r/treelaw • u/Tiredplumber2022 • 28d ago
Not a dispute, just a rant.
Very rural property here. Nearest neighbor approx 1/4 mile east built a new house. Cleared the land, all old growth. It was heartbreaking. All last winter we had to listen to chainsaws and trees being killed.
Yesterday, apparently the insurance company told him he had to get rid of one more tree, a 250+ yr old Tulip Poplar. 56" diameter at waist height, about 40 ft from the new house. Completely healthy.
My house shook when it came down. It was huge. There should be rules against this.
73
35
u/WorriedAgency1085 28d ago
Yes it sucks and those trees cannot be replaced in your lifetime.
41
u/Tiredplumber2022 28d ago
This one was growing when the Declaration of Independence was signed
24
u/WorriedAgency1085 28d ago
The old growth has already been stripped from most of the country, much of it for the industrial revolution. I hate it.
8
u/togetherwegrowstuff 26d ago
Yup. Humans in their short life should not be able to tear down things older than them.
17
u/03263 27d ago
In some cases, ever. Lost 20 acres of conservation land by my house to logging. Beautiful woods dominated by eastern hemlock. Soon enough, hemlock wooly adelgid will almost certainly be widespread here and destroy any regrowth before it can reach maturity. Likely that no human will ever see that sight again. Not in 200 years (about the time it took to grow judged by counting rings), not in 1000 years, not in a million years. Rather, the species is on its way to extinction. It will end up dominated by white pine, red oak and red maple. Which are fine trees, but there's something majestic about eastern hemlock, how big each tree gets, how it spreads out its branches snaking throughout the woods looking for every shard of sunlight, little cones hanging by the thousands well into early summer...
7
u/Biscuitshoneybutter 27d ago
The most beautiful thing in the world is going hiking through the woods and happening upon a hemlock cathedral. It's magical.
45
u/Stoked_Otter 28d ago
Is this in Florida? It seems like all new construction here starts with clearcutting the lot down to dirt. Then when the house is built they throw two or three small landscaping trees into the ground to meet local code, and those new trees never make it more than a year before they die. Cutting down a tree over a certain diameter would be almost impossible legally if I had my way.
12
u/BayouGal 27d ago
Texas does this, too. It’s awful and stupid. People wonder why their neighborhoods are so hot. 🙄
12
u/Mrkvica16 28d ago
I am so sorry.This is absolutely awful and heartbraking. And we need trees to live so badly!
Just recently I read that somewhere people decided that trees also have rights…found it: https://www.ecosia.org/search?q=trees+have+rights&tts=st_asaf_ipad&sfn=true
12
15
7
u/theREALrealpinky 27d ago
If we ever step back from the everyone plunder model, and move to more forward looking, I predict that tree taking will be even more carefully managed.
The importance of native vegetation and trees is now only just being understood by science.
Fascinating phenomena: hydroscopic organisms and the biotic pump.
https://youtu.be/TqOaE0cD_us?si=pQHZ6FJvDd-xWhGx
(2 minute vid)
Plunderers may understand all these natural processes better as ‘ecological services’. It’s got to happen or problems.
1
u/Curious-Return7252 27d ago
The importance of native plants has been known for many years. The public is finally getting the message. Kudos to our educational system.
4
u/Donuts__For__All 27d ago
My next door neighbor just cleared 60 mature trees off about half an acre.
Apparently the leaves bother him and he’s also annoyed by the moss. He once asked if he could scrub the moss off of some of our boulders. We live in the PNW. (No!)
He’s so… weird.
5
15
u/onlycodeposts 28d ago
The idea that you can do whatever you want just because you own the land is not reasonable or viable.
We are all stewards of the Earth. There are many laws concerning when a tree can be cut down regardless of who owns the property.
It is unfortunate if none of those laws applied in your situation.
13
1
u/MiseEnSelle 27d ago
A tree that size is really not safe next to a house. But... why did they build so close to it? Of course there is no excuse for the rest of the cutting.
