Your details
1. What is your name?
Name
(Required)
Daniel Frei
Forestry
106. Do you think we should look to forestry to provide a buffer in case other sectors of the economy under-deliver reductions, or to increase the ambition of our future international commitments?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Unticked
Yes
Radio button:
Ticked
No
Please write any supporting information here.
Using forestry as a carbon buffer will only be viable with mass plantations of exotic species, which should be kept to the absolute minimum needed to offset industry in the short term to avoid widespread ecological harm caused by exotic plantations
107. What do you think the Government could do to support new employment and enable employment transitions in rural communities affected by land-use change into forestry?
Please write your response here.
High value native forest for harvest e.g. Totara, Matai etc. High value domestic and export timber. NZ has got to stop low value export. LVL and other structural timbers are gaining momentum. We need to start thinking decades ahead, not in 3 year cycles.
If planting exotics limit to species with harvesting value e.g. Redwood, Macrocarpa etc that can be felled and reforested with native bush.
If planting exotics limit to species with harvesting value e.g. Redwood, Macrocarpa etc that can be felled and reforested with native bush.
108. What’s needed to make it more economically viable to establish and maintain native forest through planting or regeneration on private land?
Please write your response here.
One billion trees project grants have closed. We have recently bought a 15 hectare bock adjacent to the Ohau river. This needs native forest, however natives would earn us half the carbon income of pine. Pine will destroy the landscape but is lucrative. The government needs to honour commitments on existing pine plantations but should urgently put a deadline on new pine plantations. Removing the option of earning carbon credits from exotic plantations will remove the driver to plant them. Meanwhile, rising carbon costs will make native forests increasingly viable. Government subsidised native trees and grants for associated costs e.g. labour, tree guards, weed release etc could be considered.
109. What kinds of forests and forestry systems, for example long-rotation alternative exotic species, continuous canopy harvest, exotic to native transition, should the Government encourage and why?
Please write your response here.
If exotics are being planted to achieve short term carbon surplus to offset industry, then there should be a hard limit on the duration that credits are paid out e.g. 20 years. This would quite probably encourage planting of more native forests. Native forests will continue to absorb and store carbon in perpetuity, in addition to myriad ecological benefits.
a. Do you think limits are needed, for example, on different permanent exotic forest systems, and their location or management? Why or why not?
Yes.
Exotics should have a hard limit on the time they will attract carbon credits, which should be the absolute minimum time they are required to reduce carbon production from oter parts of the economy.
In addition there should be an exit strategy for these plantations i.e. a business plan for felling, harvesting, and end use for these plantations, as well as a plan for subsequent native regeneration. As such, these exotic plantations should only be allowed in areas with suitable access for harvest, and away from established native bush or sensitive areas e.g. rivers
Exotics should have a hard limit on the time they will attract carbon credits, which should be the absolute minimum time they are required to reduce carbon production from oter parts of the economy.
In addition there should be an exit strategy for these plantations i.e. a business plan for felling, harvesting, and end use for these plantations, as well as a plan for subsequent native regeneration. As such, these exotic plantations should only be allowed in areas with suitable access for harvest, and away from established native bush or sensitive areas e.g. rivers
110. If we used more wood and wood residues from our forests to replace high-emitting products and energy sources, would you support more afforestation? Why or why not?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Ticked
Yes
Radio button:
Unticked
No
Why or why not?
Take advantage of rapid growing native species e.g. Kanuka
114. Are there any other views you wish to share in relation to forestry?
Please write your response here.
Planting pines and other exotics in locations that will subsequently be difficult to control or non-viable to harvest is environmentally irresponsible. We should use the least exotics we can in order to bridge the gap, but they should only be supported in areas where harvest and subsequent native reforestation is viable.