Someone poisoned 4 pines.......WTF???

[TimberMcPherson]

Tie him down to a chair in a soundproof room. Get a Mac saw and stand infront of him with it. Then start it. By the time you had pulled it 500 times, cleaned out the carb, replaced the coil and had to fix the starter cord twice the suspence would have killed him.

 

[userdude]

I want to kill this ??????? for what he has done

That sounds fair enough...a human life for a couple sh*tty pines.

 

[Canyon Angler]

Plant some lombardy poplar upwind. :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[zzrjohn]

When all the authorities have done their bit, cut down the trees, pile them up wait until a nice day (when the pool is in use) and theres a nice breeze in the correct direction and toss a cigarette......:jawdrop: accidentally of course.....:biggrinbounce2:

 

[Erwin]

Paulownia has an awesome root system, sticky seeds that can and do germinate readily and massive leaves and they are the fastest growing hardwood in the world!

http://www.paulowniatrees.com.au/

I'm pretty sure Paulownia has a very white soft wood, even with small hole in the center of the trunk in smaller trees. Erwin

 

[lawnmaniac883]

That sounds fair enough...a human life for a couple sh*tty pines.

Sure does doesnt it?

No it is really the fact that he killed them. It wouldnt matter if these were 4' stump ancient oak trees or some pines he would have killed them just so a few leaves or needles didnt get on his property. Pisses me off how self centered people can be. Do you go kill your neighbors tree just because it sheds leaves into your yard? Didnt think so.

 

[userdude]

Do you go kill your neighbors tree just because it sheds leaves into your yard? Didnt think so.

Uh....no, but if I did, I wouldn't expect to be murdered over it brainchild.

 

[OTG BOSTON]

What city?Call the city and request to speak with there arborist.If its in the county call Clearwater.

As a City Arborist myself I can tell you exactly what to do. First of all don't call the city Arborist:hmm3grin2orange: We take care of City owned trees we are not the tree police for every tree within the city limits.

Call the police and the fire department NON-emergency numbers. Between these two departments they will probably have a haz-mat team you'll need them because you have know idea what has killed these trees, it could be toxic to humans and pets.

You may not have a case because it would be tough to prove who actually did the damage but you can bet that the perp will be poopin' in his bvd's when the cops come knockin' and a haz-mat team closes his pool for the season.

Had a similar situation. no-one went to jail but the homeowner/treekiller had to be relocated until we could "get around" to the removal

 

[treeseer]

Uh....no, but if I did, I wouldn't expect to be murdered over it brainchild.

What would you expect, a pat on the rear? Let's face it, killing a church's trees, or giving aid and comfort to such an arborcide, is indicative of a severe mental disorder.:monkey:

lawndude, you got good advice from OTG (and not cuz it was the same as mine) Have you called the authorities about the trespass and the poisoning?

Also, when it comes to removing the 4 dead pines, the church should not do it. If as you say they lean over Mr. Pool, then just wait until they are a hazard, and they will be his responsibility and expense to remove. After all, he owns the earth below is property and the sky above, so he owns the overhanging dead trees. In no way shape or form are they solely the chuch's concern.

 

[trimmmed]

What would you expect, a pat on the rear? Let's face it, killing a church's trees, or giving aid and comfort to such an arborcide, is indicative of a severe mental disorder.:monkey:

lawndude, you got good advice from OTG (and not cuz it was the same as mine) Have you called the authorities about the trespass and the poisoning?

Also, when it comes to removing the 4 dead pines, the church should not do it. If as you say they lean over Mr. Pool, then just wait until they are a hazard, and they will be his responsibility and expense to remove. After all, he owns the earth below is property and the sky above, so he owns the overhanging dead trees. In no way shape or form are they solely the chuch's concern.

If it's good advice to call the authorities and report these poisoned trees, then would not the church( who I assume is making the report) have greatly increased their liabilty in regards to these trees? How would they defend themselves later on when the tree's fall?
The very act of calling the authorities shows they know there is a problem and maybe even could be argued that they own those trees or at least thought they did when they made the call.
Can't have it both ways.

 

[DeanBrown3D]

Get some intense red dye and throw it over into his pool one night. See if he gets it then.

 

[userdude]

What would you expect, a pat on the rear?

No, I guess you're right. A death sentence would be appropriate.

 

[Ekka]

The owner of the trees is responsible for mitigating the hazard, they are liable.

They could only stand a chance of getting some criminal compensation money if it were allowed, I dont know the laws or rules.

Also, they can check with their insurance company if malicious damage to vegetation is covered, they might get something.

But regardless of what they get they are responsible for those trees.

Anyway, where's the pics?

 

[JonnyHart]

Perhaps your local cooperative extension may be able to help identify what was used. Absolutely a police report as well.