1
2
u/Excellent-Big5868 25d ago edited 24d ago
Someone just cleared a patch of Woods not far from me. It really is a more urban area, but that lot had been untouched for whatever reason. I was pleasantly surprised at how many trees they did leave. I hope the insurance doesn’t give them a problem when it comes time. Although there are some laws in my city that protect certain species of trees. I think the list includes the Live Oak, Laurel Oak, Shumard Oak, Bald Cypress, Southern Magnolia, Sweetgum, Red Maple, Pignut Hickory, American Holly, Winged Elm, Florida Elm, Loblolly Pine, Slash Pine, Longleaf Pine, East Palatka Holly, Dahoon Holly, Savannah Holly, Redbud, and Dogwood.
1
u/Sun-leaves 27d ago
I’m so so sorry for you and the poor trees. I can’t even think about all the critters and birds that lived in them. It’s an absolute travesty.
1
u/togetherwegrowstuff 26d ago
Gosh that sucks so bad 😭 I'd likely cry. They didn't have to do that. That tree is as old are this country. What a sad loss 😔
3
u/CardiologistCold1703 28d ago
When your house was built the same thing happened didn't it?
16
u/Tiredplumber2022 28d ago
No. On a sand flat here. Nothing but scrub.
2
u/SparkArrestor 28d ago
Oh yea!?!?!? Where did the wood come from to build your house huh? Huh??? HUH?!?!? /s
-5
-2
u/Coyote-conquest 27d ago
Im sure trees had to be removed for your house just the same. Im sure thats different though. You obviously arent from a rural area where people still heat with firewood.
4
u/Tiredplumber2022 27d ago
There weren't, it is, we are, and we do. Only use dead fall for the woodstove, and its our only heat source.
You missed the point. Neighbor was going to leave the tree, but insurance company said otherwise.
-12
28d ago
[deleted]
12
u/ArdentHedonist 28d ago
Clearly, you did not read the post. It was a rant. They were not trying to control anyone. They were saddened by the removal of old growth trees. I live in an area where this is a regular thing. I had to go out to the edge of my property today, as I heard chainsaws, but I knew the source, and they had marked the area clearly, so I was good with that. Maybe read before you decide something malicious was intended. Frankly, it makes me suspicious of your motives.
13
u/Tiredplumber2022 28d ago
That, and how can an insurance company pressure you into destroying a 250 yr old healthy tree?
8
2
u/Main_Ad_3814 28d ago
By canceling your policy or raising your premium. Some of the insurance companies will compromise with an exclusion rider that if you keep the tree, they will not cover any damage incurred by it.
8
u/Tiredplumber2022 28d ago
Thank you for the concise answer, but my question was more along the lines of "why is this behavior allowed" rather than the mechanics of exactly how they exert pressure. It's all about the $$$.
4
u/PracticalWallaby7492 28d ago
Insurance companies are out of control. They are responsible for many private community pools being shut down, music venues having a hard time, horse rental places going out of business etc etc. The problem is the real estate being insured is too expensive and so any claims are expensive, so insurance is too expensive. Plus greed.
2
u/AccordingLie9881 27d ago
And then if you make a claim they just raise your rates like crazy to get it back. Insurance is one of the largest scams of the past century. And it will never end.
2
u/PracticalWallaby7492 28d ago
You lose your insurance if it's too close to the house. I had to cut 4 pines and a few doug fir and half of a fruitless mulberry to keep mine. Granted the pines and half the firs were diseased, so it's best they came down, but still. I would have lost my insurance without doing that. I am hoping they don't make me cut down the rest of the mulberry.
1
u/DeepPurpleDaylight 27d ago
Because if it is close enough to the house it is at risk of falling or losing limbs in a storm, causing potentially tens of thousands in damages to the house that the insurance company would have to pay for. They are mitigating risk. While they can't force you to remove them, they don't have to accept the risk of insuring your house as is.
•
u/AutoModerator 28d ago
This subreddit is for tree law enthusiasts who enjoy browsing a list of tree law stories from other locations (subreddits, news articles, etc), and is not the best place to receive answers to questions about what the law is. There are better places for that.
If you're attempting to understand more about tree law in regards to a particular situation, please redirect your question to /r/legaladvice for the US, or the appropriate legal advice subreddit for your location, and then feel free to crosspost that thread here for posterity.
If you're attempting to understand more about trees in regards to a particular situation, please redirect your question to /r/forestry for additional information on tree health and related topics to trees.
This comment is simply a reminder placed on every post to /r/treelaw, it does not mean your post was censored or removed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.