Australian timber industry news

Furniture and wood-based articles placed on the EU market will have to meet a formaldehyde emission limit of 0.062 mg/m³ after 6 August 2026 under Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1464. Source: Fordaq The regulation amends Annex XVII of REACH by adding Entry 77 for formaldehyde and formaldehyde-releasing substances. Under the new entry, articles may not be placed on the EU market after 6 August 2026 if, under the specified test conditions, the concentration of formaldehyde released from those articles exceeds 0.062 mg/m³ for furniture and wood-based articles. For articles other than furniture and wood-based articles, the limit is 0.080 mg/m³. The European Commission states that formaldehyde-based resins are used in the production of a wide variety of articles and that their primary use is in wood-based panels, where they act as a bonding agent for wood particles. The regulation also refers to other wood-based products, including furniture and flooring. In the regulation, the Commission says wood-based panels, articles made of wood-based panels or other wood-based articles, and furniture containing wood or other materials are among the main sources of formaldehyde emissions in indoor air where formaldehyde other than naturally occurring formaldehyde is used during production. Appendix 14 sets the reference conditions for measuring formaldehyde released into indoor air from covered articles. The regulation specifies test chamber conditions including a temperature of 23 ± 0.5°C, relative humidity of 45 ± 3%, a loading factor of 1 ± 0.02 m²/m³ and an air exchange rate of 1 ± 0.05 h-1. The steady-state concentration measured in the test chamber is used to verify compliance with the formaldehyde limit. The restriction does not apply to articles in which formaldehyde or formaldehyde-releasing substances are exclusively naturally present in the materials from which the articles are produced. The regulation also lists exemptions for articles exclusively for outdoor use, certain construction articles used outside the building shell and vapour barrier, articles exclusively for industrial or professional use unless they lead to exposure of the general public, food-contact articles, and second-hand articles.

The post Formaldehyde regulations for the EU market appeared first on Timberbiz.

Metsa has opened a new packaging design studio in Milan, Italy to accelerate packaging development especially in its key European markets. The new studio enables earlier and closer collaboration between Metsä Board and its customers, allowing joint testing and refinement to bring real-world-ready packaging solutions faster. Source: Timberbiz Packaging is no longer just about protection and logistics. Brands are under increasing pressure to reduce material use, replace fossil-based materials, meet tightening regulations and still deliver strong shelf impact. At the same time, expectations for speed have fundamentally changed: solutions must be developed faster, with greater certainty around performance, recyclability and compliance. Metsä Board is addressing this shift with this new design studio in Milan bringing together design, material expertise and data-driven insights. It enables customers to develop packaging solutions that are more efficient and fit to their requirements. “Milan offers a unique combination of a strong packaging ecosystem and a world-class design environment. Being there allows us to work more closely with our customers and strengthen collaboration across key European markets,” said Erja Hyrsky, SVP Commercial Operations. By combining AI-supported design, simulation possibilities and material expertise, solutions can be explored and tested much earlier in the process, reducing uncertainty, accelerating decision-making and shortening development cycles. “Our customers don’t just need new packaging ideas – they need solutions that are validated for actual use conditions, and they need them faster than ever. By combining design, materials and data, we can move from concept to validated solution much earlier, with greater confidence,” said Erja Hyrsky. The Milan studio is built for a new way of working. Instead of sequential development, design, materials and performance are advanced in parallel, making it possible to improve material efficiency while maintaining performance requirements. “Instead of developing solutions in isolation, we can test and refine them together, making sure they are ready for market introduction much earlier,” said Ilkka Harju, Packaging Services Director. “For brands in segments such as food, pharma and beauty, where packaging plays a critical role both functionally and commercially, this integrated approach is becoming essential.”

The post Metsa moves to Milan for a better design appeared first on Timberbiz.

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) has secured substantial EU LIFE funding for a €6.7 million project, including €4 million from the EU LIFE program, together with a broad range of project partners. Source: Timberbiz The FSC EU LIFE FIBRA project will explore more efficient and responsible use of fibre-based materials in Europe, building on the credibility and robustness of FSC’s certification system. It will look at how FSC can strengthen its existing recycling solutions, support potential circular business models such as reuse, repair, and take-back, examine how agricultural waste streams may play a role in the FSC system, and support companies and public buyers in making more responsible material choices. Building on FSC’s existing systems, standards and core mission of promoting responsible forest stewardship, the project will strengthen FSC’s role in a changing market. “As the way we use materials changes, FSC is evolving with it,” said Subhra Bhattacharjee, Director General of FSC. “This project will define our role in a future market; from the way materials are sourced to the way they are kept in circulation over time.” FSC has been championing forest regeneration for over 30 years and with the introduction of the FSC RECYCLED label 15 years ago FSC has been directly supporting recycling too. But recycling and renewable fibres aren’t enough. As demand for renewable materials grows across Europe, industries in packaging, construction, furniture, and other sectors are turning to forest-based fibres instead of fossil-based resources to cut carbon emissions and support climate objectives. However, relying solely on virgin forest resources is not a sustainable long-term solution. In parallel, companies are facing increasing regulatory requirements under EU sustainability legislation, including expectations around resource efficiency, circularity, and traceability. Thanks to the EU LIFE program, FSC can now scale its work on exploring solutions in a broad and structured way. The FSC EU LIFE FIBRA project FSC’s existing systems are designed for linear supply chains and do not adequately capture circular flows. The project will develop and pilot tools, guidance, and verification approaches for how to enable circularity in FSC and focus on exploring four key areas: potential circular business models in FSC Chain of Custody, including piloting a Circular Economy reporting module support increased uptake of recycled materials including market guidance and public procurement support explore how to potentially integrate alternative fibre sources such as agricultural residues from certified sources into FSC certified supply chains exploring potential approaches to cascading use of fibres supported by improved traceability and digital integration.   Together, these activities are designed to be fit for FSC’s existing certification system and provide practical, scalable support for companies adapting to evolving market and regulatory requirements. “This funding allows us to scale work that we have been laying the groundwork for over the past three years,” said Loa Dalgaard Worm, Global Lead of the FSC Circularity Hub. “It is important to me that we develop solutions that are fit for market demand and deliver real impact on the ground, without reinventing what FSC stands for: ensuring that the true value of forests for nature, the economy, and society is recognized.” The project will be implemented across eight European countries – Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Italy, and France – with partners from industry, academia, and civil society. The project consortium behind the project consists of FSC International, FSC Denmark, FSC Sweden, FSC Finland, FSC Germany, FSC Netherlands, FSC Italy, FSC France, Aarhus University, University of Southern Denmark, Circle Economy, ECOS, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, and Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

The post FSC partners for €6.7M project to strengthen forest value chains appeared first on Timberbiz.

