More than 25,000 specimens from 81 countries and 6 continents grow across 131 hectares, including 170 species currently on the IUCN world endangered list. Students are walking through one of the most significant plant conservation sites in the Southern Hemisphere.
Autumn (April) is the most dramatic season, when oaks, maples, ash, liquidambars, and larch produce colour rarely seen in New Zealand native bush. Spring brings magnolias, prunus, and daffodils. Every season offers something distinct. The contrast with local native vegetation is itself a science lesson.
Over 40 native and exotic bird species are present throughout the arboretum, drawn by the density and variety of food sources. Kereru, tui, and other native birds are regularly sighted. The birdlife represents an ecosystem that developed around the collection over more than a century.
Interactive displays on plants, seasons, and arboretum history. Seasonal exhibitions on subject themes. A children's play and learning area, and a microscope for examining specimens brought in from the walk. A useful anchor point before or after time in the collection.
William Douglas Cook began planting in 1910, eventually spending his entire fortune to create this collection in the Ngatapa hills. His story connects personal obsession, international plant networks, and the very long view of conservation. The Homestead Garden, dating from 1910, is maintained by volunteers and remains an integral part of the site.
All visits must be pre-booked. When you contact the Education Coordinator, specify year levels, group size, curriculum focus, and any activities you want included. Tailored activities require the most lead time.
Autumn (April) is the most visually striking time for deciduous colour. Spring offers flowering trees. Summer is green and good for bird observation. Winter is quieter but still rich. Match your visit to your curriculum focus if possible.
The arboretum is 35 km from Gisborne, approximately 30 minutes by road. Bus and coach parking is available on site. Plan for a full day if combining multiple activities. The on-site café is available for lunches and breaks.
Comfortable walking shoes are essential. The arboretum covers hilly terrain and some tracks are steep. Dress for the season. There are no bathroom facilities on the walking tracks away from the Visitor Centre. Plan your route accordingly.
Have students download iNaturalist and practise submitting observations at school before the visit. Enable location services. Students who arrive knowing how to photograph and submit a specimen will get considerably more from the visit than those learning the tool on the day.
The Douglas Cook Centre provides accommodation for up to 20 people: a studio with ensuite, a twin room, and two bunk rooms sleeping eight each. Linen provided, shared kitchen facilities. This makes a two day field study possible for senior students.
These prompts build on what students observed and experienced at Eastwoodhill. They work best when students have at least one iNaturalist observation from the visit to anchor their inquiry. The comparison between what a gen AI chatbot says and what the Education Coordinator, Discovery Centre, or iNaturalist expert identifiers say is the learning task. The AI output is not the destination.
Choose one tree you saw at Eastwoodhill. Ask a gen AI chatbot what country it originally comes from and what the weather is like there. How does that compare with Ngatapa? Why do you think it can grow here?
Describe the colour you saw on the trees to a gen AI chatbot and ask why deciduous trees change colour in autumn. Then ask why the native bush near your school does not do the same thing. What is the difference between deciduous and evergreen?
Ask a gen AI chatbot to tell you about William Douglas Cook, who planted Eastwoodhill starting in 1910. Then ask: why would someone spend all their money planting trees they might never see fully grown? Write or draw your answer.
Use your iNaturalist observation from the visit. Tell a gen AI chatbot what you saw and ask for three interesting facts about that plant or bird. Then check the AI answer against your iNaturalist identification. Did the two tools agree?
Ask a gen AI chatbot to explain what an arboretum is, what makes Eastwoodhill significant, and what ex-situ conservation means. How does Eastwoodhill fit that definition? What would be lost if the collection were destroyed?
Ask a gen AI chatbot to compare the climate of the Tairāwhiti region with the temperate zones where these trees originate. Why can they survive here? What does this tell you about the relationship between climate, latitude, and plant distribution?
Choose one IUCN-listed species from the Eastwoodhill collection. Ask a gen AI chatbot what threatens that species in its native range. Then ask: what can a living collection in New Zealand actually do to help? What are its limits as a conservation strategy?
