19 February, 2009

LETTER: Catchment cry

Robert Stephen, Monbulk
Letter to the editor, The Age, 19 February 2009

Every year we clear-fell 150 hectares of Melbourne's prime water catchment forest near the Thomson reservoir. We lose 20,000 megalitres of water (one full Maroondah dam) every year due to regrowth, which uses vastly more water than old growth.

Clear-felling turns wet sclerophyll forest into dry sclerophyll forest and drastically increases the risk of fire. To save our water supply and reduce catchment fire risk we must stop clear-felling our water catchments, especially the Thomson.

Link

See also: Stop logging Melbourne water catchments


03 December, 2008

LETTER: Whales in a forest

Jeremy Fitzpatrick, Heidelberg
Letter to the editor, The Age, December 3, 2008

I would like to question Phillip Dalidakis' facts (Comment & Debate, 1/12), as he asks environmentalists to roll over so that the forestry industry can continue unchecked in its, oh, so sustainable enterprise.

As reported by The Age in January, figures obtained after a freedom of information request to VicForests show that, based on its industry knowledge, more than 85 per cent of the wood derived from Victoria's native forests ends up as woodchips, waste and sawdust — hardly high value resources.

Dalidakis quotes a seemingly inconsequential threat when discussing the forest industry's effect on our water supplies; a percentage figure which, in real terms, equates to millions of litres of water. How is the industry justified in posing any threat whatsoever to Melbourne's water supply as yet another drought looms this summer?

To our great fortune, outdated ideology has saved some magnificent tracts of Victoria; perhaps Dalidakis should take a trip to Brown Mountain or, rather, those parts of it that VicForests hasn't yet had the opportunity to clear-fell — or, as he puts it, manage.

I'm sure that whaling companies wished that environmentalists could have stopped their futile debate too.

02 December, 2008

LETTER: Taking the timber

Domenic Gibbs, Moonee Ponds
Letter to the Editor, The Age, December 2, 2008

Philip Dalidakis' article is a welcome change from the emotive rhetoric that seems to dominate the logging debate. Many viewpoints on this issue are high on sentiment and low on facts and science.

As a former doubter of the timber industry's credentials, I can see how environmentalism is turning into ideology. With 3.2 million hectares of forests already in protected reserves, it would be more environmentally beneficial to properly manage our remaining forests for timber production rather than import more illegally logged timber.

LETTER: Save a tree and drink more water

Simon Birrell, Melbourne Water Catchment Network and Otways Ranges Environment Network, Ascot Vale
The Age, December 2, 2008

Philip Dalidakis, of the Victorian Association of Forest Industries, reminds us (Comment & Debate, 1/12) that the native forest woodchipping industry is about to start its annual summer destruction in Victoria.

However, this summer the chainsaws will be quiet in the Otways' native forests as logging has been banned.

Mr Dalidakis' predecessors at VAFI spent a huge amount of money and time dismissing arguments put forward by the community to stop Otways logging, and failed.

Now VAFI has put up exactly the same sort of simplistic statistical arguments that rely on public ignorance. VAFI suggests that Melbourne's water has a 157,000-hectare catchment area, with 306 hectares, or 0.19 per cent, logged each year. Such a statement assumes that the rainfall and forest types across the catchments are uniform. They are not. About half cannot be logged as they are within national parks. About half of the catchment is ash forest, which produces 80 per cent of the water run-off to Melbourne. Logging that targets these forests has a disproportionate effect on run-off.

Recent State Government research shows banning logging by 2010 would increase water yields from the Melbourne catchments by enough to supply a city the size of Ballarat within 40 years — or about 100,000 people. The loggers are right to be worried.

01 December, 2008

THE AGE: Greens fail to see wood for the trees

Philip Dalidakis, Chief executive for the Victorian Association of Forest Industries.
The Age, Opinion, December 1, 2008

The Victorian forest industry provides significant benefits.

As the timber harvesting season gets under way for another year, already one week has been lost to protesters chaining themselves to industry equipment in the hope of saving "what is left" of our native forests. Often such protest action is greeted with a mixture of silent and open consent from those of us who are concerned by climate change but who don't fully appreciate the environmental or scientific ramifications of simply locking up our forests. After all, how can an industry that cuts down trees claim to be both environmentally sensitive and sustainable?

