Unfortunately, too many trees are being cut down by developers when they could have saved some of them.
I finally saw one developer in North Arlington, Va. actually save a couple beautiful, tall trees on a triangular corner lot to provide the house in the center of the land, with shade.
In most other cases, they clear-cut everything over 2 inches high. Now a lot of Arlington looks like a liberal, urban desert - lots of concrete, asphalt, potholes, pot heads, and no grass, trees, butterflies, or even honey bees.
The first thing many Hispanic immigrants (probably legal ones), did in my neighborhood when they moved in was to cut down tall (75 ft+) old oak trees from a stand that was behind all of our block’s houses, North and South. They wanted to see the apartment complex directly behind them.
They also wiped out most oldgrowth hedges/roses, etc.
We live in what was part of George Washington’s private lands, i.e. Geo. Washington Forest. What is left has beautiful trees, Barcroft Park and Creek, deer, raccoons, a silver-tail fox, possums, lots of birds (once saw a Baltimore Oriole), snakes, rabbits, an occasional lizard and dragon flies.
I grow milkweed for the Monarch butterflies, and have a Buddleia butterfly bush for the rest of the gang (Swallowtails, Fritillaries, Cabbages and Sulfurs, Painted Lady/Red Admiral, Grey Hairstreaks, etc.) My children and granddaughter grew up with flowers, birds, and butterflies/insects all around us.
Other kids grew up in f*cking backyard deserts and never got to appreciate what we were given by Nature.
Responsible development is the key to keeping a neighborhood looking nice, helping keep the air clean, and having living creatures run across your yards for all to see.
I like private property rights, so I’m not going to comment on this case as I do know see all the information in the article which we would need to make a reasoned appraisal of this particular case.
However, too many so-called conservatives are ready to give less-then-concerned citizen developers the right to create an urban/suburban desert of concrete and asphalt where a little planning could keep the area a livable clean and green area.
PS: I’ve worked in the field of toxic waste site cleanups for over 20 years, saving the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, or more in cleanup costs, while not damning those who intentionally or accidentally (WW2) polluting the environment. There are ways to correct a bad situation without nuking everyone.
True, don’t need to nuke everyone or everything....but the best way, and the most moral way, to save those oaks and rose hedges and meadows...is to buy them.
Once I buy that land, I have the right to choose the values of my options. Cut the tree, $70,000 more to get the surgery my wife needs, send my baby to college, put in trust for my grandkids, or even to take that awesome South Pacific vacation. Maybe those are all more valuable to me than the tree.
I was willing to invest in my values...you are too....but you want to invest MY money in your values. Obviously, the $70,000 was more important to me than the tree was to you, or you would have bought the tree; so why do you want me to put more value on the tree than you do?
I bought a farm 10 years ago. It has a 25 acre woodlot. In that woodlot were magnificent Doug Firs. They were worth $80,000, net to me. I loved their beauty, I loved how my property looked with them defining my skyline, and loved the grandness of them...but I needed that money to pay for machinery to run the farm. I cut what I needed, kept what I could...but had someone offered me $80,000 to leave them standing, they would still be there.