The Australian Forest Products Association (AFPA) is urging the Federal Government to withdraw support for the NSW Government’s proposed Improved Native Forest Management in Multiple-use Public Forests (INFM) method. Chief Executive of the AFPA Diana Hallam said the proposed method clearly fails to meet integrity standards.
“There are serious questions over the validity and integrity of the INFM method proposed by the NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (NSW DCCEEW). The ACCU Scheme should not be hijacked to fund government projects at the cost of realising genuine carbon abatement,” Diana Hallam said.
“We are calling on the Federal Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Chris Bowen to ask the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee (ERAC) to review how the INFM method satisfies integrity standards, including additionality, scale of abatement and adverse environmental and economic impacts.”
Diana Hallam said the proposed INFM method has expanded to include Tasmania and Queensland.
“The proposed INFM method requires a national cessation of native forestry operations and is not compatible with government commitments to support our sustainable native forestry industry.
“If a carbon method incentivising the cessation of native forestry operations is rejected by states practicing sustainable native forestry, as expected, it risks undermining the integrity of the carbon abatement scheme as a whole.”
AFPA was extremely surprised to see the INFM method recommended for further development at the expense of Forestry Australia’s Enhancing Native Forest Resilience method, which was developed by forest scientists, focuses on improved forest health through active forest management and was assessed by the ERAC as having ‘excellent alignment with Offsets Integrity Standards’. In contrast, the INFM method, developed by consultants, was only assessed with ‘potential’ to meet the same standards.
There is an increasing body of evidence that shows forests managed for production provide the greatest ongoing greenhouse gas benefits. In other words, the carbon benefits accruing from forests that are harvested and managed are greater than forests that are conserved or locked up because growing trees sequester carbon at a greater rate than mature ones, and harvested timber continues to store carbon long after it has been removed from the forest.
“Carbon methods with strong integrity are needed to ensure active forest management reaches its climate change fighting potential for Australia and the world,” Diana Hallam said.
“I urge the Federal Government to scrutinise ERAC’s decision-making processes and reverse its decision to develop the INFM method. Australia’s abatement ambitions can be realised if we understand and accept the science that managed native forests support the climate, communities and the economy.
“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has acknowledged this science. That ERAC has not, suggests Australia’s abatement ambitions are being sacrificed in the pursuit of ideology or politics,” Diana Hallam concluded.