Australian Forest Products Association (AFPA) welcomed the new Private Members’ Bill, introduced by Federal Member for Lyne Alison Penfold MP, aimed at safeguarding the integrity and transparency of Australia’s carbon credit scheme. Source: Timberbiz AFPA acting CEO Richard Hyett said maintaining confidence and credibility in the ACCU scheme was essential for supporting investment in genuine emissions reduction projects and Australia’s transition to net zero. Ms Penfold’s proposed Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Amendment Bill 2026 proposes simple changes to improve transparency and integrity. This includes requiring the Federal Minister to only make an ACCU method if it’s fully consistent with the Objects of the Act, and if all relevant science and information to develop the method is released for public consultation to allow proper scrutiny. “Our ACCU scheme was designed to encourage real carbon abatement and high-integrity environmental outcomes, and it’s important the scheme remains focused on delivering genuine emissions reductions rather than being used to retrospectively fund government policy decisions,” Mr Hyett said. The proposal follows the NSW Government’s plan to develop an Improved Native Forest Management Method (INFM), which is currently being considered by the Commonwealth’s Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee. “In a recent submission, we have advocated for strong governance, transparency and safeguards across Australia’s carbon credit framework and have previously raised concerns about maintaining public confidence in the scheme,” Mr Hyett said. “Industry applauds and welcomes Ms Penfold’s Private Members’ Bill. Carbon credit methodologies must be evidence-based, transparent and support practical emissions reduction opportunities across productive industries, including sustainable forestry. It’s also essential to drive opportunities to expand the ACCU scheme’s participation through productive abatement methods including through the built environment. “We look forward to continuing to work with governments and industry stakeholders to ensure the ACCU scheme remains credible, supports regional Australia and delivers lasting environmental outcomes.”

The post AFPA applauds new Private Members’ Bill appeared first on Timberbiz.

For New Zealand brokers placing forestry, logging and heavy plant risks, the most important test of specialist cover is not just what is on the slip. It is also the one that arrives months later, when a harvester burns out on a remote skid site or a crane topples on a steep East Coast forestry road and the client discovers what their policy is actually worth. Source: Insurance Business That distinction between capacity that looks strong at placement and capacity that performs at claim time is where specialist insurance either proves itself or quietly fails. The point has been sharpened across the Tasman by ARTes Specialty, a London-based managing general agent that has spent the past two years building a plant and equipment book in the Australian market. ARTes has launched three products into Australia – commercial loggers, plant and equipment, and, most recently, an integrated crane and rigging policy – all backed by Lloyd’s capacity, distributed locally and with claims handled in-country. Chris Thomas CEO of ARTes Specialty, has been unusually blunt about the limits of the paper itself. “Capacity on its own isn’t enough,” he said of the insurer’s Australian expansion. It is a striking admission from a business that sells capacity, but it speaks to a scepticism many brokers carry quietly. Two markets can offer near-identical security, wording and price, and none of that paperwork reveals whether anyone in the country understands a rigging contract, can inspect a damaged crawler crane, or can move a claim along before a contractor’s cash flow collapses. “Brokers and clients need confidence that there are experienced people on the ground who understand the local market, can respond quickly and will be there when a claim occurs,” Thomas said. For New Zealand, the argument lands squarely on forestry. Forestry and wood products remain among the country’s largest export earners, with revenue forecast to rise about 2% to NZ$6.3 billion in the year to 30 June 2026, according to the Ministry for Primary Industries forestry and wood-processing data. The sector supports a workforce of more than 42,000 people, on Treasury’s medium-term outlook for forestry exports, and runs on high-value, hard-to-replace machinery operating on unsealed, steep terrain in regions such as Gisborne, Northland and Southland – exactly the conditions where a single loss can sideline a contractor and where recovery is slow, costly and specialised. The gap between cover on paper and cover in practice is not hypothetical here. A North Island forestry business was left NZ$85,000 out of pocket after an insurer declined a Cyclone Gabrielle–related claim, in a dispute that turned on recovery wording, machinery access and a requirement for written consent before equipment was moved, as detailed in this recent ruling on a declined Cyclone Gabrielle forestry claim. For brokers with rural and forestry portfolios, the case is a reminder that the decisive questions are often buried in how a policy responds after the event, not in the headline limit. That points to a sharper set of questions at placement. Where does claims adjusting actually happen, and who does it? Does the person assessing the loss understand the equipment and the contractual obligations the client operates under? Can the insurer respond inside the client’s operating timeframe, or will a remote loss sit in a queue while the business haemorrhages money? New Zealand underwriters working in the space make much the same point. Matt Ziegler, head of pacific agencies at Underwriting Agencies of New Zealand (UANZ), whose Auckland-based firm covers cranes, excavators and forestry equipment, argues that service – not price – is now the differentiator in a softening market. “It’s 100% the service game at the moment,” he said when speaking to a panel of specialist underwriters on soft-market pressures, advising brokers to compete on claims handling, wording and value. The context matters because capacity itself is no longer scarce. Specialist underwriting agencies have proliferated in New Zealand, holding appetite for precisely the harder-to-place risks that mainstream insurers approach cautiously. As the New Zealand Underwriting Agencies Council set out at its recent Christchurch expo on the evolving risk market, the real challenge for brokers is no longer finding capacity but knowing where to look and, by extension, which providers will still be answering the phone when a complex loss lands. For a generalist risk, these distinctions may be marginal. For a logging contractor or crane operator whose entire business rests on a handful of high-value machines, they are the difference between a claim that gets paid and a claim that gets argued. As more overseas and Lloyd’s-backed capacity targets Australasia’s underserved specialist sectors, the temptation is to treat capacity as a commodity and place on price and security alone. The uncomfortable takeaway for brokers is the same on both sides of the Tasman: The time to test whether specialist capacity is real is before the loss, not after.

The post Specialist forestry insurance cover is tested at claim time appeared first on Timberbiz.

Forest and Wood Products Australia (FWPA) is inviting applications for three Non-Executive Director positions, offering experienced leaders the opportunity to help guide one of Australia’s key industry research and development corporations. Source: Timberbiz The appointments form part of FWPA’s 2026 board renewal process, with successful candidates to join the board following the Annual General Meeting in November. FWPA is seeking individuals with strong governance capability and a passion for driving impact across the forest and wood products value chain. FWPA plays a unique role in bringing industry and government together to invest in research, development, and market growth that strengthens the competitiveness and sustainability of the sector. This is an opportunity to contribute at a national level to help shape strategic decisions that support innovation, productivity, and sustainable growth across Australia’s forest and wood products industry. As the industry’s research and development corporation, FWPA invests levy and matched government funding into programs that deliver practical outcomes for growers, processors, manufacturers and end-users. With annual revenue of approximately $21.5 million, FWPA supports initiatives spanning forestry, manufacturing, the built environment, market development, and the commercialisation of new technologies and products. Board positions offer a unique opportunity to: Contribute to an organisation delivering tangible, industry-wide impact Influence investment in research, innovation and market development Work at the intersection of industry, government and research Help shape the future use of sustainable, renewable wood products Collaborate with a highly engaged and skilled Board and executive team   FWPA is seeking candidates with expertise across areas such as: Forestry and natural resource management Wood products manufacturing Construction, design and the use of timber in the built environment Market dynamics, marketing and promotion Technology, innovation and RD&E commercialisation   Candidates with formal governance training (such as AICD or equivalent) are strongly encouraged to apply. The roles are remunerated, with an expected commitment of approximately 26 days per year, including board meetings, preparation and travel. Applications are being managed by Directors Australia. To apply, candidates must submit: A current resume (maximum three pages) A one-page cover letter addressing the selection criteria Applications close: midnight Sunday, 12 July 2026. For further information and to apply, visit: https://directorsaustralia.com.au/vacancies/ For confidential enquiries, contact Glee Mitchell, Directors Australia, on 0417 065 408 or via glee.mitchell@directorsaustralia.com

The post FWPA seeks three directors to shape the future of forest and wood products appeared first on Timberbiz.

