Homeowners in suburban Sydney have used laws aimed at saving lives in bushfires to push up property values, secure precious water views and "annoy their neighbours", say NSW frontbenchers.
A year after the Baird government introduced its 10/50 land clearing scheme - designed to help homeowners in fire-prone areas - the laws will be tightened after a review uncovered widespread abuse.
"I am very conscious of the fact that the spirit of the law was breached all too often ... this was not meant to be legislation to improve views and million-dollar properties," said Emergency Services Minister David Elliott.
"The amendments are there to ensure people are protected in their own homes."
Environment Minister Mark Speakman said the government will act on 30 review recommendations, half of which involve greater environmental protections, including for koala habitats.
News that makes sense
Your trusted source for staying up-to-date with the world around you. Get free daily news updates and analysis, straight to your inbox.
"Unfortunately we've seen people abuse (the scheme) - we've seen people cut down trees for views, or cut down trees to annoy their neighbours," he said.
But both ministers defended the intent of the scheme, established after the 2013 bushfires in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney, where more than 200 homes were destroyed.
The 10/50 scheme allows homeowners in fire-prone areas to chop down trees within 10 metres of their homes and other types of vegetation within 50m.
The government and the Rural Fire Service (RFS) were deluged by more than 3500 submissions when they launched a review of the scheme within a few months of its introduction in August 2014.
Much of the concern centred on Sydney's once-leafy North Shore, where residents of suburbs like Hunters Hill and Lane Cove were wielding their chainsaws with zeal - though neither minister, nor RFS Acting Commissioner Rob Rogers, could recall a time when a local house was destroyed because of bushfire.
In well-heeled Mosman, residents were pulling down nearly one tree a day between August and November last year, according to the local council.
A spokeswoman said Mosman Council welcomed the prospective changes.
But much of the damage has been done.
"It is hoped these amendments would eliminate any further inappropriate tree felling as Mosman is still counting the cost of the removal of more than 150 large canopy trees and about 100 more small to medium-sized trees," the spokeswoman said.
Councils can now have low-risk pockets of bushland excluded from the scheme and anyone living less than 100m from a coast or mapped estuary will no longer be able to skip the usual process.
