Vica Bayley Wilderness Society MR
“Gunns has been claiming it wants to build a plantation-based mill, yet it has a contract that locks in 20 years supply of native-forest woodchips. We dare Gunns to prove us wrong and rule out taking native forest timber for the mill by rewriting the contract,” said Vica Bayley, spokesperson for The Wilderness Society.
MEDIA RELEASE-November 27th 2008
OPPORTUNITY APPROACHES FOR GUNNS TO PROVE THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY WRONG
Nov 30th Gunns’ chance to rule out native forests in wood-supply deal with Forestry Tasmania
On November 30, Gunns will have the chance to prove the Wilderness Society (TWS) wrong by renegotiating the wood supply deal with Forestry Tasmania to leave out native forests. TWS has consistently been attacked by Gunns for asserting the mill will never be 100% plantation based, yet the wood-supply deal currently locks in the supply of at least 1 million tonnes of native forest wood each year, for 20 years. (see http://www.gunns.com.au/corporate/nov10.html for latest attack)
Published Forestry Tasmania figures show that it will only ever be able to supply 500,000 tonnes of plantation woodchips to the mill, meaning the balance of the annual contracted supply 1.5 million tonnes must come from native forests, making a 100% plantation based mill a fantasy. (see graph below)
“Gunns has been claiming it wants to build a plantation-based mill, yet it has a contract that locks in 20 years supply of native-forest woodchips. We dare Gunns to prove us wrong and rule out taking native forest timber for the mill by rewriting the contract,” said Vica Bayley, spokesperson for The Wilderness Society.
“The option to renegotiate this deal and take real steps towards a 100%-plantation-based mill will be open on Nov 30th and this is a test of the company’s credibility and true intentions.”
Despite ongoing requests dating back to June, Gunns has yet to provide figures that substantiate the ‘plantation-based’ mill claim. Forestry Tasmania data clearly shows that it is unable to supply the contracted volumes in plantation timber only, creating a clear conflict between the Gunns’ claims and contracted reality.
“Gunns’ option to specifically exclude the supply of native forest timber is its chance to prove us wrong and demonstrate to Tasmanians its pulp mill won’t rely on the destruction of native forests, including those of high-conservation-value forests that protect domestic water supplies, provide habitat for wildlife, and represent massive banks of stored carbon.”
“Not renegotiating this wood-supply deal will confirm the native-forest dependence of this mill and lock in decades of continued conflict over logging in Tasmania’s forests.”
“All Tasmanians agree we need to move on and resolve the forest debate. Excluding native forests from the wood-supply deal for the pulp mill will open up the opportunity to review the forest industry and see the long overdue protection of high-conservation-value forests in Tasmania,” concluded Mr Bayley.
Forestry Tasmania wood supply projection graph below
Source : http://www.forestrytas.com.au/news/2008/10/bright-future-for-forestry pg. 20
