biodiversity corridors | Regenerative Livestyle Blog

Protecting All Trees

23/10/2025 by florencemicoud Leave a comment

We all agree with the Chinese proverb “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago” and we are now well aware of all the services trees provide (biodiversity habitat and food, cleaning and regulation of air/wind, water, climate/temperature, wellbeing/esthetics etc.);

Yet in our district, established trees are cut in great numbers, from Northlake to Riverbank Road, on road sides, public and private land. It is shocking and hurting to many people, we value trees. It is an offense to the elders who have planted these conifer windbreaks and plantations, beautiful poplar rows, or mixed planting in private land for future generations, not for us to dispose off.

If we are serious about the declared climate and biodiversity crises, then we need to protect our trees.

Our Council has a tree protection policy for public land. There is no distinction in tree value whether they grow on public or private land. So rules can be extended to all trees. It is as easy as replacing “On Council land, we“, with “On all land in QLDC, we” on the current tree policy.

Even with the Tree Policy, too many trees are felled (and planned to be felled) on public land so a better protection is needed to include native and non-native trees, shelterbelts, windbreaks, hedgerows, groups of trees and stand alone trees. Clear felling, burn offs, monoculture and poisoning practices are unsustainable and must stop (read on for details).

Trees are life and they should and CAN be protected by extending the QLDC Tree policy on public land and strengthening this policy to Protecting All the trees of the land. To adapt to today’s crises, regulations must be changed to set interdictions and consent requirements before harvesting trees on the land you’ve bought.

I am opening a conversation and welcome contributions to save trees. I will revise and present the request to the Council in a full meeting asap.

Thank you for your advice. Have your say!

Go back

Your message has been sent

To dig deeper 😉

Here are details on a few important points. Contributions on these aspects are welcome.

Intrinsic value of trees

Trees are beings, they are made of carbon and water like us, they have strategies to thrive in most adverse ecosystems, they live, breathe, make babies, die. At a scale so large, in a time so long that many humans do not see them.

To the Māori, trees are sacred and revered, respected and used with gratitude. Trees are taonga (treasures) with strength, resilience and interconnectedness with all living things, mirroring humans in all their diversity.

I love trees. I feel their life force, I appreciate and admire, caress and hug trees. I am like tree, carbon and water, we are the same, we are life, we are one. Trees are to me the bridge to oneness. I believe trees are unique living intelligent beings that have a right to live.

Planting native trees with Te Kakano in 2013

Do you remember how you felt when you planted a tree?
Do you remember the love, this connection with the land and contribution to the planet? The good deed and hope for a better future?
It is a good idea to think about it when planning to cut trees planted by someone else and respect them.

Just like Jane Goodall had demonstrated that chimpanzee are intelligent beings worth of protection, just like the Project Ceti deciphers whale communication, so too has Suzanne Simard demonstrated that trees are sentient beings, they cooperate to live in harmony in forests, they communicate, help each other, nurture their children… we only begin to understand their intelligence.

One day, when human society progresses, it will give civil rights to trees, and I am asking to start by protecting them now.

We need to stop killing trees just because “we’ve always done that”.

US master arborist Basil Camu has made a daring business move – refusing to cut down trees. Instead he’s turned his focus on educating people in a bid to keep their trees. He says 90% of trees don’t need to be cut, only managed. He says people can save money, time and help develop ecosystems by not cutting down their trees.

Trees are intelligent beings and have the right to live.

No money can buy
an old tree

Natives and Non-natives

I feel an intense sadness at the extend to which native forests have been removed from Aotearoa over centuries and it continues today, only protected by National Parks, just.

I understand the need to “recloak” New Zealand with native forests. I love native trees and we planted many natives over the years. I understand native areas must be weeded off non-natives in National Parks which role is to conserve the authentic original canopy.

Locally, Te Kakano is doing a formidable native tree planting effort with the community since 2013.

In human settlements however, I believe ALL trees have huge value. There is an unnecessary division between native and exotic trees. All trees are beautiful carbon-loaded and valuable resources. Fast growing and resilient maples, oaks, conifers and poplars offer splendid colours along the lakes and streets, in parks and gardens, exotic trees are precious. Existing trees, old and recently planted are all invaluable as once cut, they take 20/60/100 years to grow again, if replanted, which is a loss of time and leaves a gap between now and when they will be big again.

