This is the conversation we should have been having 50 years ago when the forestry wars began!
These are the important questions that will determine the future of the forest industry in Australia.
The end of Public Native Welfare Forestry in Australia has been coming for decades. But so many people dependent on it have chosen to ignore this fact.
Most furniture makers and builders just expect quality timber to be in the marketplace ready to buy. They have no interest in securing their own future.
How do furniture makers support farm forestry? Will furniture makers and builders support farm forestry??
New Zealand farmers have been happily growing quality timbers including lots of different eucalypt species, and blackwood, for decades. Why can’t Australian farmers?
Why don’t Australian furniture makers support New Zealand farmers and buy New Zealand grown quality wood? New Zealand farmers would love to sell their quality wood to Australian furniture makers.
If New Zealand wants timber, New Zealand farmers grow it!!
Why can’t Australian farmers grow timber for Australia??
Australia has never had a proper forest industry. Nor has it ever had proper functioning wood markets.
It has all been welfare, ideological and political!!
Not an ounce of commercial reality anywhere!!
Imagine if Australian furniture makers got behind and supported farm forestry in Australia. Just imagine the huge transformation that would initiate!!
The argument that you can’t make quality furniture out of plantation timber is of course utter bullshit. It is part of the bullshit the forest industry says to justify plundering taxpayers and our public native forests.
“We’ve never been able to grow jarrah or karri well in plantations,” Mr de Fégely said.
That is true for Jarrah, but not true for Karri. Karri is a very fast growing eucalypt species. It has been grown in plantations in South Africa for almost a century.
When it comes to defending public native welfare forestry, the forest industry will completely disparage farm forestry.
The final comments from forestry head Rob de Fégely are utterly stupid.
Growing trees for wood production is NOT welfare, it is business!!
Mr de Fégely wants to keep defending the welfare forestry model.
It’s time we gave welfare forestry the flick!!
It is time to support farm forestry in Australia!!
Congratulations on winning the Tasmanian Tree Farmer of The Year 2021 Award.
It’s a prestigious award!
1. Firstly can you give my readers some background? How did you get into farming and into growing trees?
I was raised on my parents farm and for as long as I can remember I wanted to farm and own an area of land and bush. I got into growing trees for their aesthetics and the environmental benefits they provide.
Our farm (Judy, my wife and I) is broken up by a series of short steep drops running basically North to South and were covered in bracken fern and blackberry. The prevailing winds are west/southwest so these banks seemed a percect place to provide erosion control and wind protection. Providing shelter was our primary aim in planting trees.
2. What tree species are you growing and why? How much of your farm is dedicated to growing trees?
I wanted to grow a variety of species (probably too many) that I was interested in and thought may grow reasonably well in our climatic conditions.
Approximately 14 hectares is plantation. Native bush is predominantly backwood.
3. Do you enjoy growing trees?
Yes I enjoy growing trees and I find it very satisfying and fulfilling.
4. Can tree growing be a profitable addition to a farm enterprise in Tasmania?
Tree growing can be a profitable addition to a farming enterprise. We have profitably harvested Blackwood (non plantation). Personally harvested and sold a small plantation of Radiata that was on the farm when purchased. We have just completed a profitable thinning and on site milling of our oldest redwood plantation.
5. As a tree farmer how much support and interest do you get from the local forest industry and wood markets?
As growers of mainly small lots of specialty timbers I dont consider we fit the normal profile for local timber markets, however have had local interest in Redwoods, and can always sell Radiata.
6. How much do you know about wood markets, supply, demand and prices? Is this information readily available to you?
Finding a transparent comparison of prices can sometimes be a little difficult. There are established markets for Radiata, however there are no established markets for Redwoods. C. Macrocarpa is attracting interest, however there is currently no transparent pricing for it.
7. As an award winning tree farmer do you think the market will now sit up and take notice and support and reward your efforts? In other words does the Award have any leverage in the marketplace?
I honestly do not know if the award will provide any leverage in the market place, however this should not be a negative.
8. Can you tell me where you think farm forestry will be in Tasmania in 20 years? Will it be a thriving profitable business or will it continue to struggle as it has for the past 50 years?
A very hard question! I would love to see a time when farmers would plant a crop of trees as readily as a crop of potatoes. I have no crystal ball but I think the reality is that it will continue to limp along.
