My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's so massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden. The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches overhanging our property before. I have asked if we can take it down but she says she wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a compromise, we agreed we could take the height down to the levels of the trees next to it, and leave the branches on her side as they are. I've consulted a tree surgeon who says he can make a good job of trying to make a compromise (without, in his words, "it looking like a helicopter has crashed into it"). My neighbour is now starting to get difficult and saying she "doesn't want a lot taking off" and that she doesn't want it "lop sided". When we had the overhanging branches taken off a couple of years back (with her blessing), she never said a word. Now she's saying he "cut off half the tree and didn't shape it". But, it didn't change the aspect on her side at all, just stopped the branches completely overshadowing our side. It it right that we have absolutely no right to take some of this tree down when it takes our light so badly? I'd never want to make it look ugly or odd, or to upset my neighbour. But frankly, I can't see how we can find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut the branches that overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This tree is about 30 feet high...

"Lisa T" wrote in message
...

My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's
so
massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden.
The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to
look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches overhanging
our
property before. I have asked if we can take it down but she says she
wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a compromise, we agreed
we
could take the height down to the levels of the trees next to it, and
leave the branches on her side as they are. I've consulted a tree
surgeon who says he can make a good job of trying to make a compromise
(without, in his words, "it looking like a helicopter has crashed into
it"). My neighbour is now starting to get difficult and saying she
"doesn't want a lot taking off" and that she doesn't want it "lop
sided". When we had the overhanging branches taken off a couple of
years
back (with her blessing), she never said a word. Now she's saying he
"cut off half the tree and didn't shape it". But, it didn't change the
aspect on her side at all, just stopped the branches completely
overshadowing our side. It it right that we have absolutely no right
to
take some of this tree down when it takes our light so badly? I'd
never
want to make it look ugly or odd, or to upset my neighbour. But
frankly,
I can't see how we can find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut
the branches that overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This
tree is about 30 feet high...

My understanding is anything that comes over into your property is fair
game for you to do with what you want. (Check with you City/County
government to make certain.) I had a neighbors' tree hanging over my
driveway and had a couple of their dead branches cut before they fell on
someone or a car in the driveway. As a courtesy, I did tell them before
hand. They actually seemed glad it was being done... They ended up
cutting down the tree the following year since it was dying.

The power company here comes by and butchers trees so they are not
hanging over power lines. They literally cut a big V in some, and there
are some where half the tree is just gone. Looks terrible. They claim
that you can't shape a tree, it is actually unhealthy for it and have to
cut the way they do. They give no notice to property owners, just show
up one day and hack off limbs and then leave.

On 8/5/2013 6:11 PM, Gus wrote:
"Lisa T" wrote in message
...

My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's so
massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden.
The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to
look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches overhanging our
property before. I have asked if we can take it down but she says she
wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a compromise, we agreed we
could take the height down to the levels of the trees next to it, and
leave the branches on her side as they are. I've consulted a tree
surgeon who says he can make a good job of trying to make a compromise
(without, in his words, "it looking like a helicopter has crashed into
it"). My neighbour is now starting to get difficult and saying she
"doesn't want a lot taking off" and that she doesn't want it "lop
sided". When we had the overhanging branches taken off a couple of years
back (with her blessing), she never said a word. Now she's saying he
"cut off half the tree and didn't shape it". But, it didn't change the
aspect on her side at all, just stopped the branches completely
overshadowing our side. It it right that we have absolutely no right to
take some of this tree down when it takes our light so badly? I'd never
want to make it look ugly or odd, or to upset my neighbour. But frankly,
I can't see how we can find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut
the branches that overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This
tree is about 30 feet high...

My understanding is anything that comes over into your property is fair
game for you to do with what you want. (Check with you City/County
government to make certain.) I had a neighbors' tree hanging over my
driveway and had a couple of their dead branches cut before they fell on
someone or a car in the driveway. As a courtesy, I did tell them before
hand. They actually seemed glad it was being done... They ended up
cutting down the tree the following year since it was dying.

