Trees Gone or going. All of them! That’s what the current laws allow.
Wānaka is going through a continued growth. We all witness current bulldozer suburbia practice, removing all trees, destroying soils and building nearly boundary to boundary with token native plantings. We all experience traffic, pollution and landscape degradation. It is unsustainable, decried by locals, it ruins the natural beauty and feeling of our little town. Yet it is fostered by the Council and current laws and regulations.
Over 20 years, I have attended many community meetings or Council workshops on Wānaka future, and many korero, as part of wonderful Festivals of Colour and Aspiring Conversations, Shaping Our Future, WAO Summits, Regenerative tourism huis, Royal Society, U3A, Paradiso movies etc… I am taking notes, so I have several notebooks of minutes. They show that in every meeting I went to, the attendants clearly declared the need to stop the growth, for over-capacity reasons and lifestyle choices.
But the Council rules still allow bulldozers advance and tree windbreaks to go down. Where do the birds go? The QLDC Strategic Framework “Dawn Chorus” outcome depends on it.
In 2011, Wānaka town centre design guidelines were produced by the Council to add quality to Wānaka character, with appropriate space for the public and trees. Yet, the 66-pages report being advisory only, maximization of sqm2 is practiced by developers making the whole exercise pointless.
In 2013, Shaping our Future conducted workshops in all the villages of the district. I attended the workshops in Wānaka and remember the discussions: we were most concerned about growth and our vision described a sustainable urban community, with kids biking, people growing food together, renewable energy produced here and plenty of green space. I am currently locating these foundational results.
In 2019, the Council extensively consulted for the Wānaka Town Centre Master Plan. 55 pages later in 4 pdf documents, there are 3 more carparks, several roundabouts, hardly more nature nor bike lanes, but cars are removed from the lakefront (overloading Brownston Street).
Master Plan 2019 page 95 – Plan for 2030-50
In 2023, the locals group Heart of Wānaka worked on the traditional town centre from Wānaka Station Park to Mount Aspiring College. The proposed active transport and retained open spaces seem to happen. The increased biodiversity corridors, slow streets and community gardens are yet to manifest.
What did happen is urban intensification, after many hearings and dozens of pdf documents, buildings are now allowed to block views, all bits of grass built up: new zoning has been created to cater for developers wishes, including “greater heights and density will be enabled in locations near central and on generally greenfield land in Wānaka South, increasing current permitted heights from 8m to 11m and removing density requirements of one residential unit per 250m2 net site area.”
This urban strategy is planning for intense growth, despite the community reiterated wishes and way beyond Wānaka town centre. Let’s talk about the wider Wānaka Area.
Please share a thought for the elders who planted the trees creating these green spaces. GRATITUDE. Respect.
Beyond the Wānaka town centre
In March 2002 started a well-remembered community consultation, the Wānaka 2020. With 150 participants in the launch meeting, followed by well attended 3-days workshops, the 2020 Wānaka report recommends that “The long-term town boundary should remain inside the Clutha and Cardrona Rivers and to avoid sprawl. The 40-pages report highlights the need for better water, transport and green infrastructures.
Extract:
It also recommends “A new sustainable urban extension zone with new rules“. The Green Belt, never really connected and is now rapidly nibbled.
Location and focus of Wanaka 2020 process. Base map source: NZMS 26:F40, Crown Copyright.
In November 2019 in the Whaiora Grow Well workshop roadshow for the QLDC Spatial Plan, community members were invited to have a vision for Wānaka growth then ask to vote for their preferred option for the future: all tables voted to stop Wānaka growth to where it was then and growing satellite towns (Hawea Luggate, Cardrona) with well-connected public transports. ONE table raised their hand to grow Wānaka and they were booed! If you were there, do you remember that?
Following these clear consultations, the report mentioned for the first time, a “Wānaka South area supporting 5000 new dwellings”! That is completely the opposite of the community preference and creates unrestrained growth of Wānaka suburbia…
59 people attended in Wānaka. 8 groups were asked to evaluate 3 scenarios. Tick is “better”, O is “same”, X is “worse”. The “Dispersed/Extension category” received X from ALL groups expect one table giving them 4 “better”, 4 “worse”, 1 “same”.
In August 2023, at a Blue-Green Network workshop, all attending stakeholders expressed their concern about the growth paradigm declared by the Council. The Council anticipates and fosters growth of population, business and tourism. “All consultations reveal the community wants to STOP growth. Why does the QLDC continues to promote growth?” asks a participant. The growth is already beyond people’s desired lifestyle and the carrying capacity of the land is over the maximal load, particularly water pollutions.
