Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Forestry

Let Us Keep Harvesting Timber: Media Release from NSW Private Native Forests Group

By

“The sustainable management of native timber on private land is an important income stream for many farming families struggling to survive the current drought,” said Andrew Hurford, spokesperson for the New South Wales Private Native Forests Group.

“For decades, [Australian] farmers have managed small forest holdings for times such as these – to help put food on the table for their families.

“Calls by Sydney-based greens to increase restrictions on the harvesting of private timber is a cruel blow to many farming families across the state,” said Mr Hurford.

Not only do private native forests provide a living for farmers in these times of stress, but, just as importantly provide work for thousands of timber workers.

“The money generated by private native forestry during times of drought helps to keep small, struggling country towns afloat.

“When the wheat crop fails and you have to sell your livestock because of a lack of rain, income sourced from the sustainable harvesting of timber is a life-saver,” said Mr Hurford.

On the Mid-North Coast, private native forestry generates a staggering $120 million each year to drought stricken communities and employs over 850 workers.

In the Riverina, in south west NSW, the industry contributes approximately $16.5 million each year and over 180 jobs.

“The flow-on effects to the rest of the community cannot be underestimated. It’s the shop keeper, teacher and the local mechanic who are forced to pack-up as well,” added Mr Hurford.

In August last year, the NSW Government was forced by angry farmers, timber mill owners and workers to shelve its plan to introduce a ‘Code’ that would have seen 60 per cent of forests on private land ‘locked-up’ into de facto National Parks.

Mr Hurford fears that if the ‘Code’ goes ahead dozens of communities will suffer the same fate as the Pilliga community in north-west NSW where the State Government ‘locked-up’ the Pilliga Forest into a National Park.

“It was devastating, over $40 million was stripped from local economies, six timber mills were forced to close and over 400 jobs lost. Now the towns have been left to die,” Mr Hurford said.

“With green preferences up for grabs at the next State election, the industry is fearful that an adverse decision restricting timber on private land could result in the loss of 3,000 jobs and $300 million from the NSW regional economy.

“Sound forest management can continue to provide multiple outcomes for the environment, regional communities and the economy. Forestry management actually stimulates the growth of healthy trees, healthy environments and healthy communities,” said Mr Hurford.

————————–
This is the text from a media release from the NSW Private Native Forests Group issued on 9th January 2007.

Treaty troubles

By

In Matthew Denholm’s article in Saturday’s Australian, Greens Senator Bob Brown describes a Howard Government proposal to amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999, as “…an absolutely pivotal moment in Australian environmental history.”

In a federal court case brought by Senator Brown, Justice Shane Marshall found Forestry Tasmania’s exemption from the EPBC Act did not apply at Wielangta.

Under the EPBC Act, a person or corporation must not take an action that is likely to, or will have, a significant impact on a listed threatened species included in the endangered category. The threatened species in this case include the Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle, the broad-toothed stag beetle and the swift parrot. Under another section of the same act, however, approval is not needed for forestry operations permitted by Regional Forest Agreements (RFA).

The RFA definition of “protect” lay at the centre of contention. The applicant submitted that ‘agrees to protect’ means ‘deliver protection of’ and not ‘agrees to try and protect’ or ‘consider protecting’.

According to the article, Forestry and Conservation Minister, Senator Abetz, said the judgment appeared to create a definition of “protect” that went far beyond that envisaged by commonwealth and state governments. Amendments to the act and the RFA might be necessary and could constitute a speedier way of returning certainty than appealing against the decision.

Senator Brown is quoted as saying “the Government would need to rewrite the EPBC Act to get around the ruling and most likely withdraw from international biodiversity conventions.”

As ratified treaties bind Australia in international law, the EPBC Act is constructed in conformity with its international obligations. The Commonwealth Constitution does not provide the Parliament with specified powers to legislate in respect to the environment in any way, other than under the Section 51(xxix) External Affairs power.

Win for Bob Brown, Loss for Forests

By

Yesterday the Federal Court in Hobart ruled that logging operations in the Wielangta forest in south-east Tasmania breach an agreement between the Australian and Tasmanian governments and that the logging company does not have an exemption under relevant environment protection laws.