Victoria has more than 3.5 million hectares of forest in protected reserves while on average only 0.19 per cent of our 3.2 million hectares of state forest is harvested each year. Victoria's state forests are well managed and a range of concerns, including conservation of flora and fauna, protection of landscape and indigenous and historic values, recreation and education, are considered before any timber production.

Victoria is a global leader in the regulation and oversight of forestry activities. Planning, harvesting, regeneration and other forest management activities are required to meet a code of practice for timber production. They are regulated by the Department of Sustainability and Environment and independently audited annually by EPA Victoria. VicForests, the state-owned organisation responsible for the sustainable harvest and sale of timber from state forests, is also independently certified to the Australian Forestry Standard, an internationally recognised standard for responsible forest management.

An example of propaganda outstripping the pace of truth is the issue of timber production in Melbourne's water catchments. Annual timber production in the 157,000-hectare catchment area averages only 306 hectares, or 0.19 per cent. Yet numerous environmental groups continue to claim that timber harvesting is directly responsible for Melbourne's low water yield. Independent reports commissioned by the DSE demonstrate that the impact of timber production on Melbourne's water yield is minor in comparison with the real threats of climate change and bush fire.

Recent history supports these studies and provides a level of perspective when you compare this small amount of timber production with the 1 million hectares of forest burnt in 59 days during the 2003 alpine bushfires. One of the many benefits of the timber industry is that it provides vital support in defending our forests against the effects of bushfire through the maintenance of fire tracks, reduction of fuel loads and the provision of fire-fighting machinery and personnel.

Despite accusations to the contrary, the principal objectives of any native forest harvesting operations are to maximise the value obtained from the timber, maintain the health of the forest and ensure good regrowth for future generations.

Saw logs from native forests remain the priority of timber harvesting and are a high-value resource processed domestically to produce flooring, furniture, decking and other value-added products. Harvested timber that is unsuitable for processing into high-value sawn timber is used to produce essential secondary forest products such as paper, cardboard, firewood, garden products and energy. This makes the forest industry very efficient and a generator of little waste.

Current timber plantations are largely being managed for the production of paper products and not furniture or flooring. Even if this were to change overnight, it would require a substantial area of eucalypt plantations grown on good land and need at least 25-30 years to replace what is being sourced from native forests.

All sustainably managed plantation and native forests also store carbon, which is important as we enter a carbon constrained world. Australia's forestry industry is carbon-positive, helping to offset our national greenhouse gas emissions. Growing trees absorb carbon from the atmosphere and store carbon; about half the dry weight of a tree is carbon. This carbon remains "locked" in the wood for the life of the product, until it decomposes or is burnt. For example, a 50 kilogram wooden table contains about 20 kilograms of carbon.

Wood products have amazing environmental credentials. They are renewable, recyclable and biodegradable. The production and processing of wood products is energy efficient. They offer a climate and environment-friendly alternative to many other products and building materials.

Although green groups and activists accuse the timber industry of no longer being relevant in today's world, the opposite is true. The forestry industry directly employs 25,000 people in Victoria and contributes $6 billion in output. It provides significant social and economic benefits to regional communities and Victoria as a whole. It is also environmentally sustainable, and is based on responsible and accountable forest management.

Rather than disrupting forestry workers and shutting down timber production in pursuit of an outdated ideology, environmentalists would be better off ending this futile debate and working constructively with industry to ensure ongoing balanced management of our forests.

All sustainably managed plantation and native forests also store carbon.

Source

14 November, 2008

AGE LETTER: Conservation? That's a laugh

Jeremy Fitzpatrick, Heidelberg
Letter, The Age, 14/11/08

You'll need to excuse my mirth, Max Rheese (Letters, 12/11), in taking your approach to "wise use principles". Surely someone whose organisation lobbies for the logging of old-growth forests has a conflict of interest when lecturing about the "key to conservation".

I'm sure you feel that Australian forestry practice is among the best in the world; it seems we have a State Government that reneges on its 2006 promise and simply allows the logging industry to bulldoze through our state forests, destroying 400 years of Victoria's natural legacy.

