Environment – Turning on trees

Apparently, it’s a Quaker saying that goes something like, “A (wo)man has made at least a start on discovering the meaning of human life when she plants shade trees under which she knows full well she will never sit.” But what is the saying about the man who chops down the tree that provides shade and shelter already?

Since the 2012 removal of General Tree Protection rules in the Resource Management Act, there have been fears of a great tree massacre across Auckland, resulting in a loss of living, grown heritage, beauty and habitat. Urban Auckland is intensifying and sprawling. Grand old trees that have shaded generations of children on big leafy sites become an impediment to development, or are just considered a nuisance. So, in established areas living landmarks are under the chop.

Colonial cultural values can be reflected in trees, leading to them being both revered or condemned, mostly depending on whether you are coloniser or colonised. So, conflict has occurred over the removal of Moreton Bay figs, and other introduced exotica of grand stature, on Auckland’s maunga (mountain) under the co-governance of Maori. Street trees are deformed to maintain power line clearance so the lights are always on, even if our street trees pay the price. Road development and subsequent subdivision in rural zones outside towns like Warkworth causes arboreal collateral damage. Valued trees either have no protection in the Auckland Unitary Plan, or what protection they do have comes secondary to other (human) values – usually money.

On the bright side, more trees are apparently being planted than ever before. There’s the Mayor’s million tree mission and riparian planting investment in the Mahurangi and the Kaipara. Some rural subdivision requires extensive tree planting as incentive or mitigation. And while that planting brings immediate and long-term water quality and habitat benefit, we still have a national net loss of big old trees.

Mourning and resisting that loss, courageous activists are known to occupy mighty old trees. Sometimes they are kauri, puriri, oak, or just valued Monterey pines. But if the chainsaws are stopped by rules or activists, sometimes poison or ring barking will do the trick instead. Those trying to uphold the public and ecological values of our collective living heritage are sometimes condemned as tree huggers. It’s sometimes a clash of public good and conservation-minded values, and conservative, neo-liberal views.
Back in 1720, the Bishnois Hindus of Kherjarli, India, protested the felling of their ancient forests to supply timber for the Maharaj of Jodhpur. The Bishnois spiritual belief recognised the sacredness of all life, including trees. Young Amrita Devi challenged the fellers, embraced a tree and inspired others to join her. Soldiers beheaded 363 protesting villagers. The Maharajah was so disturbed by the massacre he apologised and designated the area a protected area, legislation that is still in place today. Today’s tree huggers are in noble company. These days we don’t behead the protestors, but we also don’t protect the trees.

Christine Rose
christine.rose25@gmail.com