Thursday, September 23, 2010

Tree Vandalism- The Outcome

So the outcome was to be expected really with four Councillors supporting the motion and nine against. The debate as reported on radio was mostly mature and not the usual ridicule and lambasting that occurs in the chamber- maybe because it had been a somber evening of unusual outcomes - maybe because there was genuine interest in debating the issue.

Some of the debate went like this.

Clr Proudfoot: Thought that the very thought of putting up screens was extreme and obscene when it was the trees themselves that were the problem and needed to be cut down.

Clr Brumerskji showed his mocking immaturity when he described the screens as bunches of sheets between poles that would make the city look bad.

Clr Guile- wondered how it would look to visitors when we are perceived as being a pristine and sometimes iconic location ( i.e. Jervis Bay)

Clr Ward, pointed out that there were considerable penalties for anyone who was caught tampering with vegetation and that ought to be enough.

what did emerge just after the debate was that one of the most hotly contested areas of Jervis Bay- Collingwood beach, was one of the original Soil Conservation success stories of the late 70's early 80's. After severe storming and beach erosion events in 1974, the beach side residents were so concerned about the safety of their homes that they worked with government departments to return vegetation to the totally naked front dune- the homes along 1500m of beach were severely exposed, sand was drifting across roads and blocking up infrastructure such as storm water outlets and generally being a nuisance. The active management of the dunes and the reestablishment of vegetation was heralded as a great success.

Another point of view that I hadn't considered was how beach front property owners felt who lived with tree vegetation vandalism in front of them which they hadn't caused and how they felt guilty just by association and how uncomfortable it was to have people walk past and point at their homes in an accusatory manner.

What I had to reiterate throughout last nights debate is that using screens isn't the answer in every instance only where education and management had failed to deliver results and there was continuous vandalism from known parties who rangers couldn't catch.

I don't want to walk our beaches and look at screens, I want to admire a lovely landscape, enjoy glimpses of wildlife, sit in the shade of a tree to escape the heat of the day, swim in crystal waters and not have to look at eroded dunes with houses perched precariously a la Belongil beach style.

Monday, September 20, 2010

Tree Vandalism and Blocking the Illegal Views

Tuesday's (21 Sept 2010) meeting sees a notice of motion go before Council that attempts to put screening in where tree vandalism takes place. This motion is mostly targeted at the foreshore areas that cop a hiding from view seekers, who are almost impossible to catch red handed- which is what needs to happen if they are to be fined. These illegal view choppers get the so called bonus of improved views without ever having to pay the price.

Places like Byron Bay have been using screens to firstly impede the view and then to provide some sort of shelter for regrowing native vegetation.

On many of the Shoalhaven foreshore's there has been volunteer restoration activity to make sure that unsightly weeds don't take over where native vegetation should be. The native vegetation does a number of services in return. It helps to stabilise the dune and in storm situations acts as a barrier by slowing down sea surges. The NSW coastal management manual  lists vegetation as one of the tools to help reduce the loss of sand from dunes, it also list vegetation as the first line of defence when it comes to sea level rise.
The coastal vegetation also provides a lovely natural ambiance to the beach where beach goers aren't subjected to looking at coastal development. And of course the vegetation provides habitat for many living creatures and the contribution they make to life's great web.

I expect that the Council wont have the courage to support the motion, as the recent push has been to remove so called 'inappropriate' plantings from the foreshore that block views.

What some councillors don't seem to get is the fact that you can not buy a view and that the reserves are the commons of the people and not all people want to have to look at housing on the beach front-in fact that is why so many holiday makers make the journey to places like Jervis Bay and Narrawallee so that they can enjoy feeling like they are in a natural environment.

One cheeky journalist dared to suggest that a holiday maker would feel ripped off if they came down and rode on a beach side cycle way and couldn't see the sea- I don't think so- first of all they would be so happy to be out of the city that they would feel exhilarated just being able to ride and then might stay another day just to walk on some of the magnificent beaches the region has to offer.

Anyway back to tree vandals for views-to date the message has not been clear or strong enough- Don't Vandalise the very things that are helping to protect your property- and if we cant catch you we will inconvenience you. Regrettably some innocent neighbours will be caught up in the shadow of a sign but they can pressure the wrong doers into leaving the bush alone to do its thing- maybe even mature and provide a lasting and beautiful frame to a more tantalising view.

