Too bad about that. Since a garden with an already-matured tree is so much nicer I reckon. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if one day I end up buying a house just because it has an already-grown tree in the yard, since as an adult already - I'm not going to be alive long enough to plant a young one and see it at full maturity. I'm eager to see how much my fertilizing and regular watering is going to accelerate the growth of some young palm trees I planted last year though, but they are still only just taller than I am and are said to take between 10 to 20 years before they reach full size (and these are the fast growing palms that are native to my country ). Though I will just be happy once they get beyond fence-height, which should only take a few years
Maybe that's the answer - if the tree must go, replace it with something less messy. Your options will depend on your climate zone. I'm lucky that most palm tree types can grow in my area - they are very "neat" as far as trees go, dropping just one or two large fronds every once in a while which are one big piece and easy to get rid of Since I live in Australia, most mature-sized trees you'll see are Eucalyptus trees and damn they are the messiest things on Earth - it's like Fall in the northern hemisphere every day of the year with those around. Native they may be, but I'm glad there's none of those in my garden (though judging by the large stump that was in the backyard when we moved in - there used to be ) They constantly grow new leaves and shed older ones just as quickly, so you could rake them up, or scoop them out of a pool one day and they'll be back again the next...all year round. I don't blame people for wanting to get rid of those. But they are encouraged to stay because native birds and animals prefer them, and they're easy to grow. I think here it's actually illegal to cut down, or significantly reduce the size of native trees even on your own property without a permit or proof that the tree is posing a threat to the structures around or below it Try getting the lower branches cut off first. Large trees actually look neater and even taller when the lowest branches are removed, it helps open up the area below too, allowing for more use of the yard, and more light coming through without sacrificing the tree itself. Maybe that will convince them to keep it. Everytime I see large trees needlessly cut down for reasons as lame as "it's touching the power lines" or "I want more light in my yard" I always ask myself "did they try simply cutting off some of the branches?"
I strongly support your argument. Once, my mother was out on the porch throwing rocks at squirrels when she came inside and, tempered at their annoyance, began yelling at me to finish my chores. I told her I wouldn't and threatened to call Animal Protection Agency and report her for harming innocent rodents. She never bothered me about my unfinished chores, nor did she throw rocks at the restless squirrels. In summary, if you truly wish to persuade your mother, call an environmental agency and report to them the situation. Then have them lecture your mother about various reasons she shouldn't proceed with cutting down the tree. These people are very persuasive and strong believers of their occupation, I'm sure they would love to come up with a list of alternatives.
So you disagree on principle or reason? tree's close to structure are destructive, non natives can be damaging to habitat & lastly imo, Tree's are a renewable resource so cut them and plant them all you want. Just because its old doesn't make it special.