Canton Township, MI — In the land of the free, you must ask permission from government before you modify your own property. If you do not first ask for permission and pay them, you can face heavy fines and, or imprisonment. Two brothers in Michigan are learning this the hard way after they cut down trees on their own property. Now the state is telling them to pay up—a half million dollars.
Gary and Matt Percy have been told by their local rulers that because they failed to obtain the proper permit before cutting down 1,400 trees—on their own property—that they now owe $225-$450 per tree.
The brothers own a 16-acre plot of land that they cleared in preparation for planting a Christmas tree farm, according to their attorney Michael J. Pattwell. But they didn’t ask the government for permission first, so now they must pay up.
“Canton Tree Police showed up,” said Pattwell. “Canton Township’s tree removal ordinance prohibits landowners from removing trees from private property without government permission, which may be obtained by either payment into the township’s so-called tree fund or on-site replacement with trees of certain designated trunk diameters.”
What’s more, the property was full of invasive plants and not really trees.
The land was filled with “invasive plants like phragmites, buckthorn and autumn olive,” Pattwell said.
But the government disagrees. To assess the fines, local officials had their ‘expert arborist’ survey a nearby property which they claim had similar trees.
“They identified certain plots,” Township attorney Kristin Kolb said. “They identified the number or type of trees and did some math to figure out approximately how many trees.”
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.
According to the brothers’ attorney, however, the government uses a broad set of terms to define “tree” which makes just about anything fit the definition, even invasive brush and dead trees.
“Canton Township defines ‘trees’ as ‘any woody plant with at least one well-defined stem and having a minimum diameter at breast height of three inches.’ The Percy parcel was used historically by a local farmer for dairy pasture, so much of the vegetation on the parcel was invasive buckthorn, scrub brush and dead ash trees.”
According to mLive, Patterson also points out an exemption in the township ordinance, which states “all agricultural/farming operations, commercial nursery/tree farm operations and occupied lots of less than two acres in size, including utility companies and public tree trimming agencies, shall be exempt from all permit requirements of this article.”
Based on the aforementioned ordinance, the brothers were clearly within the law. But this is irrelevant to the officials who want their money.
“The Percy brothers believed they were exercising a state and local exemption for farming when they cleared the land, but city officials arrived on-site and signaled immediately their intention to levy big fines in excess of $700,000,” Pattwell said. “But that’s not what this case is about. We are talking here about a parcel of former pasture land surrounded entirely by industrial activity.
“This case is about misguided overreach. It is unavoidably about whether people who own property are allowed to use it … We contend the Percy brothers exercised a farming exemption in the local tree removal law to clear the historic pasture behind their business and develop a Christmas tree farm.”
Even if the brothers weren’t protected under this local exemption, the idea that government officials can and will levy fines against a person in the land of the free—for cutting down trees on their own property without first paying the government a fee—is tyrannical.
Cutting down the trees posed no threat to wildlife, no threat to neighboring property owners, and was in the best interest of the brothers. However, because they failed to pay the state and ask for permission, they will now be extorted. Rest assured, if they refuse to pay this extortion fee, state agents, likely armed with AR-15s, will come to their home to kidnap them. If they resist these armed men attempting to kidnap them, they will be killed.
And we still call this geographical area known as the United States, ‘the land of the free.’
Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 10,000 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 250+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Join our brand new reddit! and start sharing your Steemit posts directly to The_IW, via the share button on your Steemit post!!!
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Leadership/Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call
Ways you can help the @informationwar
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's the land of the fee.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The tree's are just an excuse.
The asset sucking government doesn't care one way or another about trees or anything else - they just want your assets.
They are probably hoping they can grab some property, and not just fines...
Fuckin' parasites....
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations @tftproject! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Award for the number of upvotes
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP
Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I mean it sounds like to me they cut down a forest, 1400 trees is a lot of trees and I'm sure most of them were invasive but I guarantee their were some good trees in their. Should they be fined IDK that doesn't really help but I don't see how this wouldn't impact the local ecosystem. I don't agree with deforestation they should have found another location already clear of trees.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Why should they be fined? It's their land, not the government's. It isn't even some kind of virgin untouched forest. If you want trees protected, find a way to buy land, and don't ever try to justify government extortion.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
jacobtothe I never said they should be fined read my comment again, secondly they own the land now yes but it's not their land they will die the land will remain forever. Before they were born the land was and it will remain after them it's part of the earth it doesn't belong to anyone or any government only belonging to the God who created it. P.S. I don't support government extortion in any way.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It seems then that our dispute is over the meaning of ownership. We are merely stewards of God's creation, yes, but property rights define right-of-use based on the principles of homesteading and voluntary exchange to prevent disputes while we are on this mortal plane.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Right, I feel that the 100 landmark trees that were removed shouldn't have been because they were their before and would have remained after benefiting the ecosystem and history. I agree they have temporary ownership rights to clear the brush but they should have left the landmarks and planted around them in my humble opinion.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If you want something on someone else's property left alone, offer to compensate them, don't threaten to harm them.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Did I threaten them? And why would I compensate them for doing something that harms the ecosystem living breathing creatures birds squirrels and all animals and insects alike that suffer from the mass loss of their natural habitat. The fact that it is illegal also weighs in the scale of destruction they caused, they need to be held accountable for what they have done and a fine is the only way to do it without being cruel and unusual punishment. They have laws like this for a reason if they wanted to clear out the land they should have got the proper agencies to conduct studies and research to see if they could follow through with their plan.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
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.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
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
Geez....these governmental bodies will go to any lengths to obtain revenue. Hopefully this story will blow up in the news, but probably not. Folks need to fight this stupidity whenever and wherever it shows up.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yep, that's Michigan. My family has run into that tree law a few times but I didn't know about the exemption - places we wanted to clear were a LOT smaller than that.
We do have a lot of scrub land around too.
The good news is, I'm pretty sure these guys are going to win their case easily. You can't survey neighboring property and then insist that's how many trees they cut down. That's ridiculous. Even here, they have a good chance of winning with that kind of stupidity.
But you're right: the fact they even were assessed the fine just betrays how little "our" land really belongs to us.
And don't even get me started on what happens if you try to get ahold of raw milk around here.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit