FORESTRY ACT: REVOCATION OF DEDICATION
The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [10.17]: I move:
1. That, in accordance with the provisions of section 19 of the Forestry Act 1916, this House agrees to the revocation of the dedication of those areas of State forests indicated on the Schedule hereunder:
REVOCATION SCHEDULE
State Forest | SF. No. | Parish | County | Area (ha) (Approx.) | Portion | Purpose |
| Bondo | 967 | Garnet,
Goobarragandra | Buccleuch | 1,350 | Part | Addition to Kosciusko National Park |
| Micalong | 593 | Cooleman, Garnet, Nimbo | Buccleuch | 930 | Part | Addition to Kosciusko National Park |
| Yadboro | 974 | Burrill, Yadboro | St. Vincent | 1,700 | Part | Addition to Morton National Park |
| Yalwal | 643 | Buangla | St. Vincent | 1,550 | Part | Addition to Morton National Park |
| Bundella | 511 | Bundella | Pottinger | 2,347 | Whole | Part proposed Coolah Tops National Park |
| Warung | 457 | Cunna, Moan & Warung | Bligh | 7,140 | Part | Part proposed Coolah Tops National Park |
2. That the foregoing resolution be communicated by Address to His Excellency the Governor.
By leave, my speech in support of the motion for revocation will be incorporated in Hansard.
The procedure under which State forests, or parts of State forests may be revoked is set out in section 19 of the Forestry Act 1916. The section provides for the revocation by His Excellency the Governor, but it is first necessary that a resolution be passed by both Houses of Parliament that a revocation be effected.
The State forest dedications proposed to be revoked comprise part of five State forests and one whole forest, as listed in the schedule. Following revocation, these lands will be reserved as national park and some will be subsequently declared as additions to existing wilderness areas.
Some of the lands the Government proposes to reserve as national park involve State forest lands which have been declared to be national forests or that have been set apart as flora reserves under the provisions of the Forestry Act. The revocation of State forests declared to be national forests, and the revocation of flora reserves, can be effected only by an Act of Parliament, as provided by sections 19A and 25A(4) respectively of the Forestry Act. A bill providing for such revocations has been introduced during this session of Parliament.
As the honourable members are aware, in April of this year, seven new wilderness areas were declared, being Barrington, Budawang, Kanangra Boyd, Macleay Gorges, Werrikimbe, Goobarragandra and Warrazambil. Additions were also made to the existing Bimberi and Ettrema wilderness areas.
Although State forest lands adjoining those wilderness areas have been identified as wilderness by the National Parks and Wildlife Service, in keeping with the Government's forestry policy it is not intended to declare these lands as wilderness pending the conclusion of the interim assessment process.
However there are no impediments to the inclusion in the wilderness areas of non-productive or other State forest areas which may be inaccessible for logging, with the concurrence of State Forests of NSW.
Page 3328
The first four State forest areas listed in the schedule fall into this category, that is, they are generally non-productive, and State Forests of NSW has agreed to their addition to the national park estate as a first step towards their declaration as wilderness.
A substantial part of the first of these areas, being part of Bondo State Forest, for practical purposes is already national park. Following an agreement between the National Parks and Wildlife Service and State Forests dating back to the early seventies, the State forest lands south and west of Boundary Road have been regarded as national park.
The revocation of the remainder of Bondo State Forest west of Barnetts Road as well as the revocation of part of Micalong State Forest south of the Lower Tumut to Canberra electricity transmission line will result in a well defined boundary between the Goobarragandra wilderness and State forest lands. I may add that the final boundary of the State forest lands to be revoked was determined following consultation with State Forests of NSW.
The part of Yadboro and Yalwal State forests proposed for addition to Morton National Park will eventually be declared as part of the existing Budawang and Ettrema wilderness areas respectively.
These two State forest areas are a small part of the State forest lands which have been identified as wilderness by the National Parks and Wildlife Service. State Forests of NSW has agreed to the addition of these lands to Morton National Park.
The land within the last two State forest areas proposed to be revoked being the Bundella State Forest and part of the Warung State Forest are to be reserved as the Coolah Tops National Park.
The Government's pre election nature conservation strategy identified Coolah Tops as one of the new national parks that it would establish. The Bundella and Warung State forests and associated flora reserves form the core of the Coolah Tops National Park proposal.
