Sammlung von Newsfeeds

A recent community meeting in Bombala to address a growing concern of local farmland sales to corporate entities for carbon forestry projects (both environmental plantings and plantation forestry methods) featured guest speaker, forestry industry expert, Rob de Fegely. Source: Monaro Post Other speakers at the June meeting were local farmers John Murdoch, John Jeffreys and Ben Mooney. Together they spoke to the community about concerns relating to a loss of productive farmland, reduced rural employment, outside corporate involvement and uncertainty about long-term impacts. Mr de Fegely provided an insight into the regional forestry hubs established under the National Forestry Industry Plan 2018. Mr de Fegely is the manager of the South East Forestry Hub, which supports forestry industries in southern NSW and the ACT to help grow a positive future for the region’s communities and environment. He also sits on the board of Forestry Corporation NSW and chairs the Public Forest Agency in Tasmania. There are 11 regional forestry hubs across Australia. These hubs work with industry, state and local governments, and other key stakeholders to prepare and provide the government with strategic planning, technical assessments and analyses that aim to support growth in the forest industries in their region. Mr de Fegely began his career on the Monaro in 1980 growing radiata pine in the Coolangubra, Bucky Springs, Pericoe and Rockton areas. “In my time as a career forester over 40 years, the challenge between farming and forestry has been around for a long time and its history that we haven’t actually blended together,” he said. “In Scandinavian countries and parts of Europe, you’ll find that forestry and farming are very close neighbours and they work together really well.” He recalled however the years he spent in Bombala were productive and produced good outcomes. “In the eight-and-a-half years I was here, when we were planting blocks that were basically cleared as farmland under early development in the late 1800s and early 1900s and for a raft of reasons those farms had become quite marginal mainly due to rabbits, the first World War, the loss of a generation of farm workers and then the Depression and again the second World War … those poorer quality farms fell away and were purchased by a corporate entity from the Philippines. “That was an interesting process as when re-developing those old farms in the mid-80s – by clearing all the tea trees and wattles – it suddenly looked like a farm again, but it was all granite soil and very low nutrient, so turning it back into forest was probably a sensible land use decision. “I don’t think in the eight-and-a-half years I was here, anyone seriously said to me I shouldn’t be planting that pine. So pine and forestry and Bombala and farming had worked together really well in those early years,” he said. Mr de Fegely then pointed out challenges within the industry. “The challenge has always been, despite the fact Australia is the seventh most forested country in the world, it is a net importer of wood products,” he said. “We import more than $7 billion worth of wood products a year. A lot comes from New Zealand, particularly pine framing. We get hardwood, particularly from Malaysia and the tropical rain forest, and we import paper products as well because all our paper mills have shut.” He said there are two drivers pushing the carbon debate. The first is a demand to be self-sufficient and secondly, achieving net zero such as carbon credits and cheap wood. As South East NSW Forestry hub manager, Mr de Fegely said this government funded scheme is designed to improve wood production, as Australia is not producing enough. He said within the South East hub, 60% of the land is forest and 50% of those forests are in national parks, by international standards a very high percentage.

The post Rob de Fegely addresses concerns of farmland sales appeared first on Timberbiz.