The power company here comes by and butchers trees so they are not
hanging over power lines. They literally cut a big V in some, and there
are some where half the tree is just gone. Looks terrible. They claim
that you can't shape a tree, it is actually unhealthy for it and have to
cut the way they do. They give no notice to property owners, just show
up one day and hack off limbs and then leave.



UK address. Don't know what their rules are.
Thirty feet is not a huge tree but oaks can get huge and if lots are
small her neighbor could be the one in trouble years from now.

Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's
so massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my
garden. The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending,
trying to look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches
overhanging our property before. I have asked if we can take it down
but she says she wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a
compromise, we agreed we could take the height down to the levels of
the trees next to it, and leave the branches on her side as they are.
I've consulted a tree surgeon who says he can make a good job of
trying to make a compromise (without, in his words, "it looking like
a helicopter has crashed into it"). My neighbour is now starting to
get difficult and saying she "doesn't want a lot taking off" and that
she doesn't want it "lop sided". When we had the overhanging branches
taken off a couple of years back (with her blessing), she never said
a word. Now she's saying he "cut off half the tree and didn't shape
it". But, it didn't change the aspect on her side at all, just
stopped the branches completely overshadowing our side. It it right
that we have absolutely no right to take some of this tree down when
it takes our light so badly? I'd never want to make it look ugly or
odd, or to upset my neighbour. But frankly, I can't see how we can
find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut the branches that
overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This tree is about 30
feet high...

This is a legal question whose answer will depend on the jurisdiction that
you are in. It is not sensible to ask an international garden group such a
thing as we are probably not in your area and probably not lawyers either.

D

On 8/5/13 3:11 PM, Gus wrote:
"Lisa T" wrote in message
...

My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's
so
massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden.
The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to
look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches overhanging
our
property before. I have asked if we can take it down but she says she
wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a compromise, we agreed
we
could take the height down to the levels of the trees next to it, and
leave the branches on her side as they are. I've consulted a tree
surgeon who says he can make a good job of trying to make a compromise
(without, in his words, "it looking like a helicopter has crashed into
it"). My neighbour is now starting to get difficult and saying she
"doesn't want a lot taking off" and that she doesn't want it "lop
sided". When we had the overhanging branches taken off a couple of
years
back (with her blessing), she never said a word. Now she's saying he
"cut off half the tree and didn't shape it". But, it didn't change the
aspect on her side at all, just stopped the branches completely
overshadowing our side. It it right that we have absolutely no right
to
take some of this tree down when it takes our light so badly? I'd
never
want to make it look ugly or odd, or to upset my neighbour. But
frankly,
I can't see how we can find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut
the branches that overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This
tree is about 30 feet high...

My understanding is anything that comes over into your property is fair
game for you to do with what you want. (Check with you City/County
government to make certain.) I had a neighbors' tree hanging over my
driveway and had a couple of their dead branches cut before they fell on
someone or a car in the driveway. As a courtesy, I did tell them before
hand. They actually seemed glad it was being done... They ended up
cutting down the tree the following year since it was dying.

The power company here comes by and butchers trees so they are not
hanging over power lines. They literally cut a big V in some, and there
are some where half the tree is just gone. Looks terrible. They claim
that you can't shape a tree, it is actually unhealthy for it and have to
cut the way they do. They give no notice to property owners, just show
up one day and hack off limbs and then leave.

In some areas, oaks are protected by law. A special permit is required
even to trim them. In other areas, this is not so. If a permit is
required and you don't have one, the fine can be as great as the value
of the affected tree, which can be quite substantial.

However, you should also check to see if sudden oak death (SOD, caused
by the water mold Phytophthora ramorum) is a problem in your immediate
area. It is now known not only on the Pacific coast of the U.S. but
also in the U.K. If SOD is a problem in your area, you might even be
able to get an order to remove the tree. Fortunately for me, SOD does
not yet seem to be a problem either in my area or with valley white oaks
(Quercus lobata).

