Image: Mattias Klum. Land Cleared for oil palm plantation creates a patchwork of scars across what were once Sarawak’s majestic forests, threatening …
… orangutans. Image: Tim Laman
Environment group exposes Ta Ann’s links to allegations of human rights abuses and environmental destruction in Sarawak, Malaysia.
Huon Valley Environment Centre will today launch a report that documents practices of human rights abuses and environmental destruction with global significance in Sarawak, Malaysia.
“The logging of Sarawak’s forests and peatlands for palm oil plantations is occurring at a frantic pace.
“With globally significant impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, displacement of indigenous peoples and entrenched corruption, Huon Valley Environment Centre exposes the link between Ta Ann Tasmania and it’s parent company who is one of the largest timber companies in Sarawak, linked to practices such as these,’ Huon Valley Environment Centre’s Jenny Weber stated.
“The report documents claims by indigenous people in Sarawak, that Ta Ann have been using gangsters to threaten them, having their water poisoned by Ta Ann’s plantations and losing food supply due to logging activities,
“Ta Ann’s Executive Chairman Sepawi, who accompanied Tasmania’s Forest Minister to meet with Japanese customers recently, is a notorious figure in Sarawak, a region noted for its entrenched political corruption and large scale environmental devastation.
“The Tasmanian Government by working with Sepawi is inadvertantly endorsing their questionable practices in Sarawak,’ Jenny Weber said.
“The Huon Valley Environment Centre condemns the environmental practices of the timber industry and the human rights abuses that are carried out in Sarawak.
“Ta Ann Tasmania is inextricably linked to these practices. We are calling on the Tasmanian and Australian Government to critically assess their partnership with a company that is involved in such abhorrent practices.
“We question the role that Ta Ann Holdings has to play in the future of Australia’s timber industry,’ Jenny Weber said.
“The Huon Valley Environment Centre aims to raise awareness about the activities of Ta Ann in its home state of Sarawak, and highlight the connections with Ta Ann Tasmania.
“Ta Ann Tasmania can not pretend to be disconnected from the practices of the Ta Ann group in its home state.
“The Australian community and authorities need to send a clear message to Ta Ann that their environmentally and socially destructive operations are an international disgrace,” Jenny Weber said.
The Report can be viewed here:
EARLIER ON TASMANIAN TIMES:
Hydro Tasmania Chairman David Crean, a former Tasmanian Treasurer in Malaysia
• Is this why Ta Ann Tasmania operates at a loss?
• Mr Harriss, Independent MLC, and Ta Ann
AND, from SARAWAK REPORT and THE BRUNO MANSER FUND …
• “Eco-Terrorists”? – Exclusive Revelations, HERE
Sarawak’s 2,400 MW Bakun dam – Asia’s largest dam outside of China
• First Pictures From Sealed-Off Bakun Dam Zone Reveal Social And Environmental Disaster: Read the report, from ScoopNZ, here
And,
• All about Sarawak Report, London Evening Standard, here
• BRING FOREST MANAGEMENT BACK UNDER MINISTERIAL CONTROL
Nick McKim MP
Greens Leader
The Tasmanian Greens today tabled a motion in State Parliament calling for the management of Tasmania’s state forest estate to be returned to State Government departments under direct ministerial authority.
Greens Leader Nick McKim MP said the recent URS report into Forestry Tasmania made it clear that the government business enterprise was “unable to fulfil its obligations under the Government Business Enterprise Act 1995, to operate as a successful business.” [1]
“A major cause of this finding is the failed business model involving a reliance on taxpayer subsidies, and market interference by Forestry Tasmania,” Mr McKim said.
“It is now clear that the only way forward for the industry is to abolish this rogue agency, and for the public forests and land managed by Forestry Tasmania to be transferred to relevant government departments.”
“Forestry Tasmania has done everything it can to undermine Tasmania’s forest industry transition, and it has to go.”
