Thanks for the thoughts! the state just said to reach out to them within 60 days if they need to come out and take a sample to figure out what pesticide it was. The damages are between him and the farmer. He has already been in contact with insurance adjuster who offered to pay for trimming, but that would basically only improve a little aesthetic beauty for the farmer going by in the combine to look at. The branches on that side lost all their tips and now just have a bunch of suckers along the remaining live lengths
In this case, it was Liberty herbicide, glyphosphate that damaged almost all the lateral branches on the west, the field side, of the tree.
4 trees 40 ft tall 9 to 12 in DB (the top of one is damaged) and 3 trees 25 to 30 ft tall. 7-10-in dBH
I'm thinking trees will be more likely to grow lopsided, break earlier in their life span, maybe especially since canopy growth will be most vigorous opposite from prevailing winds. not trying to be overly litigious, but I think there should be a claim beyond just aesthetic trimming. My uncle grows peas for bird's eye, a farmer killed six acres via herbicide drift so they got a settlement from his crop insurance- sounds like these kind of claims happen fairly often, just dealing with long lived organisms rather than 60-90 day rotation crops.
any thoughts on this line of thinking? how to value a tree? add the cost of replanting factor?
Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk