The story about landowners clearing public land on a trail along a Northern Wisconsin lake near their condo reminded me of a 2001 'improvement' on public land made by a Milwaukee homeowner who wanted a better Lake Michigan view:
Man fined, restitution ordered for cutting down tree
It happened in Delafield, twice. Walmart cut down a whole swath of hundred year-old oaks between it and I-94, and a private landowner cut down trees to improve his view--on his neighbor's land! The fines ought to be a whole lot bigger, and in proportion to the age of the trees cut down.
ReplyDeletePenalty: lien on the house for the total cost of replacement, and title amendment that house shall not be sold until the replacement trees are fully grown.
ReplyDeletePunishment should be depended on the offensive AND the ability to pay an appropriate fine that deters repeating the offense. If I have property on a lake is a rustic cabin built by my grandparents. It's value is $10,000. I decide to enhance my view of the lake and cut brush and trees (clear cutting) and my fine is $500.00 I might see that as a cheap way to get what I want.
ReplyDeleteIf my property is worth 1.3 million and the fine is $10,000 I might see that as a cheap way to get what I want.
Now if the fine is set at 75% of the property value i doubt either property owner would see that as a cheap way to get what I want. Make the punishment deter others and hurt the offender.
I would accept Bill Sell's (^^) solution as well