sustainable forest management - Forestry Tasmania

International science panel
In addition to the knowledge and science gained from the
Old Forests, New Management Conference, the Forestry
Tasmania Board engaged a five-member international
science panel to provide advice on Forestry Tasmania’s
program of reduced reliance on clearfelling in oldgrowth
forests.
This panel included Mr Bill Beese (Canada); Mr Jack
Bradshaw (Australia); Professor Jürgen Bauhus (Germany);
Professor Tom Spies (USA) and Professor Ivan Tomaselli
(Brazil). All panel members visited Forestry Tasmania
between July and September 2007 and prepared
independent reports.
Panel members were supportive of Forestry Tasmania’s
program to reduce clearfelling of oldgrowth by adopting
mixed silviculture, particularly variable retention.
Professor Jürgen Bauhus commended Forestry Tasmania’s
efforts to operationalise the variable retention system by
developing innovative approaches to design of harvesting
areas and regeneration burning. He noted that the main
research need was to demonstrate the ecological benefits
of the new system over clearfelling at the landscape, as well
as the production unit scale.
Mr Bill Beese noted that Tasmania had a world class strategy
for biodiversity conservation. He considered the 80 per
cent non-clearfell target to be appropriate and that it was
useful to retain clearfelling of oldgrowth for some difficult
sites. Conversely he noted that variable retention could be
considered for regrowth in landscapes where there is very
little oldgrowth, to retain or develop older forest elements.
Mr Jack Bradshaw noted that much progress had been
made towards implementing variable retention in both a
research and operational sense. The greatest uncertainty
lies in routine achievement of an operational regenerationburning
program. This uncertainty could be clarified
by another two years of operational experience and
development.
Professor Tom Spies reported that variable retention made
ecological sense in Tasmania’s tall old growth eucalypt
forests and should retain elements of old forest biodiversity
when compared to clearfelling. He urged greater emphasis
on developing biodiversity goals at the landscape level
(eg. how many hollow-bearing trees should be retained
at the landscape level). He recommended that Forestry
Tasmania more clearly prioritise its economic, social and
environmental goals and conduct landscape analysis across
all land tenures to help place state forests in a continuum of
forest management goals. He observed that at a state level,
Tasmania did not appear to have clear goals to maintain
oldgrowth eucalypt forests in reserves (or a mechanism to
achieve this).
Professor Ivan Tomaselli noted that Forestry Tasmania’s
program to reduce clearfelling would allow it to continue
harvesting oldgrowth forests but that costs of doing
so would increase over time. He recommended that
the research program should continue, along with a
communication strategy that focussed more on gains rather
than problems and impacts. He recommended feasibility
studies on increased removals from harvested old growth
coupes to provide biomass energy and offset costs. He also
believed that shorter rotations for eucalypt regrowth forests
should be explored to increase productivity.
Left to right; Professor Jürgen Bauhus ; Professor Tom Spies;
Professor Ivan Tomaselli; Mr Jack Bradshaw ; Mr Bill Beese.
17