All participants wished for more biodiversity and food space in the plan presented and proposed to cap growth at a sustainable post-growth level. Several times was raised the missing tool to enable the change from unsustainable business-as-usual growth.
I suggested a regenerative land zoning to create commons on private land on a voluntary basis. I followed up without answer so far. It’s such a good idea, it’s generous. It’s community building, resilient, low carbon… it’s nearly free.
the urban area is planned to be 10 km from East to West and 10 km from North to South.
Going South, there are no public park beyond opposite the Medical Centre
The area in blue is currently “Rural“, with lifestyle blocks of minimum 2 hectares, some more than 20. This zoning allows development at a density of up to one residence every 4000m².
Many blocks have substantial mature trees planted by their owners over generations.
The area is full of birds. Dawn chorus already here. And birds need vast areas of nature to thrive.
This green large tranquil area is jeopardized by the plan to change zone and allow subdivision. It concerns landowners. They bought a piece of land in a natural area many years ago, because they wanted a tranquil natural life and many planted trees. The plan, putting growth first, is disrespectful and damages the environment irreversibly. Specially if the trees are the first to go.
All the zones in orange, dark blue and within the “area of influence” are concerned by this QLDC Structure Plan.
A new QLDC initiative Smart Growth Wānaka is promising, with a planned citizen assembly. I am a strong advocate of citizen assemblies as I believe it is able to lift society beyond the current misfunctioning democracy and I should rejoice at this citizen assembly idea. However, since the community has time and time again expressed the same idea (Stop growth), it is not a case for a citizen assembly. It delays the action further.
Action is to pause growth immediately, at least until the results of the citizen assembly. It IS possible to pause growth as in Greytown in Wairarapa.
Now is the chance to create a landmark Wānaka, before all the trees are gone, before it’s all built up.
What does regenerative urban growth looks like?
To be regenerative, first be sustainable. Sustainable means not extracting from the Earth, not polluting the Earth, not damaging the Earth, and sharing within communities. Regenerating is improving above that baseline.
Research has also shown that the ideal sustainable population of a urban area is “whether a city’s population matches what its systems can handle” Associate Professor Kamruzzaman said. “That’s the key to sustainability.”
Some research shows that about 1000 inhabitants settlements is the best size for resilience and ecological responsibility. A NZ study says that people’s preference is to walk less than 15mn which is 5mn drive.
The End of Suburbia documentary describes the fossil fuel overuse and wellbeing decrease in suburbs which is the current trajectory. Green sustainable urban development is well documented, including for small towns.
In Wānaka
Wānaka development is removing all green areas and existing trees.
Only one community garden, and a few satellite food growers but most of the food is disaster dependent
Wānaka is already beyond capacity eg. waste water leaking the river.
It already takes 15mn at a quiet time to drive from boundary to boundary, not to mention the daily queues.
Solutions exist to create a beautiful healthy sustainable low-carbon equitable district.
Traditional villages 300-1000 inhabitants, green space with food production and trees
In modern denser urban sustainable environment, there is also a lot of nature and community wellbeing
Bulldozer land clearing in Wānaka-not one tree left
– immediately enforce 10% of land kept for nature. It is already on the guidelines for subdivisions. let’s make it a prerequisite for all new consents. Educate, encourage all landowners, small or large to create a 10% nature buffer.
– Plan and support (with financial and practical help) landowners to protect/restore 30% of their land by 2030. eg. Jobs for nature, support for social enterprises who provide fencing, local food growing and natural pest management…
Up until recently, the Council had some reserves between developments and some area kept as Parks with connecting pathways eg. Lismore Park. But beyond the existing centre, there are only private properties with no provision for Reserves. The absence of land available for shared green space was raised at the Blue-Green corridors meeting (August 2023). Potential solutions are to enforce reserves on all new projects and foster voluntary reserves by a Regenerative Land Zoning (see 3 below)
2- Protect all existing trees and groups of trees.
Proposal: Treat all trees as protected and strengthen existing rules about trees on public land to control how they can be removed and I am asking for an immediate moratorium on feeling trees until discussed.
I presented this tree protection policy concept and a demand for a moratorium in a QLDC public forum in February 2026. I had no feedback; since then, at least 5 windbreaks of mature poplars have been felled in the outstkirts of Wānaka. My heart breaks!
If we are serious about climate change and enhancing biodiversity then we will extend trees protection to the whole district. All trees are important and there are so few left! Trees are living beings, historical, sacred.
