Have your say on the maunga trees' fates
Background
By way of background, Tūpuna Maunga Authority wants to rid Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland’s volcanic cones (maunga) of all exotic trees - some 2500 in all. They had already felled hundreds of trees on three maunga and were about to destroy Ōwairaka Mt Albert’s 345 non-native trees when locals intervened and formed Honour the Maunga. See here for an explanatory article if this issue is new to you, and also this article.
Auckland couple Warwick and Averil Norman, who are not part of this group, initiated a judicial review and subsequent Court of Appeal action. That court - subsequently backed up by the Supreme Court - found Tūpuna Maunga Authority acted unlawfully by not consulting with anybody (even its own members) about the tree felling decision, and Auckland Council acted unlawfully by issuing a non-notified resource consent to fell Ōwairaka’s trees.
Although that decision was an important win, it leaves the door open for Tūpuna Maunga Authority to fell the maunga trees provided they consult with the public first - and that’s exactly what they are doing now.
Why it is very important to make a submission in support of keeping the maunga trees
There are two reasons why it is important you make a submission to this consultation:
1. If you don’t have your say, then your view won’t be heard. The trees don’t have voices so are relying on as many people as possible to speak in their favour.
2. Also, any tree felling resource consents would take account of submissions about how removing so many trees will affect people personally.
Three easy ways to make a submission – it need only take 5 minutes!
Here are three easy ways to make a submission - choose the option that works best for you.
1. If you are pushed for time or are not used to doing submissions then click here for a really fast and easy way to quickly make a submission.
OR
2. You can also simply write an email to: MaungaAuthority@aklc.govt.nz stating that you don’t want any trees to be cut down on any of the maunga / volcanic cones, and then briefly explain why. If you need some inspiration to get started, then see here for examples of submissions that other people have written.
OR
3. If you would like to go into more detail in your submission, then see below for more information and some ideas about what you could include.
The deadline for submissions is 5 pm, Saturday 8 October 2022.
IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER WHEN MAKING A SUBMISSION
If you are using options 2 or 3 (above) to write your own submission, then here are some handy hints:
At the risk of stating the obvious, specifically say you don't want the exotic trees to be cut down.
Be polite, no matter how angry or upset you may feel about the situation. Abusive or impolite comments may result in your submission being discarded.
See below for ideas about topics your submission can / cannot include. Also include information about your own personal enjoyment of the maunga, and spiritual / historic / emotional connections with it.
If you would also like to make an oral submission, then state this in your written submission. You will then be notified of oral submission dates / location. Important! Oral presentations at the hearing will be for a maximum of 10-minutes (including questions). Time out your presentation beforehand because you WILL be cut off the second your oral presentation hits 10 minutes. Best to time it for 8 minutes, to allow time for any questions. The Authority has advised that submission material should not be repeated.
With written and oral submissions, it is vital to ensure your submission 100% keeps to the topic - the proposed amendments to the Integrated Management Plan.
If you do not keep to the topic then this might result in the Authority discarding your submission! "Out of scope" topics include:
- Views on Treaty settlements - Legislation vested ownership of the maunga in a collective of iwi and hapū, with the lands to be held on trust for the benefit of them and all Aucklanders. The nature of the Treaty settlement is NOT part of the consultation so submissions should not include views for or against Treaty settlements because this topic is outside this consultation's scope.
- Legislation established Tūpuna Maunga Authority as a co-governance body. Therefore the fact that the Authority is a co-governance entity is outside this consultation's scope.
Do not duplicate submissions because there is a risk they will be counted as one.
Submissions don't have to be complicated or technical. It is enough to simply say you don't want any trees to be felled and to explain why you feel this way and how the maunga are special to you. You can also talk aobut how you felt in relation to those maunga where the exotic trees have already been removed.
The Authority’s consultation
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
These maunga are the focus of the consultation because non-notified resource consents are currently live for mass felling the exotic trees on those maunga. In Ōwairaka Mt Albert’s case the resource consent was withdrawn due to the court’s decision but no doubt there are plans to reinstate it. We anticipate that in time the Authority eventually will move to fell all exotic and some native trees on all of the other maunga, so the outcome of this consultation matters to those maunga trees too.
This consultation is very important and it is vital that as many people as possible have their say in support of retaining all native and non-native trees on Auckland’s maunga so that succession to fully native vegetation takes place over many decades, not months.
Your feedback will not only inform the Authority of the public’s views, but - importantly - may also be taken into consideration in the tree felling resource consenting process.
