While on holiday in Central Otago in January, my wife Linda and I climbed Ben Lomond, the peak overlooking Queenstown above the Skyline Gondola. The views from the saddle and the summit were spectacular. But what we saw on the track to the summit was concerning. That was the uncontrolled germination of windblown wilding pines that are rapidly transforming and destroying the natural and iconic Central Otago alpine landscape. But what can we do to slow and reverse this unfolding ecological disaster?
Image credit: Wilding Pines near Coronet Peak, Queenstown, Central Otago, New Zealand – Department of Conservation website
References
- Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment (2025). Alt-F Reset: Examining the drivers of forestry in New Zealand. https://pce.parliament.nz/publications/alt-f-reset-examining-the-drivers-of-forestry-in-new-zealand/ Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 9 April 2025. Wellington: New Zealand.
- Mackey, B., Prentice, I. C., Steffen, W., House, J. I., Lindenmayer, D., Keith, H., & Berry, S. (2013). Untangling the confusion around land carbon science and climate change mitigation policy. Nature climate change, 3(6), 552-557.
- The Independent (2025). Tourists are cancelling trips to the US – here’s where they are going instead. 8 April 2025. https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/trump-travel-advisory-us-holidays-cancelled-b2728648.html
- Ross Bennett-Cook (2025). Tourists are cancelling trips to the US – here’s how this could affect its economy. https://theconversation.com/tourists-are-cancelling-trips-to-the-us-heres-how-this-could-affect-its-economy-252858#:~:text=A%20further%20escalation%20in%20tariff,some%20evidence%20of%20travel%20cancellations.
- Department of Conservation web page on Wilding Pines: https://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/pests-and-threats/weeds/common-weeds/wilding-conifers/
Transcript
Last week on 9 April New Zealand’s Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Simon Upton released his latest report. It presents an in-depth analysis of forestry in New Zealand, with a particular focus on the drivers of different forms of forestry. It makes fascinating reading. For starters it is important to note that there are different types of forests and very different views and interests in forest management.
First of all there are native forests and exotic forests. Native forests tend to be ancient and complex indigenous forest ecosystems. They exist in forest parks, national parks and other conservation estate designations and they are hugely important for conservation, biodiversity, recreation and tourism. Exotic forests exist where trees have been recently planted en mass for commercial purposes such as wood production and for carbon credits. These different forest regimes are driven by conservation outcomes and commercial returns respectively.
We can also think of permanent forests and short-term forests. Permanent forests, as the name suggests, are intended to be managed in the long-term, possibility indefinitely. Very few remain in lowland ecosystems which have been almost completely cleared for agriculture. Sadly land clearance has included steep hill country which in New Zealand tends to be unstable when vegetation cover is lost, and very prone to erosion.
By contrast, plantation forests have one or two tree species, similar age class and regular spacing and therefore very low biodiversity. These are also low in visual amenity, although might have other amenity values, such as recreation value where mountain bike trails may be constructed for example. But they are catastrophic in terms of biodiversity, not only in terms of monoculture and lack of ecological complexity, but also because exotic forests harbour exotic pest species such as pigs, deer, possums, goats and the like, which destroy native biodiversity and can spread diseases such as tuberculosis.
And there are other problems, such as loss of productive land through conversion to exotic forestry, landscape damage through clear felling, problems of erosion and poor management practices relating to slash (the waste material left after clear felling), and fire risk in a changing climate.
Another key term in this discussion is ngahere, the Māori word for trees and forests, which reminds us of the cultural significance of forests.
The Commissioner’s report is hugely important. It was inspired by some grand estimates of the future contribution of forests to New Zealand’s climate mitigation targets. Modelling of the potential for both native and exotic forests to contribute to Zealand’s net zero target for long-lived greenhouse gases by 2050 have contributed to what the Commissioner describes as ‘heavily distorted’ policy settings that are driving land management, land use conversion and afforestation practices in New Zealand.
The destruction of native forests and the planting of exotic forests has been the dominant trend to date. Forestry companies planted exotic forests to produce pulp and construction timber typically on land that relatively close to processing facilities and ports. In most cases the species of choice for forestry has been radiata pine. To quote the Commissioner: “Starting in the early twentieth century, radiata pine has become the dominant and unchallenged commercial option for large-scale forestry in New Zealand, with almost all managed for timber production under a clear-fell regime”.
All of this was before the creation of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS). The ETS was created in 2008 to function as a carbon market allowing forests to be planted for offsetting credit as an alternative to emissions reductions. This fundamentally redefined the commercial justification for forestry. The commercial returns generated by carbon credits has steadily accelerated the transition from pasture to pine plantations and the loss of sheep and beef farming which has become increasingly marginal over time. Now large areas of productive rural land are being committed to exotic tree plantations.