I sincerely hope that the imperative for farming to achieve carbon neutrality may encourage farmers to store carbon. Hopefully farmers may consider planting speciality timber trees such as blackwood and redwood etc., that can store carbon for the longer term. The carbon credits for these plantations would be passed on with the sale of the farm and thus maybe help overcome the hesitancy of growing trees that require a longer time frame.
9. There are many issues holding farm forestry back in Tasmania. What do you think are the two most important of these issues?
Hard to limit it to two.
I think one is to provide clear and transparent pricing and encouragement from forestry companies so that farmers can be reasonably certain of achieving a satisfactory return for “locking up” part of their farm for a long period of time.
For the majority of farmers timber has to provide a return that at least gets close to equalling the return they may get for any other use they put their land too.
The other issues I see, especially for growers of longer term specialty species is how to encourage farmers to plant trees that personally they are unlikely to realise a monetary profit. Hopefully carbon neutrality may help.
10. Finally on a positive note, can you tell us about your best experience as a tree farmer.
Growing, felling and milling your own timber is extremely satisfying, however the most extreme experience is standing in a 40 year old plantation of Redwoods realising their beauty and knowing they were planted by us!
Kind regards
Graham and Judy
Thankyou Graham for your time, and may your tree-growing efforts not go unrewarded.
Island Specialty Timbers (IST), the only source of competitive, transparent market blackwood log prices, conducted 10 log tenders during the year, making up for the shortfall last year due to the pandemic.
IST is a business enterprise of Sustainable Timber Tasmania (STT) which sources and retails raw material of Tasmanian specialty timbers from harvest or salvage operations conducted on State owned Permanent Timber Production Zone land (PTPZl).
You can read my previous annual tender summaries here:
2021 was the year that plain-grain blackwood sawlog broke the $1,000 per cubic metre price barrier!
Prices for good quality plain grain blackwood sawlogs have been sitting above $800 per cubic metres for the last few years, as seen in the chart below, but this year they broke through the price ceiling.
Premium plain grain sawlogs are what can be grown in blackwood plantations.
Will this result encourage Sustainable Timbers Tasmania/IST to put more blackwood sawlogs to tender?
Will this result capture the attention and imagination of Tasmanian farmers?
This year IST put 10 blackwood logs to tender, a total of 11.9 cubic metres, or 4.4% of the total volume put to tender for the year.
One log was unsold at tender, as was a 2 cubic metre pack of sawn blackwood boards.
Two logs had feature grain and sold between $1,250 and $1,300 per cubic metre.
The other 7 logs were plain grain, with prices ranging from $300 to $1,100 per cubic metre. Lower prices were paid for smaller logs and logs with defects (spiral grain, scars, branch knots).
Higher prices were paid for large, good quality logs.
All up the 8.14 cubic metres of plain grain blackwood logs sold for $4,259.
The following chart shows the average size characteristics of sold plain grain blackwood logs. The target sawlog for a blackwood plantation has a volume of 1.5 cubic metres and a small end diameter (SED) of around 50 cm.
Remember these are tiny log volumes sold into the small southern Tasmanian market. They represent mill door prices not stumpages.
As usual IST has a policy of minimising the amount of blackwood logs it puts to tender, despite the fact that around 10,000 cubic metres of blackwood are harvested from public native forests in Tasmania each year, and sold at “Government prices”.
Imagine if IST put 10 cubic metres of blackwood sawlog at each tender, to attract mainland and maybe even overseas buyers.
Imagine if Government forest policy was about profitable tree growers and not sawmill welfare.
Imagine what that change would do for the forest industry and Tasmania!
These positive blackwood log price signals should be resulting in more blackwood plantations being established, helping to build the industry and make Tasmanian farmers more profitable.
One hectare of well managed blackwood plantation has the potential to produce approx 300 cubic metres of premium sawlog after 30 – 35 years. At $1,000 per cubic metre that equates to $300,000 per ha in todays market.
How many Tasmanian farms have difficult corners, steep slopes and weedy areas that could be more productive growing quality wood?
General Results
Overall IST put 272 cubic metres of specialty timbers to tender in 2020-21 of which 252 cubic metres sold for total revenue of $262,700.
Last year Sustainable Timbers Tasmania sold 7,921 cubic metres of specialty timbers, so these competitive tender sales represent a mere 3% of specialty timber sales from public native forests in Tasmania.