Senator Brown had argued in court that forestry operations endangered a rare beetle, the swift parrot and the wedge-tailed eagle.

Since the ruling Senator Brown has suggested that all logging operations in Tasmania are a threat to rare and endangered species and that the ruling should be the catalyst for an immediate review of all logging operations in Australia.

Also, according to Senator Brown’s website:

“The Judge pointed out that the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act requires more than avoiding harm – it requires that logging plans help the rare species populations to recover.

Here are paragraphs 281 and 282 of Judge Marshall’s 301 paragraph ruling:

281 I do not consider that the State has protected the eagle by applying relevant management prescriptions. Management prescriptions have helped to slow the eagle’s extinction but have not protected it in the sense of either maintaining existing numbers or restoring the species to pre-threatened levels.

Will the State protect the three species by applying relevant management prescriptions?

282 It is unlikely the State can, by management prescriptions, protect the eagle. As to the beetle and the parrot, the State must urge Forestry Tasmania to take a far more protective stance in respect of these species by relevant management prescriptions before it can be said it will protect them. On the evidence before the Court, given Forestry Tasmania’s satisfaction with current arrangements, I consider that protection by management prescriptions in the future is unlikely.”

Cinders, a regular contributor at this blog, sent me the following note:

“The Federal Court has found that forestry operations in the Wielangta forest area have not been carried out in accordance with the Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) by reference to clause 68.

Clause 68 of the Tasmanian RFA states that: The State agrees to protect the Priority Species listed in Attachment 2 (Part A) through the CAR Reserve System or by applying relevant management prescriptions.

The state government has created a reserve system of 2.7 million hectares including 97% of high quality wilderness, 45% of the State’s Native forest and over 1 million hectares, yet the judge ruled that this reserve system was not adequate to protect three threatened species listed in attachment 2 (Part A) of the Tasmanian RFA.

He also found that management prescription introduced by the state through its experts in the Department of the Environment, funded with millions of dollars from taxpayers, and also through Forestry Tasmania’s management systems and forest practice planning systems were inadequate to protect the species.

I would argue that the “protection” failed last week when wildfire consumed the proposed harvesting coupe and much of the surrounding forest!

Despite the Court appointed expert stating “that the forestry operations in Wielangta in coupes 17E and 19D and the proposed forestry operations in Wielangta in coupes other than 17E and 19D are not likely to have a significant impact on the eagle, having regard to its endangered status and all other threats to the eagle.”

The judge perferred to use legal precedent and interpretation to determine that there would be significant impact.

The upshot of all this legal arguement in a forest that is not pristine but has been heavily harvested in the past is to now create uncertainty for timber workers and their families in the week before Christmas.

In a Media release issued yesterday, Barry Chipman, State Manager of Timber Communities Australia said:

“This is a lousy Christmas present to the families of forest workers and dependent businesses.”

“The federal court’s decision not only endangers the RFA but the jobs of over 10,000 timber workers in Tasmania.”

The full judgment can be found at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2006/1729.html .

Cinders.

——————-

I have previously written about the Wielangta forest here: https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/001746.html

National Park Declaration Didn’t Save Tinkrameanah Forest in the Pilliga

By

As part of the campaign to have State Forest converted to National Park in the Pilliga-Goonoo region of central western New South Wales, the Western Conservation Alliance held a forest protest in the Tinkrameanah State Forest in August 2002. The main thrust of their media release* announcing the sit-in was that : logging was a threat to the beautiful and high conservation value Tinkrameanah forest because contractors were not supervised.

Tinkrameanah State Forest became national park just over a year ago and timber harvesting is now banned.

This last week there have been bushfires in the Pilliga-Goonoo region with over 100,000 hectares burnt.

Volunteer fire fighters have been working around the clock, but in the Tinrameanah nature reserve they couldn’t put in a fire break because national parks officers were concerned about the potential environmental impact.

Yesterday I received an email from a woman who lives in the Pillaga near Tinrameanah, Juleen Young wrote:

“Tinkrameana was under State Forestry control but went under National Park’s control with the Brigalow decision. They have not had it 12 months and it has been incinerated, gone.”

