3.2 FLAMMABILITY OF COMMON NATURAL CHRISTMAS TREE SPECIES 3.2.1 Testing Methodologies 3.2.2 Foliar Moisture Content 3.2.3 Flammability 3.2.4 Tree Longevity in the Home

3.3 FIRE RETARDANT SUBSTANCES 3.3.1 Existing & Approved Brand Names

3.3.11 Existing Brand Names 3.3.12 Approved Brand Names .

3.3.2 Chemical Content & Related Toxicities 3.3.3 Application Methods, Results, Rates & Costs

3.4 ARTIFICIAL TREE SAFETY 3.4.1 Existing & Approved Brand Names 3.4.2 Chemical Content & Related Toxicities 3.4.3 The Potential for Fires 3.4.4 Safety Tips to the Consumer

i(iE)

0-1

1-1

2-1

3-1

3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-5 3-6

3-7 3-7 3-8 3-8 3-10

3-11 3-11 3-12 3-13

- .' 3-14 3-14

3-17 3-17 3-18 3-19 3-20

3.5 CHRISTMAS TREE-RELATED FIRES 3.5.1 The United States & Canada 3.5.2 Media Documentation 3.5.3 The Misuse of Statistics & Sensationalism

3.6 -- PROVINCIAL/FEDERAL FIRE REGULATIONS 3.6.1 - Saskatchewan-3.6.2 Other Provinces 3.6.3 Canada 3.6.4 Reversing Legislation

4. THE SASKATCHEWAN SITUATION

4. 1 THE TREND

4.2 MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS 4.2.1 Regina 4.2.2 Other Municipalities

4.3 NATURAL CHRISTMAS TREE RETAILERS

4.4 THE GENERAL PUBLIC

4.5 INSURANCE AGENCIES

4.6 LEGAL BATTLES & NON-COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS

5. THE WAY .AHEAD

5.1 THE ROLE OF THE SCTGA 5.1.1 Fire Marshals 5.1.2 Christmas Tree Retailers 5.1.3 General Public Awareness & the Media

5.2 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDIX

LIST OF REFERENCES

ii(iii)

3-21 3-21 3-23 3-23

3-25 3-25 3-27 3-29 3-30

4-1

4-1

4-1 4-1 4-3

4-4

4-4

4-5

4-6

5-1

5-1 5-1 5-2 5-2

5-3

TABLES

1. IGNITION TIME OF BRANCH TIPS EXPOSED TO A 2.5 INCH BUNSEN BURNER FLAME

2. DAILY WATER CONSUMPTXON OF CUT CHRISTMAS TREES INDOORS

3. EXISTING FIRE RETARDANT CHEMICALS

4. ANNUAL AVERAGE OF STRUCTURE FIRES STARTED BY IGNITION OF CHRISTMAS TREES

5. ALBERTA FIRE STATISTICS FOR CHRISTMAS TREE-RELATED FIRES (1977-88)

iii( iii)

3-9

'3-10

3-12

3-22

ACKNOWI.JIDGEHENTS

This Report is based on research materials individuals and government agencies from across States, too numerous to mention.

supplied Canada

by many key & the United

However, Mr. Jim JOHNSTON, FORESTRY CANADA (Prince Albert) must be thanked for his time & effort devoted to supplying any related materials available; and Mr. Frank SUDOL, President of the SASKATCHEWAN CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION, for his drive to make this Report a reality.

Finally, FORESTRY CANADA, Prince Albert Offices must be commended for the provision of funds to initialize & complete this Project.

FOREWORD

This Report, requested by the SASKATCHEWAN CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION (SCTGA), represents a literature & status quo review of natural Christmas tree safety information gathered from sources across Canada & the United States.

This Report is accompanied by a separate Reference Package~ containing all research materials cited, .. providing . the. initiative for an SCTGA library of pertinent statistics, Christmas Holiday Safety Tips, research reports and articles, past & present.

Although conducted under a limited Project time schedule, this Report offers the SCTGA unl~ited opportunities to enhance membership awareness and knowledge of all Christmas tree safety facets.

Cap. 0-1

o. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

0.1 The SASKATCHEWAN CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION has become increasingly concerned with a growing trend towards legislation against the natural Christmas tree in public buildings.

Recent legal battles have 'pointed the- way towards SCTGA involvement through a literature review of pertinent statistics, research reports· and articles, to meet the challenge of fighting discrimination against the natural Christmas tree and related public safety concerns.

0.2 The following points summarize the objectives of this Report:

(a) To tap all existing sources of information, including government agencies, fire safety organizations, and independent research laboratories, for full input into documented studies, reports & general factual information on natural Christmas tree safety.

(b) To provide the SCTGA membership with quantitative & . qualitative information for potential litigation, given that the current, suspected misleading information could jeopardize the natural Christmas tree market potential.

(c) To form an in-depth reference library on natural Christmas tree safety information.

(d) To document artificial Christmas tree safety concerns.

(e) To provide recommendations to establishment of guidelines safety campaign.

the SCTGA membership for the to implement a natural tree

0.3 A review of safety tips available to consumers reveals some potentially confusing and sometimes misleading information. Only one (1) brochure, published by the CANADIAN CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION, presented both an illustrative & informative package.

0.4 Two (2) research reports fully document that natural Christmas trees are essentially resistent to fire if the moisture content of the tree is kept above, approximately, 75-85%. Minimal tree maintenance, consisting mainly of constant watering, should be adequate to keep moisture levels at 100% or greater.

Cap. 0-2

0.5 There seems to be no consensus amongst government authorities as to which fire retardant substances are approved for use on natural Christmas trees, to reduce the potential for fires.

At least four (4) methods exist to apply the chemical to the natural tree. "Dipping" was found to be the most cost efficient, least wasteful of fire retardant, and more apt to conform to local fire department recommendations.

0.6 Many unknown chemicals are present in artificial Christmas trees that not only burn easily, but also represent little-known, publicly, toxilogical hazard.

No Canadian authorities any particular brand resistant artificial as

were found to test or approve the name, although some recommend

opposed to a natural tree.

use of a fire

Very little information is available to the general public on the potential hazards of the artificial tree.

0.7 Between 1982 - 1986, there were approximately 650 Christmas tree­related fires throughout Canada & the United States.

Saskatchewan Fire Officials were found to misuse existing statistical information, condemning the natural tree and favouring the artificial Christmas tree.

0.8 The Saskatchewan Fire Prevention Act prohibits natural trees in any education facility. Municipal fire authorities have the ultimate power in restricting any potential fire hazard they feel exists in a public building. As a result, the City of Regina has in place a bylaw prohibiting natural trees in public buildings.

0.9

Two (2) case examples are possibility of changing banning natural trees.

presented to municipal or

illustrate Provincial

the existing legislation

A trend exists within use of artificial trees to seriously affect the whole.

Saskatchewan communities to recommend the in public buildings. This trend is shown natural Christmas tree industry as a

At present, one (1) related court case in Regina has resulted in a successful bid to display natural trees, under the Charter of Rights & Freedoms.

Cap. 0-3

0.10 Although the SCTGA will not be marketing the bulk of its natural trees until 1995, the situation in Saskatchewan at present calls for immediate action through the following recommendations:

(a) redevelopment of a new, more informative safety tip brochure.

(b) personal contacts with all Provincial Fire Commissioner, tree safety literature.

City Fire Marshals & the to present factual Christmas

(c) offer support, through the prov~s~on of research reports and any factual materials, to any known Christmas. tree retailers & public building owners undergoing legal battles or confrontations with c~v~c authorities regarding natural Christmas tree display.

(d) publish the SCTGA safety tip information and general facts about the Christmas tree industry, including growing, planting, cutting, baling and marketing of natural Christmas trees, in local newspapers & magazines.

(e) ensure that retailers of natural trees handling & safety tip information, quality natural Christmas trees.

have proper storage, to minimize dry, poor

(f) 'maintain & regularly update the Reference Package presented with this Report.

(g) never discount the ability of the SCTGA to sway the OpLn10ns of Fire Authorities and the general public, into accepting the natural tree into all public buildings.

The factual materials, reports, personal interviews & correspondence, and finally, the recommendations provided, should be merely the initiation of a process towards a well-established SCTGA public awareness campaign.

Cap. 1-1

1. INTRODUCTION

The SASKATCHEWAN CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION has become increasingly concerned with a growing trend towards legislation against the natural Christmas tree in public buildings.

This trend was discovered during the 1988 Christmas. Tree Market Study, conducted by INTERNATIONAL FORESTSEARCH (CANADA) LTD. (IFSC), on behalf of the SCTGA. The results of one aspect of this Study revealed a city bylaw in place in the City of Regina; local Fire Marshals in a variety

. of cities & towns recommending artificial over natural Christmas trees; and a safety-conscious public taking a possibly misguided initiative of favouring artificial trees in their own residential dwellings. .

Recent legal battles involving a Regina Lutheran church & a natural Christmas tree retailer, with Regina civic authorities, have pointed the way towards SCTGA involvement, through a literature review of pertinent statistics, research reports & articles. This solid ammunition base is necessary to meet the challenge of fighting discrimination against the natural Christmas tree and related public safety concerns.

Cap. 2-1

2. OBJECTIVES

(a) To tap all existing sources of information, including government agencies, fire safety organizations lO and independent research laboratories, for full input into documented studies, reports & general factual information on natural Christmas tree safety.

(b) To provide the SCTGA membership with quantitative information for potential litigation, given that suspected misleading information could jeopardize Christmas tree market potential.

& qualitative the current, the natural

(c) To gather information from insurance companies, stating whether natural Christmas trees are in their premium parameter guidelines.

