World's Tallest Trees

Logged and Burnt - Never to Return

The largest tree on Planet Earth is not the California Redwood, but the Mountain Ash (Eucalyptus Regnans).

The largest trees ever recorded were located in southern Australia near present day Melbourne.

The world's largest tree was the Ferguson Tree at over 500 feet (154m). It was measured by Surveyor Ferguson in 1872 in the Watts River Catchment near Healesville.

The above image represents the approximate location of the world's tallest ever recorded trees. It is based on information sourced by Bernard Mace 2005. Numbers 3, 7, 8 and 10 are not listed as they refer to trees in California and Canada. Green dot shows approximate location of 'Strzelecki Big Tree', now under the control of US Multinational John Hancock Financial Services.

The numbers in the following table relate to the numbers in the Google Earth image (above).

Book Review (and an alternative view of the History of Campaigns to Save Victoria's Native Forests)

Dr Rod Anderson's 'Cheap as Chips - A History of Campaigns to Save Victoria's Native Forests' Published by Dr R W Anderson 2006

This attempt to tie together the history of Victorian forest campaigning is fundamentally a flawed undertaking, as the inherent bias of the editor ultimately weakens the overall package.

Rod Anderson was Environment Victoria's (EV) forest campaigner from 1997-2000 and therefore his views are heavily influenced by his experiences and networks gained at EV during that time. It appears that a lot passed him by. As a forest campaigner myself during the 1990's, a host of other people would need to be included if such an ambitious project could ever be called authorative.

As a historical document, the book ultimately fails the test, as the selective nature of the contributors makes one question Anderson's real intentions. For instance two of the contributors use the book in a cowardly manner to attack other forest campaigners that they (& the editor?) disagree with. This fundamentally weakens the credibility of entire book as the criticisms are based on misguided political assumptions.

There is no real input from GECO and the fezza contingents, the piece on Goolengook (the longest running forest blockade in Australian history - 7 long years!) should have been written by actual blockaders who were there and there is almost no input from indigenous people which perhaps is the books greatest failing (The first idea about blockading Goolengook also came from a FoEFN meeting). No information is presented on either Rainforest Action Group or the Nomadic Action Group and very little is offered from other direct action forest groups.

The largest protest arrests for a Victorian Forest Action occurred in 1991 in the timber yards of the company Timber Sales (see photo above). In one day 66 people were arrested over Timber Sales importation of rainforest timbers from Malaysia. The action was organised by the Rainforest Action Group which organised hundreds of actions, including 29 ship actions between 1988-1992. Timber Sales was later sold off to the 'plantation' company, Auspine. Auspine continued the lucrative rainforest timber import side of their business as well as producing vast quantities of toxic timber, a fact totally avoided by forest groups who began promoting Auspine as an outstanding corporate citizen in the mid 1990's.

After page 167, the book's credibility is weakened as it provides uncontested interviews with 'key people', selected of course by the author and selected no doubt because of their political position of no native forest logging. Anyone with a different assessment is of course not invited to comment, although to be fair some of FoE's concerns are broached by selected quotes from FoE Fitzroy newsletters and reprinted extensively through the text. FoE comes out looking pretty good which is odd considering the attacks that have been made at FoE over the years because of our forest policy. A policy which, a decade later, some of those same critical groups are now reluctantly accepting as the way forward.

It should be noted that the Victorian forest movement has effectively been split since the early 1990's by the No Native Forest Logging agenda, which was driven largely by Environment Victoria, The Wilderness Society, Australian Conservation Foundation and later in decade by the Greens. The rift is of course not mentioned in the book in any detail. It's as if the rift never existed.