Aside from the fact these forests are massive carbon storage banks, which release carbon into the atmosphere when clearfelled, old-growth forests are far more fire retardant than your proposed monoculture plantations; essentially a crop of pine trees.

As someone genuinely concerned for the environment, this view may seem a little over emotional, but I'd like to be able to show my kids, and your kids, just how magnificent Australia is.

13 November, 2008

AGE LETTER: Show some leadership

Luke Chamberlain, Victorian forest campaigner, The Wilderness Society, Fitzroy
Letter, The Age, 13/11/08

Old growth forests are one of the most important stores of carbon on the planet and logging them releases enormous amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. Logging old growth forests causes less water to flow into our rivers and further pushes our endangered species towards extinction.

Premier Brumby has a clear choice to make, and one that will upset those that apologise for industrial destruction of the ecological systems that support life on this planet. He can show leadership by pulling the bulldozers out of Brown Mountain, or he can ignore the wishes of the community and his own policy to protect our magnificent old growth forests.

AGE LETTER: Telling tall stories

Jill Redwood, co-ordinator, Environment East Gippsland, Orbost
Letter, The Age, 13/11/08

Trees of many ages continue to provide the shelter, hollows and nectar that an old giant of 400 years would have when it eventually falls.

What else can the logging industry or Government now try to tell us? That annihilating these stands of forest are essential to provide five blokes with work for four weeks?

Come on Mr Brumby, we're all waiting for you to protect what you promised us in 2006.

LETTER: Conservation, not preservation

Max Rheese, executive director, Australian Environment Foundation, Benalla
Letter, The Age, November 13, 2008

Surely, the aims of "environmentalists" in their outcry over timber harvesting at Brown Mountain would fall within the "wise use principles" of conservation? Full protection for a portion of the forest for all time, sustainable use of a portion of the forest for human endeavour and the regeneration of harvested forest.

This is what happens now. Australian forestry is among the best and most regulated in the world and we should all support the good environmental outcomes that flow from that. We do not have to look far to see the alternative.

The emotional claptrap put forward by various writers (Letters, 12/11), — failing to recognise that more than 90% of Victoria's forests are permanently reserved — does little to foster the integrity of the environment movement.

The fact is fire is the ultimate determinant of forest structure in Victoria; therefore the environment movement should be bringing pressure to bear on land managers to better manage our forests for fire, rather than campaigns based on ideology that aim to have the remaining 9% of forest locked up.

Sustainable use with adequate protection, not preservation, is the key to conservation.

ABC NEWS: VicForests defends Brown Mountain logging

ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
13/11/08

VicForests is defending the clear-fell logging of old-growth forest near Brown Mountain in East Gippsland.

The logging area has been the subject of protests in the forests and on the steps of Parliament House in Melbourne.

The East Gippsland manager of VicForests, Barry Vaughan, says the area was not part of the State Government's election promise to protect more forests.

He says the area is outside the established reserves and is producing high quality timber.

"It's very much a reflection of the site quality that's there," he said.

"It is very similar to the forest that's across the road in the national park and that's part of the reserve system which was established in East Gippsland which was a large percentage of this tall, wet forest reserved in national parks."

The environment movement says the logging coup near Brown Mountain has more value as a standing forest than as cut timber.

Amelia Young from the Wilderness Society says the large 400-year-old trees are a precious carbon bank.

She says they are also valuable for their biodiversity and as a tourism resource.

She says the Government will find it difficult to meet its promise to protect more old-growth forest in East Gippsland.

"We need young regrowing trees to continue to sequester carbon out of the atmosphere, we also need our older ecologically mature forests like those on Brown Mountain to remain intact so they can be important carbon banks," she said.

"These forests live continuously, they're self perpetuating and they don't require human intervention for their evolution."

Article source

See also: Brown Mountain old growth forest

12 November, 2008

Throw a koala on the BBQ

Roger Gotch, Scoresby
Letter, The Age, 12/11/08

Barry Vaughan believes that harvesting what remains of old growth forest is "more sophisticated and more sustainable" than plantation timber and that timber is produced by a chainsaw. If Barry duffered and butchered a wild koala and threw it on his barbie, by the same logic he could boast of sophisticated and sustainable meat production. Of course, koala and old growth forest harvesting is sustainable, until there are no more koalas or old trees to harvest.

