I am sure some of you have had to deal with your neighbours and their trees, so I am hoping for some advice on how to go about dealing with a neighbour who seems to think trees should grow however they want! ::)
We have been living next to this person for about 15 years, and during this time, her badly maintained tree has grown taller, wilder and has been hanging over my fence (three branches), and also brushes the roof of my house.
Every year I go over to this woman (retired), and tell her very nicely that the storms will be coming soon and the constant brushing of the tree branches on my roof tends to wake us up. She would always say she needs to cut it back, and after some weeks, get her now two grown daughters who both have good jobs, to get up on a ladder and try to cut back a bit of the branches. This tree is now at least 20 ft so they do a very poor job of simply removing some leaves and a few twigs.
We put a new roof in two years ago and it irks me to hear the damn tree grating against my new roof. This past week when we had high winds, I thought her tree would crash into my house as the branches slammed against the house.
To give you and idea of the nutcase I am dealing with, let me tell you that since the big snow storm of three years ago, when all those trees came down from the heavy ice on them, one of her branches broke and is being held by a thread almost. I asked her if she was going to cut it down and she said she hoped it would grow back! I must take some pics to show how unkempt this treee is .
My insurance agent told me to tell her again and even better, write her a letter stating that I have asked in the past, and the tree has never had a professional prune it, and that I would like her to do this before we have another big storm and the tree falls on my fence or my bedroom window!
We are not friends, but we have been cordial with each other over the years. What to do? Would this cause more problems if I wrote a letter? The thing is though that a letter and pictures of the tree will prove that I have attempted to ask
her to do something about it and show that she has never really done anything to keep her tree on her sde of the yard!
The tree is extremely close to her house and actually looks like 5 trees that have grown together with three leaning toward my house,.
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 16, 2010, 12:32:06 AMWe are not friends, but we have been cordial with each other over the years. What to do? Would this cause more problems if I wrote a letter?
Wait 'til after the Stanley Cup is over to write a letter, then if that doesn't work pen another letter after Canada Day (s-oh-rry, but your spelling amused me). If nothing else, send some Timbits with your letter.
Greetings.... I checked into this once before and was surprised at what I found....
Before you call her a nutcase, go Google "tree law" or "tree laws" and read on....
I had a healthy tree on the property line (my side) fall towards my neighbors house not on it, in a 100 mph wind. My neighbor called me frantically demanding what I was going to do about it, so I called my insurance agent to inquire about my liability if I go onto their property to remove a tree hanging over their house and what if their house is damaged by my tree man and to my surprize he said I had no obligation to do anything and in fact if the neighbor did not do anything to prevent impending damage to their home their insurance could deny their claim , if any... However to bring peace, I could offer to split the costs if I so desired... I was so surprised at this, I Googled tree law and its variations of the term, and found out this has been fought out for eons... Basically it is this: If the tree is healthy (which mine was) and it falls on your neighbors house, by as the insurance biz calls "an act of God," you have no liability for damages, since you did not cause the wind etc... If the tree is diseased or dead and not dealt with in a reasonable time, the tree owner is liable for damages.. Also if you as a property owner discover a tree that has branches growing over your property, you can cut them off even w/ the property line.... in essance your property goes up from your property line as well i.e. the airspace if you will...
My neighbor was so rude and demanding without knowing the facts I ignored them til we moved the next month or so... they removed the tree and even asked my son "do you think your dad should take care of the tree threatening our house?" They were so sure I was at fault and were not even asking, just demanding...
IMHO Your ins co. is incorrect in telling you to demand anything of your neighbor and you can trim the branches even with the property line...
In many states, whatever part of the tree is on your side of the fence is yours to cut, so long as you don't kill it. Generally, it is recommended you have a professional trim it so that it would be more difficult for the neighbor to get a judgment against you should the tree end up dying after you have it trimmed. One can hardly be called negligent if they have a certified arborist do the tree trimming, after all.
Quote from: nathanm on May 16, 2010, 01:29:19 AM
In many states, whatever part of the tree is on your side of the fence is yours to cut, so long as you don't kill it. Generally, it is recommended you have a professional trim it so that it would be more difficult for the neighbor to get a judgment against you should the tree end up dying after you have it trimmed. One can hardly be called negligent if they have a certified arborist do the tree trimming, after all.
Good intentions, fersure, and it is always better to settle things neighborly.... But, I would go so far as to say the fate of the tree is not an issue except to be neighborly or if the law specifically addresses it... In our litigous society of legal technicalities, where do you draw the lines of what is too large to cut? What if you have small branches cut and introduce disease to the tree and kill it? Or if the tree originates on your neighbors side, and goes up say, 10 feet and is 18 inches in diameter, and past 10 ft high the tree leans over your property and goes up 40 - 50 ft, leaning over your house, must you always be encroached upon by, and have this thing threatening your safety because of the presumed fate of the tree should you decide to cut it even with the property line..
Also check your property line specifically, since most fences belong to one neighbor or the other and may be on one side or the other of the line...
Quote from: In2neon on May 16, 2010, 01:50:07 AM
Also check your property line specifically, since most fences belong to one neighbor or the other and may be on one side or the other of the line...
Yeah, I should have specifically stated "property line" instead of saying "fence." Killing the tree can be a tort. They have value, but the part that overhangs your property is often yours.
Much of what is stated in this pdf (http://www.utextension.utk.edu/publications/spfiles/SP687.pdf) probably applies to Oklahoma as well as Tennessee.
Yea, from what I always heard. The part of the tree that goes over your property line is yours, not the neighbors. If its over your roof, thats your responsibility to cut off. Say part of the tree was over your driveway and a branch fell off and hit your car and damaged it. That would have been your own fault for not trimming the tree over your property.
Quote from: TheTed on May 16, 2010, 01:02:46 AM
Wait 'til after the Stanley Cup is over to write a letter, then if that doesn't work pen another letter after Canada Day (s-oh-rry, but your spelling amused me). If nothing else, send some Timbits with your letter.