As to utilities trimming trees, I have see a large number of palms
topped by the utility companies in my area; cutting off the top of a
palm kills it. The trunks remain. As they dry, they can become
horrific torches during even a minor wildfire (common in this arid area)
and destroy all overhead wiring. I just cannot understand why the
utilities do not cut the palms at ground level to avoid future problems.

--
David E. Ross
Climate: California Mediterranean, see
http://www.rossde.com/garden/climate.html
Gardening diary at http://www.rossde.com/garden/diary

On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 09:26:28 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
wrote:

Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence.

Then it is on the neighbor's property line as well... here in the US a
tree on the property line is a no brainer, the portion on your side
gets removed, in fact in most US municipalities if one land owner
wants it gone the entire tree goes... most zoning laws specify a set
back for large trees, may be that no large trees can be planted closer
than 15' from the property line.

This tree is about 30 feet high...

That's not a very large oak tree, but it's not a small tree either.

This is a legal question whose answer will depend on the jurisdiction that
you are in. It is not sensible to ask an international garden group such a
thing as we are probably not in your area and probably not lawyers either.

I concur, get legal advice... and take pictures.

On 8/5/2013 1:22 PM, Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's so
massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden.
The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to
look for light.

I've been in this situation before, including having the
passive-aggressive neighbor who is fully aware that the tree is a
nuisance to you - but instead of candidly discussing the problem, she
prevaricates, promises, and complains.

I'll tell you what I finally resorted to (and this was after a third
of the tree crashed down onto my parked car during a storm, leaving me
responsible for the removal and cleanup, since it fell onto my property):

I acquired a bottle of brushkiller (failing that, the most
highly-concentrated formulation of Roundup could be used). In the
middle of the night, I quietly went to the tree and dug away some of
the soil to expose a spot on one of the larger roots. I scraped off a
small patch of the root's surface with the knife, applied a goodly
spoonful of the brushkiller to the exposed area. I then patted the
dirt back over the spot and went back to bed.

Within a week, the tree began to show some browning of a branch or
two. I said nothing, but repeated the process in a couple of weeks,
this time finding another root to treat, as well as hitting the
original root with another dose. By the time the damage from the
second application showed up, the neighbor noticed the tree was in
distress and had it removed. Good thing; I was prepared to continue
until the tree died.

You can also kill a tree by girdling it - removing a collar of bark
from the base of the tree - but that is much easier to detect than a
few scraped patches on some roots.

On 05/08/2013 19:22, Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's so
massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden.
The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to
look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches overhanging our
property before. I have asked if we can take it down but she says she
wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a compromise, we agreed we
could take the height down to the levels of the trees next to it, and
leave the branches on her side as they are. I've consulted a tree
surgeon who says he can make a good job of trying to make a compromise
(without, in his words, "it looking like a helicopter has crashed into
it"). My neighbour is now starting to get difficult and saying she
"doesn't want a lot taking off" and that she doesn't want it "lop
sided". When we had the overhanging branches taken off a couple of years
back (with her blessing), she never said a word. Now she's saying he
"cut off half the tree and didn't shape it". But, it didn't change the
aspect on her side at all, just stopped the branches completely
overshadowing our side. It it right that we have absolutely no right to
take some of this tree down when it takes our light so badly? I'd never
want to make it look ugly or odd, or to upset my neighbour. But frankly,
I can't see how we can find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut
the branches that overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This
tree is about 30 feet high...

You really need to check your local council website. Search for "Tree
Preservation Order" on it (sometimes called "Tree Protection order").
Be very careful - there are severe financial penalties for damaging
trees which are subject to a TPO. This is from my local council's FAQs:

"I am having problems with a tree in my neighbour's garden blocking
light. What can I do?
Alleged blocking of light to the house or garden involves complex legal
issues and there is no legal right to light. The council will not
generally prune healthy trees to allow greater access for light.
Technically, your neighbour only has a duty to ensure their trees are
safe. There is currently no height restriction on trees and hedges. If
you have concerns regarding a hedge or tree, ask your neighbour how they
intend to maintain it. You may be able to cut the overhanging branches
back to the boundary. However, before either you or your neighbour
undertakes works to any trees, it is important to check the trees are
not covered by a Tree Preservation Order or located within a
Conservation Area."