We've got to think, do we really want the remaining fragments of old growth forest preserved in this state or do we want to pay the likes of Barry Vaughan fat salaries to manage their total destruction and turn the definition of sustainability of its head as they spin nonsense?

AGE LETTER: Chop, chop, let's honour a promise

Tracey Callander, Preston
Letter, The Age, November 12, 2008

Having walked through the Valley of the Giants on Brown Mountain, I am horrified that it is now being annihilated ("Nothing natural about selection of which trees live, which die", The Age, 10/11). Barry Vaughan (VicForests) can't be serious when he muses that destroying our remaining old-growth forests could be a "better thing for the world" than importing timbers and using plantation timbers. We shouldn't be importing timber from countries whose native forests are as compromised and exploited as our own. And, yes, we should be using plantation timber and engineered timber products.

I also fail to see how killing 300-year-old trees is a "more sophisticated … more sustainable way … of producing natural resources". So, we destroy old-growth forests to replace them with degraded ones? Releasing masses of carbon into the atmosphere, exterminating wildlife, biodiversity and mucking up water systems in the process? That's parochial, not sophisticated. There is nothing sustaining in forest degrading.

Enough with the "consulting". The State Government should honour its 2006 electoral promise and take immediate action to cease logging on Brown Mountain.

AGE LETTER: Heedless of consequences

Dan Musil, Northcote
Letter, The Age, 12/11/08

THE Victorian Government is hellbent on the destruction of our last remaining and irreplaceable old growth forests — and is apparently oblivious to the consequences. Continued logging of Victoria's old growth forests, including logging at East Gippsland's Brown Mountain occurring now, is in direct violation of the Government's 2006 election promises.

Logging of old-growth is reprehensible on biodiversity grounds alone, but when the huge carbon emissions from logging and the severe disruption to water supply are taken into account, it is ludicrous. The pro-logging rhetoric is illogical — ancient forest ecosystems cannot just grow back after being clear-felled, and the logging of old-growth is unsustainable and uneconomic without public subsidy.

LETTER: Enough of the hysteria

Mark Poynter, Victorian media spokesman, Institute of Foresters of Australia, Doncaster East
Letter, The Age, 12/11/08

OLD growth forests have long been misrepresented as museum exhibits that will stand forever. The Wilderness Society's Luke Chamberlain is just the latest conservationist to forget that forests actually live and die with his claim that "92% of Victorian old growth has been lost since European settlement. Brown Mountain is among the best still standing" (10/11). Aside from the impact of Europeans over the past 180 years, millions of hectares of Victorian forest has naturally grown old, declined, died, and been replaced by young regrowth — some of it several times over. Other areas that were young forest have since grown to comprise Victoria's current crop of 840,000 hectares of old growth, including at Brown Mountain.

The only certainty is that these old forests will eventually die or be killed by fire and that the parks and reserves in which almost all of them reside will look different in the future. In the context of this, the hysteria surrounding the harvesting and regeneration of a tiny 18-hectare portion for human use is unwarranted.

HANSARD: Timber industry: East Gippsland logging

MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL, VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA
FIFTY-SIXTH PARLIAMENT — FIRST SESSION

12 November 2008, Page 25

Ms PENNICUIK (Southern Metropolitan) — My question is for the Minister for Environment and Climate Change. Will the minister confirm that three logging coupes at Brown Mountain in East Gippsland — numbers 840-502-15, 19 and 20 that are mapped by the Department of Sustainability and Environment as old-growth forest — have been approved for clear-felling this season, that one is almost fully logged, and that this is in contravention to the Labor Party’s 2006 commitment to protect the last significant stands of Victoria’s old-growth forests currently available for logging?

Mr JENNINGS (Minister for Environment and Climate Change) — I will answer the question in reverse order. I can confirm that the timber allocations this year are not inconsistent with the Labor Party’s formal commitment to make sure we reserve old-growth forests in east Gippsland in the future. This is something the government is committed to doing and something that I am committed to doing, but it has not been specified in any way that there will not be timber harvesting in areas that may be described as old-growth forest in current timber allocations.

