New Perspective
On Tree Theft

Last week’s Herald story on the Spaulding timber trespass case in Royalton inaccurately stated that "…the consulting forester, Alan Turner, … allowed the Spaulding’s trees to be cut down." The Herald apologizes to Mr. Turner and his famly.

In that story we reported that George and Agnes Spaulding lost some of their large maple trees when their neighbor, Jeffery Howe, harvested the trees, which he then sold. Subsequently the Spaulding’s won a $30,000 judgment against Howe.

The Spauldings also sued Turner for making a forest management plan and map based on a previous inaccurate map, which they said Howe might have used to justify his trespass. Upon learning the undisputed facts in the case, however, the Court dismissed the case as having no merit. The facts are as follows, Turner explained to The Herald this week:

Turner was asked by the previous owner of the Howe property, the Phipard estate, to prepare a forest management plan for the Use Value Program, based on a map given to Turner by the executor of the estate. He was not asked to verify the accuracy of the map nor was he legally qualified to do so, since he is not a licensed surveyor. The management plan was prepared for the sole benefit of the Phipard estate and was clearly labeled as "Not A Survey."

Turner was never employed by Howe for any forestry or logging purpose. The only contact Turner had with Howe regarding the logging, he said, was to warn him that he seemed to be cutting many more pine trees than the plan called for, based on the logs that were being piled near the road.

Later, he refused Howe’s request to rewrite the management plan to allow for additional cutting on another section of the property.

Turner stressed he had no responsibility or authority to monitor or control the harvesting Howe was carrying on in apparent disregard of the forest management plan. However, he said, he did report what he suspected was improper harvesting to both the state and the Vermont Land Trust, which holds certain rights as to how the forest is managed. As both the landowner and logger, Howe was solely responsible for determining where his boundaries were located before commencing with the cutting..

When the Spauldings first learned of the timber trespass they visited Turner to warn him of Howe’s apparent disregard for property lines. In the course of that discussion, Turner shared his knowledge of the map given to him by the Phipard estate executor, which had been prepared by the Vermont Land Trust, and the forest management plan map made in accord with Land Trust map.

Turner explained that Howe might use those maps, assuming he had copies, to avoid a triple damage settlement. Triple damages are awarded when a timber trespass has occurred with the full knowledge of the perpetrator that a trespass is occurring.

Turner said he also helped convince the Land Trust that the Spauldings were correct in asserting they owned the damaged land. As a result, he said, the Land Trust withdrew a demand that the Spauldings have a survey done to prove their ownership.

In view of the above, Turner was surprised to be named as a defendant in the case, requiring the expenditure of legal fees before the court dismissed the case against him.