HTM's submission on the Authority's proposed Integrated Management Plan changes
Tūpuna Maunga Authority has responded to the court’s consultation requirement by publicly notifying a proposed amendment to its Integrated Management Plan - this is the Authority’s ‘big picture’ plan that guides its approach to managing all of the maunga it administers. The proposed amendment makes clear the Authority’s intention to fell the exotic trees and some native trees on the following maunga:
* Ōwairaka Mt Albert
* Puketāpapa Mt Roskill
* Ōtāhuhu Mt Richmond
* Te Tātua a Riukiuta Big King
Members of the public were invited to provide written and/or verbal submissions on the matter. The deadline for written submissions was 8 October and verbal submissions are being heard in the week beginning 31 October. We have not yet been formally told about the number of submissions received and the ration of for/against the trees being saved. But we understand that between 1000 and 2000 submissions were sent in, with the vast majority in favour of keeping the trees. We have put in an official information request around this and will provide more detail as it comes to hand.
We understand the Authority will be meeting on 11 November to consider its response to the feedback received. We will keep you posted on the outcome.
Honour the Maunga’s written submission
Honour the Maunga wishes to make an oral submission and we request that our written and oral submissions are minuted
Note: We believe Tūpuna Maunga Authority’s Integrated Management Plan Amendments submission process is legally flawed and designed for a pre-determined outcome. Our submission is therefore being provided on a “without prejudice” basis.
About Honour the Maunga
Honour the Maunga is a grassroots community group that formed in November 2019 to save Ōwairaka Mt Albert’s trees from being felled. Our members are drawn from all ethnicities (including Māori) and walks of life, and range in age from young adults to those in their 90s. In addition to our many ongoing supporters, more than 11,4000 people have signed our online and hard copy petition to save Owairaka’s trees despite us not having promoted the petition to a huge extent.
Executive summary
We support succession to native vegetation on the maunga over time but are deeply concerned about the environmentally destructive clear-felling methodology proposed for achieving this goal. We therefore do not support tree felling on any maunga. The exception would be where there is an independent arborist report that has involved undertaking an international standard tree by tree assessment to identify specific tree(s) that present genuine H&S risk. Our primary consideration in this submission is the wellbeing of Mother Earth, and her children the trees and all the lifeforms they support. For if they are well, then we all are well.
This submission is made against the backdrop of the massive and increasing loss of trees and biodiversity in its wider sense as Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland intensifies. Mt Albert is particularly hard hit, with hundreds of mature trees currently being felled in the Unitec MHUD housing development, and – if the Authority’s IMP amendments are implemented – then potentially hundreds more on one of our few large green spaces Ōwairaka Mt Albert. Not to mention many hundreds more on the other maunga. A secondary, but nevertheless very important, consideration in our submission relates to our concerns about the significant division and rancour arising from the maunga tree issue.
The points made in our submission on the proposed Integrated Management Plan (IMP) amendment apply to all maunga, including: * Ōwairaka / Te Ahi Kā a Rakataura / Mt Albert * Pukewīwī / Puketāpapa / Mt Roskill * Ōtāhuhu / Mt Richmond * Te Tātua a Riukiuta / Big King. Our submission covers the following topics:
Our environmental concerns
We support succession to fully native vegetation but not the environmentally destructive method of felling large numbers of healthy mature trees. The IMP amendments don’t discuss the proposed felling timelines, but the Authority’s actions, comments and resource consents indicate this will be done over a short time. It is a climate emergency and healthy mature trees are needed more than ever for carbon sequestration and climate management. Furthermore, removing thousands of trees from the maunga runs counter to Auckland Council’s environment and climate policies.
Auckland has already lost more than 30% of its tree cover since Resource Management Act changes in 2015 removed tree protection. This rate is accelerating with intensification and also, in Mt Albert, the large-scale tree felling on the Unitec lands as part of the MHUD housing developments. These trees provide habitats for innumerable lifeforms – including uncommon native birds such as kākā. Removing large numbers of trees will affect the birds, other biota such as insects, lizards, lichens and subterranean life forms – not to mention the many thousands of people from all walks of life who love the maunga and its flourishing environment.