Private forest owners across NSW may be banned from harvesting their trees by the NSW Government and Timber NSW is calling for Minister Penny Sharpe to outline what compensation for lost earnings will be available to private forestry owners across the entire State. Source: Timberbiz According to Timber NSW Chief Executive Maree McCaskill, the creation of the Great Koala National Park will have dire consequences for owners of private forests. Timber NSW is calling on Minister Penny Sharpe to clarify what compensation will be available to private forest owners in NSW who may be banned from harvesting their trees due to the creation of the Great Koala National Park. “The NSW Government will be paid by Australian taxpayers for shutting down the timber industry in northern NSW. That’s an undisputed fact and it all stems from the Improved Native Forest Management carbon credit scheme which is used to calculate payments under the Australian Carbon Credit Unit Scheme,” Ms McCaskill said. “Once again, the reality as it’s experienced by the people of NSW is completely different to the Minister’s words. “What the Federal Government says is that under the Australian Carbon Credit Unit Scheme, the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee (whoever that is) must be satisfied that a method complies with the legislated Offsets Integrity Standards. “Those standards require that credited abatement reflects real, measurable, and additional emissions reductions. If leakage is underestimated, more ACCUs could be issued than the true global emissions benefit justifies, undermining the environmental integrity of the scheme.” Under the Australian Carbon Credit Unit Scheme, there can be no private native forest harvesting above a calculated baseline level, meaning private landowners would lose control of their own income while Australian taxpayers fund the NSW Government for enforcing these restrictions. According to Timber NSW what this really means is that there can be no private native forest harvesting in the State above its ‘baseline level’ which is calculated as the average monthly wood volume extracted from private native forests over the previous 4-year period. The Sydney Morning Herald has reported that; “There are also leakage clauses, providing penalties if logging of public forest increased elsewhere in the state on private or public land, or if there is an increase in imports of unsustainable timber”. Timber NSW argues that the carbon leakage figures used in the scheme are misleading, with independent research from the University of Queensland calculating timber harvest leakage at over 80%, far exceeding the maximum 40% discount permitted by the Commonwealth. What is not reported is that only a maximum of 40% of the carbon leakage (both domestic and international) can be discounted by the Commonwealth despite that figure being widely debunked and calculated by Dr Tyron Venn et al from UQ at more than 80% for timber harvest leakage, with most of the demand met by elevated-risk countries. According to Timber NSW this means that: communities in northern NSW are shut down Private forest landowners no longer control their own income Australian taxpayers are funding the NSW Government for forcing those changes The real impact of carbon emissions into the atmosphere is assumed away because it will happen overseas.   The forestry sector supports thousands of jobs across NSW and contributes significantly to regional economies through timber harvesting, transport, processing and manufacturing. It is an undisputed fact that sustainably managed state forests can and do deliver both conservation and economic outcomes. Timber NSW has warned that reduced domestic timber production will likely shift demand to overseas suppliers in elevated-risk countries, meaning the scheme effectively exports carbon emissions rather than reducing them globally.

The post NSW private forest owners may be banned from harvesting their trees appeared first on Timberbiz.

Timber Queensland has launched the Colin MacKenzie Award to strengthen timber design and construction capability. The Colin MacKenzie Award for Technical Excellence in Timber Application and Use is a new national initiative recognising outstanding technical achievement and leadership in the use of timber across Australia’s building and construction sectors. Source: Timberbiz The award was launched at the WoodSolutions event, Queensland Timber: Trajectory Award Winning Exemplars Showcasing the Way to Modern Construction, that brought together leaders from the forest and timber, engineering, architectural and construction industries. This initiative responds to widespread calls from industry to formally recognise Colin MacKenzie’s legacy following his passing on 24 March 2025 and to continue the work he championed in lifting capability, innovation and confidence in the use of timber across Australian construction. Widely regarded as “The Timber Expert”, the award reflects Mr MacKenzie’s lasting contribution to advancing timber as a high-performance, compliant and fit-for-purpose construction material across a diverse range of applications, from buildings to infrastructure and beyond. Timber Queensland CEO Mick Stephens said the award is intended to recognise those delivering real technical impact across the sector. “The award is intended for engineers, architects, designers, builders and researchers who are delivering real technical impact and helping to strengthen capability across the sector,” Mr Stephens said. “This is not limited to building projects it recognises the full breadth of timber innovation, including infrastructure, engineered solutions and other applications that demonstrate excellence in using or enabling the use of timber.” Mr Stephens said the award will focus strongly on outcomes that contribute to advancing industry knowledge and practice. “Judging will focus on technical merit, innovation, and the contribution a project or individual makes to improving knowledge, collaboration and sustainability in timber use,” Mr Stephens said. “It will also consider alignment with Colin’s vision for timber as a high-performance, compliant and fit-for-purpose construction material.” A national judging panel comprising respected leaders from across engineering, design and specification will assess entries, ensuring a strong emphasis on technical rigour and industry relevance. “We are honoured to have Professor Benoit Gilbert, Griffith University, Rob Mansell, National Specification Manager, Hyne Timber, Dr Andrew Magub, Principal, Architectus, Kim Harris, Technical Advisor, AKD and Matt Smith, Senior Technical Consultant, Timber Queensland join the inaugural selection process,” Mr Stephens said. By recognising leading projects and individuals, Timber Queensland said the initiative will help drive greater confidence in timber and support the continued development of capability across the industry. Mr Stephens said the recipient of the inaugural Colin MacKenzie Award will be honoured at the Queensland HIA Building Awards in Brisbane on 13 November 2026. “We gratefully acknowledge the support of the foundation partners, including Timber Queensland, to launch this award. The seed funding has enabled the national award to be offered annually for the next five years at which point the goodwill and delivery of the award can be reviewed going forward,” Mr Stephens said. The Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC) is supporting the 2026 award as Presentation Sponsor, recognising Mr MacKenzie’s long-standing expertise, collaboration and trusted advice across a range of QBCC initiatives and the broader development sector over many years. The QBCC’s involvement with an award associated with technical excellence aligns with a commitment to promoting high standards, capability and integrity withing the building and construction industry. Further details about the application and judging process is available at https://www.timberqueensland.com.au/colin-mackenzie-award

The post Colin MacKenzie Award to strengthen timber design and construction appeared first on Timberbiz.