Submit a photograph from your visit to iNaturalist. Then describe the same specimen to a gen AI chatbot without the photograph. Where do the identifications agree? Where do they differ? What does the difference reveal about how each tool works, and which is more reliable for cultivated arboretum specimens?
Ask a gen AI chatbot to explain the scientific case for ex-situ plant conservation and its limitations compared with in-situ conservation. Evaluate the response against what you observed at Eastwoodhill. Where does the AI account hold up? Where does it miss what a living arboretum actually provides?
Ask a gen AI chatbot: given that Eastwoodhill holds Northern Hemisphere temperate climate trees, how might climate change in the Tairāwhiti region affect the collection over the next 50 years? Evaluate the causal reasoning in the AI answer. Is it physically defensible? What would you need to know to test it?
For an arboretum specimen, compare: iNaturalist with location enabled, iNaturalist without location, and a gen AI chatbot description without a photograph. Document results systematically. What does the comparison reveal about training data, design assumptions, and appropriate use cases for each tool in a botanical or conservation context?
Ask a gen AI chatbot what a conservation masterplan for an arboretum needs to account for over a century. Ask it to identify the main risks to a collection like Eastwoodhill over that timescale. Compare the AI risk list with what you observed on site and what you know about the Tairāwhiti region. What did the AI miss or underweight?
| Level | Years 0–6 | Years 7–10 | Years 11–13 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Student names at least one tree they encountered at Eastwoodhill and can say where in the world it originally comes from. Understands the trees are real living things that were deliberately planted here over many years, not wild New Zealand bush. | Student identifies at least three species encountered, notes their country or region of origin, and makes a basic observation about how they differ in appearance from New Zealand native trees the student knows from local experience. | Student records species observed with country of origin, notes any IUCN-listed specimens encountered, and produces an initial assessment of what the geographic and taxonomic diversity of the collection tells them about its conservation significance. |
| 2 | Student explains in simple terms why someone built this collection: to keep rare trees safe in case they disappear from their home country, and to let people see trees from all over the world growing together in one place. | Student explains the founding story and conservation mission: Cook's vision, the role of the Trust, the concept of ex-situ conservation, and why a living collection of endangered trees has scientific value beyond what a seed bank alone could provide. | Student constructs an account of the arboretum's conservation rationale: ex-situ preservation, gene pool contribution, IUCN listing significance, and the difference between conservation in a species' country of origin and conservation in a surrogate environment. |
| 3 | Student asks a gen AI chatbot about a tree or bird they observed and compares the answer with what the Education Coordinator said or what the Discovery Centre showed. Can say whether the AI was accurate and explain one thing it got right or wrong. | Student uses iNaturalist and a gen AI chatbot to identify the same specimen and documents where they agree and differ. Considers what the AI might not know about cultivated arboretum specimens or regional New Zealand variants of the species. | Student analyses the reliability of AI identification and information across multiple specimens, draws conclusions about the conditions under which each tool is reliable, and evaluates the implications for using AI in botanical and conservation contexts. |
| 4 | Student explains what being at the arboretum added that a photograph, video, or AI explanation could not: the scale of the trees, the smell of autumn leaves and soil, the sound of the birds, the feel of bark. Can name one moment from the visit that surprised them. | Student articulates what direct observation in a living collection provides that secondary sources cannot: sensory experience of scale and age, the ability to observe bark, leaf, and form together in context, and the specific knowledge that came from being in that place on that day. | Student reflects on the epistemological difference between a living arboretum as a place of encounter and the same information mediated through databases, AI systems, or photographs: what is gained and lost in each mode of knowing, and what that implies for conservation education and research. |
| 5 | Student submits at least one iNaturalist observation from the visit and can explain that it will be seen by expert identifiers and may contribute to research. Generates one question they would like to investigate at the arboretum in a different season. | Student submits iNaturalist observations, checks back for expert identifications, and formulates a testable question: if they returned in a different season, what would they expect to see change, what would they measure, and how would they know if the data confirmed or challenged their prediction? | Student designs an inquiry or monitoring protocol suitable for repeat visits: specifies the species or indicators to track, the seasonal timing and rationale, the data to collect, and a hypothesis about how climate change or other pressures might affect the collection over the coming decades. |