Particularly, existing trees should not be cut to be replaced by native trees.

An ancestor has planted douglas firs? Thank you for the shade and windbreak.

A forest of pinus radiata is growing on its own? Great! Let it grow, thank you nature, thank you tough tree. It can be interplanted with natives. When it is grown, it can be selectively harvested.

I think it is great to plant lots of natives but existing trees should never be cut to make space for them. Tony Rinaudo shows that the habitual way of removing what grows naturally (ie. cutting weeds) is depleting the land; keeping them instead hold moisture and nutrients fostering more life.

Be careful what we wish for. Cutting non-native trees could result in a bare land as many established trees are willows and poplars, conifers and oaks. Where will the bird live when they are removed?

NZ forest loss
Source: EPA Environmental Protection Authority (New Zealand government agency) – click on image to open the source document

On the Fisherman track along Mata-Au, a mix of natives and non-natives grow happily together, protecting each other, feeding and protecting wildlife in complementarity. Beautiful!
What’s wrong with the pine forest in the other side on Dean’s Bank? Nothing.

I will add here that non-native trees were introduced lawfully to New Zealand, they provide valuable services and are often grown in plantations. Wanting trees “here but not here” is madness, segregation. Wanting only natives is also extreme when most food in NZ is not native; pasture, sheep, kiwifruit, non native… Just like us people, most of us are not native, yet we are an asset to our chosen beloved country and we thrive to live in harmony with people who were here before. New Zealand is one country in the world where we learn to live together, enriching us all on the way. It requires effort, but it is worth it. So with the people, so with wildlife. I believe native and exotic trees can live in harmony together, in complementarity. They certainly do at our place.

“If we want a truly sustainable carbon future, we need a diversified forest portfolio — some species for quick sequestration, others for lasting stability“.
Carly Green

What exactly is invasive?

Aspen trees, cherry trees, poplar trees form clusters, clonal colonies; oaks and sycamore grow thousand of trees babies every year; all trees in forests, native trees in native forests, multiply and reproduce. Of course they reproduce, they are life. Let’s embrace this quality, not fight it.

“Ticking time bomb” I hear some say, well everything is relative… In 20 years, we have just 3 baby Pinus radiata coming from the nearby forest and we decided to keep 2 of them. I don’t call this an invasion. It is manageable.

We all like a good ground cover, don’t we? And it’s beneficial for the soil and wildlife too! So when a yellow archangel lamium, a purple ajuga, an arctostaphylos or dandelions really enjoy it and spreads, I hear people say: “Oh no! we need to remove it” and they spray.

It is similar with trees, only on a much longer time frame. Some trees enjoy an area and grow well and create a family. Great.

If a tree or a plant IS a problem, we make sure we cut it back with as much root as possible and remove all seeds before they spread. By removing 80% of it every year, we are on top of it in a few years.

When we are in harmony with nature, we welcome the vigour, manage it to keep room for other plants and ourselves. Whether a plant is a weed or welcome is political and cultural, it is a mental construct, a world view of nature.

Qualities of the so-called-invasives.

Many conifers, gorse or broom have same or better carbon values than natives.

And yes, so-called-invasive are tough! That is why they grow in the wild. Many of the so-called-invasive are ruderal, they are the first to cover the soil after scarring or poisoning. Interesting how thistles come back over and over again just on the herbicide sprayed areas, which then need spraying again.

Broom and gorse grow well on bare land and traditionally offer protection of native plant regeneration then dissolve when the natives shade them. Over the years, other plants will colonise too, native trees will pop over the protective cover and the shade they create will dim gorse which will die, nature left to her own devices usually comes back to a forest. Hinewai Nature reserve near Christchurch is a great example of this. It takes time.

The beauty is it can be greatly accelerated by inter tree planting.

Wilding pines?

The main wilding pine is Pinus radiata which is widely planted for forestry in areas previously deforested from their natives. “These trees are good here“. “These (same)trees are not good there“… This control of nature is damageable to the planet and a mindshift is required. These trees are precious long term resources and harvesting them selectively at the right time for timber and other local materials make better economic sense. Trees that grow on their own are a gift from nature and can be used as resources. We could choose to let “wilding pines” grow, then harvest them for timber and firewood, selectively like they do in Europe (no clear cut on the Swiss mountains, is there?). They are not invasive; they are growing instead of monoculture of pasture. We see many images of wilding pines colonizing bare pasture but very rarely pines growing amongst natives.

