Atherton resident says neighbor cut down tree without permission

What right does the Gardner have to give permission? Time for a new gardner.

Steve:

do you really believe the gardener gave permission. Smells like a big fat lie to me.

Was the tree completely cut down? Or just some branches removed?

You don't want to mess with some else's yard anywhere, but you *really* don't want to mess with a neighbor's yard in Atherton.

The sanitary district has been replacing a sewer pipe going through our back yard, and while, yes, they have an easement, they tore up some flower beds they *really* didn't need to. But that's OK, we're just in Belle Haven, go ahead and destroy. (In fairness, they said they would restore everything after we complained, but I wish they had been more careful in the first place. I don't think they would've been that careless in Atherton.)

AS someone who has had to live for decades under the shadow and toxicity of a large stand of eucalyptus trees just a foot or 2 from my fence, I tend to have sympathy for people who have finally had enough of a nuisance tree(s) negatively affecting property. When appeals to a neighbor fail to ease the problem of dangerous trees, I can understand why sheer frustration would drive someone to take an axe to the trees. I'm not condoning it, but I do think the tree owner's refusal to cooperate is partially responsible for this incident.

From a comment n an old Almanac story re tree topping.

"Years ago when Joe Montana lived on Valpariso on the Atherton side his new neighbor to the east topped Joe's trees along the property so he could get more sunlight. Without Joe's permission of course."

There are a heck of a lot of folks in the area who consider themselves entitled to do whatever they want.

Correct action in the current situation should be felling the culprit neighbor's favorite tree. Teach 'em a lesson.

I'm glad to see that people in Atherton are still insane.

> The police report says the neighbor
> said he believed he had permission
> from the resident's gardener to cut
> down the tree, and that workers went
> over the fence from his yard to
> remove the tree, Sgt. Kockler said.

The gardener gave permission ... riiight. Even if that's true, the gardener doesn't have the power to make that call.

Any branches over the property line are fair game for removing, provided it doesn't affect the overall health of the tree; no permission required. However, if the only easy access to the tree is by climbing the trunk (likely) and the trunk is only accessible by entering the neighbor's yard (likely), then the tree-chopping neighbor DOES need permission from the neighbor to access the tree. Which he/she clearly didn't do.

I'm not buying the tree-chopper's story at all, and I hope that they at a minimum fine him/her, then require him/her to plant a new tree...the same size at the same location.

The correct solution is to follow the law which this neighbor failed to do and let the court decide.