‘No birds, no wildlife’: Nithin Kamath’s case for native trees in India’s rewilding efforts

As rewilding and land restoration gain momentum across India, conservationists are flagging a crucial but often overlooked factor: the choice of trees being planted. While large-scale plantation drives are frequently projected as climate and biodiversity solutions, experts warn that planting the wrong species — especially non-native trees — can undermine ecological recovery. 

Highlighting this concern, Zerodha Founder and CEO Nithin Kamath recently shared a personal reflection on X, underscoring why native trees are essential for meaningful rewilding. 

“When we discuss rewilding and land restoration, ensuring that native trees are used is equally important,” Kamath wrote, admitting that he had unknowingly planted Conocarpus, a non-native species, at his home nearly a decade ago. “No birds or animals have ever come to the tree,” he noted, pointing to the ecological disconnect such species create. 

Kamath’s experience mirrors a broader issue in India’s afforestation efforts, where fast-growing, non-native species like eucalyptus, conocarpus and silver oak are often favoured for convenience, aesthetics or rapid green cover. However, ecologists argue that these trees frequently fail to support local biodiversity and, in some cases, actively harm ecosystems. 

When green cover isn’t enough 

Native trees co-evolved with local birds, insects, mammals and microorganisms, forming complex food webs that sustain ecosystems. Non-native species, by contrast, often act as ecological dead ends — providing little food, shelter or nesting value for native fauna. 

Kamath observed that despite years of growth, his Conocarpus trees attracted no wildlife. “I also realised much later that these trees aren’t good for humans either. They cause allergic reactions in many people,” he wrote, adding that the decision to remove them now feels difficult because of the time invested, even if it may be necessary. 

Environmental researchers say this dilemma is common. Once planted at scale, non-native trees are hard to remove without social or emotional resistance, even when scientific evidence points to long-term harm. 

Ecological & human costs 

Beyond biodiversity loss, non-native trees can strain water resources, alter soil chemistry and increase health risks. Eucalyptus, for instance, is known for high water consumption, while Conocarpus pollen has been linked to respiratory allergies in urban areas. 

“Planting trees is not the same as restoring ecosystems,” says a conservation scientist familiar with restoration projects in the Western Ghats. “Rewilding is about bringing back natural processes, not just greenery.” 

Kamath echoed this sentiment, urging people to intervene when they see non-native species being planted. “Next time you see someone planting eucalyptus, conocarpus, or similar non-native species, make sure to stop them,” he wrote. 

Choosing the right tree 

To bridge the knowledge gap, Kamath highlighted Plantwise-India, a digital tool developed by a group of organisations including the Nature Conservation Foundation (NCF) and ERA, a Rainmatter-supported partner. The platform allows users to enter their latitude and longitude to receive recommendations on native plant species suited to their specific location. 

Currently operational in the Western Ghats, one of the world’s most significant biodiversity hotspots, Plantwise-India aims to prevent well-intentioned but ecologically damaging planting choices. Kamath expressed hope that the tool would expand nationwide, enabling people across India to verify what is truly native before planting.