Note the final sentence. The previous FAQ ("My neighbour's trees
encroach over my boundary. Can I cut them back?") has the following
final sentence " If a tree is protected by a Tree Preservation Order, or
because it is located within a Conservation Area, the Common Law right
is removed and you will need to seek formal permission from the Council
before undertaking work to living parts of the tree."

--

Jeff

Moe DeLoughan wrote:
On 8/5/2013 1:22 PM, Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence.
It's so massive that it takes all light from the middle section of
my garden. The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are
bending, trying to look for light.

I've been in this situation before, including having the
passive-aggressive neighbor who is fully aware that the tree is a
nuisance to you - but instead of candidly discussing the problem, she
prevaricates, promises, and complains.

I'll tell you what I finally resorted to (and this was after a third
of the tree crashed down onto my parked car during a storm, leaving me
responsible for the removal and cleanup, since it fell onto my
property):
I acquired a bottle of brushkiller (failing that, the most
highly-concentrated formulation of Roundup could be used). In the
middle of the night, I quietly went to the tree and dug away some of
the soil to expose a spot on one of the larger roots. I scraped off a
small patch of the root's surface with the knife, applied a goodly
spoonful of the brushkiller to the exposed area. I then patted the
dirt back over the spot and went back to bed.

Within a week, the tree began to show some browning of a branch or
two. I said nothing, but repeated the process in a couple of weeks,
this time finding another root to treat, as well as hitting the
original root with another dose. By the time the damage from the
second application showed up, the neighbor noticed the tree was in
distress and had it removed. Good thing; I was prepared to continue
until the tree died.

You can also kill a tree by girdling it - removing a collar of bark
from the base of the tree - but that is much easier to detect than a
few scraped patches on some roots.

What a wimp. You shoulda man'dup and firebombed it. That'd teach'um that
****ive aggressive stuff.

D

If the trimmer took checks from both of you, she can deal with him about any shaping on her side. You can cut off any limbs on your side without involving her.

If you paid the trimmer and then she paid you, then both you and the trimmer will have to work with her.

"Lisa T" wrote in message ...

My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's so
massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden.
The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to
look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches overhanging our
property before. I have asked if we can take it down but she says she
wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a compromise, we agreed we
could take the height down to the levels of the trees next to it, and
leave the branches on her side as they are. I've consulted a tree
surgeon who says he can make a good job of trying to make a compromise
(without, in his words, "it looking like a helicopter has crashed into
it"). My neighbour is now starting to get difficult and saying she
"doesn't want a lot taking off" and that she doesn't want it "lop
sided". When we had the overhanging branches taken off a couple of years
back (with her blessing), she never said a word. Now she's saying he
"cut off half the tree and didn't shape it". But, it didn't change the
aspect on her side at all, just stopped the branches completely
overshadowing our side. It it right that we have absolutely no right to
take some of this tree down when it takes our light so badly? I'd never
want to make it look ugly or odd, or to upset my neighbour. But frankly,
I can't see how we can find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut
the branches that overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This
tree is about 30 feet high...




--
Lisa T

PS -- Be sure that when you cut the limbs that it doesn't kill the tree.

When I have to prune a tree that is important to keep, I always make up a disinfecting solution of 1 teaspoon of chlorox in a gallon of water, wipe it around where I'm going to cut and wipe the saw blade. Then after cutting, paint the open wound with a pruning seal. Cheap, easy and helps to ensure the tree survives. I do this even with small cuts if the tree is important to keep.

"Guv Bob" wrote in message m...
If the trimmer took checks from both of you, she can deal with him about any shaping on her side. You can cut off any limbs on your side without involving her.

If you paid the trimmer and then she paid you, then both you and the trimmer will have to work with her.

"Lisa T" wrote in message ...