I can confirm it is not inconsistent with the commitment made by the Labor Party in the lead-up to the last election and certainly will not be inconsistent with my intention, which is to deliver beyond the 33 500 hectares of old-growth forests that it was indicated would be added to the reserve system. It is my intention during my tenure as minister responsible for the environment to beat that number and actually have a higher number of areas of old-growth forest incorporated into the reserve system. That is something I am very happy to be measured by at the end of the term.

The thing I cannot quite verify in relation to the question is the specific numbers of the coupes in question, although if the question is, ‘Is there activity currently being undertaken in East Gippsland that is a source of contention in relation to the appropriateness of it being allocated for harvesting activity and being subject to protest activity?’, I can confirm that that is absolutely happening.

I would like to put the sequence of decisions and responsibilities that have led to this time frame. As far back as August 2004 the allocation order was signed off by my predecessor, the Minister for the Environment at that time, regarding areas that would be available for harvesting from that time over a 15-year period and that were going to be considered and reviewed in five-year cycles. In the first instance, the timber allocations that were then the responsibility of VicForests and that would be subsequently the responsibility of other ministers and agencies — that is, VicForests allocation of the timber orders that relate to the harvesting schedule — were required to comply with the allocation orders made in 2004. In 2004 the areas that are currently subject to harvesting were identified as potentially being available for harvesting, subject to VicForests determining the harvesting plan that would apply from 2004 to 2009.

Subsequently the election commitment — which was that we would increase the reserve system within East Gippsland — at one level may have been interpreted to mean that there would be absolutely no logging in areas that may be seen to be old growth, but they are not mutually exclusive commitments. In fact the coupes in question continue to be in areas known as general management zones within the forest.

There are a number of categories of forest designation, which include special protection zones and general management zones, that give guidance to the way in which those forests should be managed. The coupes in question have at no stage been designated, in my understanding, as being in anything other than general management zones. On any map that had been prepared prior to my arrival as Minister for Environment and Climate Change, or any map subsequently in relation to whether the areas in question would be added to the reserve system, this area has not appeared. It continues to not exist on those maps. I stand by the commitment of the government to increase the reserve system significantly beyond the 33 500 hectares that we identified for old-growth protection in the future, and I will be measured by that and will be accountable to the Parliament and the people on that matter

Supplementary question

Ms PENNICUIK (Southern Metropolitan) — The minister and I might disagree on what is on the maps. One of these logging coupes has been named ‘The Walk’ by VicForests in reference to the local community’s marked and tracked tourist walk, which was also committed to by the Labor government as the ‘Old Growth Forest Walk — Goongerah’. How is this consistent with the current logging operation?

Mr JENNINGS (Minister for Environment and Climate Change) — I obviously know that commitments were made at the same time, which the member did not refer to. Commitments were made to make sure that a number of walks were generated within the East Gippsland region to try to enhance the visitor experience and hopefully be supportive of tourism activity and engagement from the community within the forests. That commitment continues to be maintained by the government and to be implemented by various agencies to try to make sure that the walks are deliver.

Again, this may be an area of contention.— It is an area of contention where people purport that there had been an alignment of a walk that had been adopted by the various state agencies. Despite the fact that there are many passionate and committed people — and good on them for being passionate and committed to environmental outcomes and sustainability in this area and generally — there has been no formal adoption of any delineation of a walking track by government agencies or the government that will define how the commitment to those walks will be delivered on the ground. That is a process and a program that the government continues to be committed to and hopes to engage with the community on. We will continue to work to deliver on that aspect of the commitment as well.

Hansard document (PDF) [link]

22 May, 2008

MEDIA RELEASE: Major parties ignore communityconcern on forests

Jill Redwood, Environment East Gippsland
22nd May 2008

Environment East Gippsland has responded to the Federal Government’s report on the state of Australia’s forests as little more than a PR exercise.

"It’s little wonder that logging supporters like VAFI chime in with glowing compliments after pro-logging reports are produced on forests", said Jill Redwood of EEG. “No matter what flavour of government has been in over the decades, our forests have been and still are sacrificed as union pacifiers and exchanged for political donations. The only thing that's being 'sustained' is the parties' submission to the logging industry."

