The prohibition against uprooting a fruit tree applies only when the tree produces fruit. If, however, the tree has aged or become diseased to the point that it produces less than a kav of fruit per year (approximately 1,200 cc), it no longer has the halakhic status of a food-producing tree and may be uprooted. For an olive tree, because of its special importance, the rule is stricter: as long as it produces a quarter-kav per year (approximately 300 cc), it may not be uprooted. To be certain that the tree does not produce the required amount, one must observe it for several years. This is especially true of an olive tree, whose yield varies greatly from year to year. Only when it is clear that it cannot produce a quarter-kav in a year may it be uprooted. This is measured according to the owner’s ordinary watering and care: if he waters and tends the tree as he understands the tree’s needs and as he normally does, and despite this it does not produce that amount of fruit, there is no prohibition against uprooting it. [3]
One may not uproot even a young sapling that has not yet produced fruit, because it is destined to produce a kav of fruit. Plants that produce foods whose berakha is ha-adama are not included in the prohibition, since the prohibition concerns only uprooting a tree that produces fruit for many years, as explained above, 2:8. [4]
Of course, one may prune the branches of a fruit tree in order to enhance its growth. However, when cutting additional branches will not benefit the tree, some maintain that one may not cut them (Mahari Basan 101). In the opinion of most poskim, however, there is no prohibition against cutting branches as long as the tree itself remains alive and healthy (Meiri; Mishneh La-Melekh; Ḥavot Ya’ir; Har Tzvi 2:101; and many others).
Some maintain that one may uproot a fruit tree together with its roots and the surrounding soil in order to plant it in another place where it can survive, as explained above, 2:5. Since the prohibition is to kill a fruit tree, if it is nearly certain that replanting it elsewhere will succeed and the tree will continue living, there is no prohibition (She’elat Ya’avetz 1:76; Shevut Yaakov 1:159; Maharash Engel 3:111). Others maintain that the act of uprooting itself is forbidden, and the fact that the tree will later be planted elsewhere does not help. Moreover, there is a reasonable concern that the tree will not take root in its new location (Ḥatam Sofer, YD 102; Mahari Ashkenazi 34; Zivḥei Tzedek). In practice, it appears that in a case of need, when it is nearly certain that the replanting will succeed, it is permitted. To ensure the success of the replanting, one should use an experienced gardener. When there is doubt whether halakha permits uprooting the fruit tree, one may uproot it in order to replant it as long as it is very likely to survive, even though there remains some risk that it may die.
[3]. The source for the particular need for caution in this law is the verse, “Only a tree that you know is not a food tree” – meaning that only when one knows with certainty that the fruit tree does not produce enough fruit may it be uprooted (Ḥatam Sofer, YD 102; Arugat ha-Bosem, YD 119). The volume of a kav is calculated as follows: an egg-volume is 50 cc; a log is six egg-volumes, or 300 cc; and a kav is four log, or 1,200 cc. Although according to R. Ḥayim Naeh an egg-volume is approximately 56 cc, and according to Ḥazon Ish approximately 100 cc, the precise measure is approximately 50 cc, as explained in Peninei Halakha: Berakhot 10, note 11, and above, 11:6, note 6.
[4]. Many authorities write that the prohibition also applies to a young sapling that is not yet producing fruit, including Erekh Shai, YD 116; Shevet Sofer, YD 94; Maharsham 7:178; Responsa R. Eliyahu Guttmacher, YD 34; and Beit Shlomo, YD 2:176. Ḥatam Sofer and Ha’amek Davar write, however, that one is not liable to lashes for uprooting such trees. Maharil Diskin suggested a reason to be lenient during the years of orla, since the fruit is forbidden to eat, but his view was not accepted in practice; see Har Tzvi, OḤ 2:102. Some maintain that a tree that produces fruit edible only in pressing circumstances, such as crabapples, is included in the prohibition (Darkhei Teshuva 116:51). Others maintain that since in practice people do not eat these fruits, and the trees are not planted for their fruit, the prohibition does not apply to them (Arugat ha-Bosem, YD 120), and this appears correct.
