# protection of trees



## alexacohen

Hello everybody,

I have just come from a walk to the brook. The path has trees on each side.

One of the trees wasn't there today. There was a gap, and a bleeding white and cream round circle that still smelled of sawn wood and was all that was left of the tree. 

It had been a very tall oak tree. It towered over the other trees, and its branches had shadowed a huge patch of the road.

I know enough of trees. I counted the circles. One, two, three, four... three hundred and seventy four circles. The tree had been three hundred and seventy four years old.

I sat down and cried.

I would like to know if this would be allowed in your countries. People can cut centuries old trees simply because they are located on their property or this would be considered outrageous, illegal, whatever?

Thank you.


----------



## ascension

Hello,

As far as I know this could most definitely happen in the United States. If a tree is on someone's property he can do whatever he would like with the tree. If the tree were in a public space or on protected land I would assume that only the government would have say over whether or not a tree could be cut down.


----------



## Hakro

Dear Alexa,

I feel exactly the same. I've seen some useless fellings of trees, and I have (nearly) cried.

But they may have a reason for felling a tree: an old tree may be rotten and dangerous for people and traffic. In Finland the trees along a road often belong to the road keeper (city, municipality, etc.), not to the owner of the nearby land.

For example, I have a line of some fifty year old spruces along the road in front of my house. They seem to be on my block but I have nothing to say if the road keeper decides to fell them. (In fact they cut some branches every now and then.)

On the other hand, last autumn I planted some twenty trees on my backyard, as a "puits de carbone" (whatever it is in English). But I'll never see them grown up.


----------



## alexacohen

Oh, sorry, Hakro.


> But they may have a reason for felling a tree: an old tree may be rotten and dangerous for people and traffic.


I should have specified "for no reason other than a whim".


----------



## Suehil

In the Netherlands you have to apply for permission to fell a tree, even if it is on your own land.  And you have to have a very good reason before you will get that permission.


----------



## anothersmith

In California, old oak trees are protected by the law, and you need permission to cut one down.

Other states may have similar laws.


----------



## alexacohen

I'm awfully glad to know trees are protected somewhere, Suehil and Anothersmith.


----------



## lablady

anothersmith said:


> In California, old oak trees are protected by the law, and you need permission to cut one down.


In a nearby town, those old oaks are so protected that any pruning must be done by someone with a special license. 

Other than the oaks, I think property owners are free to do as they please with the trees on their land.


----------



## viera

I remeber my father complaining about the hassle he had getting permission from the authorities (in Ontario) to cut down a tree in his garden, as it had become dangerous.  My father was an avid tree-planter and planted many over the years.


----------



## mirx

As far I as am concerned people in Mexico can cut down trees that are on their property.


----------



## jonquiliser

I believe very few individual trees fall under special regulations in Finland. There are protective regulations of forest areas though, where felling is, depending on the type of forest, restricted. The land-owner can apply for some forest area to be protected, in case it's considered particularly "valuable" (rare forest type, or because it provides habitat for rare species of animals or plants). 

In front of my father's house, there are two maple trees, both quite big, one of them older and larger than the other. A few years ago it split in two half-way down the trunk. Often there would be a car parked in its shadow, but there wasn't any the day its one half fell. The other half  - the one reaching over the house - is now supported by a few robust boards


----------



## Vale_yaya

alexacohen said:


> Hello everybody,
> 
> I have just come from a walk to the brook. The path has trees on each side.
> 
> One of the trees wasn't there today. There was a gap, and a bleeding white and cream round circle that still smelled of sawn wood and was all that was left of the tree.
> 
> It had been a very tall oak tree. It towered over the other trees, and its branches had shadowed a huge patch of the road.
> 
> I know enough of trees. I counted the circles. One, two, three, four... three hundred and seventy four circles. The tree had been three hundred and seventy four years old.
> 
> I sat down and cried.
> 
> I would like to know if this would be allowed in your countries. People can cut centuries old trees simply because they are located on their property or this would be considered outrageous, illegal, whatever?
> 
> Thank you.


 
Dear Alexa.. you almost made me cry... I know how you feel...

In MN, if the tree is on your property you can cut it down for any reason, but if the tree is on a government property... or public zone such as a park you would need a permit for it (as far as I know).

In Ecuador... it's almost the same thing as here. But If you cut down a tree from a public area, you need to plant either 2 or 3... (to somehow recover the lost..) obviously a lot of people don't follow the rules... and they get away with it.