[1] Strategic Review of Forestry Tasmania, Stage 1 Report, 3 Feb 2012; p. 5
Text of Motion tabled by Greens Leader Nick McKim MP:
That this House:
1. Notes the Stage 1 URS report into Forestry Tasmania, (Full name: Strategic Review of Forestry Tasmania: Extract of Stage 1 Report (Redacted)), released on the 3rd February, which confirms that “‘the recent poor financial results mean that under current policy settings, Forestry Tasmania is unable to fulfil its obligations under the Government Business Enterprises Act 1995, to operate as a successful business”;
2. Agrees that a major cause of this finding is the failed business model involving a reliance on taxpayer subsidies, and market interference by Forestry Tasmania; and
3. Agrees that Forestry Tasmania cannot continue to operate in its current form and that the management of Tasmania’s state forest estate should be returned to Government departments under direct ministerial authority.
Dave Groves
• MINISTER CLEARFELLS FT’S CLAIMS ON TIMBER CONTRACTS
Kim Booth MP
Greens Forestry Spokesperson
The Tasmanian Greens said that the Minister for Forests Bryan Green had today exploded the myth that Forestry Tasmania was unable to reduce logging in areas identified for protection under the IGA because of its existing contractual obligations.
Greens Forestry spokesperson Kim Booth MP said that the Minister confirmed in Parliament today that Ta Ann Tasmania had approached Forestry Tasmania seeking to reduce its contracted wood supply quota, and to have its timber sourced outside the IGA identified areas.
“Today the Minister has confirmed that Ta Ann has requested a change of timber supply resource and a reduction in their logging volumes, and yet, astonishingly, Forestry Tasmania continues to log within the areas agreed for reservation under the Forests Intergovernmental Agreement,” Mr Booth said.
“This follows confirmation from the CEO of Forestry Tasmania last week that Ta Ann had requested timber from outside high conservation value forests identified in the IGA.”
“This should put an end to Forestry Tasmania’s fraudulent claim that it cannot reduce logging inside the areas identified for protection.”
“Forestry Tasmania now has a choice to either listen to the wishes of its biggest customer, or continue with its fanatical campaign to mow down Tasmania’s high conservation value forests.”
“Forestry Tasmania’s myopic vision to destroy the IGA by continuing to log within the protected 430,000 is now destroying the international image of its major customer.”
“If Ta Ann wants out of high conservation value forests, how can Forestry Tasmania continue to lock them in? This is yet further proof of a rogue agency out of control,” Mr Booth said.
john hayward
March 5, 2012 at 1:34 pm
Jenny had better get the message out quickly, before the LibLabs pass their legislation which will make the exposure of water contamination, destruction of food production, and industry racketeering, illegal. They might also hand any property she owns over to the TCA or someone, a la FT.
John Hayward
Karl Stevens
March 5, 2012 at 1:39 pm
I see there has been no explanation from Hydro Tasmania as to what they are doing in Sarawak and if Ta Ann is a part of the dam construction deals. They seem to think that shutting-down the Tasmanian economy is so minor that nobody will notice. We have noticed that as the Bell Bay electro-metallurgy plants close they are mysteriously re-opening in Sarawak. Its time both Hydro and Forestry came clean about the ‘Sarawak scandal’.
Jane Bennett
March 5, 2012 at 1:50 pm
Can you please provide reference to local Malaysian NGO reports which collaborate this “evidence” compiled by the HVEC? The report appears very light on in terms of actual evidence, a two verbal statements and cherry picked statements out of court documents do not constitute actual evidence. I place more weight in the fact that the WWF are in partnership with this organisation, then some Tasmanian ENGO flying in and making broad sweeping unsubstantiated statements.
Having seen other ‘evidence’ compiled by HVEC in Tasmania I am sceptical as to the authenticity. I also note that the recommendations of the HVEC are more substantial in Tasmania than in Malaysia where these practices are allegedly occuring. Seems a very ridiculous comparison, add all the pictures of orangutans you like, but that doesn’t add credibility.