Best practice native revegetation involves a transitional approach that takes many decades. Taking this approach will enable the Authority to tread lightly upon the maunga environments, the maunga surrounds, and everyone who has cultural, ancestral, spiritual and emotional connections with them.
Ōwairaka is a significant ecological area (SEA). Removing nearly half the canopy will negatively affect the maunga’s biodiversity and its SEA status when these trees are known habitat trees. We also note that the healthy mix of native and exotic trees on Ōwairaka, with many of the mature exotic trees sheltering a flourishing understory of 99.9% native seedlings demonstrates biodiversity in action. The transition from exotic to 100% native vegetation is already happening naturally and in an environmentally sound manner. Felling all non-native trees will set back this process by many decades.
Removing a significant portion of the maunga tree cover (e.g. 45% in Ōwairaka Mt Albert’s case, 75% in Ōtāhuhu Mt Richmond’s case) will have devastating consequences for the fauna and flora that depend upon them during the many decades it will take for any native tree species plantings to grow to maturity.
Furthermore, the Authority plans to plant comparatively few natives compared to other well-known native restoration programmes such as Tiritirimatangi. A size-adjusted comparison between that programme and Ōwairaka’s is revealing. In the 10 years to 1994, volunteers planted between 250,000 and 300,000 natives on Tiritirimatangi, resulting in a 60% forest cover today. The remaining 40% was left as grasslands for birds like takahē, which prefer an open environment. By comparison, the Authority states it intends to plant 13,000 natives (mostly not tree species) on Ōwairaka. At the same time it plans to get rid of the current non-native vegetation as well as some native vegetation. Planting plans show that the new plantings will not go in the same areas as where the exotics currently are, so retaining those trees won’t impede native planting progress. Tiritirimatangi is 22 hectares, and Ōwairaka is 43% that size at 9.547 ha. This means between 108,500 and 130,200 natives would need to be planted at Ōwairaka for its native restoration to come even close to Tiritirimatangi's. According to data obtained via official information requests, around 5000 natives have been planted at Ōwairaka since 2019, many of which have died. Therefore what can be seen there today (mostly around the archery field and domain gates) is 40% of the intended end result.
Leaving the non-native trees in place on the maunga while the new native plantings grow to maturity will confer the following benefits:
Benefit 1: Maintain food, homes, nesting sites and shelter for birds and other fauna
This is about so much more than birds. Single (or short-term) phase felling of all exotic and some native trees undermines ecological biodiversity in many ways, including killing millions of insects and disrupting mycorrhizal networks that benefit all trees. Each tree is an ecosystem in itself, supporting a plethora of native and non-native lifeforms both seen and unseen.
Native button fern (tarawera - Pellea rotundiflora) growing at the base of a cherry near the archery field at Ōwairaka. It will be destroyed if the cherry is felled. Not seen in this photo is a different species of native fern (bracken) growing on the other side of the tree.
Self-sown pōhutukawa and kawakawa seedlings growing in the Sadgrove macrocarpa’s bark at Ōwairaka. Also, birds nest under the bark.
Mushrooms growing in leaf-litter at the base of an exotic tree at Ōwairaka. Native and non-native trees are interlinked by huge mycorrhizal networks that will be severely damaged if trees are mass-felled.
Native lichens, including the rongoā plant Angiangi (old man’s beard) growing on cherry trees at Ōwairaka. Angiangi is known as “The Lungs of the Forest” because it absorbs pollution and has powerful antibacterial, antiviral and antimicrobial properties that treat a wide range of ailments.
The Ōwairaka magnolia shelters a self-sown native understory that includes kawakawa (pictured), totara, karamu and more. These native plants are all used for Māori and non-Māori herbal medicine.