Conifers do not grow in the shade, this is why they are outcompeted worldwide by deciduous trees that grow faster when young, says conifer expert Aljos Farjon. Conifers are often seen on margins along track and roads (created by humans), in ditches and ravines where nothing else grows yet and in riverbeds where they are watered. They can be managed. In our region, I have never seen wilding pines growing in a native forest and smothering it. It is likely that with climate change, trees are now growing in places they didn’t use to. But I believe culling wilding trees is the wrong war. What needs to stop is the destruction of carbon absorbers

These trees grow on their own on our -difficult- land and they should be let to grow and harvested when grown for timber, resins and other goodies trees provide. I realize I am hurting some people with this radical view! I hope, with good intention, they will widen their views soon.

A great example of the necessary shift: the lawn!
Lawns were made fashionable by rich aristocratic people showing off that they had enough to afford a useless space, at a time when all the land was forest or used for food or resource growing. Today, specially when they are kept short, watered, “weed free” or “worm-free”, lawns swallow a lot of resources: energy, water, time, poisons, they do not hold water nor carbon; in a climate, biodiversity and “cost of living” crises, they are a squander. Apart from the kids and the dog playing around, large lawns and large pastures are of little use and value. Leaving the grass to nature and mowing only footpaths is an elegant way to accommodate both nature and people.

Do we need to mow all land? Or just footpaths?

What are we doing when we cut and poison trees? We remove a free resource, use carbon heavy chemicals and pollute the planet, animals and people’s bodies. The use of chemicals brings a cancer epidemics well documented by Rachel Carson in her 1962 Silent Spring book.

Trees that grow well and fast in our climate are larches, sequoias, eucalyptus, douglas firs, walnuts, cherry and apples, all absorbing huge amounts of carbon, much more than a slow growing native. They are also providing excellent timber, firewood and food. Larches produce such a durable wood that it doesn’t need treating even used as roof tiles in European Alps.

Going deeper, I believe, the “invasive” issue is due to a mis-repartition of land. Some people have a land bigger than they can be guardians of. Meanwhile, many people can’t afford a quarter acre, which is the size of the land where you can grow some trees and some food. The iconic 1/4 acre New Zealand of the 60’s was allowing every household to live. Now, people are pushed into boundary to boundary house with no space to grow, unlivable, so as soon as they can, they move somewhere bigger, impacting the land further and creating a runaway economic growth which erodes wellbeing and is incompatible with the climate, biodiversity and inequality crisis. Adapting does require a change of culture but change we must as the crises are squeezing us.

Proposals

Manage, not kill.
Manage a 20km margin around National Parks to remove self seeding trees;
Welcome these plants growing well naturally
Practice selected harvesting
Interplant with natives as wished
Share. If you don’t cope with your land, then share it with others who will help
Do not poison as it pollutes the planet

Do you embrace – grow – appreciate – protect ALL trees?

It IS cultural and political. It IS reflecting a different world view.

In our district

In our district, big trees are not native and they take an expensive real estate space. It has been leading to their destruction, for example Northlake, Three Parks, Orchard road etc. “They are just Douglas Firs, get rid of them” I hear. Well, they are trees.
Of note here, douglas firs, along with many conifers, live for several centuries, 500 years is common. In our region, trees planted won’t be more than 150 years old so killing them is like killing a young adult with many years of good service ahead.

For many residents and visitors, Wānaka trees have huge value. There are world-known poplar and willow rows along the lake, there are still a few beautiful established trees in town, a dozen standing survivors on Orchard road, a mighty old Douglas fir across the police station, a small forest left at Eely point and Lismore park, there are patchy areas of big trees in parks, on the Golf course and on private land. They are all condemned by current rules and practices…

In Wanaka, some Wanaka Station Park trees and the start Mt Aspiring road trees are protected along with 15 others, including the three mighty McDougall sequoias.

