Maunga Authority has court win in long-running battle over trees
A plan by the Tu¯puna Maunga Authority to replace exotic trees with native plantings at
wairaka/Mt Albert can proceed after a legal attempt to stop the exotic trees being toppled failed.
The High Court declined a judicial review brought by Auckland residents Averil Rosemary Norman and Warwick Bruce Norman alleging the authority’s decision was made without proper planning or consultation.
The court declined to make any of the orders sought by the Normans.
It found the authority acted lawfully, as did Auckland Council when granting consent to remove the trees on a non-notified basis.
Authority chairman Paul Majurey welcomed the judgment, saying the authority remained committed to removing 345 exotics trees as part of a native restoration programme to plant 13,000 native trees and shrubs at wairaka/Mt Albert.
The authority, which cogoverns the city’s 14 tu¯puna maunga (ancestral mountains), in October last year unveiled the long-term project which involves removing the exotic trees and planting 13,000 natives, along with restoring cultural values.
In their submission, the Normans stated they opposed logging of the trees all at once, and said there was no consultation with the public on the decision, and no documents even recording Othe¯ decision to
The Authority is pleased with the court’s finding. Paul Majurey
clear the trees from the maunga.
They also disputed the reasoning for the resource consent to be granted on a non-notified basis.
Majurey said he was pleased the court recognised that Reserves Act had to be read in the context of the Treaty settlement.
He also embraced the court’s view that the Treaty settlement legislation established the authority to govern the tu¯puna maunga while providing for the exercise of mana whenua and kaitiakitanga by the mana whenua of Ta¯maki Makaurau.
“The Authority is pleased with the court’s finding that the cultural, spiritual and ecological restoration of wairaka/ Mount Albert is a project that includes both the removal of exotic trees and restoration replanting,” Majurey said.
The Normans’ lawyer, Bob Hollyman, QC, said the couple were considering an appeal.
He said the key issue for the Normans, who are not part of the protest group camped at the maunga for the past year, was the failure to consult the public properly.
Hollyman said the judgment meant the authority could theoretically go ahead and cut down non-native trees.
In a statement, Honour the Maunga protest group said it did not initiate the judicial review and was not bound by its decision.
“Even though the decision has gone Tu¯puna Maunga Authority and Auckland Council’s way, we would note that just because they now can destroy around 2500 exotic trees from Auckland’s maunga, it doesn’t mean that they should,” the group said.