undefinedWhat is the name of your state? North Carolina
I have recently sold a tract of timber. A timber deed was prepared and signed. In the timber deed it was specified that "White Oak groves" would be marked and not cut. The White Oaks were not included in the sale in order to maintain a viable food source for the deer, turkeys and fox squirrels on the timber land. The timber company purchaser participated in the marking of the groves to remain uncut and a minimum of 150 White Oak trees were guaranteed.
The timber company subcontracted the timber harvesting to another company and all but a few of the White Oaks were cut, even though he was told twice during the cutting that the White Oaks were to remain. I have two losses here. The first is the loss of the timber. Knowing the number of trees that was agreed upon to remain and their average size, the number of board-feet of lumber can be calculated and a bill presented.
The second loss is the hardest for me. These trees were in the 80 to 100 year old range and were producing acorns. If replanted today, acorn production would begin in 25 to 35 years. This is a loss of food source for game that will have to be replaced. Data are known on the average acorn production of an oak tree as a function of age. Knowing the average age of the trees (count the growth rings) and production factor, the mass of acorns can be calculated on an annual basis. I can equate this to the mass of corn that I will have to buy to replace the acorn food source. This calculation can be made until the new trees could start producing.
Obviously, the first loss is something that is winnable in court. The second loss is a real loss to me and the wildlife habitat that it was serving. Is the second loss something that would be considered by the courts and does anyone have any experience in this area?
I have recently sold a tract of timber. A timber deed was prepared and signed. In the timber deed it was specified that "White Oak groves" would be marked and not cut. The White Oaks were not included in the sale in order to maintain a viable food source for the deer, turkeys and fox squirrels on the timber land. The timber company purchaser participated in the marking of the groves to remain uncut and a minimum of 150 White Oak trees were guaranteed.
The timber company subcontracted the timber harvesting to another company and all but a few of the White Oaks were cut, even though he was told twice during the cutting that the White Oaks were to remain. I have two losses here. The first is the loss of the timber. Knowing the number of trees that was agreed upon to remain and their average size, the number of board-feet of lumber can be calculated and a bill presented.
The second loss is the hardest for me. These trees were in the 80 to 100 year old range and were producing acorns. If replanted today, acorn production would begin in 25 to 35 years. This is a loss of food source for game that will have to be replaced. Data are known on the average acorn production of an oak tree as a function of age. Knowing the average age of the trees (count the growth rings) and production factor, the mass of acorns can be calculated on an annual basis. I can equate this to the mass of corn that I will have to buy to replace the acorn food source. This calculation can be made until the new trees could start producing.
Obviously, the first loss is something that is winnable in court. The second loss is a real loss to me and the wildlife habitat that it was serving. Is the second loss something that would be considered by the courts and does anyone have any experience in this area?