Image Courtesy of the Bay Post/Moruya Examiner

Friday, September 17, 2010

Sample letter to Stop woodchipping

here is a sample letter to the government regarding stopping wood chipping, letters don't have to be complex or long but it is better that they are sent snail mail (in my opinion). If you include a CC to all house members and federal senate then all should get a copy- or you may just want to target a few individuals. This is the link to the feds web page for contact details.


http://australia.gov.au/directories/parliament-of-australia-contacts#localmember

its not about a technically correct letter, but getting something in front of the noses of those who make decisions- some of them I'm sure would be oblivious to the wood chipping issue


The Hon Julia Gillard MP


Prime Minister

Parliament House

CANBERRA ACT 2600
 
CC All members House of Representatives and the federal Senate
 
I call on the Federal Government of Australia to intervene and cease Native forest wood chipping for export immediately.


In NSW the industry is recording losses up to $14 million and yet as a country we continue to provide subsides directly and indirectly to an industry that has obviously failed. These figures appear to have been hidden and absorbed by the plantation industry in the same state under Forests NSW stewardship..

While we continue to subsidise a failed industry we are missing out on redirecting these valued funds into research and development opportunities for replacement fibre for paper and cardboard production and the extension of the plantation timber resource.

More critically though we are missing out on opportunity’s to mitigate our intense carbon use and tackle the issue of climate change.

There is much talk about reinvigorating regional Australia and intensifying population in different areas. Without a clean, green workforce for people to participate in a migration back to the job centres will occur. Instead of small aging forestry workforces there are many opportunities to provide good forest stewardship jobs to young people and help ease the outward flow of young people from regional areas.

There are many environmental benefits for ceasing native forest logging operations for woodchip, yet the environmental argument has been eclipsed by economic interests-the time has come to recognise that the current economic arguments are fallacies and fantasies.

I challenge you to uncover the economic truth that is a failed native forests woodchip industry and think laterally about the possibilities’ that are currently passing us by.

I look forward to the end of native forest ‘mining’ and hope that you can make this issue a priority for this government early in its parliamentary life.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Shoalhaven Business Chamber planning for the future

Have been running from one thing to the next so no letter yet as a sample on the wood chipping industry.

Spent the evening at the Institute of Design Ulladulla- meeting with the business chamber who are looking at setting themselves a strategic direction with some sub groups to work on issues that people are passionate about rather than leave everything to a time poor executive. Still in the modern day it works- a lot of people contributing their piece to a larger outcome.

The chamber identified quite a few issues that they could see would help to improve the town and hopefully business. From the simple issue of customer service and trading hours to the long term issue of parking and what we might expect in the future. The frustration for some was that things seem to take such a long time - but I really think that the town has changed quite a lot in recent years- maybe not in outward appearance but in attitude and growth wise.

My contribution was to tell the facts on Councils budget and not to make false promises for this does no one any good, and for things to really progress we need people power not to wait for government to take our good ideas and sit on them. Our community like many has the capacity to take responsibility for its own destiny and work with our best asset- people- to get results.

Interesting times just keep on getting more interesting.

Monday, September 13, 2010

Putting the carbon back in Native Forests.

Ok- So here is the promised policy review that I put together- it is a little wordy but hopefully captures for you the situation as it currently stands and where we need to go. I havent modified it for the blog.

The reference list is at the end if you need further reading and I hope the format is a little intact if you need to copy and paste for use offline.

Aiming to have a draft letter up tomorrow and some contact details.


Putting the Carbon back in State Forests: A Review of Regional Forestry Agreements in a Carbon Constrained Policy Framework aiming for Zero emissions by 2020

ISSUE.


This review will look particularly at the NSW Forests Act 1916 and how the prescribed management practice extolled can help NSW achieve a zero Greenhouse Gas Emission target by 2020. The Forests Act 1916 underpins the management of Australian forests in four States, which has been regulated by Regional Forestry Agreements since 1997. The Regional Forestry Agreements were founded on a basis of settling conflicting views on forest management practice.

