No doubt most property owners in the US have every right to cut down trees
or eliminate all vegetation and pave everything over. My question is, what
about stewardship for that which we own/control? I my mind, that is a
larger issue than a neighbor losing a shady area. For anyone who thinks
that cutting a tree down, especially in an urban area, is no big deal,
perhaps it would be worthwhile to look into why other folks think trees are
so valuable.

But, as I mentioned earlier, it will take another 30 years to replace that
tree. Beside the loss of shade, I definitely got the impression that the OP
was also upset because the neighbors cut the tree down in one week without
considering the short AND long term effect (in the OP's mind anyway).

Just my take on the subject............

Suzy O

"Janet Baraclough" wrote in message
...
The message
from Ann contains these words:

I can cut down any tree I want on my property. As I should be able
to. You go ahead and live in your controlling environment, I promise
I won't move next door to you. And thankfully most of New England
feels as I do.

I suppose that depends whether you view yourself as the sole owner
the land you bought, or just the latest in a long line, the current
custodian who will one day hand it on to another by death or sale or
inheritance.

What if the tree is many hundreds of years old, or a "champion" of its
species, or an extreme rarity, or a special landmark of the
neighbourhood? Does someone who pays a mortgage on the tree's patch of
soil for a few years, acquire an inalienable right to remove something
very rare or special?

Janet.