(d) To form an in-depth reference library on natural Christmas tree safety information.

(e) To doCument artificial Christmas tree safety concerns.

To provide recommendations to the SCTGA membership for the est~blishment of guidelines to implement a natural tree safety campaign.

Cap. 3-1

3. LITERATURE REVIEW 3.1 SAFETY TIPS AVAILABLE TO CONSUMERS

The vast amount of safety information published by government agencies, Christmas Tree Growers' Associations, safety associations, local fire departments and the media, offers the general public some common Christmas tree care & maintenance information.' However,-" differences do exist between the presented material~ This section will discuss some of these differences, as well as reveal missing information.

Cap. 3-2

3.1.1 Freshness Tests

All sources recommend purchasing a fresh tree. However, the onus is currently on the consumer to provide a suitable test for freshness.

Often, safety authorities recommend testing twigs & needles to check for brittleness or shedding. The actual testing methodologies for freshness are not discussed, however, in either Christmas tree safety brochures, published by the Fire Prevention Association of Canada & the National Fire Protection Association. The National Safety Council does describe a few basic tests for freshness, including tapping the butt of the tree on the ground to check for an abundance of needle drop, or to test the needles of a tree by bending them and attempting to pull them from the branch. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission makes an excellent point in a published fact sheet, stating" Don't depend on a nice green colour - trees may be sprayed green to improve their appearance".

Environment Canada (1976) published a news release involving the results of a study done on balsam fir trees, to come up with a suitable test on how to detect a dry tree, even if it appears to be green & fresh". In this news release, conflicting information may confuse the general public. The results of the test showed that brittle needles represent a tree that will refreshen if stood in water. If, after testing ten (0) needles, "none break, chances are that the tree is too dry to absorb moisture and is a potential fire hazard" (Environment Canada, 1976). The potentially confusing aspect is that most Christmas tree growers' associations & fire departments state that brittle needles represent a dry tree which should not be purchased.

Ultimately, the general public may then, perhaps, rely on their own judgement regarding tree freshness. As well, brochures offered by local fire departments or government agencies may not reach the bulk of natural Christmas tree consumers. Here, the Christmas tree retailer & the general media sources have the advantage. However, a review of media safety tip information from local newspapers shows a severe lack of details regarding freshness tests.-'"General statements such as "Don't purchase a tree that has dried out tl (Regina Leader Post, 1988), or "get a green tree, not one that is dried out" (Prince Albert Daily Herald, 1988), not only fail to inform the public on what is the proper method to test for freshness, but also provide false & misleading information.

Cap. 3-3

3.1.2 Indoor Lighting

It may seem very obvious that electricity is commonly the cause of Christmas tree-related fires. However, the tree itself is often blamed for causing fires (see Point 3.5).

Safety tip information in most published 'safe indoor lighting' information sheets & brochures is very "explicit, emphasizing the use of only Canadian Standard .Association (CSA) labelled electrical cords & lights. Consumers are often told not to use any worn or frayed wires, and, perhaps the most common tip, is to avoid overloading electrical outlets.

Turning off the Christmas leaving the house, is also lighting information.

lights before retiring to bed or high on the agenda of indoor

Almost all information sheets available to the public quoted electrical lights on a metallic tree to be an extreme fire hazard due to the chance of the whole tree becoming electrically charged.

The only information which seems to be generally lacking is some information on the ability/inability of these indoor lights to dry out a tree due to the radiant heat given off. Here, Van Wagner (1963) provides an answer to this question. After a three (3) week display time indoors with Christmas lights in direct contact with the tree foliage, a match test on this foliage determined that the needles would dry out and become flammable. However, the flame would quickly extinguish once the dried out needles were consumed.

Common sense, again, should dictate the safety of indoor lights within a home. Nonetheless, it takes just one fire, as the result of lack of common sense, that will permanently scar the 'safe' reputation of the natural tree. (Refer to the December 8th, 1977, Nova Scotia Department of Labour & Manpower information sheet entitled "Christmas Tree Lights", found in the Reference Package).

Cap. 3-4

3.1.3 Tree Storage (Indoor & Outdoor)

The outdoor storage of natural trees must be continually emphasized to the general public, to ensure Christmas tree freshness. Point - 3.2 fully documents the effect of temperature on Christmas tree water consumption. The variety of tests found in that section prove that even up to seven (7) weeks storage, -. a- Christmas tree can· remain fresh. However, the SCTGA should investigate the-length present-day suppliers store their trees before they ship them to Saskatchewan retailers. If these trees are cut over seven (7) weeks before they are sold, and if trees are stored

-improperly (ie. exposed to the sun & wind), then the general public must be aware of the proper methods for checking for tree dryness.

The natural tree consumer may take all the necessary tree care, maintenance, & storage information precautions, but without the ability to check for freshness, may still end up with a dry tree. In other words, it is the retailer & supplier of the natural trees who must handle & store the trees properly for the longer period of time, and ·it is these people who must be aware of all tree storage information.

There is some discrepancy between sources which recommend that trees receive a brief indoor storage period (one day) before setting it up for display (Canadian Christmas Tree Growers' Association (CCTGA), and those who recommend an immediate placement in water, once brought indoors (Canadian Forestry Service (CFS). The adjustment period recommended by the CCTGA is necessary to help the tree adjust to the warmer temperatures inside a home. However, the tests on Christmas tree flammability, found in Point 3.2, illustrate the relationship of rapid moisture loss of natural trees if stored inside, as compared to outside in the winter environment.

A common sense approach to this matter is purchasing the tree only when it will be displayed immediately upon its arrival at the purchasers' home. This way, one ensures the tree receives the water it needs without any guessing, on the consumers' part, as to how long the tree has beeri stored by the retailer & supplier.

Cap. 3-5

3.1.4 Location of Tree Within Home

There is a general consensus, regarding tree location for display, amongst most of the reviewed information sources.

The tree should be kept away from any sources of heat, such as heating ducts, televisions, fireplaces & radiators. As well, the tree should be placed away from exits, hallways, doors, windows, drapes and any high traffic areas.

Another excellent idea that seems to be surfacing in more recent safety tip articles, is to declare the room in which the tree is displayed a "non-smoking" area.

3.1.5 Tree Decorations & Ornaments

Lighted candles, metallic ornaments and extremely small decorations in homes with children are generally the most commonly -not recommended items throughout the review of Christmas tree safety literature.

Non-flammable, non-combustible, flame retardant decorations are stated as the safest type for Christmas tree display.

Cap. 3-6

3.1.6 General Tree Care & Maintenance

All information sheets recommend cutting the butt of the tree diagonally from one (1) to two (2) inches above the original cut. The importance of carrying out this procedure is to remove the clogged vessels that are used to transport water up the tree. As well, a diagonal cut (usually stated at . a 45 degree angle) actually enlarges the vesser circumference, maximizing water uptake.

Point 3.2.4 discusses tree stand size and the water consumption rates of three (3) common Christmas tree species. These rates show that a suitably large stand, of at least a one (1) gallon size, should be used. Although most of the reviewed safety literature states that the water level should be maintained, emphasis should be placed on the fact that a tree will consume two (2) to three (3) times its usual daily consumption during the first few days of Christmas tree display. It is critical to maintain a water level above all portions of the cut stem so that the tree will not seal off its vessels, eliminating any chance for future tree water consumption.

Following the Christmas Holiday Season, suggestions for use of the tree such as a bird feeder, mulch for the garden, or firewood, help to quell consumer viewpoints towards the "wasteful" practice of displaying a natural tree.

Cap. 3-7

3.2 FLAMMABILITY OF COMMON NATURAL CHRISTMAS TREE SPECIES

The following section deals strictly with two (2) government reports which test a variety of Christmas tree characteristics, relating directly to the safety of these trees. It should be a priority to base all SCTGA safety tip information (as discussed in the previous section) on the facts presented through these reports and to remain aware of more recent'studies' to-consistently update the information presented.

3.2.1 Testing Methodologies

Van Wagner (1963) conducted three (3) conifers commonly Canada:

a series of intensive tests on used for Christmas trees in

Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.); Balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill); and White spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss).

The balsam fir & white spruce were considered suitably dense due to internodal branching, whereas the Scots pine maintained a foliage-free hollow inside due to no internodal branching.

One-half of the trees were cut & stored outside for 6l weeks and the other half were cut two (2) days before the indoor test period.

The trees underwent a series of tests outside and then indoors, to obtain key information on the moisture content of the trees and their related flammabilities.

Stephens & Ahrens (1976) tested white spruce for needle loss characteristics and for interrupted water supply. Colorado blue & white spruce were included in tests of indoor water consumption rates, flammability following a variety of outdoor storage time periods, and a general discussion on in-house safety information.

Cap. 3-8

3.2.2 Foliar Moisture Content

The amount of water found within the needles of a conifer is referred to as the foliar moisture content. The importance of knowing how much water is in the needles of a tree relates directly to Christmas tree flammability - the higher the moisture c?ntent, the less chance for immediate ignition.

A common complaint of Christmas tree consumers is one of shedding needles and the general messiness of a conifer. Although the ~enetics of pine versus firs does relate to needle retention, the moisture content of twigs & foliage of these trees also plays an important aspect in a tree's ability to maintain its needles.

Van Wagner (1963) found that a critical moisture content exists "below which the foliage of the tested species will continue to dry when the tree is set in water, but above which the moisture content will increase". This critical moisture content was found to be approximately 75% for balsam fir & white spruce, and 85% for Scots pine. In fact, it was found that Scots pine dried more slowly than the spruce or fir whether stored outside for 6! weeks or freshly cut and left indoors without water.

