The Victorian Upper House inquiry into ecosystem decline wants to expand the definition of ‘old growth’ forest to include mature trees that are now being harvested. The Environment and Planning Committee recommended that the Victorian Government review the definitions of forest used in forestry regulation and operations. Source: Philip Hopkins for Timberbiz
“Consideration should be given to expanding the definition of ‘old growth’ to include mature trees and/or forests with more than 10 per cent but less than 50 per cent regrowth,” the committee said.
The 746-page report contains 54 findings and 74 recommendations. Those relating to native forestry included:
- Work with First Nations experts in Country and fire to examine the impacts of salvage logging on the regeneration of bushfire-affected forest ecosystems. This would also include the impacts on threatened species, aiming to incorporate the findings into forestry policy to support forest recovery after bushfires.
- The Victorian Forestry Plan balances increasing forest conservation while shifting the forest industry to a plantation-based supply.
- Mandate adaptive, variable retention harvesting of native timber into the review of the Code of Practice for timber Production 2014.
On the issue of fuel reduction, the committee welcomed work by government agencies to ensure that “environmental values are given appropriate consideration during fuel management and bushfire management policy more broadly”. “Biodiversity 2037 acknowledges that ‘fires, including planned burning, can have significant positive or negative effects on biodiversity’, including when they are too frequent, intensive or extensive,” the report said.
In recommending expanding the definition of ‘old growth’ forest, the committee discussed the 2014 definition of the term – significant amounts of its oldest growth stage (usually senescent ageing trees) in the upper stratum and with negligible disturbance. Any regrowth must be less than 10 per cent of the crown cover.
The committee noted changes in identifying old growth by the Office of the Conservation Regulator. The OCR noted that 80-year-old regrowth trees originating from the 1939 fires may be more mature but were still classified as regrowth rather than a mature tree “given they are still actively growing and have pointed crowns”.
VicForests chief executive Monique Dawson testified that the agency did not harvest old growth and applied the OCR’s prescription. “There is often confusion about very old single trees and old-growth forest. You need to have more than one tree to have a forest, and any old tree that you see us harvest will be trees that we have been directed to remove because they are dangerous trees,” she said. This was part of a broader effort managed by the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.
Ms Dawson noted that most native timber harvesting, particularly in the Central Highlands, was regenerated forest after the 1939 bushfires.
“Despite these assurances, stakeholders expressed concern that the definition of old growth forest is too narrow and is enabling logging in those areas to continue,” the committee said.
The stakeholders included various environmental groups and ANU academic Professor David Lindenmayer, who said VicForests’ definition of old growth was too narrow. The committee accepted this criticism, which was enabling “irreplaceable, mature forest ecosystems to be disturbed”.
In backing the push to mandate variable retention harvesting, the committee noted Professor Lindenmayer’s concerns about VicForests’ retention harvesting practice. “However, as it does not have specific expertise or breadth of evidence in relation to these issues,” the committee said. This issue should be studied by the Government and the OCR, it said, but congratulated VicForests on its retention harvesting initiative.
Environmentalists alleged timber harvesting was contributing to ecosystem decline. Professor Lindenmayer said that ‘widespread’ logging was contributing to the fragmentation of forests and threatening the viability of 70 threatened species due to ongoing loss of habitat.
Ms Dawson rejected these claims. “Mathematically, it is impossible for that to occur,” she said, with only 6 per cent of the forest available for harvesting. “Also, scientifically – because of the care that we apply in our harvesting activities. All risk to any particular threatened species is managed at a coupe level, so there is negligible impact on any threatened species,” she said.
VicForests told the committee that salvage logging focussed on the removal of burnt trees without habitat value. The work was performed by tertiary-qualified scientists and field forestry staff.
Environmentalists and Professor Lindenmayer maintained that salvage logging was “highly damaging”.
The committee accepted stakeholders’ concerns that salvage logging could compound habitat loss driven by the 2019-20 bushfires. It urged a study to compare areas that had and those that had no salvage logging.
The impact on threatened species after bushfires should also be examined. “This could be undertaken by the Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research,” the committee said.