Spectacular and much admired McDougall sequoias

In our district urban areas, most natives have been replanted recently and are still too small for wildlife habitat. We do not have tall totaras. There are established kowhais, plenty of kanuka and flaxes and small native hedges (eg. griselinia) and grasses. I observe every day that native wildlife lives and sings in tall trees, mostly non-native. Each of these existing trees are extremely valuable as they are what we (and wildlife) currently have. If we let these non native trees be cut, birds have nowhere to live, therefore disappear.

Trees need to be kept. The plan for Eely Point reserve to remove hundreds of healthy windbreak trees is inappropriate in a climate emergency; I hope the new Council and the Blue Green network step up to protect this important part of the existing (patchy and disappearing) Wānaka green belt. Natives can be planted understory, between the gaps, or on grassland further along. It is nice to read that in the Queenstown gardens (also planned to be culled), public consultation has resulted in “trial planting sites before any trees are removed, helping to demonstrate what the replacement plantings will look like ahead of future works.” Well, collections of little tree guards containing beautiful native baby trees do NOT replace mighty canopies… Not for us anyway…

Tree Protection in QLDC

QLDC has created, with public consultation, a tree policy designed to protect the trees.

It is in fact very weak as it really only protects native trees on public land. Douglas firs on public land are not protected, on the reason that they are not native. Queenstown botanic gardens, Eely point recreation area, a group of douglas firs on a public area in Peninsula bay… All cut or about to be.

This tree policy is more a process to cut trees. Not to protect them.

There are a few protected trees in Wanaka. Many trees of the Wanaka Station Park and the start of Mt Aspiring road are protected, along with less than 20 trees on private land.

I inquired in August 2024 about protected trees in QLDC. I was referred to The Upper Clutha Historic Records Society, who didn’t know much. Very little importance is given to protected trees, trees at all, I’d say!

I asked how to protect trees and was informed that the 10-year district plan is the time to apply for that.

Iconic Wanaka Lake front in autumn, lighten by poplars and willows. Beautiful! That Wanaka tree itself is a willow, a post in fact.

They grow happily and protect native planting happening around them.

Mt Aspiring road beautiful tree tunnel, many of these trees are protected.

Little group of douglas firs on the little reserve opposite the medical centre, full of birds. These trees on public land should be protected but being non-native, they could also be on the chopping board.

This screenshot of protected trees from the QLDC maps system in 2023 doesn’t seem to work anymore. It speaks volume to me.

I understand that wilderness areas deserve to keep or restore their native-only status. I don’t believe native-only is good for human settlements areas. Importantly, these established trees exist -thank you- and cannot be replaced.

Trees, native or not, have high intrinsic value, ecosystem value and wellbeing value.
Biodiversity value is higher if there are natives AND non natives.

The blue-green plan could include spaces for planting these essential resources for human settlements – as the draft stands, the Blue Green plan is only about natives. How are we going to build and heat houses in a zero carbon economy or in a disaster zone? The wood is no longer going to come from over the ocean, or across highways with broken bridges. It must be grown locally and the blue green plan can include that. Always in diversity (no monoculture). Which landowner has enough space for a couple of rows and allocate a part of that wood to the community ? Are you in?

Let’s maturely rise above the native/non-native invasive viewpoints and embrace all TREES.

Beyond trees, a whole district regenerative design

Yes it IS Political and the Council has the potential to fix all these crises by capping growth and planning steady state local circular economy, by protecting trees and encouraging sharing of the land, creating commons, to grow food, for recreation access or commuting, for tree growing or biodiversity restoration… I suggest Council elected members and staff go and talk with the landowners. Ask them what would they need to be on board with sharing a part of their land as commons. It doesn’t need to be money.

Many landowners I know are creating a biodiversity asset on their land (eg. they plant trees or create ponds…) and they just want the certainty that their land is not chopped up after their death. When we plant trees, it is for us to enjoy when we are alive. It is also for future generations and the birds, and the planet. It’s generous. It needs intergenerational guardianship and the current land zonings do not allow that. It is the governance responsibility to change rules to protect what we have for now and future generations. We cannot wait and squander what we have.

Carbon sequestration is calculated over many years and at the moment, trees are planted with no guarantee that they will be kept, it is wrong. We need to create a way to protect what IS. A land zoning or any form of protection of private land is an essential part of the creation of a regenerative community.