Tasmanian farmers have reacted with anger and disbelief at the Federal Government’s decision to allow 22,000 hectares of prime dairy and beef country in the state’s north-east to be transformed into a pine plantation. Source: Timberbiz Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers last week announced the approval of the sale of Tasmania’s largest farm, Rushy Lagoon, to UK-based forestry investor Gresham House. The 22,000-hectare property will be converted from an agricultural estate into a $142 million pine plantation and carbon project. The Australian Forest Products Association has welcomed the sale, saying the plantation project will expand Australia’s sovereign capability in sustainable timber production. However, TasFarmers President Nathan Cox said the decision was a betrayal of Tasmanian agriculture and a breaking of the social contract between government and the Australian people by greenlighting the use of taxpayer money against Australian farmers. “This is a disgraceful outcome for Tasmania and for Australian food security,” Mr Cox said. He said the Federal Government had broken its covenant with the Australian people by agreeing to turn productive farmland into a monoculture pine plantation “so a foreign investment fund can tick a carbon abatement box”. Tasmanian Forest Products Association Chief Executive Officer Nick Steel said while there has been public debate surrounding the transaction and the Foreign Investment Review Board process, the conversation also provides an opportunity to recognise that agriculture and forestry are not mutually exclusive industries. “Tasmania’s future prosperity is dependent on evidence-based land use decisions that recognised the strengths of both industries,” Mr Steel said. “Agriculture and forestry are not competing land uses they are complementary industries that have successfully coexisted across Tasmania for generations.” “Farmers make practical decisions every day based on soil capability, rainfall, topography, market conditions and the long-term sustainability of their businesses. In many cases, integrating forestry into farming operations provides additional income, strengthens business resilience and ensures land is used according to its natural capability.” Mr Steel said the guiding principle should remain simple: the right tree, in the right place, at the right scale. “Highly productive agricultural land should continue producing food and fibre, with suitable areas supporting forestry without compromising agricultural output,” he said. “That balanced approach delivers multiple benefits, including regional employment, investment certainty, environmental outcomes and diversified income streams for landholders.” As a renewable industry, forestry also plays an increasingly important role in supplying sustainable timber products to meet growing demand for low-emissions building materials. “Our forestry sector is built on renewal where forests are grown, harvested and regrown, supporting a renewable biodegradable resource that’s increasingly important as markets shift toward lower emissions materials,” Mr Steel said. “The discussion surrounding Rushy Lagoon reinforced the need for balanced and informed land use policy. “A strong future for regional Tasmania depends on recognising that agriculture and forestry can coexist successfully. They operate side by side, supporting regional communities, creating jobs and contributing to the state’s long-term prosperity,” Mr Steel said. Rushy Lagoon, together with the neighbouring East Wyambi, spans almost 22,000 hectares between Gladstone and Musselroe Bay and has run dairy and beef cattle at a capacity of around 85,000 DSE, supported by 1,170 hectares of developed irrigation and more than 12,500 megalitres of water entitlements. Gresham House’s reported offer of more than $100 million sits well above TasFarmers’ own estimate of the property’s $70–80 million market value, a gap the organisation says points squarely to government-backed financing tilting the paddock in favour of a foreign buyer using everyday Australians ‘ money. “We have real, unanswered questions about why funding was committed to this deal before the sale and why a foreign forestry fund could outbid every Australian farmer at the table,” Mr Cox said. “The treasurer’s excuse relating to the classification of farmland holds no water, as highly productive dairies have operated on Rushy for many years; any good farmer knows that cannot happen on poor or second-rate land. These comments are a smoke screen for his poor decision-making. “TasFarmers has raised the glaring conflict at the heart of this process: the Clean Energy Finance Corporation stands to benefit financially from carbon plantations like this one, and a CEFC director sits on the very Foreign Investment Review Board that was supposed to assess it independently. Tasmanian farmers cannot compete against their own government. “Our community survey found 99 per cent of respondents opposed this sale. Dorset Council has warned it creates an unfair playing field for local farmers and puts regional dairy pick-up runs and beef processing jobs at risk. Coalition members from Senator Colbeck to Senator Askew to Shadow Agriculture Minister Darren Chester have all raised the alarm. The only people who seem untroubled by any of this are the ones who signed off on it.” Mr Cox said TasFarmers would now demand the public release of the full FIRB assessment and financing arrangements behind the sale, and called on the Government to explain what safeguards, if any, were applied. “Tasmanian farmers deserve transparency, not a sneaky decision snuck out the back door during the winter recess. We will be pursuing this through every avenue available, including calling for a parliamentary inquiry into how a foreign carbon-forestry fund was allowed to outbid Australian farmers for our largest and most productive farm.” “TasFarmers and local interested parties and politicians have reached out over and over again to our federal Agricultural Minister, FIRB, and the Treasurer only to be stonewalled by meaningless responses. “For something that is so important, these responses and today’s announcement demonstrate the Treasurer did not have the national interest at heart, and that ideology drove this decision”.

The post Tasmanian farmers unhappy with Rushy Lagoon decision appeared first on Timberbiz.