The first shot in this 'rift' was actually fired in Feb March 1996 by Concerned Residents of East Gippsland in their very odd piece published in Potoroo Newsletter “Are you a Stop-the Chopper... or a Friend of the Earth - rapers”. The timing of this attack was pathetic considering that in 1995 FoEFN had organised numerous direct forest actions and in 1996 organised over 50 direct actions in support of forest protection. CROEG later evolved into Environment East Gippsland who in late 2006 were attempting to make alliances with timber workers, something that FoEFN has always supported, which makes the decade old criticism even harder to stomach. Such criticism however should always be taken with a 'grain of salt'. Essentially the criticism was probably a lame attempt to make FoE 'toe the line' into accepting the dogmatic NNFL views which certainly were not entertained by notions of holistic environmental thinking.

Charming Title published by Concerned Residents of East Gippsland (Jill Redwood) in Potoroo No.149 Febuary (Sic)-March 1996 p8. This is how the supposed elite in the forest movement treat people who do not support No Native Forest Logging, despite the fact that between 1993-6 FoEFN organised hundreds of actions in support of native forest protection including the infamous pressure hold action of February 1994, where protesters lives were threatened by police violence.

First person featured in 'Cheap as Chips' is Linda Parlane who was EV's director from 1990-97. Linda had been active on forest issues since 1975 which is quite an amazing effort against overwhelming odds. What is fascinating about Linda's spiel is that she gives a detailed explantation of why the national environmental movement got totally sold on plantations in the early nineties. Linda was the driving force of this change in direction for the movement, which effectively was a top down approach not endorsed by all groups and certainly not by communities impacted by plantations. To be a success it also would have to rely on the environment movement keeping very quiet about the many ecological downsides of plantations.

For instance in 1993/4 FoE groups in Tasmania were already up in arms about atrazine in their drinking water at Lorinna and Derby and were at that time being put under pressure by NNFL advocates. According to Annie Willock who has embroiled in a major fight with Forestry Tasmania over plantation mis-management; "We had two calls from a member of The Wilderness Society who said cool off; we support plantations. It didn't go down well at all". (Source: Helen Gee For the Forests The Atrazine Campaign). How could FoE endorse a 100% plantation position when our members were being poisoned by plantation chemicals?

Between the 1968 to 1978 vast areas of Victoria's plantations were aerially sprayed with dioxin tainted 2,4,5-T mixed with diesel. How many people suffered the consequences of being exposed to 2,4,5-T in the air or their drinking water and how many of these people are suffering health effects from this chemical legacy? In 1978 birth deformities were recorded near Yarram. 2,4,5-T sprayed on blackberries and pine plantations was regarded as the prime suspect. A subsequent government enquiry relied on statistically erroneous assumptions to hose down concerns. It would be a very interesting exercise to ask people suffering from health problems associated with plantations, what they think of the environment movement now supporting the landuse that may have made them ill in the first place.

Korweinguboora: 1400 hectares of pine will be clearfelled in this plantation and Geelong's water supply. Hexazinone has been leaching from this plantation since December 2004. 2,4,5-T was also likely used in this plantation in the 1970's.

In 1993 the hundreds of square kilometres of the Ballarat region was 'accidently' sprayed with Hexazinone by Victorian Plantations Corporation. In 1997/8 Adelaide's drinking water was contaminated with Atrazine and Hexazinone by Forestry South Australia. Geelong's drinking water was polluted from a pine plantation for 31months between 2004 and 2007. In 2005 the Federal Regulatory Body the APVMA, placed health bans on pine treated with Copper Chrome Arsenate. The list goes on and on, yet none of these toxic issues are ever raised by promoters of the plantation ideology. An ideology fully supported by advocates of NNFL. Monitoring for pesticides in Victoria is lax. Plantation companies may monitor water quality once or twice after herbicides are used, but some the herbicides, particularly the residual ones can actively leach from plantations years after application with noone monitoring for offsite impacts. For people relying on stream water - outside of proclaimed water supplies - there may never be any monitoring done at all. Residents may not even know if their water supply has been sprayed. In 2004 only one Victoria water authority had started testing for hexazinone. By 2007 this number had increased to two.