“I don’t want to die!
Because then…
All this gets chopped up”
Says an old gardener with an ample movement showing extensive gardens and unusual established trees 🌲 🌸🌳

Growth is too much in our district.
EVERY public meeting I have attended in the last 20 years have clearly reflected that “locals”, the community does not want this uncontrolled growth. And yet the Council continues planning for growth. Instead of planning for a sustainable urban environment. I am asking the new Council to step up and provide what the community asks.

Solutions

Create citizen assemblies to define community and the planet future best outcomes and implement them
Stop growth where it is already planned now. It is essential to keep fertile greenfields close to urban areas and stop over-building.
Keep All trees, Keep 30% for nature at all levels, on a section, in a subdivision, in the urban space, in a connected way. Use these commons for planting useful and native trees fostering wildlife, connected walk and bike ways for recreation and commute, surface water reticulation, community food growing (food forest, plots, orchards, community gardens or social entreprise growing market food…) – and to be resilient, add local energy production on all roofs, with subdivisions requirements to build battery capacity. Make it part of resource consents, it is just a political will (or not?)
Encourage landowners to regenerate 30% of their land and share and join the commons network.

This is how we create and re-create biodiversity, resilience and wellbeing.

I think it is time to have a wise holistic view on the trees, cherish and protect them all. It’s possible. It’s a matter of time and humanity maturity. It’s happening. In 2017, the Whanganui River became the first river in the world to be recognised as an indivisible and living being and it is award winning now.

How about we politically deliberately recognise trees and forests as indivisible living beings?

Have your say!

Alternatives to current practices of clear felling, burn offs, monoculture and poisoning

Alternatives to clear felling

Since 2021, NZ Farm forestry recommends replacing clear felling with a selection system to halve (or reduce tenfold) soil erosion and to retain forest ecosystem, maintaining soil nutrients, nesting sites, food sources, cover, shade and protection from climate extremes. Read the article here.
Clear felling only looks cheaper, it is externalizing actually higher costs to the public. The impacts on roads during rain events is costly and detrimental to the communities. The devastation of the cyclone Gabrielle even cost death.
Clear felling is also ugly and severally impact landscapes, a detriment to wellbeing and tourism. Nelson area, Golden Bay, Coromandel etc. are no longer beautiful, they have scars, it is hurting, visitors often comment on it.
We don’t see clear felling in Europe where selective forestry is generalized, nor in North America where they hide clear felling behind rows of uncut trees. Clear felling is a practice for underdeveloped countries with uncontrolled illegal logging, eg. Indonesia or Brazil. Clear felling must be banned in New Zealand, starting in our district.

In our district, subdivision developments start by removing all the trees on the land. This is unnecessary and costly. Why do passer-by have to witness yellow machines moving earth etc. for years, where they used to pass a row of singing trees? Where are the birds going? The developers soon replace the once old trees with young ones, which will take decades to provide similar services that already existed! Why?

Solutions:
Move away from intensive monoculture forest management into a well-practiced closer to nature or integrative multifunctional forest management with single tree selection.
In resource consent conditions, keeping trees on the boundaries and keeping 30% of all other trees and natural space.
Practice coppicing: by cutting one every three trees, we keep the 30% for nature ratio, keep the visual shield provided by trees on the boundaries and trees keep growing without the need to replant.

Alternatives to burnoffs

Outdoor burning is sometimes authorised on Check It’s All Right. However, many articles show elevation of air pollution and complaints in burnoff seasons. Furthermore, burnoffs are the main reason of wildfires: “In New Zealand, about 99% of all fires are caused by people. A number of fires are started as a burn-off (farmers getting rid of excess vegetation), which then escapes, becoming a wildfire“, say Scion scientists.

Solution: ban burnoffs. It is not acceptable to continue burn offs in 2025 in a climate emergency. On hills, let it grow, let regeneration in progress. For wood debris: hire a mulcher, with the right tool, landscapers will turn it to valuable fertilizing resource for cheaper than buying mulch.

Alternatives to monoculture

It is so obvious monoculture should not exist, but it does, so it needs regulation! Monoculture is by definition unsustainable. Biodiversity is essential to hold food and shelter year around. Monoculture is the opposite of biodiversity so we need a mind shift away from monoculture, in forests, in agriculture and in lawns.