Australia’s first National Environmental Protection Agency was launched this week with stop-work-style powers, expanded audit powers and penalties of up to $16.5 million for serious corporate breaches. Native forestry is shielded for now, but that protection falls away in 12 months. Source: Timberbiz According to the Federal Government the National EPA, the first in Australia’s history, underpins the Albanese Government’s landmark environmental law reforms, which were passed in December last year. It is a key plank in the reforms’ promise to strengthen environmental protections and speed up the approval of critical housing, energy and minerals projects. The government says that the National EPA will be a modern and effective regulator that helps people understand Australia’s environmental laws and makes sure those laws are followed. These include the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and laws regulating sea dumping, ozone protection and synthetic greenhouse gas management, hazardous waste, product emissions standards, recycling and waste reduction and underwater cultural heritage. The role of the National EPA will include issuing permits and licences, environmental assessments and approvals, compliance and enforcement activities and the assurance, monitoring and auditing of the operation of accreditations, bilateral agreements and bioregional plans under the EPBC Act. Forest and Wood Communities Australia says the forestry sector now has just 12 months to prepare for the most significant expansion of federal environmental enforcement in a generation, after the National Environmental Protection Agency commenced on 1 July. “From 1 July, the clock started ticking for every native forestry business still operating under the Regional Forest Agreement framework,” said Steve Dobbyns BSc (Forestry), Chairman of Forest and Wood Communities Australia. “The sector has been told it has 12 months, but 12 months is not long when you are talking about federal approvals, accreditation, legal risk, wood supply contracts, contractors, mills and regional jobs. “Australian native forestry is not an environmental free-for-all. It is already managed through state forest practice systems, detailed environmental prescriptions, regeneration obligations, threatened species protections, audits and decades of scientific assessment under the RFAs. The danger is that Canberra builds a duplicate approval system that treats one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country as if none of that regulation exists.” Launched by Environment Minister Murray Watt and led by inaugural chief executive John Bradley PSM, the agency can now issue urgent environment protection orders where serious environmental harm is alleged, expand compliance audits and pursue breaches through the courts. The most serious penalties can reach $16.5 million per company and may be linked to the benefit gained from breaking the law. Native forestry conducted under a Regional Forest Agreement remains outside the full reach of these new arrangements until 1 July 2027. Operations outside an agreement have already required federal approval since December 2025, and current agreements allow approved harvesting to continue only until 30 June 2027, after which the exemption falls away. National Environmental Standards are now being developed and consulted on. Those standards will determine how forestry operations are judged under Commonwealth law and whether existing state systems are properly recognised or overridden by another layer of federal control. The five remaining Regional Forest Agreements across New South Wales, Tasmania and Western Australia have underpinned native forest management for a quarter of a century. They were built on regional scientific assessments, conservation reserves, sustainable yield modelling and state-based forest practice systems. When the exemption ends, thousands of regional workers and the communities built around them will face a federal regulator armed with stop-work powers for the first time. “This is the point where government must decide whether these reforms are about genuine environmental outcomes or whether they become another political weapon against Australian forestry,” Mr Dobbyns said. “You do not protect forests, jobs or the climate by strangling Australian production with duplicate green tape and then importing more timber from countries with weaker environmental standards. That is not conservation. That is environmental outsourcing.” Conservation groups are already pressing the new regulator to use its powers harder, including on land clearing and activities they claim threaten species such as the koala. It leaves the timber sector caught between a countdown clock and mounting political pressure to bring the full force of the new laws to bear the moment the exemption lifts. Forest and Wood Communities Australia says the federal government must guarantee that the new standards recognise the world-leading regulation Australian forestry already operates under, rather than treating sustainable domestic timber production as the problem. “The Commonwealth must not use these reforms to pretend that native forestry is unregulated, unscientific or unmanaged,” Mr Dobbyns said. “Our industry grows and regenerates forests, supplies renewable building materials, supports regional families and operates under rules that many imported products would never meet. “If the new system rewards activist pressure over evidence, the losers will be regional workers, local mills, Australian builders, housing affordability and the global environment.” The Australian Forest Products Association has warned that losing the RFA framework would bury native forestry in green tape and drive greater reliance on imported timber, including products from jurisdictions with weaker environmental oversight than Australia. Forest and Wood Communities Australia is calling on the federal government to work directly with forest scientists, state regulators, workers, contractors, processors and regional communities before the 1 July 2027 deadline. “Regional communities cannot be treated as collateral damage in another Canberra deal,” Mr Dobbyns said. “If the government is serious about timber security, housing supply and better environmental outcomes, it must back sustainable Australian forestry, not regulate it into uncertainty.”

The post New national EPA has stop work powers – is native forestry next in the firing line appeared first on Timberbiz.

My prediction of impending drops in export log prices has regrettably come to pass.  Wharf gate sales dropped NZ$6-10 per m3 in June across NZ ports.  This was due to the combination of weaker selling prices and higher shipping costs combining into an imperfect storm. The better news is China market fundamentals remain ok with major further price drops unlikely to be in the mix. The price drop in June has seen a rapid slow-down in deliveries to NZ ports and that is what is needed to see any sort of recovery in July. I had a respondent to my last report suggest we need to “stop China playing with us”.  I want to put this one to bed as I have also often heard conspiracy theorists commenting negatively about the supposed China grand domination plan. I have been directly involved in the China export log market for 30+ years.  Let me assure you, there is no grand plan. The important point here is NZ is, by a significant margin, the largest supplier of softwood logs to China, currently hovering around 70% – 80% of all supplies. A sales price tempering impact is what China traders get for NZ logs sold into the China domestic market. They currently pay NZ exporters US$124 per m3 A grade shorts basis. The domestic wholesale price is US$120 per m3, slightly closer negative margin than I reported in May. In May/June another impact was a large NZ exporter trying to push prices above US$130 per m3 until vessels were sailing with some volume not contracted or LC’s issued against. This very silly history repeating tactic created nervousness amongst buyers who then folded their arms until the prices landed lower.  This is a “stupid is as stupid does” NZ plan, not a China plan! The domestic wholesale price in China is driven by manufacturing and sales – significantly furniture and moulding components to the US.  Current manufacturing stats across the Eastern seaboard suggest mild but not concerning weakness. If there is a grand plan it will be more about what pops up in Donald Trump’s head when he wakes up each morning. We see ample evidence of that being a pretty scary place.  The imposition of tariffs and propensity for war and the wide-ranging consequences obvious to all except Donald Trump, is what is controlling our collective destinies at present. There is no grand plan in China to gear prices for NZ logs. If we should shorten supply, prices will lift, but only in so much as China domestic pricing will allow. The China market is vast with multiple players operating in a highly dynamic market driven by domestic and export sales and the RMB/US$ exchange rate.  And like in NZ, each player is trying to play their own game whilst protecting their own profits, mostly without regard for others. The softwood log inventory across the Eastern seaboard is sitting around 2.54 million m3 round numbers, down 60,000 m3 in April which regarded as unchanged by the market. A reason for likely good recovery is daily consumption which continues to sit around 60,000, a pretty good utilisation for mid-summer conditions.  There is potential for July inventory to slip below 2mil m3.  That will also promulgate recovery. Exporters continue to turn eyes toward India with solid demand and elevated deliveries not appearing to scare the market in to price drops.  NZ Radiata pines logs are favoured by India sawmillers, being much better quality than other supply sources. There is no question the impending NZ/India Free Trade Agreement is elevating interest with shipments expected to increase as a consequence.  But this market is not large so it will not take much for NZ exporters to destroy their own price if too many want a slice of the action. Current CFR prices are in the late US$160’s per m3 compared to US$124 for the same grade in China.  But shipping costs to India are much higher at around US$70 compared to mid US$40’s for China fixtures.  This then nets back to a better price point currently for India trade. It is also great to see the NZ domestic sawmilling sector going gang buster – or at least a mild form thereof.   Long may that continue! Allan Laurie, Managing Director, Laurie Forestry.           

