Australia's National Association of Forrest Industries
Search NAFI
 
HomeNewsNewslettersMedia ReleasesBriefingsLibrary
issues Harry & SalEducationTimber TrekFuture Forests Conference 2003
Environment
Forest Ecosystems
Forest Industries
Forest Management
Forest Products
Greenhouse Gases
NAFI Submissions
Policy and Politics
Renewable Energy
Sustainability

Government Decision on Woodchip Exports

19 September 1996
Senator Bob Brown
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Senator Brown,

I was struck by the sincerity of the distress you showed at the announcement by the government in mid-July that it had lifted the ceiling on hardwood export woodchips. You called the decision a "terrifying decision for those people who know and love Australia's forests". You also deplored what you called:
"the destruction of habitats of rare and endangered species like leadbeater's possum in Victoria, like the white goshawks and the grand Tasmanian wedgetails, the sub-species which are down to about a hundred nesting pairs in Tasmania."

Because of the gravity of the consequences you were pointing to, it seemed to me I should inform myself more closely about these problems, which hadn't previously been characterised quite so starkly by anyone in a position of influence and responsibility such as you now hold.
You might be interested to know what I found out.

Leadbeaters Possum

In 1960 the scientific community had listed leadbeaters possum as "probably extinct", since no sightings had been recorded since 1910. A year later one was found near Marysville, and since that time, according to my information, the species has been discovered in relatively large numbers throughout the ash forests of the Central Highlands of Victoria. Despite this relative abundance, concern is still held for the possum's future, which is probably why it remains on the endangered species list maintained by the Australian Nature Conservation Agency under the Endangered Species Protection Act, 1992.
The reason for this concern, according to the Victorian Department of Natural Resources and Environment's quarterly magazine, "Outdoors":
"... is that the optimum habitat for Leadbeater's is a young regenerating or uneven-aged forest that contains both wattles and an ample supply of old hollow logs which are used for nesting. Regrowth from the 1939 wildfires which devastated much of Victoria, together with the fire-killed remnants of mature forest, has provided abundant feeding and nesting habitat during the past 30 years. However, these remnants are gradually decaying and falling over, and suitable nesting hollows will not occur in regrowth forest for another 150 years. Population models have predicted a massive decline of the possum over the next 30 years, with no increase in population until about 2075 when the 1939 regrowth ash forest will begin to develop tree hollows suitable for nesting."

The results of detailed and painstaking research carried out by scientists at the ANU and elsewhere seem to indicate that what the possum is mainly vulnerable to is uncontrolled wildfire, exactly like those of 1939. Effective fire management, it seems, may be the key to ensuring its survival.
The Victorian government, which of course manages Victoria's public forests, says it is committed to conserving leadbeaters possum throughout its range, and there doesn't seem to be any reason to doubt the strength of this commitment, since the possum is one of Victoria's faunal emblems. The Action Statement it has adopted provides for the protection of "optimum habitat" (mature ash forest or regrowth ash forest with more than 12 live hollow-bearing trees per three hectares). It also recommends the trialling of alternatives to clearfelling in selected areas of ash forest within the Central Highlands, and special protection for hollow trees. The government acknowledges that the problem is not an easy one, because it stretches across centuries, but it says that computer modelling by ANU scientists has predicted that the steps being taken will ensure the survival of leadbeaters possum through the Central Highlands for at least another 250 years.

A number of points seem to me to stand out in this information, and perhaps you will be struck by them too.


  1. just as the aftermath of the 1939 bushfires seems to have played an important part in providing optimum habitat to enable the possum's increase, so it is likely that the fires themselves were a major, (possibly the major) reason for the possum's decline;

  2. active forest management for timber production seems to have greatest potential to ensure the continued availability of food and shelter for the possum, (as well as the greatest opportunity to maintain a degree of fire control and prevention). This is because with the maturing of the forest, the canopy closes, and the growth and flowering of wattles is suppressed. Leadbeaters appear to need some regrowth, and sustainably managed forestry supplies it.

  3. there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the forest managers, who are employees of the state government, or the timber industry have been at all recalcitrant about finding and adopting measures to protect the possum. The relationship between the possum and timber production may not be entirely comfortable, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence of hostility or neglect on the part of forest managers either.

  4. given that the Victorian government manages the forests, as well as being responsible for environmental protection, it doesn't seem likely, prima facie, that it would allow any decision by the federal government about permissible woodchip export levels to upset the provisions it has put in place to protect the possum;

  5. the steep decline in possum numbers that is apparently expected over the next 30 years does not appear to be a function of forest management practices per se, but mainly of forest growth and maturation. It is not, to borrow a term from the greenhouse debate, an "anthropogenic phenomenon".



With all the scientific understanding that has been accumulated, and the concerned and enlightened protection measures that are being put in place, I expect that you will be relieved to know that the situation is not as bleak as you perhaps inadvertently painted it. As an aside, I would be interested to know whether you have made any public statements about the need for effective fire control and prevention measures in the forests.

