On August 14, the Supreme People's Court released typical cases of illegal tree felling adjudicated by people's courts in accordance with the law. Among them, the case in which Wu Mouliang and two others jointly felled most of the trees planted in an early year on a certain mountain site was selected; the court sentenced the three defendants to fixed-term imprisonment ranging from one year and one month to one year for the crime of illegal tree felling, and also imposed fines.

　　Forests, together with wetlands and oceans, are known as the three major ecosystems of the Earth, and play important ecological functions in addressing climate change, protecting biodiversity, conserving soil and water, and preventing wind and fixing sand. Protecting forests and cracking down on the crime of illegal tree felling in accordance with the law is an inherent requirement of building an ecological civilization in which humanity and nature coexist in harmony. In recent years, China's judicial protection of forest resources and ecology has been continuously strengthened; a large number of high-profile typical cases involving damage to the forest ecological environment have been properly handled in accordance with the law, and various illegal and criminal acts of indiscriminately felling public trees have decreased markedly, effectively raising the level of rule-of-law protection of the forest ecological environment.

　　The crime of illegal tree felling refers to violating the provisions of the Forest Law, without approval from the forestry administrative department and other competent departments as prescribed by law and without the issuance of a tree felling license, or, although holding a felling license, violating the time, quantity, tree species, or method specified in the tree felling license and arbitrarily felling forests or other trees owned by one's own unit or by oneself; where the quantity is relatively large, the offender shall be convicted and punished for the crime of illegal tree felling. Therefore, unlicensed felling, or felling beyond the prescribed intensity or scope, may constitute this crime even if the trees felled are owned by the offender. Exceptions are felling bamboo forests outside nature reserves in accordance with the technical procedures for tree felling, or rural residents felling scattered trees owned by individuals on their private plots and around their houses. It is worth noting that the scattered trees mentioned here generally refer to 3-5 trees; if the trees planted on private plots or around houses have already formed contiguous woodland, a tree felling license is likewise required for felling.

　　It should also be noted that, along with the increase in disputes over transactions involving forest land and trees, driven by interests, some people, under the mistaken belief that "one has the right to dispose of one's own trees," occasionally commit the criminal act of illegally felling their own trees. Against this background, the Supreme People's Court's release of relevant typical cases helps to give play to the warning, deterrent, and guiding role of typical cases and to strengthen the rule-of-law consensus that "illegally felling one's own trees is also a crime."

　　Some tree owners recklessly fell their own trees and, after being imprisoned, still remain puzzled; an important reason is that they know very little about the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law on the crime of illegal tree felling. Article 345 of the Criminal Law clearly provides that whoever, in violation of the provisions of the Forest Law, illegally fells forests or other trees in a relatively large quantity shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, or public surveillance, and shall also, or shall only, be fined; if the quantity is huge, the offender shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than seven years and shall also be fined. It can be seen that the constitution of the crime of illegal tree felling does not depend on the ownership of the trees; even for one's own trees, illegal felling by the owner will also constitute a crime.

　　The reason the law seriously pursues the criminal responsibility of owners who illegally fell their own trees is to avoid the adverse impact of such felling on the stability of the local ecosystem. Such serious criminal accountability is more conducive to warning against and curbing illegal and criminal acts of arbitrarily felling one's own trees. In this sense, tree owners obviously cannot regard illegal felling of their own trees as a matter of disposing of their own rights, but should possess basic rule-of-law common sense.

　　The occasional occurrence of the crime of illegally felling one's own trees, although directly arising from tree owners' weak awareness of the rule of law, also reflects from one aspect the current governance shortcoming of insufficient publicity and education on the law in this regard; it is necessary to explain the law through cases and popularize relevant legal knowledge. Compared with abstract legal provisions, typical judicial cases can better enable owners to understand the harm caused by illegally felling their own trees to the forest ecological environment; they can both guide owners to use typical cases as concrete rule-of-law coordinates for examining their own conduct and enable more people to understand and become familiar with the crime of illegal tree felling. This undoubtedly helps to promote the formation of the rule-of-law consensus that "illegally felling one's own trees is a crime" and to avoid the occurrence of similar cases of illegally felling one's own trees.

　　Building an ecological civilization is a distinctive feature of Chinese-style modernization. As an important part of ecological civilization construction, the protection of forest resources and ecology requires not only maintaining high-pressure criminal deterrence against all kinds of illegal and criminal acts that damage forest resources and the ecological environment, including illegally felling one's own trees, but also, more importantly, learning from cases to strengthen the rule-of-law consensus that "illegally felling one's own trees is also a crime." Judicial organs should regularly release such typical cases, thereby strengthening the warning and deterrent function of typical cases, guiding the public to form a correct understanding of illegally felling one's own trees, and ensuring that the concept of ecological civilization takes root in the hearts of the people.