My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence. It's so
massive that it takes all light from the middle section of my garden.
The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are bending, trying to
look for light. My neighbour has let us cut the branches overhanging our
property before. I have asked if we can take it down but she says she
wants to keep it for 'shade' on her side. As a compromise, we agreed we
could take the height down to the levels of the trees next to it, and
leave the branches on her side as they are. I've consulted a tree
surgeon who says he can make a good job of trying to make a compromise
(without, in his words, "it looking like a helicopter has crashed into
it"). My neighbour is now starting to get difficult and saying she
"doesn't want a lot taking off" and that she doesn't want it "lop
sided". When we had the overhanging branches taken off a couple of years
back (with her blessing), she never said a word. Now she's saying he
"cut off half the tree and didn't shape it". But, it didn't change the
aspect on her side at all, just stopped the branches completely
overshadowing our side. It it right that we have absolutely no right to
take some of this tree down when it takes our light so badly? I'd never
want to make it look ugly or odd, or to upset my neighbour. But frankly,
I can't see how we can find a compromise if she won't allow us to cut
the branches that overhang our property. It feels grossly unfair. This
tree is about 30 feet high...




--
Lisa T

Moe DeLoughan wrote:
On 8/5/2013 1:22 PM, Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence.
It's so massive that it takes all light from the middle section of
my garden. The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are
bending, trying to look for light.

I've been in this situation before, including having the
passive-aggressive neighbor who is fully aware that the tree is a
nuisance to you - but instead of candidly discussing the problem, she
prevaricates, promises, and complains.

I'll tell you what I finally resorted to (and this was after a third
of the tree crashed down onto my parked car during a storm, leaving me
responsible for the removal and cleanup, since it fell onto my
property):
I acquired a bottle of brushkiller (failing that, the most
highly-concentrated formulation of Roundup could be used). In the
middle of the night, I quietly went to the tree and dug away some of
the soil to expose a spot on one of the larger roots. I scraped off a
small patch of the root's surface with the knife, applied a goodly
spoonful of the brushkiller to the exposed area. I then patted the
dirt back over the spot and went back to bed.

Within a week, the tree began to show some browning of a branch or
two. I said nothing, but repeated the process in a couple of weeks,
this time finding another root to treat, as well as hitting the
original root with another dose. By the time the damage from the
second application showed up, the neighbor noticed the tree was in
distress and had it removed. Good thing; I was prepared to continue
until the tree died.

You can also kill a tree by girdling it - removing a collar of bark
from the base of the tree - but that is much easier to detect than a
few scraped patches on some roots.

I had an elderly neighbor that didn't like a shrup growing on his neighbors yard
edge. He sprayed it with some weed killer at night. His neighbor hired a sprayer
to spray his fruit tree, and the sprayer asked about the dying shrub. The
sprayer took it upon himself to notify the local state EPA equivalent about it.
They sent an investigator who tested the plant to determine the chemical, then
cornered the elderly neighbor and had a long talk with him. He could have been
prosecuted, had the investigator chosen to.

"Bob F" wrote in message ...
Moe DeLoughan wrote:
On 8/5/2013 1:22 PM, Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence.
It's so massive that it takes all light from the middle section of
my garden. The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are
bending, trying to look for light.

I've been in this situation before, including having the
passive-aggressive neighbor who is fully aware that the tree is a
nuisance to you - but instead of candidly discussing the problem, she
prevaricates, promises, and complains.

I'll tell you what I finally resorted to (and this was after a third
of the tree crashed down onto my parked car during a storm, leaving me
responsible for the removal and cleanup, since it fell onto my
property):
I acquired a bottle of brushkiller (failing that, the most
highly-concentrated formulation of Roundup could be used). In the
middle of the night, I quietly went to the tree and dug away some of
the soil to expose a spot on one of the larger roots. I scraped off a
small patch of the root's surface with the knife, applied a goodly
spoonful of the brushkiller to the exposed area. I then patted the
dirt back over the spot and went back to bed.

Within a week, the tree began to show some browning of a branch or
two. I said nothing, but repeated the process in a couple of weeks,
this time finding another root to treat, as well as hitting the
original root with another dose. By the time the damage from the
second application showed up, the neighbor noticed the tree was in
distress and had it removed. Good thing; I was prepared to continue
until the tree died.

