The value of trees

I readily admit I’m a tree hugger, from way back. My dad initiated my love of trees by taking me on explorations in the “Forest Preserves” in Illinois. My husband and I bought our property in West Washoe Valley in 1988 not because we fell in love with the house, but because I fell in love with the trees. 

Recently, a property near ours sold. The new owner prefers evergreen trees over the existing poplars, willows, elms and Russian olives. So, he removed the deciduous trees — not only the thickety willows and olives, but also the 40-year-old shade trees. I am not only saddened that “my longtime friends” are gone, but I’m also concerned about the amount of carbon released by chopping everything down. 

I understand some people agree with the new neighbor, that these types of trees are problems rather than benefits. They break easily in the wind. They have invasive roots that can damage foundations and pipes. They shed lots of leaves. They are disease and insect prone. Russian olives have long sharp thorns and are unruly. Tall shrub willows crowd everything else out.

Yet, I still think differently even about “trash” trees. To this day, I love our tall poplars that shade the house and our willows next to the creek. Having lived in Nevada for 45 years, I appreciate how challenging the growing environment is here: arid, windy and hot with poor soils. It takes a long time to grow tall trees that provide cooling shade and wind protection. His willows provided much needed shelter for birds and wildlife. Great-horned owls and Coopers hawks nested in his poplars and elms. There was the occasional kingfisher or heron hanging out by the creek in the shelter of the trees. In addition to wildlife benefits, trees also cool and filter the air. They take in carbon dioxide and release the oxygen we breathe. Healthy mature trees add, on average, 10 percent to a property’s value, with an average value of $500 or more per tree.

Yes, his property was overgrown and needed work. I too, would have removed the Russian olives and thinned, but not eliminated, the willows along the creek. I might have removed a couple of trees nearest the house. But I would have pruned and shaped everything else to accentuate each tree’s beauty and to preserve the shade, wind protection and wildlife habitat.

The neighbor’s yard is mostly bare and unattractive at the moment, but he plans on planting evergreen trees, which will eventually provide shelter for the birds again. And, after a decade or so, if all goes well, perhaps there will once more be shade and wind protection.

JoAnne Skelly is associate professor & extension educator emerita at University of Nevada Cooperative Extension. Her email is skellyj@unr.edu