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

Alas, there are almost no rules about cutting down trees in Canada, unless they're publicly owned.  If it's on your property, it's considered your tree.

Until the law designates people as stewards, rather than owners, of plants and animals, this practice will continue.  I know of several cases where owners have razed their property to prevent it being designated as "environmentally protected" in one way or another.

I too have cried over needlessly cut trees.


----------



## cuchuflete

The answer where I live is a little complicated.  This region has long depended on forestry for much of its economy, hence cutting trees in a heavily forested region is quite normal, and supports a fair portion of the local population.  The state government provides tax subsidies for land "in tree growth", to support planting and cultivation, as well as harvesting.  In short, we like trees, encourage their planting and care, and also cut lots of them.

In addition to all of the above, if you own waterfront land, which is common enough with a very large Atlantic coastline and many rivers and lakes, trees anywhere near the water are protected, for water and land conservation motives.  Before cutting anything, you must file a plan with local town authorities.  Such plans protect the older, larger trees, and limit the amount of cutting of saplings.


----------



## Macunaíma

Chaska Ñawi said:


> I know of several cases where owners have razed their property to prevent it being designated as "environmentally protected" in one way or another.


 
I know of a few such cases in Brazil too (and a case of someone who demolished the façade of his house before it was officially declared as belonging to the historical heritage. Such is the extent of people's ignorance sometimes). Nowadays, as a way to avoid this, properties that have such protected areas in them are exempted from taxes. Proprietors now _want_ their properties to be recognized as enviromentally relevant somehow.

Alexa, I sympathize with your feeling. I too felt terribly indignant and impotent when a 150-year-old chestnut in my town was cut down by the proprietor of the house where it stood. I am for more strict rules concerning the felling of trees even if it's in private property. Sometimes the impact on the landscape is just brutal.


----------



## se16teddy

In England (and in the UK I think), local authorities (local government) have the power to issue orders protecting trees that _make a significant impact on their local __surroundings_. You can read all about it here http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/protectedtrees


----------



## alexacohen

cuchuflete said:


> The answer where I live is a little complicated.  This region has long depended on forestry for much of its economy, hence cutting trees in a heavily forested region is quite normal, and supports a fair portion of the local population.


I understand that. In Galicia there are whole forests that are grown just to be cut down; but the trees are fast-growing species - such as eucayptus and pines or cypress, which are usually "grown-up" trees in six or seven years.

But oak trees, willows, chestnut trees, olive trees, holm trees take centuries to grow.

By cutting down one of them you not only deprive your generation, but your children's, and your grandchildren's...


----------



## Miguel Antonio

alexacohen said:


> Oh, sorry, Hakro.
> 
> I should have specified "for no reason other than a whim".


Not whim, my dear, but MONEY. A three-hundred-plus year-old oak is worth a fortune.



Suehil said:


> In the Netherlands you have to apply for permission to fell a tree, even if it is on your own land.  And you have to have a very good reason before you will get that permission.


In Galicia too, if the owners did not ask for the permission they are liable to a hefty fine. Call SEPRONA and report it, if the tree was close to a watercourse then it is illegal to cut it.

I felt the same when a neighbour of mine cut an old oak for firewood!!! She was given the relevant permit, though. So did another, an old cherry tree rotten to the core. Fortunately, some eucalyptus trees are dying, I don't know why, but I won't miss them in the landscape.


----------



## jonquiliser

Miguel Antonio said:


> In Galicia too, if the owners did not ask for the permission they are liable to a hefty fine. Call SEPRONA and report it, if the tree was close to a watercourse then it is illegal to cut it.



As far as I've understood, "autoctonous forests" also may not be cut down, hence the extreme numbers of "inexplicable" forest fires. Though the problem of course isn't easy; many owners of small forest areas are far from rich, and the prospect of fast-growing, lucrative eucalyptus triumphs. Or?


----------



## Miguel Antonio

jonquiliser said:


> As far as I've understood, "autoctonous forests" also may not be cut down, hence the extreme numbers of "inexplicable" forest fires. Though the problem of course isn't easy; many owners of small forest areas are far from rich, and the prospect of fast-growing, lucrative eucalyptus triumphs. Or?