Why should it amuse you? It's the way many in Europe/Canada etc., spell ;D
According to what I read online, some say that if the tree was not taken care of over the years i.e. been pruned professionally etc., my neighbour might be liable. I won't say it is the healthiest looking tree.
I also read that if the roots are coming toward my property (near our driveway and patio), I have to advise her that we plan to remove said roots that's on our side. The part that hangs over my fence shows that a great portion of it is on her side, except for the part that's hanging over. The part that's on my house is tricky. I am thinking that I should go ahead and write this letter as "proof" that I had talked to her before, and also I have pictures of the tree that would show it was not taken care of and left to go au natural. If she refuses, then at least I had let her know what's going on so if we end up having to pay for those parts to be removed, she won't (hopefully) be able to say we are wrong?
This is most annoying. No one should have trees so close to a house that also annoys their neighbours. I read too that one could call the city to find out if this could be a hazard? But that might be in other states.
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 16, 2010, 09:28:32 AM
Why should it amuse you? It's the way many in Europe/Canada etc., spell ;D
I am curious, are you originally from Europe/Canada?
Call a tree trimmer and pay to have it trimmed up. If she gets upset, tell her you've repeatedly asked for this and she's not done anything you need to protect your roof. When I bought my house last year there was a huge dead limb and some smaller ones hanging in my neighbor's elm tree. I asked if he intended to get the tree trimmed he never would do it so I had my tree guy take care of it on my nickel. Beat the heck out of worrying if those branches were going to punch a hole in my roof or fall on myself or my dog. A few hundred bucks was worth my piece of mind. And yes these were limbs hanging over on my property from his tree.
We have faced this problem before. Living in the city its unavoidable. Many people don't understand that landscaping, including trees, needs to be attended to just like painting your house or paving your driveway. And, its expensive to have trees pruned.
Here are some of my observations:
-Trim the area over your property if it needs it. It sets the tone. You are responsible for your own property and intend to keep it up.
-Let the neighbor know that your insurance man is concerned about the overhang on your roof and may possibly exclude any damage it causes from your policy.
-Property values are increased with trees on site. Treed lots and well landscaped homes sell faster too. People may actually sue for the decrease in value of their properties when a tree is damaged or destroyed by anothers actions. So you must be careful in the pruning or treatment of the tree.
Understand that your neighbor is not charging you for the shade her tree produces (which decreases your utility bill), the enhancement to your property value, its potential as a wind break and its entertainment value for attracting birds, tree frogs and squirrels.
Good luck.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 16, 2010, 11:17:02 AM
Call a tree trimmer and pay to have it trimmed up. If she gets upset, tell her you've repeatedly asked for this and she's not done anything you need to protect your roof. When I bought my house last year there was a huge dead limb and some smaller ones hanging in my neighbor's elm tree. I asked if he intended to get the tree trimmed he never would do it so I had my tree guy take care of it on my nickel. Beat the heck out of worrying if those branches were going to punch a hole in my roof or fall on myself or my dog. A few hundred bucks was worth my piece of mind. And yes these were limbs hanging over on my property from his tree.
That's exactly what I did with my neighbor. He'd do it himself, but he's old and has been quite sick in the past few years. He was in no condition to take care of a problem tree. So we took care of it ourselves.
He does some favors for us, and we do some favors for him. We're not keeping score, and we're content with that.
Quote from: Red Arrow on May 16, 2010, 11:16:32 AM
I am curious, are you originally from Europe/Canada?
I am of European descent. Not born in this country, but I am a naturalised citizen. Just cannot give up my way of spelling ;D
Quote from: Conan71 on May 16, 2010, 11:17:02 AM
Call a tree trimmer and pay to have it trimmed up. If she gets upset, tell her you've repeatedly asked for this and she's not done anything you need to protect your roof. When I bought my house last year there was a huge dead limb and some smaller ones hanging in my neighbor's elm tree. I asked if he intended to get the tree trimmed he never would do it so I had my tree guy take care of it on my nickel. Beat the heck out of worrying if those branches were going to punch a hole in my roof or fall on myself or my dog. A few hundred bucks was worth my piece of mind. And yes these were limbs hanging over on my property from his tree.
Can I also dig up all the roots that are coming toward my patio and walkway? They have caused the grass to die, and the soil is eroded now. I wonder if I can dig the roots up without having to ask her permission?
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 16, 2010, 03:01:23 PM
Can I also dig up all the roots that are coming toward my patio and walkway? They have caused the grass to die, and the soil is eroded now. I wonder if I can dig the roots up without having to ask her permission?
As long as you don't kill the tree. If the tree grows on the property line, you both own it, BTW. You still can't kill it.
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 16, 2010, 03:00:10 PM
I am of European descent. Not born in this country, but I am a naturalised citizen. Just cannot give up my way of spelling ;D
No problem. If I were to go to the UK, I'd have a difficult time adding the "u"s
Perhaps a legal expert on this forum could assist here in pointing us to a specific Oklahoma statute or city ord. that would address this specifically...
You would not get very far in court saying, "I read somewhere" or "That's what the law is in Tenessee"...
There are too many things left to opinion for me in this issue like, how much is too much to cut off the tree that won't kill it in say 5 years and will I be blamed 10 years down the road when the tree dies because I weakened its ability to fight disease or bugs thus killing it according to the current thinking....
And again, what if the tree originates on the neighbors side and 90% of the tree hangs on my side and obviously cutting it to the property line would probably kill it. Is the law specifically saying I have to permit this encroachment becuz it is a common tree?... I am not sure the common tree thing is a part of Oklahoma law, thus irrelevent .... Yes, it might be a good way, in principal, to peacefully resolve an issue, but sometimes neighbors look out of their house and say "look at my beautiful tree" when from your perspective, "I hate that tree of theirs hanging over my house" so the neighbor with the "beautiful tree" won't be likely to do anything about it on the contrary they will protect it, thus sometimes these valid arguments have to be mediated by a court of law, so I would want to know what the law says b4 even considering what to do...
If you trim your neighbor's tree that hangs over the property line, you are responsible to get rid of the debris. You cannot throw it over the fence like my neighbor did to me. I got that info from a friend that's a lawyer.
