How much is the perfect view really worth?
A recent USA Today article caught my attention, only to leave me very unsatisfied at the end. The article, Cutting trees can fall on wrong side of the law, is about home and business owners cutting down trees to improve their views of Lake Tahoe and the Las Vegas Strip. Those desiring the ideal scenic views, however, forgot to ask for permission and are now facing hefty fines and prison time. The topic of the article was very interesting, however, the execution of the writing was a different story. From the get go I had issues with the article. The writer started the article with a “who” lead that is completely irrelevant to the story. Who cares who Douglas Hoffman is (sorry, Doug)? Rather than introducing the most important, relevant information first the writer buried the real meat of the story, $200,000+ fines and possible 20-year prison sentences for cutting down more than 500 trees. In addition to burying the lead, the author leaves readers with many unanswered questions. While reading I found myself asking many questions that I hoped would be answered later in the story: Why is the tree cutting such a large problem resulting in such stiff legal penalties? How do officials find out about the illegal tree cutting? What are the environmental impacts on Lake Tahoe? Is the issue all about money and politics or are lawmakers actually concerned with the well-being of the land and the species living there? To my displeasure, none of the previous questions (or any others for that matter) were answered. The lack of relevant information in this article was baffling to me. The author had plenty of space to expand on background information and other pertinent details. Rather than using the space to do so the author switched focus mid-way through the article, switching from the problem in Lake Tahoe to similar problems occurring in other states. This move would have been better if the article did not have so many loose ends that need answers.
