Tasmania’s peak forestry body has slammed the Liberals’ election promise to make more native forest available for logging, arguing the industry is being used as a “political football”.
The Liberals announced on Thursday they would make 40,000 hectares of forest from what they described as a “wood bank” – Future Potential Production Forest (FPPF) – available for logging at short notice.
Premier Jeremy Rockliff made the announcement alongside Liberal forestry spokesperson Felix Ellis on Thursday morning.
Their plan would cover 27 land parcels, mainly in the state’s north-west and north-east.
They argued it would “give certainty” to sawmillers and logging contractors, who had been facing pressure from Victorian companies entering the Tasmanian market after the phase-out of native logging interstate.
But the announcement, in the Liberal conservative north-west stronghold of Braddon, lacked representation from forestry sector bodies.
The reason for this soon became apparent, when the Tasmanian Forest Products Association (TFPA) released a statement.
Chief executive officer Nick Steel said the association was disappointed.
“The Liberals have been government for a decade and could have solved our wood supply issue at any time. But instead, they have decided to make it an election issue,” Mr Steel said.
“The TFPA has been talking to the government for a long time about active management of FPPF land, and what has been released today is nothing like our plan.”
Instead, the TFPA wanted a full examination of the 356,000-hectare FPPF with input from forestry, Aboriginal groups and environmental agencies.
Mr Steel said the Liberals had used the sector as a “political football”, by inserting it as an election issue.
FPPF is a legacy of Tasmania’s “forest wars”.
In the original 2012 forestry peace deal, the 356,000 hectares were designated as future reserves.
But when the Liberals came to power in 2014, they promised to rip up the deal, and the land was changed to FPPF — a potential “wood bank” for future use.
A moratorium on logging these areas ended in 2020, and now the Liberals want to transfer 40,000 hectares of it into the 800,000-hectare area that is already available for logging.
Doing so would require the support of both houses of parliament.
‘We won’t be blackmailed by environmentalists’: Ellis
Mr Ellis said he believed the policy had “broad support”, particularly in the north-west and north-east, and it would happen within 100 days of being elected.
He promised the additional forests would be available “exclusively” to Tasmanian sawmills.
“We think that bringing more supply back on in those areas, in particular, will be a massive benefit for regional jobs and the businesses that rely on our responsibly sourced timber,” he said.
The policy aimed to increase the amount of high-quality sawlog available to 168,000 cubic metres per annum.
Mr Ellis was asked whether the policy would increase anti-logging protests, which have continued across Tasmania since the Liberals came to government, including this week, when a sawmill was shut because of a protest.
“We’re not going to be blackmailed by environmentalists,” he said.
“The alternative is to do what Victoria and Western Australia have done, shut down their forest industry and rely on imports from third world countries that can’t manage their land.”
Dwayne Kerrison from forest contractor Orana Enterprises joined the Liberals for the announcement, and said their policy was “a step in the right direction”.
“If contractors are willing to get it, and mills are willing to take it … customers are going to buy it as well,” he said.
Labor not convinced
Labor leader Rebecca White argued the Liberals’ policy was “cooked up overnight with no consultation”, and that it was more about reigniting the forest wars.
“I don’t think anyone really understands what Felix Ellis is trying to do today,” Ms White said.
“He needs to explain to people what exactly he is trying to do here and whether or not there are any sawmillers in Tasmania who will take the timber he’s saying he’ll make available.”
Ms White reaffirmed her party’s support for Tasmania’s native forest logging sector, and said Labor would announce its own policy in the coming days.
Independent Lyons candidate John Tucker also said the issue was being used as a “political football”, and other solutions needed to be considered.
The state’s public forestry company, Sustainable Timber Tasmania (STT), had been making sawmillers tender for access to plantation timber.
The sawmillers faced competition from Victorian companies that had benefited from an $875 million Victorian government package that is part of that state’s transition away from native forest logging.
Mr Tucker said the amount of plantation timber made available to hardwood sawmillers had steadily decreased over the past decade.
“They need to have secure resource security,” Mr Tucker said.
“This is just a political stunt to try and unsettle things and try and wedge Labor.”
Environmental concerns
The Liberals’ policy also drew condemnation from the Greens and environmental groups.
Environmentalist Bob Brown – who has been arrested and charged several times in recent years during anti-logging protests – said making more forest available for logging would put more pressure on endangered species, like the swift parrot and masked owl.
“The major timber outlets don’t want to be branded with destroying high conservation forest in Tasmania,” he said.
“It’s going to bring international condemnation onto Tasmania.”
Nala Mansell, from the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre (TAC), said the Aboriginal community had been sidelined.
“Once again, Aboriginal people are having to fight for the protection of our land, our heritage and our forest,” she said.
Tasmanian Greens leader Rosalie Woodruff said her party would aim to use balance of power in the new parliament to influence the major parties on forestry policy, with a view to following the Western Australian and Victorian governments.
Posted , updated