The ETS has become an economic driver of exotic forestry in New Zealand, which is itself driven by an environmental driver – the sequestering carbon to offset emissions. Unfortunately, as the Commissioner points out, the environmental driver is based on the deeply flawed assumption that there is an equivalence between carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion and their capture in stocks of biological carbon. The research of my colleague Brendan Mackey has shown how badly flawed this assumption is (see references below).
The PCE’s report highlights the environmental and economic risks that this course of development has created. The scale of land use change caused is being driven by the ETS with increasingly negative economic, social and environmental outcomes. But the PCE also points out that the ETS settings can be changed and argues that the ETS settings must change. It is necessary to phase forest offsets for fossil fuel emissions out of the ETS.
I was very interested to see the release of Simon Upton’s report. As I have mentioned, I have been increasingly aware of landscape transformations taking place in recent times. Three examples stand out. The first was when cycling through the Mackenzie two years ago on the Alps to Ocean section of a bike ride from Queen Charlotte Sound to Piopiotahi Milford Sound. When cycling between Lake Tekapo and Lake Ōhau I was shocked to see wind-blown wilding pine saplings popping up across the open landscape. Like dark green stubble on the dry summer vegetation – as far as the eye could see. The other was driving to Central Otago from Milton to Lawrence and Beaumont, and seeing extensive rural land conversion from productive pastures to exotic forestry. The beautiful rural landscape is being lost to extensive exotic forestry.
And most shockingly the Ben Lomond walk in January. After taking the gondola to Bob’s Peak the first part of our walk was through dense conifer pine forest. It was dark and foreboding, with no sub canopies; it was cold and silent – complete void of any birdlife and with no views whatsoever. After a few minutes of climbing along the track we emerged into the sun and into a transition ecology of mixed pine saplings competing with low lying indigenous flora.
We could see the lake below and the surrounding landscape opened up again as we emerged from the pine forest. Here in the sub alpine zone we could once again see and hear native bird species. Across the valley we could see extensive evidence of the conservation effort – dead pines trees – competing with indigenous beech species that reached up to the natural bush line. Here we could see rapid regeneration of invasive and fast-growing pines, but more worryingly, wind-blown dispersal of tiny pine saplings now growing far above the beech tree line, high into the alpine zone, all the way up to the saddle far above us.
Here we saw the efforts of the Whakatipu Conifer Wilding Pine conservation group and read information boards on ‘adopting a plot’. We could see the work of families and school groups, among others, who have adopted a plot on the mountain side to try to remove pines and protect the native flora that will otherwise be overwhelmed.
This natural landscape is in the advanced stages of transformation to a conifer monoculture of zero biodiversity and conservation value. The beautiful sub alpine and alpine landscapes of Central Otago are in the process of being lost.
It was a beautiful day and a spectacular hike to the summit. Wherever I could I pulled pine saplings out of the ground. Anything above about 50cms tall was too deeply rooted to physically pull out. When I returned home I joined the Whakatipu Wilding Conifer conservation group. Rather than adopt a plot, on future visits to Central Otago I will work for the group to combine walking in the hills and gullies with physically removing invasive wilding pines.
The purpose of the Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, for those who don’t know, is to advise the government of the day on matters of importance to the environment. The reports produced by the Commissioner and his team of researchers are hugely important in their own right, but also because they directly inform government policy recommendations. Much can be learned from these reports. But for some reason the policy recommendations put forward are rarely taken up by the government it seems.
The response from the current government late last week was generally dismissive. This does remind me that despite clear economic, environmental, social and cultural benefits, building support for significant reforms is always difficult. Policy advisors can never assume that policy makers will adopt strong, clear and actionable recommendations, because governments and citizens don’t necessarily see issues in the same way that researchers and policy advisors do, despite the evidence being presented.
It is critical to try to understand public views and the conditions under which the public will be willing to support – if not demand that – governments undertake reforms. So producing good policy documents is both a project end point but also an engagement and outreach starting point. From a political point of view there is a compromising balance between knowing what needs to be done (which can be very obvious) and knowing what needs to be done (or not done) in order to win the next election. The problem that making changes to the ETS may be unpopular among those who don’t want it to change for commercial reasons. According to Simon Upton planting trees is (quote) “a cheap and easy way of kicking the gross emissions reductions can down the road”. But, importantly, the reports exist and they do contribute to discussion and debate that hopefully will leave to change in due course.
While the government may be unresponsive to this report, we can consider the relevance of the report to tourism. Indeed Simon Upton’s report does make some mention of tourism directly or indirectly. For example the Commissioner’s report makes it clear that we must find ways to disengage from any activities that drive the planting of carbon sinks in the form of exotic pine forests.
