Today I was visited by a class of university students who are studying environmental journalism. It was great to be able to chat with them (over the walkie-talkie) and answer their many questions about what I’m up to. Hopefully they will write some interesting articles about The Observer Tree. Here is a short video of some of their comments about visiting me today:

In other news, I am super excited about my up-coming interview on Primary Perspectives.  It’s a very inspiring project – a radio program “created by kids for kids.” It’s so great to see young people getting active and having a voice and I’m really looking forward to chatting with them tomorrow (Tuesday April 17). If you’re in Melbourne you can tune in on 94.1FM or otherwise check out the website for live streaming or pod-casts. My Observer Tree video even made it onto their website as the “hot vod” of the month. Check it out HERE.

Miranda

This is footage taken on Wednesday. It shows some of the destruction that is continuing to occur within the 572,000 hectares of forest that has been verified as having significant high conservation value, national heritage value and world heritage value.

The footage shows first an area of forest called Butlers Gorge. In the footage you can see not only logging operations occurring, but also new roads being pushed into areas of pristine and previously untouched wilderness. In fact, this area of forest has been recommended for inclusion in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area precisely because it is such a significant area of untouched wilderness. The West report described this area as one of the most, if not the most, significant tract of Tasmania’s tall eucalypt forest. Until about a decade ago it had no disturbance from logging or roading. And the majority of the area remains intact. It is outrageous that now, when it has been recommended as World Heritage, when negotiations are going about its future protection, that new roads would continue to be pushed in to the pristine tracts of forest there. They are compromising the very values that they are talking about protecting! This is the reason that we need an immediate moratorium on logging in the 572,000 hectares. To continue to log the very areas they are discussing as the potential future national parks and world heritage areas just doesn’t make sense. By the time they decide whether or not to protect them, how much of the forest will they have degraded or destroyed?

After the footage of Butlers Gorge, the video shows a devastating burn off in the Plenty. This is an area also within the 572,000 hectares of verified high conservation value forest. This burn off was the topic of an article in the Mercury today (which you can read by clicking HERE).

Finally the footage shows a blackened and still smoldering clearfell in the Weld Valley which was burnt about a week and a half ago. A group  of conservationists gathered in the clearfell to hold a banner reading “Stop selling forest destruction.”

I think the footage speaks for itself, in showing the reason why a moratorium on these forests is so necessary. This moratorium is long overdue. Originally due to be in place by March 15th 2011; over a year ago now! And then when the IGA was signed in August last year, it said a conservation agreement would be put over 430,000 hectares, this was never fully implemented. The IGA also stated that once the verification process was complete (as it is now) the conservation agreement would need to be renewed to take into account the recommendations and information in the West report. Therefore, a new conservation agreement should be put in place over the full area of forest that has been verified. This includes these areas depicted in the footage above.

The fact that they are putting new roads into some of these areas raises serious questions about whether there is any intention to stop logging there. Why would Forestry Tasmania be wasting taxpayers money on constructing roads into areas that are being negotiated over and that have been recommended to be included in the World Heritage Area.

You can listen to the PM radio show coverage of the issue here: PM: “Stand off in forest peace deal” 
Check out the news coverage from Monday night, about our “olive branch” offer:

Click HERE to view footage of Monday’s press conference with Peg Putt (Markets for Change), Jenny Weber (Huon Valley Environment Centre), Ula Majewski (The Last Stand) and me (Still Wild Still Threatened: skyping in from the Observer Tree).

Hope you are all having a good easter break! For those of you in Tasmania, why not spend the weekend in the wonderful Upper Florentine Valley? There is a great skillshare running at Camp Floz which will include lots of hands on workshops, discussions and walks (with a guided visit out to The Observer Tree too). stillwildstillthreatened@gmail.com for more details.

Take care and talk soon,
Miranda

Did you see Q and A on ABC last night? I sent in a video question for Terry Edwards (of Forest Industries Association of Tasmania). It was great to see they included my question! (Although they did cut my video off part way through). Here is the segment of the show featuring my question and the response from the panel.

I have to wonder if Terry Edwards has been paying attention in all those meetings over the past two years. His reaction to my question gives the impression that he has never heard anyone mention the figure of 572,000 hectares until now. He claims that environmentalists have upped the stakes from 430,000 hectares to 572,000.  The figure has always been 572,000. It was the industry that pushed it down to 430,000. The Intergovernmental Agreement listed only 430,000 hectares to be put into a conservation agreement, though it still lists the full 572,000 as open for potential new reserves and it is that full area that was assessed by the expert team, lead by Professor West. The expert team looked at that full area because 572,000 hectares was what was on the table as proposed reserves from environment groups. And when they assessed the values, they found that it all contained substantial conservation values, including world heritage value. That is why it is crucial that logging is stopped immediately in that area. How can they continue to destroy the very forests they are sitting in a room talking about protecting. As they speak, the very values that have been verified as worthy of protection are being degraded on a daily basis, while logging occurs.

I found it very intriguing that Terry brings up the Trades Practices Act, saying that people shouldn’t misrepresent their products. This is a very odd comment considering that environmental groups have been the ones who have had to go out and tell the truth about the lies and misrepresentations being made by Ta Ann (a company represented by his organisation). Ta Ann tell their customers the wood comes from plantation. The reality is that it has been officially verified that they are driving the destruction of high conservation value forests.

As Andrew Wilkie pointed out, there are a range of reasons why the forest industry is in crisis. Including the fact, which has been verified by Professor West, that the industry has been over-cutting the forests. And in addition that Forestry Tasmania have made contracts that are not even possible to be fulfilled. Contracts are going to have to be renegotiated anyway, if the wood is simply not there. So why not make the changes needed to conserve these forests that have now been verified as globally significant?

It will be interesting to see how the rest of the industry and government respond to our offer of a suspension of the markets campaign, if a moratorium on logging is put in place. I guess we will have to wait and see if they respond over the next few days. Forestry Tasmania have come out very quickly, in what seems to be a knee-jerk reaction. Interestingly they are claiming that they cannot suspend logging because that area accounts for 50% of their contracts. And that it can take up to 9 months for them to re-work their Forest Practices Plans to move logging to other areas. These two facts raise serious questions about FT’s committment to the negotiations. If they claim they can’t get out of the high conservation value forests now, then will they ever be willing to? What about in when the negotiations are finalised –  Will they still claim they have to keep logging and logging and logging? Will they still want to continue to log at double the sustainable yield, as was found to be the case with their current practices? If they cannot even meet a moratorium (over due by a year now, so they have certainly had enough time to plan!) then how will they respond to the rest of the negotiated outcome? The question that needs to be asked then, is how serious is the industry about finding a solution?