The post Opinion: Allan Laurie – there is no grand plan in China to gear prices for NZ logs. appeared first on Timberbiz.

Metsä Group and Qutwo, a Finnish AI and quantum technology company, are launching a collaboration aimed at deepening the use of artificial intelligence at Metsä and bringing next-generation AI into the core processes of the forest industry. Source: Timberbiz Next-generation AI refers to solutions that can take into account a broader range of variables and simultaneously optimise complex systems. “Metsä has been leveraging AI for a long time in its production facilities and wood supply operations. Our partnership with Qutwo takes this to the next level. Together we can address increasingly complex challenges and develop new intelligence to support our business,” said Anni Rasinen, Director, Business AI at Metsä. Qutwo will provide Metsä with its AI and quantum platform, Qutwo OS. The aim is to increase the value derived from wood raw material and strengthen Metsä’s international competitiveness. “The competitiveness of European industry will depend on how quickly it develops next-generation AI. Metsä Group’s commitment to long-term development together with Qutwo creates capabilities that neither could build alone. This allows European companies to be at the forefront of technology rather than follow others,” said Peter Sarlin, Founder and Chairman of Qutwo. The first initiatives focus on improving productivity in mill converting lines and optimising wood procurement. In wood procurement, AI will enable better use of multiple factors at the same time, helping to guide the use of wood more efficiently from forest to mill and increase overall value. “Our goal is to significantly increase the value derived from wood and reduce variable costs between the forest and the mill. Together with Qutwo, we are advancing completely new types of development with considerable potential,” said Juha Jumppanen, EVP, Wood Supply and Forest Services at Metsä. Metsä already uses AI, for example, in predicting forest damage, pricing wood trade and silviculture services, and in valuing forest biodiversity. At the mills, the collaboration focuses particularly on improving productivity in tissue converting lines. Converting is the stage in the production process where the base paper from the paper machine is processed into finished tissue products. AI enables the optimization of the production process, improving efficiency, increasing production capacity, and strengthening Metsä’s competitiveness in the market. Qutwo has rapidly emerged as one of Europe’s most interesting players in AI and quantum computing. The collaboration with Metsä demonstrates how next-generation AI can solve demanding industrial challenges and help build sustainable competitive advantage for European industry in global markets.

The post Qutwo to provide Metsa with its AI to increase wood value appeared first on Timberbiz.

In 1943, as World War II made materials like steel scarcer, the US Navy turned to timber to construct airship hangars at Moffett Federal Airfield, located at what is now NASA Ames Research Centre. Source: Timberbiz The structures were built in just 208 days using Douglas fir, widely assumed to have been harvested from the forests of the Pacific Northwest, and became part of a strategic West Coast hub for blimp operations during the war. In 2014, Planetary Ventures, a subsidiary of Google, entered a long-term lease of the airfield and assumed management of the historic hangars. Though Hangar 3 stood for over 80 years, the structure was compromised by substantial engineering challenges. Ultimately, ongoing efforts to repair and preserve the historic structure could not prevent progressing damage, prompting the difficult decision to remove the now hazardous hangar. A typical demolition would have routed this historic timber to the landfill, but Google’s sustainability and real estate teams saw a different opportunity: salvaging the wood for reuse in modern buildings. Once engineering assessments confirmed Hangar 3 couldn’t be preserved in its original form, the question became how best to remove the structure. Typical demolition wasn’t an option: the wood within the structure had been exposed to a variety of chemicals, creating a high risk of contamination. So, the 1,000-foot-long structure would have to be systematically dismantled. Teams used high-reach excavators to surgically disassemble the hangar, salvaging approximately 119,000 board feet of the most structurally sound Douglas fir boards (roughly 178 tons of material). Some of this salvaged wood wasshipped back up to Spokane, Washington, for evaluation and remanufacturing and is now destined for a Google mass timber office prototype in the Dalles, Oregon. Reclaiming used lumber on such a large scale is often dismissed as unpredictable, labour-intensive and costly. Modern building codes assume builders are using freshly milled lumber, so there’s no easy path to certify reclaimed wood. In the absence of a roadmap, the Hangar 3 project team created their own. They consulted wood scientists, structural engineers and mass timber manufacturers to rigorously test the structural integrity of the salvaged timber. After planing the contaminated outer layers, testing yielded incredible news: the historic Douglas fir still possessed robust, predictable structural strength. In the end, approximately 66,000 board feet of the material successfully met the rigorous requirements for mass timber remanufacturing. The Hangar 3 journey underscores the opportunity presented by deconstruction and reuse. It shows that if we can view our existing physical assets as “material banks” for future uses, then we can minimize the economic and environmental costs of purchasing new materials. The timber salvaged from Hangar 3 is getting a new life in showcase installations across Google campuses in the Bay Area, California, and for mass timber construction at supporting office facilities on Google data centre campuses. You can read more about this, there is a white paper Reclaiming Structural Wood at Scale: From Airship Hangar to Portfolio Reuse at https://sustainability.google/reports/circularity-reclaiming-structural-wood/  

The post Google repurposes Douglas Fir from a WWII hangar appeared first on Timberbiz.