Quote from: In2neon on May 16, 2010, 04:41:42 PM
Perhaps a legal expert on this forum could assist here in pointing us to a specific Oklahoma statute or city ord. that would address this specifically...
Most states don't have specific legislation on the ownership of trees, so common law controls.
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 16, 2010, 03:01:23 PM
Can I also dig up all the roots that are coming toward my patio and walkway? They have caused the grass to die, and the soil is eroded now. I wonder if I can dig the roots up without having to ask her permission?
I'm not an attorney, so don't act on my advice without careful consideration. I'd say if the roots are disupting and damaging your property, you are within your rights to protect your property from damage. If the roots are on your side of the fence, dig away.
This is a big topic for me, I don't believe trees should be growing next to a house. Trees belong in parks and in a forest not next to where people live. Trees do alot of damage to homes, they fall over in ice storms, wind storms, attract lightning, tornados, disease, trees attract termites, and trees can do alot of house foundation damage/pipe damage. I believe if a neighbors tree is growing over your yard you have the right to cut off the branchs that are over your yard. I seen some homes mostly in older areas of Tulsa with huge trees growing right next to the house- Yale & Harvard seem to have alot of huge trees around.
Quote from: sauerkraut on May 18, 2010, 10:35:17 AM
This is a big topic for me, I don't believe trees should be growing next to a house. Trees belong in parks and in a forest not next to where people live. Trees do alot of damage to homes, they fall over in ice storms, wind storms, attract lightning, tornados, disease, trees attract termites, and trees can do alot of house foundation damage/pipe damage. I believe if a neighbors tree is growing over your yard you have the right to cut off the branchs that are over your yard. I seen some homes mostly in older areas of Tulsa with huge trees growing right next to the house- Yale & Harvard seem to have alot of huge trees around.
They attract tornados AND disease?
Quote from: sauerkraut on May 18, 2010, 10:35:17 AM
This is a big topic for me, I don't believe trees should be growing next to a house. Trees belong in parks and in a forest not next to where people live. Trees do alot of damage to homes, they fall over in ice storms, wind storms, attract lightning, tornados, disease, trees attract termites, and trees can do alot of house foundation damage/pipe damage. I believe if a neighbors tree is growing over your yard you have the right to cut off the branchs that are over your yard. I seen some homes mostly in older areas of Tulsa with huge trees growing right next to the house- Yale & Harvard seem to have alot of huge trees around.
Funniest post I've read in awhile. One would almost suspect you're serious. Why would you live here if you only think trees belong in parks? Go live in OKC for heaven's sake.
Quote from: waterboy on May 18, 2010, 10:50:46 AM
Funniest post I've read in awhile. One would almost suspect you're serious. Why would you live here if you only think trees belong in parks? Go live in OKC for heaven's sake.
I'm really hoping SK is someone's joke.
That's one of the looniest things I've read in a while on here.
Quote from: sauerkraut on May 18, 2010, 10:35:17 AM
This is a big topic for me, I don't believe trees should be growing next to a house. Trees belong in parks and in a forest not next to where people live. Trees do alot of damage to homes, they fall over in ice storms, wind storms, attract lightning, tornados, disease, trees attract termites, and trees can do alot of house foundation damage/pipe damage. I believe if a neighbors tree is growing over your yard you have the right to cut off the branchs that are over your yard. I seen some homes mostly in older areas of Tulsa with huge trees growing right next to the house- Yale & Harvard seem to have alot of huge trees around.
Dang those trees! Next thing you know they will try and trick us by providing shade, and bearing good tasting fruit to make us want more of them around. ::)
Quote from: TURobY on May 18, 2010, 10:38:42 AM
They attract tornados AND disease?
Or maybe diseased tornados.
Waterboy,
Now, you have to know that isn't quite accurate. OKC has a tree in a yard. I drove by and saw it one time. Just off of NW Expressway, almost to the Kirkpatrick turnpike.
Nah, that one's gone. "Put 'em in a tree museum..."
Strange place OKC. The lack of trees probably increases the severity of the tornadoes there as they are able to pick up momentum. Maybe there were trees there at one time and the tornadoes blew them up the 'pike?
I have been around a great many right of way projects were clearing was required and understand from various legal minds that in Oklahoma tree damage to your roof = your problem as you have the right to trim the property line vertically to protect your property and failure to do so makes the problem yours for a branch falling on your roof. I understand (there is case law supporting this but have not seen it) that the only way a neighbor is directly liable for your roof damage from their tree is if the entire tree blows over onto your house because then the damage came from their property since a limb falling straight down = your problem because you could have pruned it...
Quote from: waterboy on May 18, 2010, 10:50:46 AM
Funniest post I've read in awhile. One would almost suspect you're serious. Why would you live here if you only think trees belong in parks? Go live in OKC for heaven's sake.
Yeah, then he could call it '"O" towne'...LOL.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on May 18, 2010, 02:27:01 PM
the only way a neighbor is directly liable for your roof damage from their tree is if the entire tree blows over onto your house because then the damage came from their property since a limb falling straight down = your problem because you could have pruned it...
Even in that case, unless the tree was diseased or otherwise damaged in a way that should have been apparent to its owner, when the wind blows it over it's an act of God and the tree's owner has no liability for the damage it caused.
In Louisiana if your neighbor's tree blows over onto your land and wasn't diseased or otherwise defective, they aren't responsible for the damage, but they do have to remove the tree. Does Oklahoma have a similar law requiring the owner of the tree remove it?
If it's a boundary tree, it would get more interesting, since both you and the neighbor own the tree.
All the more reason to become better friends with your neighbors. Friends usually are able to solve conflicts a lot easier than people who hardly know each other. Married people excepted ;)
I stand firm, big trees do not belong next to a home where people live. They can crush a home and the people inside it without warning, or do thousands of dollars in damage to the home and/or foundation.
Quote from: sauerkraut on May 22, 2010, 10:21:58 AM
I stand firm, big trees do not belong next to a home where people live. They can crush a home and the people inside it without warning, or do thousands of dollars in damage to the home and/or foundation.
