STT's desecration continues

 

The desecration continues. Another 20 hectares, this time in the iconic Dial Range on Tasmania’s Central Coast has been earmarked for clear-felling by Sustainable Timber Tasmania STT later this year.

The projected yield will only be 5,100 tonnes. The age of the coupe is unknown but if its producing Cat 1 sawlogs it’s likely to be at least 60 years old.

Which make the growth rate about four tonnes per hectare per year. To get this into perspective, plantations grow four to five times faster and produce superior woodchips.

Of the estimated harvest 3,700 tonnes will go straight to the woodchipper, with the balance of 1,400 tonnes comprising various categories of sawlogs and peeler logs for Ta Ann taking a more circuitous route. At best 30 per cent may end up as a timber product with the rest resuming their journey to the chipper before deportation.

For every tonne that’s taken off site, native forest operations usually leaves as much again on the forest floor.

This is what the estimated cash profit & loss statement for the Dial Range coupe looks like:

Parameters
Area of coupe (hectares)	20
Harvest estimate (tonnes)	5,100
Harvest per ha (tonnes)	255
Profit & loss statement $'000
Proceeds	420
Harvest & cartage	255
Road costs	20
Replanting costs	30
Wages & overheads	127
Cash loss	-12

Notes:

1.    Proceeds based the prices (the high price scenario) in BluePrint Institute’s paper on alternate land use options for Tasmanian native forests https://www.blueprintinstitute.org.au/seeing_the_forest_for_the_trees 

2.     Harvest and cartage costs $50 per tonne.

3.     Road costs $1,000 per hectare.

4.     Replanting $1,500 per hectare.

5.     Wages and overheads $25 per tonne.

The above follows the pattern observed in STT financial statements. In 2022/23 STT produced cash operating losses before roading costs which it still treats as capital outlays.

It’s what enables STT to pretend it’s sustainable, by overlooking some costs when reporting a profit outcome.

Overlooking some costs when estimating future harvest proceeds is what enables STT to include the value of native forest as an asset, when the incontrovertible evidence is that native forest harvesting produces cash losses and hence STT should record its native forests as a liability.

STT Chaiman Rob de Fegely also happens to be a director of the State-owned Forestry Corporation of NSW (FC) which manages a hardwood estate of comparable size to STT with approximately 1.8 million hectares of multiple-use native forest and 34,000 hectares of hardwood plantations. Hardwood assets have been fully impaired, and the tree crop value is not recognised in the financial statements for the simple reason that it won’t yield future profits. The only trees recognised with value is FC’s much larger softwood plantation estate. Tasmania continues to pretend to be the only State with a sustainable native forest industry. How much longer will we keep deluding ourselves?

Like an iceberg most of the losses from native forest harvesting are underwater. The above water bit is the bogus profit figure. Below the waterline are the cash losses as set out above, all the unrecorded non-timber losses whenever a native forest is clear-felled (environmental, water catchment, habitat loss etc,) and the loss of opportunities that flow from leaving native forests in situ.