“What they didn’t announce yesterday from the report is that Australia has 10% less forests, 200,000 hectares less old growth and more threatened species than was reported in the 2003 report. The report also admits that about 1/3rd of these important conservation forests left remaining are still allowed to be clearfelled for timber and woodchips. Yet we’re told this is sustainable.”

“There are 1,290 forest dependent species classed as nationally rare and endangered. But the ALPs minister for forestry, Tony Burke, says he’s happy to keep the bulldozers knocking over Gippsland’s native forests. There’s been absolutely no change to more sensitive management of our environment since Ironbar Tuckey held the portfolio”.

“Thousands of Gippsland voters are extremely concerned about climate change, the loss of our wildlife, the destruction of our native forests by logging and the loss of water that results. But unfortunately these voters can’t match the political donations given by the large logging companies and unions that seem to influence the ALP, Liberal and National’s forest policies.”

“Tree growers in western Victoria are currently screaming out for a thousand workers to help process their wood. If jobs were really the concern, the CFMEU and the ALP would not support woodchipping but be looking at mature plantations for providing secure employment.

An NCS Pearson poll showed that 70% of East Gippslanders don’t want to see our forests turned into woodchips. Politicians must acknowledge this. Our public forests are far more precious as climate moderators and carbon stores than as woodchips, cardboard and union-pacifiers.”

For comment: Jill Redwood 5154 0145

17 May, 2008

THE AGE: Forestry industry to tap tree 'sinks'

Fred Brenchley
May 17, 2008

AUSTRALIA'S forest industries are bidding for a major role in Australia's climate change future, claiming forest "sinks" could absorb 20% of the planned 60% cut in emissions by 2050.

A confidential document from the National Association of Forest Industries circulating in Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's office proposes a joint industry-government strategy for forests and plantations in Australia's carbon-constrained future.

It involves forestry not only helping meet emissions and renewable energy targets but also becoming involved in biofuel production and indigenous economic development.

Overarching these outcomes, according to NAFI, is the need for the Coalition of Australian Governments to reaffirm commitment to the 1992 National Forest Policy Statement, which opened the door to regional forests agreements.

Article source


15 May, 2008

THE AGE: Slug loggers too

Scott Bilby, Kensington
Letter, The Age, 15 May 2008

In "Plan to make timber industry pay for rain" (The Age, 11/5) the Victorian Government is deciding whether to make the plantation timber industry pay a fee for the rain that plantations soak up. This is because plantations reduce the amount of water that would otherwise flow into streams, thereby reducing water available for rural towns and the environment.

If the Government is so concerned, why does it allow the native timber industry to clearfell our precious native forests in water catchments that supply the majority of water to Melbourne?

Despite the very long drought and tough water restrictions, five of Melbourne's catchments are still available for logging. These catchments supply more than half of Melbourne's water, yet water supplies are reduced by up to 50% when we log them.

If the Government thinks it's a good idea to make the plantation timber industry pay for the water it soaks up, then it must also see the logic in making the native timber industry pay for the vast amount of water that is lost when they destroy the native forests in our water catchments.


BBC NEWS: Charles urges forest logging halt

BBC News
Thursday, 15 May 2008

The halting of logging in the world's rainforests is the single greatest solution to climate change, Prince Charles has said.

Prince Charles said there needed to be rewards for preserving the rainforest

He called for a mechanism to be devised to pay poor countries to prevent them felling their rainforests.

The prince told the BBC that the forests provided the earth's "air conditioning system".

He said it was "crazy" the rainforests were worth more "dead than alive" to some of the world's poorest people.

The world's forests store carbon in their wood and in their soils.

But they are being felled for timber products, food and now bio fuels. Experts say this carbon is being released into the atmosphere and contributes to global warming.

The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, published in 2006, suggested that the destruction adds about 18% to the CO2 from human sources.

In an interview to mark BBC World Service's Amazon Day, Prince Charles said: "When you think they [rainforests] release 20 billion tonnes of water vapour into the air every day, and also absorb carbon on a gigantic scale, they are incredibly valuable, and they provide the rainfall we all depend on."

He said a way had to be found to ensure people living in the rainforest were adequately rewarded for the "eco-system services that their forest provides the rest of the world".