3.2.3 Flammability

Stephens & Ahrens (1976) conducted basic flammability tests holding the branch tips of trees at the apex of a 2.5 inch flame from a Bunsen burner. Twigs with high moisture content "sputtered and charred, but did not burn when removed from the flame". White spruce was the only species that did support combustion and were those trees which were kept indoors without a water supply for seven (7) or fourteen (14) days, some with a seven (7) week outdoor storage period and some which had an interrupted water supply (see Point 3.2.4). The twigs from trees with a consistent water supply would not burn. Table 1, on the following page, p-~esents a summary of the results.

Cap. 3-9

Table 1. Ignition Time of Branch Tips Exposed to a 2.5-inch Bunsen Burner Flame

DAYS IGNITION

OUTDOOR INDOOR TIME SPECIES STORAGE USE (seconds)

White Spruce 49 - 21· 11.9 7 21 13.0 0 14 9.9 0 14 7.1

Colorado Blue Spruce 7 21 18.9 7 21 12.8

White Pine 3 22 17.8

Paper, Cardboard, 1.5 Cotton Cloth (or less)

Source: Stephens & Ahrens, 1976

Van Wagner (1963) found that Scots pine became flammable by match ignition at 657. moisture content, and balsam fir at approximately 507.. White spruce was found to lose most of its needles by 607. moisture content and could not, therefore, provide reliable flammability test results. At moisture contents of less than 207., all species were highly flammable.

Van Wagner demonstrated, in this same report, that all tested trees maintaining a moisture content over 1007., could not be ignited with matches. After applying an 8-inch Bunsen burner flame, some foliage did burn, but after removing the flame, all combustion ceased immediately. A test using crushed newspapers around the base of the trees, however, showed that no matter what the moisture content, trees are not fireproof.

No clear-cut distinction was made concluding which tree species represents a greater fire hazard. Scots-pine was found to take a longer time to dry out, once removed from water. However, once ignited, it burned similar to the balsam fir.

Cap. 3-10

3.2.4 Tree Longevity in the Home

Stephens & Ahrens (1976) discuss some interesting facts about water supply and storage of a Christmas tree.

The following table summarizes the water consumption rates of three (3) tree species at an indoor temperature of 65 degrees Fahrenheit. It is to note, however, that increasing

-the temperature and decreasing the relative humidity results in increased water consumption by the tree. The table is based on trees approximately six (6) feet tall and weighing twenty-(20) pounds.

Table 2. Daily Water Consumption of Cut Christmas Trees Indoors

AVERAGE DAILY CONSUMPTION

SPECIES (pints)

White Spruce 1.0 - 2.3

Colorado Blue Spruce 1.3

White Pine 2.2

Source: Stephens & Ahrens, 1976

It is also important to note that the above-mentioned rates are averages for a three- (3) week period. It was sometimes found that these tested trees would consume 2-3 times this 3-week average during the first few days indoors.

When outdoor versus indoor storage time periods for cut Christmas trees are compared, Stephens & Ahrens found that trees stored dry, indoors, at 65 degrees Fahrenheit for ten (10) days, fell to the same moisture content as those stored outside, in the shade, for seven (7) weeks. Van Wagner (1963) found that trees stored indoors at 73---degrees Fahrenheit for 4-5 days, had similar moisture contents to cut trees stored outside at 25 degrees Fahrenheit for 6~ weeks.

Cap. 3-11

Temperature, humidity, wind and the size of tree are all important factors affecting the moisture content of a tree. These factors influence the amount of water consumption, as well as indirectly influencing the length of time a tree will reach its critical moisture level. As Van Wagner (1963) points out, "Trees stored for reasonable periods recover and maintain high foliar moisture contents when set in water; if however, moisture content is allowed to fall below 75-857., they continue to dry out even if the butt is then immersed in water. Below about 507. foliar moisture content, Christmas trees ignite readily from matches ... ".-

Scots pine & balsam fir were found to hold their needles well, even at 107. moisture content; whereas, white spruce experienced severe needle-drop below -607. moisture content. Therefore, the freshness test of tapping the tree butt on the ground may not be suitable for the more rugged Scots pine & balsam fir tree species.

The location of tree storage outside, out of the wind, is extremely important, as is indoor storage away from heat sources that can abnormally increase water consumption. Stephens & Ahrens (1976) found that white spruce, with an interrupted water supply, mimicking an in-house condition of a homeowner letting a tree stand go dry, may be worse than no water supply at all. Needle loss on trees stored dry indoors for ten (10) days was less than trees that had their water supply cease for three (3) days, and then replenished.

Clearly, a suitably large tree stand (one (1) gallon, or greater) and a common sense approach to watering (daily, if necessary) should be adequate to keep moisture levels at 1007. or greater. "Trees standing in water maintain moisture contents over 1007., and cannot be ignited with matches or Bunsen gas flame (Van Wagner, 1963).

3.3 FIRE RETARDANT SUBSTANCES 3.3.1 Existing & Approved Brand Names

There is a substantial difference between the number of existing fire retardants, or flameproofing agents, and the number of "approved" brand names. There is some discrepancy amongst many authorities whether these treatments are truly effective in reducing the potential for fire of a natural tree or their ability to retard flames.

Cap. 3-12

3.3.11 Existing Brand Names

The following table lists existing chemical brand names of fire retardants and their respective manufacturers. This list is not all-inclusive, due to new products being continually developed & introduced.

Table 3. Existing Fire Retardant Chemicals

CAUFORNIA OFFICIAl 118 ",.norle... CAUFORNIA OFFICiAl 157 WE). THERPAOOFING ",.riot-&.nor I ~ GrNn

FLAUORT-X ~/e...

SWO-BOND CHRlSTIMS TREE FLOCK ", .. ICINr

SENTREE n In»tior I Clear

SENTREE ",,.,.,, Only I Clear

SWO-JET FIRE RETARDANT FLOCK ",-

JACK FROST FIRE RETARDANT FLOCK ",1IINior

PROFESSIONAL FLOCKING In ..

CAl-FlOCK CHRlSTIMS FLOCK "'.riot

EVERGREEN CHRISTMAS TREE FLAME RETARDANT ",Wior I Clear

STA-GREEN CHRlSTIMS TREE FLOCK ",_-&.nor

STA-GREEN. THE CHRISTMAS CO CONSUMER FIRE RET AROANT ",renor I Clear

FIRE OUELL XL CLEAR ",.riot I Clear

CARCO FIRE BAN ~ Im"nor I {)p.aque pfHIl

DAZZLE WHITE SELF STICK FLO: "'.nor SUPER SNC-WHITE FLOC Im.rior

CHRISTMAS TREE FLOCK· MARATHON '22 ImellOr

CHR!STMAS TFiEE FLOCK· REGAL FOREST

SANTA FLOC mlellO!

CHR!STMAS TREE FLAME BARR!ER Inrenor I Clear

REG. NO. MANUFACTURED FOR OR BY

C-3.05 CaIiIomiIl FliImepoDo6ng , ~ Co. 170 N. HIII.-ad SL. Pasadena. CA 111107

C-3.06 CaIilDmia FIan_ODr.OO , ~ Co. 170 N. H.I-.d St. p_. CA III 107

c..c. I I Flamorl Chemical Co. 7~ NaIDma St. San Ftanc:osco. CA ~103

0.27.0<1 H~ Pili", Co. 15501 S. Texaco A .... P.....-nounl. CA 110723

0.27.05 H~ PeinI Co. 15501 S. Te_ A .... Panmounr. CA 110723

0.27.06 HugMc PIIinI Co. 15501 S. T __ A ..... P.....-nounL CA 110723

C.133.00 SuIIovan MIg. & Sales Corp. P.O. Box 666. Hammond. IN 46325

0.133.01 SuIIiwn MIg. & Sales Corp. P.O. Box 666. Hammond. IN 46325

C.133.02 SuBiwn MIg. , Sales Corp. P.O. Box 666. Hammond. IN 4632S

0.134.00 CaidDlTlia UQuid Fenillzer Co. 7S5 S. R.ymond A ..... Pa-... C"

0. ,.11.0, Peak Sea5Oll. Inc:. ~7Ca1Ie L..o5 Aoeilunos. Camarillo. C" 930'0

0.150.01 1.& K Seuonal Supply DBA SLa~ The ChrisImaS Company 5341 Deny St- G. Apaura. CA 111301

0.150.02 A' K Seuonal Supply. DBA SLa~ The ChI1$ImaS ComDany 5341 Deny St- G. AQoura. CA9130,

C-3S.0' Fabric Flame!>l'DOfing Co. 835 Miltord St. Glendale. CA 91203

0."9.02 Chernme Corp. 12600 S. Daphne Ave .. """"""orne. CA 90250

C. I 29.03 Aoc-FIo Corp. 21 I N. Carpenter St. Chicapo. IL 6060;-

o.129.~ Floc-AD Corp, 211 N. Carpenter St. Chicapo. IL &0G07

0.132.00 Hobday Sales. Inc. '031 W. SO!h S~. M,"neapolls. MI..: 5~21:

0.13201 Hollc:!aV Sales. In:. 1031 W. 8O!h S~. M.nneaDOilS. MN ~20

C·1S2.01 NOMnw8S! Speaalty Fabria. In; SOC 7th Ave .. SoUln. Klfl<lanC W" 98~:;'&c25

C·155.01 CADD. Inc .. 8S28 CorporaDon Dr .. Inoana.oohs. It< 4E2~

(818)681~m

(S18)681~m

(415) 62'·7825

(213) 633-1054

(213) 633-1054

(213) 633-1054

(219) 113'-90G0

(219) 93'·9060

(219) 931·Il060

(213) &84·1900

(S05) 987.1715

18\8) 707·2404

(S1S) 245·1701

(213) 757-8203

(312) &&&-7000

(312) &&&<7000

(612) 884·24.(0

(206) 527-8711

Cap. 3-13

To reemphasize the wide variety of treatments available to the enqu1r1ng public, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA, 1952) published three (3) recipes for home-made fire retardant application, producing a variety of coatings, from transparent to a frosty white coating. This Technical Note also includes a section on fire retardant chemical solutions that are mixed with water before application.

