Are you really saying that I should be forced to sell my property because you don’t like the way it looks? Is that really what you mean? You can’t be serious.

I mean, that must be the case, right? It can’t possibly be true that you’d voluntarily stay in a place so strongly restrictive of your fundamental rights!

At least you are agreeing that this is a restriction on fundamental rights.

So tell me Duck, why do you support the restrictions of people’s rights based on aesthetic reasons? Tell me why a person should suffer a restriction of rights when there is no threat to other people’s rights?

You haven’t answered that, so I guess that is a couple points to me.

I like how you’ve totally given up on the public-safety argument. Point to me, it appears.

It was only an issue in your mind, Duck. Your premise seems to be that every tree that is trimmed improperly dies. That is factually false. Perhaps you believe that a dead tree means the owner is not liable for the damage if the owner knows the tree is dead. That is factually wrong. Or perhaps you believe that only dead trees or trees that have been improperly pruned fall to some unknown fate during weather events. That is factually false as well.

“Safety issue,” “it’s not about the money,” and “it’s for the kids” are all arguments from the same pile of manure.

How sad to hear that you’re legally prevented from selling your house and moving, and therefore cannot find a community that better suits your viewpoint.

I mean, that must be the case, right? It can’t possibly be true that you’d voluntarily stay in a place so strongly restrictive of your fundamental rights!

PS I like how you’ve totally given up on the public-safety argument. Point to me, it appears.

Funny that you should mention that Bob. When I first moved here, there was a major flap with a couple that was concerned about the eco-system. They ripped up the green grass of their lawn and planted natural, drought tolerant plants and trees. They had taken a plan for their yard from a plan offered by the University of Florida that was represented as water saving and a look at how Florida was before people moved here.

Someone complained to the city that they didn’t like the way the yard looked. Because some of the ground cover grew to over 6 inches tall, they were cited for code violations.

While I understand Duck’s concerns, at some point we have to realize that this is not about trees. We can “cure” bad tree trimming with education. This is about power and the authority to control and rule a person’s property.

Bob

Cement is ecologically incorrect – both hard on children and non-porous to rain – obviously, a foot or so of shredded rubber is more suitable…

Bob

Whether the tree is “beautiful” or not is a subjective matter. Whether I think it is attractive or not is immaterial because it is not my tree on my property.

So–I just want to make sure we all agree, here, to make sure we all understand the situation

And clearly you do not understand the situation. What gives you or the state the right to determine what is “beautiful” on my property? What gives anyone the right to tell me that absent of a violation of someone elses rights that I can’t trim a tree on my property?

Your argument seems to be that you and the state can apply some subjective standard of what is “beautiful.”

If that is the case, can we tell you what color to paint your house? What car you can drive (darn Prius’ are so ugly)? Can we tell you that your dog is ugly and you have to get rid of it? What happens when you plant a tress or a shrub that the rest of the world thinks is ugly. Can we demand you remove it?

When you can answer those questions, then and only then will you “understand the situation.”

I mean, we both know you’ll say “yes” just to be an asshole. But I want you to stand up and actually say it.

This is going to sound harsh, but please believe me it isn’t.

If you believe that your sensibilities are more important than my property, my trees and the way I like them to look…..
….. then there really isn’t much room for conversation.

But it’s not like arborist licenses or tree-trimming permits are pointless bureaucratism.

Sure they are. They don’t do anything other than enrich the coffers of the bureaucracy. If a person wants to hire an unlicensed arborist, what compelling interest does the state have to prevent that?