Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, , 3:35:51 to 3:42:58
Senators express concern that low site productivity might prevent the project from delivering expected carbon credits and timber outcomes, citing past failed schemes.
Topics: Forestry, Carbon farming, Climate change
Speakers: Hon Richard Colbeck, Guy Bursle, Matt Lowe, Unknown Speaker, Heather McGilvray
And and look kind of just to to add to your comments and to reflect on learning from past history um with um the MIS scheme. Senator, the support plantation establishment um program is primarily primarily there to assist with what was identified to us as as a key market kind of gap or failure
>> um with the establishment of plantations that I mean this this I have to say smacks of a desperation to get ac >> this project >> is so this that's my opinion and other others are happy to comment on that that's fine. I don't have a problem with that. But that's what this looks like. A desperation to get a lot of ACUs in the ground. There's a whole heap of Commonwealth money from a CFC perspective and also unfortunately um a double dipping through this program um to to actually achieve that. And I have to say my genuine concern is at the end of the day we don't get either the ACUE outcomes or the timber outcomes because of the productivity of this site. M >> so that's why I'm curious to understand how the process assessed it because I think it's important that we get what we're paying for both in terms of the ACUs and in terms of the timber at the end of the day. That's that's got to be the objective here because you're right, we need more trees in the ground, but they got to be right trees, right place, right scale. >> Yeah. And so this is where my concern comes from in terms of um this this um particular project
>> and senator we would wholeheartedly share your interest in the achieving the
objective. That's why I'm asking about >> and how it's demonstrated as part of the application given that the guidance says that they need to be >> in an econom e economically viable location for wood production and timber harvesting and processing and from that comes the
>> ACU and Senator as as as often the case in our discussions with you at estimates you've given us some certainly some things to reflect on we'll certainly take that on notice um and and come back
>> can I just clar So I took on notice where as my team's just sent through as part of the plantation management plan, there's a cover sheet that is signed off by the the accredited forester which includes a specific note uh in relation to the grant requirement uh that that you've identified that the forest sites are in an economically viable location for wood production, timber harvesting and processing. So there's a specific response that's endorsed by the forester um including for this project which is in the the plantation management plan cover sheet.
>> Okay. So what does that say? What does it say that productivity is expected to be off the site?
>> Bear with me. I mean I I don't think it's in that level of detail. I think the specific response uh says that the plantation forest sites are located within the Tasmania National Plantation Inventory Region and the Tasmania uh forestry hub. The plantation sites are generally gentle to moderate slopes and all can be conventionally harvested, i.e. groundbased and untethered. The plantation forest sites have direct access to public road networks and are within 150 kilometers of the key markets in Bell Bay, Scottsdale and Branson.
>> So it doesn't make any statements about what the productivity of the site is.
>> Uh it doesn't give specific numerical but it provides their professional assessment that they are economically
viable. So, so in your assessment, do you apply for example a question as to what the MAI of the site might be?
>> No, we don't.
>> Why not?
>> Uh, well, I think that the the requirement that I think we we wouldn't be seeking to second guessess the specific expertise that we've required of applicants uh through their uh accredited forester. Um, it's also not our kind of particular expertise. So, the program requires each project proponent to demonstrate that they have the skills and capability to establish and manage a plantation, including having sought specific advice about managing a plantation at the location of the project. And so we then rely on that qualified forers's uh professional opinion about
>> so how do you do without that without some demonstration of what or statement of what the MI might be as a part of the forest management plan. How do you assess that? >> because it goes back to the point that I
was making before. I I think we we rely on the view that's provided by the forester about the overall uh viability
>> and and senator I guess kind of just an an additional overlay is um we would anticipate that um the economic interest of the proponent to achieve a maximum return from the investment would also be a driver in relation to um their choice of site um and and their choice of um resources. that they choose to plant as well.
>> Okay. So, can we go to the assessment of the property that was done by the department in terms of it being suitable uh an ACU project which is part of the so the minister has a veto in terms of um of that process.
>> That's correct.
>> Was there an assessment done of the productivity of the property as a part
Um so there was certainly an assessment done um of of I guess agricultural production.
>> Yes, I've got both in the region >> which that was released as part of the
of >> the OPB. That's right. That's right.
>> I've got some but but I'm interested in the agricultural in the forestry productivity because that's part of the overall assessment. So you >> well as part of that document there's no mention of forestry at all. It just talks about um and I'll go to the summary. The propo the proponent reported and again we're just taking the proponent's word. Proponent reported an average livestock numbers is 1,800 dairy cattle and 300 3,300 meat cattle which have been used
colleague.
>> So sorry is as far as an actual assessment of what the property is capable of. >> Um what's what's happened in that sense?
>> Senator Heather McGilvray.