A relatively new p~~duct on the market today is 'Fire·Knock Out'. This flame retardant· is contained within two (2) bell­shaped ornaments. Points 3.3.2 & 3.3.3 discuss the chemical contents & application rates of 'Fire Knock Out' and other flame retardant treatments.

3.3.12 Approved Brand Names

The word "approved" has many connotations depending on the government agency or safety authority responsible.

For example, the Saskatchewan Fire Commissioner considers 'California Official No.8' as the only acceptable retardant of fire for application on natural Christmas trees in Saskatchewan.

The CSA & the Underwriter's Laboratories of Canada (ULC) have no set standards for testing or approving any chemical for treating natural Christmas trees (Tucker, 1989) (Roberts, 1989).

The Underwriter's Laboratories Inc. (ULI) , United locations, has only approved 'California Official No. flameproofing natural Christmas trees (Rowland, (Barlett, 1989).

States 8' for

1989)

The California State Fire Marshal has approved a total of twenty-one (21) flame retardants for the treatment of Christmas trees or foliage for both interior & exterior use (Chong, 1989).

Many government agencies such as the Alberta Department of Labour, Forestry Canada, the Nova Scotia Department of Labour, and large associations such as the National Christmas Tree Growers' Association (NCTGA), do not presently "approve", or recommend any fire retardant treatments for natural Christmas trees.

Cap. 3-14

3.3.2 Chemical Content & Related Toxicities

The chemical contents of varies considerably between chemical components include:

the fire brand

retardant substances names. Some typical

sodium silicate water, containing- -a wetting- agent such as Dreit, Vel, or Breeze sodium alginate monoammonium phosphate ammonium sulphate dibrom otetrafluoroethane (Halon 2402) etc.

There is little information available on the toxilogical features of the chemicals used, and yet there seems to be no existing standards in Canada for testing these substances, both in the liquid form or- when exposed to heat or flame (Roberts, 1989).

3.3.3 Application Methods, Results, Rates & Costs

There are three (3) main application methods for fire retardant treatments of natural Christmas trees:

(a) SYSTEMATIC

This method involves m1x1ng a chemical substance, for example ammonium sulphate, with the water that is placed in the tree stand. The tree then attempts to absorb the chemical with the water, fulfilling its normal day-to-day water consumption requirements.

Ammonium sulphate treatments to water result in serious discoloration of the needles and may actually make the Christmas tree more flammable (USDA, 1952). Van Wagner (1963) found that both the ammonium sulphate & calcium chloride treatments provide no advantages over simply standing the tree in water, and the very prevalent side-effect of needle discoloration is a distinct disadvantage.

Cap. 3-15

(b) SPRAY

This is, perhaps, the most common application method for fire retardants on trees. The chemical may be provided in a pump-spray bottle format at the point of retail sale, or simply in a container that must be either mixed with water or sprayed as is.

To be fully effective, the chemical must cover every needle on the tree, whic~ is. virtually impossible according to Saskatchewan's Fire Commissioner, Vern Barlett (1989). Regina's Fire Marshal, Rick Rowland, is also not an advocate of the spray method. However, in a document provided by the Fire Commissioner, a Hudson­type fruit sprayer is stated as being a suitable tool for applying the chemical.

A Prince Albart retail outlet conducts a successful business spraying Christmas trees, amongst other general household articles. The owner stated, during a personal interview, that the spray method results in a lot of wasted chemical due to the amount of air space available in any given tree (Kline, 1988). Therefore, the effectiveness of the fire retardant application is dependant on the foliage density of each individual Christmas tree.

(c) DIPPING

This is the most effective method of ensuring full coverage of a tree with any given liquid fire retardant. The application process involves placing (dipping) the whole tree in a tank or drum, partially or completely full of the liquid. The tree may remain bundled through this whole process.

Another advantage of this method is less waste with each application due to the residual liquid dripping back into the tank.

(d) OTHER METHODS

As mentioned in Point 3.3.1, the brand name 'Fire Knock Out' is a relatively new product on the market. Contained within a bell-shaped ornament that hangs on the tree, the chemical remains inactive -Until a Christmas tree fire heats and then vaporizes the liquid. The increased pressure causes the gas to be released from the bottom of the glass ornament and, supposedly, extinguishes the fire. No tests on the effectiveness of this retardant were encountered during the research & write-up phases of this Project.

Cap. 3-16

Application rates of each method are dependant on the individual method utilized.

The systematic application of ammonium sulphate or calcium chloride is generally a weight of salt equal to 257. of the weight of the Christmas tree (Van Wagner, 1963). This method is the cheapest of the previously described methods. However, it is somewhat inconvenient due to the repetitive mixing of the salt each time_ the tree is watered.

The spray -application rate is - dependant on the height & density of the tree foliage. Also, individual fire retardant liquids require different application rates depending on the chemical ingredient and its concentration. Some _ examples of rates & costs include:

'Christmas Tree Flame Barrier' has a wholesale price of $3.59 per bottle, if a box of twenty-four (24) 16-ounce bottles are purchased. The manufacturer claims that one (1) 16-ounce bottle covers a 6! foot tree.

'Clear Flame' retardant, applied by a Regina Christmas tree retailer, costs the average consumer $20.00 to spray a 6 foot tree.

'Unflame' retardant, applied cleaning firm, costs consumers 15 foot tree.

by a Prince $20-25.00 to

Albert dry cover a 10-

The dipping application rate is the most efficient method, as any unused liquid returns to the main supply tank. No figures were available on the volume of retardant required to fully cover a tree or the cost difference as compared to the spray method.

It should be noted that the drying period for most of the liquid retardants, once applied to the tree, is commonly 24 hours before the consumer can display the tree.

Cap. 3-17

3 . 4 ARTIFICIAL TREE SAFETY 3.4.1 Existing & Approved Brand Names

The Canadian Standards Association & the Underwriter's Laboratories of Canada are two (2) product safety testing authorities often referred to by governmental agencies and their respective fire codes, as having lists of approved artificial tree brand names that have met their fire testing restrictions. ·According to' the letters of correspondence with these testing authorities (1989), no such lists exist.

CSA has no standards for artificial information on the composition or trees (Tucker, 1989).

Christmas trees and no flammability of these

ULC has not conducted any (artificial Christmas trees) standards (Roberts, 1989).

evaluations and therefore,

on products has no set

The following is a list of authorities who either failed to respond to requests for information on this subject at the time of Project completion, or who were referred to by ULC representatives:

Mr. Leon J. PRZYBYLA Underwriters Laboratories Inc. 333 Pfingsten Road Northbrook, ILLINOIS 60062 U.S.A.

Dr. K.A. KASEM Product Safety Branch Consumer & Corporate Affairs Canada

Place du Portage 16th Floor, Phase 1 Ottawa, Ontario K1A OC9

Dr. A.K. KIM, Researcher National Fire Laboratory Institute for Research

in Construction Ottawa, Ontario K1A OR6

Mr. C. Ross THOMSON Vice-President Codes & Standards Canadian Wood Council 55 Metcalfe Street Suite 1550 Ottawa, Ontario KlP 6L5

Cap. 3-18

The United Laboratories Inc. of Northbrook, Illinois, should have a list of approved, fire tested, artificial tree brand names. In 1973, three (3) names were on such a list (Fuessenich, 1973):

AMERICAN TREE & WREATH DIVISION (American Technical Machinery Corp., Lexington, Kentucky)

Simulated Scotch pine & blue spruce trees intended for decorative purposes ..

CAREY-MCFALL COMPANY (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)

Simulated Scotch pine trees intended for decorative purposes.

CONSOLIDATED NOVELTY CO., INC. (Paterson, New Jersey)

Simulated Scotch pine and blue spruce trees intended for decorative purposes.

3.4.2 Chemical Content & Related Toxicities

Very little information is made readily available to an inquiring public on the chemical composition of artificial Christmas trees and the related toxicities of these chemicals when exposed to heat, or flame.

Some common components that do occur in a plastic tree include: polystyrene, polyurethane, polyethylene, polypropoline, & polyvinyl chloride (Babbits, 1977).

In a related medical journal, the authoritative Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA, 1975), Dr. Esch, Chief Surgeon of the District of Columbia Fire Department states "We fill our houses with all kinds of furnishings made of synthetic materials that are a lot more flammable than wood ever was. Besides with wood we knew what we had to deal with. With plastics - not a chance. There are too many of them".

Babbits (1977) reports that polyvinyl chloride is often the main component of which most artificial Christmas trees are constructed. The JAMA (1975) article, cited previously, also contained a comment from a National Bureau of Standards researcher, Merritt Bricky, stating that the combustion degradation of polyvinyl chloride results in at least 75 products, including hydrochloric acid. The dyes and other ingredients used in the manufacturing process, complicated the picture even more (JAMA, 1975).

Cap. 3-19

3.4.3 The Potential for Fires

Due to the lack of testing done on the flammability of artificial Christmas trees in Canada, very little is known about the potential for fires that exists. As described in Point 3.5, Christmas tree-related fires across North America involve the artificial tree as well as the natural Christmas tree.