Perhaps it was inevitable that the Tinkrameana forest would one day burn?**

The Pilliga forests are only new. Early explorers described the country as open grassland and woodland. Early European settlers followed with sheep but they didn’t survive the drought. Then there were flood in the 1880s triggering massive germination of native cypress and Eucalyptus. A timber industry established and flourished until about 1967 when the state government started converting the working forests to National Park beginning with the 80,000 hectare Pilliga Nature Reserve.

In May last year then NSW Premier Bob Carr announced a ban on logging over a further 350,000 hectares describing the decision as achieving ‘permanent conservation’ of the iconic forests. As the timber workers were chased out of their forests, they explained that without active management there can be no conservation. They said that the Pilliga forests need to be tended – including thinned and protected from wildfires.

Indeed foresters have a vested interest in not letting their forests incinerate, and that vested interest has benefited barking owls and koalas.

I’m sure that the Western Conservation Alliance, not to mention the Wilderness Society, are disappointed that the Tinkrameanah is gone. But the bottom-line is that while campaigning so hard to have State Forest converted to National Park, they didn’t budget for fire prevention.

In fact environmental activists in NSW have lobbied hard for restrictive fire intervals for prescribed burning and heavily conditional licensing and on top of this the National Parks and Wildlife Service is chronically under funded with inadequate reources for effective hazard-reduction (see ‘When Will We Ever Learn?’ by Jim and Aled Hoggett).

The Tinkrameanah forest may start to grow back one day, but with timber workers excluded will it ever be as biologically diverse? Indeed if the cypress is not thinned it may just develop into thicket void of koalas and barking owls?

The Western Forest Alliance was wrong to suggest the greatest threat to the Tinkrameana was logging, indeed the long term survival of biologically diverse healthy forests in the Pilliga region may depend on sustainable use conservation, in particular getting timber workers back into the forests.

————————————
* Media Release
Embargoed until 12 noon, 9 August 2002

Western Forest Protest: First ever in region

Today the Western Conservation Alliance is holding the first-ever forest protest in the region against destructive logging, including the destroying of hundred-year-old grass trees in Tinkrameanah State Forest, near Coonabarabran.

“Management of this beautiful forest by State Forests is seriously lacking. Logging contractors are either failing to follow new licence conditions negotiated last year, or they are working under old, inadequate licences with no supervision”, said Friend of the Pilliga representative, David Paull.

“Either way it’s obvious that when land is designated state forest, it is in harms way. National park protection would ensure such damage would not occur.”

The WCA is calling for an immediate investigation into the logging and a moratorium on all logging of high conservation areas in the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion, such as Tinkrameanah State Forest, until the Western Regional Assessment is finalised.

‘Conservationists from all over the Western Region and NSW are concerned about the ongoing destruction of western woodland remnants and other poorly conserved forest communities’ said Bev Smiles from National Parks Association of NSW.

‘The protest highlights the need to stop logging key western forests and start planting hardwood timber lots on degraded agricultural land’, she said.

The Western Conservation Alliance wants Tinkrameanah State Forest to be protected in the Western Regional Assessment, to be finalised this year.

The peaceful protest in Tinkrameana State Forest, 40 km east of Coonabarabran and just to the west of Tambar Springs is being held on Friday 9th August. Further protests are planned.

** See comment from Luke (December 2, 3.21pm) following my recent blog post ‘Pilliga Forest Burns’ for a history of fires in the Pilliga.

Pilliga Forest Burns

By

Large areas of Pilliga scrub are burning right now in central western NSW with large koala populations threatened.

The forests were declared national park less than 18 months ago, with many timber workers losing their jobs*. At the time the timber workers warned that unless National Parks and Wildlife officers maintained fire breaks and control burnt the entire forest could convert back to grassland.

Today a new group, the NSW Private Native Forestry Group put out a media release about forests and fires with particular reference to the fires now burning in the Pilliga:

“With predictions that this summer will see the worst bushfires in the state’s recorded history, farmers and foresters are warning that further government restrictions on the management of forests on private land will dramatically increase the threat and severity of bushfires.