Benefit 2: Protect and preserve the native understory currently growing under many of the exotic trees
As can be seen in the flourishing native seedling understory at Ōwairaka and other maunga, and the abundant native birdlife, ecological biodiversity is naturally working well and supporting long-term succession to native flora and fauna. Many of these natives will be collateral damage if their exotic shelters and hosts are felled.Furthermore, mass removal of exotic trees will likely harm the native trees because the environment in which they are currently co-existing with exotics will become far more exposed to drying out and edge effects that foster invasive plant species. Removing so many trees, rather than mitigating risks through appropriate maintenance, is an extremely aggressive, financially costly and socially divisive approach.
Benefit 3: Safeguard the fragile maunga soils from erosion and run-off
Maunga environments are harsh - being very exposed to the elements and having thin, almost non-existent top-soils. Mature large canopy trees create soil, prevent erosion and limit stormwater runoff. This is significant given NIWA advises the extreme weather currently being experienced will become a significant climate change issue in future. Furthermore, accelerated erosion will lead to the shallow topsoils being increasingly washed into the Hauraki Gulf and Manukau Harbour and contribute to destruction of the marine ecosystems, a recognised problem.As can be seen below, where a grove of 100 old olives was removed from Ōtāhuhu Mt Richmond several years ago, the bare maunga lands become subject to erosion once the trees’ stabilising influence is removed.
Benefit 4: Reduce the need for weed control and herbicide usage
Kikuyu and other non-native weeds will quickly grow into the empty spaces left by the felled exotics, creating increased fire risk, requiring costly maintenance and undermining efforts to return the maunga to fully native vegetation.
Achieving the Authority’s planned rapid conversion to native-only vegetation will require more carbon-emitting mowing and increased herbicide use, as can be seen in this pre-planting photo taken at Mangere Mountain last year. Herbicide usage is also a known contributor to marine ecosystem damage of the Hauraki Gulf and Manukau.
Benefit 5: Provide amenity value
Mature trees provide significant amenity value, something that is becoming ever more important as the city’s development intensifies. Significant health and amenity values will be lost by removing such a large proportion of the maunga vegetation, given that it will take many decades for the young native plantings (only a small proportion of which are trees) to reach maturity. Honour the Maunga receives a steady stream of feedback from grateful members of the public. Here’s a sample of their comments concerning the trees’ amenity value and also the importance of the maunga trees to them:
o Thank you for protecting the tree's [sic]. They always make me feel calm and happy when I walk among them.
o Trees are trees. The whole world needs each and every tree for without them climatic chaos will prevail. These trees are iconic. They have held up the mount slopes for years and years. Young and old have posed for family portraits with these lovely trees as their backdrop. We must take all steps to preserve them for future generations.
o Thanks to all who are helping preserve our heritage I’ve enjoyed the tranquility of this beautiful mount for 75 years.
o Thank you for saving these trees this far. Which give an incredible canopy of cover in summer time. Without this canopy Mount Albert would be unbearable to visit, walk and play in summer months.
o We love climbing the trees and playing in the beautiful bush. We love going up the mountain at night to try and spot Ruru with our parents. Thank you for helping to save our trees.
o Great work in protecting our beautiful mountain and all its trees. I grew up under the shadow of the mountain, and parents before. Mum's ashes scattered there as well, she would be very saddened by this aggressive move.
o Such an important cause - every time I run up Owairaka I am deeply appreciative of the trees, the birds, this space, and to those volunteers who have been dedicating time to protecting them and the constancy of the movement - it's so much more than just trees, but protection of our natural environment, which is important now more than ever during this generation for those future generations, along with coming together as community.
Benefit 6: Reduce fire risk
Maintaining green cover is a valuable tool for reducing fire risk. In recent years fires have been a problem at maunga with low tree cover. Fires have recently occurred where TMA has already clear-felled the non-native canopy trees - Maungarei Mt Wellington and Te Pane o Mataoho Mangere Mountain. Removing lots of trees not only makes the maunga drier and more prone to fire, but it - ironically - opens the way for invasive non-native kikuyu grass, which thrives in open, sunny ground. The other grasses found on the maunga stay green under tree cover during the hot dry summer months, but quickly dry out where they are growing on open ground. This significantly increases fire risk.
Native vs non-native fact checking
We question a number of statements made in the proposed IMP amendments, particularly paragraph 1 in Appendix 5.
