by frog
The chainsaws are warming up for the first of October, as National’s rushed RMA deforms come into effect even earlier than originally proposed.
What irks me no end is Labour’s Phil Twyford grandstanding on the axing of tree protection, when he and his Labour Party voted in favour of gutting the RMA last night.
For shame Labour. Empty promises about reversing this decision if you win the next election are in vain.
It will, as usual, require the Greens and other small parties to keep the old grey parties honest – under MMP.
This dishonest double-speak and I hope people remember it.
Labour is just as culpable as National when it comes to the RMA deforms.
Published in Environment & Resource Management by frog on Thu, September 10th, 2009
Tags: labour party, Phil Twyford, rma, tree protection
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Don’t worry about saving the trees, normal decent folk will do that, worry about the gravy train that’s about to stop for all the hangers on that call themselves the Green Party. Without MMP there will be no Green party. Can’t wait for the referendum!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Don’t count your chickens too early dageni. There were Greens before MMP, during MMP, and will be whenever MMP gets replaced, which I doubt will be in this century.
As for hangers on – Much as I hate to admit it, no minor party can be labelled a hanger on. All have contributed to the House in a meaningful way – even if I don’t happen to like the contribution they made.
But then, you may want to get all the women, Maori, Muslims, Pacific Islanders and other minorities/imports out of the House as well as the Greens. Is that your true agenda?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
dageni’s right! Normal, decent folk will save the trees- that’s us! Join us dageni! Save the trees and retain MMP! (You know you want to!)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly – what a sense of humour you have. Me a closet ‘greenie’ who would have thought!! As regards hangers on, almost without exception, politicians in a modern democracy are hangers on and an mmp system only excacerbates the problem by multiplying the number of hangers on – i.e. no decisive governing = numerous reviews, commissions, thinkfests, consultations etc etc, which all in reality = gravy train????
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Almost without exception”
Who then, dageni, is (are) the ‘decisive governer(s)’ in our political system?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
MMP and decisive government are not compatible. Some politicians (few and very far between) are still idealists and not ‘hangers on’, normally first termers. Most reps in parliament are second termers who must by now know that +90% of their time is spent unproductively. If they don’t know this then they are too dim to provide a meaningful contribution anyway, but either way they are by default hangers on.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Frog, I am not sure I understand why you say I was grandstanding. Labour has opposed the ban on tree protection rules throughout this process. We have made our position clear publicly. We put up amendments to delete and improve the tree clauses, and we voted for all yours. However we voted for the passage of the bill because unlike the Greens we felt that the committee process had significantly improved the bill and that it struck a reasonable balance between preserving the essential RMA and some needed stream lining. The bill is a lot bigger than just the tree clauses. The way the debate was structured last night there was no opportunity to vote against the various clauses we were opposing. It was voted on its entirety.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just so we know you’re not just making stuff up dageni.. name some names (you must be proud of them, surely!)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
dr smith has said that he makes no apology for destroying public participation and reducing costs for developers. What a disgrace – he is like Dr Zacery Smith off ‘lost in space’ and i am happy to be, like you, the robot saying danger, DANGER, DANGER!!!
and to clarify – if you trim a tree and kill it – you haven’t trimmed it – you’ve killed it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly, maybe degeni is looking up to the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Tito?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Two arms marty!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
He’s not said Glenn, so we’ll have to postulate. He does seem to favour the dictatorial types, reading between the lines.
Degeni?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
They certainly were decisive, and got things done, it has to be said…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“it struck a reasonable balance” sounds incredibly like Nick Smith! Yes, the SC did make significant improvements to the Bill, but it was a bad bill before and after the SC process.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Agreed.
Going from absolutely appalling to extremely bad doesn’t make it any good.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Death by a thousand cuts – how effective that ploy is.
In my town, a venerable old ‘cabbage tree’ tii kouka was felled by the council. At the council meeting a week later, I was told that there had been no intention to kill the tree, that the contractor had promised to re-plant it, but found, on the day, that this was impractical. Re-plant a 100 year-old cabbage tre,e, I hear you incredulously ask?
Nothing to see here.
death by 1000 cuts.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Wow,
Politicians up in arms because people will be returned the individual responsibility to look after their own property.