For the record I do not agree with woodchipping native forests here in Tasmania, but I do agree with using them for higher value products – sawn timber, veneer etc. I thought this is what the ENGOs and greens wanted, but appears it is simply to stop all native forest harvesting and continue their relevance through conflict.
jack lumber
March 5, 2012 at 3:54 pm
Know i will be hounded …but after the headline and the words- what is Ms Weber saying .I think Ms Weber says TAT is owned by a Sarawak company . OK understood . I am not on a first hand basis knowledgeable on forest /land practices in Sarawak so happy to learn more from Ms Webber and others to make sure we get the whole picture BUT what has this do do with anything in Tasmania ? Help me understand the point she is trying to make about Tasmania and our forests . Please refrain from amy ideologocal rants
Barnaby Drake
March 5, 2012 at 5:12 pm
From The Mercury
‘If elected, a Liberal government would reverse every tenet of the forest peace deal and hand national parks created under the Intergovernmental Agreement back to the loggers, Mr Hodgman said yesterday.’
“We have 60 or 62 per cent of our forests going to be locked up,” he said..
“We don’t believe that is appropriate socially, economically or indeed environmentally.” Mercury
“Ta Ann’s Executive Chairman Sepawi, who accompanied Tasmania’s Forest Minister to meet with Japanese customers recently, is a notorious figure in Sarawak, a region noted for its entrenched political corruption and large scale environmental devastation.
“The Tasmanian Government by working with Sepawi is inadvertantly endorsing their questionable practices in Sarawak.”
“Ta Ann Tasmania is inextricably linked to these practices.” … Jenny Weber
Strategic Review of Forestry Tasmania: Extract of Stage 1 Report (Redacted)), released on the 3rd February, which confirms that ‘the recent poor financial results mean that under current policy settings, Forestry Tasmania is unable to fulfil its obligations under the Government Business Enterprises Act 1995, to operate as a successful business’.
Thank you Will Hodgman. Our future is looking so, so very bright!
I get a little confused at times. Could you tell me please, just who are you representing?
Garry Stannus
March 5, 2012 at 6:08 pm
Congratulations to HVEC. Many forest defenders live on the smell of an oily rag. And yet they kick goals that put the establishment to shame. Why isn’t this sort of reporting coming from the ABC? Four Corners? Why will we have to wait ’till it’s all over bar the shouting’ for mainstream Australia to damn it
‘Well yes, it was a shame, now that we come to think of it, some of the things that went on, back then in 2012, but I guess we didn’t know better then … anyway you can’t (cough…cough…’when’s that damned nurse coming with the regulator?’) anyway you can’t turn back the clock…much as you might want…
Get Ta Ann out of Tasmania. Let’s wheel in this bulldozer called progress and give it a 21st Century service and tune up. Let’s require that we live within our (and that of the world’s) ecological means. Let our progress be sculpted.
Bryan Green, in answering Kim’s question, tried to suggest that Ta Ann’s request for wood not from the 430 came as a result of shrinking market due to the treacherous campaign run by forest activists. The more likely truth is that FT has duped Ta Ann Tas into taking the poisoned chalice … the wood that by the terms of the IGA is not supposed to be logged in the meanwhile until Prof. West’s report (now presented) gets digested.
Either way, there is no wriggle room for Forestry Tasmania. They are guilty.
john hayward
March 5, 2012 at 6:20 pm
Mr Lumber, #4, Ta Ann,a company already worth in excess of ten digits to start with, was given $10.5m of Tasmanian public money by a fine gentleman called Lennon to set up operations here , and then further inexplicable perks.
John Hayward
moo
March 5, 2012 at 7:17 pm
#5 Barnaby…Will is not representing anybody, he is representing THE MONEY
William Boeder
March 5, 2012 at 7:35 pm
I wonder, is the photo of the clear-felled former forested area that accompanies this article another depiction of Forestry Tasmania’s World’s Best Practices?
If not, then it be damned close to what went on with the conversion by Forestry Tasmania of large zones of Old Growth Native Forests into what are now much of this State’s realm of mono-species plantations.
There is no escape for this GBE from its former evil intended, Gunns directed, poorly disguised, greed glutted assault in those former times in converting such vast amounts of our former Forests into bastard wood-chips.
Were it not for the Greens and the State’s ENGOs rising up to challenge this insane disposal of our Old Growth forested-environments, this would still be occurring today.