See below for guidance on information you may wish to consider when writing your submission. These are just suggestions and you don’t need to cover everything there! The purpose is to give you some ideas about what your submission could cover.
View the proposed Integrated Management Plan amendments here. The Authority’s amendment document sizing makes it difficult to print out so click here to download a print-friendly version that we have created. View the original Integrated Management Plan in full here.
Click on the links below to 'jump' to the following topics
Translations of some Māori language terms used in the proposed amendments
Key points about the proposed Integrated Management Plan amendments
Some points you may choose to include in your submission
Personal, family and community connections with the maunga, the trees and the wildlife the trees support
Mass felling is bad for taiao / the environment
Misalignment with Tupuna Maunga values
Pest species
Removal of native tree species
Planting numbers not as impressive as they might appear
Other points to consider including in your submission
It’s about so much more than the earth, the trees and birds
A positive vision for the future
Translations of some Māori language terms used in the proposed amendments:
A number of Māori language terms are used in the proposed Integrated Management Plan amendment document. Here are translations for some of them:
Mokomoko: Lizard / skink / gecko
Pā harakeke: Flax garden
Mara kai: Food garden
Ngāhere: Forest
Raranga: Flax for weaving
Rongoa: Medicinal plants
Whakairo: Kete/basket weaving
Key points about the proposed Integrated Management Plan amendments
View the proposed amendments here. The Authority’s amendment document’s sizing makes it difficult to print out so click here to download a print-friendly version that we have created. View the original Integrated Management Plan in full here.
The key take-outs are as follows:
The Authority proposes to remove (virtually) all exotic trees from the maunga for no other reason than they are non-native.
Although it undertakes to plant thousands of natives to “replace” the exotics, a closer look at what is planned reveals there is absolutely 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. See below for more information.
The proposed Integrated Management Plan amendment also 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 archeological features such as terracing, etc. While they may not doing so in the near future, ratifying this Integrated Management Plan amendment gives the Authority license to fell native trees should they so wish.
The plan’s proposed amendments state that all tree species listed in the Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) will be removed. Yet we have seen recent Authority communications that reveal they are unaware some species (such as Japanese flowering cherry Prunus serrulata) have been taken out of that plan’s pest list because they are not invasive species! See below for more information.
Note that the amendments refer to the following policies, but they are not on the Authority’s website. We will endeavor to get the policies posted: Filming & Events Framework / Health & Safety / Tupuna Maunga Weed Control Programme / Integrated Public Access Times Decision / Bylaws review.
Some points you may choose to include in your submission
Talk about your personal, family and community connections with the maunga, the trees and the wildlife they support
It is important that Tūpuna Maunga Authority - and any Auckland Council commissioner who may in future be considering tree felling resource consents - understands the deep personal and spiritual connections people from all walks of life feel with the maunga and its trees, birds and other wildlife. We encourage your submission to include things like:
Talk about the specific trees that are important to you personally, and why.
Particular parts of the maunga that are special to you, and why.
Talk about the nature and /or duration of your personal connection with the maunga and the ways you use it (e.g. recreation, chilling out, spiritual, connecting with nature, de-stressing, exercise, etc.).
Talk about the nature and/or duration of your family’s connection with the maunga, the trees and the wildlife.
Talk about how you would feel if all the exotic trees were felled. You can draw upon how you felt about the exotics being felled on Ōhuirangi Pigeon Mountain, Maungarei Mt Wellington and Te Pane o Mataoho Mangere Mountain.
This is what you can expect to see if Tūpuna Maunga Authority proceeds with its tree felling plans. From left: Ōhuirangi Pigeon Mountain, Maungarei Mt Wellington, and Te Pane o Mataoho Mangere Mountain.
Mass felling trees is bad for taiao / the environment!
It is a climate emergency and Auckland is losing green spaces at a frightening rate as the city undergoes intensification; we need trees more than ever.
Removing hundreds of healthy mature trees from each maunga in a short timeframe will have devastating effects on the natural environment, as seen at Maungarei Mt Wellington, Ōhuirangi Pigeon Mountain and Te Pane o Mataoho Mangere Mountain.
Maunga environments are harsh - being very exposed to the elements and having thin, almost non-existent top soils. Mature trees help prevent erosion and stormwater runoff - a big issue now that climate change is resulting in more extreme weather.
The proposed Integrated Management Plan amendments talk about how getting rid of the exotics will “restore and enhance the mauri (life-force) and wairua (spirit/soul) of the maunga. This is an ideologically driven human construct! Mother Nature does not discriminate between native and non-native; they are all her children.