Native/Non-native trees… In Wānaka, most mature trees are non-native therefore viewed as “worthless” and are chopped by inconsideration or convenience. The problem is, if we remove them, we have a 20-50 years of bare land until the baby natives grow. Poplars, willows and douglas firs, cherry, dogwoods, cedars are not native but if we continue removing them all, our town will be bare. With the native-only logic, sheep, cows, and pakehas… all culled! I love natives and plant lots of them. But existing trees should never be removed to plant natives, it goes against common sense and climate science.
So we need to discuss how to protect trees effectively and learn how to love them and manage them. I realise there will be exemptions but starting by a blanket protection is the most effective easiest solutions. A moratorium right now will save many trees.
I believe Protecting trees is the cornerstone of sustainable urban development as trees need space. The space allowed for trees can be left for nature, used for bike lanes, walkways, parking, park, food growing, all things wanted by the community.
I understand it is the responsibility of the developers or the landowners to choose to protect or kill trees. So I am creating a campaign for cherishing Wanaka Trees, ALL of them. Jump on if you love trees too. I am continuing this campaign and appreciate all contributions/ideas.
3 – Create public-private partnership where the Council and the public benefits from land without the need to own it. It doesn’t matter who owns the land, 30% need to be protected.
Since 2022, I work on a new voluntary land zoning that protects a land from subdivision for perpetuity when it contributes to the community, future generations and the planet. Maybe 30% minimum of the land is kept for nature and regenerated, and maybe also shared for the greater good.
When someone planted trees, it’s not to be cut for houses next generation. It’s for the Trees, for Papatuanuku. For All.
Some landowners are already sharing part of their land as civic assets for wildlife habitat, for food growing (essential in a low carbon society), for access (bike commuting, walk, bike and horse tracks, for parks…). This creates commons that serve both the environment (so that it can continue to provide ecosystem services) and the community (recreational parks, connected bike lanes for commuters, food production areas…)
Developers can subdivide well, with keeping all the trees, regenerating 30% of the land creating shared spaces rather than stripping the land and adding as many rows of houses as possible. 30% for nature means: out of 60 sections, 20 should be reverted to a natural environment.
Loosing fertile greenfields to concrete and buildings is unsustainable, as highlighted by a government report dated April 2024. I am not radical here. Science is clear. In a climate and biodiversity crises, it’s land clearing and tree killing that is radical.
I hope the opportunity is taken by the Council, as this would foster a beautiful green low-carbon resilient and happy community. We need nature and land for food here, not 83km away where the National Park starts. That’s whaiora, with dawn chorus and other principles in the 2050 spatial plan. This new land zoning is the missing tool of the shift, allowing willing landowners to start and pave the way. Please refer to the well-research page on the powerful yet simple proposed piece of regulation here.
Bold Inspiring Vision
I urge the Council to be bold and inspiring, actually creating a beautiful future, starting now, not in 10 years when it’s all built up – when what we do have and love will be destroyed.
At the historic Regenerative Tourism Hui 3 in 2023, the Carbon Zero by 2030 goal was adopted. Solemnity rippled on the crowd after we collectively committed to it, fully understanding the why and meaning of such a bold engagement. Tyler Robinson said “Queenstown Lakes is the ideal place to show the world that decarbonization and regeneration is possible. We have an ecosystem of early adopters here“.
We all know that carbon zero goal means stopping the crave for more. More houses don’t solve the affordability crisis or cities like Auckland or London would be cheap. More money for more consumption exhausts the planet already beyond capacity. Living simply, locally, circular, without chemicals and pollutions, keeping precious remnants from the natural world and regenerating the land, that’s achievable.
But not with the current rules and the touted growth goal. Growth may be the money carrot for many, growth will benefit the developers and the tradies but growth is not the solution, it worsens all the crises. We need a paradigm change, that put people and planet first BEFORE the money and growth; and a culture where we share.
I will speak at the QLDC Council meeting in Wānaka on the 23rd July 2026 to encourage sustainable urban development with urgency and practical solutions. It’s all possible -and better. And invite Councilors to take responsibility for us and future generations. What else?
Appendix Exemples of rules that results in generous green connecting natural spaces (click on image for links)
Substantial sustainable greenways in Baton RougeThe most generous green corridor image I find online is from the gameplay Cities: SkylinesDetroit green space food production
Appendix Example of Regenerative Urban Roads
Roads become green corridors, much wider than the current plan “New street trees shall not be planted where the projected mature canopy spread is within 5 meters of any street light or overhead services.” A 5 meter canopy is reached within 10 years by many trees. Allow for 12 or 15 meter canopy, the average crown size of a medium size oak tree.