That's why your home will never sell for the same as the same home with trees. Trees ADD value to the home as long as they are maintained properly.
They also provide shade, reducing cooling bills in the summer.
You just amaze me. Sheesh.
I agree with Sauerkraut. Trees do NOT belong within a couple feet of the home. One can have trees (like the other neighbours) that are not up against the house ::)
Anyway, I went ahead and put a note for the lady that sounded non-threatening telling her about the trees branch banging and scraping against our roof. I also added that we had a company come out (Wrights), to prune the tree in our backyard and that they were affordable, and reliable. I told her too that we would share the cost, or we could get the part that is offending pruned ourselves.
I heard nothing since this post, but come Saturday, I heard some shouting and screaming and a thud against the house. The foolish woman and her male relatives were on chairs (kid you not!), with a pruning gadget that was long and the were attempting to trim some of the smaller branches away. They even took the branch that was more on her side that has been hanging on there since the big ice storm a few years ago ::) However, they could NOT reach the major offender and I heard her saying she will call someone about it. I went over while they were trying to cut and told them that they could enter my backyard if they needed, and that I wanted to know if it was okay to remove the tree roots that's smack up against my patio and walkway. She was a little peeved and wondered if it might affect her beloved tree in someway :o Anyway, her relative assured her that these were surface roots and it's okay. Sheesh. She added at that time that she wanted to prune said tree because she was not sure I would leave it the way she wants!!! :o :o ::)
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 24, 2010, 11:54:54 AM
I agree with Sauerkraut. Trees do NOT belong within a couple feet of the home. One can have trees (like the other neighbours) that are not up against the house ::)
Anyway, I went ahead and put a note for the lady that sounded non-threatening telling her about the trees branch banging and scraping against our roof. I also added that we had a company come out (Wrights), to prune the tree in our backyard and that they were affordable, and reliable. I told her too that we would share the cost, or we could get the part that is offending pruned ourselves.
I heard nothing since this post, but come Saturday, I heard some shouting and screaming and a thud against the house. The foolish woman and her male relatives were on chairs (kid you not!), with a pruning gadget that was long and the were attempting to trim some of the smaller branches away. They even took the branch that was more on her side that has been hanging on there since the big ice storm a few years ago ::) However, they could NOT reach the major offender and I heard her saying she will call someone about it. I went over while they were trying to cut and told them that they could enter my backyard if they needed, and that I wanted to know if it was okay to remove the tree roots that's smack up against my patio and walkway. She was a little peeved and wondered if it might affect her beloved tree in someway :o Anyway, her relative assured her that these were surface roots and it's okay. Sheesh. She added at that time that she wanted to prune said tree because she was not sure I would leave it the way she wants!!! :o :o ::)
Read the non-res's post again:
QuoteThis is a big topic for me, I don't believe trees should be growing next to a house. Trees belong in parks and in a forest not next to where people live. Trees do alot of damage to homes, they fall over in ice storms, wind storms, attract lightning, tornados, disease, trees attract termites, and trees can do alot of house foundation damage/pipe damage. I believe if a neighbors tree is growing over your yard you have the right to cut off the branchs that are over your yard. I seen some homes mostly in older areas of Tulsa with huge trees growing right next to the house- Yale & Harvard seem to have alot of huge trees around.
I take that as saying you shouldn't have trees in your yard. Period.
That's crap. While I agree they should not be growing from root right next to your house, most sane people live in homes where the roots are a ways from the house. Or, heaven forbid, they plant their own trees.
Next trees I have will have a smaller horizontal profile. Ash trees are a pain. But they sure were nice in the summer.
Quote from: Hoss on May 24, 2010, 01:34:56 PM
Read the non-res's post again:
I take that as saying you shouldn't have trees in your yard. Period.
That's crap. While I agree they should not be growing from root right next to your house, most sane people live in homes where the roots are a ways from the house. Or, heaven forbid, they plant their own trees.
Next trees I have will have a smaller horizontal profile. Ash trees are a pain. But they sure were nice in the summer.
But I never said trees should be growing in forests. Why did you quote that with my post? ???
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 24, 2010, 04:16:28 PM
But I never said trees should be growing in forests. Why did you quote that with my post? ???
Because it appeared to me that you were agreeing with him in principle that homes should not have trees. Period.
That's how his disjointed logic reads to me.
I just wanted to make sure you had an out if others read it that way.
And yes, trees should be growing in forests. Trees can also grow in urban areas.
I sure don't want Tulsa looking like OKC...
Quote from: Hoss on May 24, 2010, 05:47:30 PM
Because it appeared to me that you were agreeing with him in principle that homes should not have trees. Period.
That's how his disjointed logic reads to me.
I just wanted to make sure you had an out if others read it that way.
And yes, trees should be growing in forests. Trees can also grow in urban areas.
I sure don't want Tulsa looking like OKC...
Heck I don't want to ever have Tulsa looking like OKC either!! Spent quite a bit of time going back and forth to OKC last year, and we sure are a much prettier city than they are ;D
No, I did not agree that trees should be in forests, but agree that they should not be as close as the one that is next to me. We both have tiny front yards that are almost in a V shape, and her five trees take up that area ::) These are the trees you see growing everywhere, nothing fancy. They drop their seeds or whatever and a bunch of others pop up. Can't remember what she said they were. They litterally grow in a clump like setting. The guy who used to live on the other side of me was a landscape contractor and he said the first thing he learned was to never plant a tree so close that you open your window and it's right smack in your face.
Quote from: HoneySuckle on May 24, 2010, 06:43:59 PM
Heck I don't want to ever have Tulsa looking like OKC either!! Spent quite a bit of time going back and forth to OKC last year, and we sure are a much prettier city than they are ;D
No, I did not agree that trees should be in forests, but agree that they should not be as close as the one that is next to me. We both have tiny front yards that are almost in a V shape, and her five trees take up that area ::) These are the trees you see growing everywhere, nothing fancy. They drop their seeds or whatever and a bunch of others pop up. Can't remember what she said they were. They litterally grow in a clump like setting. The guy who used to live on the other side of me was a landscape contractor and he said the first thing he learned was to never plant a tree so close that you open your window and it's right smack in your face.