Where will it end?
Will the people burn their tree trimmings when there is a fire ban on (sorry, couldn’t help that one, jeanette may wish to comment)?
Here are some positives.
No more tree police for the councils the have to fund out of my rates, a rate reduction in order.
If you look around the Botany development overseen by the Manukau City Council you will see why no one plants big trees. The sections are only just big enough for a double story dwelling. No room for a tree of any size. Bushes maybe, but not a tree in sight.
Now lets have bigger sections so we can plant bigger trees.
But that wont be allowed because of urban spread. Cant have urban spread as it eats up green spaces.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit, have you considered the bureacracy necessary to schedule every individual tree of significance under the law that was passed last night.
What a property owner may save in a one-off cost to get consent to remove or trim trees will be passed on to all ratepayers, because Councils will now have to consider every individual tree or group of trees.
The Green Party proposal, which was to delegate the decision-making in respect of every protected tree to an arborist on-site – thereby shortcutting the resource consent process, was a sensible one.
But the Nats, for some reason, wouldn’t buy into it.
This is not just a matter of property rights. Trees are living things. They contribute to and are an intrinsic part of our ecosystems, and as living things they have a value of their own. Without trees, almost all life forms on this planet would be extinct.
Trees are not just “property” in the sense that buildings or cars or gold or company shares are, and with regard to trees, there are imo some justifiable restrictions on property rights.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
toad,
I have, and it is a bureacracy we cant afford and dont need. Heck they work of aerial photos.
Before we moved from the large Papatoetoe family house to something a bit smaller we had a magnificant Kowhai tree. We looked after it because we liked.
When we sold the property was sold to “new” New Zealanders. Within a week the tree was gone. So much for the “protection” of the tree.
The “bureacracy” did not notify us that the tree was protected and they certainly did not tell the new owners.
Not saying cut down all trees, just let the property owner take responsibility. Dont trust us to be responsible?
Tthe power companies come along and trim trees away from power lines and I bet they dont get resource consent. In fact they offered to remove the Kowhai as it was interfering with the lines to the house plus the street ones as well. No consent required.
To “bureacracy” is so busy studying aerial photographs that they sent a very terse letter to us say that the swimming pool on the new property did not have a permit, nor had been inspected for pool fencing and as such we would be prosecuted.
Waited till the papers were served when I let the “bureacrats” know that the blue blob on the aerial photograph was actually a boat cover. Never seen such a backtrack!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit asks:
Dont trust us to be responsible?
I do arborist work Gerrit, pruning, felling and thinning.
I have my ‘eye’ tuned to both good and bad tree work.
As I travel around, I take note of how trees are managed by property owners, so my answer to your question is
NO!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is a wonder you have time todo any work greenfly,
The volume of comments you make does not leave much room for “work”.
I will be out with my chainsaw this weekend and take responsibility for my trees. Having “bureacrats” responsibile for trees is stupid when they cant even keep the footpaths in good repair.
If you think we cant be responsible for our trees, can we be responsible enough for our lawns?
After all we might dig them up and concrete the whole yard!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit – don’t fret about my ability to work – I’m a multi-tasker and have several ‘income streams’, all of them earned by the sewat of my brow. I’m not a 5-day-weeker and have full days, punctuated (for pleasure) with quick visits to the Frogblog.
I imagine you might be able to manage your trees well, though your apparent fondness for the chainsaw shows me that you’ve not thought that concept through very well, but still hold that most people are very poor at it.
As to your lawn, I hope you do dig it up! Lawns are counterproductive, in my view, to sustainable land use. Concrete rates even lower, so I’d encourage you to grow food where your lawn now squats. A concrete yard, however, is not a complete waste of space and can ‘support’ raised beds, barrels and pots, producing all manner of food. Do as you wish, it’s you land but be prepared, should you choose to describe what you have done, to have someone like me, offer suggestions as to a better way.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
or sweat, you choose.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
But greenfly’s are short and pithy, Gerrit. So not much imposition on worktime. You fit that sort of stuff in within 30-60 seconds.