The CSA does publish safety pamphlets that promote natural tree safety but no distinction is made between the natural & artificial tree. For example, the Christmas tree section of the December 1988 Christmas safety brochure describes natural tree safety, followed by "all ~ of trees should be kept away from fireplaces, heaters and other sources of heat. Trees should never block exits" (CSA, 1988). Does all "types" mean species of tree or is it inferred that artificial trees are to be included? Commonly, the hazards of metallic trees are mentioned, yet artificial trees (plastic) are rarely, if ever mentioned directly, as being potentially dangerous.

An Environment Canada (1976) News Release available articles stating the hazards of lilt may be a fire hazard. Some artificial entirely of soft plastic, will burn, plastic on Christmas wrappings and materials".

is one of the few artificial trees. trees, those made dripping flaming other flammable

From the safety tip information found further on in this section, some articles, pamphlets & brochures do provide a brief note on, mainly, the proper location of the artificial tree in the home. However, clearly the artificial tree is most favoured by Saskatchewan Fire Marshals, as opposed to the natural tree. Yet no mention is made of the potential for fires with these artificials, and very little information is provided to the artificial-buying public on which one is "safe" to display in their home.

Cap. 3-20

3.4.4 Safety Tips to the Consumer

The following is a summary of consumer safety information sheets available to the general public, published by a variety of governmental authorities, agencies and associations.

THE FIRE PREVENTIONCANAoA ASSOCIATION (FIPRECAN)

"some plastic trees are flammable, other artificial trees are fireproof".

THE CANADA SAFETY COUNCIL (CSC)

"consider buying an artificial flame or fire resistant tree".

THE CANADIAN STANDARDS ASSOCIATION (CSA)

(no reference to artificial or plastic trees)

THE U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION (USCPSC)

"if you purchase a plastic tree, it should be made of a fire-resistant material. This does not mean that the tree will not burn, but only that it will not catch fire easily. As with natural trees, keep away from (heat) sources •.. ".

THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (NFPA)

"make sure it has a fire retardant label". "read all warnings carefully .•. especially about the use of lights".

THE NATIONAL'CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION (NCTGA)

"artificial or plastic trees shall not be used unless they contain the testing label of a recognised testing lab indicating a fire retardant approval. Manufacturers and/or distributors may be required to provide a test approval document".

Most Christmas tree safety fact sheets commonly state that no electrical lights should be placed on a metall~c tree, due to the possibility of a faulty electrical- system energizing the tree.

Saskatchewan media sources (Prince Albert Daily Herald & Regina Leader Post) failed to mention anything about artificial tree safety amongst their published safety tip information. As well, no artificial tree safety tips were handed out by the Regina Fire Marshal or mentioned in the Regina notice about indoor Christmas decorations (see Reference Package).

I

Cap. 3-21

3.5 CHRISTMAS TREE-RELATED FIRES

Natural Christmas public building, facts, however, sections.

trees, when involved in a fire in a private or are commonly blamed for causing the fire. The tell a -different story through the following sub-

3.5.1 The United States & Canada

The following table summarizes the years 1982-86, for natural & artificial Christmas tree-related fires in the ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. & Canada.

Table 4. Annual Average of Structure Fires Started by Ignition of Christmas Trees

CIVILIAN

PROPERTY CLASS FIRES DEATHS INJURIES

Homes 547 12 66

Other Residential 7 0 1

Non-Residential 96 0 2 · Dwelling Garages (14) (0) (1) · Office Buildings ( 6) (0) (0) • Schools ( 4) (0) (0) · Churches ( 4) (0) (0) · Hospitals ( 4) (0) (0)

· Unknown Properties ( 6) (0) (0)

TOTAL 650 12 69

Source: National Fire Protection Association, 1988

DIRECT PROPERTY DAMAGE

(Millions)

$ 10.2

0.1

1.1 (0.0) (0.1) (0.1) (0.3) (0.0) (0.0)

$ 11.4

Cap. 3-22

A January 1989 conversation with Allison Norton, NFPA Data Fire Specialist, reveals that the figures presented in Table 4 represent a lumping, or pooling, of artificial & natural tree-related fires. Natural tree-related fires cannot be statistically separated. These figures are based on fire department reports submitted from both Canada & the United States. The actual cause of these fires, by area of origin, is available on request for a fee. (Please refer to Point 3.5.3 for a discussion on how these statistics are misused by government authorities to emphasize their views).

Requests for data from British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario & Nova Scotia Fire Commissipners regarding Christmas tree-related fires by Province was met with only one submission by the Alberta government, found below in Table 5.

Table 5. Alberta Fire Statistics for Christmas Tree-Related Fires (1977-88)

YEAR NUMBER LOSS ($) DEATHS INJURIES

1977 1 30,261 0 0 1978 1 14,915 0 0 1979 1 66 0 0 1981 1 7,423 0 0 1983 2 76,573 0 0 1984 1 1,530 0 0 1985 2 49,878 0 0

TOTAL 10 $ 180,646 0 0

Source: Caufield, 1989

A personal interview with the Deputy Fire Commissioner of Alberta, H.M. Caufield, revealed that most of these reported fires "usually involved children playing with matches around the natural Christmas tree" (Caufield, 1989).

Ontario claimed not to have any figures available, and Saskatchewan's Fire Commissioner,- Vern Barlett, sta~ed that a new computer system was just coming on-line that -will soon link all Provincial fire data. However, at present, he could not provide any statistics for Saskatchewan.

Valuable information that would SCTGA would be a comparison of tree-related fire statistics with the U.S. & Canada, and to importance, to illustrate the these type of fires.

be extremely useful to the the NFPA 1982-86 Christmas all other fire types, in

rank these according to possible insignificance of

Cap. 3-23

3.5.2 Media Documentation

During a personal conversation with Rick Rowland, Regina Fire Marshal, two (2) newspaper articles published in December 1988 were produced by Mr. Rowland, to emphasize his point about the real hazards of natural Christmas trees.

One article; taking up only a very small portion of a page in the Regina Leader Post, properly reports a fire caused by faulty Christmas tree w1r1ng, resulting in an estimated $60,000 in damages. However, a much larger article, reported by the Canadian Press, describes a fire that ocurred on Christmas Day in Vancouver, British Columbia, destroying a large mansion of a well-known multi-millionaire, Edgar Kaiser. Receiving almost half a page for a'full commentary, this article states in its second paragraph itA prized collection was also lost in the blaze caused by a Christmas tree".

It should be a priority of the SCTGA, when such articles occur here in Saskatchewan, or of the Canadian Christmas Tree Growers' Association, when such articles are published nation-wide, to contact these media sources. Any reference made in these articles to Christmas trees as the cause for fire, or specifically natural trees as the cause, should be refuted emphatically.

This can be done through editorial comments, or information articles, intending to inform the public about natural Christmas tree safety awareness prior to each Holiday Season. Without such information, the media will continue to subtly mislead the public into believing that natural trees are commonly to blame for starting fires at Christmas time.

3.5.3 The Misuse of Statistics & Sensationalism

The SCTGA does not face a unique situation in with the banning of natural trees in public Regina. However, it is the methods employed Fire Marshal, backed by the Provincial Fire which requires some refute.

Saskatchewan, buildings in

by t:-~e Regina Commissioner,

Cap. 3-24

For example, the following paragraphs are taken from a Christmas Safety Tips information sheet provided by the Regina Fire Marshal & the Provincial Fire Commissioner on January 23rd, 1989:

"1982-1986 NFPA Study revealed that there were 650 fires involving natural Christmas trees ..• " (Barlett, 1989).

"National Fire Canada & the USA there were 547 involving natural

Protection Association statistics for for the· years 1982-1986 revealed that home fires· and 103 business ·fires

Christlnas trees" (Rowland, 1989).

In these two examples, the natural tree is falsely accused of being involved in 650 fires across North America. When in fact, NFPA results really indicate that both natural and artificial trees were involved in these fires (Norton, 1989). Also, the first example does not indicate the source country, leading an uneducated public into believing that these statistics may be for Canada. alone.

Two examples of sensationalism demonstrated by Regina civic authorities and published in the following media sources include:

"Ignited cedar boughs, not a burning Christmas tree, were blamed for a fire in Quebec in 1980 that left 48 people dead. But the incident was used by civic officials Thursday to illustrate the consequences of carelessness around Christmas conifers" (Regina Leader Post, December 9th, 1988).

"How it might start, that leaves a lot to the imagination", said Rowland, " "He (Rowland) compared the danger posed by indoor trees to a stockpile of fireworks that ignited in Mexico City on Sunday, killing 70 people". (Regina Leader Post, December 14th, 1988).

Without stating the words directly, the Regina fire officials seem to be drastically overstating the dangers of a natural tree and are, in effect, promoting the use of the artificial tree for Christmas. Public buildings in Regina are forced by a municipal bylaw to refrain from natural tree display, and a safety-conscious public may choose to -- rely on the Fire Marshal's 'factual' information, resulting, perhaps, in the use of artificial trees or no tree at all.

It should be very important for the SCTGA to study and possibly publicly refute, if necessary, any false or misleading claims against the natural Christmas tree industry.

Cap. 3-25

3.6 PROVINCIAL/FEDERAL FIRE REGULATIONS

A review of Provincial & Federal fire regulations is presented with all related excerpts from the respective laws. Differences between the laws do exist and, ultimately, it is usually the individual municipality which regulates the respective fire codes on a per city/town basis. The regulations quoted in this section can be found in the accompanying Reference Package.

