High Court logging appeal decision a game changer

The brilliant Sue Arnold’s article in April was a rare source of joy for conservationists in these dark times, and was greatly appreciated by IA’s large and principled readership.

*****

Conservation groups can now appeal Forestry Board decisions… and the list of concerns is long. Sue Arnold reports.

A NEW SUPREME COURT dismissal An appeal by the NSW Forestry Corporation (FCNSW) has been celebrated by many conservation organizations.

The objection may be filed by the Company only by government agencies as defined in Clause 2. Forestry Act 2012can initiate proceedings against them. “Government bodies” means the NSW Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Which monitors Forestry operations and enforcement.

There is no legal regulation within the scope of the law. Forestry Law This will force the EPA to take action against the NSW Forestry Agency after conservation groups presented evidence of non-compliance and sought sanctions.

Decision reigned HE:

‘Unless there is a clear and unmistakable legal intention to the contrary, the action may be commenced and maintained by a person whose private rights are affected or who has a special interest in the subject matter of the action.’

Prior to the court’s dismissal, any legal attempt to appear as a plaintiff and sue the Company for failure to comply with the provisions of the registration legislation was difficult, fraught with conflicting decisions and lacked clear guidelines.

a decision about on foot requirements are at the discretion of the Court.

While it is encouraging that the highest court in the land has affirmed some form of rights for public citizens, attempts by the Corporation to suppress the democratic rights of public citizens raise significant issues.

Since it is a state-owned company, it is subject to the following conditions: State-Owned Companies Act 1989.

Some of the main purposes of a state-owned company according to this legislation are:

..exhibiting a sense of social responsibility by considering the interests of the society in which it operates, and

..to carry out its activities in accordance with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, where its activities affect the environment. chapter 6 (2) Protection of Protection Environmental Management Act 1991.

The record shows that these goals make little sense in light of the Company’s ongoing attempt to censor public protests and legal challenges to its destructive practices.

Let’s put the evidence in perspective.

according to Nature Conservation CouncilThe company faces an $18 million fine in 2022 for destroying habitat, giant trees and hollow trees. This was the fifth fine imposed by the courts in four weeks at the time.

The company will operate in 2024 fine $360,000 to fell 53 eucalyptus trees on the NSW South Coast. This was a violation of the conditions put in place by the Environmental Protection Agency. Coastal Integrated Operations ApprovalThis is the state’s legal approval for industrial logging.

It was in 2025 fine $30,000 for failure to protect critical habitat in a state forest near Coffs Harbour.

These penalties are just the tip of the iceberg. Although hundreds of complaints and evidence of non-compliance were submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency, no action or sanctions were taken. IA. Many conservation and community organizations are aware that comprehensive non-compliance lists are ignored by the Environmental Protection Authority.

Professor Graeme SamuelIndependent review of Australia’s federal environmental laws, in question Ongoing breaches by the NSW Forestry Corporation despite Environmental Protection Authority enforcement have revealed an ingrained culture of non-compliance within the logging agency.

HE in question Changing the culture and attitude required action from the top: from the relevant ministers and the prime minister.

This is unlikely to happen anytime soon. Politically, indigenous forests and biodiversity losses are rife.

A. Government led by Leader of the Opposition Peter Dutton It will not support additional bans on indigenous forestry, will not introduce a “country of origin” label for timber, and will remove all public funding from disputed areas Environmental Defenders Office.

The Australian forest industry has confirmed that the Dutton coalition government will not support further bans on native forestry and will not ensure the continuation of forestry managed and regulated timber harvesting. to create permanent timber production areas.

Welcoming the commitments, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) chief Executive Officer Tim Lester in question:

These policies will provide much-needed certainty for businesses, hundreds of communities and tens of thousands of workers. Production forestry from our regrowing local property is sustainable and renewable, producing positive outcomes for communities and the environment.

Australia’s native forest industry is safe (for now) Anthony AlbaneseThe Prime Minister of the country refused Tanya Plibersekenvironment minister and canceled last-minute talks to reach a deal Nature Positive Laws before the Christmas parliamentary closure period.

Dutton’s forest policies stand in stark contrast to the top NSW Liberals’ efforts in 2023. to call Support from the Government of Albania to obtain carbon credits from stopping logging in state forests.

The Liberal Party plan included commissioning Border Economy Examining how the cost of reducing logging by 20% in southern NSW forests could be offset by the resulting carbon credits.

Accordingly GuardThe funds will provide:

‘…provides major ecological benefits for species such as koalas, greater gliders and other threatened species, as well as significant economic benefits for regional Australia.’

What Minister of Environment Tanya Plibersek nor the Minister of Climate Change Chris Bowen Responded to liberals’ demand

In any case, National Party predictably blocked the Liberals’ plan to end native forest logging.

There is no indication yet that the future Albanian Government will do anything to stop native forest logging or the ongoing devastating loss of forest fauna.

Instead the Albanian Government invest The future of the forestry industry is 300 million dollars. Translated, this means more logging, more loss of native forests, koalas, gliders, possums, birds, ecosystems and eucalyptus; It’s a long list.

Greens to have in question:

‘Native forest logging must be stopped to ensure the immediate protection of forest ecosystems. repeal Regional Forest Agreements and that forestry activities be treated the same as other activities under environmental law.’

Australian Conservation Foundation Despite political promises to protect the species, it has been revealed that approximately 2 million hectares of koala habitat have been destroyed since 2011.

Meanwhile, Government of NSW Minns continues ignore public protest, scientific research and Labor’s promise Big Koala National Park. I approve instead logging In koala centers that need to be protected, if any park is actually declared it is guaranteed to be a skeleton. Evidence of political lies.

Both major parties have zero interest in the environment, they make false promises and are willing to deliver. to approve Extinction of Australia’s iconic and unique species as the price of re-election.

Australia holds the record for the largest number of mammals extinctions globally since the colonization of Europe. 35% of global mammal extinctions since 1500 have occurred in Australia. Almost 90% of terrestrial species are found only in Australia.

And are people just worried about Donald Trump?