Oops, how wrong I am, it is still happening in our still un-declared HCV forests, look to the quite recent log supply arrangements contracted to the overseas owned forest-raiding Ta Ann operations?
Look to the recent halt of Native Forest log deliveries to the Artec Wood-chip Mill.
The demand for our profitless taxpayer subsidized Native Forest wood-chips is no longer apparent, yet the rogue operation of Forestry Tasmania is still hammering its way through the proposed nominated HCV Forests.
The relentless attack upon our State Forests will not fill the State’s cash drawer, no matter how much fiction is attached to this State’s logging operations.
I cannot understand the mentality of those, (particularly Will Hodgmans Liberal lot of touters and twisters,) hell-bent wanting this ecological destruction of our primeval forests to continue en-masse, how clever of Will and his nodding colleagues?
Destroying our Ancient Forests to sate the ego’s and Bank balances of those few exclusives, to continue to try to fool the people of Tasmania this is a good and business, does bugger all for Tasmania nor toward it’s international reputation!
Oops, wrong again, “it yet continues to lower this State’s governmental standing in the eyes of all who know and have visited Tasmania.”
Currently this State is broke and busted, the cash-drawer of this present State government and its State Retirements benefit Fund having been looted by our former State Treasurer with the consent of our former Premiers of late, in their ignorant attempt to show the World how great this State of Tasmania truly isn’t.
When will the false profitless purposes of logging the heart out of our Ancient Forests be fully realized for what damage and destruction it has wrought upon Tasmania?
Do understand our Forests are not finite resources no matter how much fictitious political hype is created and directed to suggest otherwise.
William H
March 5, 2012 at 9:07 pm
#3 I agree, a collection of seemingly random grabs of unsupported green propaganda is what passes for journalism on TT.
William H
Mike Adams
March 5, 2012 at 10:24 pm
No 5. Will Hodgman is representing the lowest common denominator in the Tasmanian electorate. That means he’s a shoo in at the election.
Robin Halton
March 6, 2012 at 12:04 am
#3 I am in agreement with what Jane Bennett has outlined in her comments.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt is needed that Ta Ann is heavily involved in the conversion of natural forests into palm oil plantations within Sarawak.
HVEC reputedly based in Huonville I believe, has been a constant threat to the Tasmanian economy as it has relentlessly opposed both regrowth and old growth logging in our home state as well as accusing FT and the forest industry of environmental malpractice of massive proportions!
Unfortunately developing Asian countries are overpopulated run by governments spiralling way beyond their critical pace for development to provide goods for trade within their region as well as for the neighbouring populations in the South East Region.
With modern world trade the drive for Asian big business and for governments to increase their booty can come at the expense of their rural populations!
Australia is a far more modest country however we must ensure our governments do not undervalue its population by over reaching becoming involved in massive land transformation schemes and overseas ownership.
We need to be vigilant and first and foremost protect our freedom and our Australian values to maintain population stability.
In Tasmania’s case a far wider protection of the States valuable timber resources is required to ensure forests for the future emphatically provide far higher value commodities than we have seen during the past 40 years.
The Hodgman plan to protect the future timber values of the majority of the area currently constrained by the IGA makes more sense than any plan so far by the ENGO’s, and the Green influences that are by now fast tracking the collapse of the current Giddings mislead State Government.
Karl Stevens
March 6, 2012 at 12:25 am
By getting the Borneo tentacles out of our economy we are doing both Tasmania and Sarawak a favour. Already RioTino has been forced into an unprofitable back-down. Paying Aussie ‘award wages’ must really make them squeal and yet if they flee to Borneo their mates get a caning from the unions. Beautiful work! Who said you can’t wedge billionaires?
jack lumber
March 6, 2012 at 12:38 am
hmm not sure how this thread stuff works – guess we get a little latitude but then agin how about dealing with the allegations made by HVEC . Nah that would destroy the narrative that some one is trying . Ms weber substantiate your claims ?