The following chart shows the volume and price summary for all log tenders back to 2015. The price spike in the January 2021 tender was due to this tender being an all Huon pine (Lagarostrobos franklinii) tender.
The tiny volumes and wide variability in species and quality of logs that IST put to tender makes assessing trends over time difficult.
The next chart shows the average volume of the sold logs. Here there is a clear trend of diminishing log size. If it wasn’t for the occasional large eucalypt log IST throws into the tender mix, this trend of diminishing log size would be even more pronounced.
The following 2 charts show the above data summarised by year:
2020-21 was significant for a) the major increase in volume of specialty timbers put to tender, and b) a record unit price set for a single log at IST.
The record unit price of $5,300 per cubic metre was for a Black heart sassafras log at the March 2021 tender. The log was only 2.5 metres long with a volume of only 0.16 cubic metres, so total price was only $850!!
The highest price paid for a single log was at the same March 2021 tender where another Black heart sassafras log of 1.3 cubic metres sold for $5,570.
The main focus of IST tenders is black heart sassafras (Atherosperma moschatum) which can command very high prices for good logs.
However the tree is slow growing (500+ years to reach commercial size) and is restricted to rainforest and old growth eucalypt forest, so supplies of this species are dwindling.
Surprisingly the marketplace continues to support the plundering of Tasmania’s last ancient forests!
Five Year Review
Again it is important to recognise that this data represents tiny volumes sold into the small southern Tasmanian market. The results DO NOT represent the wider Tasmanian, Australian or international markets.
The results are also influenced by the fact that IST is NOT a commercial business. Like its parent Sustainable Timbers Tasmania, IST is NOT obliged to make a profit. These rare timber resources are brought to market at taxpayer expense.
Looking at the annual aggregate results of the IST tenders three trends are apparent:
the maximum price paid for quality wood is increasing; and
the volume unsold at tender is decreasing. Whether this is due to a) IST becoming better at excluding logs that will not sell, and/or b) increasing demand for quality wood, is unclear. The fact that both the average and minimum prices paid remain steady indicates better log selection rather than increasing demand. Certainly the quality of product put to tender by IST varies enormously.
the average price paid for quality wood has not changed over the last 5 years, remaining at around $1,000 per cubic metre.
The 7-year trend for plain grain blackwood logs is less clear, but the volumes are microscopic!
In general the prices paid for plain grain blackwood logs have been good, with indications in the last few years of solid price increases.
Since blackwood is the only Tasmanian specialty timber species that can be grown in commercial plantations, this is good news!
Will the Government and the forest industry make use of this valuable positive market information?
Notice the headings across the top of the page. How do they compare with the New Zealand website?
The Australian website contains nothing about Contractors & Suppliers nor about Market Information & News!
Why is that?
Are there no forestry markets in Australia?
Do tree growers in Australia not want access to uptodate market information?
Or is it because profitable tree growing is not the focus of the forest industry in Australia?
New Zealand has a real forest industry where the focus is on supporting tree growers to make sure they are as viable and profitable as possible. That way more farmers plant trees, the forest industry expands and has a successful future.
It is a successful simple industry model!
PF Olsen NZ is acutely aware of this and do their bit to ensure tree growers and the forest industry share a successful future.
Go to PF Olsen’s New Zealand website and check out their Market Info & News. It’s a great resource for NZ farmers!
Curiously PF Olsen Australia does not seem to share the same vision.
The focus of the forest industry in Australia has always been about supporting and subsidising domestic processors, at the expense of growers and the future of the industry.
Curious to hear your thoughts on this.
Please post a comment…
PS. If anyone can find a single Australian forest industry website that provides uptodate market information I’d love to know. Thanks.
I’ve been reading your newsletter. Have you thought about joining your group up to FSC?
I’m in the environment chamber and on the board. Happy to talk about it if you are interested.
Cheers
I recently received this invitation to join the Australian branch of the FSC.
I’m making my reply to this invitation public because I believe the public and the marketplace need to better understand what is happening within the forest industry.
Hi XXXX
Thanks for the invitation for the Tasmanian Blackwood Growers Cooperative to join the FSC.
Twenty years ago I had hopes that the advent of the FSC would see major reform within the Australian forest industry.
Today I have no such illusions!