Mine tend to be short (and admittedly have minimal, if any research) in my usual working hours. Early morning and late afternoon they may have more detail and research. Much past this time of evening, however, they tend to ahve speellign mistakse.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“This is not just a matter of property rights. Trees are living things. They contribute to and are an intrinsic part of our ecosystems, and as living things they have a value of their own. Without trees, almost all life forms on this planet would be extinct.”
Same with flies, ants, grass and microorganisms. So in other words any of the above on my property is not for me to control, but for you?
Should people get permission to kill weeds, insects too? If not, why not, or is it just that lots of people “value” trees but not enough to actually pay for them to be looked after?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
libertyscott – you are very keen on ideals.
you had the single remaining example of a certain tree growing on your property. Do you believe you have a responsibility to the community, to preserve it?
Let’s say
If you believe, as you indicate in your 10:06 post, that the decision is your and yours alone, I sense a problem and a threat for anything that cannot defend itself against your whims. Is it out with the chainsaw and down with the rare tree, because it’s yours?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Aww Dad! Ease off on the flattery, we love you heaps already!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly: Presumably, if it WAS the remaining example, I would have been competing with you and many others to buy that property, given how much you and “the community” value it. As such, i couldn’t afford to buy the property in the first place if I didn’t value the tree. Perhaps if I could, I might prefer to use that tree to produce new ones, given how highly valued it is – I might even subdivide the property to focus on this incredibly valuable tree and selling rare offcuts.
I’m not a whim worshipper, it would be quite irrational to cut down a rare tree on a whim.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly,
Cant grow food where the lawn sits now and where concrete will shortly flow.
The boat needs a place to rest, between bouts of Manukau insertion.
One thing about South Auckland, we have so many good vegetable retail and market outlets we dont have to grow anything ourselves.
Best place is out at Kingseat but plenty others along the way.
I guess the next step for the “bureacrats” will be to not only make sure I keep my trees healthy, but that I grow enough vegetables.
Nah, I rather go fishing and trade my fish for the vegetables my neighbour grows.
See, not totally lost.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s easy dad. You can even be the village idiot, if you want to! I’d be happy to hand over the reins to a natural like you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
liberty – to clarify, the tree is only known to be rare by me. The call is yours. You say you are not a ‘whim worshipper’, but many are. If there were trees of similar rarity on the properties of ‘whimmers’, what do you imagine the fate of those might be? Do you feel there is a responsibility for the community to look to the security of trees that might be of enormous value to all?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
No rules on the taking of fish in the Manukau then? Or restrictions on taking anything at all from the harbour?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Dad! You make me sound like the Incredible Hulk! I’m kinda flattered!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
don’t you be handing my Titles away to a Ham, Fly
Scientists disagree on whether he’s natural or not
Few too many additives for me
Down the drain with Crafar’s eh….?
Daddy – you are such a picture of divine benevolence
Can you get offa thy Cross? – we need the wood…
Woof woofer
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yes there are, especially scallops at Clarks Beach. I get your point.
Best fishing is out through the heads and over the bar. Fantastic snapper.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Snapper is superb. Blue cod is better.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hey, Gerrit, can you get scallops at Clarks Beach these days. I grew up in that area, and as a kid regularly used to get scallops from Clark’s Beach and Glenbrook Beach.
Then they built the steel mill at Glenbrook and the scallops all disappeared.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Can you please enlighten me as to why Auckland has had to have this draconian law when no other city in the country has felt the need for it ?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
toad,
A myth that we perpetuate to keep out of towners away. Yes they have all gone (knowing smile, taps side of nose and and winks).
The steelmill outfall is actuall the cleanest part of the harbour. No problems at all.
Since the Mangere sewerage ponds have closed the harbour is the best for fishing and recreation that it has ever been.
What people have to remeber is that the Manukau is tidal and will always have floating sediment.
Out biggest problems are actually pacific oysters and mangroves.
Understand that a barge is being built so that removal of the oyster pest can begin to be managed. Mangroves are easy, just dig them up.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit said: The steelmill outfall is actuall the cleanest part of the harbour. No problems at all.
Since the Mangere sewerage ponds have closed the harbour is the best for fishing and recreation that it has ever been.