Take a look for yourself by visiting the three bleak maunga where Tūpuna Maunga Authority has felled hundreds of non-native trees and planted small areas of mostly low-growing species. Then go for a walk on Ōwairaka Mt Albert and Ōtāhuhu Mt Richmond, which are both thrumming with life. It’s clear which ones have the strongest mauri and wairua.
Maungarei Mt Wellington is one of several maunga harmed by fire in recent years. 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 dries out where it grows on open ground. This creates a massive fire risk.
Misalignment with the Integrated Management Plan's tupuna maunga values
The Integrated Management Plan sets out values and pathways to achieve the integrated outcomes for all the maunga. The plan goes on to say (and we quote): a. The Values provide the tika (correct) framework for the care and protection of the Tūpuna Maunga. b. The Pathways elaborate and give tangible expression to the Values. They are guiding principles and objectives that set the direction for the Tūpuna Maunga Authority to protect and care for the Tūpuna Maunga and provide a crucial framework for decision-making.
You can find the tūpuna maunga values in this section of the Integrated Management Plan.
However, the proposed tree felling amendments contradict a number of those values, such as:
VALUE - Waituatanga / Spiritual: Destroying all the exotic trees breaches the “tread gently: part of that value.
VALUE - Mana Aotūroa / Cultural and Heritage: Getting rid of all the exotic trees breaches the ”recognise European and other histories and interaction with the maunga” part of that value.
VALUE - Mauri Pūnaha Hauropi / Ecology and Biodiversity: Ridding Auckland’s maunga of hundreds of trees and replacing them with mostly grasses, flaxes and shrubs contradicts the “Maunga tū mauri ora, maunga to Makaurau ora / if the Maunga are well, Auckland is well” part of that value.
VALUE - Mana Hononga Tangata / Living Connection: Felling the exotic trees against strong ongoing community opposition contradicts the “Actively nurture positive relationships” part of that value.
How you can address these points in your submission: Use your own words to discuss your thoughts and concerns about the values’ intentions that are being breached.
Pest species
The plan’s proposed amendments state that all tree species listed in the Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) will be removed. The Authority regularly refers to Japanese flowering cherry (Prunus serrulata) as being a pest species even though it was removed from that plan’s pest list because they are infertile hybrids that are non-invasive species.
The following lists show which the Regional Pest Management Plan species are actually present on each of the four maunga that are currently being consulted about. As you will see, it’s not at all cut and dried with some of those species.
Comments re: "pest" trees on Ōwairaka Mt Albert
| Species listed in regional pest management plan | Number | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Acmena smithii (Monkey Apple) | 5 | - |
| Banksia integrifolia (Banksia) | 26 | See here for DOC officials email that expressed concern about how removing the banksia would affect native birds |
| Lagunaria patersonia (Norfolk Island hibiscus) | 1 | - |
| Ligustrum lucidum (privet) | 1 | - |
| Ligustrum sinense (Chinese privet) | 1 | - |
| Prunus species on ARMP list | 0 | Tūpuna Maunga Authority has inaccurately included Ōwairaka Mt Albert's cherries as being on the pest list. However, the 131 cherries on the maunga are all Prunus serrulata - an infertile hybrid that has been excluded from the pest list. |
Comments re: "pest" trees on Ōtāhuhu Mt Richmond
| Species listed in regional pest management plan | Number | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Acmena smithii (Monkey Apple) | 15 | - |
| Eriobotrya japonica (loquat) | 2 | - |
| Ficus macrophylla (Moreton Bay fig) | 26 | - |
| Phoenix canariensis (Phoenix palm) | 5 | - |
| Prunus species on ARMP list | 0 | Tūpuna Maunga Authority has inaccurately included Ōtahuhu Mt Richmond's cherry as being on the pest list. However, the 1 cherry on the maunga is Prunus serrulata - an infertile hybrid that has been excluded from the pest list. |
Comments re: "pest" trees on Puketāpapa Mt Roskill
| Species listed in regional pest management plan | Number | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Acmena smithii (Monkey Apple) | 10 | - |
| Banksia integrifolia (Banksia) | 2 | See here for DOC officials email that expressed concern about how removing the banksia would affect native birds |
| Eriobotrya japonica (loquat) | 1 | - |
| Ficus macrophylla (Moreton Bay fig) | 2 | - |
| Phoenix canariensis (Phoenix Palm) | 15 | - |
| Prunus species on ARMP list | 0 | Tūpuna Maunga Authority has inaccurately included Puketapapa Mt Roskill's cherries as being on the pest list. However, the maunga's 12 cherries are all Prunus serrulata - an infertile hybrid that has been excluded from the pest list. |
| Schinus terebinthiflous (peppertree) | 5 | - |
Comments re: "pest" trees on Te Tātua a Riukiuta Big King
| Species listed in regional pest management plan | Number | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Acacia sp (wattle) | 3 | - |
| Acmena smithii (Monkey Apple) | 20 | - |
| Cotoneaster | 3 | It is questionable whether the species of Cotoneaster found on Big King is one of the two species in the regional pest list. |
| Eriobotrya japonica (loquat) | 4 | - |
| Euonymus japonicus (Japanese spindle) | 5 | - |
| Ligustrum lucidum (privet) | 28 | - |
| Ligustrum sinense (Chinese privet) | 1 | - |
| Prunus species on ARMP list | 0 | Tūpuna Maunga Authority has inaccurately included the maunga's cherries as being on the pest list. However, the 60 cherries on the maunga are all Prunus serrulata - an infertile hybrid that has been excluded from the pest list. |
Pictured left: It is questionable whether the species of Cotonester listed in the regional pest management plan is the same Cotonester species that can be found on some of the maunga. Pictured right: The flowering cherries on Ōwairaka Mt Albert and other maunga are infertile cultivars, which have been removed from the regional pest list.
