Dear Chairperson

I write to express my concerns about the Regional Forest Agreement Consultation Paper, and the process by which the West Victoria RFA has been developed.

Ideological issues

I have a fundamental conflict with the position from which the RFA has been developed – that forests are resources for human beings to exploit as they wish. I firmly believe that human beings are an integral part of the ecological fabric of the planet and that we must consider all other forms of life and respect their right to exist also. If this were the approach of the RFA I believe it would reflect a much greater priority for appropriate forest management (meaning that it not only protects but enhances the forest) rather than for sustainable management (meaning we will take as much as we can without totally destroying the forest).

Tiger Quoll

The West Victoria RFA does not take into account the implications of research into the endangered Tiger Quoll species whose habitat is in the Otways.

Hydrology and Water values vs. ‘timber’ values

Existing research by environmental groups and by the DNRE itself on the effects of clearfell logging in water catchment areas of the Otways has not been acknowledged in the paper. Estimates of ‘sustainable yield’ do not reflect recent information on the protection of catchment areas. Evidence provided at the Water forum in Geelong in December 99 overwhelmingly supported the value of water as outweighing the value of woodchips to the community. As a resident of Geelong currently enduring phase 2 water restrictions I am particularly concerned that catchment areas be totally free of logging activity as is the case for Melbourne’s catchment areas.

Inaccurate, incomplete information

Throughout the RFA consultation process it was revealed that the information on which this 20-year agreement would be based was inaccurate (whether this was in maps showing vegetation in the 1850’s that differed vastly from other sources or incomplete hydrology research). Other information is still incomplete. I cannot see how the DNRE is in a position to make any guarantees to the logging industry about timber available and still honour a commitment to the RFA being ecologically sustainable while this information is of such a poor standard.

My lack of faith in the process is further exacerbated by the approach of DNRE beauracrats who have noted concerns but give no indication or commitment that this information will influence the final agreement. I have devoted a significant amount of personal effort and time in order to participate in these consultations and have been left feeling quite hopeless about them.

RFA’s are logging industry driven

Ultimately my gravest concern is the biased approach of the West RFA in favour of logging interests and woodchipping interests. The agreements aren’t about conserving our forest so that future generations of people and all other life forms can benefit from them. The agreements exist to guarantee a resource for an industry that is short sighted, unsustainable and currently already subsidised by government. They do nothing to address the development of alternative industries that actually complement the forest.

If I had more time I would include more information in this submission but I have a full time job, which limits my ability to participate more fully in this consultation process.

I hope that you will consider my concerns in your deliberations about the Regional Forest Agreement.

Yours Faithfully,

Robyn Hodge