Both the ash trees I had were well away (about 20 feet) from the house. That being said, ash trees grow quite large, and their root system can be extensive. It was bad enough that it started tearing up my driveway. They're not the heartiest of trees for this part of the country, so I had major feeder limbs that died, so I had both removed, simply from having to worry about AEP not coming out to trim the tree back from their right of way.
While I do miss the shade, I don't miss worrying whether or not a tree limb will knock my ceiling down. I'd like to plant some smaller trees, something that has more of a vertical profile than horizontal.
Quote from: Hoss on May 24, 2010, 09:34:04 PM
Both the ash trees I had were well away (about 20 feet) from the house. That being said, ash trees grow quite large, and their root system can be extensive. It was bad enough that it started tearing up my driveway. They're not the heartiest of trees for this part of the country, so I had major feeder limbs that died, so I had both removed, simply from having to worry about AEP not coming out to trim the tree back from their right of way.
While I do miss the shade, I don't miss worrying whether or not a tree limb will knock my ceiling down. I'd like to plant some smaller trees, something that has more of a vertical profile than horizontal.
I have an Ash in the backyard. We lost two big branches and lots of little ones during the biggish storm we had a few weeks ago. I was shocked because this was the darn tree I paid to have pruned! :-\ I was walking at La Fortune park a couple days ago and there are some smaller, wider trees that I just love there. Those are the kinds I would like to plant in the backyard. Looks nice enough to sit under.
What's the best way to deal with the roots I was talking about? Do I dig and cut out? Are they going to come back? We will have to fill in with more soil, and I am hoping to plant some shade loving things there.
Are we okay now about trees? ;D
Trees do tons of damage to homes, people tend to plant them too close to the house and then they just let 'em grow & forget about 'em. The older parts of Tulsa have some massive trees just a few feet from the house- WoW, I would not want want to live there- a guy on my street told me some of those big trees cost about $8,000 to cut down. BTW, did ya see the tree storm damage on the RiverSide jogging trail between 61st and 71st? Huge trees were knocked over root ball & all, some of those rootballs were over 6' tall. Other trees were sheared off 30' above the ground. What a mess. The trail was not damaged and the city cleared the trail of the trees that fell across it. Had one of those trees hit a house it would of totaled it.
I have nothing against trees they just don't belong next to a home, trees also do alot of damage to the powerlines, many of the powerfailures during storms, ice, and wind storms are the result of tree branchs or trees falling on the power lines. Trees really should be in parks & forests only- they are not good for residental streets. Ever get tree roots in your home drainage pipe system? Goodby $4000.00, tree roots are attracted to moisture in the drainage pipes they grow into the pipes and block & crack them. A simple chain saw a few years earlyer could of saved the home owner thousands of dollars. Oh, trees also attract ants & termites, it does not take much for a yard tree termites to get into your home. :-X
Quote from: Hoss on May 24, 2010, 05:47:30 PM
Because it appeared to me that you were agreeing with him in principle that homes should not have trees. Period.
That's how his disjointed logic reads to me.
I just wanted to make sure you had an out if others read it that way.
And yes, trees should be growing in forests. Trees can also grow in urban areas.
I sure don't want Tulsa looking like OKC...
Nothing wrong with OKC, I think it's a fine city- Anyoo, The problem is people plant trees close to a house (useually when the home is new) and then they don't take care of them or trim them back now & then they just let the tree grow & grow, and then they move and the next home owner is stuck with a huge tree and big branchs hanging over his roof. People cut their grass on a reg. basis, they need to also trim back their trees on a regular basis too... Trees can grow back cut branchs at a fast rate. If people would trim their trees then it would not be such a problem. Drive around any neighborhood and you'll see many big trees next to a house. After every storm the biggest mess is always caused by- all together now gang- "Trees taking a tumble or falling branchs"... That's not just in Tulsa but every city. Ice storms bring down trees all over a city and emergency vehicles can't get thru, cars are crushed or damaged, homes ruined, and power lines brought down by trees.
Quote from: sauerkraut on May 27, 2010, 06:13:45 PM
Nothing wrong with OKC, I think it's a fine city- Anyoo, The problem is people plant trees close to a house (useually when the home is new) and then they don't take care of them or trim them back now & then they just let the tree grow & grow, and then they move and the next home owner is stuck with a huge tree and big branchs hanging over his roof. People cut their grass on a reg. basis, they need to also trim back their trees on a regular basis too... Trees can grow back cut branchs at a fast rate. If people would trim their trees then it would not be such a problem. Drive around any neighborhood and you'll see many big trees next to a house. After every storm the biggest mess is always caused by- all together now gang- "Trees taking a tumble or falling branchs"... That's not just in Tulsa but every city. Ice storms bring down trees all over a city and emergency vehicles can't get thru, cars are crushed or damaged, homes ruined, and power lines brought down by trees.
Guess you had to find a library open past 5....
Quote from: Hoss on May 27, 2010, 06:50:38 PM
Guess you had to find a library open past 5....
No, the sanitarium changed the hours he can go of premise.
Sauer, you're lucky RM is sick right now. At least he'll get better.
Why stop with trees? Bushes do the same thing as trees. Crepe Myrtle? They get big too. Dang birds and squirrels eat my garden, they must go too. Fertilizing grass causes it to grow, which causes you to mow, which causes air pollution. The runoff from the fertilized yard goes into the storm drains causing excess phosphate buildup in the river causing algae blooms and killing the fish as well. Nature is such a biotch! We should simply concrete the yards and paint them green. Use plastic palm trees with little twinkly lights for shade and oh yes,...kill all the geese by the river trails cause they surely make it hard for you to dodge their little piles of green, slippery droppings.
Its all so clear now.
Uh, guys... trees SHOULD grow in forests! Otherwise, they aren't forests, they are fields.
And yes, trees belong in the landscape, too. Great things to have. Away from the house footing.
Quote from: waterboy on May 27, 2010, 08:21:32 PM
Sauer, you're lucky RM is sick right now. At least he'll get better.