Statement: Returning native vegetation is a key step in healing the Tūpuna Maunga.
Our response: While we support returning the maunga to fully native vegetation over time, it is simplistic to imply that native and non-native lifeforms exist in isolation from each other and have universally antagonistic relationships. In reality there is a complex and usually mutually beneficial relationship between the two, and with the maunga itself. This can be seen in a member of the public’s short video that was recently filmed at Ōwairaka. It shows a kererū feasting on the blossoms of a lichen festooned Japanese cherry (Prunus serrulata). This scene demonstrates how simplistic the native = good / exotic = bad narrative is. For here we have a native bird clearly enjoying feeding on a non-native tree, which is host to native lichen and no doubt other native life-forms such as wētā and other insects. The non-native tree’s fallen leaves nourish the earth, making it easier for native vegetation to re-establish itself.
Statement: Non-native trees have been randomly planted…
Our response: Many of the trees on the maunga (native and non-natives alike) have been randomly planted. We would draw to your attention that, certainly in Ōwairaka’s case and no doubt other maunga too, many of the natives have been planted by local residents. There are many written historic and anecdotal accounts of this. In Ōwairaka’s case, it was also local residents who stopped the government of the day from quarrying the maunga.
Statement: Many non-native trees…have been allowed to self-seed.
Our response: Close inspection of Ōwairaka Mt Albert shows that 99.9% of the self-seeded saplings are natives, not exotics. Examples include karamu, totara, karo, kawakawa and native ferns. Most are growing healthily under the protective cover of exotics and natives alike. Exotics comprise very few of the self-seeded shrub and tree species.
Statement: This will include massive plantings of native species and the removal of non-native trees that are negatively impacting the cultural features of the maunga.
Our response: The Authority’s own planting plans and information obtained under LGOIMA reveal that the vast majority of planned plantings are low-growing species, not trees. Refer to the Tiritirimatangi comparison above. We also note that the Collective Redress Act required the maunga lands to be held on trust for the benefit of Ngā Mana Whenua and the other people of Auckland. While it is of course important to respect and reflect the Tāmaki Collective’s cultural values, it is also important to respect and reflect wider Māori cultural values that consider all trees to be Papatūānuku’s children. All trees existed before humanity so are our ancestors and therefore all worthy of protection. Furthermore, many of the exotic trees hold deep cultural significance for other peoples. For example, eucalyptus are especially significant to indigenous Australians; cherries to Japanese; oaks to English and Irish; olives to people from the Middle East, parts of Africa, and southern Europe, etc.
Statement: The restoration will help enhance the mauri and wairua of the Tūpuna Maunga
Our response: All trees are native to our earth. Mother Nature does not discriminate between native and non-native; they are all her children. The differences between maunga mauri and wairua is evident when visiting Mangere, Maungarei Mt Wellington and Ōhuirangi Pigeon Mountain, where the Authority has felled hundreds of non-native trees and planted small areas of mostly low-growing species. A common refrain we hear from people from all walks of life (including Māori) who have contacted us, is how desolate those maunga feel. By comparison, well vegetated maunga such as Ōwairaka Mt Albert and Ōtāhuhu Mt Richmond are thrumming with life. Their mauri and wairua feel strong!
We would also like to address the many exotic tree myths being promulgated.
Myth: Eucalyptus trees poison the soil
Fact: As can be seen in the photos below at Ōwairaka there are numerous examples of self-sown natives, particularly totara, flourishing under the protective cover of eucalyptus trees. Clearly no sign of soil poisoning here! Furthermore, native birds such as ruru, tūī and kākā routinely use these trees.
A wide range of native and non native trees growing beneath eucalyptus alongside the archery field at Ōwairaka.
Totara growing underneath eucalyptus trees at Ōwairaka.
Myth: Pines poison the soil
Fact: This may be the case in densely planted large monocultural pine forests but is not so in more open plantings of pines.
As can be seen in this photo (taken at Western Springs before the pines were clear-felled), pines can harbour a flourishing closed-canopy native understory.
