Forest & Bird say the Government could be onto a winner with their proposal to plant trees on Crown-owned land – but only if those trees are natives.

Forest & Bird spokesperson, Dean Baigent-Mercer, says if it’s done well, it could be a bold step forward for Aotearoa New Zealand’s climate action and biodiversity restoration.

“However, if it’s done poorly, it risks becoming a disaster for native ecosystems and the climate.

“Positive outcomes of this new policy [exploring public-private partnerships to plant native and exotic trees on public land] hinge on ensuring that both native biodiversity and our climate benefits.

“This means planting permanent carbon sinks with native species only.”

Mr Baigent-Mercer says the Government should not even be considering planting exotic species.

“With exotics like pine, not only would we be missing the opportunity to reverse biodiversity loss, but we would also be creating fire-prone landscapes during droughts, and depleting groundwater in vulnerable catchments.

“Scientists from NIWA have already highlighted which regions will face increasing drought and fire risks this century.”

Forest & Bird also opposes experimental transition forests where pines are planted with the expectation they will be transitioned to native forests in the future.

“There’s very little evidence that exotic plantations can be successfully transformed into native forests, especially at scale and in areas without existing native forest and robust pest control. Starting with diverse, eco-sourced native species is the best way to achieve long-term success while avoiding fire risks posed by monocultures such as mānuka or pine,” says Mr Baigent-Mercer.

For this initiative to succeed, Forest & Bird asserts that climate and biodiversity goals must drive every decision. This includes:

Prioritising eco-sourced native trees: Wild seed must come from within the district where they are planted so the genetic diversity of native plants is protected. Mixing up plants from different regions at scale risks forever damaging the genetic diversity of native plants.

Planting in the right places to suit local ecosystems: Recent missteps, such as non-native species being planted en masse on the Chatham Islands for carbon sequestration purposes alone, is a short-sighted, generic approach and won’t deliver the dual benefits of carbon sequestration and biodiversity restoration.

Investing heavily in pest control to protect young forests: Unless introduced wild goats, deer, possums and wallabies are culled first on a large scale and their numbers held at the lowest possible level, all the efforts of growing and planting will be wasted as the native trees will be rapidly eaten by these animals.

Ensuring that the integrity of public conservation land is protected: plans must be focused first and foremost on use that is consistent with the public conservation purposes for which the land has been set aside.

Mr Baigent-Mercer says: “This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to regenerate large areas of public land, but it must be done right. A clear focus on native species, local seed sourcing, and integrated pest management is the only way to ensure that these efforts deliver meaningful climate and biodiversity outcomes.”

He underscores that any such proposal will lack integrity unless New Zealand also focuses on reducing its gross emissions.

“In the broader context of climate action, New Zealand must include a rapid decrease in climate pollution from other industries, such as agriculture. We can’t just plant our way out of the climate emergency. Without the dual action of planting native trees as permanent carbon sinks and cutting climate pollution, we give polluting industries another loophole to avoid responsibility.”

© Scoop Media