Forest Products Industry

A conservation group has gone to court in a bid to halt logging in more NSW forests where vulnerable and endangered species live. Source: Timberbiz The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has repeatedly extended stop-work orders in the Tallaganda and Flat Rock state forests, alleging the corporation failed to competently look for habitat trees used by endangered species before harvesting began. Now the South East Forest Rescue (SEFR) group has launched court action in a bid to expand the list of forests where harvesting is banned until “adequate” surveys are done for imperilled species including the greater glider. “SEFR is seeking an injunction that the Forestry Corporation be permanently restrained from logging anywhere in the north east or south east forests unless they conduct effective surveys for gliders,” the group says. “SEFR’s position is that the Forestry Corporation is breaking the law by not performing adequate surveys for den trees, and necessary exclusion zones around den trees are not being implemented.” The matter will be heard in the NSW Land and Environment Court on Tuesday. The Forestry Corporation has voluntarily agreed to suspend harvesting operations in parts of seven state forests, pending Tuesday’s hearing. It says it’s working to improve the way it looks for important habitat trees before harvesting commences,” the Forestry Corporation said in a statement. “Forestry Corporation continues to work with the EPA on new approaches to surveys and searches for Greater Glider dens and fully cooperates with the EPA, as the body responsible for monitoring and enforcing compliance of forestry operations in NSW.”

In the wake of the Federal Court’s recent decision on native forestry, Lyndon Schneiders (executive director of the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation) tells us the Albanese government has recognised the need for a new native forestry approach. So too has the forestry industry. Source: The Australian No sector can expect to do things the way they have always been done. Least not the forestry sector. That’s why I accepted Agriculture Minister Murray Watt’s invitation to join union leader Michael O’Connor as co-chairs of his Strategic Forestry and Renewables Partnership. The partnership – among other things – will provide advice on the best way to secure the forest resources we need while also enhancing conservation and carbon values in the native estate. Anthony Albanese and his ministers understand that closing-down our sustainable native forestry sector is a recipe for higher consumer prices and more timber imports from countries that do not enforce Australia’s high environmental standards and practices. Responding to the Federal Court’s decision, NSW Premier Chris Minns also acknowledged both our domestic resource needs and growing import-dependence. Schneiders celebrates the unfortunate decisions in Victoria and Western Australia to shut down native forestry. Victoria is now importing its wood from Tasmania and Brazil and in WA the government departments are rushing to secure all the native product they can for their construction needs before the policy is implemented. They need it for important infrastructure including bridges and power poles. Schneiders talks about the importance of our plantation estate. The industry values it too. But due to high land prices, the plantation estate is not keeping pace with demand. The Albanese government is attempting to turn that around by providing planting grants and access to carbon credits. But even if successful, hardwoods take between 40 to 80 years to grow. And in a welcome move, at COP28 the Australian government signed up to the Greening Construction Coalition to increase timber in the built environment due to its ability to decarbonise the hard to abate construction sector. The fact is Australia – and the world – will need more timber products not less. Australia now imports more than $6 billion worth of forest products. The window frames, floorboards, back decks and staircases in our homes are typically made from hard woods, most of which comes from our native estate. The industry has access to just 4% of the native estate and takes around four in every ten thousand trees using sustainable practices. Every tree harvested is replaced with a younger tree which in turn absorbs more carbon than the older tree it replaces. The carbon stored in the harvested tree is transferred permanently to the built environment. Schneiders mischievously claims our native product goes to low-value products like “firewood, woodchips, landscaping and transportation pallets”. That’s the pallets that deliver our food and drinks to the supermarkets and bottle shops. But all of the products that Schneiders dismisses have value. Native hardwoods are manufactured into high value products. It makes no sense to do otherwise. But trees don’t grow perfect shape and there will always be offcuts. It’s a positive thing we turn them into things that have value. Schneiders was keen to repeat his assertion that the legal challenge was initiated by “community conservationists”. But we all know that while their name is on the application, it’s the activist machine that runs these cases. A machine typically funded by high wealth individuals in search of relevance and represented in court by a partly government-funded Environmental Defenders Office. It’s like Legal Aid for Greenies. In an attempt to put a positive spin on their loss, the activists made much of Her Honour’s conclusion that the future of native forestry was a matter for politicians, not the legal process. Yet our elected leaders in Canberra and Sydney have made their support for the sector clear. Thirty years ago, the politicians created the Regional Forest Agreements to put an end to the “forestry wars” by striking the right balance between conservation and our resource needs. The National Forestry Statement is due for a fine tune no doubt, but that’s not what the activists want. They want to kill yet another of our important sovereign capabilities. Joel Fitzgibbon is chair of the Australian Forest Products Association. 