Many native birds also roost and nest in pines, including the native grey herons and many migrating bird species that roost in Ōtahuhu Mt Richmond’s pine and other exotic trees.
Myth: The maunga cherries are pests / Many of the maunga trees are pests
Fact: The proposed Integrated Management Plan amendments state: “All plant species identified in the RPMP will be removed”. We draw to your attention that Ōwairaka’s Japanese cherries are a sterile cultivar Prunus serrulata, which is currently exempt as per the Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan 2020-2030 (exemption issued on 1 April 2022 under Section 78 of the Biosecurity Act 1993). This is because the inclusion of this species in the ARPMP list is currently being disputed.
The current exemption applies to the Shimidsu Sakura and KIanzan cultivars (which are of low fertility) until 31 December 2030. It also provides a temporary extension for five other potentially low fertility cultivars through to 1 September 2023, to enable further fertility testing to be undertaken. The maunga cherries are old and their specific cultivar is unknown. There is no evidence of Japanese cherry germination on Ōwairaka and the lack of seedlings strongly indicates they are either Shimidsu Sakura or Klanzan cultivars. The same comments apply to Japanese cherries on other maunga.
Tūpuna Maunga Authority has on a number of occasions referred to Ōwairaka’s (non-feral) olive trees being pests. Non feral olives are not listed as a pest in the ARPMP plan.
Banksia, of which there are 26 on Ōwairaka, is listed in the ARPMPS as requiring a site-led response. This means its removal within the reserve is subject to discretion rather than being mandatory. Correspondence by DoC biodiversity officials, obtained via official information request, expresses concern about the removal of exotic vegetation that is beneficial to native species, given how long it will take the new native plantings to become mature and provide for ecosystem functioning. The is particularly so for ecosystems (e.g. maunga) in an urban landscape where vegetation is limited. As seen in this correspondence, the officials went on to discuss the value of leaving Ōwairaka’s banksia in place until newly planted native trees were well-established.
The photo here is of a kākā, which is uncommon in Auckland, seen feasting on banksia seed on Ōwairaka. Kākā have also been seen on other non-native trees on the maunga, including its willow.
Taking the above into account, this leaves a total of eight trees on Ōwairaka that could be subject to the ARPMPS provision: 5 x Acemna smithii (monkey apple), 2 x Ligustrum (privet) trees and 1 x Lagunaria patersonia (Norfolk Island hibiscus).
The lack of a pest tree issue on Ōwairaka is demonstrated by a detailed visual inspection, which reveals that native species comprise virtually all of the juvenile tree species. Ironically, removing large swathes of tree cover will open the way for increased invasion by kikuyu (which prefers open ground to shade) and other invasive species.
Please note, the use of the term ‘pest’ and ‘weed’ appears to be used interchangeably within the Authority’s proposed IMP amendment. They are not one and the same for a plant can be a weed without being a pest on the ARPMP list.
Furthermore, the ARPMP does not list any trees as being weed species. We recommend those terms are clearly defined and used correctly and consistently.
Myth: The exotics are getting in the way of the planned native plantings
Fact: The Authority’s planting plans show that, although it undertakes to plant thousands of natives to “replace” the exotics, a closer look at what is planned reveals there is no intention to cloak the maunga in trees. “Revegetating” the manga does not mean that the Authority plans to regenerate a native forest or restore the ecological habitat they will destroy when felling the current trees. Instead, the intended effect is largely bare, barren looking maunga. The new plantings will not be going where most of the exotics currently are, so leaving the trees in place will not impede the native planting programme.
Myths: Exotics are blocking the sightlines between maunga / damaging archaeological features
Fact: As can be seen in the photo below, in Ōwairaka’s case it is pōhutukawa, not exotics, blocking the sightlines to at least two other maunga. The Ōwairaka tree survey below that photo shows numerous natives growing on archaeological features (mostly terracing). Refer to the native trees (green dots) on the maunga outer slopes – particularly the southern slopes. These slopes are terraced and are therefore archaeological features. Likewise on the terraced inner slope of the soccer field (i.e. at the southern end of the rectangular field shown in the photo). Similar examples can be found on other maunga.