3.6.1 Saskatchewan

There are two (2) distinct Provincial laws governing the use of natural Christmas trees in certain building types. (Refer to the Reference Package for the Saskatchewan Fire Prevention Acts).

(a) Saskatchewan Regulation 207/72: Regulations Fire Prevention Act Governing Fire Educational Buildings.

Under the· Safety In

These regulations apply in the construction and operation of all educational buildings such as:

• public schools · high schools

vocational schools · separate schools

• private schools · colleges

universities · convents & dormitories

The following "approved" designation means listed & labelled under the inspection services of the:

• National Research Council Canadian Standards Association

· Underwriters' Laboratories Incorporated Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada

· British Standards Institution; or the · Laboratories of the Associated Factory Mutual Fire

Insurance Companies

From Section 2(4) of these regulations, "Decorations of cloth, paper, other flammable materials or Christmas trees, used for special occasions shall not be permitted in educational buildings unless flameproofed". There are no definitions for flameproofing nor is there any mention of whether an "approved" flameproofing agent must be used. However, the regulations do specify the powers of the Fire Commissioner as being ultimate (Section 2:(1)) or an "inspector" (Section 1:(9)) as the authorized representative of the Fire Commissioner.

Cap. 3-26

(b) Chapter F-15.01 The Prevention Act, 1980

This Act deals with all private & public building types found within Saskatchewan.

The "approved" designation in these Regulations "means certified under the inspection services of a recognised testing laboratory designated by the Fire Commissioner" (Section 2(a). The Fire Commissioner, Deputy Fire Commissioner or any other officer- employed by the public service· authorized by the Fire Commissioner can serve as an "inspector" (Section 2(i). Further definitions are found for the fire inspector (Section 2 (f), and the municipal- inspector (Section 2(n).

The general powers & duties of the Fire Commissioner and inspector are found within- Sections 3 to 5.

Sections dealing with Fire Hazards, having a direct bearing on the Regina municipality situation, are found within Sections 15-17.

Section 15 states that any fire inspector has the right to enter any building or premises within his jurisdiction.

Section 16 reflects Fire Marshal, has owners:

the methods Rick Rowland, Regina taken to notify public building

Section 16(1): After an inspection under Section 15, a fire inspector may serve ... , a written order requiring the person served within a specified period of time: (c) to remove combustible or explosive material ... or to remedy flammable conditions which are dangerous to the safety of any building or premises.

Section 16(2): Where the Fire Commissioner finds a danger to the public in any institution or assembly, educational or residential building ... , the presence of flammable material or any other cause, he may serve: (a) a written order on the owner requiring him to remedy the dangerous condition .•.

The Regulations continue further into appeals (Sections 18 & 19), exits from certain buildings (Section 21), and Offenses & Penalties (Sections 23-32).

Section 33 distinguishes how municipality bylaws that are more exacting than the Provincial Regulations have the ultimate power within individual municipal boundaries.

Cap. 3-27

The results of the review of Saskatchewan's Provincial legislation show a very general, overall power of authority embodied in the Provincial Fire Commissioner and his designated fire inspectors. Their jurisdiction lies over virtually all building types and is enforceable by Provincial law.

Provincial legislation stipulates that Christmas trees (natural/artificial type is not defined) are not allowed in educational facilities, unless flameproofed. Other building types can have Christmas trees ordered out of their premises by the municipal Fire Marshal if the respective city bylaw indicates that they are not allowed, or if the Fire Marshal/Inspector feels that they represent a fire hazard or a combustible & explosive material.

3.6.2 Other Provinces

(a) ALBERTA

Section 23(12) of the Alberta Fire Code specifies that "Festive decorations, including Christmas trees, used in any Group A or Group B occupancy, shall be of the flame resistent type".

Group A occupancy is an assembly type facility such as arenas, schools, churches, etc .. Group B occupancy is an institutional type facility such as hospitals, nursing homes, penitentiaries, etc. (Caufield, 1989).

No specific fire retardant chemicals have been approved by the Deputy Fire Commissioner, Fire Prevention Branch (Caufield, 1989).

A Fire Prevention Branch Bulletin, December 1988, was published to officially interpret the Alberta regulations. The following is a brief summary of this bulletin.

Natural Christmas trees are considered to be flame resistant if freshly cut. A freshly cut tre~ is one that has been harvested within fourteen Cf4) days. However, the tree must be removed from the Group A & B occupancies within the fourteen (14) time period to remain inherently fresh.

Cap. 3-28

The Fire Prevention Branch has interpreted Section 23 (12) to mean that festive decorations, including Christmas trees (natural or artificial), that are intended to be used in any Group A or Group B occupancy are to be resistant to flame either inherently or by the application of an approved flame retardant material (Caufield, 1989).

From this same letter of correspondence from Mr. Caufield, no fire retardant 'cheri:licals nave yet been approved. Therefore, a reasonable interpretation of the fire code might be to virtually rule out any flame retardant materials (because none are approved) and to try to cut, display and then dispose of a natural tree within two (2) weeks.

(b) ONTARIO

No specific reference to Christmas trees (natural or artificial) is mentioned in the Ontario Fire Code (Chong, 1989).

Personal conversations with the Fire Code specialist, Kevin Kelly, reveals that natural trees can be displayed in all building types (Kelly, 1989). If a flame retardant chemical is used on the natural tree, or if an artificial tree is used, the generally approved materials are ones that are ULC or CSA approved. In fact, Interior Finishing, Furnishing & Decorative Materials, Section 2.3.2.2 states "Drapes, curtains and other decorative materials, including textiles ... used in buildings shall meet the requirements for a high degree of flame resistance".

The Ontario Fire Code Section 2.3.2.2 contains requirements for flameproofing textiles, however no such requirement exists for natural trees (Kelly, 1989).

Cap. 3-29

(c) NOVA SCOTIA

This Province has a similar fire code to that of Ontario. Although the fire code remains general, specific recommendations from the Office of the Fire Marshal to institutions state "Use an artificial, flame resistant tree, tested and listed by ULC. Use flame resistant ornaments and decorations. Natural evergreen boughs as separate. decorations are prohibited. Tree lights (are) to be shut off and unplugged 15 minutes before leaving building; and trees and decorations to be removed -before work ends for holiday period at Christmas".

The recommendations listed for Nova Scotia are set out by the Office of the Fire Marshal and are not part of the Fire Code. However, it is important to point out that failure to comply with these recommendations can, in most Provinces, result in a fine.

3.6.3 Canada

According to a Fire Prevention Bulletin published by Labour Canada, "The Canadian Labour Code, Part IV, and the pursuant Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, outline fire safety requirements within the federal jurisdiction. This legislation does not prohibit the use of natural Christmas trees" (Dunfield, 1988).

Recommendations are given for natural Christmas tree safety procedures, and some of these have been summarized in Point 3.1 of this Report.

/ .

Cap. 3-30

3.6.4 Reversing Legislation

Saskatchewan & Alberta seem to be taking the hardest stance against the natural Christmas tree amongst all reviewed provinces. Saskatchewan has restrictions against natural trees in educational facilities as well as at least one city, Regina, banning them from any public building, using a municipal bylaw.

In Saskatchewan, it is the municipal Fire Marshal (Chief) who makes the final judgement and, upon his/her judgement, influences the City Council to adopt a city bylaw, if necessary. With the full support of the Provincial Fire Commissioner, a relatively non-informed City Council can easily be manipulated into adopting regulations that are really unnecessary and can seriously jeopardize the natural Christmas tree industry.

There are two (2) case examples of a reversal of State laws prohibiting natural Christmas tree in public buildings, in the United States. No known, similar examples have taken place in Canada.

In 1972, the State of Nebraska was undergoing a Christmas tree controversy relating to natural trees in public buildings. Like many other individual States, Nebraska had adopted the National Life Safety Code that declares live trees to be a hazard, apparently prohibiting their use in schools & churches. Upon debates in the State legislature and a meeting between the State Fire Marshal and members of the Nebraska-National Christmas Tree Growers' Association, the State adopted its own fire code that allows live Christmas trees in public buildings without having to be treated with any fire retardant substance (Maclean, 1973) (United Press International, 1973).

In November 1973, the State of Connecticut issued a notice to all Fire Chiefs, Fire Marshals & Building Inspectors reemphasizing . the State Fire Code that stipulated natural Christmas trees would not be allowed in any public building and in private dwelli~gs with greater than two (2) families (Fuessenich, 1973). This notice even included a list of artificial trees which were recommended by the State & ULI.

Cap. 3-31

Similar to the Nebraska case example, Connecticut had adopted the National Fire Protection Code, with a few minor changes (Fuessenich, 1973). The Connecticut and National Christmas Tree Growers' Associations helped, through various meetings with the State Police Commissioner & State Fire Marshal, and provided the driving force for amendments made (CCTGA, 1974). Finally, natural trees were to be allowed in public buildings under a list of several conditions.

These case examples represent months of hard work carried out by the local & national Growers' Associations and the respective fire authorities, before any changes could be made to the State fire codes. In addition, the results of these changes could not have happened without concessions from both sides. Nebraska public buildings have a fifteen (15) day natural tree display period, and Connecticut public buildings & private multiple dwellings have ten (10) and twenty-one (21) days, respectively, to display their natural trees.