White Goshawk

According to the Australian Nature Conservation Agency the Grey Goshawk, also sometimes known as the White Goshawk (Accipiter novaehollandiae) is not a vulnerable or endangered species, so you do not need to be distressed or concerned about its status. The red goshawk, (Erythrotriorchis radiatus) or the other hand, (which you didn't refer to) is listed as vulnerable under the Endangered Species Protection Act . This means that, under the Act, "within the next 25 years the species is likely to become endangered unless the circumstances and factors threatening its abundance, survival or evolutionary development cease to operate."
You will probably be pleased to know, notwithstanding the fact that you did not express concern about this species, that a "recovery outline" has been prepared by ANCA. The recovery outline lists the reasons for the decline of this species:
"Widespread clearance for agriculture in north-east New South Wales and south-east Queensland (confirmed); in Queensland changes to fire regime (speculative) egg collecting (speculative), shooting by pigeon and poultry owners (speculative). Clearance of habitat has undoubtedly caused a decline in the south-east of the species range, other factors may be having local effects that reduce abundance."

Forest managers and the timber industry don't look like the villains in this piece either. The recovery outline doesn't list in the reasons for decline anything like "timber harvesting (speculative)." I imagine this is the reason you didn't actually refer to this species in your remarks to the media about the woodchip decision.

Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagle

There's not much doubt about the Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aquila audax fleayi). The Commonwealth's list says it is endangered (critical). The reasons for its decline given in ANCA's "Action Plan for Australian Birds" says:
"Clearance for agriculture (confirmed) clearfelling for timber extraction (confirmed), poisoning and shooting (confirmed). Though there are no historical records of the population much suitable habitat, particularly in eastern and northern Tasmania has been cleared and the birds are still subject to disturbance when nesting and to illegal killing."


(I wonder how, if there are no historical records, you have become aware that the population is "down to" about a hundred nesting pairs as you put it, and not "up to" that number).
The recovery outline for the species says that management actions already initiated are:


  1. "in state-managed forests buffer zones must now be left around known nests and those discovered during logging operations;

  2. a public education program has been attempted but with limited success."

    The recovery outline says that management actions still needed are:

  3. "maintain close liaison between conservation authorities and forest managers to improve protection of nest sites on public land;

  4. develop a vigorous public education program in areas where illegal poisoning and shooting [are] most prevalent, and to encourage conservation of nesting habitat on private land."


What strikes me about this information on the Tasmanian Wedgetail, and may well seem important to you too, is this:


  • to the extent that inappropriate forest management was responsible for any decline, diligent efforts seem to have been made to remedy the problem;

  • there seems to be a serious problem with public attitudes, as reflected in the incidence of poisoning and shooting, (presumably for livestock protection);

  • as with leadbeaters possum, the active involvement of the state forestry agency, along with state parks and wildlife officials, in implementing the recovery plan seems to make it unlikely that any decision by the Commonwealth government about permissible levels of woodchip exports would be allowed to undermine or impede the implementation of the recovery plan.



[The Action Plan does not say so, but I suppose it is possible that purposeful poisoning and shooting of the bird by farmers and landowners who suffer economic loss from its predations has accounted for a significantly higher rate of fatalities amongst adult birds than the pressures created by either timber harvesting or vegetation clearance. If you have made any public statements about this aspect of the problem, I would be grateful if you could draw my attention to them.]
I am sure you will find it reassuring, as I did, to know that diligent efforts are being made to protect these species, and that foremost amongst the people making those efforts are the responsible forest managers.

Whilst it is clear that vegetation clearance has had a major impact on the diminution of preferred habitat of many species, the harvesting and regrowth of relatively small areas of forest on a sustainable basis does not seem to have been a problem in attempts to ameliorate the plight of endangered species. In the case of leadbeaters possum, there are even grounds for believing that sustainable forest management works to the specie's advantage, by preserving nesting sites, ensuring a continuing food supply, and reducing the risk of wildfire.

I am sure that the concerns you expressed were inspired by genuine concern for the environment, but they do not seem to do justice to the real nature or the complexity of the problems, or to the efforts of the people responsible for solving them. It is possible that, at an appropriate time, you may want to acknowledge publicly that diligent efforts are being made, with some success, to preserve endangered species and that forest managers, who were not and are not responsible for the vegetation clearance for agriculture that has been and is still taking place, have been in the forefront of those undertaking this work for the small proportion of endangered species which are forest-dependent.

I have taken the liberty of copying this letter to members of the media audience to whom your remarks were initially addressed, because I appreciate that they too are concerned about the plight of endangered species, as am I.

Yours sincerely,

Warren Lang
Deputy Executive Director

Postscript 19 September 1998
No reply was received from Senator Brown

Return to Top of Page
HomeNewsNewslettersMedia ReleasesBriefingsLibrary
Harry & SalEducationTimber TrekFuture Forests Conference 2003
Site development by Rendrag Networks, Canberra - Graphic design by Swell Design Group, Canberra