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
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Property developer and a 500 year old Kauri tree
Collapse
X
-
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.
-
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.
Comment
-
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.You can find me at: Energise Web Design
Comment
-
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by drelly View PostIf 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.
Comment
-
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............
Comment
-
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 ?
Last edited by speights boy; 10-03-2015, 07:18 PM.
Comment
-
there are dozens of similar trees in this locality.
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.."Squadly dinky do!
Comment
-
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
Comment
-
Originally posted by John the builder View PostWe shouldn't chop them down without due consideration but in this case that was exactly what happened and due process followed.
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.
Comment
Comment