Reforms threaten our trees

Understandably, tree advocates are furious (Nov 18) that the proposed RMA reforms appear to be threatening trees in the face of urban intensification.

One of the most alarming parts of the article, however, is minister Phil Twyford’s reported comment, ‘‘We are going to make it easier for councils to protect the really special trees that people love in their neighbourhoods . . . big, really old trees, sometimes called specimen trees.’’

This issue is not just about big, old trees measured and judged by set criteria to be suitable for protection. Nor is it about percentages.

It’s about all trees on public or private land; urban or rural. Maybe there’s an opportunity here.

Perhaps, as we confront today’s complicated environmental and societal challenges, we’re at a moment in history when we should stop thinking we have a right to impose hierarchies on nature.

Instead, we might consider our trees worthy of protection unless a convincing case can be made for their removal.

Yes, there would need to be some rules, but, rather than the ‘‘unjustifiable burden on property owners’’ as described by Twyford, the future of trees might well be managed by the ‘‘carrot and sticks’’ strategy advocated by Justin Morgenroth in the same article, and trees might be considered innocent until proven guilty. Dr Susette Goldsmith, Hataitai