14 Comments Posted

  1. Not for an airport in any case.

    The missing point of course is the purpose that is served.

    Is this airport truly desired by the people of hte region, of the country, even counting the notable absence of redeeming features (aside from speed) for that particular mode of transport?


  2. I’ve not complained Peter, but you are right when you describe the situation with Geoff’s trees. As you have said before, there are times when there is a need for the State to act and there will always be those closest to that action who will feel the pinch more keenly.
    Sue Bradford however, would be unlikely to support the cutting down of geoff’s trees, imho.

  3. Don’t see what you’re complaining about, Greenfly. The collective power of the state is asserting its will against the individual.

    Bradford is well familiar with this concept….

  4. Oh, the irony. The collective wants to impose their will, and the individual gets crushed underfoot.

    Wouldn’t happen under libertarianism….

  5. Geoff, I wonder whether the NZ Native Forests Restoration Trust might be able to support or help you in some way: http://www.nznfrt.org.nz/, along with the good suggestions that Mark has made above.

    If the trees really must go, you could contact a forestry organisation to tell you what the trees are worth standing now. I wonder whether carbon credits might be involved as well.

  6. geoff; Good Luck with the fight – and let me guess – if you owed the Council 10c there’d be hell to pay. Go to your local DOC office and see if you can get ’em to support you.
    Then, the Ombudsman isn’t doing much just now.
    Then, there’s the QE2 Trust, National Geographic – all the local Media hmmm – time for a fiendish plot methinks….

  7. Geoff, that sounds horrible for you. Another little piece of native forest bites the dust.

    Greenpeace in the UK have mobilised to stop the construction of another runway at Heathrow, to help halt the upward spiral in CO2 emissions:
    http://www.airplot.org.uk/ .

    I wonder what effect the proposed new Rotorua international airport will have on CO2 emissions. Has anyone done numbers on that?

  8. Thanks Greenfly, but I am not appalled and I am not in need of sympathy, much as it is appreciated. We have to take a stand, to save the planet, our country, and, at the end of the day, ourselves. That is a great challenge and a good one.

  9. Geoff – you find yourself in an appalling situation and you have my sympathies.
    Somehow, your story seems to be that of the whole country – the things you value your trees for, count for nothing when it comes to decisions made by bodies such as the company and council you name.

  10. A little closer to home than the rainforests, and a cause which is unlikely to gain the support of royalty, but at http://www.tengaetrees.com you can read the story of how the Rotorua District Council is in the process of building a new international airport and is claiming the right to destroy the trees on my half acre of land at Te Ngae without compensation or restitution, so as to allow larger commercial airliners to fly at low altitudes over the eastern suburbs.

    (As a result of the Council and Rotorua Airport Company moves I will be devoting my full energies to the issue and “the republican” website will go into recess)

  11. A group of Chinese and Japanese scientists claimed that the dustball, which weighed 800,000 tons, was kicked up during a storm in 2007 in the Taklamakan desert…

    the dust circled the earth, then fell into the ocean..

    They also suggested that micro-nutrients from the dust could have a beneficial effect on the oceans, helping to feed plankton.

    Well hoo-rah! I wonder how much of the planet’s soil has ended up feeding the plankton?


  12. Thanks frog. The link takes one to a protest letter as well – which I have sent at the convenient click of a button.

    One can sign up as a supporter of the Prince’s Rainforests Project as well (for free), link is http://www.rainforestsos.org/ .

Comments are closed.