Copper Chrome Arsenate (CCA) Treated pine playground. Such playgrounds leach copper, arsenic and chromium. Where oh where are the NNFL elite when health issues concerning treated timber are publicised?

In 2002 NNFL groups opposed Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification in native forests in Australia. The main groups endorsing this position were The Wilderness Society and the Tasmanian Greens. As consensus about this issue could not be agreed by environmental groups, FSC has since been confined to plantations in Australia based on weaker FSC interim standards, rather than stronger national standards. In late 2005 FSC plantation companies operating in Australia and New Zealand, threatened to pull out of FSC on mass, unless their demands to keep using pesticides that had recently been added to the FSC prohibited chemicals list were not met. Eight pesticides used by the plantation industry in Australia and New Zealand were of concern. As a result of pressure mounted by FSC certified plantation companies, FSC reviewed its chemical policy, for an argueably weaker process which gives more scope for plantation companies to be allowed continued use of FSC prohibited chemicals through the derogation process. It will be interesting to see the development of this issue within FSC over the next few years.

In February 2006, members of the Wilderness Society and Australian Conservation Foundation were appointed to FSC environmental chamber (both groups have vigourously been advocates of NNFL in favour of plantations) and in August 2006 both representatives without consultation with other environmental chamber members allowed the derogation of Simazine to occur for FSC certified plantation companies in Australia. According to UCLA Professor Tyrone Hayes, who visited Australia in 2007, Simazine chemically castrates amphibians at levels as low as 0.1 parts per billion. Simazine and its relative Atrazine, convert testosterone into oestrogen via the aromastase enzyme. These herbicides are known 'gender benders' and their effect on people is unknown. Even Forestry Tasmania had stopped using Simazine in 1997. What message does this send out, that conservation groups will allow FSC certified companies to use dangerous pesticides that have even been banned by Forestry Tasmania? What message does this send to non-FSC companies who will now keep using Simazine knowing that green groups have supported its use via the FSC process? In their haste to get the entire timber industry into plantations, NNFL advocates have basically now become apologists for an industry addicted to pesticides. Simazine is regularly turning up in water sampling in Tasmania.

Cascade River Catchment (Derby's Water Supply). Atrazine was detected in 1994 and the furore led to Forestry Tasmania ceasing the use of Atrazine in timber plantations 1995. Note plantations in the southern portion of the catchment.

Linda explains that "The fact that we no longer needed to log native forests to meet our wood needs meant that the whole strategic perspective of the forests campaigns had to shift..." EV used this plantation information to start influencing the national agenda."In 1993, Conservation Councils and National Groups ... agreed to ... speed up transition from native forests to plantations. John Faulkner funded the Conservation Councils to undertake a national plantations study..". This study was the infamous Judy Clark report which provided over-optimistic estimates about plantation yields. The Clark report was an economic document rather than an ecological document and it was heavily quoted as the truth by supporters of no native forest logging. There was basically no debate about this change of direction in the movement with groups that didn't support plantations. It effectively meant that at a time when the plantation industry was growing at its fastest rate, green criticism would be muted without offering any social or ecological criticism about one of the largest land grabs Australia has ever seen. Effectively the forest movement had been voluntarily captured and even by 2007 criticism of the plantation expansion throughout many regions of Australia has barely raised a comment from ENGO's.

December 2003: Strzelecki Ranges - Merrimans Creek Domestic Water Supply. NNFL advocates remain mute about plantation activities, including activities in domestic water supply catchments such as cable logging and aerial spraying.

Linda also claims that “...the issue of pesticides in plantations will be dealt with at the right time". Linda then gives no explantation about what the right time is? Plantations by their very nature are reliant on pesticide props for their survival. Without the props the plantations in many instances will fail. There never will be a right time, so what Linda is actually endorsing is an unsustainable industry based on non-ecological criteria and as explained earlier environment groups are actually now supporting the use of pesticides in plantations. When exactly is the right time?