Solution: Plant a minimum of 10 different trees species for example. Row of slow growing natives with rows of fast growing timber. Plant diverse hedges, small or large, it all improves biodiversity.

Alternatives to poisoning

So much is known on pesticides and herbicides, it’s a wonder people use them still. Do they realise these chemicals require huge amounts of energy for their production, packaging and transport; they pollute the environment and bodies with long lasting chemicals with myriads of more or less known consequences on life. One is sure: by intermingling with human hormones, they create infertility and various cancers. Maybe it is time to stop and instead manage when necessary, mulching, fostering biodiversity to maintain a balance…

Solution: commit to no chemical fertilizer nor pesticide use and care for the land in harmony with nature. Share the practices that work on managing self fertile trees locally.

All these things are possible. We are doing it. We plant trees. We do not pollute. We use bokashi, worm juice or comfrey tea to feed the garden. We only mow what we need, that is less than 10% of the land. We appreciate the privilege to co-create so much beauty and abundance with nature. We trust nature. We connect with nature. We love each of our trees. The land becomes a heaven for us and wildlife. We live in a bird sanctuary! The joy and privilege have unfathomable value.

This famous quote shows the importance of protecting trees planted 20 years ago. And yet…

To All the trees planted and growing, thank you.

If we are serious about the climate, biodiversity and sickness of the world (are you?), then Tree protection is the cheapest easiest essential way on the transition to a planet and people friendly society.

What do you think about this tree protection proposal? What improvement to the statement do you suggest? Any recommendation on how to go about it?

My intention is to gather feedback and revise the text accordingly, then go to a QLDC public meeting and submit the request to the Mayor with all the support received.

Click here to start protecting trees with me

I love trees and want to protect them;

All of them, from any unnecessary killing.

Florence

REFERENCES

Ecosystem services https://treesforever.org/2022/02/02/ecosystem-services-and-trees/

QLDC Tree policy https://www.qldc.govt.nz/services/environment-and-sustainability/trees#tree-policy

I am tree https://regenerativelifestyle.blog/2023/03/28/i-am-tree/

Jane Goodall work https://janegoodall.org/our-story/our-legacy-of-science/

Project CETI work https://www.projectceti.org/

Suzanne Simard work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanne_Simard

Interview with an arborist who stopped cutting trees https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2019010570/the-arborist-refusing-to-cut-down-trees

Recloaking Papatuanuku project by Pure Advantage https://pureadvantage.org/recloaking-papatuanuku/

Minimal interference in the Hinewai forest interview https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018703481/gorse-for-the-trees-how-one-man-brought-back-a-forest

Carly Green article https://www.linkedin.com/posts/carly-green-a2b6598_carbon-sequestration-potential-of-plantation-activity-7383306791494959104–blD

A short history of the McDougall trees in Wanaka https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1D4SQ3f4Np/

Tony Rinaudo experience https://www.facebook.com/reel/748830131506635

QLDC Blue Green Plan draft https://letstalk.qldc.govt.nz/blue-green-network-plan

How to recreate commons with a regenerative landzoning https://regenerativelifestyle.blog/2023/07/25/regenerative-lifestyle-land-zoning/

A river with indivisible living rights https://www.teaonews.co.nz/2025/11/06/groundbreaking-new-zealand-law-wins-global-award/

NZ Forestry discourages clear felling https://www.nzffa.org.nz/farm-forestry-model/tree-grower-articles/may-2021/why-alternatives-to-clear-felling-harvests-should-be-seriously-considered/

Coppicing what why how https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/discover/nature/trees-plants/what-is-coppicing

Is it safe to light a fire website https://www.checkitsalright.nz/

The case against burn offs https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/743-managing-fire-risk-in-the-outdoors

Our Stolen Future https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Stolen_Future

The problem with fertilizers https://regenerativelifestyle.blog/2011/05/07/nitrogen-cycle/

Forest Management systems in Europe https://forest.eea.europa.eu/topics/forest-management/management-systems

A natural history of conifers, by Aljos Farjon, Portland: Timber Press, 2008

This gallery contains 4 photos

25/07/2023
by florencemicoud 3 Comments

Regenerative Land Zoning

We are proposing a new Regenerative Land Zoning that encourages landowners to protect, regenerate and possibly share the land they are guardians of.

