Australia’s native forests can be sustainably managed for wood production together with other important forest values
Australia’s native forests can be sustainably managed for wood production together with other important forest values
ABSTRACT
Australia has a large and diverse public native forest estate, the management of which remains controversial, especially in relation to timber harvesting. We reviewed the criticisms and assertions commonly made against native forestry using relevant science, the long-term practical experience of forest managers and field outcomes. These assertions converge to promote the view that all timber harvesting causes severe and irreversible damage to forests. We conclude that these adverse criticisms are based on poor evidence and lack a scientific basis. Evidence shows the contrary. Sustainable timber harvesting does not lead to deforestation or forest degradation and that small spatially dispersed harvested areas are, in general, consistently regenerated to healthy forests with a low threat to biodiversity, including to iconic species such as the koala. Full Life-Cycle analysis shows that timber harvesting and use of wood provide net carbon mitigation benefits, thus the proposition that ceasing harvest of native forest would deliver reliable additional carbon credits is flawed. Harvesting does not increase risks from wildfire at the landscape scale. Prescribed burning to reduce fuel is a well proven means of lowering fire risks. Contemporary management does not threaten either water yield or quality. The rising national demand for timber cannot be met solely by plantations in the next 2–3 decades and the best option is a judicious sourcing of wood from plantations and selected parts of native forests. The generalised criticisms and campaigns against native forestry, demanding a total ban on harvesting (annually only 0.05% of the total forest area, and 1.5% of the net harvestable area are harvested) are largely based on misinformation, flawed use of science, misplaced championing of the fate of iconic fauna and exaggeration of occasional management failures. Environmental and political activism based on misinformation is hampering development of rational policies for sustainable management of native forests for providing multiple benefits to the nation and future generations.