House debates

Monday, 22 June 2009

Grievance Debate


9:20 pm

Photo of Dick AdamsDick Adams (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I have a really strong grievance about the way that Tasmania has been badly maligned. There have been some severe misunderstandings regarding the issue of forestry as it relates to many of the issues being discussed today, including resource harvesting, biomass for energy and climate change. Senator Bob Brown’s call for an end to the harvesting of native forest is part of an anti-forestry agenda rather than a genuine desire to reduce Australia’s carbon emissions. Ending harvesting does not enhance Australia’s overall carbon position. It will, in fact, make it worse.


David Leigh
Posted on 7 Jul 2009 6:57 pm

Resource harvesting is clear felling and it is wrong. The carbon stored in Tasmania's native forests is 5 times that sequestered by warmer climate forests elsewhere in the world. That means we only have to cut down 20% of the timber cut elsewhere to cause the same damage to our environment.
Harvesting trees on the scale that takes place in Tasmania, burning the waste and then seeding blue gum plantations is not carbon storage it is carbon release and on a massive scale. Turning both the forests and the plantations into wood chip and then paper has to be the most senseless abuse of environmental principles and flies in the face of any government attempt to curb emissions.
First the carbon is released from the soil and fallen trees, second the take up of present and future carbon is denied, third the burning of waste and chipping of the harvested timber releases even more carbon. Finally, the carbon take up of plantations is short-lived, being released in 10 - 20 years but then you know that. Still you pump out this supercilious crap, hoping that the average Joe will swallow it... Shame on you.