Barnaby Drake
March 6, 2012 at 5:02 am
In Britain the Government decided to sell off the national forests and were met with a public backlash. The Minister was forced to apologise and the legislation was dumped. This is the force of public perception of the value of forests, yet here in Tasmania, without consultation with the owners, the public, they have condemned our forests to destruction for no perceivable material gain.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/feb/17/forest-sell-off-abandoned-sorry-caroline-spelman?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
Here we are driven by cronyism and series of shonky deals that do not stand up to the light of day and we hand over some of the finest forests in the world to third rate and even criminal companies, and our politicians fawn and smile on us as though it is a job well done.
And for what benefit to us? So that we can continue to pour our taxes and assets into the maw of these loss-making companies and deprive ourselves of all our essential services to pay for this pillage and to hold sacred a few jobs in Forestry.
Meanwhile, our government, of its own volition, is working hard to undermine some of the major industries that employ over 2000 people in the north of the State. They are not coming out in support of the workers or addressing meetings, as they did for Ta Ann. It appears that this situation is unimportant, as they cannot blame the Greens or the Environmentalists for these actions but have to carry the can themselves. Instead, of looking after their interests, they would rather sell out these workers to the same disreputable people who are responsible for the rape of Sarawak and are now operating here.
phill Parsons
March 6, 2012 at 9:29 am
Ta Ann have requested a variation of their supply indicating that the position on source of supply was correct, their customers don’t want HCV forest because the consumers don’t want it.
#3. should do some research into the history of the still extant indigenous people of the forests of Sarawak before opining.
Less than 2% is in national parks and the indigenous people, although their right to land has been recognized by the courts actual land title has proved elusive.
jack lumber
March 6, 2012 at 10:13 am
#5 Dear Barnaby sorry about the confusion – it seems to be an endemic condition for Tasmania and while we are talking about confusion . Again i make the point what is Ms Weber trying to say about landand forest management in Tasmaia . Ms Weber is guilty of flinging mud and hoping some will stick . There is no wriggle room for HVEC either
David Obendorf
March 6, 2012 at 10:41 am
Mad Men mentality still determines that “it’s the economy, stupid!”.
The entropy in the world is accelerating just as China’s growth rate faulters to a mere 7.5% after years of near 10% growth per annum.
In Australia’s two-speed enconomy, we see local manufacturing jobs declining, as the mining boom in Qld and WA escalate to feed export steel/aluminium manufacture and cheap coal-fired energy in China and India, etc.
It appears to be a form of madness that’s hard-wired into the human psyche, Our children and grandchildren will be inheriting this run-down world.
Barnaby Drake
March 6, 2012 at 11:14 am
Hi there Robin and Jane.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt is needed that Ta Ann is heavily involved in the conversion of natural forests into palm oil plantations within Sarawak.
You want proof – here it is!
http://stop-timber-corruption.org/resources/Companies_linked_to_Taib_which_have_been_leased_palm_oil.pdf
Can’t argue with that one!
Robin Halton
March 6, 2012 at 11:25 am
#9 William, There could some good news as Will Hodgman has constantly been watching the IGA circus unfold while the government, forest industry and the combined groupings of Environmental attack dogs have ultimately failed to drive a workable solution that would in any way benefit the state!
Our second best mate Bryan Green along with stubborn Premier Lara Gidding are so deeply entrenched in this mess to satisfy the Greens they are way out of touch with public favor.
The Hodgman plan, while not perfect according to my very specific caculations is far more tolerable solution!
Will Hodgman has stated the majority of the HCV area currently under contention would be made available as reserves for future timber production.
This would be a far more sensible outcome compared with the current drive to create more reserves to be managed as National Parks.
The state already has sufficient NP’s to manage and showcase to the nation, why more NP’s and deny ourselves of locally grown timber?
Jane Bennett
March 6, 2012 at 11:27 am
#18 The way I see it the change in request from Ta Ann has nothing to do with the forest claimed to be HCV. It has to do with an avoidance of conflict and hate campaigns by groups such as the HVEC. How on earth is it a bad thing for Tasmanian timbers to be showcased to the world at the London Olympics? How else do you increase the value of a product, other than to make it sought after. High Value products is what we should be aiming for from Tasmanian native forests. Reserves are important, but there needs to be a balance.