Removal of native tree species
The Integrated Management Plan amendments talk about opening up the sight lines between maunga, and protecting archaeological values before going on to say this may mean “native and non-native trees may also need to be removed”.
For a start, having trees on the maunga won’t ruin the site lines because the maunga’s forms can still be seen regardless of whether or not trees are there.
The Authority often talks about the important of the tihi (summits) being able to see each other. As can be seen here on Ōwairaka Mt Albert’s tihi, a pohutukawa grove is blocking the sightline to Maungawhau Mt Eden.
The Authority’s proposed amendment to the Integrated Management Plan paves the way for these and other native trees to be felled in future.
Planting numbers not as impressive as they would appear
Although it undertakes to plant thousands of natives to “replace” the exotics, a closer look at what is planned reveals there is absolutely no intention to cloak the maunga in trees or to come even close to restoring the environment they will destroy in mass felling the current trees. Most plantings will be low-growing grasses, flaxes and shrubs. See here for an analysis of the Authority’s Ōwairaka Mt Albert native plantings; the picture is very similar on other maunga. These plantings can never replace the carbon sequestration of the exotic trees that will be removed; nor can they provide the same level of food and homes for birds and other wildlife.
Also, the planting numbers sound impressive when taken at face value but a comparison with Tiritirimatangi’s native restoration programme shows the maunga ones don’t even come close. See here to find out more.
The intended effect is 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.
Several years ago Tūpuna Maunga Authority removed a grove of around 100 old olives from this steep slope on Ōtāhuhu Mt Richmond, leaving a barren eroding landscape. The ruru (moreporks) that lived in those trees left and never returned.
Other points to consider including in your submission
There are many other points you can discuss in your submission, for example:
The trees’ amenity value: This is planning speak for the way trees make the surroundings look more pleasant.
Health & safety: The Authority’s proposed amendments (and their previous communications) strongly signal they will use health & safety as an excuse to get rid of exotic trees in particular. Yet there has never been any kind of formal assessment of the maunga trees. Any such assessment should be undertaken by a qualified arborist and done on a tree-by-tree basis.
Recreational value: Discuss how having a pleasant green space to enjoy is important to your recreational pursuits. Would having a barren, largely bare landscape make you want to go there?
The trees' heritage value: Many maunga trees have significant heritage value so you may like to discuss these trees' importance to you and your community in your submission. See here for some Ōwairaka Mt Albert heritage tree examples.
Note the proposed amendment's dismissive comment ..."Non-native trees have been randomly planted without any comprehensive plan for their future management..." The same can be said for most of the maunga's trees. Significantly many of the native species were "randomly" planted by locals over the years.
It's about so much more than the earth, the trees and birds
Much ado is made about protecting the maunga itself, its trees and its birds. But what about all the other native lifeforms that co-exist with, and depend upon, the trees? Felling hundreds of healthy mature trees and largely replacing them with flaxes, grasses and low-growing species will destroy habitats for many of the exquisite lifeforms that depend upon them.
From left (all taken at Ōwairaka Mt Albert): 1. Native mushrooms growing underneath mature trees. 2. Mosses and lichens festooning cherry trees. 3. A kahukura red admiral sunning itself on a eucalyptus leaf 4. Native fern growing at the foot of a cherry.