Thanks, Gerrit – that certainly was not the case in the mid-70s. So we have made some progress on cleaning up the Manukau over that time. Let’s hope the Nats’ RMA “reforms” don’t let things slip back.
Might just head down to Clarks Beach next time I’m in the vicinity at low tide then. What’s the daily limit for scallops these days?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Mangroves eh! What earthly use could they be?
Without an effective RMA to hinder development, mangroves can join the dodo and the huia as another unnecessary impediment to our expansion, terminated.
Good to hear that the flow of sewerage into the harbour no longer occurs. The steelmill outfall must be a miraculous piece of engineering – cleaner than anywhere else! How do they manage that?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly says:
September 11, 2009 at 9:55 am
> The steelmill outfall must be a miraculous piece of engineering – cleaner than anywhere else! How do they manage that?
If the steel mill is using water for cooling, then maybe they’re filtering the pollutants out of it when they take it in, to avoid impurities encrusting in the cooling pipes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
toad,
dont know wha tthe limit is. Mud flats have changed since you were last there probably. The tide flows around the backm of the scallops banks and it is easy to get cut off. be careful.
ARC do regular water checks around the steel mill (from a helicopter) plus the mill has numerous air monitoring stations.
Yes they are pretty clean and green. They generate their own electricity.
Most water is from the Waikato and is used to deliver ironsand by slurry pipeline.
Large settling ponds are visible (have a look at google earth).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Mangroves threatened?
They are an increasingly damaging pest.
They are destroying the breeding grounds for mullet all over the Kaipara Harbour and elsewhere.
They need to be managed because they have been expanding rapidly since the little ice age, and have recently got a big boost from aerial topdressing drift.
They have been kept under control near pasture edges by the cattle which love them but now that we are properly keeping cows out of the estuary areas we need to step in and do what the cattle have been doing. By coincidence that cows arrived at about the time the water started to warm after the LIA so we did not realise the connection. They also release massive amounts of methane if that worries you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Politicians up in arms because people will be returned the individual responsibility to look after their own property.”
Or not as the case may be.
Property rights are not sacrosanct – we live in communities, and like it or not, what we do with our property impacts on others. If I were to chop down all the trees on my property and concrete the place over, my neighbours quality of life, not to mention property values, will fall.
The notion of collectivity is acknowledged as reality by the “free market”. Where I live, every real estate agent highlights “an opportunity to join this thriving community” as part of their advertising – in other words, the price is higher because you’ve got decent neighbours. Not that we ever get a cut.
Cheers
Sam Buchanan
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Going from absolutely appalling to extremely bad doesn’t make it any good.”
True, but as soon as Labour’s in opposition they begin the chorus of “you’ve got to vote for us because National are worse”. It starts to stick in the craw after a few trips around the merry-go-round.
“it struck a reasonable balance between preserving the essential RMA and some needed stream lining.”
That would be lining the streams with concrete to divert them from new developments?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“we need to step in and do what the cattle have been doing”
Funny, if you look at it all squinty Owen. Managing mangroves seems sensible. How is it done? Herbicides? Sounds less appealing already. Does a plant that needs to be ‘managed’ automatically become a pest? Are cows a pest (they certainly need to be managed). Is our economy reliant on the milk of pests?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Owen McShane said: …now that we are properly keeping cows out of the estuary areas…
Um, are we?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
There is no doubt that there will be a net loss of trees in Auckland over this, in saying that I can also see some short comings of the current law that actually discourage planting larger tree species.
As long as there are chainsaws and red necks wielding them, no tree is safe in the urban environment. Chuck in a red neck district council (where I am from) and the urban environment doesn’t stand a chance.
My council doesn’t even have a tree policy despite my best efforts to help them develop one (for free!!).
Get this greenies, they have dismissed me as a radical because I like trees!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Ha, just shows you what we’re up against.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Should ‘larger tree species’ be planted in urban spaces? If their presence results in these conflicts, why not restrict them to spaces where they can grow without causing distress?
What would the Ents say?
Shunda – ya tree hugger, get back to ya wacky backy and ya bean sprout sandwiches!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I mean how can anyone like trees and not be a sandal wearing hippie?
