Houses with mature trees - desirable or not?

[Anonymous]

You want trees and don’t like my pool. Good. There’s Shenonodoah or whatever the bloody things are called

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mature trees are very desirable in parks, but very undesirable within 20 feet of houses where they fall and kill people.

This is paranoia. The actual chance of being killed by a falling tree is very low.

Until it happens to you and damages your house or kills a family member. You’ll change your mind.

[Anonymous]

If you want to live in a jungle, go live in the jungle. We are in cities here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trees are often given more credit than they deserve. Many of the touted benefits are half truths, which make it even more misleading. Trees have their benefits, until they start impeding on maintenance, quality of life, or safety. That's why there are parks and agricultural reserves - to have trees for environmental benefits, but away from personal property.

The first issue is that trees are dark, at least compared to other things that might blanket the land, such as grass or snow. As a result, planting more trees typically makes the land darker. Since dark surfaces absorb more heat, a dark tree-covered surface will trap more of the Sun’s heat – and warm the local climate.

As a result, there is a delicate balance between trees’ ability to take in CO2, reducing warming, and their tendency to trap additional heat and thus create warming. This means planting trees only helps stop climate change in certain places.

Specifically, according to a 2007 study that has been repeatedly confirmed, the best place to plant new trees is the tropics, where trees grow fastest and thus trap the most CO2. In contrast, planting trees in snowy regions near the poles is likely to cause a net warming, while planting them in temperate climates – like that of the UK, much of Europe and parts of the US – may have no net effect on climate.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200521-planting-trees-doesnt-always-help-with-climate-change

Omg you are crazy. Talk to an actual botanist.

Pretty sure all the studies cited in the BBC article were written by environmental scientists and botanists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I bought my house because of the mature trees both on the street and in the yard. I have a strong dislike for new construction homes and subdivisions because they lack trees, which give character. I have no idea why anyone buys a lot without trees.

You clearly have never spent $4,000 to have a one single dead tree taken out of your yard.

Folks down the street from me had 5 giant silver maples in their yard, in various stages of illness. They spent $15k to have them removed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mature trees are very desirable in parks, but very undesirable within 20 feet of houses where they fall and kill people.

This is paranoia. The actual chance of being killed by a falling tree is very low.

Until it happens to you and damages your house or kills a family member. You’ll change your mind.

So much irrational anxiety! Pop a Xanax and stop killing trees.

[Anonymous]

What are the desirable neighborhoods? The ones with mature trees.

If you want clearcut, head out to Loundon.

[Anonymous]

I live in a beautiful wooded neighborhood. Of course we do spend several thousand dollars having the trees cared for every 5 years or so. It is just like any other household expense. We also rake leaves. So worth it to me but if not you just choose a different neighborhood. It is just one of all the decisions in choosing a house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not desirable if on your lot, desirable if between your lots and neighbors. You'll need to consider cutting them down if they are on your lot even more so if close to the house

When we built our new hours we cut all the trees down and have much less maintenance inc gutters

Our neighbor did this too and yes, he is a moron in general.