If I plant a tree on my own land, morally should I own the tree or the land?

Question

And if I don't own the land or the tree so I don't get some personal benefit/yield from it, where/how/why would I plant trees?

Do you own land/not own land and plant trees you have no personal yield/output from?

Answer 1

Plant trees because you like them.

Trees have intrinsic value.

Not everything is a financial transaction.

Answer 2

Trees have value.  Compare the ascetics between new homes that are sterile land and one with large oaks.  Who wants to live on a piece of land where all the trees plowed under?

Now let me one up you.  What are you doing to save native tree species that have been decimated and are on the verge of extinction because of non native invasions?

6 BILLION American Chestnut trees are gone because of the blight.  Imagine how much carbon could be sequestered if only half those trees made a come back.

Read the plight of these beautiful trees.

Answer 3

I've never truly thought of myself as owning any of the land I sit on or any of the trees or plants.  My first reason is because I am 1/3 Native American (Sioux) and that is a traditional belief that the culture holds.  We are more so just borrowers and tenants just like everything else living on this planet.  I cannot own a tree that has other living things dwelling in it,  nor the land or my garden.  That's why I don't get upset if I see a few cabbages or broccoli heads missing.  I'm here to share and share alike.  To finish up I believe that are all really part of the land.  Read my blog entry from a few months ago.  Yes, I get even spacier.  Enjoy.

Edit- Oh Well. Yahoo deleted it. But basically what it said was that our ancestors had enough wisdom to realize that after we die we are supposed to go back to soil.  All matter is supposed to fertilize the earth and keep existing life going. That's my view of what reincarnation is. You never really go away as long as the Gaia is here because you are a part of it. The advent of Christian burials has disrupted that.

Answer 4

If you own the land, you own the tree that is on it.  It's called an "emblement."

Answer 5

Plant trees because they're the reason you're alive! Hello! Have you ever been to biology class?! By the way, trees produce oxygen and that helps us breathe, they're also fun to climb and are pretty scenery. And they're good for the environment!

Answer 6

No, you do not own the land or the tree-----God does.   Humans just think they own land.

Yes we plant trees, and yes sometimes not on our own land.  It's just great to plant a tree.  Helps the environment out----doing for others----including non humans----can give a great feeling.

Answer 7

I have my own land, and have trees (and have plans for many more of them).  However, I don't think I get any personal yield/output from them.  Other than the fact that they are pretty, I suppose.

Answer 8

I think this is an interesting but extremely complex issue. It has connections with political, ecology, environmental ethics, and even property law. I understand your concern regarding ownership of nature. Where do we draw the line? Is it drawn at animals, trees, land, air, water, other natural resources......

It is concerning because once we claim ownership of something (even living things) it implies possession, and therefore the removal of this "thing's" rights. Simply by owning it, the implication is this thing is now an *object* rather than a tree or animal. They are now simply chattels to be traded, consumed and used.

However this is all theoretical. We still have to consider practical economics, politics and international borders. If we no longer have land ownership rights, what should happen to international borders? will they be dissolved, who should be responsible for care of the land? What about economics and agricultural trades?

I'm sure there's more to it. But very thought provoking. You've really made me think Bella. Thanks. :o)

Answer 9

Your question invites more questions than answers:

Is this an extension of your previous questions regarding internal vs. external motivations?

Can you morally "own" another living thing?

Is this an example of Deep or Shallow Ecology?

Ownership is an illusion, control is an illusion, Dominion is an illusion:

you already realize the government has more power to decide what you do with your land than you do;

a beetle could kill your tree tomorrow, do you favour one element of nature over another because you benefit economically from one and not from the other, if so are you sure you can control it; and

what gives you or anyone else the "right" to decide the fate of another living thing: rights are a non-natural human invention.

Answer 10

Lots of people plant trees and such on public land because it's good for the environment in terms of CO2 absorption and erosion control, etc., and because in general, landscaping increases the value of property, shows it's actively maintained and tends to lower crime levels a little.

If it's on your property, do what you want... but the same principles still apply.

If you are talking about moral perspectives, there's something in the Bible about being stewards of creation and all that's in it.

Answer 11

As we all die, we own nothing. "The things you possess come to posess you." ~ Tyler Durden.

Answer 12

okay tress produce oxygen righyt so u get oxygen so u get output out of the tree and people are killing trees more than growing trees so EVERY TREE HELPS!!!!!!!

Answer 13

yeah sure you should

Answer 14

i have planted trees most of my life on land i did not own for the sake of the Environment

that is the big picture

Coming from another angle ,

In the Netherlands you never own a tree even the ones on your own land ,and need government permission if you want to cut it down ,

And rarely do they give this .

My sister had to put her house in another place because a tree already occupied her favorite spot.

Morally speaking it is hard to see how we can be the boss of a tree that is 3 times older than you

In Japan it is illegal to cut any tree older than 50 years i think.

Many Indigenous people consider them selves temporary guardians  of land

all of this irrespective of the benefits,

One plants trees for the good of the whole .not for egoistic reasons,because many live far longer than we do.

But everyone has their own opinions

We tried planting fruit trees on the street but the people objected ,they said others would get fruit for nothing

can you beat that.

And fruit that hangs your side of the fence is yours ,anywhere in the world.so if these free trees had branches that hung over someones garden ,there would be disputes over ownership

I know this also confused me

Answer 15

In many places at high risk of wildfires, you may be restricted in what or any trees you may plant in the area of urban development. Kelowna British Columbia learned the hard way that it is not wise to put houses up into the near desert forest area.

Now that the forest has burned, they are having to take steps to avoid a repeat.

In Contrast to that, Toronto has legislation that makes owners preserve any tree that has reached 30 cm diameter, even at major cost to the  owner. Home owners  are dutifully cutting down all trees before they reach that diameter.

I have a walnut farm, and I claim the right to cut an occasional tree to provide walnut wood for fine furniture, and myself with the price of the wood. I take out any tree that is too close to other trees to optimize walnut production.

I make it a point to remove saplings that grow, wherever a walnut has fallen. Some of them go to neighbors, some just get burned for fuel. Trees are always starting themselves, so we have to treat excess trees as weeds.

Too many trees for  the available rainfall can be a disaster, so I have no qualms about limiting the number of trees on the land. Trees put down deep roots and take the water from way deep, even drawing down the aquifer. But one tree mostly limits the moisture that surrounding trees can get, and vice versa.