I was collecting some Pohutukawa seed one day and some twerp yells out at the top of his lungs “you’re not a greenie err yer? I have many such stories.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Should ‘larger tree species’ be planted in urban spaces? If their presence results in these conflicts, why not restrict them to spaces where they can grow without causing distress?”
Yes, poor species selection is a big problem but the situation in Auckland was anything over 3m could not be touched. This would include species like Kowhai, Pittosporums etc which are hardly large trees.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Same Shunda. What was your reply?
I had a visit from the constabulary following a road-side poroporo-seed collecting expedition, where I was grilled for what could have been, in his eyes, my ‘casing of the joint’ ( a farm) How on earth do you think that came about.
When challenged as to whether I’m a greenie, I say, “Too f*cken right I am!”
Seems the gentlemanly thing to do.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I do most of my trimming with my cat 320 Digger
I don’t find the need to trim many trees after I have finished with that
I find it amazing that a council thought it had the right to to tell people what trees they can trim on property they own
It is typical WE know best council busybody’s
I am so glad national are in power and are peeling back the worst excess of labour and the greens Nanny state policies
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Managing mangroves is quite easy.
They invaded the breeding ground and sandy clear bay at the bottom of my property after the farmer across the stream fenced out the cattle.
So I began by just pulling up any new young plants that appeared – by hand.
Then I used a brush cutter to clear the ones too tough to pull out.
Unlike pruning which stimulates growth, cutting a mangrove below the tide mark kills it because the salt water penetrates via the cut and they cannot cope with that.
Now there is a clear bay again and when you sit on the edge you can watch the young mullet jumping – and the oysters are growing back now that the mud has gone.
I didn’t touch the old large ones. They have been there for yonks and do not cause any problem. They have only been here several thousand years and if they arrived last month they would be declared a noxious weed.
They have certainly not been here long enough for any of our native fish or birds to be co-dependent on them. They massively invade fish and shellfish grounds. I don’t know why they are so beloved by so many.
I suspect it is because when they invade these sand small beach areas they prevent people enjoying themselves and the New Puritans cannot bear that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Panda spouts:
“I do most of my trimming with my cat 320 Digger …and most of my thinking * with my head up my *rse!
* digger-driver’s lingo
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Owen
Do you have a ‘niwashi shark’ in your tool kit? They are the very best thing for hands-on management of tough plants. They are a Japanese-made toothed knife on a wooden handle and the very best thing for cutting flax and toetoe etc.
Are you suggesting that anything that arrived here withing the past ‘several thousand years’ and is vigorous is a noxious weed?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yar he gottiss own Blog Fly – can you loan it wings….?
Please
I do most of my trimming with an 8 megaton hydrogen bomb
and to blazes with the neighbours eh?…..eh?
Very shellfish grounds indeed!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Panda you are a West Coaster no?
Do you think it would be ok for the character of the West Coast to be destroyed by successive land owners?
By Character I mean the large Kahikatea and other podocarps that stand in farm paddocks, trees that would take some where between 300 and 500 years to replace.
Is it morally right to remove landscape features that would take many generations to replace? features that stamp a distinctive New Zealand feel to the landscape?
While I appreciate your concerns about private property ownership, surely anything that is such a unique feature of New Zealand and part of our heritage (not to mention the time it would take to replace) should have some value for the wider community.
Please Panda spare the Kahikatea, once lost they will never be replaced.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yes I havea niwashi or two and they are good.
But hacking away at mangroves while in the mud and water is flying around is pretty unpleasant and a brush cutter blade on a weed eater is more efficient.
Well no, although many in the ARC seem to think any thing which is not a native is noxious.
The main point is that there has not been sufficient evolutionary time for mangroves to develop close symbiotic relationships within any fish or birds in spite of the frequent claims they have. IT is amazing to see how many beaches on the kaipara harbour have disappeared since the fifties. And we dont have many to start with.
A net loss of trees in Auckland. Well I left for Northland to escape blanket tree rules and have planted over 80,000 trees and plants here and other tree refugess along this road have planted at least 400,000 trees and plants in total.
So I wonder who has made up for that “loss” to Auckland.