Why stop with trees? Bushes do the same thing as trees. Crepe Myrtle? They get big too. Dang birds and squirrels eat my garden, they must go too. Fertilizing grass causes it to grow, which causes you to mow, which causes air pollution. The runoff from the fertilized yard goes into the storm drains causing excess phosphate buildup in the river causing algae blooms and killing the fish as well. Nature is such a biotch! We should simply concrete the yards and paint them green. Use plastic palm trees with little twinkly lights for shade and oh yes,...kill all the geese by the river trails cause they surely make it hard for you to dodge their little piles of green, slippery droppings.
Its all so clear now.
I have not heard of too many bushes falling on homes & power lines after a ice or wind storm, maybe that's why. It's your home if you want a big tree next to your home cracking your foundation or dropping branchs on your roof at every storm go for it, I'd rather spend my money on other things besides fixing home damage.
Quote from: sauerkraut on May 29, 2010, 11:41:46 AM
I have not heard of too many bushes falling on homes & power lines after a ice or wind storm, maybe that's why. It's your home if you want a big tree next to your home cracking your foundation or dropping branchs on your roof at every storm go for it, I'd rather spend my money on other things besides fixing home damage.
How about a gas guzzler engine for your '75 Marquis?
Quote from: Hoss on May 29, 2010, 11:51:26 AM
How about a gas guzzler engine for your '75 Marquis?
Yeah it drank alot of fuel, but gas was cheaper back then, under $1.00 a gallon- it had a 2 barrel carb.
I think you'd be more at home in the frozen tundra of Alaska. You and Sarah. Maybe she'll get you her old job when she becomes president. ;)
Look, no one who knows anything about landscaping, plants a huge tree next to their foundation. It usually happens through years of lack of landscape maintenance because of absentee landlords or poverty. So that is a non issue. Once they are there and full grown, they are expensive to take out so many people opt to work around them. I think that is a mistake, but if you don't have the money or the skills to remove them it is just going to happen. BTW, the crepe myrtle in my back yard was nearly 20ft tall until one of our notorious ice storms felled it and it took out our phone line. Had it been near the house it no doubt would have caused more damage. It is not a tree per se, but a bush. Bushes also send deep tap roots that attack sewer lines.
When I moved into my home, the landscaping had suffered years of neglect. I turned that around but some of the trees that were growing over the sewer lines were quite large and would have caused more expense to remove than the occasional roto-rooter job to clean the lines (cost to remove tree > $5000. cost to roto rooter every two years =$300 yr-or a break even at about 15 years in constant $). It also would have caused me higher utility bills and a lower property value. My neighbor who also benefits from their shade begged me to not remove them. My insurance agent never asked me if I had trees so I would gather it is figured as a cost of overhead.
So, you'd rather live in a neighborhood with no trees? You would have loved early Tulsa. It had few trees except around the river and they used those up quickly for heating and construction. The new wealth started the tree growth in Tulsa that differentiates us from OKC.
Balance my friend. Balance in all things.
Quote from: sauerkraut on May 29, 2010, 12:01:45 PM
Yeah it drank alot of fuel, but gas was cheaper back then, under $1.00 a gallon- it had a 2 barrel carb.
But we're not talking about then; we're talking about now.
Wow! You cannot be for real.
Quote from: Hoss on May 29, 2010, 12:08:51 PM
But we're not talking about then; we're talking about now.
Wow! You cannot be for real.
I was talking about back then, back in that cars time, back in the world of 30 years ago.. None the less the same idea applies today just make it a 1998 Mercury Marquis and apply it to todays standards.. That '75 Merc is no longer here it has long since gone to that big scrap heap in the sky. ::)
1975 Merc Grand Marquis had a 460 cu. in. engine with 4 barrel, just like the Lincoln Continental. Got 6 mpg - just like the Continental. How do I know? Because I had several friends who drove them. I drove one for a while, then stopped as gas went from 0.55 gallon to about $1.00. I got to work on the friends cars, too.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 01, 2010, 05:12:26 PM
1975 Merc Grand Marquis had a 460 cu. in. engine with 4 barrel, just like the Lincoln Continental. Got 6 mpg - just like the Continental. How do I know? Because I had several friends who drove them. I drove one for a while, then stopped as gas went from 0.55 gallon to about $1.00. I got to work on the friends cars, too.
We had the 1975 Marquis with the 400, the 460 was a option, ours had the two barrel carb. The big 460 may have been standard in the Grand Marquis & Lincoln. Ours was a white, 4-door with green vinyl seats. It was my dads pride & joy, he paid $4,600 dollars for it I believe he bought it in April, 1975. My dad died and my mother gave it to me and she bought a smaller car. BTW Ford had a real nifty ext. Green color in the mid-1970's they called it "Jade" green I think they only used it on certain models like the Mark IV & Lincoln. Speaking of Ford, I liked the design of the mid-70's Mercury Cougars with that sleek rear roof panel, another car I like alot back then was the Dodge Chargers from 1972-1976 with that long front hood & wrap around front bumper. There were some good looking cars back then. Today alot of cars look alike.
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 01, 2010, 06:19:37 PM
We had the 1975 Marquis with the 400, the 460 was a option, ours had the two barrel carb. The big 460 may have been standard in the Grand Marquis & Lincoln. Ours was a white, 4-door with green vinyl seats. It was my dads pride & joy, he paid $4,600 dollars for it I believe he bought it in April, 1975. My dad died and my mother gave it to me and she bought a smaller car. BTW Ford had a real nifty ext. Green color in the mid-1970's they called it "Jade" green I think they only used it on certain models like the Mark IV & Lincoln. Speaking of Ford, I liked the design of the mid-70's Mercury Cougars with that sleek rear roof panel, another car I like alot back then was the Dodge Chargers from 1972-1976 with that long front hood & wrap around front bumper. There were some good looking cars back then. Today alot of cars look alike.
OK, 6 mpg vs 9 mpg.
My 2.7l V6 gets 23 mpg average; I do about 50/50 highway/city driving. It's also a 'FlexFuel' vehicle. Although I've never ran E85 in it.