In Galicia, only trees along riverbanks are protected under the law, apart from the odd "unique" specimen, as long as it has been catalogued. As for forest fires, they are more davastating in eucalyptus and pine forests, because of the accumulated bark of the former and needles of the latter, a veritable time-bomb tinderbox. Eucalyptus trees, though, not only withstand, but actually thrive after a fire.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

As far as I know, in Ireland you can cut down whatever you want, as long as it isn't protected and it's on your property.

I just spent the past while sawing up pieces of our evergreen trees and many of our neighbours are doing the same in order to keep them pruned back.


----------



## TRG

I live north of New Orleans, Louisiana, an area which was heavily impacted by hurricane Katrina.  There was an immense amount of damage to houses almost all of which was from falling trees.  We were also without electric power for several weeks because of trees falling on power lines.  Most of the damage was caused by fast growing but weakly pine trees.  The oak trees are much more durable in the wind and did little damage. I did have a large oak tree taken down in my yard, and luckily it missed the house.  It was simply tipped over at the roots.  

Trees in Louisiana are in many respects like overgrown weeds and I wish they were kept more under control.  They also detract from environmental aesthetics because they completely block ones view of the surrounding landscape.  It would be nice to see the sunset once in a while.

In front of my house there is a large and nicely formed live oak tree.  My house was located on the lot in such a way as to preserve this tree, which I would estimate to be between two and three hundred years old.  I wouldn't harm this tree for anything, but as I am endlessly cleaning up after it I sometimes wish the tree belong to someone else.

That said, I too would be sad to see a grand old tree cut down for no good purpose.  In the subdivision in which I live, I am supposed to get permission to cut down any trees more than 4 inches in diameter.


----------



## alexacohen

Thank you very much.

I am deeply grateful to all of you, for taking your time to answer my thread. And you have made me feel less of a freak too.

I will not see the time when human beings realize that Nature is not our property, but it feels good to know that some of us understand it.

Thanks again, AudKaem, Hakro, Suehil, Anothersmith, LabLady, Viera, Mirx, Jonquiliser, Vale Yaya, Chaska Ñawi, Cuchuflete, Macunaíma, Se16Teddy, Miguel Antonio, Pedro y la Torre, TRG.

It was a privilege reading your answers.


----------



## Joca

Hakro said:


> ...But I'll never see them grown up.


 
Excuse me, Hakro, but why do you say you will never see your trees grown-up, or fully developed? You could still have more than 30 years to live, so why not?

Now, to Alexa: that must have been a very cruel act to the tree. However, there are times, as Hakro himself pointed out, when trees happen to be in the way of humans in terms of safety, developments or whatever. Even in such cases, I think you can find ways of not felling it and moving along with your project. 

This is a paradoxical country in terms of tree protection. It's a shame what they are doing in the Amazon region: they are destroying not one tree, but the whole forest. At the same time, I often hear about urban people fighting for a particular tree in their immediate environment. 

Some time ago, in this city (Florianópolis), a group of citizens fought fiercely to prevent the felling of an aged tree (I can't remember anymore what was happening to the tree and what the authorities wanted to do about it), but the case was reported in the national media. The people even blocked the way to the tree and eventually succeeded in saving it. I must pay a visit to that tree (a survivor) one day. 

In many senses, trees are more important than human beings, aren't they?

When we were about lo leave our old house to move to this place, we spent some time bidding farewell to the trees. It was one of the saddest moments of my life, and whenever it comes to my mind, it still makes me cry a little.


----------



## Hakro

Joca said:


> Excuse me, Hakro, but why do you say you will never see your trees grown-up, or fully developed? You could still have more than 30 years to live, so why not?


Thank you for your kind words, Joca, but in these latitudes trees grow very slowly; in Finland a tree is considered fully grown-up only after 50 years or more, rather at the age of 70 to 100 years. I planted some trees here 35 years ago and they seem to be only "middle-aged". Especially coniferous trees that I like most (spruce, pine) grow very slowly.

After all, I never planted trees only for myself but for people who will live here after me. Besides, now I know that "puits de carbone" is in English "carbon dioxide sink" (thanks to Kelly B).


----------



## Nanon

Trees burn every summer in southern France, in my home region of Provence.
Whatever the reasons, intentional or not, I consider it is a crime to let trees burn.
Actually not all trees are protected by law. But in Provence, smoking in a car with an open window falls under local law, because incandescent ashes can set a fire very quickly.


----------

