Kauri tree

Forums › Off topic › Kauri tree

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256531 11-Mar-2015 18:12

mattwnz:
Geektastic:
Presso: Whats everybody think of this Kauri tree drama that is unfolding up north (up north for me).

Find a solution to save the tree or cut it down with the protester in it ??

The latter. It's a tree. There's no shortage of them. One less enviro nutter would, on the other hand, be a benefit.

There is a shortage of hundreds of years old native trees though. We are not talking about fast growing pines that grows to full size in a generation. These old trees take hundreds of years to get to a large size, and they can live up to a thousand years. So they can't just be replaced. Councils do realise this, which is why they prevent their removal without resource consent.

I don't mind the removal of non native trees which are up to 30 years old, and can be replaced within a short period of time. But our forest and old trees are a huge part of NZ, and our tourism industry is based around this.

However in climate change terms, 100 fast growing trees are more use than one slow growing tree I suspect.

This is ONE tree. The tourism industry would be more concerned about bungee jumping being banned or losing their car keys....

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1256536 11-Mar-2015 18:23

Geektastic:
mattwnz:
Geektastic:
Presso: Whats everybody think of this Kauri tree drama that is unfolding up north (up north for me).

Find a solution to save the tree or cut it down with the protester in it ??

The latter. It's a tree. There's no shortage of them. One less enviro nutter would, on the other hand, be a benefit.

There is a shortage of hundreds of years old native trees though. We are not talking about fast growing pines that grows to full size in a generation. These old trees take hundreds of years to get to a large size, and they can live up to a thousand years. So they can't just be replaced. Councils do realise this, which is why they prevent their removal without resource consent.

I don't mind the removal of non native trees which are up to 30 years old, and can be replaced within a short period of time. But our forest and old trees are a huge part of NZ, and our tourism industry is based around this.

However in climate change terms, 100 fast growing trees are more use than one slow growing tree I suspect.

This is ONE tree. The tourism industry would be more concerned about bungee jumping being banned or losing their car keys....

It sets a precedent though. If one developer can remove a tree, than others will say that they should be able to remove their trees for development, as a precedent has been set. It is not as though NZ lacks clear land to build on either. There is a huge amount of land free of any trees around NZ for building houses on.

In this case, from what I have seen on the news, they appear to be removing quite a few trees, and it looks like a small ancient forest area. Many people like to live in those areas due to this special environment, which has it's own micro climate. I used to live in such an area myself, and it was full of native NZ birds. So this is why they are often heritage areas as they are special areas to be in, and not something that can just be created without hundreds of years of waiting.

Climate change doesn't come into it as far as I am concerned. We have bigger problems overseas with deforestation that will come back to bite us with that.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1256560 11-Mar-2015 19:05

Land owner comes across as a very rational chap

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11415515

Consulting with 7 iwi groups. I'm surprised there isn't a Taniwha living in the area who is needing some Koha to go away.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256561 11-Mar-2015 19:10

mattwnz:
Geektastic:
mattwnz:
Geektastic:
Presso: Whats everybody think of this Kauri tree drama that is unfolding up north (up north for me).

Find a solution to save the tree or cut it down with the protester in it ??

The latter. It's a tree. There's no shortage of them. One less enviro nutter would, on the other hand, be a benefit.

There is a shortage of hundreds of years old native trees though. We are not talking about fast growing pines that grows to full size in a generation. These old trees take hundreds of years to get to a large size, and they can live up to a thousand years. So they can't just be replaced. Councils do realise this, which is why they prevent their removal without resource consent.

I don't mind the removal of non native trees which are up to 30 years old, and can be replaced within a short period of time. But our forest and old trees are a huge part of NZ, and our tourism industry is based around this.

However in climate change terms, 100 fast growing trees are more use than one slow growing tree I suspect.

This is ONE tree. The tourism industry would be more concerned about bungee jumping being banned or losing their car keys....

It sets a precedent though. If one developer can remove a tree, than others will say that they should be able to remove their trees for development, as a precedent has been set. It is not as though NZ lacks clear land to build on either. There is a huge amount of land free of any trees around NZ for building houses on.

In this case, from what I have seen on the news, they appear to be removing quite a few trees, and it looks like a small ancient forest area. Many people like to live in those areas due to this special environment, which has it's own micro climate. I used to live in such an area myself, and it was full of native NZ birds. So this is why they are often heritage areas as they are special areas to be in, and not something that can just be created without hundreds of years of waiting.

Climate change doesn't come into it as far as I am concerned. We have bigger problems overseas with deforestation that will come back to bite us with that.

it isn't setting a precedent at all as it still has to get a permit and given this tree isn't protected it was given, if what is being reported is true then it has gone through the process but this isn't to say others can just do the same thing.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

vexxxboy

4243 posts

Uber Geek

#1256564 11-Mar-2015 19:17

i feel sorry for the land owner , he's done everything by the book, got permission and now he's got a nutter living in the tree, Media camped out in the street and is receiving death threats. Bet he wished now he just cut the damn tree down without telling anyone.

Common sense is not as common as you think.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1256565 11-Mar-2015 19:22

Get the fire hoses out and flush out the trespasser off his property

Get directional speakers out and blast his ear drums with high pitched music 24/7

Chop the tree down with him in it. See if he is a martyr.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256580 11-Mar-2015 20:01

if you want to cut the tree, cut the tree.

if you dón't want to cut the tree, don't cut the tree.

vote.

what's so hard about this???

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Jase2985

13457 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1256595 11-Mar-2015 20:06

the problem is the green brigade will be the majority who would vote, when the other people who don't care, who in fact are the actual majority wouldn't vote because they dont care enough to bother

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256596 11-Mar-2015 20:18

then don't cut it

Jase2985

13457 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1256597 11-Mar-2015 20:22

joker97: then don't cut it

great way to decide

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256601 11-Mar-2015 20:25

as i said. if you want to cut it, cut it down. if you don't want to cut it down, don't cut it down.

it won't be the end of the world either way.

Jase2985

13457 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1256606 11-Mar-2015 20:36

joker97: as i said. if you want to cut it, cut it down. if you don't want to cut it down, don't cut it down.

it won't be the end of the world either way.

hard to cut it down when there is a man in it :)

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256607 11-Mar-2015 20:39

Sounds like they're not cutting it down then.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1256615 11-Mar-2015 20:56

Jase2985:
joker97: as i said. if you want to cut it, cut it down. if you don't want to cut it down, don't cut it down.

it won't be the end of the world either way.

hard to cut it down when there is a man in it :)

Actually no, it's not hard at all. Gravity works exactly the same way whether Michael in his high vis vest is up the tree or not.

I see loads of neighbours are protesting too. Why don't they all pitch in and buy the property. Stupid question.

Lias

5589 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256619 11-Mar-2015 21:00

Should absolutely cut the tree down with him in it if he refuses to budge.

Hell fly me to Dorkland and I'll do it for free!

You want trees? Buy some land and grow your own, if I own property it should be mine to do whatever the hell I want with.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8