Forest institute opposes proposed national park

Australia’s forestry scientists have opposed the concept of a Great Forest National Park in Gippsland as unnecessary because existing measures to protect the Leadbeater’s Possum are adequate.

The Institute of Forests of Australia (IFA) has also condemned as “flawed” the assessment of the possum’s conservation status as “critically endangered”, and has urged an independent review of this status.

The AFI, which represents more than 1000 forest scientists and managers, sets out its position in a report on the proposed ‘Great Forest National Park’ (GFNP).

IFA president Rob de Fegely emphasised that foresters were informed by the science of natural resource management. The reports key elements include: More investment in bushfire management is needed to protect Gippsland’s forest, which is prone to large, destructive bushfires.

No new national park is needed, as current land use policy in the Central Highlands has a good balance between conservation and other (multiple) land uses.

The GFNP is unlikely to provide any clear additional biodiversity benefits, while closing industry would destroy the fire-fighting expertise of the skilled forestry work force.

Tourism will not compensate for the loss of jobs and economic activity from the forestry industry.

The proposal will greatly reduce timber supply and have a significant impact on the region’s timber industry.

A national park would make no discernible difference to Melbourne’s water supply and would not reduce carbon emissions.

Mr de Fegely said the major research effort since the possum was designated as ‘critically endangered’ in May last year had shown the animal was thriving in the current mix of tenures.

“This includes in logging regrowth as young as 10-20 years, and fire regrowth only seven years old,” he said. About 70 per cent of Mountain Ash habitat forest is already in parks and reserves.

Mr de Fegely said with a population estimated at 11,000 in 2014, 556 new colonies had been detected by February this year.

“The pre-harvest detection and full protection of all known possum colony sites in State Forest wood production zones ensure that timber harvesting has no impact on its current population,” he said.

More than half the artificially created tree hollows and nest boxes were showing signs of occupancy – a big innovation as hollows usually took 200 years to develop in trees.

Mr de Fegely said there was no evidence that past harvesting was responsible for the absence of old growth forest in the region.

This was due to the 1926 and 1939 bushfires, which killed 75-80 per cent of the forest, and the 2009 Black Saturday fires that killed the remaining old growth forests in Melbourne’s water catchments, he said.

Ecological studies showed that a diverse forest with a mosaic of different age classes, produced by a cycle of harvesting and regeneration mixed with unharvested forests, supported a greater range of biodiversity.

Mr de Fegely said economically, tourism could not compensate for the Central Highlands timber industry, which generates $573 million of economic activity annually.

“Forest-based tourism is very seasonal given that the forests are cold, wet and uninviting for at least the winter months,” he said.

Tourism, in part, relied on the road network built and maintained to service the timber industry. Without this, the road network would deteriorate, thus reducing tourist access.

Mr de Fegely said without a timber industry, Australia would increase timber imports and use more carbon-intensive materials like concrete and steel.

“Wood is the only building material that that is both renewable and stores carbon, and so there should be more of it commercially available, not less,” he said.

“Due to the prevalence of bushfires, Victorian forests are not permanent carbon stores, despite environmentalists’ claims to the contrary.”