
This recent article in the Times of India caught my attention. That’s not surprising given my interest in log markets and prices.
The Indian Government has tight controls over the harvesting and sale of logs. These logs were Government owned. The Government retained the rights to the trees when the land was subdivided and sold.
The various State forest agencies in India conduct regular log auctions with the objective of improving market transparency, reducing corruption, and maximising the value adding for its forest products.
That’s right! Unlike here in Australia, the Government of India is not interested in subsidising sawmillers, boat builders and craftspeople.
East Indian Rosewood (Dalbergia latifolia) is a high value timber, and these numbers certainly confirm that.
Species: East Indian Rosewood (Dalbergia latifolia)
Log Class: I
Girth (cm): 246
Diameter (cm): 78
Length (m): 3.1
Volume (m3): 1.49
Unit price ($AUD): $14,400
Total price ($AUD): $21,500
No comment is made about the wood grain of the log, whether it was straight or feature grain.
I’ve converted the Indian prices to Australian dollar prices.
The log was purchased by Gemwood a company that amongst other products specialises in supplying the international tonewood market.
I wonder what impact such transparent competitive log prices have on the planting of trees in India? Do Indian farmers really plant rosewood trees knowing that in 100 years time someone will make money harvesting the trees? Do they appreciate that the rosewood trees they harvest today are due to the far-sighted benevolence of people 100 years ago?
In my 40 years as a forester I’ve never seen a newspaper article like this in Australia. That is because the forest industry in Australia believes that log prices and competitive transparent markets have no part to play in the industry’s future.
Across the Tasman Sea the very successful New Zealand forest industry has the opposite viewpoint.
Will we ever see prices like these for Australian logs?
And if we did would it have any impact on the tree-planting behaviour of our farming community?
When will Australia get a real forest industry?
PS. Just discovered this earlier news article about the harvesting of these rosewood trees. Certainly makes for an interesting story.






Landowner opinion on trees
This message arrived in my email recently:
Private Forests Tasmania, Institute of Foresters of Australia, Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association and the Forest Practices Authority seek your opinion on growing trees on your property, the benefits and barriers that you face.
Could you please assist us by participating in this 5 minute survey. If you would like to know more, please consider attending a field day. Please complete by 7th March 2019.
https://www.pft.tas.gov.au
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MCVC72B
I’m heartened by the presence of the TFGA in the above list, but disheartened by the absence of FIAT/TFFPN.
I’ve copied the survey questions here:
Question Title
(You may select more than one answer).
(You may select more than one option).
As a forester I read this survey and think – NOTHING HAS CHANGED! The forest industry thinks exactly the same way today as it did 50 years ago!!
How is that humanly possible?
Given what has happened in Tasmania over the last 50 years how can people NOT change?
This is just extraordinary.
The forest industry has spent the last 50 years lurching from crisis to failure to crisis. The forest industry today is a mere shadow of yesteryear, but still the attitude and thinking remains unchanged.
I could just as easily write a survey for members of the forest industry to respond too, because for me the weight of inertia and lack of vision lies not with Tasmanian farmers, but with members of the forest industry (most broadly defined).
Firstly let me state plainly:
Tasmania will never have a proper forest industry while we continue to log public native forest! The past 50 years proves that beyond any doubt whatsoever!
Secondly:
Growing trees for wood production is business. Not politics! Not community service! Not ideology! Not subsidy!
Many/most people in the Tasmanian forest industry choke on either or both of these statements.
And therein lies the problem.
Progress with Tasmanian farmers in building a new forest industry is not possible whilst the old mindset remains.
And I see no indication of such change.
Private Forests Tasmania, and its predecessor the Private Forestry Division within the old Forestry Commission, has been around for almost 50 years!!
PFT should have been doing these surveys every 2-5 years since it formed. I know there have been farmer surveys in the past but obviously nothing came of the results.
Here are two examples of how the New Zealand forest industry engages with farmers:
https://nz.pfolsen.com/market-info-news/
http://www.laurieforestry.co.nz/Monthly-Newsletter
I don’t know ANY company in Australia that behaves like this.
And does this survey mean that no one in the forest industry including retailers, manufacturers as well as sawmillers, has any ideas on how to engage with farmers? No ideas at all on how to motivate, recognise, reward and encourage Tasmanian farmers to grow quality timber?
If that is the case then it is little wonder that the forest industry is in such dire straits. There is no mental capacity there whatsoever!
If the forest industry wants to genuinely engage with Tasmanian farmers it doesn’t need an opinion survey. Let’s see some real honest genuine engagement!!!
When will Tasmania get a fully commercial profitable forest industry?
4 Comments
Posted in Commentary, Politics, Private Forests Tasmania