“It’s time the NSW Government knew what farmers and foresters have known for decades: sustainable management of forests reduces the risk of catastrophic bushfires,” said Andrew Hurford, forester and spokesperson of the NSW Private Native Forests Group.

“Farmers and foresters help to reduce the frequency and intensity of bushfires by managing dangerous fuel loads that accumulate on the forest floor before they become a problem. We also play a crucial role in maintaining fire trails so that firefighters can access remote areas quickly.

“Farmers and foresters are the best ‘frontline of defence’ against bushfires: we are the ‘eyes and ears’ of the forest, helping to put out fires as soon as they occur. It’s in our best interests to protect these forests from catastrophic wild fires,” said Mr Hurford.

Mr Hurford said that radical green groups would have politicians believe that the policy of ‘Fence and Forget’ is the best way to conserve native forests on private land: a theory that totally ignores the fact that Aboriginals actively managed Australia’s bushland for thousands of years.

“Just look at how this policy has been an absolute disaster for fire management in our National Parks. For example, in the last forty-eight hours, 100,000 hectares of the Pilliga Forest near Coonabarabran in Central West NSW has been incinerated,” said Mr Hurford.

“Today, over 8.5 million hectares of private land in NSW (an area larger than Tasmania) are able to be looked after and sustainably managed for timber production by farmers and foresters.

“Millions of hectares of native bushland and millions of dollars worth of rural infrastructure, such as fences and sheds, will be incinerated if radical green groups get their way on locking-up private forests,” Mr Hurford said.

In August this year, the NSW Government was forced by angry farmers, timber mill owners and workers to shelve its plan to introduce a ‘Code’ that would have seen 60 per cent of forests on private land ‘locked-up’ into de facto National Parks.

“Without private landholders, who will be left to safeguard bushland from fires?” said Mr Hurford.

The 2003 ‘State of the Environment Report’ for the Australian Capital Territory lists that nearly 6.4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide were emitted into the atmosphere during the January 2003 Canberra wildfires: equivalent to 1.6 million new cars on the road for a year.

“The radical green policy of ‘Fence and Forget’ will lead to more catastrophic bushfires and more greenhouse gas emissions – the very thing governments are trying to prevent!” said Mr Hurford.

The NSW Private Native Forests Group is made up of timber mill owners, forest workers and farmers who harvest timber from private land. The Group is supported by the NSW Forest Products Association, Timber Communities Australia and Australian Forest Grower’s. Private native forestry is the long term and sustainable management of native forests on privately-owned land. The industry employs approximately 3,000 people and generates over $300 million for the NSW regional economy. Around a third of all native forests in NSW (or 8.5 million hectares) are on private land.

———————-
* At the time I wrote several blog posts on the issue including:

Timber Communities and National Parks (Part 1), 21st April 2005
https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000563.html

Pilliga-Goono Lockup Announced, 5th May 2005:
https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000590.html

And I wrote about enviromentalism and the forests for On Line Opinion in June 2005:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3535

Thinning Forests To Increase Water Yield

By

“Despite being portrayed as a villain, timber harvesting in the form of thinning can substantially counteract the impact of fire regrowth on water yield. The benefits of regrowth thinning have been widely studied throughout Australia. In Melbourne’s catchments, strip-thinning trials have shown that up to 2.5 million litres a year of additional run-off can be generated from each hectare of thinned regrowth. A program of thinning the 1939 regrowth could add billions of litres of water to our storages.

Western Australia has been quicker to take advantage of thinning as a water management tool. Earlier this year, a $20 million, 12-year thinning program was initiated in a substantial segment of Perth’s catchment following four years of exhaustive public and stakeholder consultation. Every 1,000 hectares thinned is expected to deliver an additional one billion litres of run-off into the Wungong Dam a year.”

This is an extract from an opinion piece by Mark Poynter first published in The Age and just republished by On Line Opinion, entitled ‘Fired-up Forests, Have More Impact Than the Loggers‘. Read the full article here: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5213