Tree Planting and Trimming

* I heartily agree with the May 10 commentary by Donald C. Shoup, “Let a Tree Grow in L.A.,” which supported the City Planning Department proposal for homeowners to plant curbside trees when selling their houses. What concerns me, however, is L.A.’s antiquated, unaesthetic and harmful tree-trimming policy.

Several years ago I tried unsuccessfully to get the city to revise its destructive trimming practices, which waste resources, shorten the lives of trees, reduce the biomass and destroy the canopy over the streets. Most so-called “trimming” is really amputation, which causes many new branches to sprout, destroying the form of the tree and inviting pests and disease.

I was told by city officials that their chain-saw massacre is pursued solely for liability reasons, yet ironically greater public danger is created with a tree weakened or killed by overtrimming.

MICHAEL E. ARTH

Los Angeles

* Not a bad idea! You realize it’s another unfair tax on the less-advantaged. The person selling the $100,000 home pays the same as the guy who sells a $1-million home.

Another problem. I have six oak trees on my property. The guy across the street has 20. People down the block don’t have any.

How about a requirement that a person contribute an amount (really a tax), based on the selling price of their home, into a fund managed by the School of Urban Planning at UCLA?

Make it a requirement that 90% of the money would be earmarked for planting at a location determined by urban planners.

HARTLEY KERN

Westlake Village