Trees in China that were planted as part of huge reforestation projects appear to grow faster than those in natural forests, a new study finds. This is possibly because the reforestation trees are responding more strongly to the rising atmospheric carbon dioxide, scientists say. Source: LiveScience China is quickly turning green. The country has planted 66 billion trees since 1978, with plans for 34 billion more by the middle of this century, as part of its “Great Green Wall” to slow the spread of the Gobi and Taklamakan deserts. These new forests absorb large amounts of CO2, but it is unclear exactly how they differ from natural ones, study first author Yuhang Luo, a landscape ecologist at Peking University in Shenzhen, China, told Live Science. Luo and his colleagues set out to study how differences between natural and planted forests, including species diversity, tree density and age, might affect how the forests respond to rising CO2 and climate change. “Planted forests are widely used in climate mitigation strategies, but most global ecosystem models do not distinguish between forest types or represent age-related dynamics adequately,” Luo said. “So, we felt it was important to clarify how these factors interact — not just for scientific understanding, but also for improving the models and assumptions that underpin real-world forest policy and carbon accounting.” Planted forests are those purposefully created by humans, such as those in the Great Green Wall. Natural forests, on the other hand, grow without human intervention. The researchers used satellite data to track leaf area index, a measure of canopy density and a key driver of carbon uptake, to determine how fast the different forest types grew, and found a striking difference: Planted forests increased their leaf area 66% faster than natural ones. Most of that difference was due to planted forests being, on average, much younger than the natural ones, and young trees grow faster than old ones. But even when comparing forests of similar age and growing conditions, the planted ones still grew 4.6% faster, and the difference was even more pronounced in mixed and evergreen forests. This is largely due to how planted forests are managed. They tend to feature fast-growing species like eucalyptus and poplar and are often actively managed, with people removing competing vegetation and even fertilizing them. These interventions reduce competition for light, water, and nutrients, amplifying the fertilization effect of rising atmospheric CO2. This discrepancy peaks in planted forests when trees are around 30 to 40 years old and then declines noticeably after age 40. In contrast, natural forests grow more slowly but steadily, so have an advantage over the long term. “Planted forests can be a powerful short-term tool for carbon uptake, but this advantage is temporary,” Luo said. “For long-term carbon storage and resilience, natural forests remain irreplaceable.” Kevin Dsouza, who worked on reforestation models during his postdoctoral research at the University of Waterloo and was not involved in the new study, said the results make intuitive sense, as the sprawling leaves of young, fast-growing trees could lead to increased carbon take-up. But he is not sure that leaf area is the best measurement for tracking growth and carbon sequestration. “It’s not a bad proxy, but it doesn’t give you the full picture,” he said. “The canopy is just the top of the tree, and the carbon is stored in all sorts of different places like wood, bark, roots and soil.” Another study of Chinese forests found that natural forests actually accumulate more carbon above ground than planted ones in their early years, Dsouza pointed out, so these results should be considered carefully alongside other factors. Luo said the findings show that most global climate models are missing something when it comes to understanding how various forest types play a role in carbon sequestration and climate change. “Land use management works in more subtle and specific ways than we had assumed,” he said. “It is not just about planting more trees. It is also about when you plant them, what species you choose, and how you manage them over time.” Luo hopes these findings will help guide reforestation efforts, to ensure we get the most benefit from planting new forests to help mitigate the effects of climate change. “Our work offers a more practical guide for forest-based climate action: when to plant, what to plant, how long the benefits last, and what current models are getting wrong. We hope that helps people make better decisions,” he said.  

The post Chinese reforestation trees growing faster than natural forests appeared first on Timberbiz.

Traceability was one of the strongest themes to emerge from the sold-out Threads of Tomorrow Summit in Auckland, New Zealand in June, highlighting the growing importance of transparent supply chains and credible verification of material origins and impacts. Source: Timberbiz FSC Australia and New Zealand joined industry leaders across the fashion and textiles sector at the event. The event brought together more than 220 people from across New Zealand’s fibre, textile and fashion value chain, from growers and farmers through to manufacturers, brands and retailers, for a day of discussion about where the industry is heading and what it will take to get there. Presented by Fashion & Textiles New Zealand, an FSC promotional licence holder, the summit was structured around three themes: Place, Possibility and Momentum. The morning began with a look at the current state of New Zealand’s fashion and textile sector, before shifting to discussions around design, storytelling, circularity and supply chain integrity. The final session focused on what comes next for the industry, including building business resilience, improving transparency and traceability, and finding new value in waste streams and by-products. As part of the Summit’s Innovation Hub, FSC showcased products from promotional licence holders and certificate holders, including Kazzi Kovers, Step One, Wattle Accessories, Sandos and Merry People. The display highlighted the many innovative ways forest-based materials are already being used across the sector and provided an opportunity to discuss responsible sourcing, certification and supply chain transparency with attendees. Trademarks and Partnerships Manager of FSC ANZ, Jennifer Nicita, said it was energising to connect with such passionate and driven voices from across the industry, all working towards a shared vision. “These collaborations reinforce the shift towards a more transparent and traceable industry, and a positive future for responsible fashion,” she said. FSC ANZ exhibited alongside other industry leaders in this space, including Wool Impact, Trust Trace, Inter-Weave and Wool Yarns, which brought a strong mix of perspectives across fibres, materials and traceability solutions.

The post FSC’s threads of tomorrow appeared first on Timberbiz.

Forest & Wood Products Australia (FWPA) Chief Executive Officer Andrew Leighton has concluded his tenure with the organisation following his decision to take on a new position as Chief Executive Officer of OneFortyOne Plantations. Source: Timberbiz To ensure continuity of leadership and operations, the FWPA board has appointed Craig Taylor as Acting Chief Executive Officer, effective from 1 July 2026, until a permanent CEO is appointed. Under Mr Leighton’s leadership, FWPA has strengthened its strategic focus, aligned investment priorities with member needs, and progressed key initiatives to support industry growth, market development and long-term research impact. He has played a key role in shaping a more integrated, industry-led approach to engagement, ensuring FWPA delivers clear, coordinated outcomes across research, marketing and stakeholder engagement. “It has been a privilege to work alongside such a committed team and an industry that is deeply invested in its future. I’m proud of what we’ve achieved together to strengthen collaboration, sharpen our focus and position FWPA to deliver meaningful outcomes for members,” Mr Leighton said. “I leave knowing the organisation is well placed, with a clear direction and strong foundations to continue building impact for the industry.” FWPA wishes to thank Andrew for his leadership and contribution to the organisation and the broader industry during his time as CEO. “Andrew’s achievements while he has been CEO are significant but most importantly, he moved the culture of the organisation towards one of service to the industry, our levy payers and members. The Board wishes him every success at OneFortyOne Plantations,” FWPA Chair Craig Taylor thanked Andrew said. The board’s search for FWPA’s next CEO is progressing, with applications now closed. The recruitment process is being managed by a subcommittee of the board with assistance from Pacific Search Partners. FWPA remains focused on delivering value to members and industry stakeholders and looks forward to updating stakeholders on the appointment process in due course.

The post Leadership transition at FWPA appeared first on Timberbiz.