Oh, and if you think cars look alike today, you may want to visit your ophthalmologist and see if you have cataracts...
Quote from: Hoss on June 01, 2010, 06:48:41 PM
OK, 6 mpg vs 9 mpg.
My 2.7l V6 gets 23 mpg average; I do about 50/50 highway/city driving. It's also a 'FlexFuel' vehicle. Although I've never ran E85 in it.
Oh, and if you think cars look alike today, you may want to visit your ophthalmologist and see if you have cataracts...
Flex fuel is not that great since Ethonal has less bang per gallon than gasoline, sure it's cheaper, but your gas mileage drops too. What I'd like to see is natural gas vehicles, it burns clean and has more power than gasoline.
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 01, 2010, 06:52:15 PM
Flex fuel is not that great since Ethonal has less bang per gallon than gasoline, sure it's cheaper, but your gas mileage drops too. What I'd like to see is natural gas vehicles, it's cheap, burns clean and has more power than gasoline.
If you're buying gas at QT, Murphy's or any place where the price of gas is the same, then you're getting up to 10% Ethanol anyway.
Quote from: Hoss on June 01, 2010, 06:54:07 PM
If you're buying gas at QT, Murphy's or any place where the price of gas is the same, then you're getting up to 10% Ethanol anyway.
That's correct, but E-85 is 85% ethonal and 15% gasoline and only new cars can use it. When I buy pure gasoline my fuel mileage per gallon increases.
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 01, 2010, 06:52:15 PM
Flex fuel is not that great since Ethonal has less bang per gallon than gasoline, sure it's cheaper, but your gas mileage drops too. What I'd like to see is natural gas vehicles, it burns clean and has more power than gasoline.
CNG doesn't burn clean. It burns cleanER, but by no means clean. Oil, per year, produces about 10500 metric tons of CO2. Natural gas? About half that. So saying it's clean is a misnomer. It's cleanER.
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 01, 2010, 06:56:21 PM
That's correct, but E-85 is 85% ethonal and 15% gasoline and only new cars can use it. When I buy pure gasoline my fuel mileage per gallon increases.
If you still drive a tank, I guarantee you mine still gets better gas mileage.
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 01, 2010, 06:56:21 PM
That's correct, but E-85 is 85% ethonal and 15% gasoline and only new cars can use it. When I buy pure gasoline my fuel mileage per gallon increases.
I've found that the mileage hit from E10 depends largely on the particular vehicle. With my '91 Honda Accord (with the 110hp engine, not the 120 in the EX) there is no difference whatsoever. The 99 Escort ZX2 gets ever so slightly worse mileage. My SO's V6 Explorer, on the other hand, actually does take a significant hit from E10. Almost 15% less, in fact.
Ethanol really pisses me off, though. It's subsidized through farm subsidies, drives up the price of corn (which is in and of itself not an altogether bad thing) and is grown with oil based fertilizer. It doesn't save much, if any oil, but I guess it makes people feel better. There are much better ethanol feedstocks (hemp and sugar cane and/or beets are both pretty decent and use much less fertilizer), but heaven forbid we use them.
Quote from: nathanm on June 02, 2010, 12:19:41 AM
I've found that the mileage hit from E10 depends largely on the particular vehicle. With my '91 Honda Accord (with the 110hp engine, not the 120 in the EX) there is no difference whatsoever. The 99 Escort ZX2 gets ever so slightly worse mileage. My SO's V6 Explorer, on the other hand, actually does take a significant hit from E10. Almost 15% less, in fact.
Ethanol really pisses me off, though. It's subsidized through farm subsidies, drives up the price of corn (which is in and of itself not an altogether bad thing) and is grown with oil based fertilizer. It doesn't save much, if any oil, but I guess it makes people feel better. There are much better ethanol feedstocks (hemp and sugar cane and/or beets are both pretty decent and use much less fertilizer), but heaven forbid we use them.
That's interesting so it seems the larger the vehicle the more of hit you take with eithonal on fuel mileage- Indeed, it's not wise to use food sourcs as motor fuel, besides it still takes oil to make E-85, and like you said it all has to be subsized by the government to work otherwise ethonal would be a flop in the free market place. Why not have flex fuel vehicles that burn natural gas & gasoline instead of gasoline & E-85? We really should try and start phase in another alt. fuel source and E-85 is not it, it's a joke. They had some talk of running Semi-trucks on natural gas but then it died out. Diesel fuel is expensive and it's in higher demand than gasoline in the world market, if they could run big rigs on natural gas it'll save alot of money.. natural gas is about $1.00 a gallon when compaired to gasoline, or so they say..
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 01, 2010, 06:56:21 PM
That's correct, but E-85 is 85% ethonal and 15% gasoline and only new cars can use it. When I buy pure gasoline my fuel mileage per gallon increases.
WRONG. Only cars designated as FlexFuel cars can use it. Don't misrepresent. You got into the habit of that when you weren't living here. I still don't know that you are.
Quote from: Hoss on June 02, 2010, 02:47:08 PM
WRONG. Only cars designated as FlexFuel cars can use it. Don't misrepresent. You got into the habit of that when you weren't living here. I still don't know that you are.
That's what I said only NEW cars can use E-85 and since 2008 or so all new vehicles are flex~fuel. That's ok if you don't know who I am, I like it that way anyhow, -I don't know nothing about you so it works out perfect. ::)
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 02, 2010, 02:51:12 PM
since 2008 or so all new vehicles are flex~fuel.
Wrong again
Quote from: sauerkraut on June 02, 2010, 02:51:12 PM
That's what I said only NEW cars can use E-85 and since 2008 or so all new vehicles are flex~fuel. That's ok if you don't know who I am, I like it that way anyhow, -I don't know nothing about you so it works out perfect. ::)
You're still wrong. You obviously don't do enough reading while at the library.
Well I think your car will still run on E85. I think it just tears up all the seals eventually.
Quote from: Trogdor on June 02, 2010, 03:30:25 PM
Well I think your car will still run on E85. I think it just tears up all the seals eventually.