. If you live downwind or downstream from these plantations, bad luck, because you won't get any support from conservation groups who recommend plantations as the only solution. After 20 years battling for forests, Linda effectively retired from the scene in 1997, leaving others to plod on and deal with the woodchipping fiasco that was increasing both in native forests and plantations. Was EV's support for plantations a desperate attempt for change from a burnt out elite that was fast running out of steam? Rod Anderson came into the scene at this point of time, well after the no native forest logging controversy had been ignited.

In 1997-98 Adelaide's drinking water was contaminated with Atrazine and Hexazinone leaching from plantations managed by Forestry South Australia, again no comments from the NNFL elite. Adelaide residents weren't informed about the incident for a full year after the pollution started occurring.

The book then includes a detailed 24 page history by Jill Redwood in East Gippsland which is written in a dull but informative manner. In contrast, Simon Birrell from Otways Ranges Environment Network (OREN) is given only 2 pages. Unlike the trench warfare in East Gippsland, the Otways campaign argueably was the most successful Victorian grassroots forest campaign ever, with the Bracks Government eventually handing over 150,000 hectares of forests in 2005. It is odd that this victory is given such short attention in 'Cheap as Chips'.

The politically ambitious Greens Forest Spokesperson and failed upper house candidate, Marcus Ward then is given freeboard by Rod Anderson to do a 15 page rant on the plight of the Wombat Forest, including a complete uncontested hatchet job on Wombat Forest Society (WFS). (Marcus has long been viewed suspiciously by members of Forest Network after his unprovoked sledging of Friends of the Earth in front of 5000 people at the Victorian forest rally on May 18 2002. Marcus was also loosely involved with conservationists (including Doctors for Native Forests, a group supported by Dr Rod Anderson), in setting up an investigation of Wombat Forest Society in the late 90's by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. ASIC found nothing untoward about the financial management of WFS and one really has to wonder why supposed forest conservationists would stoop so low in 'dobbing in' another forest conservation group to government authorities. Did the Victorian Greens support these activities?)

Why was there no input into Ward's article from Wombat Forest Society whose members, Tim Anderson and Loris Duclos managed to get licenced sawlog volumes reduced by over 33% throughout Victoria in 2002? Loris was the instigator of determining that logging was occurring way above sustainable yield throughout Victoria and after crunching the figures for a year, managed to convince the Bracks Government that logging had to be reduced significantly across the state. No easy task! Two respected forest commentators (see below) have acknowledged the brilliant work done by Duclos and Anderson in unravelling these numbers however none of these references were sourced by Anderson in 'Cheap as Chips';

“For the record, the impetus for this new policy can largely be attributed to the modeling work of two community forest activists, Tim Anderson and Loris Duclos rather than existing monitoring and review processes. Though neither has formal expertise in the field of resource modeling, they produced statistical analysis which debunked the sustainable yield estimates of the government’s own departmental experts and external consultants, damaging the credibility of the Regional Forest Agreements in the process.” Nicastro 2003

“Loris Duclos and Tim Anderson of the Wombat Forest Society were crucial to these events in the 1990s by analysing wood resource estimates for the Wombat forests and throughout Victoria. Loris Duclos credits TFFTF (The Fight for the Forests) with providing the philosophical and analytical framework they used to unravel the complexities of forest management systems: Considerations such as overly optimist growth rates and standing volumes have been proven in the Wombat. The industrial models described by (TFFTF) in the early 70s have become a reality in the Wombat, both in terms of native forest and plantation logging. With the use of modern computers, WFS developed methods that can analyse forest management figures and demonstrate flawed as-sumptions in the industrial forestry model.” Penna 2003

This successful campaign strategy not only stoppd logging in key forest areas througout Victoria, it also led to the shutdown of close to 30 sawmills throughout Victoria, as the mills could not be guaranteed a supply of timber into the future. A massive achievment, yet Ward and Rod Anderson refuse to acknowledge any positive contribution from Wombat Forest Society at all. Why?

