The future of Forestry Tasmania is a question to which the state still hasn’t found an answer.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
In previous years it's been publicly subsidised. But like any enterprise, it should stand on its own feet.
News on Tuesday that the company made a $67 million loss last financial year was foreshadowed when Forestry Minister Guy Barnett revealed FT had expressed concerns about the sustainability of its yield from public production forests.
Mr Barnett has presented a case to solve FT’s financial situation, which would involve bringing forward a state government plan to open 400,000 hectares of native forest for logging.
The government’s solution, met with opposition from the Greens and environmentalists, could see a reboot of the forest conflicts that have exhausted Tasmanians for decades.
Tasmania is presented various paths forward. FT could log the native forests. Or the state could downsize FT and adapt it eventually to the approach that’s benefitting operators like Forico, which focus on plantation forestry.
The question isn’t just one of finding a balance between conservation and employment.
Nor is it solely about adapting FT to a more sustainable path.
It’s about doing so in a way that doesn’t cause avoidable hardship for the state’s forestry workers, and averts damage to the state’s tourism brand.
The Greens ask whether the state government’s solution would would jeopardise FT’s application for Forestry Stewardship Council approval, and it’s a fair question.
Also unclear in the government’s plan is whether logging the native forests would tarnish Tasmania’s brand as a pristine wilderness tourism destination.
But the alternative is hard to swallow. A proposal from FT to reduce its legislated sawlog supply would result in 700 jobs lost, or a 25 per cent reduction in Tasmania’s native forest industry, Mr Barnett told the Australian Forest Growers National Conference on Sunday night.
Given that many communities are still transitioning following the forestry downturn, it’s hard to accept 700 job losses without a clear path forward into new employment for displaced workers.
It’s a debate Tasmanians don’t want. Given it’s so unresolved, it’s one the state needs to have.