You can also kill a tree by girdling it - removing a collar of bark
from the base of the tree - but that is much easier to detect than a
few scraped patches on some roots.

I had an elderly neighbor that didn't like a shrup growing on his neighbors yard
edge. He sprayed it with some weed killer at night. His neighbor hired a sprayer
to spray his fruit tree, and the sprayer asked about the dying shrub. The
sprayer took it upon himself to notify the local state EPA equivalent about it.
They sent an investigator who tested the plant to determine the chemical, then
cornered the elderly neighbor and had a long talk with him. He could have been
prosecuted, had the investigator chosen to.

Yes, vandalism or destruction of property means hiring an attorney, court costs and, especially with so much being online these days, anything on your record will have far-reaching and long lasting impacts on a person's life.

Guv Bob wrote:
PS -- Be sure that when you cut the limbs that it doesn't kill the
tree.

When I have to prune a tree that is important to keep, I always make
up a disinfecting solution of 1 teaspoon of chlorox in a gallon of
water, wipe it around where I'm going to cut and wipe the saw blade.
Then after cutting, paint the open wound with a pruning seal. Cheap,
easy and helps to ensure the tree survives. I do this even with
small cuts if the tree is important to keep.

My understanding is that "pruning seal" is not recommended these day. They can
prevent the tree from properly sealing the wound.

On 8/6/2013 8:15 PM, Bob F wrote:
Moe DeLoughan wrote:
On 8/5/2013 1:22 PM, Lisa T wrote:
My neighbour has a huge oak tree literally on my boundary fence.
It's so massive that it takes all light from the middle section of
my garden. The trees on my side (an apple and rowan tree) are
bending, trying to look for light.

I've been in this situation before, including having the
passive-aggressive neighbor who is fully aware that the tree is a
nuisance to you - but instead of candidly discussing the problem, she
prevaricates, promises, and complains.

I'll tell you what I finally resorted to (and this was after a third
of the tree crashed down onto my parked car during a storm, leaving me
responsible for the removal and cleanup, since it fell onto my
property):
I acquired a bottle of brushkiller (failing that, the most
highly-concentrated formulation of Roundup could be used). In the
middle of the night, I quietly went to the tree and dug away some of
the soil to expose a spot on one of the larger roots. I scraped off a
small patch of the root's surface with the knife, applied a goodly
spoonful of the brushkiller to the exposed area. I then patted the
dirt back over the spot and went back to bed.

Within a week, the tree began to show some browning of a branch or
two. I said nothing, but repeated the process in a couple of weeks,
this time finding another root to treat, as well as hitting the
original root with another dose. By the time the damage from the
second application showed up, the neighbor noticed the tree was in
distress and had it removed. Good thing; I was prepared to continue
until the tree died.

You can also kill a tree by girdling it - removing a collar of bark
from the base of the tree - but that is much easier to detect than a
few scraped patches on some roots.

I had an elderly neighbor that didn't like a shrup growing on his neighbors yard
edge. He sprayed it with some weed killer at night. His neighbor hired a sprayer
to spray his fruit tree, and the sprayer asked about the dying shrub. The
sprayer took it upon himself to notify the local state EPA equivalent about it.
They sent an investigator who tested the plant to determine the chemical, then
cornered the elderly neighbor and had a long talk with him. He could have been
prosecuted, had the investigator chosen to.



I'm calling BS on this one. The feds lack the funding and thus the
inclination to investigate a single incident complaint. They declined
to investigate a local "lawn care expert" who was recommending the use
of a banned chemical for off-label purposes and openly selling at his
store. Additionally, we had one hell of a time getting the state, much
less the feds, to do anything about all the complaints about
misapplied chemicals from the lawn care services in the area. The
reality is that the regulatory agencies have been deliberately starved
of funds and are thus so short-handed, they have to practice triage -
which means no, they do not go out an conduct an investigation of a
lone neighbor complaint.

Hell, we couldn't even get them to investigate the chemical dumping
along the local railroad tracks, until we got the media involved.