It’s time Federal Government funding of the Environmental Defenders Office was turned off. Just last week it lost the case brought by the North East Forest Alliance (NEFA) against the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of NSW with its lawyers arguing that the RFA should not have been renewed without assessment and approval under federal environment laws. And this week it lost a landmark case against Santos’s $5.3bn Barossa LNG project, with claims the company’s proposed 262km pipeline would cause irreparable damage to First Nations people and their sites being rejected. The EDO, which again began receiving money – $10 million from Labor last year after a 10-year funding drought initiated by the Abbott government, is carrying out four additional cases in the Federal Court, one involving Woodside’s $16.5bn Scarborough offshore gas field and another relating to the federal government’s $13bn Murray-Darling Basin water plan. AFPA chair Joel Fitzgibbon told The Australian this week that legal aid for activists was “hurting” the Australian economy and called on the federal government to scrap taxpayer funds from the service. “Hopefully the broader community is beginning to see activist lawfare for what it is, ideological and a threat to our living standards,” he said. Mr Fitzgibbon said legal aid for green activists “makes no sense, there is no case for public funding”. He also wants the EDO to disclose a list of its donors. “It was another spurious claim by the EDO, a body constantly in search of a cause rather than one championing the national interest,” he said. “Legal aid for activists is hurting our economy and our reputation as an attractive place to invest. “There should be mandatory disclosure of donations. How else can we be confident there aren’t commercial interests at play?” It echoes a call by Senator Jonno Duniam and Senator Susan McDonald who late last year said in a joint statement that alarm bells should be ringing for the Albanese Government to defund the EDO. “The Albanese Government is enabling green lawfare and stifling billions in investment by funding the EDO. The need to revisit this arrangement couldn’t be more urgent,” Senator Duniam said. “The Government is out of touch. They are on the side of niche activists, not Australian workers and communities that would benefit from investment.” “When the Government’s own union backers and the WA Labor Government are questioning the regulations and power of environmental activists, alarm bells should be ringing for Federal Labor to change the way they are governing.” Shadow Resources Minister Susan McDonald said Labor’s divided, shambolic Cabinet was sending mixed signals to industry and crippling investment. “It is clear Labor doesn’t value mining and resources, and the fact even the unions are now criticising the government should prompt a serious rethink of how they are treating our most important industry,” she said. All three are of course right. Why should any Federal Government fund with taxpayer money an organisation which seems to do little more than use the courts to seek to block legitimate value-creating businesses from operating, or even starting up? The Santos case, according to respected financial journalist Peter Switzer, draws into question the tactics of environmentalists, who do have a right to question all projects and what impact they could have on the environment. “We can’t assume all miners and other businesses are great corporate citizens, but the law courts shouldn’t be used to screw big businesses that employ people, pay taxes, and help the share prices of stocks in our super funds,” he wrote. The delays are said to have cost Santos $800 million, and Switzer points out that while we should be thankful that our courts can play the fair referee (as we’ve seen with the Santos and RFA decisions), there are calls for the Albanese Government to pay a more active role in making sure regulatory actions are not one-sided and anti-business. This, he wrote, should be what you expect of a government that represents all our interests, which not only looks like common sense but also is fair. There is no doubt about that. No doubt at all.