Cap. 4-1

4. THE SASKATCHEWAN SITUATION

The Province of Saskatchewan is presently undergoing a natural/artificial tree safety conflict that has ocurred in many other locations across North America over the past two (2) decades. Thus, the situation is not unique nor is it as wide-spread as some Province or State-wide legislations enacted in past years.

i 4.1. THE TREND

In 1987, a market study of Saskatchewan retailers was completed within the larger population centres. No mention had been made of any safety awareness issue amongst contacted retailers, and it seemed not to be an issue just H years ago. Yet, the year 1988 has brought about the beginning of a trend towards the elimination of the natural tree from Christmas celebrations. First discovered in 1988 through published newspaper articles highlighting the ban on real (natural) Christmas trees in public buildings in Regina, the full scope of the trend became evident through the 1988 SCTGA Natu~al Christmas Tree Market Study research, households & institutional survey phases of the Project.

4.2 MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS 4.2.1 Regina

The City of Regina continues to be the moving force behind strict enforcement of Provincial & Municipal legislations limiting the natural tree to certain building types.

A change in the city policy ocurred after the 1979 Chapais, Quebec fire, which killed 48 people during a New Year's party. Although the ignition of cedar boughs, not a natural Christmas tree, started this blaze, Regina civic authorities often use this tragedy as an example of the potential for fires around natural Christmas trees due to carelessness.

Cap. 4-2

No strict enforcement of this policy had taken place until the summer of 1988, when the Regina Fire Marshal (Rick Rowland), acting with the full support of the Provincial Fire Commissioner, distributed a notice (found in the accompanying Reference Package) notifying known natural tree-displaying public buildings that their "combustible" natural trees and related decorations are no longer permitted. This notification procedure, followed by newspaper coverage up to and including the 1988 Christmas Holiday Season, was necessary because the ... Regina Fire Department does not have enough manpower to visually inspect every public building for compliance to the City's regulations (Rowland, 1988).

This City bylaw is enforceable with a $2,000 fine following non-compliance with the regulations. Although no known fines were levied during the 1988 Holiday period, some public buildings defied the order resulting in the variety of results found later on in Point 4.6 (Legal Battles & Non­Compliance) .

Results of a January 1989 personal interview with the Regina Fire Marshal and the Provincial Fire Commissioner, Vern Barlett, indicated identical stands on a variety of natural tree issues.

Natural trees would be acceptable for display in public buildings if:

the tree is dipped, not sprayed with an approved fire retardant (see Point 3.3.3);

a tag is attached to the tree documenting the date the tree was cut & the name of the fire retardant substance approved by Underwriter's Laboratories (Canada or the United States locations); and

the tree is "fresh", before fire retardant application

Both authorities are quoted as stating that freshness cannot be achieved through the purchase of natural trees from existing retailers. In fact, Mr. Barlett prefers to adapt to Alberta's restrictions specifying fourteen (14) days between the time a tree is cut to the final day the tree may be displayed in a public building. -.

Clearly, it is virtually impossible to adhere to such strict regulations, leaving artificial or no tree display as the only alternative left for the owners & managers of Regina's public buildings.

Cap. 4-3

4.2.2 Other Municipalities

Moose Jaw, Swift Current & Yorkton are slowly changing their policies against natural tree display. A random telephone survey conducted, during January 1989, to various institutional & commercial buildings, indicated that these cities have, or are soon to have, city bylaws similar to Regina.

Saskatoon, however, takes a less severe approach to natural tree display. Sticking close to the Provincial Fire Prevention Act, educational buildings are. restricted to artificials only, but virtually all other building types are free to display an natural. Buildings doing so, must have their natural tree erected directly under a ceiling sprinkler and the responsible persons are to follow their "common sense" (Saskatoon Star Phoenix, 1988).

Prince Albert follows no clear path,· with no existing municipal legislation restricting natural trees and, seemingly, a very lax following of the Provincial Fire Prevention Act. During the 1988 Christmas Holidays in this City, a competition even took place to see which public building, schools included, could display the tallest natural Christmas tree (see Reference Package for news coverage) .

A personal interview with Jim Wilm, the Prince Albert Fire Inspection Officer, revealed that no city bylaws exist requ1r1ng certain building types to refrain from natural tree display. He stated that he does recommend the use of fire retardant applications to these trees. However, no prescribed application method (dip or spray) or fire retardant type (ULC, CSA, etc.) is to be strictly followed.

Cap. 4-4

4.3 NATURAL CHRISTMAS TREE RETAILERS

The effect of fewer natural trees being displayed each Christmas period in public buildings directly & substantially reduces the market potential, depending on the Saskatchewan municipality. All public buildings displaying natural trees during past years in Regina, now must either refrain from these purchases or place their

--natural tree outside of the building. Thus, the. natural tree market potential has been reduced, with no way of recovery, save a change in the city bylaw. A trend towards banning these natural trees in Regina, and other southern Saskatchewan communities, depending on the recommendations of the respective Fire Marshals, reduces the market potential for these trees, directly affecting retail sales.

For example, Regina quoted natural tree buildings and

a large natural Christmas tree retailer/supplier from lost sales of approximately $5,000 due to cancelled supply contracts with the Provincial legislative

independent commercial buildings.

In addition, a retailer was forced to close down his "indoor" showroom, consisting of natural trees displayed for sale in a carwash, located within Regina. A location in a building with easy water access is still considered to be a substantial fire hazard by the local Fire Marshal.

4.4 THE.GENERAL PUBLIC

The reduction of contracts & showrooms directly affects the accessability of potential consumers for natural Christmas trees. Publicity, mainly through media coverage, may also directly affect natural tree sales in Regina. This is due to the question of natural tree safety.

Regina fire officials (Rick Rowland, Vern Barlett) state that no natural tr~e sold by present-day retailers is fresh, and then in a follow up statement, recommend the general public to purchase only fresh trees. This totally eliminates the possibility of purchasing a natural tree in Regina, by consumers who follow Regina fire officials recommendations regarding the fire hazards of natural trees in their own home.

News coverage of institutional & commercial establishments' contravention of this municipal bylaw against natural tree display, calls into question the true facts or reality of natural tree safety in private households. These householders may start to believe the local Fire Marshal and avoid natural trees altogether, or continue to make their own decisions regarding safety in their own home.

Cap. 4-5

4.5 INSURANCE AGENCIES

Although municipal bylaws may restrict the use of natural trees to certain building types, failure to comply with these laws has no fire insurance implications. Personal conversations with three (3) insurance agencies (SGI, Cooperators, & Lillico Insurances) indicate that all have no home or fire insurance implications (increased premiums~ etc.) for residential or commercial buildings displaying natural or artificial trees.

One insurance agent went so far as to say faulty w1r1ng, hot lamps and even lit candles on a natural tree will not increase individual fire insurance premiums nor eliminate the potential for non­coverage of a fire insurance policy.

Therefore, insurance companies are tree-related fire as a factor that fire insurance policy.

set on considering a Christmas will not affect coverage of a

Cap. 4-6

4.6 LEGAL BATTLES & NON-COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS

This section discusses the results of the ban on natural trees in all public buildings in Regina. No other known city bylaws exist in Saskatchewan. However, Fire Marshals in Moose Jaw, Swift Current & Yorkton are known to be recommending the use of artificial trees rather than naturals.

The majority of Regina's public buildirigs complied with the new 1988 city bylaw. A survey of Regina media sources, throughout December 1988, and an SCTGA Market Study survey, showed that most building owners did not really understand why 1988 is the year for banning trees when in past years "they've displayed their trees without incident" (Leader Post, December 1988).

A personal conversation with Rick Rowland, Regina Fire Marshall, indicated that the office of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) initially failed to comply with the bylaw. However, Rowland indicated to the building owners, the Saskatchewan Property Management Corporation, that failure to comply would result in no more fire inspections by city officials (Rowland, 1988). Apparently, it was this potential lack of an approved fire insurance policy which necessitated the dismantling of the CBC natural Christmas tree.

Two (2) other establishments did not accept the City's restrictions on their natural Christmas tree display. The Trinity Lutheran Church in Regina recently won the right to display live trees in its building. At last report, the Court had granted a temporary stay of the fire department's order to remove the trees (Edmonds, 1989). A letter was written to the Church's solicitor, requesting more information about the case, but no reply had been received at the time of Project write-up. The right to live tree display in the Church was argued & won in court, using the Church's religious freedom rights, under the Charter of Rights & Freedoms.

The second confrontation with civic authorities, yet to be decided in Court, is due to abolishment of the right to retail natural Christmas trees in an indoor showroom facility at a Turbo Gas Station/Car Wash. The owner of the gas station was displaying his trees in his car wash-showroom, thiriking that the close proximity to water should negate any fears about potential fire hazards. The Regina Fire Marshal shut down the operation, and presently, the City is being sued for damages.

These examples may be just the beginning of a yearly trend of challenges to the Regina City bylaw. Depending on the circumstances, the SCTGA could play a supportive role for the proponents of natural trees through the provision of factual Christmas tree safety information, that could, possibly, refute the arguments against natural tree display.

Cap. 5-1

5. THE WAY .AHEAD

The near future offers quite a challenge to proponents of the natural Christmas tree. Although at present, only Regina has enacted a city bylaw legislating the natural tree out of public buildings, other municipalities can be expected to adopt similar bylaws within the next few years. There will continue to be challenges to these bylaws that must have the full support of a knowledgeable and active SCTGA.

5.1 THE ROLE OF THE SCTGA

The SCTGA should play an active role in promoting the natural Christmas tree through, at least, four (4) important groups of decision-makers, who both regulate & determine the fate of the natural tree.

5.1.1 Fire Marshals

It is hard not to interpret the Provincial Fire Commissioner's and the Regina Fire Marshal's stance as a deliberate attempt to harm the natural Christmas tree industry through legislation. But no matter how difficult a job it may seem, Saskatchewan's fire authorities must be provided with as much natural tree information, in the form of studies, reports & articles, to sway their decisions towards favouring the natural tree.