Forestry Australia has raised concerns following the Australian Government’s approval of the Improved Native Forest Management in Multiple-use Public Native Forests Method, warning that the method creates risks that could undermine confidence in Australia’s carbon market. Source: Timberbiz The method was approved by Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy Josh Wilson and will help fund the New South Wales Great Koala National, by stopping native timber harvesting in multiple-use public native forests. Forestry Australia President Dr Michelle Freeman said the organisation is very supportive of high-integrity carbon crediting for native forests, but that the method as approved had significant problems. “Forestry Australia strongly supports the development of high-integrity carbon methods for native forests. Our concern is that this method, as approved, falls short in a number of areas, including additionality, leakage and low ability to generate carbon outcomes.” At a time when media reports are highlighting that native hardwood previously sourced from Victoria is now being supplied from Tasmania, it is deeply concerning that the method will substantially underestimate the real leakage that occurs when harvesting stops. “If approved methods fail to fully account for leakage, or do not properly distinguish between genuine carbon abatement and policy-driven land-use change, such as in the case of the Great Koala National Park, then confidence in the ACCU Scheme is put at risk. Carbon markets must be grounded in science, transparency and integrity.” Forestry Australia also has concerns regarding the future stewardship of these forests. “Although the method allows for broader management activities in principle, the relevant provisions are so restrictive that they would, in effect, largely prevent active forest management for fire risk mitigation, forest health and long-term resilience. Despite the name, the method does not represent genuine improved native forest management.” Healthy, resilient and actively managed forests play an important role in storing carbon, reducing emissions and supporting biodiversity, cultural, social and economic outcomes. Improved outcomes could come from a range of evidence-based activities rather than from ceasing a single activity, Dr Freeman said. “Healthy forests require active management. Improved outcomes can come from restoration, ecological thinning, cultural burning, fuel management, assisted regeneration, more selective silviculture and other evidence-based interventions. Australia needs a carbon method that supports active, adaptive and science-based forest management across all tenures, not a one-off mechanism focused on stopping one activity in a very small part of the native forest estate.” Forestry Australia strongly supports investment in native forest management and the development of credible carbon methods that recognise the climate value of healthy, resilient forests, and has called for the risks in the approved method to be transparently addressed so that the ACCU Scheme can maintain the confidence of the market and the community.

The post New native forest carbon scheme must be grounded in science and integrity appeared first on Timberbiz.

The Federal Government’s new carbon credits method for ‘protecting’ native forests will allow fossil fuel companies to greenwash their climate pollution and expand coal and gas production, according to The Australia Institute. Source: Timberbiz A new carbon accounting method, proposed to fund the creation of the Great Koala National Park in NSW, pits forest and biodiversity protection against acting on climate change, when those objectives are inseparable. “The science doesn’t say that it is okay for us to approve new gas and coal mines, as long as we save some trees at the same time. However, under this Great Koala National Park offsets scheme, that is exactly what is being proposed,” said Dr Richard Denniss, co-CEO of The Australia Institute. The Australia Institute says its research has shown that: Half of Australians (48%) agree that so-called carbon offsets are greenwash. Three in five Australians (62%) agree that so-called carbon offsets help polluters look like they are reducing emissions even when they aren’t. Three in five Australians (61%) say that stopping new gas and coal projects is an effective way to reduce emissions.   “It is simply climate denial to pretend that saving a forest can ‘offset’ the harm of approving a new gas or coal mine and expanding fossil fuel pollution,” Dr Denniss said. “Australia institute research has shown there is no shortage of offsets boondoggles in Australia, but there is a shortage of the bravery required to confront the fossil fuel industry and their friends in the carbon offset industry. “It is obscene to suggest that the only way we can save native forests is to allow the fossil fuel industry to use those forests to greenwash their growing emissions.” The Australia Institute says it provides intellectual and policy leadership and conducts research that drives the public debate and secures policy outcomes that make Australia better. The institutes motto is research that matters.

The post Forest offset plan will allow greenwashing and expansion of coal and gas appeared first on Timberbiz.

Federal Member for Lyne, Alison Penfold MP, has condemned Chris Bowen’s approval of the Improved Native Forest Management (INFM) methodology, saying it will accelerate job losses across the NSW North Coast while fundamentally undermining the integrity of Australia’s carbon credit scheme. Source: Timberbiz Ms Penfold said the Minister’s decision clears the way for the NSW Labor Government to generate millions of dollars in Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) by locking up State Forests as part of the proposed Great Koala National Park. “Workers have already lost their jobs because of the NSW Government’s harvesting moratorium, and this decision will only encourage further permanent job losses across the North Coast,” Ms Penfold said. “The people paying the price are not politicians in Sydney or Canberra. They are timber workers, contractors, truck drivers, sawmill employees, mechanics, small businesses and regional families who have built their lives around a sustainable forestry industry. “The Minister was required under the legislation to consider the likely economic and social impacts before approving this methodology. He concluded those impacts could be appropriately mitigated. I simply cannot fathom how he reached that conclusion. “Has Chris Bowen met the workers who have already lost their livelihoods? Has he spoken to the businesses already forced to make impossible decisions because of Labor’s forestry policies?” Ms Penfold said the decision represented far more than another environmental policy. “It fundamentally changes the purpose of Australia’s carbon credit scheme. “The ACCU scheme was established to encourage genuine new emissions reductions and carbon sequestration projects. It was never intended to reward governments for shutting down existing industries and then claiming carbon credits for doing so. “The Minns Government announced the Great Koala National Park first and then went looking for a funding source. Chris Bowen has now handed them exactly what they wanted. “Instead of encouraging genuinely additional carbon abatement, this methodology allows governments to monetise a political decision to prohibit an existing lawful activity. “If governments can create carbon credits simply by locking up productive land, we’ve fundamentally changed what Australia’s carbon market was created to do.” Ms Penfold said the decision reinforced a growing belief across regional Australia that Labor simply does not understand or value regional industries. “When Labor weighs up the interests of inner-city environmental activists against the livelihoods of people who live and work in regional Australia, regional communities lose every time. “This is another example of Labor treating regional industries as expendable while expecting country Australians to carry the economic burden.” Ms Penfold said the Minister’s decision was precisely the outcome she sought to prevent when she recently introduced her Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Amendment Bill 2026. “I introduced my Private Member’s Bill because I could see exactly where this was heading. “My Bill would have protected the integrity of the ACCU scheme by preventing governments from using Commonwealth carbon credits to fund political land-use decisions instead of genuine carbon abatement. “Unfortunately, Chris Bowen has chosen to ignore those concerns.” Ms Penfold called on the Government to immediately release the full advice, modelling and analysis provided by the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee that supported the Minister’s decision. “If Chris Bowen is confident this methodology satisfies the integrity standards required by law, he should release every piece of advice that underpinned his decision.” She also called on the Parliament to disallow the methodology. “The Parliament now has the opportunity to stop this dangerous precedent before lasting damage is done to Australia’s carbon markets and before Commonwealth carbon credits are used to subsidise a policy that has already cost North Coast jobs and threatens many more. “I urge every Member and Senator to stand with regional Australia, restore the integrity of the ACCU scheme and support the disallowance of this regulation.”