BACKGROUND

Deforestation has a significant impact on Australia's Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) with an estimated 77000 Gg tons of Carbon Dioxide equivalent emissions . A proportion of this impact is mitigated by reforestation projects delivering a net amount of Co2 equivalent at 56000 Gg tons . Forested land is held in multiple ownership including, private land holdings, National Parks and State Forests. Government must take a leadership role in mitigating GHG Emissions and make changes to its own portfolio while commencing on a parallel process with private land-holders.

NSW Forests are a highly contested area of natural 'mining ' and have been subject to many conflicts especially with conservationist in regards to the management of the forest estate. The argument that forests are excellent natural carbon sinks and should be valued more in this context is juxtaposed against the reality of a 6000 kiloton per annum export wood chip industry and logs for a local timber industry .

Growing trees and retaining forested land is acknowledged as a one of the many actions required to reduce GHG. It is a low technological area that can provide employment across a mixed age workforce, backed by sound research and development into the attributes and quality of planted forest estates. The current workforce for timber harvesting and mill workers is faced with an aging workforce crisis and is finding it difficult to find and retain younger workers in a physically demanding and often dangerous occupation.

Regional Forest Agreement have been adapted to provide security for the saw mill and woodchip industry by forecasting the volume of logs available from numbered forestry compartments over a twenty year period. Anecdotal evidence suggests that high quality saw logs are still in demand and are more difficult to come by .


The use of Forest logs for high-end aesthetic product is acknowledged as a unique and valued added product. However, exporting of native forest wood chips to other countries at highly subsidized rates has been the practice most questioned by the conservation movement. Wood chip exports are reported as using up to 80%of the native forest resource . Wood chip exportation is a carbon intense process that takes raw product (wood chip) and ships it long distances for processing and then returned as a value added product to Australia and elsewhere. Wood chip export industry has a negative public image and draws criticism from a wide range of people who are disappointed with the lack of transparency and ability to have information released via Freedom of Information to make sound analysis of the industry value.

It is within the context of carbon constraint, conflict, ability to supply and value of the industry that this review takes place.

ANALYSIS

The NSW Forestry Act 1916 (the Act) is a policy with a primary function to support the use of native forests for timber harvest. Section 11 of the Act,' Powers and duties of the commission' clearly outlines the taking of timber powers that are conferred to Forests NSW as the principle authority to carry out and enforce the regulations under the Act and ancillary agreements such as the Regional Forest Agreements. Other features of Section 11 include the ability for Forests NSW to supply timber, seedlings, procure land and manage the forest estate. Forests NSW are to pay any dividend from a net surplus to the States Consolidated Fund at the end of the financial year.

Forests NSW under the act are also to ensure that a minimum area of no less than 3 250 000 hectares of land remain dedicated as forest and 600000 hectares is kept for the purpose of pine plantation . The dedication of these lands is to happen with consideration for public interest. Section 17.3a binds Forests NSW to providing economic and effective control over timber and other forest products. Land can also be managed that has special conservation values under section 21 A of the Act. Land that is under reserve cannot have timber operations commence without the consent of the relevant Minister . Royalty payments for removal of timber are expected and are set by Forests NSW . Forests NSW native forest operations ran at a loss in excess of $14 million and had to rely on the productivity of plantation operations to balance its trading sheet and create profit. The loss of $14 million that was absorbed by the plantation operations of NSW begs the question as to why the native forest estate continues to be included in forestry operations.

The Act under Part 4a- Carbon Sequestration rights gives Forests NSW the right to develop a carbon market and provide services in respect to qualifying carbon sequestration . The Act does not provide a directive in regards to Carbon sequestration but leaves it optional. Regulations that are prescribed further within the Act relate to retaining the quality of the timber products through land management practices such as weed exclusion.

The Forestry Act of NSW (1916) along with Regional Forestry Agreements (NSW 1997) take a 'sustainable management' approach that allows for the removal of trees for multiple purposes but mainly wood chip and saw logs. Forestry NSW is supposed to apply principles of Environmental Management Systems to the forest reserve to ensure that a comprehensive assessment is made of the reserve before commencement of an extraction operation. However, the value of the forest reserve as a carbon sink has not been considered as an economic instrument.