Also back in 1972 I bought a slum house in Freemans Bay and restored it to glory. It is now a listed historical building – which is a bit of a joke. But I would not repeat the exercise because the blanket listings of heritage neighbourhoods mean you have no confidence of what you can do or not do and it costs too much time and money. Life is to short to waste time dealing with people who know less than you do about such things. It is a pity. I was one of the team that rescued Freeman’s Bay from the slum clearance programme. The current over regulation means that investment will probably decline and it will go into slow decay. Buildings need care and upgrading. Its funny – ordinary people rescue neighbourhoods and make them splendid and then the regulators convince themselves that the neighbourhood has to be protected from the same people.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Panda= the tree murder, off with his head
and most of my thinking * with my head up my *rse!
* digger-driver’s lingo
nice Mark thanks for that
fyi I have 80h of native also 2 stands of lowland Kahikatea that I would never touch I love them
but I have no problems chopping down trees that block my sunlight or spoil my view
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“fyi I have 80h of native also 2 stands of lowland Kahikatea that I would never touch I love them”
Do you agree with what I am saying though Panda? Those huge old Kahikatea are a significant feature of the rural landscape and in real terms are very difficult to replace once felled.
I would imagine that most farmers would retain them, but I have witnessed some shocking attitudes by some farming folk that see land as nothing but an economic unit there to serve them. Surely there is a moral responsibility to see the unique rural landscape preserved?. I am not advocating violating private property rights, but I do see a difference between a 35m 400 year old Kahikatea and a 3m 5 year old Pittosporum.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
panda – you’ve attributed my gentle jibe to Mark (not that he’d squeal)
Sounds as though your feelings are hurt. Can’t think why. You digger drivers are a sensitive lot, despite your penchant for trimming with a cat 320. Perhaps I’ve misread your intentions. Were you hoping we’d admire your subtlety?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda – you’re in a bind. You see that the brutish will fell at will, yet you fear to lay down the law. What to do, what to do?
Maybe an education programme? They’ll doubtless respond well to that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oh yes sorry fly
no not sensitive at all
just happen to think personal abuse should be kept under control
as to whether I see a difference between a 35m 400 year old Kahikatea and a 3m 5 year old Pittosporum? I surly do and yes some terrible acts of Wotan vandalism have been carried out on farms but that is not to say you have the right to tell me what I can and can not do with my own property
I buy the land and the trees and it is my choice as to what I do with them I do not accept you have the right to be my conscience or do my thinking for me
I have other considerations eg family, economic, social ,etc to form those choices, I don’t need the green religion of ghia to help me decide
I tree is just a tree it is not sacred it dose not have a soul it will not cry out if I cut it down
A 400 yo Kahikatea is a beautiful thing and I would do every thing I could to preserve it but not at any cost to my family or business
I am sorry but that is just the way it is
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
panda – Sam’s comments @ 11:56 answer your concerns best.
You say:
I buy the land and the trees and it is my choice as to what I do with them I do not accept you have the right to be my conscience or do my thinking for me.
You would accept though, that I have the right to express my opinion about what you do on your land? After all, this is a blog for greenies to express their opinions. Is your land somehow ‘off limits’ for discussion? Why is that? I hardly think that commenting here rates as doing your thinking for you, or being your conscience, whatever that might mean. Think for yourself man.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Re labour and cutting down trees. I ask you why was the MOE when building Mission Heights School in 2006 allowed to clear mature Totara, Kahikatea and rejenerating bush when the developer was required to included the greenery within its development.
Labour was at best passive re hugging trees.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly: You say the tree is rare, but only you know it, yet you expect others to act to save it. The “community” does not value something it doesn’t know exists, it’s like saying “if only everyone read my book they’d know how great it is”. It is not encumbent on me to protect something if you alone hold knowledge about it. It’s an absurd straw man, as you’d rationally tell me, tell whoever was interested and want to encourage me to protect it, or sell it or otherwise. In other words, it’s called putting away the gun and using persuasion. I may disagree, I may destroy the tree, but it isn’t a good enough reason to use violence to stop me. Violence is never the answer. However, as I said, odds are most people would either agree to look after the tree, sell it or find a way to provide legal protection to it within certain limits.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)