And aluminum and magnesium parts.
It won't run well on a naturally aspirated engine (i.e. carbureted)
I though we were talking about trees? ;D
What on earth does all of this have to do with my neighbour's tree? :o :o :o
I am now waiting for her to remove the main offending branch, which she claimed she would call a tree service about. I guess they figured out standing on chairs and trying to reach it would be foolhardy ;D
I did tell her we would PAY for the removal, but that lady is scared stiff I take off more branches than she would like, or they cut it too low or whatever. She wants control...old hag ;D
Quote from: HoneySuckle on June 02, 2010, 04:08:47 PM
What on earth does all of this have to do with my neighbour's tree? :o :o :o
I guess you could use E85 on the tree and then yank it out of there using Sauerbraten's car.
Will the tree hit your house when it falls over?
Can you get up there to cut it at the property line yourself? (And would that help the threat any?)
I have great neighbors (mostly). They are glad to let me cut their trees. So am in process. Need a new chainsaw, though.
Update on neighbour's tree.
I wrote the old bat yesterday reminding her about having the tree pruned back, and also mentioned in the letter that I was going to help her by getting quotes.
Called a tree company and they came out today and gave me a quote for cutting back from the house etc. I had told the neighbour that I would pay half of whatever it cost to do this.
Good news. The Arbotrist check the tree out and realised it was split down one side and on further investigation the other side was split as well, and it sounded hollow. He said it could come down anytime! He wrote on the work order that this tree is hazardous and must be taken down soon.
Now I never promised to pay half of taking a tree down, only the part for pruning which is the other tree!
Not a word from this woman yet. We did fax a copy of this report to our Insurance company, so in the event she does nothing and it does come down on my house, she was warned, making her responsible! I hate this type of neighbour. A real stubborn kinda old bat!
You did the right thing.....
Secretly hollowing out the tree was genius. Kudos
Quote from: Townsend on April 15, 2011, 09:39:24 AM
Secretly hollowing out the tree was genius. Kudos
Haha...sure wish I had thought about that 15 years ago! Seriously though, it's a good thing I did nothing last year and waited for her to respond because she could come back and say we cut back roots or had some work done on the tree and that's why it hollowed out, thereby trying to make us responsible for its removal! This has not been easy on us. That blasted tree (a cluster of 5 total), but one particular one that has been growing toward out house has caused us many nights of disturbed sleep due to high winds, snow storms etc. It would literally bang across the window or the roof. With the snow, it was lying on the roof and would make a grating sound.
I've been overly considerate and patient. She's the type who would not cut a tiny branch off a tree.. sigh
Many of the storm deaths last week were from trees falling on homes. A tree should not be next to a house. In Tulsa I have seen some huge jumbo really big trees right next to a house, the tree dwarfs the house. If that came down...
Quote from: sauerkraut on April 22, 2011, 03:50:52 PM
Many of the storm deaths last week were from trees falling on homes. A tree should not be next to a house. In Tulsa I have seen some huge jumbo really big trees right next to a house, the tree dwarfs the house. If that came down...
Let's not start THAT discussion again please. Are you so forgetful you can't remember you started this last year in the same thread? Does the library's internet suck or something?
So what's wrong with Sauerkraut talking about trees coming down and killing people? Not to mention destroying properties!
It's not a lie. Did you hear about the lawyer last year whose hammock was strung up between two trees and as he got into the hammock the damn tree came down and crushed him :-\ That's not a lie. Trees too near a home can be very dangerous. I saw the blasted branch on the roof of my house again and it really annoyed me. The neighbour did not look my way. She's pretending she didn't get my note or the report from the tree company. At this moment, I only like trees that are a planted away from the house, not so close that they branches hit the roof (mine and hers), or the windows and side of house. And still the witch thinks you hurt the tree by cutting back.
I just hope the City does something, and soon!
Quote from: HoneySuckle on April 22, 2011, 11:30:51 PM
So what's wrong with Sauerkraut talking about trees coming down and killing people? Not to mention destroying properties!
It's not a lie. Did you hear about the lawyer last year whose hammock was strung up between two trees and as he got into the hammock the damn tree came down and crushed him :-\ That's not a lie. Trees too near a home can be very dangerous. I saw the blasted branch on the roof of my house again and it really annoyed me. The neighbour did not look my way. She's pretending she didn't get my note or the report from the tree company. At this moment, I only like trees that are a planted away from the house, not so close that they branches hit the roof (mine and hers), or the windows and side of house. And still the witch thinks you hurt the tree by cutting back.
I just hope the City does something, and soon!
Did I say it was a lie? I was just calling out the non-res for spewing the same thing twice in the same thread. He's starting to act like Guido now...an AW.
Quote from: HoneySuckle on April 22, 2011, 11:30:51 PM
So what's wrong with Sauerkraut talking about trees coming down and killing people? Not to mention destroying properties!
It's not a lie. Did you hear about the lawyer last year whose hammock was strung up between two trees and as he got into the hammock the damn tree came down and crushed him :-\ That's not a lie. Trees too near a home can be very dangerous. I saw the blasted branch on the roof of my house again and it really annoyed me. The neighbour did not look my way. She's pretending she didn't get my note or the report from the tree company. At this moment, I only like trees that are a planted away from the house, not so close that they branches hit the roof (mine and hers), or the windows and side of house. And still the witch thinks you hurt the tree by cutting back.
I just hope the City does something, and soon!
You must watch out for self designated forum cop.....
Quote from: Breadburner on April 23, 2011, 03:26:42 PM
You must watch out for self designated forum cop.....
Not surprising you'd share that opinion with your frat brother. Probably joined at the hip too...
Honeysuckle, can I ask who your arborist was? I have some trees I need to have looked at.
S&W Tree specialists. Mark Harwick. He's very professional, very open to what you want. I won't use anyone else. Prices are around what other tree specialists charge, but they do an incredibly good job. Call him out and hear what he says. He won't try to talk you into anything. Leaves a quote and you get to make up your mind. This company works at Philbrook as well. But don't get scared. They don't gouge your eyes out on prices.