Recent Australian position papers on policy have begun to recognise the contribution to Carbon Pollution levels by deforestation. The recent NSW Greenhouse Plan identifies Forestry as a medium priority in dealing with the emissions from the sector . However the Australian Governments Green Paper on Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme deliberately leaves out deforestation. The reasons sited for this are that Australia has significantly improved land protection and that a move to include deforestation is difficult due to the active forest industry .

Deforestation is recognised by Governments internationally as a contributing factor to Climate Change. The United Nations have made many recommendations in regards to this issue including the landmark Agenda 21 adopted in 1992 which adopts a preservation and enhancement approach to biologically diverse areas . A preservation and enhancement approach to forest assets would ultimately produce a forest reserve that is growing in size and in quality.

A brief analysis of the quantity of logs harvested Australia wide across both hardwood and plantation softwood sends 60% of its volume to export wood chip. The export wood chip market is valued in the same report at $344 million. This compares to the much lesser volume but higher valued saw log market, which contributes $788 million to the industry from the remaining 40% . These figures are presented in a manner, which makes it difficult to scrutinise deeply the proportion of volume to income coming from NSW native forests.

Australian data sources for calculating the amount of emissions generated by the forest industry and the amount of carbon sequestered in the forest estate seem to frustrate those interested in pursuing a policy position according to Dr J Ajani . The current policy position would see the forest industry continue to extract high value carbon store logs from the forest estate and contribute to the overall increase of Australian and Global harmful Green House Gas inputs. Opportunities exist to replace forest industry jobs with data collection and forest management careers that are far less harmful to the environment. There is also a strong argument to cease native forest operation and to leave the estate intact for carbon storage purposes.

COMMENT
Forests NSW are facing many challenges in the coming years including an aging workforce and the costs of haulage of logs from the forest estate. Forest compartments for logging are further away from the infrastructure needed to process them into consumables. Add to these emerging issues the significance of Climate Change and the challenges presented by rising fuel costs a compelling case is arising for a significant change in industry direction.

With the aim to reduce NSW to a zero emissions target by 2020 the forestry industry will have to make significant changes through a major policy review that reflects a carbon constrained economy. Forests NSW are well positioned to make a valuable contribution to easing the carbon burden of the state. The current Forestry Act needs to aggressively pursue carbon storage as a major part of the forestry portfolio particularly in native forest operations. Forest accounting needs to accurately reflect the carbon value of the standing forest, with an afforestation program that creates positive growth in the amounts of carbon captured and not a decline. The focus must be on the amount of carbon held in the estate, which will have a monetary value, if the asset was available for sale in the marketplace. The carbon that is sequestered in forests must be for the benefit of the public good and only be applied to the balance of the NSW carbon account and not applied as an offset to particular projects or sold to outside agents.

Closing down of the native forest operations in NSW will have an impact on the availability of wood chip for export and high quality saw logs for aesthetic timber product purposes. With less wood chip available pricing for remaining stock will be forced upwards and result in an industry review in regards to viability which will include the carbon costs of shipping. Up ward pressure on hardwood building materials would result in a greater timber take from private landholdings, which will require continued monitoring and provide income for landholders. Landholders need a compensatory rating system that allows them to put land in reserve for forest income. A result of this upward pressure on viability will have a positive result on the recycling industry and could lead to a revival in onshore processing. Plantation timber products will remain firmly placed as a leading building material. Australia currently runs a trade deficit on forest exports to imports of $2.1 million .

Ceasing operations in native forest will have a positive social benefit and remove the stigma from forestry operations. With a newly positioned forestry industry that focuses on being part of the carbon pollution solution and the cessation of native forest operations, the industry will become a more attractive career option. This in turn could assist in solving the aging workforce by attracting younger persons who wish to be part of a solution for climate change. Taking steps to reduce emissions to zero by 2020 without impacting on jobs will be motivational for other states to follow suit and build key industry knowledge that can be exported from NSW.

