I hope someone can assist me in this matter:
We have experienced a loss of approx. one acre of historic landscape due to neighbor's clear cutting efforts. (property boundaries were clearly identified - paint on trees, "no trespass" signs, etc.- telephone calls to neighbors to stop cutting - to no avail) We
finally obtained a court order to stop the work and prevent them from removing the stumps/burning the evidence that we needed to prepare a civil action. However, they violated
court order and were later found in contempt.
Criminal charges were also brought and a jury
convicted them of criminial trespass and trespass after notice.
Here's the problem: In preparing the case for civil trial, the state statute calls for "value" to be established by a registered forester. However, the trees that were removed were not considered premerchantable/standing timber. The trees were part of our historic landscape (plantation setting) and under an existing forestry stewardship plan. We have a certified
arborist's opinion as to "replacement value" as well as a registered forester/consultant who agrees that the loss was indeed aesthetic. He defers to the opinion of the arborist since the arborist utilizes the industry accepted plant appraisal guide and
typically registered foresters do not specialize in urban forestry matters such as this.
Because the strict definition of the state statute calls for the value to be established by a registered forester as opposed to a certified arborist, how can overcome the defense position that the "value" of our loss should be restricted to board foot value?

Your comments and suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Reply to post by Lee, on February 05, 2000 at 22:25:14:

This sounds identical to the case described by Jan at http://tree-tech.com/board/?topic=topic6&msg=214 and following. Same case?

Anyway it sounds like you've describe two (2) technicalities.

1. that the opinion be presented by a registered forester. If it's merely a question of legal competence it seem like you have two courses of action.. if acceptable to the court have a registered forester be the "lead" and testifying expert assisted as necessary by arborist or other expert on replacement cost... or find an expert with both qualifications. This forum might help you lacate a registered forester who is also a qualified plant appraiser if you identify your state.

2. that the measure of damages MUST be based on the conversion of merchantable timber you were deprived of (that opinion coming from a registered forester being anadditional condition).

If # 2 applies then your attorney needs to determine if that's explicit in statute leaving no room for interpretation or if it's an interpretation of case law which may be both archaic and inequitable. You may also want to explore whether the historic designation is supported or enabled by law which may create a conflict with a damages statute. In any case it's a legal matter to decide if your case can be effectively argued under the law or if not then is there a basis to appeal the law after you lose. You might try to enlist interest groups or even state agencise to help with the appeal if the existing law is not in the public interest, particularly if that interest is specifcally established in law... trees have value and should be saved for things other than timber.

All this varies by state.

Reply to post by Scott Cullen, on February 05, 2000 at 22:25:14:

Thank you for your response, Mr. Cullen.
Yes, Jan posted info in December on this case.

I would certainly appreciate finding someone who may posess both qualifications in the state of SC. Anyone who knows of other cases and is willing to share that information is also appreciated.
Most folks I have spoken with so far are either registered foresters or certfied arborists but not both. We are not attempting to quantify aesthetic values. We simply need to establish the REPLACEMENT values and that is only for the few stumps that remain on the site. The loss is actually much greater but because the evidence was destroyed when they defied the court order by removing the stumps and burning them. We are forced to limit the amount of damages to only those stumps that remain.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Reply to post by Lee, on February 06, 2000 at 08:58:57:

I realize that the "horse is out of the barn", but this seems like a case where some video tape would have come in handy. Surely it took more than an afternoon to do all this damage? Was it in a secluded location, or one hard to reach? Also, it seems to me that the destruction of evidence in a crime should have some bearing on this matter, in terms of a judgement against the destroyers.

Reply to post by Lee, on February 06, 2000 at 08:58:57:

Try this link to you state urban forestry office, they may be able to refer you to a registered forester who is also a qualified arborist.

http://www.state.sc.us/forest/urban.htm

Reply to post by Mark Goodwin, on February 07, 2000 at 12:29:40:

I am a registered forester in the state of Mississippi and am currently practicing urban forestry. Just wanted to let you know that in some states if someone cuts timber unlawfully on your land, you may sue for 2 to 3 times the value of the trees. This may be something to look into if you already haven't.