"Logged areas are immediately regenerated into new forest" MWP

Um, except when regeneration fails as it has at in Victoria.

"DSE’s Monitoring of Annual Harvesting Performance in Victoria’s State Forests 2007-08:

• 89% of coupes logged by VicForests are still outstanding and have not been handed back to DSE

• Over 7000 hectares of forests logged requires further treatment

• There are approximately 19,000 hectares overdue for stocking surveys

• there has been little progress in regards to reducing the large areas of outstanding backlog regeneration and ensuring coupes are regenerated and finalised by VicForests in a timely manner

• There is no current funding available to assist with completing regeneration activities associated with backlog regeneration

• Serious consideration and action must be taken to attempt to deal with this regeneration issue if DSE wish to ensure harvesting operations are carried out in a sustainable manner"

http://tinyurl.com/6z6eexf

And you have the cheek to accuse environmentalists of lying and providing misleading information! Glass houses Mark.

maaate

Well, you are getting a bit desperate, aren't you. Sigh ...... the intention is to regenerate immediately and action is taken to achieve it of which 89% of coupes are successfully regenerated at the first try. Stocking surveys reveal that the other 11% are identified as having insufficient regeneration and are prioritised for further work. Misleading? .... I don't think so.

Backlog in stocking surveys .... most of these would be just final confirmation of success after secondary treatment. Often stocking naturally increases over time, but need to confirm. Hardly a disaster, but I agree that there was a funding backlog 4 years ago.

MWPoynter

"Sigh .... mate, with all due respect, why can't you understand that logging does not reduce the area of land under forest? Logged areas are immediately regenerated into new forest - a one-year old stand of regrowth is still land under forest."

You are talking about plantation forests not encroachments into old growth, national parks and native forests, that have not previously been logged. And you have ignored the differences as regards biodiversity between continually logged plantations and native or old growth forests.

I don't deny we need forestry products and the issue of logging is about balancing the pressures growing populations and distribution and management of resources.

Do you hold equal concerns about the false information about environmental impacts by some timber companies? Read a bit more about the history of Gunn's and the pulp mill as regards to judicial and political proceedings to gain an insight into the integrity of some of these players. Any misrepresentation you claim by Green groups pales by comparison.

The reason why I react to these sorts of articles is there is no acknowledgment of the good Green groups do in ensuring the foresty industry does not run amok. Many of the concessions logging companies have made to improve management of forests and agreements to protect old growth (in some cases) are because of the actions of these 'greenies'.

Do you really think the logging industry would self-monitor in regard to environmental protection. History reveals this is highly unlikely.