Appendix Practical rules for subdivisions and all landowners
Here are better practices, to embed in compulsory rules, as we see that discretionary recommendations do not work.
30% of nature is integrated into subdivisions as parks, surface water management, shared food production, connected pathways, beautiful and great for wellbeing
Each section keeping 30% for nature OR each subdivision keeping 30% for nature OR each group of apartments built on land with 30% for nature around them.
mandate to ensure existing trees on subdivision are protected particularly the trees surrounding the property, protected as public land trees, ban clear felling.
Limit terraforming, soil removal and compaction to maintain soil life and its sponge properties
All rainwater to be slowed down with surface planted drains, reed beds and wetlands, the local Kirimoko Park offers some of these features
compulsory roof rainwater harvest tanks, possibly subsidised like on the Kapiti Coast, also great for resilience.
Protect ridgelines, no dominant house, all ridge houses to be integrated in planting
Keep at least one viewpoint to be preserved for public access,
All new streets and access to have separate connected bike-lanes and separate footpaths
All streets and dead ends to be connected with at least foot access to adjacent streets
Appropriate junctions with existing roads paid for by the developers, not minimal intersections generating traffic congestion for both new residents and neighboring residents, as we have on North Lake or on the Ballantyne/Sir Tim Wallis intersection.
Developers to pay the costs of infrastructures needed to accommodate the new housing residents, not existing ratepayers. (eg. The Longview Hawea waste water is literally a shame)
Ban the use of herbicides and pesticides
What does it look like?
a 8-10 hectares block holds 60 household blocks. All the trees have been kept. The outer hedges trees are complemented with three layers of plantings for a generous hedge, hosting wildlife and tracks. There is access for pedestrians and bikes on all sides. The centre of the subdivision is a park featuring trees, children playgrounds, reed beds for water sanitation, shared gardens or plots for food production. The park can be borded with a couple of apartment blocks with view on the trees. The centre of the subdivision can host shared spaces, shared tools, market place, community building…
Each 1/4 acre section is well surrounded by trees, space for gardens and play, a smaller sustainable house, water harvesting, orchard, food production and nature, at least 30% or more. Imagine the wildlife and privacy here!
Or any combination of these, like here: 1 acre showing 4 households with a shared nature zone and food production to ensure wellbeing for people and nature. Sorry, the drawings are not the best! But I hope you get the idea. Lots of trees. Just make sure you plant deciduous trees on the sunny side of the house for cooling in summer and sun in winter.
Does any of this inspire you? Let us know in the comments below.
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.
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.
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“.
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
We are asking the Council to extend the tree protection policy for public land to all trees on private land too. We suggest replacing “On Council land, we“, with “On all land in QLDC, we” on the current tree policy.
We are asking to strengthen the tree protection policy to include native and non-native trees, shelterbelts, windbreaks, hedgerows, groups of trees and stand alone trees.
We are asking to ban clear felling, burn offs, monoculture and poisoning practices.
We are asking to protect All the trees of the land. This means for example:
Manage trees, only kill when dangerous
Manage a 20km margin around National Parks to remove self seeding trees
Welcome plants growing well naturally
Replant way before cutting, so that tree services are maintained
Practice selected harvesting
Practice coppicing
Interplant with natives as wished
Share the land -to help with the workload of managing trees
Do not poison as it pollutes the planet
What does it mean for a land owner ?
All the trees on their land are protected, even when the land is passed on or sold. It means they can plant trees knowing they will live and provide their services for perpetuity. They can manage trees as they wish as long as the tree is not critically damaged. For example, topping a tree to keep the sun on solar panels.
Trees can be removed:
if they present a risk of falling, a risk to existing building foundation
if a replacement has reached enough maturity to provide shelter, privacy and other ecosystem services of the tree cut,
when one tree out of 4? 5? 10? is removed as part of a group of trees
Trees cannot be removed around subdivisions, for any building or infrastructure construction, for power lines (power lines can go underground and lines are obsolete in a community where solar panels are providing private electricity).
Trees are recorded as part of the existing system of Land Information Memorandum report and thereby protected. Any change is recorded online in the LIM report, for example 5 years after planting trees (to make sure they are established) or if tree removing is possible along the rules 1. 2. 3. above.
Landscapers and arborists are trained to follow the rules and manage trees.
Carbon calculations can be done automatically to reward the landowners for keeping their trees and tree removing incurs a carbon tax.
