Curious what was the cost for removal and stump grind? Doug

FL no longer requires permission to chop down trees. I had mine done last week. Contact Tree Frog Service The Villages Fl.

It all depends on who is doing the removing from whose property. I've related this story on here before: one day in March a few years ago a contractor "cleared the forest" by suddenly removing 27 healthy, large oak trees from a grove on Kenya golf course. I called the Golf Management System to ask why they were doing that. Todd Basso, head of GMS, said they were removing them so the remaining trees would "flourish" and that he had decided which trees to take out without consulting an arborist. So oak trees are only sacred to the ARC, not the developer.

The Lake Miona incident is different, in that it involved removing trees from property that the SW Florida Water Management controls, not the ARC.

We removed a very large diseased water oak from a lot we used to own in another town near here. The cost was $2,000.

Thanks for the recommendation, contacted Tree Frog responded same day, came to the house , did a survey and we have plan/solution!

Yep they confirmed same this afternoon, tree coming down in a couple of weeks, will replace with a “canopy” tree. Big job though lots of root and stump grinding, need topsoil and new lawn as part of the project.

Confirmation, recent FL law no permission needed to remove or trim trees
 

That explains a lot. Almost all of the new homes that were being built in the historic district had new trees planted. Most were close to the foundation. A new house went in behind me and a live oak was planted eight feet from the foundation in the backyard. The owner found someone that wanted it and gave it to them in exchange for their removing it. I looked at one house that was built about five years ago. On the tiny front lawn were three palm trees that had been there. The Villages planted a magnolia tree in the middle of them. They were evidently planting trees to replace the ones that they they took down.

For every x-number of trees removed in clearing the land for building, they were required to plant one. Don't know if the requirement was for Oaks, but at least they chose Live Oak rather than Water Oak because of the better root system. (This is what we were told.) Water Oaks grow more on top of the ground, making them less stable in storms. Dunno for sure, because where I come from, Chinese Elms were the norm and had enormous tap roots. Not a lot of trees of any kind there.:1rotfl:

But a licensed arborist is still required to certify removal is necessary.

Interesting

Seems as though you never really have ownership freedom or really own your house here.

You don't have "ownership freedom" in most parts of the country. Just because you own property doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it. For instance - you're not allowed to build a nuclear reactor on your property. You're not allowed to have horses in a city that has an ordinance against keeping horses on the property. You're not allowed to rent your property out to terrorist organizations. You're not allowed to tear down the house, let the property grow out, and then invite all your friends to dump their garbage on it.

Lots of things you can't do even though you own the property. No such thing as "ownership freedom." And that's a good thing.

Pack Salt around the base
Using salt is an effective way to kill a tree. The sodium in salt will prevent a tree's flow of potassium and magnesium, both of which are vital ingredients in the making of chlorophyll. The lack of chlorophyll will eventually kill the tree. You can simply make a line of salt around the tree, and it will die.

Just to clarify, arborists are not licensed by the state. You need approval from either an arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture, or by a Florida licensed landscape arcthitect.

This happened to us. They send out an arborists to determine if the tree is healthy. If the arborists reports the tree is healthy you are automatically denied. Our application was also denied. Appeal the ruling and show up in person, with pictures and other evidence to prove that the tree is putting your property at risk. The ARC members are reasonable folks who are following a process. They ultimately gave us permission to remove our troublesome tree, with the requirement that we have the stump ground below ground level and replace the tree with an approved shade tree. The replacement tree can be something other than what is removed, like an East Palaka Holly, which can be easily groomed to insure it remains relatively small and never grows out of control. Good Luck.