. Question: What exactly is the issue with cutting down fruit trees?
Introduction: The prohibition of cutting down fruit trees is explicit in the Torah in Parshas Shoftim (Devarim 20:20). Various Gemoros (Bava Kama 91b, Bava Basra 26a) also mention this issur, and the Rambam (Hilchos Melochim Perek 6 Halocho 8) clearly rules that it is forbidden to cut down fruit trees. The Rambam (ibid) writes that the prohibition does not only apply to a situation of siege [which is the context of the possuk] but to all other situations and places.
Surprisingly, this prohibition is not mentioned explicitly anywhere in Shulchan Aruch. (It should be mentioned that the Tur in Choshen Mishpot Siman 382 when discussing if a person has a right to damage his own possessions does write in passing that one may not cut down trees.)
The Taz (Yoreh De’ah Siman 116 s.k. 6) writes that “there is another issue that Chazal forbade because of danger – that one should not cut down a fruit-producing tree”. Many ask on the Taz who writes that “Chazal forbade because of danger”; surely this is a clear issur min hatorah and not only an issur d’rabonon because of danger?
Various Acharonim explain that the Taz could be discussing a situation where there is no prohibition to cut the tree down (as will be explained), but there is still associated danger in cutting down the tree, despite the lack of a prohibition. The Graz however writes that in the situations where there is no prohibition to cut down the tree there is also no associated danger in doing so.
Discussion: There are various situations in which there is no prohibition to cut down fruit trees:
• Damaging to other trees/field – the Gemoro in Bava Kama (ibid) relates that Shmuel instructed that a fig tree be uprooted, to prevent it from detrimentally affecting the wine that would be produced from grapes that grew in close proximity to the fig tree. The Graz (Chosen Mishpot Hilchos Shemiras Guf v’Nefesh 15) stipulates that cutting down the tree is only permitted if there is no alternative solution to stop or prevent the damage from incurring.
Based on this, the Rambam (ibid) writes that if a particular tree is damaging to other trees, or to a field, the damaging tree may be cut down. The Rambam concludes that “the Torah only forbade [cutting down trees] in a destructive manner”. I.e., when cutting down a tree is to prevent damage, the prohibition does not apply.
• Profit – the aforementioned Gemoro quotes a statement of Ravina who said that if the value of the tree [i.e. the wood] is worth more (than the value of its fruits – Rashi) then it is also permitted to cut down the tree. The Rambam (ibid) also rules this leniency.
The Chasam Sofer (Shu”t Yoreh De’ah Siman 102) writes that unless it is certain that cutting down the tree will be more profitable than leaving the tree alive, it is forbidden to cut down the tree.
• Non fruit bearing tree – the aforementioned Gemoro learns out from the pesukim that non fruit bearing trees are exempt from the prohibition of bal tashchis. The Rambam (ibid Halocho 9) rules that one may cut down a non-fruit bearing tree even if one has no need for it.
• Minimal fruit yield – Rav ruled (Bava Kama 91b) that it is forbidden to cut down a tree that yields a kav of fruit. However, regarding olives which are more expensive than other fruits, if an olive tree yields even a quarter of a kav it is forbidden to cut down the olive tree. The Rambam (ibid) also quotes this ruling.
Summary: It is forbidden min hatorah to cut down a fruit bearing tree, except for specific situations (which will be enumerated). Additionally, there is spiritual danger associated with cutting down fruit trees.
If the tree is damaging, or if cutting down the tree will be more profitable than keeping the tree standing, or regarding a non fruit bearing tree, or a tree that only produces a minimal amount of fruits, it is permitted to cut the tree down.