In 2006 Ward, applauded the closing down of the last small sawmill (Dwyers) in the Wombat Forest, yet each year, 500% more timber is being cut as firewood than what was being sawn by Dwyers from the Wombat. Why isn't Ward campaigning to shut down all firewood harvesting in the Wombat? The Dwyer sawmill was never a shareholder in the largest forest destroyer of the Wombat, Midways Pty Ltd who own the export woodchip mill at Geelong. Woodchipping of the Wombat went into overdrive in the early to mid 1990's after logging syndicates closely aligned with Midwys got access to the Wombat.

The remaining large sawmill in the region Black Forest Timbers, based at Woodend, which closed down in April 2007 (who were large shareholders of Midways), were being supplied by forests from the Central Highlands after being kicked out of the Wombat in 2005-7. Even Ward acknowledges this in the book, "Sadly, the victory is a hollow one. The solution has come at the cost of shifting the woodchipping and logging to other, and arguably more environmentally significant forests". Effectively Black Forest Timbers cut their own throat by profiting in the 1990's by the over sustainable logging of the Wombat.

It should also be noted that the Greens forest campaign in Victoria was initially set up only to support a no native forest logging agenda. Anyone not agreeing with this hypothesis was effectively not invited into the party, leaving people like Marcus to 'rule the roost' and people like Wombat Forest Society, FoE and many others as perpetual outsiders. Wither democracy and common sense? This black and white analysis of a complex problem also feeds paranoia amongst no native forest logging advocates who consider any form of native forest logging as being the arch enemy which must be eliminated at all costs. Any gradual reforms to the logging industry (including restoration forestry) are ultimately seen as failures by the NNFL elite who want the entire industry shut down immediately. With this as their ideological underpinning, anyone pushing for reform of the native forest industry, is immediately looked upon suspicially by NNFL advocates.

The real reason why WFS was targeted by Ward and others was that they were reformists who were not happy that the only option left for their community in regards of green forests policy was logging confined to pine plantations which were foreign owned and were also not being managed in an ecologically sustainable manner. The issue of community based forest management where a community takes control of logging based on what the forest can ecologically sustain, is a non event for Marcus and the Greens who by being locked into a plantations only ideology have effectively painted themselves into a limited corner. WFS did not want to be in such a corner.

Spargo plantation located around Korweinguboora Reservoir (Geelong's Water Supply) in the Wombat State Forest. Traces of hexazinone were recorded 50km downstream from this site after spraying by Hancock Victorian Plantations. Hexazinone was detected over a 31 month period between December 2004 and July 2007. Is this really the only solution to the logging debate that the Victorian Greens are supporting?

Vandana Shiva coined the phrase 'Monocultures of the Mind' and it is clear to this writer that this ideological framework is the dominant theory that has entrenched itself in forest campaigns in Australia since the early 1990's. First espoused by the Wilderness Society in 1990/91, Conservation Councils in 1993 and the ACF in 1996, this ideology has meant that it is wrong to criticise plantations in any shape or form (including aerial spraying of pesticides and water loss due to plantation establishment) because such criticism apparently undermines attempts to save native forests which according to NNFL advocates is the only supreme concern. The timing of such a blinkered approach could not have come at a better time for the plantation industry who in 1996 was given the go ahead to treble in size by the year 2020, when Federal and State Governments endorsed the 2020 plantation vision. Effectively then the 'big end of town of the conservation movement' remained mute as plantation companies embarked on what is probably the largest corporate land grab in Australia's history. The black and white forest analysis has failed dismally and people for decades to come will suffer from the impact of such short sighted policies.

Bluegum plantations being established in central Victoria. MIS schemes amount to Australia's largest ever corporate land grab.