Interesting that you make the statement that I should research the Indigenous populations, otherwise I have no right to ask questions. I have an open mind, but I am savvy enough to recognise blatent green propaganda when I see it. What I see is the HVEC do not have a substantial emotive argument for Tasmania, so they have gone to the home of the Orangutan and cobbled together a report. What I am asking for is some verification of authenticity – not too much to ask is it? Presumably if they have done their homework and research properly it shouldn’t be too much of a problem?
William Boeder
March 6, 2012 at 11:29 am
#16. jack lumber, how come you are so keen to dispel the truths that are issuing from the Huon Valley Environment Centre?
The truth has been a constant abused, belittled business term and something that this State’s logging industry will not countenance in their business plan.
Their is very little evidence of truth flowing from the vendors and the spruikers of this now more internationally known infamous Forestry Tasmania.
Jane Bennett
March 6, 2012 at 11:45 am
#21 I can’t see Ta Ann in the list of named companies, can you please clarify?
John Wade
March 6, 2012 at 12:24 pm
“How on earth is it a bad thing for Tasmanian timbers to be showcased to the world at the London Olympics? How else do you increase the value of a product, other than to make it sought after. High Value products is what we should be aiming for from Tasmanian native forests.”
Well my mind tells me it is a bad thing by the way in which it is gathered and the lies told of the process and origins of the timber species. It is called HABITAT.
Sure, let people walk all over the beautiful remnant old growth forest of Tasmania, after all, no-one really cares if ecology was destroyed for the sake of a ‘feel-good’ syndrome.
Jane Bennett
March 6, 2012 at 1:15 pm
#26 “lies told of the process and origins of the timber species”… Then you go on to say that the regrowth veneer is “remnant old growth”. Who is lying?
I want to see our forests used for high value products, have wooden furniture in my home and would much prefer it to be Tassie Oak than anything else. For years the greens and conservation groups have been pushing for a move away from low value woodchipping of native forest and I have supported that. Now the goal posts have been moved and they are targeting high value products, which makes a mockery of their previous claims and positions. This is what has made me highly sceptical of their claims and actually makes me rethink much of the previous information I had taken as fact from these types of groups.
jack lumber
March 6, 2012 at 2:31 pm
#24 William Not trying to dispel anything just asking what is the issue with respect to the management of tasmania’s forests . HVEC have made a statement(s)
jack lumber
March 6, 2012 at 2:36 pm
#14 TQ can we agree on a varioation on Goddards/godwins law – any mention of the term ecoterrorist et al kills the thread or the poster cant continue .
Pete Godfrey
March 6, 2012 at 3:27 pm
#27 Jane Bennet, Taa Ann don’t make high quality products out of the veneer they get for less than cost in Tasmania. They make plywood for flooring.
The fact that they get the wood for less than they can buy it in Malaysia should tell us something. They were Taa Ann’s own words, they were suprised at how cheap Thuggo Lennon sold them the logs for.
To top that off we subsidised them to the tune of nearly $30 million to set up here, and they can’t make a profit selling the veneer to their own parent company. The way I see it there is something that smells a bit in that.
The Sarawak issue has gone on for a very long time. A swiss fellow called Bruno Manser was there trying to bring the issue of local indigenous peoples to the attention of the world.
He lived in the forest with the Penan people, they lived a hunter gatherer existence like they had always done. Along came the loggers and cut down their forest homes, moved them into squalid camps and destroyed their culture and homes.
Unfortunately a bit like here there are a few bad apples who run the industry in Sarawak. Barnaby Drake has posted many informative posts and articles showing the link between Taa Ann and corrupt politicians over there.
If you need more information I suggest you google Bruno Manser who is unfortunately dead as he mysteriously dissapeared while in Sarawak.
His crime was to try and help people, he tried to help the poor tribesmen, not the loggers.
Barnaby Drake
March 6, 2012 at 6:33 pm
25.#21 I can’t see Ta Ann in the list of named companies, can you please clarify?
Surely you are woman enough to know!