Context: the situation in Wānaka

In our district, urban growth is transforming the small town we love and pushing nature further and further away, decreasing inhabitants wellbeing and tourism appeal.

The urban area already stretches 10km from Bills Way to Albert Town bridge, which requires everyone to hop in a car to go anywhere, work, shopping, hobbies…

As developments start by removing all trees (incl. natives), massive earth moving and soil compacting, life, trees and soil present in the previously rural landscape are destroyed. It doesn’t have to be that way.

We now have kilometers of suburbia with houses four meters away from each other, where people can’t grow food let alone trees.

In 2023, we have to consider the climate, biodiversity and cost of living crises. To adapt, we need:

Connected pathways for commuting and recreation biking and walking
Plenty of trees and nature, 30% of land and water left to nature by 2030
Local food production

These 3 simple points enable low carbon living, good for nature and wellbeing, good for resilience and affordability. And it’s aligned to the QLDC Vision beyond 2050 principles:

Green belts exist on private land

The new subdivisions are now well beyond initially planned green belts and reserves.

Nature is pushed further and further away from the people. But in a sustainable resilient low carbon society, we do need nature and space for food production on our doorstep, not half an hour drive away.

Urban development is creeping on rural lifestyle areas, bulldozing them. Have a look at Orchard Road. It doesn’t have to be that way.

On many lifestyle properties in town and adjacent to town, landowners have planted trees and enhanced biodiversity on the land they are owners and guardians of. They are givers not takers. Kaitiakitanga. Thank you for having planted trees, established trees are treasures🙏 Taonga.

The current rules and price of land mean that when these creators sell, the land is chopped off with all the life on it. A simple optional new land zoning could prevent that.

Innovative Regenerative Land Zoning

We are proposing a regenerative land zoning, allowing landowners to voluntarily secure their land for perpetuity, providing they enhance biodiversity and/or the community.

The land can be sold with the same conditions.

The owners can choose how they want to regenerate: planting trees, native or not, restoring or creating wetlands, planting orchards for local food, planting fast growing well managed forests for local timber and firewood…

And the owners can choose whether they share it with the public or not, or which part of it. For example a strip along the road can be made into a bike lane; a grove of trees can be open as a park for the public; an orchard can be open for a time for locals to harvest; a land can be gardened by community groups or as plots…

It already happens. A few enlightened and generous landowners are already offering their land for the greater good.

A regenerative land zoning would foster green belts connections. It would create a network of biodiversity and community enhancing parks and corridors. Tracks through these corridors would enable low carbon transport. Food would be produced locally for resilience and affordability, and nature would be accessible for everyone with all its biodiversity and wellbeing benefits. Win-win-win.

Steps

I have shared the idea for two years, in emails to local influencers, including all the Councilors, several times. I have talked with many Council staff, I have presented it to several community groups and in the tourism sector, even prompting a standing ovation (at the WAO Regenerative Tourism hui October 2022). It IS a great idea with huge desirable benefits for all, thriving nature, resilient community and cheap for the Council.

Now is the time to sit around a table and make it happen.

Let’s start with the pioneers who have already created something beautiful which is at stake of being destroyed by growth. Let’s start with the landowners who already regenerate and share (or wish to).

What would encourage landowners to participate is yet to be discussed and finetuned, from rebate to maintenance or simply protection.

The Council is the entity capable of creating a land zoning and I am talking at a Council meeting on the 10th August to invite them to start the process. LWT, WAO, WAI, UCTT, Te Kakano, are invited in the discussion and action.

The innovative land zoning protects what we already have and deploys it to an exciting collective creation that, we all agree, would be great.

From landtaker to landmaker; From land management to guardianship; From $growth$ first to Nature first: a mindshift is happening.

One example of outstanding landscape, nature and biodiversity right on the urban boundary. Are we going to Love it? Or to bulldoze it?

To go deeper… here are 4 documents with more details.

Regenerative-land-zoning-proposal-10-pages-june-2022

Regenerative-wanaka-5-pages

Regenerative-land-zoning-proposal-outline feb 2023

Questions/objections-and-responses

Please contact us for any further information, if you are interested in participating, contributing, or if you know of similar public/private regenerative schemes in New Zealand and the world.