After the Wombat piece, the 'Cheap as Chips' includes Doug Phillips giving a decent 12 page view on Cobbobooneee Forests, Box Ironbark gets 5 pages, EV does 3 pages on boycotts, Wendy Radford gets 3 pages on Doctors for Native forests (please don't mention pesticides in drinking water) and Lawyers for Forests get 3 pages.

Julie Constable makes for an overdetailed rave (46 pages!!!) on the Strzeleckis, whereas the main movers and shakers in the Strzeleckis, Friends of Gippsland Bush (FOGB) only get a couple of very small mentions. FoGB's non-appearance in the book is due to EV's (Rod Anderson) unintended? role of helping split FOGB members in a very torrid 1997 after an 8 point agreement was signed with Amcor and FoGB over logging 2000 hectares of land that Amcor wanted to clear to establish plantations. This agreement helped stop logging in almost 90% of the contested area, yet was attempted to be torn down by EV supporters in Gippsland and members of the infamous A-Team. See here for further details.

The book then closes off with chapter 7, a 44 page rant by Gavan McFadzean from the Wilderness Society (TWS). Gavan uses the book for all its worth pushing the historical importance of TWS in saving the world. For over 15 years (1990-2006), TWS were the main exponents of the NNFL ideology in Australia. The simple fact is that if you did not accept this ideology, you did not gain employment at TWS.

TWS are probably the second largest ENGO in Australia giving them considerable influence. Such influence also means a larger capacity to raise funds, and a larger capacity to employ people. By dominating the amount of employed staff in a notoriously under resoured area, such as forest conservation (where most blockading work has traditionally been done by volunteers), TWS more than any other group has the means at its disposal to spread its influence. This can be done by maintaining a funding base which assures that despite the fickle funding opportunities, TWS can maintain well paid workers who do not have to suffer the dole queues or time consuming employment opportunities which may be the only means of financial support that many forest volunteers 'enjoy'. This funding cushion in turn makes TWS staff more pliable to the demands of its own elites in the organisation and allows the TWS elite to 'outlast' concerned individuals outside of the TWS 'umbrella'.. TWS also uses the simple NNFL message to successfully get people donate to their cause.

Gavan saves his worst in 'Cheap as Chips; to discredit and undermine the work of OREN and WFS. Totally unethical behaviour knowing full well that this may well be the only history of the movement written. WFS is attacked because of their support of limited native forest logging and their influence with the Labor Party. Similarly, OREN's influence with Labor is also criticised, an influence McFadzean could only dream of.

McFadzean for years has endorsed the TWS position of no native forest logging, which in 2006 was overturned by TWS backing certification of native forest logging via the Forest Stewardship Council. This was done under the proviso that the State Government grant a new 960,000ha forest reserve. Forests outside of the reserve (possibly 500,000ha+) would then be theoretically managed under systems that were FSC certified. This meant TWS accepting FSC in an order to win a 'larger prize'. This policy backflip was of course not broadcast widely to the public but it was known amongst forest campaigners.

Therefore by late 2006 TWS were working from an acceptance of some native forest logging under an FSC model, a position that WFS had always supported. Ironically this is the very issue that McFadzean critically slams WFS for in 'Cheap as Chips'. One has to wonder why McFadzean did not include this interesting piece of history in 'Cheap as Chips' which was actually written after TWS's native forest logging policy backflip. Perhaps the editor would not have been amused.

It appears that McFadzean, by being so critical of OREN and WFS in 'Cheap as Chips' is attempting to shift blame from himself and the forest elite in their role in the 2002 Election Fiasco. OREN and WFS cut deals with the State Government in order to get what they wanted. OREN eventually won a large forest reserve in the Otway Ranges, whilst WFS managed to get sustainable yield sawlog rates cut across regions in Victoria. In 'Cheap as Chips' McFadzean heaves blame on these two organisations for giving the State Government an apparent easy way out in the lead up to the State Election over the issue of logging native forests, particularly in East Gippsand. By cutting deals, McFadzean argues, these organisations undermined efforts to protect forests in East Gippsland, particularly old growth forests.

