Whose tree was it?

A Temuka couple faced a fine of up to $300,000 or a jail term for cutting down a rotting tree on their property.

Whose property was it? Theirs.

Whose tree was it? Theirs, but it was protected.

However, they didn’t know it was protected and their lawyer says there was nothing on the property title referring to the tree or its status.

In light of the background to felling the tree, the council agreed not to prosecute, but only if the Wests agreed to pay $3000 compensation.

The amount covered what would have been paid for getting resource consent and for the compensation for the loss of “amenity value” of the tree.

The council may have been within the letter of the law to prosecute but to do so in these circumstances would have been ridiculous.

And while $3,000 may be a fraction of what the couple could have been fined, it still looks like a very steep price to pay for resource consent and the amenity value of a rotting tree.

If the council wants to protect trees,  it has a responsibility to ensure those whose properties they are on are aware of that.

There must be a schedule of protected trees, how hard would it be for the council to ensure they are noted on property titles?

They should also think about the costs of protection.

Presumably a tree is protected so that the community, rather than the property owner, can enjoy its amenity values. In that case,  doesn’t the community have a responsibility for any costs associated with its  care including, when the time comes  as it does for all living things, its end?

Sadly not. This is a case where the public get the benefit and the private property owner pays the price.

Hat Tip: SOLO.