Property developer and a 500 year old Kauri tree

[ATM]

Just been reading about the consent given to remove the 500 years old Kauri tree for building a house. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6712...0yearold-kauri. Just wonder what people would do if you were the developer ... (developing property while keeping such precious trees). There is a petition for saving the tree. https://www.toko.org.nz/petitions/sa...ime=1425856318

[speights boy]

Ironically, Auckland council spends money on saving Kauri nearby in Waitakeres.

Kauri dieback disease

Kauri dieback is a deadly disease, killing kauri trees throughout the Auckland region.

Reports of kauri deaths in the Waitakere ranges in 2007 prompted an investigation by the late Dr Ross Beever (Landcare Research) and Dr Nick Waipara.
This work led to the discovery of kauri dieback, a new disease to science. This disease is spread via spores in the soil and can kill kauri trees of all ages.

Little is known about the disease and management of parks has been directed toward minimising the spread of soil in an effort to prevent the spread of the disease.
In 2008, kauri dieback disease was pronounced an unwanted organism by MAF, prompting the formation of a joint agency response and the Kauri Dieback Management team.

Auckland Council is a key partner and works to 'keep kauri standing' within the Auckland region.

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/environmentwaste/pestsdiseases/Pages/kauridiebackhome.aspx#help

[Maccachic]

Interesting the protester is in Hi Vis and a hard hat.

[Leftette]

Dr Beever!??? hahahaha

[Leftette]

Whaleoil feels strongly in favour of the landowner's right to fell the tree, especially given the proper hoops they've jumped through, and I think I have to agree. Apparently the quoted age is bollocks (although I've no evidence either way) plus the property in question has other kauri that are fine and will remain. So it all seems a bit of a hippie beat up, as much as I love the hippie movement and for all it stands.

[drelly]

If I were the developer, I would want to do everything possible to keep these trees because they add value. On the other hand... you could plant some more trees in different locations and they might well be there in 500 years while we won't be.

[MikeO]

Just signed the petition. I'm far from a tree hugger but I can't think of any possible rationale to chop down a 500 year old tree. Here well before we ever were and could/should be here for a long time to come. Something is seriously broken with the system if a 500 year old tree can be approved to be removed when you have to jump through hoops for a big ugly pine tree.

[Damap]

The developer should force the council to pay him for the site plus his lost profit. Whole thing is ridiculous.

[ATM]

If I were the developer, I would want to do everything possible to keep these trees because they add value. On the other hand... you could plant some more trees in different locations and they might well be there in 500 years while we won't be.

We could always plant some more trees but I am not sure about their chances of being there in 500 years later.... If consent is given to remove a 500 years old tree, the younger trees will be easily removed well before they reach an old age.

[MikeO]

And in 500 years the tree in question will be 1,000 years old.

[John the builder]

what a load of BS there are dozens of similar trees in this locality.

The guy went through due process The mistake he made was to not fell the tree first thing when he had the chance. Council say tree was only over a 100?

Apparently Cunliffe is offfering to climb up too. I say let him and give me the chain saw............

[speights boy]

I see the Govt is having a look into the circumstances around this consent.

An Inquiry....surely not ?
Is Northland an electorate with any interest in preserving old Kauri ?
Is there a certain politician touring Northland currently who likes asking tricky questions of the Govt ?
Kaurigate ?

[Davo36]

there are dozens of similar trees in this locality.

Dozens? Really? So this makes it ok to chop it down?

Dozens left where there were hundreds of thousands?

Next they'll be saying "Oh there's a few of those trees left, no worries" then "Oh there's another one..." then "Oh we'll plant some more.."

[John the builder]

I say dozens within sight of this tree. We shouldn't chop them down without due consideration but in this case that was exactly what happened and due process followed.

This is not the last kauri or the oldest. This is in a kauri forest where felling this one tree allows the land to be used sensibly and the rest of the forest protected forever, its a win win for the environment

Trees dont last forever

[speights boy]

We shouldn't chop them down without due consideration but in this case that was exactly what happened and due process followed.

Auckland Council ignored planner on kauri

In a May 2014 report, Griffin told the council that the development would involve "considerable visual impacts and modification of the highest quality vegetation..."
"I agree that there would be adverse effects that are more than minor..." he wrote.

If the effects on the environment are considered to be more than minor the law says a consent application must be publicly notified, those opposing it say.

However, Griffin said that on balance he supported granting consent for the development at 42 Paturoa Road.

It was subsequently granted without being notified.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/67198986/auckland-council-ignored-planner-on-kauri