During the lead up to the election the Bracks Government was willing to also cut a deal with the logging of old growth in East Gippsland. An offer was put on the table by the Government, which was basically a phase out of logging old growth in 5 or 6 years time, with immediate protection for thousands of hectares of old growth. The deal was not an immediate shut down of all logging of old growth forests and for this reason the supposed forest elite did not take up the offer. The decline was not broadcast widely around the forest movement. The forest elite responded to the Government claiming that the offer would have to include an immediate shut down of all old growth logging. The Bracks Government could in no way agree to such terms, due to union and worker pressure. Bracks probably considered the offer and found that it was politically unworkable. The deal therefore fell through. Since that time thousands of hectares of old growth forests earmarked for protection under the plan have been lost forever and continue to fall. To try and foist blame on WFS and OREN for this turn of events is simply bizarre.

2006: Strzelecki Ranges - College Creek. In May 2008, Gavan McFadzean from Wilderness Society effectively gave support for a plan to clearfell this site of National Conservation Significance.

McFadzean along with ACF in 2003 was also supportive of corporatisation of VicForests, the entity in charge of managing native forests in Victoria, a position far more extreme than that of WFS. It has been rumoured that McFadzean was also influential in lobbying the Environment Victoria CEO to shut down its long running forest campaign in 2003, because the then EV forest campaigner was contemplating a position more sympathetic to that of WFS and FoE (ie very limited native forest logging). More blunders from the TWS camp occurred in May 2008, when Victorian Environment Minister Gavan Jennings announced that 1500ha of rainforest reserve in the Strzelecki Ranges would be logged including sites of national conservation signifance. Wilderness Society supported the logging "The Wilderness Society (TWS) and the Victorian National Parks Association (VNPA) welcomed the deal. TWS campaigns manager Gavan McFadzean said without it, the Strzelecki Ranges were under threat from logging and woodchipping. "We are pleased to see the Victorian Government moving to protect native forests in the Strzelecki Ranges," he said. (Age 30/5/08)

Stevensons Falls Otway Ranges October 2007: 300 hectares of pine has been recently logged in this popular tourist destination which also supplies drinking water to 50,000 people in the State's south west. The pine has been replanted with bluegum which will be logged on rotations of 10-12 years. The water authority only tests for Simazine twice a year. What happens when it rains? Why do NNFL advocates remain silent about this?

These double standards and contradictions are not unusual in Victorian forest campaigns, some would argue that they have been the movement's greatest weakness, however to publicly attack a group in a supposed historic document, over supposed policy differences, when they were soon to be the similar policies being used by TWS as a matter of political expediency is a total disgrace. One has to wonder what the real intentions of these attacks are?

What value did Rod Anderson see in publishing contributions critical of groups that have successfully campaigned in their regions? Ward, McFadzean and Rod Anderson have actually done the movement a great disservice by using the book as a means of reinterpreting their narrow blinkered view of history. How will supporters of OREN and WFS view 'Cheap as Chips'. Not highly I would venture to say. Maybe in time someone will write a definitive history of the Victorian forest movement, but 'Cheap as Chips' definately is not it. 3/10.

Launceston's water supply being converted into plantation monocultures. One of the risks of pushing a pro-plantation mantra can be explained by this simple explantation. 1. Native Forests are good. 2. Logging Native Forests is bad. 3. Converting Native Forests to plantations is bad. 4. Plantations are good.

What this esstentially means is that once a native forest is converted to plantations, the plantations are regarded as being a good thing, because they supposedly lessen pressure to log native forests!? This feedback loop has backfired on the NNFL elite in Tasmania where full scale conversion of native forests to plantations has escalated since 1996. By promoting plantations in such a positive light, the fight against conversion has been made almost impossible.

Anthony Amis – Friends of the Earth Melbourne (March 2007 - Edited September 2007).