The post Improved Native Forest Management scheme is no improvement at all appeared first on Timberbiz.

Four of Australia’s most senior forest scientists have questioned the evidence underpinning native forest harvesting bans. In a new paper in the peer-reviewed journal Australian Forestry, they argue that closures of commercial native forest harvesting on public land in Victoria and Western Australia, and the push to extend such bans into New South Wales and Tasmania, rest on contested science. Source: Timberbiz The lead author is Dr John Raison, a former Chief Research Scientist at CSIRO who has spent nearly five decades studying native forests. He is joined by former CSIRO scientists Dr Sadanandan Nambiar AO, Dr Glen Kile, and University of Melbourne hydrologist Associate Professor Leon Bren. Between them, the authors bring more than 200 years of experience in sustainable forest management. The paper examines the scientific literature on six common claims made against native forest harvesting, spanning forest loss, water, fire and wildlife. They find a far more complex and nuanced picture than what is commonly portrayed to the public and in political discourse. Much of the science drawn upon to justify native forest harvesting closures comes from a singular narrow viewpoint that does not encompass or recognise the breadth of local and landscape-scale research that provides a counter-perspective. Blanket bans on harvesting, the authors warn, are only deepening the challenges Australia already confronts regarding maintaining the skills, capacity and resourcing needed to manage forests for their ongoing health and resilience and to meet domestic demand for wood products through locally sourced wood products. Australian Forestry managing editor Dr Mohammad Ghaffariyan said the paper brought together more than two centuries of combined research experience to ask a straightforward question about what the published evidence shows. “Australian Forestry exists to put work of this calibre in front of the people making decisions about our forests. Readers will weigh the findings for themselves, but the debate is better for having the evidence on the table,” he said.

The post Former CSIRO scientists question native forest bans appeared first on Timberbiz.

Dr John Raison, Former Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO penned an open letter to the managing director of the ABC. This is that letter. The management of Australia’s vast and diverse native forests, understandably, is open to a range of views and often conflicting suggestions and actions. The provision of balanced information to enable informed public discussion would help the community, and the ABC should play a constructive role. Unfortunately, the recent ABC 4 Corners program [‘Timber turmoil’, 22 June] was yet another catering for the anti-forestry campaign, designed and delivered accordingly. Understandably, it has been widely criticised as biased, unfair and factually flawed by many stakeholders. It was seriously deficient in reporting on the science underpinning sustainable management, including harvesting, of Australia’s native forests. We are advised that the ABC was provided with relevant scientific background papers and offers from senior scientists to be interviewed – but to no avail. We recently published a detailed scientific analysis and rebuttal of the main claims and allegations made by activists against the harvesting of native forests (Raison et al., 2026). The program repeated many of the false claims and ignored all alternative science-based information Prof Lindenmayer (author of a book entitled ‘The Forest Wars’, 2024) had several appearances and was interviewed (and used to promote the program). He repeated his well-publicised (including via several ABC programs) claims including that harvesting is accelerating the loss of old habitat trees and other biodiversity values, is increasing bushfire risks and threatens water supply. He accused state forest management agencies of ‘rape and pillage’ of native forests. These serious allegations were left unquestioned by the presenter. All the claims above have been strongly challenged or debunked by critical scientific research and analysis published by several academics and researchers, and by experienced forest managers. The aging process and repeated wildfires are the main factors driving loss of old trees, not harvesting. Detailed studies over extensive areas have shown that harvesting does not increase either the severity or area burnt by wildfires at the landscape scale because harvested areas are small and dispersed. Fire weather, heavy fuel loads and steep topography are the main drivers of extensive wildfires. Good planning and regulated harvesting are effective in protecting water values – repeated claims that harvest of mountain ash forests is a threat to Melbourne’s water are based on flawed and outdated modelling. In this program and on several occasions previously, the ABC seeks only the opinions and conclusions on native forestry from one academic source, as though Australia has no other science-based expertise spanning our diverse native forests and how to sustainably manage them. The extensive on-ground experience of many hundreds of dedicated forest managers across the country seems to matter little. This skewed approach is a disservice to the community and does not reflect well on our national broadcaster. The program used emotive techniques to create a negative image of native forest harvesting. Thus, we saw the reporter and Prof. Lindenmayer standing on large stumps to create the impression that cutting down old-growth trees is common when in fact almost all areas now harvested are regrowth originating after earlier harvesting or wildfire. Nationally, about 95 % of current harvesting uses lower impact selective removal trees – but background images used in the program mostly show intensive higher impact harvesting operations. Then an activist spotlights to locate a glider and argues that their identification of ‘den’ trees will save gliders from harvesting. No mention is made of the considerable efforts made by the Forestry Corporation in pre-harvest surveys, and in modifying harvest plans and practices to protect endangered species. First class long-term research and monitoring by scientists from the NSW Forestry Corporation, the NSW Environment Department and CSIRO which shows that koala numbers are increasing, and that regulated sustainable harvests have no impact on their populations is not even mentioned. The activist from the Wilderness Society made the usual allegation, without providing any evidence, that harvesting is destroying forests and creating major threats to biodiversity, especially old-growth forests. The program made much of so-called “timber turmoil”! At the hub of the story was the discovery (by the ABC and anti-forestry ‘detectives’) that a small quantity of logs from Tasmanian public forests are being sold and transported to Victoria for processing. What is improper or wrong about that? The logs are being legally sourced from sustainably managed, independently certified, forests and being converted into high value, strong, long lasting (storing carbon) and beautiful wood products which we use. Those industries support rural economies and jobs for hundreds of fellow Australians and is exactly what we should do and promote. Such activities are internationally recognised as one effective way to support climate change mitigation. The allegations made by Prof. Lindenmayer and by the Wilderness Society that Victorian taxpayers are subsidising a ‘zombie’ industry are flimsy and highly disrespectful. Broad claims and campaigns against native forestry, including calls for a total ban on harvesting, are largely based on misinformation, selective or flawed use of science, misplaced focus on iconic fauna and exaggerated accounts of occasional management failures. Such campaigns hinder the development of better policies and practices that can benefit both the environment and the community. What we urgently need is not more “Forest Wars” or one-sided activism, but science-based forest policies that support informed conservation and enable sustainable forest management for multiple forest values and community benefits.   Dr John Raison, Former Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO Dr Sadanandan Nambiar AO, Former Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO References: D.B. Lindenmayer 2024. The forest wars: the ugly truth about what’s happening in our tall forests. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin J. Raison, E. K. S. Nambiar, G. A. Kile & L. J. Bren. 2026 Australia’s native forests can be sustainably managed for wood production together with other important forest values. Australian Forestry, DOI: 10.1080/00049158.2026.2663997

The post Forest wars – an open letter to the ABC’s managing director Hugh Marks appeared first on Timberbiz.