As discussed elsewhere in this submission, there are numerous examples of younger native trees growing under or right beside exotic trees on the various maunga. As has already happened at Mangere, Maungarei and Ōhuiarangi, most of these natives would become ‘collateral damage’ in the mass felling of the exotics.
The proposed Integrated Management Plan amendment makes provision for removing native trees as per this statement in Appendix 5: “To protect the archaeological values and the health and safety of people on the Maunga native and non-native trees may also need to be removed.” This means, for example, the way is paved for the Authority to remove native trees that obscure the view of the tihi (summit), are growing on or near archaeological features such as terracing, etc. Under no circumstances (apart from genuine H&S concerns based on an international standard tree by tree assessment) do we support the felling of any native tree on the maunga.
Myth: The maunga exotic trees post a health & safety risk
Fact: We note the Integrated Management Plan amendment proposal to remove trees that pose a health & safety risk. This is against a backdrop of repeated claims by the Authority that the exotics pose such risks. In relation to Ōwairaka, several arborists have advised that, apart from some trees in need of routine light maintenance such as pruning, there is no obvious evidence that any of the maunga trees (native or non-native) pose a significant health and safety risk. We would only support the removal of any tree on H&S grounds if that removal was based on an assessment of the specific tree/s concerned, conducted by an independent and qualified arborist using an internationally-recognised methodology.
Historic connections
Many of the maunga trees have significant heritage value, particularly to local families. In many cases these trees were either planted by their ancestors or in remembrance of them. To fell those trees would be deeply hurtful and disrespectful to those families and to the local communities who know and care about those trees’ histories. The following trees on Ōwairaka have known historical value:
Sadgrove macrocarpa: At an estimated 150 years old, this grand old macrocarpa may be the oldest tree on the maunga. It was planted by the Sadgrove family (of nearby Sadgrove Tce). Native and exotic birds love this tree and many nest in its canopy and under its bark. Morepork have been heard calling from it at night.
The old olives on the northern slopes grew from seeds sent home from Palestine by a local family’s ancestor, when he was on leave for a week in 1940 prior to four years as a POW in the Second World War.
Many of Ōwairaka’s eucalyptus trees were planted by local school children during the 1950s. Birds such as kākā and ruru (morepork) love tall trees such as these.
They also form a valuable wind break for the exposed upper slopes. The wind would roar in if those trees were removed.
There are numerous Japanese flowering cherries (Prunus serrulata) on the maunga. This species is not to be confused with the invasive Taiwanese cherry. The avenue of cherries depicted here were planted by a local family in remembrance of a close family member killed in one of the World Wars.
These trees are loved by tūī and kererū (wood pigeons) in particular, who flock to feed on their nectar and berries in the early spring months when there are few native trees flowering.
The maunga trees are important to people from many cultures, not only European. For example, the olive trees on Auckland’s maunga are deeply significant for people from middle-Eastern and African cultures, including this east African woman who regularly walks on Ōwairaka.
While mana whenua histories must of course be acknowledged and treasured, it is important that all histories – of other iwi and other ethnicities – are also acknowledged and respected on Auckland’s maunga.
Implications for the UNESCO World Heritage bid
The proposed IMP amendments have significant implications for the UNESCO World Heritage bid. Community opposition to felling large numbers of trees will almost certainly undermine a future UNESCO World Heritage bid for the tūpuna maunga should the Authority implement its proposed plans.We note that “Communities” are a core pillar in the UNESCO World Heritage’s Strategic Objectives, which states:
“This is necessary because: a) Heritage protection without community involvement and commitment is an invitation to failure; b) Coupling community to the conservation of heritage is consistent with international best practice, as evidenced by comparable international regimes; c) Conservation, capacity building, credibility and communication are all intrinsically linked to the idea of community. d) Heritage protection, should, wherever possible, reconcile the needs of human communities, as humanity needs to be at the heart of conservation.”