These are all suggestions, ideas of how it could work and are up for discussions.
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. Well managed, a beautiful avenue. We could extend this to the whole place. 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?
What do you think of maturely rise above the native/non-native invasive viewpoints and embrace all TREES. Click here to have your say, start a conversation to save the trees.
Beyond trees, a whole district regenerative design
Protecting trees or using and disposing of them IS cultural. It IS reflecting a different world view. 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.
Alternatives to current practices of clear felling, burn offs, monoculture and poisoning
Alternatives toclear 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.
I talk for the trees here, With love, with peace. Because I love trees, I want to see them around forever ♡🌳
A tree protection is free. It’s political as it means industries cannot maximize their profits. But the state of the planet calls for protecting trees and nature remnants. I am committed to it myself and it’s fun, it works well, how abundant nature is!👏 So I know it can be done. I invite you to join the conversation here
I hope many embrace a culture of creating of a beautiful low carbon resilient place and society. Thank you.
I believe humans (me and you) nature and trees are one.
I AM TREE! I realize it’s a bit extreme…
But it’s the story of my life and my purpose to protect them.
Growing with trees
Pun intended, as a child, I was often found in the garden observing or dreaming, up in “my” cherry tree.
Always, I found solace sitting against a big tree. I remember running to the park nearby to calm down after exams.
I feel the trees’ sap pulsing I feel the trees strength and grounding infuse and calm me.
A sequoia nook. Powerful!
Seeing oneness
But it’s only at 50 that I experienced ONENESS with nature and trees, in Rakiura, after 3 days walking in the forest.
I had slowed down, influenced by the calm, on the lookout for wildlife and photos, to enjoy it longer, and surely the feet and the back were getting tired!
I stopped to drink the delicious champagne of the sky collected at the last hut. I realized that THIS water had surely been in THOSE trees before.
DID YOU KNOW?
Trees are 50% water and humans 60% approx
The rest is mostly carbon
We are the same! Trees are just much bigger, rooted, many old and wise, living in beautiful living communities.
I was standing there in that forest, amazed, open.
I felt my blood and the sap pulsating together, just at a way different speed I felt the life force in the trees and my self as one, as a big healthy body I felt small but nurtured, in full gratitude and humbleness I felt WE ARE LIFE.
A deep connection moment
Once you’ve seen that,
there is no unseeing.
Valuing Trees
Now, we all know that trees, forests and nature are degraded for resources, agriculture, housing, or for a revamp or for water reservoirs right here in Wanaka. In our society, trees have value as timber, when they are dead; In our society, nature has value per square meter, when it is bare.
Luckily, more and more people realize that trees provide great habitat, air cleaning, water sponge, shade and wellbeing and other “ecosystem services” and we need them. Importantly, trees are fantastic carbon absorption machines. So trees are now central to climate action.
For me, trees are beings. They have intrinsic value. Because they are, because they live. Thank you 🙏🏼
Trees communicate, trees feel, taste, touch, see… Trees adapt, they help each other.
An immense intelligence that we don’t understand. Trees are sentient beings. Their consciousness is beyond ours. But the life in me recognize the life in them.
ONENESS – LOVE – RESPECT
A Canadian study found that Mother trees send more nutrients to their baby offspring compared to other seedlings!
Action for nature and trees
So what do I do with this realization?
All my life, I linked in nature-related jobs and groups
All my life, I planted and gardened where I could, and now, it’s a lot!
For years, I have spoken for the trees. The Lorax you know. I talk at meetings, I write submissions and letters, I sign, I march, and I share on social media to protect nature and trees.
“Don’t cut trees!” – “Put nature first!” – “Plant more diversity” over and over…
But at the Wanaka Climate March earlier this month, I publicly pledged to do more so I launched the #LoveWanakaTrees campaign to create a tree loving culture.
At the Wanaka Climate March earlier this month organized by Mac Team Green, I pledged to create a tree loving culture #lovewanakatrees. With love, comes respect and protection.
With MAC Team Green – Climate March March 2023
CREATING A TREE LOVING CULTURE
#lovewanakatrees is an invitation to everyone to take note and photos of trees around them, in parks and gardens, when driving around Wanaka or from the carpark to the office.
Stop and look.
Admire! The leaves turning day after day into beautiful colours.
Observe! The cones, the bark, catkins and samaras, maybe a nest;
Listen! To the birds, the insects, the wind, maybe the tree
And give a thought to whoever planted them.
Breathe.
Thank the trees, honour them, enjoy them, love them.
Regenerative Livestyle Blog 