The forest industry has been in the media a lot lately.
That is no surprise as we have now entered the final battle in the decades long Forestry Wars.
The old forest warriors are back in the trenches – shouting and vilifying, rattling sabres and thumping hairy chests. Just like the good old days!
One thing different this time is the so called Forest Economics Congress being organised by Kirsha Kaechele later this year, as reported in The Mercury newspaper Saturday 19th August.
The idea that after decades of bitter conflict a bunch of people can sit down and solve the forestry wars seems completely fanciful. Especially so after the 2014 Tasmanian State election when the last attempt at discussion and compromise was destroyed by Tasmania’s corrupt political system.
Ms Kaechele is promising free and open discussion about a positive forestry future for Tasmania.
Part of the problem however is that Ms Kaechele has already set a long list of Terms of Reference for the Congress that are identified in these two articles.
These Terms of Reference include:
- the continued logging of public native forests, including oldgrowth forests;
- “artisans and boatbuilders” will be given preferential access to our public native forests;
- sawmillers are our friends!
It seems that many outcomes from the Congress have already been determined
Curiously Ms Kaechele fails to mention anything about politics, as if the Congress will define and implement a positive forestry future completely independent of our State parliament.
Q. How can a public resource (our forests) be managed outside of the political system in a small corrupt fishbowl like Tasmania?
A. It can’t! Never has, never will!!
I could ask 100 people in the forest industry what their vision of the future is and I would get 150 different answers, many of them mutually exclusive. Many people are not prepared to compromise, and many people have utterly fanciful ideas about our forests. There is much distrust, anger and hostility in the mix as well.
How can common ground be reached under these difficult conditions?
Many of the fundamental issues facing timber markets and the forest industry are not mentioned in either of these articles. Fundamental issues like the complete absence of proper functioning timber markets in Australia, the absence of level playing fields for all tree growers, farm forestry, etc..
No doubt the Congress will provide some interesting discussion, but I for one am not holding much hope. One thing is guaranteed – the forestry wars will not be resolved by the Tasmanian parliament. The Tasmanian parliament can only enflame and exacerbate the conflict.
That is the reality that Kirsha Kaechele faces.
PS. Never mind that John Lawrence has spent the last 18 years repeatedly destroying Forestry Tasmania’s business model and their very dodgy accounting practices. What really are they going to talk about in November?
http://tasfintalk.blogspot.com/search/label/Forestry%20Tasmania
Tasmanian Blackwood Growers Cooperative 
Tasmanian Forest Economics Congress – what next?
The much anticipated MONA Forest Economics Congress has been and gone.
I wrote a commentary back in August when the event was first announced.
I did not get an invitation to the congress so I cannot write from personal experience, only from what I have read and my long history in Tasmanian politics and the forest industry.
The congress received considerable media coverage, especially on the mainland.
The only post-congress media coverage was the following article in The Mercury newspaper Saturday 2nd December.
To date MONA has not published any details about the congress – who were the speakers, what was discussed, what was agreed and what was disagreed?
https://mona.net.au/blog/2023/08/forest-economics-congress-new-a-class
As expected, the usual suspects attempted to make political mileage out of the congress, rather than act in a respectful and positive manner. There are plenty of people who want the status quo to remain.
The further “working sessions” that Ms Kaechele plans to organise should be interesting. Where is all this discussion heading? Any change in the forest industry status quo will inevitably result in winners and losers. How do we stop this becoming yet another forestry bun fight?
Edit: We have had “collaboration” before in 2011-2012 with the 2013 Tasmanian Forestry Agreement, but that collaboration was betrayed by Tasmania’s corrupt political system and the 2014 Tasmanian State election. The corrupt political system remains a major threat to Ms Kaechele’s plans.
The fundamental problem is that public native forestry is a political decision made by the Tasmanian government, and the Tasmanian parliament has made it perfectly clear that the status quo is unlikely to change.
If Ms Kaechele wishes to promote change in the forest industry and politics, then she must engage with the wider Tasmanian community. Otherwise she risks repeating the disaster of the 2013 Tasmanian Forestry Agreement/2014 State election. She, and the members of the congress, must convince a significant portion of the Tasmanian community that a better future is available. Otherwise the congress will become yet another forestry political football used to divide and destroy the Tasmanian community, just like the 2013 Forestry Agreement.
The failure of both the Tasmanian government and the Tasmanian forest industry to respond positively to the congress may well be the straw that finally breaks the camel’s back. This charade called public native forestry is teetering on the brink. Any player in the charade may finally decide the game is over, and bring the house of cards crashing to the ground.
We can only hope!!
3 Comments
Posted in Commentary, Politics, Public Native Forestry, Sustainable Timbers Tasmania, Tasmanian Forest Products Association
Tagged MONA