You originally asked :’3.Can you please provide reference to local Malaysian NGO reports which collaborate this “evidence†compiled by the HVEC?’
That is exactly what I did. I supplied you with a government report detailing the ownership of oil plantations in Sarawak.
However, let me spell it out for you.
Ta Ann is wholely owned by Separwi who is cousin of Taib, the Chief Minister of Sarawak. They are internationally recognised for their questionable activities, savaging the native forests and displacing the local communities from their traditional lands without compensation or giving them the wherewithal to survive.
In the table I presented Separwi’s name appears 14 times as owner of large tracts of converted forest to oil plantations in Sarawak. This is an official Governmnt document.
There are several more of this ilk if you care to do a little research.
Perhaps you should now apologise to Jenny Weber?
Pete Godfrey
March 6, 2012 at 7:02 pm
#25 Jane Bennett, look at the list of palm oil companies and look at the number of times the name Hamed Bin Sepawi appears. He is one of the founders of Ta Ann.
I hope that clarifies the matter a bit for you.
It is a lot like looking at Australian Business names really, many companies have other subsiduaries.
William Boeder
March 6, 2012 at 7:33 pm
#22 in reply Robin, this Tasmanian timber you speak of, is it of that construction grade proportion of 6% that you are referring to?
Barnaby Drake
March 6, 2012 at 7:37 pm
#23. By the way, there are 130 references at the end of the HVEC report. Where are yours?
YOU STATE:- I have an open mind, but I am savvy enough to recognise blatent green propaganda when I see it.
What do YOU base your assumption on, seeing that you don’t even understand a simple proof when it is presented to you. Even now you don’t know the connections between Sepawi, Taib and Ta Ann, but dismiss a well researched report as ‘blatant green propaganda’.
I think the boot is on the other foot. I believe you are just another name on a thinly disguised Forestry spin panel. They take it in turns do disseminate misinformation and discredit the Greens but fail to furnish any evidence of anything. Just ‘blatant propaganda’, to use your own words.
And in #27. It is not necessary to clearfell whole tracts of native forest to make you an armchair. Natural forest have trees in them of different ages. Foresty like to call them ‘regrowth’ so thay can keep Ta Ann happy, but they are really part of the ecology of a forest and are merely immature trees that will never be allowed to grow to full maturity. Before Ta Ann they were called ‘waste’ and chipped. Now they are ‘regrowth’. It’s all just semantics for… er … money. Oops…. I nearly said ‘profit’!
Silly me!
max
March 6, 2012 at 7:39 pm
27 # Jane Bennett. A peeler log should be 700 mm thick, straight as a gun barrel, good solid timber to the centre and long enough to go on a log truck. This is also the description of an immature saw log. My question is where will our future sawlogs come from if young immature trees are sold as peeler logs. Peeler logs are being sold at a cheap price as coming from re-growth and practically worthless when in fact they are selling our children’s future.
Jane Bennett
March 6, 2012 at 11:47 pm
So I ask for evidence and get attacked. #33 Pete thankyou for answering my question so politely. I am interested to hear whether it is a definite subsidiary company or one that is owned by the same person.
#32 Baranby Drake “official Government Documents” generally don’t appear as single pages on stop-timber-corruption.org. But perhaps I’m not woman enough to know that either.
The fact that they have been converting forest to palm oil plantation does not mean they are auotmatically guilty of crimes against indigenous people. Even the report itself kind of skirts around making a direct accusation.
jack lumber
March 7, 2012 at 1:17 am
common TQ!!! can we agree on Godwin Law and still no clarity re the claims of the HVEC . How can we rightly ask politicians to be accountable for their actions , when those same people making claims are not accountable for their own . Does the use of the term “media release ” absolve people ?
PS is quoll blood like “charlie sheens tiger blood”?
Barnaby Drake
March 7, 2012 at 1:19 am
#32 Baranby Drake “official Government Documents†generally don’t appear as single pages on stop-timber-corruption.org.
Yes they do if they are being quoted other than in the report they came from. It even says what it is on it!
Try another disseminating line!
BARNABY Drake