What if there were a simple solution to help assure that a landslide didn't jerk the foundation from under your house? That erosion didn't wash away at your hillside property? That springs didn't pop up beneath the basement? What if there was something that could substantially reduce the risk that during the next big windstorm, a fir tree didn't come crashing down into the living room? And what if this solution cost you nothing? You didn't have to buy anything or even hire some professional to give you advice or study the problem? You didn't have to investigate, install or improve anything?

Much as been written about how clear-cutting slopes and cutting in roads have resulted in landslides destroying property and life. While tree-cutting and land-clearing are not the cause of every unstable slope and ground-water problem, they are certainly contributing factors. This is not something limited to practices of big timber companies on public lands. It is a practice that affects individual owners of small lots.

As a geotechnical engineer, I deal with the destructive processes of the land on a daily basis. No doubt the past two years have witnessed very high rainfall amounts as well as ice and windstorms. Predictions are that this will be the typical weather for the next several years. But the problems are often more the result of human alteration of the landscape than wet winters. This is Oregon; we have always had wet winters and springs. What we haven't experienced is the drastic changes the suburban and rural landscapes are undergoing as development and sprawl continues. Entire hills and buttes are being clear-cut for new residential developments, streams are being put into pipes and natural drainage ways filled in. Ground that once soaked up the water is being covered by asphalt, concrete and houses.

Consider this: The root system of a stand of trees covering a slope is like a massive reinforcement system holding the ground in place. Cut or uproot the trees and the integral strength of the soil declines, resulting in landslides, slumps and erosion. A stand of trees soaks up thousands of gallons of water from the ground each day. Remove the trees and the water that had been absorbed by the roots runs overland, causing erosion. Or it runs just under the ground surface until it pops out somewhere down slope in the form of springs -- often under the cut-out building pad of someone's house or beneath a street.

Dense stands of trees also form a barrier to the wind, reducing its force. The root systems of a group of trees interlock, forming a resistant web. Each tree essentially supports the others. Cut down the trees or thin them out drastically and the ones left standing are vulnerable to blowing over.

So the obvious thing to do is don't remove the trees. But if there is such a simple solution to greatly enhance the protection of property, why isn't it a widespread practice not to remove trees, except dead ones that pose a risk? Some cities, including Portland and Gresham, require a permit to cut a large tree. But many areas receiving the greatest development have no requirements. Why aren't there building codes or land-development devices throughout the metro area that would restrict clear-cutting in residential areas?

Well, in new developments, it is easier and more cost-effective to build by bulldozing everything in sight, except maybe a token tree here and there. Working around trees and tree roots is costly for a contractor. So the land is cleared, and people spend the next 50 years planting saplings and trying to establish trees again.

On established properties, the seemingly sacred right of personal property implies that a person has a right to do what he will, even if he moves in for just a few years then sells and moves away.

Trees in the way of a view? Cut 'em down.

Need some easy cash? Clear-cutting a couple of acres of trees can bring a tidy sum. There is a demand for timber from small lots.

This seemingly personal property issue often affects people on neighboring properties. Runoff water moves onto the neighboring property down slope. Wind whipping through a new clear-cut blows down trees on the neighbors house. And denuded hillsides are lost habitat for wildlife that could have coexisted with humans in a conscientious residential development. Suburban woodlands 50 to 100 years old can be reduced to slash piles in a few days. The impacts will remain for decades. And sometimes the ground becomes permanently unstable.

Of course if a tree near your house is dead or leaning toward the house, it should be removed. But I have seen entire lots cleared after the owners were told that most of the trees were dying anyway. There may also be other factors contributing to instability of the ground that may require other solutions be enacted.

And consider not only the impacts of actions on your own property, but how those action might affect your neighbors. If you have a neighborhood association, urge it to establish bylaws to prevent cutting trees except when diseased or rotten. And write letters to state and local agencies responsible for planning and development urging them to adjust their thinking and consider requirements for new developments that restrict land-clearing and alteration to drainage patterns.

John W. Ferguson is an engineer who consults regularly about the problems of landslides, ground water and surface-water runoff.

We want to hear from you. If you have an issue you'd like to discuss in My Turn, please submit your column to the MetroEast Bureau of The Oregonian. If mailing or faxing your material, a signature, street address and daytime telephone number are required. My Turn material should be written exclusively for The Oregonian and is subject to editing. Unsolicited material submitted for publication becomes property of The Oregonian and may be edited for publication. Published material may also be redistributed in other media. Write: MetroEast Bureau, The Oregonian, P.O. Box 1398, Gresham, 97030 or fax us, 667-9973.