Tree Climbing at School: Managed Play Outside NZS 5828

Tree climbing is something many of us remember fondly from our own childhoods. It’s active, challenging, confidence-building—and still very much part of free play in many New Zealand schools today.

During playground inspections, we regularly observe trees that are clearly being used by students for climbing. In many cases, schools are comfortable with a managed version of this activity and actively support it as part of a balanced play environment. That approach is entirely reasonable—but it does require clarity around how tree climbing is managed for safety, particularly because it sits outside the scope of NZS 5828.

This article explains what that means in practice and outlines the key considerations schools and Boards of Trustees (BOTs) should be addressing.

Tree Climbing and NZS 5828 – Understanding the Boundary

NZS 5828 applies to designed and installed playground equipment. Trees—being natural features—are not typically playground equipment and are therefore not assessed for compliance under the standard.

That does not mean tree climbing is prohibited, unsafe, or unmanaged. It simply means responsibility for risk identification and control sits with the school under its general health and safety and risk management framework, rather than under playground compliance.

In short:

Tree climbing is a governance and management issue, not a compliance one.

However, actively climbing trees does introduce very real risk in the event of a fall, particularly for head, neck, and spinal injuries. While NZS 5828 does not apply directly, many of its underlying principles—such as falling space, impact attenuation, and hazard management—are highly relevant and should be considered as part of a sensible risk-management approach.

Why Schools Should Consider Allowing Tree Climbing

When managed appropriately, tree climbing can support:

• Physical strength, balance, and coordination

• Risk awareness and decision-making

• Confidence, resilience, and independence

• Connection with nature and outdoor environments

The goal is not to remove risk entirely, but to manage it sensibly and proportionately.

Key Safety Considerations for Managed Tree Climbing

Where tree climbing is permitted, there are several fundamental risks that should be acknowledged and actively controlled.

1. Fall Hazards and Impact Risks

Falls are the primary foreseeable hazard associated with tree climbing. Key considerations include:

• Falls onto hard or blunt objects such as exposed tree roots, compacted soil, grass, rocks, edging, concrete paths, or nearby fixed elements

• Impacts between branches, trunks, or adjacent trees, particularly where canopies overlap

• Secondary impacts, where a falling child may strike multiple branches at different heights

Identifying and managing what a child could reasonably fall onto is critical.

2. Falling Space and Surface Management

The area beneath approved climbing trees should be treated as an informal falling space:

• Keep the area clear of hard obstructions and unnecessary fixtures

• Where practicable, provide a loose-fill impact-attenuating surface such as bark or woodchip around the base of the tree

• Ensure loose-fill is maintained at an adequate and consistent depth

  • As a guide, a minimum of 300 mm loose-fill depth is recommended where the potential fall height exceeds 1000 mm

  • Regular checks should be undertaken to manage displacement and compaction

Good surface management significantly reduces the severity of head injuries should a fall occur.

3. Height Management

Unrestricted height is one of the most common unmanaged risks we observe.

Best practice includes:

• Establishing a maximum allowable climbing height, determined by the BOT and informed by surface type and site conditions

• Clearly communicating that height limit to students

• Using visual indicators such as paint marks, signage, or naturally defined branch limits to reinforce expectations

Playsafe guidance: Even with good impact surfacing in place, we recommend never encouraging or permitting climbing beyond 2000 mm fall height in trees.

Clear boundaries help children self-regulate and reduce the need for constant intervention.

4. Tree Selection and Ongoing Condition

Not every tree is suitable for climbing.

Schools should ensure that:

• Only trees assessed as structurally sound and appropriate are permitted for climbing

• Trees are visually inspected routinely for deadwood, unstable branches, decay, or damage

• Any tree presenting increased risk is temporarily or permanently removed from climbing use until issues are resolved

Depending on tree species, age, and usage, periodic arborist assessment may also be appropriate.

5. Supervision and Policy Controls

Tree climbing should never exist in a policy vacuum.

At a minimum, schools should have:

• A documented tree-climbing policy or risk-benefit assessment, endorsed by the BOT

• Defined supervision expectations, particularly for younger students

• Clear behavioural rules, with active management of unsafe behaviours such as jumping from height, pushing, or overcrowding

Documented controls provide clarity for staff, students, and the wider school community.

A Balanced, Defensible Approach

Tree climbing does not need to be eliminated simply because it falls outside NZS 5828. However, its continued use must be intentional, managed, and regularly reviewed.

When supported by:

• Clear governance

• Defined physical controls

• Appropriate supervision

• Ongoing inspection and review

…tree climbing can remain a valuable, defensible, and developmentally rich part of a school’s play environment.

At Playsafe, we’re strong advocates for balanced play—where developmental benefit and safety management sit side by side, rather than in opposition.

If you’d like support reviewing tree climbing on your site, developing a risk assessment or policy, or integrating this into your wider playground management approach, feel free to get in touch.