Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I realize if farmland was converted to subdivision, that's initially there won't be trees, but even subdivisions that have been establsihed for 10 years, it seems like these owners plant FAR fewer trees than they did back in the 60s through the 80s. I don't mean they're not as big, that goes without saying, just fewer planted.
I realize if farmland was converted to subdivision, that's initially there won't be (big) trees...
I don't mean they're not as big, that goes without saying, just fewer planted.
Has anyone noticed this, or am I crazy?
Nope; you're not crazy. Builders will shave every dime they can get away with.
Still, I planted nine last year.
Three Cypress near a corner where headlights would shine in a bedroom and six Holly
along a property line to make a hedge. So far so good.
I think they think equate trees with gardening expense. Deciduous trees require raking and leaf disposal, etc. There's also a laziness factor.
There are also certain ethnic groups (in these parts) who eschew trees- like the Portuguese. Italians and Jews don't seem to care much about them either. It might have to do with preferring the look of the homeland.
Well, I guess I'm weird, I don't care for fully wooded lots, since I like to have some choice as to my trees and landscaping, but also don't like just a house on a huge expanse of lawn with nothing else around it.
To me, it's not that hard to read a book, dig a hole, and water a tree!
We have tree codes in my city. Builders have to plant two trees on any lot where there aren't any, after building a house. I don't see it as an issue out here, generally. There are some subdivisions before the tree codes that don't have very many, but that isn't the norm. Trees are desirable out here, but this is Oregon.
I realize if farmland was converted to subdivision, that's initially there won't be trees, but even subdivisions that have been establsihed for 10 years, it seems like these owners plant FAR fewer trees than they did back in the 60s through the 80s. I don't mean they're not as big, that goes without saying, just fewer planted.
Has anyone noticed this, or am I crazy?
I don't doubt your observation, but we did our part. Over the last 10 years we have planted roughly 50 trees on our property.
I do notice that cities/towns don't seem to be maintaining the landscaping. I see a lot of dead trees and bushes, simply because they haven't been watered.
You know what really drives me crazy is a huge parking lot without a speck of shade. It may have a few spindly's that don't do anything. I have concluded it's a liability thing. They are afraid something will drop and they'll get sued - or connecting to water is too much expense. Cement parking is so ugly and hotter than blazes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