An article published in the Northwest Lookout magazine relates directly to the role that the SCTGA should play in Saskatchewan. From this article, following two (2) Christmas tree-related fires in Las Vegas, Nevada on December 29th, 1987, "the fire department's response was to tell people to remove their trees promptly" (Malone, 1989). The article continues by showing how inadequately informed the city & county fire departments were about the 'true' problem of tree safety, being that of faulty wiring & lights. and not necessarily the trees.

Although it is very adversaries ... It is towards trees and

easy to see our job to

tree sellers accurate research information announcements" (Malone, 1989).

"the fire departments as change their attitudes by providing them with and public service

Cap. 5-2

5.1.2 Christmas Tree Retailers

Retailers of natural Christmas trees play a major role in the presentation of a safe Christmas tree. As a key market chain element, these retailers are the prime, up-front candidates for the provision of "the best information on how to care for our (the grower's) products" (Malone, 1989).

However, the SCTGA faces a unique situation in that, at present, natural trees are being supplied by out-of-Province growers who cut & bale their trees months in advance of the Christmas sales period. Although these trees are not SCTGA products, Saskatchewan retailers must still be aware of the best methods for handling, storage and general care of the product, as well as providing the consumers with tree care & maintenance instructions for a safe Holiday Season.

This close cooperation should result in not only the development of an excellent working relationship between the growers & the retailers, but also a fresher product, resulting in increased consumer satisfaction with their natural tree. In turn, increased consumer satisfaction will result in increased retail sales that creates a win-win situation. The SCTGA will have retailers willing to market a fresh product because a fresh product means increased sales at Christmas time.

In addition, retailers fighting legislation which prohibits indoor sales of natural trees should be fully supported through the provision of factual information such as is presented in this, and other natural Christmas tree safety reports.

5.1.3 General Public Awareness & the Media

Natural tree safety awareness of the general public is the end result of the SCTGA marketing a 'safe' product. The provision of factual information to the Fire Marshals, the Provincial Fire Commissioner and Christmas tree retpilers is of paramount importance. Additional methods of achieving public awareness is through media documentation.

Local magazines, newspapers and even the television can be informed of the development of a guaranteed-fresh Saskatchewan-grown tree. General information articles about natural tree safety along with editorial comments and annually published safety tips to the consumers are excellent ways of illustrating SCTGA concern for safety, while at the same time ensuring a sound clientele base.

Cap. 5-3

5.2 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

The SASKATCHEWAN CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS I ASSOCIATION has a clear role to play in the acceptance of the natural Christmas tree within public & private dwelling types alike.

Although the Association will not, until 1995, be marketing the bulk of its natural trees, the Saskatchewan situation calls for immediate action through the following recommendations:

(a) An. improvement to the Association's natural Christmas tree safety sheet, tailoring it to Saskatchewan's situation of an extremely safety-conscious public.· Utilize the safety & factual information provided in this Report,· and glean ideas from the safety tip brochures published by governmental agencies, safety associations & the Canadian Christmas Tree Growers' Association brochure. Be sure to include artificial tree safety tips as well, pointing out a few of the potential fire hazards & toxicities.

(b) ·Personal contact with all City Fire Marshals & the Provincial Fire Commissioner, for friendly, but serious, discussions on natural & artificial tree safety. Provide these authorities with as much factual literature as possible, including the "new" SCTGA Safety Tip Information Sheet.

(c) Contact any known natural Christmas tree retailers and public building owners, especially in the City of Regina, undergoing legal battles or confrontations with the Authorities regarding the right to display a natural tree, offering them support through the provision of factual reports, research materials, etc.

(d) Establish in local newspapers & magazines, infrequent articles about the SCTGA's devotion towards a quality natural Christmas tree. The steps of growing the trees, from plantation establishment through to cutting, baling and marketing the trees should be included.

An SCTGA Christmas Tree Safety Information Sheet is badly needed during the Holiday Season, on an annual basis, in every local newspaper, if possible.

(e) Ensure that Saskatchewan's natural tree retailers have the proper storage, handling & safety tip information available so that dry, poor quality trees are kept at a minimum.

Cap. 5-4

(f) Maintain & update all factual material presented in this Report, by annually requesting statistical information on Christmas tree fires and their causes. The National Fire Protection Association & the National Christmas Tree Growers' Association are excellent sources of this kind of information. As well, the names & addresses for artificial tree safety testing agencies, provided on page 3-17 of this Report, are excellent starting points.

(g) Never discount the ability of the SCTGA to sway the opinions of Fire Authorities and the general public, into accepting the natural tree into all public buildings.

The 1989 Christmas Holiday Season will bring new developments into the light regarding the trend towards the abolishment of the natural Christmas tree in public buildings. If no action is taken to thwart the efforts of Saskatchewan's Fire Marshals, this trend will continue.

The factual materials, reports, personal interviews & correspondence, and finally, the recommendations provided, should be merely the 1nitiation of a process towards a well-established SCTGA. public awareness campaign.

~

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. BARLETT. V., 1989

2. CAUFIELD. H.M .• 1989

3. CAUFIELD. H.M •• 1989

4. CHONG, J., 1989

5. DUNFIELD. T.J., 1988

6. EDMONDS. D., 1989

7 • ENVIRONMENT CANADA. 1976

8. FUESSENICH, C.B., 1973

1(4)

Personal Interview. January 23rd. 1989 Provincial Fire Commissioner Saskatchewan Department of Labour Regina. Saskatchewan

Correspondence Letter. March 15th, 1.989 Deputy Fire Commissioner Alberta Department of Labour Edmonton. Alberta

Personal Interview. March 21st. 1989

Correspondence.Letter. March 13th. 1989 Fire Sciences Library Ministry of the Solicitor General Toronto, Ontario 3p

Fire Prevention Bulletin No. 1988-2 Labour Canada Ottawa, Ontario

Personal Interview. January 23rd, 1989 Christmas Tree Retailer Regina, Saskatchewan

News Release Department of the Environment Canadian Forestry Service Fredericton, New Brunswick

3p

2p

Personal Correspondence Letter from the Connecticut State Fire Marshall to Mr. Donald L. McNeil, National Christmas Tree Growers' Association Hartford, Connecticut 2p

9. HIBBARD, J.E., 1974

10. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1974

11 . JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1975

12. KELLY, K., 1989

13. KLINE, C., 1988

14. MACLEAN, C.P., 1973

15. MALONE, B., 1989

16. NORTON, A., 1989

2(4)

Newsletter. October 1974 Connecticut Christmas Tree Growers' Association Simsbury, Connecticut 2p

How hazardous to health is vinyl chloride? Medical News. June 10th; 1974 Vol. 228, No. 11. Pages 1355-1356, 1364

'Plastic fires' create new hazards for both firemen and public. Medical News. December 22nd, 1975 Vol. 234, No. 12. Pages 1211-1213

Personal Interview. March 13th, 1989 Office of the Fire Marshall Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General Toronto, Ontario

Personal Interview. December 1988 Owner/Operator of Sunshine Cleaners Prince Albert, Saskatchewan

Correspondence Letter from the Nebraska Christmas Tree Growers' Association Trustee to the National Christmas Tree Growers' Association November 21st, 1973

Christmas Tree Falsely Accused The Northwest Lookout Vol. 22, No.1. Page 28

lp

Personal Interview & Correspondence Letter March 1989 Data Fire Specialist --National Fire Protection Association Quincy, Massachusetts 3p

17. PRINCE ALBERT DAILY HERALD, 1988

18. REGINA LEADER POST, 1988

i

19. REGINA LEADER POST, 1988

20. REGINA LEADER POST, 1988

21. ROBERTS, J., 1989

22. ROWLAND, R., 1989

23. SASKATOON STAR PHOENIX 1988

24. STEPHENS, G.R. & AHRENS, J.F., 1976

25. TUCKER, C., 1989

3(4)

Article. 'There is a legal way to search for that perfect Christmas tree'. December 12th, 1988. Page Ai

Article. 'Don't let Christmas go up smoke' . December 9th, 1988. Page 3

Regina Citizen Information - Christmas Tree Safety Tips December 10th, 1988. Page A22

Article. 'Live trees out in the cold'. December 14th, 1988

Correspondence Letter

in

Re. Natural/Artificial Christmas Tree Fire Safety Information Underwriter's Laboratories of Canada Toronto, Ontario

Personal Interview. January 23rd, 1989 Municipal Fire Marshal Regina Fire Department

1p

Article. 'Real Christmas trees banned from Regina public buildings'. December 16th, 1988. Page A8

Keeping Christmas Trees Fresh The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station New Haven, Connecticut

Correspondence Letter Re. Natural/Artificial Christmas Tree Safety Information Canadian Standards Association Toronto, Ontario

3p

5p

26. UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL 1973

27. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 1952

28. - VAN WAGNER, C.E., 1963

4(4)

Article. 'Real Trees OK in Public Places.' October 23rd, 1973·

Treating Spruce & Balsam Fir Christmas Trees to Reduce Fire Hazard Technical Note No. 250 Forest Products Laboratory Madison, Wisconsin

Flammability of Christmas Tre~s Forestry Publication No. 1034 Forest Research Branch Ottawa, Ontario

4p

19p

Prepared & Submitted

CHRISTMAS TREE SAFETY

LITERATURE & STATUS· QUO REVIEW

A PREI..JHINARY INVESTIGATION

FINAL REPORT

to SASKATCHEWAN CHRISTMAS TREE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION

by INTERNATIONAL FORESTSEARCH (CANADA) LTD.

April 15th, 1989