ajax18 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 3:48 pm
Given the current crisis we face in climate change, do you think maybe there should be a law against people cutting down trees in their yard?
Nope. Not unless your tree is a lawfully protected species. Otherwise, it’s your land, and your tree, and you get to do with it what you will.
I do believe that we should generally be mindful of activities that push ongoing climate trends in the wrong direction, but the occasional homeowner cutting down the occasional tree just doesn’t really factor into that equation.
So the shade over 15 years is worth the risk of the tree smashing through your house?
It depends. In Arizona, a tree or two shading your house will literally save you hundreds of dollars a year in cooling costs. That’s a good risk considering the minimal chance that it will fall on your house and do some damage. And that’s just looking at the most utilitarian aspect of trees. But, to your point, maybe there’s a tree
too close to your property and it’s not in the best form or health ... then it represents a
greater risk, and you might cut it down and secure several cords of wood for yourself, for heating (or if it’s an oak, for your smoker!). Utilitarianism goes both ways, here.
Do you realize that if you ever successfully make a claim on your homeowner's insurance you'll probably never find anyone willing to insure you again?
Were that the case, nearly everyone in the south between Austin and The Keys, and from Oklahoma to the Mississippi Delta would be uninsurable, given the weather there.
But, who wants to partake in that crazy socialist insurance thing, anyway? Better to foot whatever the repair bill is for your own property damage yourself than rely on some communist scheme to share the risk and pool your dollars with the village, right?
: )
I don't think it a wise use of insurance to cover people building houses right next to giant trees in a windy place. It's irresponsible not to cut the tree down before you build there.
Your policy ordinarily covers this sort of damage, usually if wind felled the tree. Ask your agent.
Here’s a reference:
https://www.allstate.com/tr/home-insura ... house.aspx
Otherwise, I don’t know that you have any more ground to stand on than someone else if you’re arguing that they should remove older but otherwise healthy trees from their property because it might pose a threat to your own property
in a hurricane. You’re basically asking for
your fear of potential damage to override what
they may perceive as
their right to enjoy the aesthetic qualities or increased property valuation that trees contribute to. Well-placed trees in good health can add a fairly good amount to the appraised value of your home. Per the link below, “homes with trees are generally preferred to comparable homes without trees, with the trend across studies being a price increase of about 7%.”
https://www.homelight.com/blog/trees-in ... rty-value/