Nope, I've seen the kind of scrubland they're talking about. If there was phragmites growing, it's highly unlikely there were good trees - phragmites grows where you have kind of marshy ground and doesn't cohabitate with big trees. Besides, they were planning on PLANTING a forest! Pine trees like they were planning to grow are an actual part of our ecosystem around here and we have legitimate pine forests. The land wasn't forested - it was brushy. Big difference.
RE: Brothers Face $450,000 in Fines for Cutting Trees on Their Own Property Without Asking Gov’t First
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Brothers Face $450,000 in Fines for Cutting Trees on Their Own Property Without Asking Gov’t First
From the article "According to mLive, the arborist estimated 1,385 trees with trunk diameter of six inches or more were removed. That could mean $225 to $300 per tree in penalties. Anther 100 landmark trees were also removed, the township estimated, meaning another $450 each." Like I said most were probably brush invasive crap but they claim 100 landmark trees were removed these are the trees I'm concerned over the loss of and they should have let them remain and just plant around them. Now about the fine part do I agree with IDK because there needs to be some type of punishment to keep people from going around chopping down trees that are hundreds of years old should it be a fine IDK what other way would be effective.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit