RMA Streamlining Bill goes to seed when it comes to tree protection warns ARC

26 August 2009

The Government’s plan to ban general tree protection in urban areas, as outlined in the Resource Management Act (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill is a step backwards says the Auckland Regional Council (ARC).

Deputy Chair of the ARC’s Parks and Heritage Committee, Cr Christine Rose says a local council’s ability to protect any tree or group of trees within the urban area is the best way to recognise the value of trees in the urban area.

“Think of the pohutakawas that fringe many of our Auckland beaches. The fact they look so great, give Auckland its character and are so much a part of Kiwi culture is just the tip of the iceberg. They offer rare urban habitat and shade for wildlife and plant life, the roots stablilise the land and reduce soil erosion, and they filter the contaminants that run off hard urban surfaces and into the harbour,” says Cr Rose.

“This planned ban will remove protection from more vegetation than is perhaps envisaged; as well coastal pohutukawa, native bush within urban areas, lakeside vegetation and riparian margins to urban streams, there is also the added value of backyard vegetation. All of these have economic as well as environmental benefits.

“In Auckland, where population pressures are increasing, our small areas of vegetation are under great pressure. This is why six out of seven of the local councils in Auckland have general tree protection. The Environment Court accepts the approach declaring in its favour in 2002 and arguing that general tree protection rules were necessary to achieve the purposes of the RMA. Tree protection is used in different forms in other international cities such as Vancouver, Sydney, Brisbane and in the UK.

There are more than 20 years of general tree protection applying to much of urban Auckland which could be undermined by this Bill. All general tree protection rules have been through a rigorous public participation process. They have only survived because they have been found to be one of the most effective and appropriate ways of protecting urban character, amenity and environmental quality.

“The ARC agrees that implementation improvements may be warranted. There are some examples of residents facing delays and costs to remove trees and, developers willing to pay the penalties and purposefully ignoring the rules. Councils should be encouraged to review how they implement their general tree protection rules to ensure that the process is as simple, fair and efficient as possible,” says Cr Rose.

“While many people and organisations, including the Arboricultural Association, recognise that the tree protection rules could be made more manageable, this is no reason to throw the baby out of the bathwater..

“With the passage of this RMA amendment, thousands of trees - many of them hundreds of years old - will be at risk of hasty removal. This is a very real threat to the character of urban Auckland.”

The council recognises that amendments to the Bill allow for a broader range of methods to identify areas of trees, rather than scheduling individual trees alone. While this may allow for areas of significant native bush in urban areas to be identified through District Plans, it does not address the wider heritage values and ecosystem functions of trees and vegetation in urban areas.

ENDS

© Scoop Media