When shade turns into shadow
Communities value their trees – but also get grumpy about them. So it is no easy matter for local authorities to formulate rules worth the paper they are written on, reports
Asociety grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit – Greek proverb. Beautifully put.
But how should a society react when, in time, that shade is being seen by some as more of a problematic shadow?
Rightly or wrongly, grand old trees can reach the stage where they are deemed dangerous, oppressive, or just to have outgrown their welcome by standing in the way of the changing plans of a dynamic society.
As well as knowing how to pen a good proverb, those ancient Greeks also invented democracy. But they could scarcely have been expected to have envisaged the twists and turns of modern-day planning consent applications, district schemes, Resource Management Act protocols, the politicisation of environmental and developmental pressures, and the bloody overhead bloody power lines.
Of late, some of the deep south’s notable trees – on both private and public land – have been lined up for the chop. In Lumsden, ardent defenders are opposing the removal of trees outside the Presbyterian church, itself scheduled for replacement.
In Gore, a consent application that includes removing a couple of century-old monkey puzzle trees is right now drawing public submissions.
In Winton, historic memorial trees on Great North Rd were deemed too damaging to underground services and too costly for ongoing maintenance.
In Invercargill city, plenty of tall timber has been coming down, too. Most of it planned. But let’s not forget how the formation of the council’s tree plan – which, in 2021, took the Recreation Aotearoa award for outstanding research, policy and planning – came about. Which was with an almighty thump.
In November 2018, a giant Invercargill City Council (ICC) tree crashed on to half a dozen, mercifully empty, parked cars on the south side of Victoria Avenue. The wind was a rarity – a stiff-enough easterly, in a province where trees grow braced against prevailing westerlies, and the council’s present parks and recreation manager, Caroline Rain, says it plainly: ‘‘It was very, very lucky no-one was injured.’’
This was a startling reminder that if we aren’t on top of our tree management our trees can wind up on top of us. Councillors were quick to call for an audit. A stand of neighbouring trees was speedily cut down, but the implications went wider.
The council, by its own assessment, didn’t have a coherent plan: Its trees were looked after, but under a series of independent judgments. There was no specific strategy.
Now there is, designed during the term of Rain’s predecessor, Michele Frey, and with parks and recreation planner Cassie Horton. It’s a plan that comprises an inventory of council-owned trees and sets out a consistent approach to meeting their present and likely future needs.
Over time, it will lead to changes to some of Invercargill’s vistas. The city has council-owned trees that wouldn’t be approved for their locations, or perhaps at all, under the new plan. Example? A poplar might be a perfectly good paddock tree, but doesn’t look so pretty in the middle of a street.
A lot of the plan’s detail, says Rain, is so that as new and replacement plantings are made ‘‘our future selves don’t have some of the issues we have now’’.
That said, the removal of any tree is treated as a last resort. Even if we sometimes get grumpy about them. So they might drop leaves, bark, seeds, fruit, or spread pollen? The council’s view is that this is normal, to be expected, and so we can, and should, live with it.
‘‘We do not manage trees to reduce leaf litter or debris or nesting birds.’’
That doesn’t mean doing precisely nothing. Judicious pruning is still on the agenda, and the council can actively manage public spaces and infrastructure to clean up debris, prune trees, repair footpaths and fences.
As for ‘‘underground pipe conflicts’’ most of these are, in fact, from ageing, damaged or poorly maintained infrastructure, not trees themselves.
Trees seek water and nutrients where they are available to them, such as where seals have perished. Underground services can be repaired, redirected or replaced without having to remove trees. Gutter guards and drain cloths cost almost nothing compared with the value of a tree, she says.
New buildings should be designed to their surroundings – not with open internal gutters near leaves that drop.
The council is treating trees as part of the view. It will not remove or take the tops off them to maintain or reinstate people’s views.
A tree may be replaced by a more appropriate one, but sometimes likefor-like tree replacement is exactly what’s needed. The massive Queens Park pines alongside Kelvin St, being felled at present, are being replaced with other fast-growing pines. Because the park needs that shelter.
Rain marvels at the intricacies of the park’s tree management, involving a combination of specimen trees and those providing key protection.
‘‘Our hugely clever landscape designers really understand the windflow through the park.’’
Not to put too fine a point on it, Rain says there are many false opinions and rules of thumb about trees. Poor advice and management of tree assets can lead to unnecessary removals, increased costs and risk.