The fact that Bunnings/Officeworks will help shut down public native welfare forestry next year is indirectly due to the FSC, but otherwise the industry and the wood marketplace are utterly moribund.
Harsh words I know, but after a 40 year career that is the only conclusion I can come too.
The FSCs standards for “economically viable” are a joke. No they are worse than a joke! They are completely offensive and destructive to the future of the industry:.
Because of this “Standard”, private forest growers have no hope. Because of this “Standard” my Group has no future. How can it when annual taxpayer subsidies to public native welfare forestry are fully supported by the FSC and PEFC? Private growers don’t get FSC/PEFC approved annual taxpayer subsidies!!
Growing trees for wood production is a commercial activity. It is not welfare!
Should I join the FSC to help drive change within the FSC?
If Greenpeace resigned because it could not achieve meaningful change within the FSC what chance would I have of doing so?
Greenpeace is right! Third party certification without transparency is a waste of time. It becomes a form-filling, label-sticking exercise of little value.
So why would I join an organisation like the FSC that deliberately seeks to undermine private forest growers?
Taxpayer subsidised welfare forestry and profit-driven commercial forestry cannot coexist in the same marketplace.
It’s that simple!
The FSC supports welfare forestry and therefore undermines commercial forestry.
It’s that simple!
If the FSC wants to support and encourage farm forestry in Australia then it needs to change its assessment standards.
Here we are. Sawmillers who have spent generations being on the Government payroll are now complaining about having to exist in a global competitive market.
With the sale of Government pine plantations, the new plantation owners are free to sell their logs to whoever they like, including customers who are prepared to pay more than domestic customers/sawmillers.
Imagine that! Competition and free trade in the forest industry. Who would have guessed?
This is a classic forest industry sob story, about poor hard-done-by sawmillers who can’t compete in a global marketplace.
The softwood industry is no longer part of the Welfare Forestry System in Australia, except in Western Australia and New South Wales, where Governments have yet to privatise their plantation estates.
I just love the pity-me language:
“Our forefathers planted the trees — they were planted with a plan to create jobs into the future. It wasn’t about growing wood for Asia.”
A classic example of Trees-as-Welfare, not Trees-as-Commerce. The idea of growing trees to make a profit is anathema to these poor folk.
These sawmillers are demanding welfare not trees!
They are unwittingly demanding the destruction of their very own businesses and industry.
Clearly the Green Triangle Forest Industry Hub (GTFIH) is not the cohesive single-minded group that their website wants us to believe:
Tensions between growers and processors are running high!
The GTFIH has a plan to plant 50,000 ha of new plantation over the next 10 years. That definitely won’t happen with stories like this in the media.
Who would want to plant trees knowing you cannot trade in an open competitive market? Nobody that’s who!!
Unfortunately the article does not talk about prices and markets, or any idea of the growers side of the story.
And as for an industry Code of Conduct, that would be the final nail in the coffin for the already struggling forest industry in Australia.
What other primary producers in Australia face a more hostile political environment than tree growers? I can’t think of any! Happy to have your comments!
Anyone growing trees for wood production in Australia, whether plantation or native forest, should be very worried right now. Your investment is about to be destroyed by your politicians.
As usual the New Zealand forest industry is generations ahead of anything happening here in Australia.
This new proposal to establish a NZ Specialty Timbers Association is just brilliant.
Unlike specialty timbers in Tasmania, the industry in NZ has nothing to do with plundering public native forests, or endless, repetitive political games.
New Zealand’s specialty timbers are farm-grown, and include plantations and managed native forest.
A discussion paper about the proposal is available from the above website. It is only 5 pages and well worth reading.
One of the interesting aspects of the proposal is the key role which portable sawmillers will play in the Association; providing the vital link between the marketplace and the thousands of specialty timbers growers in New Zealand.
The current focus of the discussion paper is on the NZ domestic markets which is fine. There are plenty of opportunities locally. But there are a few specialty species (incl. Blackwood) for which available volumes are already in excess of domestic demand, so that export markets must be developed immediately.
Two aspects that I believe are vital for the new Association to consider:
An Industry Plan is needed, with objective, measurable goals and regular reviews. Having thousands of farmers randomly planting thousands of different timber species with no vision or coordination, will not build a viable future. The marketplace needs to develop a select list of preferred species, so that viable marketable quantities of quality wood from these species are available to the market.