 

[treeseer]

The owner of the trees is responsible for mitigating the hazard, they are liable.

Which owner? Is the owner of the lower trunk responsible for all other parts of the tree? Is the owner of the branches over his pool able to foist all responsibility for maintenance on the owner of the lower trunk?

I think not, tho I am not a lawyer.

Hey lawndude, get a camera ok?

 

[Ekka]

Is the owner of the lower trunk responsible for all other parts of the tree?

YES

Is the owner of the branches over his pool able to foist all responsibility for maintenance on the owner of the lower trunk?

YES

And now, just to settle the score on these tresspassing trees which have been thrust onto "victims" here's the law.

http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/gateway.asp?c=legalinfo


Due to the way the website is set up you have to follow in this order. Left hand side near top in blue text click on


Civil Law then in green text
Land then in green text
Trees and Plants

Extract for those unable to follow.

Overhanging branches and roots constitute a legal nuisance. The owner of the land on which the plant grows is liable for damage caused. Tenants are not usually liable unless they have planted the plant.

A neighbour affected can raise the matter with the neighbour directly

seek assistance for mediation from the Dispute Resolution Centres

abate the nuisance by cutting off overhanging branches and digging up roots on their property as long as they take care not to cause unnecessary damage to the plant. The overhanging branches and fruit belong to the owner of the tree, they may be returned to the owner or, with the owner's permission, disposed of. Unless the neighbour agrees to pay the cost of removal beforehand, it is necessary to take court action to recover any cost and legal advice should be obtained

commence court proceedings for damages or an injunction, and legal advice should be obtained.

A tree owner may also be liable under the ordinary principles of negligence.

FruitBelongs to the owner of the tree or plant on which it grows.


Fence line trees are the cause of many disputes, and even council gets caught up in the red tape of many laws. The above over rides local law as is a state law, however if the tree is protected then it's another kettle of fish but the responsibility is still on the trunk owner.

I have seen too many lawyers letters getting the trunk owner to prune or remove the tree.

 

[treeseer]

What a civilized society you live in--is this provincial or national law?

I don't know of any such statute here in cowboy land, the good old usa.

Here we value trees as much as swimming pools--what a concept.

What is "unnecessary damage"?

 

[lawnmaniac883]

Well, the authorities were called and didnt seem all that interested, big surprise right? But anyway, called the city arborist per your guys' advice and he will come make sure the trees were poisoned.

 

[Ekka]

This is State law and over rides council (local law).

I think the whole gist of it is that everyone has a right to enjoy their yard the way the want to and if that means no leaves, overhanging branches etc that is their right.

Nuisance .... Something which interferes with the right of an occupier of property to use their property eg: noise, smells, dust, smoke, fire

But if the tree is protected then it gets sticky. Still that means the owner of the tree is liable for works, but also in many instances the non tree owner neighbour pays and does the work to keep good relations.

unnecessary damage to the plant .... I can think of an instance of this. A large low gum branch was hanging over the back fence of an ordinary yard. The new back neighb, a developer was building 2 story town houses (so popular now, yuck!). They decided to prune the branch off with a 20t excavator ... they tore it off including a decent chunk of the trunk, a massive tear, now that's unnecessary.

I see it as not sticking to pruning standards and damaging the vegetation ... flush cuts, poisoning, cutting off half the roots destabilizing etc. Yes it needs more accurate wording but a reasonable person would know what is unnecessary I would think.

Now I need to shove all this on that fenceline thread I started.

 

[trimmmed]

I don't know of any such statute here in cowboy land, the good old usa.

Here we value trees as much as swimming pools--what a concept.

Uh, here in cowboy land, we have decisions made everyday in terms of failing to mitigate damages. It's general law, not tree specific, but does certainly apply

MITIGATE DAMAGES - Taking action to avoid or reduce damages.

A person who claims damages as a result of an alleged wrongful act on the part of another has a duty under the law to "mitigate" those damages; that is, to take advantage of any reasonable opportunity he may have had under the circumstances to reduce or minimize the loss or damage.

Personal Injury - Property Damage - General Property Damage Questions

Question 4 of 11

What is the ‘duty to mitigate damages?’
A person is not allowed to stand by idle and watch further harm come to his/her property. Everyone must use reasonable care and diligence to minimize the damages - to do what s/he can to prevent additional damage. An injured party must make a reasonable effort or expend reasonable costs to prevent the amount of loss or harm from increasing. If constant rain is raising the level of a lake next to your home, you have the responsibility to take steps to prevent damage from flood which is about to occur, such as moving property to higher ground or putting out sand bags to prevent water from entering your home. The particular acts required by a person to mitigate damages is determined on a case-by-case basis, it is set as what is "reasonable" under the particular circumstances.

These quotes were from the first couple of hits on a google search query "mitigate damages"