Look to the experts – trained and qualified arborists, she says.
New Zealand’s local bodies have some flexibility in how they manage trees, including whether to enshrine protections beyond those in the Resources Management Act by including a register of significant trees in their district plans.
Neither the ICC nor Southland District Council (SDC) has put such a list in its district plan, but many – including Gore and Clutha – have.
Until the RMA was changed in 2003, many New Zealand councils had imposed blanket bans on felling or trimming trees which required home owners to seek a resource consent to remove a branch from a tree that was causing danger.
ICC governance and legal manager Michael Morris said the council’s first district plan had been developed in 2005 at a time when the council was seeking to encourage all development – ‘‘and rules that could restrict or stop a development from occurring were not included’’.
Should there be an initiative to include it, the council would consider this .
‘‘The [existing ICC] tree plan is a fantastic document that informs the council and the community of the council aspirations for trees and of their management, but of itself it is not able to cloak any tree with legal protection.’’
A notable trees register tells the community about the trees the council considers important and that need protection, and helps make sure they are looked after during phases of development.
But a register can also burden landowners, Morris says.
‘‘If a notable tree becomes unsafe the landowner will still need consent in order to help make their property safe.
‘‘If the rules in the register aren’t developed carefully they can also lead to controls that could deter people from buying a property.’’
For its part, the Southland District Council has been working on its own tree plan and it is expected to go out for public consultation early next year.
But it’s not intended to be included in the district plan.
SDC did have a limited schedule of trees of local significance in its previous district plan in 2001, says council environmental planning manager Marcus Roy, but this did not identify trees on private land and in the latest version of the district plan, in 2018, the council decided to remove it
A significant amount of work would be required to identify, consult on and formulate a schedule involving trees on private land.
And councils have plenty else on their plate right now, given the large scale and abiding uncertainties surrounding the details of significant environmental reforms under way nationwide.
Given the scale of work required across the district on issues of landscapes, indigenous biodiversity, natural hazards and climate change, ‘‘initiating a plan change to register trees on private land – which the landowners may not want – is a lower priority,’’ Roy says.
SDC open spaces planner Bridget Elliott says the tree plan due for consultation early 2023 is in many ways a starting point, recognising trees in the district’s parks, reserves and streetscapes more emphatically as an asset to be valued and developed, rather than as a liability.
Previously, she acknowledges, ‘‘we didn’t really entirely understand what we had’’.
‘‘If we look at Southland district as a forest, this is not necessarily about decreasing it. We look at how we could compensate for removals – and having the right species of tree in the right place.’’
Another matter coming up for consultation will be the level at which decisions about trees are made. The plan would be ‘‘leaning into the facts and scientific benefits’’ involving professional advice, but also into the fact that the council had the ability, should it so choose, to delegate decision making to community boards, Elliott says.
The Gore District Council’s district plan requires activities that would ‘‘adversely affect’’ listed significant trees to obtain consent. It’s not intended as an unsurpassable hurdle.
‘‘There may be instances,’’ says communications and marketing manager Sonia Gerken, ‘‘where removal is appropriate, and the resource consent process ensures an assessment is undertaken to determine if the trees can be removed’’.
Right now, the fate of the two large century-old Chilean pine (monkey puzzle) trees at 40 Charleton Lane is an issue in the town. Owners Power Farming have applied for resource consent to cut them down and build new premises. Submissions close on August 3.
Gore is updating its district plan this year and a draft plan will be released for public feedback next month. ‘‘People will be able to share their views about whether they want trees protected in the new plan or not,’’ Gerken says.
In Lumsden, Chris Henderson, one of the group seeking to preserve the trees outside the Presbyterian church, sees a real need for improving the formal stages for notable tree registration, recognition and protection.
‘‘My concern is that no process currently exists for new nominations, nor a document that contains all the nominations and citations of a preliminary notable tree register,’’ she says.
There has been some effort to bring together a regional register. A booklet produced by Environment Southland in the 1990s made some progress to this end.
Making such a formal document, brought up to date with public participation, an appendix to the district plans could convey some protection under future RMA legislation, Henderson says. ‘‘The good news is that many of the trees people love are already documented, which would be a starting place for further inquiry to ensure the trees still exist, and that the community and individuals still want them to stay.’’