A plea to Tūpuna Maunga Authority: please lead the way in uniting, rather than dividing, all the people of Auckland
We are concerned at the extent to which the maunga tree issue created divisions and rancour within and between communities and respectfully ask Tūpuna Maunga Authority to move forward from this consultation in a manner that is true to your Integrated Management Plan statement about the tūpuna maunga values and pathways: “The values weave together and give expression to mana whenua and other world views, and the connections and histories in a manner that highlights the way in which these views complement each other and create a richness to the relationship that people have with the Tūpuna Maunga and multiple ways in which these relationships are thought of and expressed.”
Honour the Maunga’s members and supporters care deeply about the maunga as evidenced by our steadfast tree protection efforts over the past three years. Although many of us don’t belong to the Tāmaki Collective, we still have deeply held ancestral, spiritual and historical links to the maunga. We also care deeply about the maunga itself, and its environment and ecology. People from other maunga communities regularly tell us they feel the same about their local maunga.
The Treaty settlement for Auckland’s maunga was designed to foster a spirit of partnership and positive relationships between the Tāmaki Collective iwi and hapū and the other people of Auckland, which is why the Authority was established as a co-governance organisation. We are saddened by how things have played out over the past three years and encourage the Authority move forward in a positive and respectful way so that future maunga activities are cause for unity and celebration, not division and discord. So, please:
· Put Mother Nature’s wellbeing first
· Tread lightly
· Respect all cultures and histories
· Actively nurture positive relationships
· Engage with local communities in a way that enables constructive conversations rather than “consultations”
· Promote health and wellbeing for all
· Leave the existing native and non-native trees be while at the same time undertaking the native planting programme
Honour the Maunga's verbal submission
Here is the transcript of our verbal submission, delivered to the Authority’s hearing panel on Monday 31 October 2022.
Recently, the World Wildlife Fund reported that the world's wildlife populations have declined by more than two-thirds since 1970 due to deforestation, human exploitation, pollution, and climate change. A conservation expert observed: This "serious drop … tells us that nature is unravelling and the natural world is emptying." Our submission was prepared against this report’s backdrop, and that of massive tree loss in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland, including at nearby Unitec and on many private properties to make way for intensified housing. Mt Albert’s biodiversity is taking a massive hit these days and Ōwairaka maunga is set to become one of the area’s few large green spaces. The same can be said in other maunga areas, too.
Honour the Maunga has always supported succession to fully native vegetation, but argues for a much slower succession, as outlined in our written submission. Today we focus on the proposed IMP amendment in the context of the Collective Redress Act, the Integrated Management Plan, and environmental best practice.
Although the Collective Redress Act quite rightly provides mechanisms by which the Tāmaki Collective may exercise mana whenua and kaitiakitanga over the maunga, it is not a carte blanche arrangement. This is evidenced by TMA’s establishment as a co-governance body and the Act’s provision that the maunga be public reserves that are held by the trustee for the common benefit of all Aucklanders. The maunga trees are not on private property as such; they are on public reserves. Ratepayers fund maunga maintenance and capital works. The law requires the public be given the opportunity to have their say and their views be taken into account.
Taken into account’ doesn’t mean ‘pretend to listen then completely ignore’. It means engaging in good faith and genuinely, and respectfully, factoring those views into decision-making. And exercising mana whenua and kaitiakitanga need not require belittling and disrespecting the other people of Auckland, and the trees and other things they hold dear.
Yet the proposed amendment’s underpinning rationale does just that by implying that non-native trees harm and damage the maunga mauri and wairua, and by making derogatory statements about non-native trees (even when the same points could be made of the native species). It tramples on the other people of Auckland’s mana by implying that they and their environmental taonga are worthless.
We request that all inflammatory and derogatory references are removed from the amendments. But going even further, we request that the Authority goes back to square 1 on the Integrated Management Plan and consults around the plan itself rather than proposed amendments that people had no input into and that run counter to the original IMP’s intentions.
Many red flags have been raised in relation to this current consultation process and we get the strong sense that this is a box ticking exercise and there isn’t actually any intention to make many – if any – changes. Time will hopefully prove us wrong and that the end result will benefit all – the Earth Mother, the environment, the Tāmaki Collective and all the people of Auckland.