Increasing the amount of plantation timber in NSW must not be at the expense of native forests or first class agricultural lands but seek out crown land holdings, and private landholdings to enter into partnership with. Private land holding partnership should be targeted at agricultural sectors, which are also high emitters of Green House Gas as this mix of farming i.e. cattle and timber could become mutually beneficial. Planted forests must include a mix of species to assist in building environmental resilience in the face of climate change, which is in line with the objectives of the United Nations Agenda 21.

NSW creates 34% of the nations carbon emissions and has a key role to play in influencing the Federal Government . The NSW Greenhouse Plan notes that land clearing represents only .75% of the emission from Agriculture, forestry and fishing but it also acknowledges the role that forests play in carbon sequestration . There are no explanation notes with the figures that consider wood chipping export, timber processing and manufacturing. This omission could be because of the difficulty and different accounting standards that are applied in regards to emissions.

The Federal Government's Green Paper failed to include native forests. Dr Judith Ajani recommends that this position should be revised due to the value of carbon stored in native forests and the cost of exclusion on other Australian business' trying to meet a carbon reduction target

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are made to advance the forest industry in NSW to a Zero emissions target by 2020. When implemented a review period should be put in place to ensure that targets are being met.

Recommendation 1:
Amend the Forestry Act 1916 and replace this with a policy that focus' on carbon storage and plantation timber.

Recommendation 2:
Immediately cease native forest operations that supply wood chip for export.

Recommendation 3:
Develop a Carbon Accounting system for standing forests that is accurate and can be used around Australia.

Recommendation 4:
Commit funding for research and development into an onshore paper recycling industry to supply the paper and packaging industry of Australia including the use of non-wood fibers.

Recommendation 5:
Phase out Federal and State subsidies that support traditional logging industry and redirect to the establishment of a fiber industry.

Recommendation 6:
Remove Rural Land Protection Board land rates that tax native ecosystems that are not in use for farm production.

Recommendation 7:
Target marginal farmland for multipurpose fiber production and timber plantation.

References
Ajani J. (2008) 'Australia's transition from native forests to plantations: the implications for woodchips, pulpmills, tax breaks and climate change', Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, 15(3), 2008.

Australian Forest and Wood Products Statistics-September December quarters 2008 http://www.abare.gov.au/publications_html/forestry/forestry_09/forestry_09.html accessed online April 2010.
Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, National Greenhouse Gas Inventory,

http://ageis.climatechange.gov.au/# accessed online April 2010.

Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Green paper CPRS

http://climatechange.gov.au/publications/cprs/green-paper/cprs-greenpaper.aspx

accessed online April 2010.

Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/climatechange/greenhouseplan.htm accessed online March 2010.

Findley A. Interview conducted with Davis and Herbert Mill manager March 2010.

Forestry Act 1916, accessed online via

http://www.austlii.edu.au/ March 2010.

United Nations Division for Sustainable Development

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_00.shtml accessed online March 2010

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Batemans Bay Forest Forum

Saturday was a busy and exciting day for lots of reasons. Forest Forum, Dunn and Lewis opening and of course On Stage 2010.


The Forest Forum in Batemans Bay that I attended for the morning was an inspiration to start writing letters to the new government to try and force action on the issue of native forest logging, which is still happening here in the beautiful Shoalhaven. So many reasons why logging for woodchip is wrong wrong wrong.

I was inspired by the fact that the Greens are in a strong position in both houses of government federally and I believe that if the independents can see a convincing argument that has good outcomes for regional/rural Australia they may be supportive.

The other piece of news that I unaware of was the statement from Gunns Pty Ltd believe that they have lost the battle with environmentalist for native forests and will move to plantation based business.
It is a significant statement on many fronts but means that more pressure has to come on government to make sure that we do not loose native forest cover to be replaced by plantation- we would end up with a disaster similar to the palm oil story in neighbouring countries.

I have written a short paper on the native forest woodchip industry and will post it tomorrow as background material for anyone who wants to write to government and put some pressure on. Its amazing how pester power works - I have seen first hand how council has made decisions based almost solely on pester power..
will also aim to put up a sample letter and some contacts for you all to use.

Shelter to Close it doors as letter requesting more rentals goes out.

Salt Care - follow link to see their services  I received the sad news that our local homeless shelter needs to close it's doors on Sund...