I discovered this small inconspicuous sign in a business I recently visited in Hobart. I found the sign rather curious. Other customers also found the sign curious.
The sign says a great deal about the mixed, confused emotions and morals, and acute sensitivity that surround the special timbers industry in Tasmania.
The business, like many in Tasmania, features Tasmanian timber in the shop fittings.
So is the sign an explanation or an apology?
I’m not sure.
Or perhaps it is a statement of pride.
If so it leaves me confused.
Here’s what I think the sign is saying:
A patch of old growth native forest in North West Tasmania was clearfelled to feed the industrial forestry business model that dominates Tasmania. After the industrial clearfelling operation was completed, a second smaller operation recovered some craftwood from the site including the 400-year-old Myrtle stump. The logging coupe was then burnt and resown to native forest. Or perhaps the coupe was converted to plantation. The harvesting duo (industrial and craft) then moved on to the next old growth forest logging coupe to repeat the cycle of sin and redemption.
Is that what the sign is about? Sin and redemption!
It’s a pretty standard story about the fate of Tasmanian old growth forest.
Most people regard the clearfelling of Tasmanian old growth forest as unacceptable practice in the 21st century.
But somehow the idea of “salvaging” after the industrial clearfelling has finished attracts some crumb of virtue.
Why? Where is the virtue?
For the past 40 years the Tasmanian special timbers industry only existed because it was a minor subset of the industrial forestry business model. It needed the industrial harvesting to continue for its own existence.
But to improve its status and product differentiation from those industrial loggers the special timbers industry adopted the word “salvage”.
“Are’t we good people! We help save all that good special timber that would have been wasted.”
No that’s not quite true now is it?
Yes there has been plenty of waste. That’s to be expected when dealing with a low value commodity. But to call the special timbers craftwood operation a virtuous salvage is specious indeed.
No virtue attached at all.
Just a marketing con.
The old growth forest in North West Tasmania is gone. Where is the virtue in that?
But the market now believes the virtuous salvage story and continues to buy these special timbers.
So perhaps the sign could just as well read:
This timber veneer was harvested from a 400 year old Myrtle stump as part of an old growth forest clearfelling operation. It comes from North West Tasmania. The site was subsequently burnt, cleared and converted to eucalypt pulp plantation.
It would be just as informative and a lot more honest!
By the way what did happen to the 400-year-old Myrtle tree that sat upon the stump? Where did it end up?
A second point is that the word salvage should automatically imply to the reader there is no notion of sustainability. It’s a cleanup operation, that’s all! But in the forest industry you will sometimes see the phrase sustainable salvage being used. I don’t think so. Another marketing con job.
Now is there such a thing as genuine virtuous timber salvage?
Absolutely!
The Hydrowood operation on the west coast comes close. Unfortunately it is wrapped up in the wrong marketing spin.
http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2014/s4129593.htm
Dead, dying and storm-damaged trees can also be honestly salvaged. They do this under strict Government supervision and competitive tender on Crown Land in New Zealand:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11278973
And private property in Tasmania:
http://tasmaniantonewoods.com/salvaging-old-growth-standing-dead-blackwood/
But a craftwood harvest that is part of regular industrial old growth forest clearfelling operations does not classify as salvage in my books. And certainly has no virtue!
Finally now that Gunns has gone industrial forestry in our native forests is looking pretty sick. But never mind, the mouse has now become the lion. The (public native forest dependent) special timbers industry now dominates and controls old growth forest policy in Tasmania, with the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area firmly in its sights. It will be wrapped up in a glossy “strategy” and the language of virtue, but don’t be fooled.
Customers need to understand the consequences of their purchase decisions.
Ask for special timbers that are grown on private property. Let’s give Tasmanian farmers the clear message that they can grow and supply the profitable, sustainable special timbers market.
What do you think?
Post your comments.
Tasmanian Blackwood Growers Cooperative 
Forestry Tasmania fate in balance
http://www.examiner.com.au/story/2926663/forestry-tasmania-fate-in-balance/?cs=95
[The fate of] Forestry Tasmania hangs in the balance, with its chairman telling staff the company’s immediate future is entirely in the government’s hand.
In an email sent to Forestry Tasmania staff yesterday, chairman Bob Annells [pictured above] responded to mounting concerns that the cash-strapped company may be dissolved and folded into a government department.
[“folded into a government department” What an absolutely terrible idea! What Government department would it fit into? And what would be the point? It would fix none of the existing problems, and create even more new problems. A classic case of duck shoving!]
This article in today’s The Examiner tells us that things are pretty grim at the Government forest management agency.
While no official announcement has been made it now seems clear that FTs application for FSC Certification has been rejected. FSC auditors SCS Global were due to deliver their report last month.
And yet another review into Forestry Tasmania is currently being written. I’ve lost count of how many of those we’ve had. Far too many. And none of them have been at all useful, at least in terms of their implementation.
But enough is already known to understand that FT has absolutely no commercial future.
The Tasmanian Government is no doubt finding it increasingly difficult continuing to sack teachers and nurses whilst propping up the forest industry.
It is now just a matter of how best to clean up the decades of mess and close the organisation down.
It will be a bitter pill for many Tasmanians.
Decades of mismanagement may finally be coming to an end. Or it may drag on for a few more painful, bitter years. History tells me that the latter is more likely eg. the “fold” option.
The shutting down of FT will see the supply of blackwood to the market drop dramatically, with a corresponding rise in price very likely. Will Tasmanian farmers finally reap the rewards of a more competitive blackwood market?
UPDATE:
Seems like the FSC outcome is indeed correct judging by the article in today’s The Examiner. No medal for FT.
http://www.examiner.com.au/story/2929002/demands-on-forestry/?cs=95
So FT will “keep trying”. They don’t have the time nor the money to keep trying.
The longer FT stays in business the longer it will take for private tree growers and private investment to rebuild the forest industry. It just wont happen whilst FT continues to play zombie corporation.
Leave a comment
Posted in Commentary, Forestry Tasmania, Markets, Politics, Prices
Tagged Bob Annells, FSC