Lots of marketplace support and feedback, from builders, architects, craftspeople, etc., needs to be generated so that farmers can have a sense of what they are doing and why. Currently the marketplace completely avoids thinking 10, 20, 30 years into the future when it comes to timber supply. This must change!!
I will follow this story as it develops over the coming months and years.
Having spent decades/generations complaining about protesting and blockading “greenies” in the public forests, and demanding legal and political protection from such activity, it seems the forest industry in Australia now openly supports a citizen’s right to protest and blockade.
Even politicians who have been champions of “lock up the protestors”, have changed their spots and are preparing to chain themselves to the nearest Bunnings charity barbeque.
Will that be white or wholemeal bread with your sausage Maam? Onions? Sauce or mustard? I hope your chains are comfortable Maam! Can I get you a seat?
It’s not a good look for the forest industry. Bunnings Hardware is stepping out courageously and developing a social conscience, and the forest industry is demanding that they stop!!
I’m not going to mention the “H” word because people get offended by that kind of language. Instead I’m giving these people the benefit of the doubt and assume the forest industry is now a champion of freedom and democracy. The right to protest is a fundamental cornerstone of democracy….even when you are on the receiving end of the protest!
From now on the forest industry will welcome protestors to the public forests with open arms, divided by values but brothers and sisters in freedom and democracy!
And we will hear no more rubbish about Anti-Protest Laws in Australia from either the forest industry or politicians, otherwise I will be forced to use the “H” word!!
Whilst wandering around the internet I came across some more Australian salvage timber prices that are completely outrageous!
Once again this is farm salvage macrocarpa cypress.
But these prices are beyond ridiculous.
These prices are total destructive of farm forestry and the greater forest industry.
“Structural” grade macrocarpa timber for $800 per cubic metre???
Even the seriously large sizes are the same cheap price.
These prices are for lengths up to 4.2 metres. Pay 20% extra for lengths of 4.2-4.9m, 30% extra for lengths of 5-5.9m, 40% extra for lengths of 6-6.5m.
This sawmiller’s motto is “quality timber at affordable prices”!!
More like “premium timber at give-away prices” buy now before it’s all gone!!
This sawmiller obviously believes he’s doing a good job helping farmers get rid of unwanted trees and turning them into something useful.
Instead they are guaranteeing that no one will have premium timber in the future!
When I made this chart up, I had to go back and check my figures to make sure I was doing it right. I could not believe what I was seeing.
No farmer is going to bother growing cypress (or any tree) for wood production when its “sold” on the market at these prices.
If the forest industry wants a future; if the marketplace wants to have premium wood in 20, 30 years time, then this nonsense must stop!!
Tasmanian Blackwood Growers Cooperative 
Going backwards!
There are many reasons why the forest industry in Australia is going backwards.
Here is just one small example:
PF Olsen is a forestry services company which started in New Zealand, but has also opened offices in Australia.
Here is their New Zealand website:
https://nz.pfolsen.com/market-info-news/
Notice the headings across the top of the page.
Now here is their Australian website:
https://au.pfolsen.com/
Notice the headings across the top of the page. How do they compare with the New Zealand website?
The Australian website contains nothing about Contractors & Suppliers nor about Market Information & News!
Why is that?
Are there no forestry markets in Australia?
Do tree growers in Australia not want access to uptodate market information?
Or is it because profitable tree growing is not the focus of the forest industry in Australia?
New Zealand has a real forest industry where the focus is on supporting tree growers to make sure they are as viable and profitable as possible. That way more farmers plant trees, the forest industry expands and has a successful future.
It is a successful simple industry model!
PF Olsen NZ is acutely aware of this and do their bit to ensure tree growers and the forest industry share a successful future.
Go to PF Olsen’s New Zealand website and check out their Market Info & News. It’s a great resource for NZ farmers!
Curiously PF Olsen Australia does not seem to share the same vision.
The focus of the forest industry in Australia has always been about supporting and subsidising domestic processors, at the expense of growers and the future of the industry.
Curious to hear your thoughts on this.
Please post a comment…
PS. If anyone can find a single Australian forest industry website that provides uptodate market information I’d love to know. Thanks.
Leave a comment
Posted in Commentary, Markets, New Zealand
Tagged PF Olsen