In terms of cause, the carbon market has obvious environmental failings and we need to stop buying credits, which drives exotic forestry, as an alternative to gross emissions reductions. Tourism businesses should try to stop using the ETS to justify continued unrestrained consumption of high carbon travel. That said, and to its credit, Air New Zealand’s carbon offset investment strategy has given priority to protecting permanent native forests. A more diverse portfolio of investments in permanent carbon storage is obviously required. This will require changes to the ETS settings.
And in terms of effect, we must find ways to harness the power of tourism to transform. In this instance, tourism must align with the forestry transition that the Parliamentary Commissioner calls for. Much has been said about the power of tourism to raise awareness of indigenous values relating to te taiao – the environment – engaging visitors in planting native species and contributing to ecological restoration fits very nicely here.
The Commissioner’s report highlights the fact that degraded ecosystems such as exotic forests can be sources of rapid release carbon, though ecosystem depletion, erosion, forest fires and the impacts of out-of-control populations of browsing pests on native plant regeneration. To counter this tourism must advance regenerative pathways, informed by Te ao Māori, to advance the forest transition outlined by the PCE. Research is urgently needed to inform a tourism paradigm shift to align with and support positive long-term environmental outcomes. Not only in relation to carbon but also in relation to ecological restoration.
Clearly in tourism the social, cultural, environmental and economic benefits of native afforestation should be taken very seriously. But the potential contributions of tourism to these regenerative outcomes need to be better understood. Research is needed to bring the concept of regenerative tourism into much sharper focus. I am pleased to say that this work is in progress – my current PhD student Yi Bian is actively advancing our understanding of regenerative tourism in Aotearoa New Zealand. Her PhD investigates the potential for tourism to create positive environmental outcomes and her results will be the focus of forthcoming publications which I promise we will report upon in future podcasts.
To finish a few updates of potential interest. In podcast #20 I spoke about the ‘war on science’ in America and that US politics is driving changes in consumer demand. I have been interested to read that changes of consumer demand have extended to tourism, according to an article in the Independent newspaper and a piece by Ross Bennett-Cook from Leeds Beckett University published last week in The Conversation.
Recent forecasts of travel to the US have shifted from 9% growth this year to a projected 5.5% decline in visitor arrivals. It is expected that continuing tariff uncertainty and trade hostilities will result in further reductions in international tourism, to the tune of an estimated US$18 billion reduction in tourist spending in 2025.
Canada is America’s biggest international visitor market and was first to react to the tariffs. Canadian border crossings have fallen by up to 45% on some days and Air Canada has announced reduced flights to some US holiday destinations in response to falling demand.
A Canadian market research poll last month found that 36% of Canadians who had planned trips to the United States had already cancelled, while passenger bookings on flights from Canada to the US are down by over 70% compared to the same period last year. Meanwhile the US Travel Association has warned that even so much as a 10% reduction in Canadian inbound travel could result in a US$2.1 billion loss in spending, putting 140,000 hospitality jobs at risk.
These declines are of course driven by unfavourable attitudes towards America. Many oppose the current political regime, particularly its close alignment with Russia, its abandonment of European alliances particularly support for Ukraine, and its continued military support for Israel. The global trade war that the US has unilaterally triggered, has also caused enormous financial uncertainty and increased costs.
Equally, the US is now seen to be unwelcoming to visitors due to hostile rhetoric about foreigners, migrants and the LGBTQ+ community, loss of personal freedoms and cases of detainment at the US border. Many countries have issued travel advisories warning travellers of risks after some of their nationals have been arrested or detained at the US border.
It comes as no surprise that these articles report that attitudes towards the US have become increasingly negative since Trump’s re-election. The Independent reports that 53% of Brits, 56% of Germans, 63% of Swedes and 74% of Danes now view the US negatively. I saw on Stuff a poll of readers in New Zealand that asked “Have the events in the US made you less likely to travel there?” 92% said yes.
These reports speak to the economic and political power of tourism.
And in episode #21 I spoke about stabilisation wedges in reference to the ban on advertising of high fossil fuel products in The Hague in the Netherlands, including air travel and cruise packages. This podcast has led me to notice other stablisation wedges that are emerging. Last week I was chatting to an Uber driver about Uber Green, which is limited to drivers of electric and hybrid cars. It is usually the cheapest option so a good but unfortunately rare example of sustainability options that are better for the environments AND better for the wallet. She told me that Uber are changing the settings on Uber Green so that very soon only electric vehicles will qualify. This is a big step in the right direction to electrifying one important form of urban transport.
****
It is clear that tourism is shaped by societies, but this podcast reassures me that tourism can also contribute to reshaping societies, not only in terms of protecting and restoring forests, but also as an economic and political force for change.