We note that a Chairperson’s address has been quietly added to the IMP in recent times – something that was not in the original version. This addition should have been included in the amendments document. In his address the Chair claims: “It was through the manaakitanga of the Auckland tribes with their Treaty settlement that the Tūpuna Maunga have been shared with all peoples.” We submit that this statement should be removed because, in reality, the maunga treaty settlement was contingent on the maunga remaining accessible to all Aucklanders. Agreeing to them being public reserves was a pragmatic decision, as were other decisions Tāmaki Collective members made in relation to this treaty settlement. If manaakitanga was a genuine consideration, then this current situation would never have arisen, and this current consultation would not be run in the way that it is.
The Chair also states: The plan acknowledges the diverse worldviews that add richness to the relationship Aucklanders have with these remarkable landscapes. It sets the foundation for how the Tūpuna Maunga are valued, restored, protected and managed. This sentiment is reflected in the IMP, which states: The Tūpuna Maunga are… increasingly important as spiritual and aesthetic anchors for all Auckland communities, and as valuable open spaces and places of refuge in an urban landscape. These statements and other aspects of the Plan itself signal the intention to show respect for all peoples and their histories, and for the TMA to have a positive relationship with local communities – and with the environment itself. Yet, the suggested amendments propose exactly the opposite by getting rid of the exotic and some native trees, creating largely bare, barren and uninviting landscapes with small pockets of mostly low-growing plantings. While the claimed “massive plantings of native species” sound impressive at face value, in reality they are minimal when the maunga land mass is taken into account, and when compared to other native restoration programmes as discussed in our written submission.
We submit that what you are planning to do to the maunga is going to significantly harm – not enhance – the natural environment for many decades to come. It will also disrespect the spiritual and aesthetic connections of a significant proportion of Aucklanders, including many Māori. Furthermore, the amended maunga plans don’t factor in climate change. Our climate is very different to what it was in past centuries, as are the flora and fauna. It is impossible to turn the clock back, but it is possible to create a positive, constructive and sustainable way forward that is informed and led by nature herself.
We’re sure we are not alone in having found the past three years challenging and unpleasant; it has felt like a battle for winners vs losers. It’s not healthy and in the long-term nobody actually wins. So, how to move forward in a way that respects the environment, and respects all people?
The Earth Mother always comes to mind when reflecting upon that question because humans regardless of race and culture keep getting in the way of her best efforts to protect herself, her children…and all of us.
Pre-European Māori were the first to modify the maunga and remove their vegetation before the Tāmaki isthmus was abandoned for many years during the early 19th century. This gave the Earth Mother a breather and she started to regrow the vegetation and begin the slow process of getting the maunga environments back to where she wanted them to be. Then the Crown and others put a stop to that, quarrying many of the maunga – some into oblivion. However, many Aucklanders from all walks of life were concerned and protested against the quarrying, which was eventually stopped.
Over the years various borough and city councils, and locals from all cultures and walks of life, planted native and non-native trees on the maunga. These grew large and attracted many birds and other lifeforms. The maunga was regaining her protective cloak. A different cloak to the one she had originally had, but one that she nurtured and one that supported a huge variety of increasingly native wildlife.
Fast forward to today. As anyone familiar with Ōwairaka and other maunga can attest, the large mature native and non-native trees have created a nursery for self-seeded natives. At Ōwairaka, natives comprise 99% of the self-seeded species. Mother Earth is gently and slowly guiding her children and the lifeforms they support in the direction she wants them to go, while at the same time providing much needed climate management and green spaces for the city’s 1.7 million residents.
Deforesting the maunga yet again disrespects the Earth Mother who nurtures us all and contributes to nature’s unravelling and the natural world’s emptying out from Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland.
We ask you to scrap the proposed IMP amendments and to involve Aucklanders in working with you to develop an action plan that puts the environment at the front and centre of decision-making. For if the maunga are well, then we are all well.
Respect Mt Richmond Ōtāhuhu’s verbal submission
See here for the written and verbal submissions from the Respect Mt Richmond Ōtāhuhu maunga tree protection group.