We're asking for something pretty dreadful unless we really understand the issues now
Prince Charles

He said: "The trouble is the rainforests are home to something like 1.4 billion of the poorest people in the world.

"In order to survive there has to be an effort to produce things which tends to be at the expense of the rainforest.

"What we've got to do is try to ensure that those forests are more valuable alive than dead.

"At the moment there's more value in them being dead. This is the crazy thing."

Drought and starvation

The prince called on governments, big business and consumers to demand an end to logging in the rainforest.

He said the time was right to persuade business to play its part because there was increasing concern about global warming.

"Halting deforestation would be the easiest and cheapest way in helping in the battle against climate change," he said.

"Waiting for all the new technologies to come on stream is not going to be soon enough."

Charles said if deforestation did not slow down soon there would be "far more drought and starvation on a grand scale".

Urgency

He said: "We're asking for something pretty dreadful unless we really understand the issues now, and urgency of those issues.

"It is the easiest way to create a win on the climate change front while all sorts of other things come along later."

The BBC's environment analyst, Roger Harrabin, says that Prince Charles' observation that saving the forests is the cheapest and most effective way of cutting CO2 emissions is "widely acknowledged".

At the recent Bali climate conference, developing countries asked for compensation from rich nations if they agreed to avoid future deforestation.

Talks are continuing, but there are issues over sovereignty – and genuine difficulties over who pays, who collects, and how much money should be offered.

Mike Childs, of Friends of the Earth, said: "The Prince is absolutely right to highlight deforestation as the single greatest cause of climate change, but putting a stop to it much more complex.

"Forests are cut down for many different reasons, such as the growing of food, animal fodder and bio fuels."

Article source

11 May, 2008

THE AGE: Parched forests get an overdue drink

Melissa Fyfe
The Age, May 11, 2008

Thousands of red gums on the brink of death have been saved — temporarily at least — after 17 billion litres of water were released from dams to boost Victoria's ailing Murray wetlands.

The water sparked an immediate response from the environment. Hundreds of frogs spawned, waterbirds arrived and tortoises laid eggs. Many of the areas targeted had not seen water for two years. Numbers of waterbirds have dropped by two-thirds during the 11-year drought.

About 10,000 red gums — some 500 years old — would have been dead within a year had the environmental flow not occurred, said Dr Jane Doolan, from the Department of Sustainability and Environment.

Water has flowed through the wetlands and creeks for two weeks.

Recent studies have found that 70% of red gums in northern Victoria are dead or dying. This month's watering will cover only 900 hectares, or 1.4% of the state's river red gums.

The environmental allocation consists of 6 billion litres from the Murray-Darling Basin Commission's Living Murray program and 11 billion litres from Victoria's pool of environmental water.

It is flooding the Gunbower Wetlands north-west of Echuca; Little Lake Boort west of Echuca; the Lindsay-Walpolla site in the Mallee; and the Reedy, Kinnaird, Black and Moodies swamps near Shepparton.

State Environment and Climate Change Minister Gavin Jennings said the water had prevented ancient forests from turning into red gum graveyards. "Some of the river red gums were alive when Columbus discovered the Americas. They are part of all Victorians' heritage," he said.

The Murray remains bleak, however. Dried-up wetlands and creeks in the lower parts of the river in South Australia have started to turn acidic and leach heavy metals, including high amounts of aluminium and arsenic, zinc and lead.

The $12.9 billion water package to save the Murray has been finalised, but water specialist Mike Young, from the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, has warned that time is running out and the Federal Government must act quickly to use $3 billion to buy back the 1500 billion litres the river system needs to be healthy.

The Bureau of Meteorology winter forecast for the basin, released last week, suggested another dry El Nino phase could be on the way and there was little hope of good rainfall. The basin commission's chief executive, Dr Wendy Craik, described the situation as not terribly optimistic, but dam levels were slightly higher now than at this time last year.

It is hoped the northern Victorian environmental water will help threatened species such as the regent parrot, the inland carpet python, the barking owl, the painted snipe, the white-bellied sea eagle and the growling grass frog.

It is hoped the royal spoonbill, the great egret and the glossy ibis will benefit from the watering in the Gunbower Wetlands.

Article source