The proposed park makes a significant contribution to the establishment of a comprehensive, adequate and representative reserve system within the Brigalow belt south bioregion. The proposal makes a contribution to comprehensiveness by including seven forest communities and swamps; adequacy by reserving a greater proportion of those vegetation communities which characterise Coolah Tops and support high fauna populations enhancing their viability; representativeness by incorporating flora and fauna communities which are currently poorly represented in existing reserves in the bioregion and NSW.
The Government recognises that the establishment of this national park will have an effect on the local timber industry. However, as has already been announced, we are prepared to compensate the mill owners at Haggerty and Morrison's Coolah sawmill. The Government is looking for 100 per cent re-employment for sawmill workers and will offer an unprecedented level of assistance to the owners and the six remaining mill workers.
Government support to those at the Coolah sawmill falls under the forest industry structural adjustment package. Assistance under that package includes:
•business exit assistance for the mill owners, which entails compensating the mill owner's business based on an independent assessment of value and profits prior to the Government policy's impact
•options for assistance to the six remaining workers include financial assistance with relocation to a new job, training and special redundancy payments
•jobs are still available with the National Parks and Wildlife Service and also under negotiation is alternative work with other employers in the region
•officers from the Government structural unit are working in conjunction with TRAIN, the forest industry training company, to coordinate assistance to the workers. A forest liaison officer from TRAIN is in constant contact with the workers, and he is negotiating on their behalf for future employment and training and is advising them about other types of assistance available.
The mill's foreman has already received a new foreman's position at the upper Hunter timber mill and he is eligible for financial assistance for his relocation costs.
The Government is committed to assisting those people affected by conservation decisions such as the creation of this new national park.
Mr President, I commend the motion to the House.
The Hon. D. F. MOPPETT [10.17]: I do not intend to take much of the House's time on this matter, as it is obvious that the House has made up its mind in relation to the overall move to reduce forest areas and create new national parks. It would be vexatious to call the House to divide on the motion at this stage. I shall, however, take a few minutes to say how much the Opposition regrets the substantial dislocation that has occurred in the forestry industry. I am very concerned about where the residents of New South Wales will source their timber supplies if we continue to erode the areas of useful forest that are available from our natural woodlands. It is not adequate to say that plantation forests will supply the needs of a nation such as Australia. Most honourable members would know that Australia imports a substantial amount of timber. I do not think I would be challenged in saying that Australia imports a billion dollars worth of timber.
It is important to recognise that in drawing timber from other areas of the world Australia is not pulling its weight, because it is not a country that can say that it is short of land resources and therefore ought to be able to draw renewable resources from other areas of the world that are better endowed. Obviously, there are areas of much greater population density than Australia. We cannot continue to dismantle the forest and timber industries in New South Wales and rely increasingly on imported timber to make up the gap. There are moves afoot to encourage timber plantation in New South Wales. However, I do not believe those moves are adequate.
Timber plantations should not entirely replace the natural timber that has been drawn from our forests over many years, which I believe in many cases improve the aesthetic and pure conservation values of our country - a matter often referred to by the Hon. I. Cohen. I am sure that the Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations, who listens intently to Opposition contributions and who has been particularly gracious in listening to me this
Page 3329
evening, would be aware that the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation recently completed a two-year study of forests in the northern part of New South Wales. The CSIRO, which employed 32 ecologists to conduct that study, could not establish a statistically reliable difference between the flora and fauna in logged forests and the flora and fauna in unlogged reserve areas. That has been put forward as the basis for the setting aside of many of these areas.
The Hon. I. Cohen often regales us with reasons for setting aside forest areas. The biodiversity in these areas is being threatened by continued harvesting. The CSIRO, the most renowned research organisation in this country, has clearly established that the effect of harvesting on biodiversity is not nearly as great as it is made out to be. In fact, in many cases it is not measurable. It is sad that substantial forest areas are being withdrawn. Many special areas in flora reserves that are managed by State Forests have been withdrawn. These areas, the pride of local districts, were valued as recreational areas by local people and as jewels by tourist industries. Whilst resources are being set aside in a physical sense, they are not being backed up with sufficient financial resources to ensure that the objectives that have been advocated by the Minister are met. I believe that this State and the people of New South Wales run the risk of falling between two stools.
The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations) [10.24], in reply: I acknowledge the arguments put by the Hon. D. F. Moppett and the appreciation he has of the issue. But, as he rightly recognises, the House has indicated by its support of earlier legislation that, in essence, it desires to take a particular course. I urge the House to take the same view in relation to this revocation motion.
Motion agreed to.