A retirement village in a national park sounds pretty good to me. Therefore a lot of Tasmanian locals actually support the Greens vision. As to those who don't I'd ask how long can you expect to keep chopping down 400 year old trees? The loggers essentially had the 20th century to switch from old growth to plantation yet they failed to see the writing on the wall.

The thinking behind a wood fired power station is flawed. For starters it relies on massive amounts of diesel to transport the wood waste. Ideally the ash should be spread back on the forest floor to conserve nutrients. If that generates a carbon credit under some strange reasoning there's really no point if it excuses more coal burning. Alternatively if the trees and litter simply fall to the ground the average amount of stored carbon is much higher.

Here's another point about old growth logging; tourists hate it. It's not only unsustainable but it harms other industries. The only future for forestry is growing plantation timber on former sheep paddocks.

I often wonder what Tasmania will be like once the logging stops, and all the logging and forestry industry disappear.

It must be great for the folks down there, who know that regardless of what happens, they have income from taxation from the rest of Australia to sustain them.

Of course, there will be all those wonderful new green jobs available, just around the corner, any minute now.

Hospitality industry, yes, a little, but most people want to go somewhere warmer not colder unless you're hardy bush-walker type. Do they really think that if logging is stopped, it will bring tourists?

It would be great to see Tasmania prosperous, but it just seems to be spiraling into a depressing place, obsessed with itself but unable to fund itself any longer.

A retirement home, sure, I can just see all the greenie eco types staying once the gravy train ends.

I grew up in the Mid North Coast of NSW where land grants were given for agriculture at the same time as the Timber industry were clear felling the areas. My father farmed there for several years as did my uncle nearby. If you return there today the whole area is dense rainforest that supports the hardwood timber and building industries. New growth forests absorbs huge amounts of CO2 and is totally sustainable.

Just 14 years ago I was involved on a private farm on John's River where 60 hectare of land was replanted to hardwood. Timber is a regrowth industry, hugging 400 year old trees is not sustainable, and is merely an attempt to destroy a local economic industry.

Using the dubious Q & A program from Tasmania as a “snap shot of what Tasmanians think” is really quite humorous.
The program is so preloaded with only questions that are “sound” being allowed and the audience is chosen for the reaction that is required by the ABC.
The next thing will be a demand that the results of the Audience reaction are used to define future policy.
Re the trial ling by FT of Biomass for power, well it is obvious to blind Freddy that once the idea is accepted, it will be open slather for any tree growing to be used for power generation as a “renewable energy source”
FT would be ecstatic with this and would cheerfully forget all about chipping and saw logs so they could concentrate on clear felling everything for this new source of income.
Sorry to be such a wet blanket Mark but the business as usual for the Forest is just not an option.
There is no, way that it can continue with now arrived peak oil limiting the economic operations of the present FT practice.
That is apart from the continuing and worsening GFC.

I wonder what the rest of Australia will be like after the big mining boom fades away?
It must be great for the folks who live in non-mining areas and cities, who know that regardless of what happens, they have income from the taxation of the miners to sustain them.
Of course all those wonderful new green jobs, providing food for the mainland where there will be very little water and less topsoil will be just around the corner.
Hospitality industry, yes a little but that will go for all of the rest of Australia after peak oil hits and the GFC squeezes harder.

Here's a bright idea- why don't you actually ask the locals what they want (referendum), instead of assuming that deep down what they want is what the Institute of Foresters of Australia wants?