Following a storm of criticism of DELWP's draft revision of the Code of Forest Practice, Minister D'Ambrosio has today (23 Sept) announced the abandonment of the Stage 1 review. RFPG warmly appreciates Minister D'Ambrosio's very sensible decision.

The proposed revision of the Code stemmed from the October 2018 report of the Independent Review of Timber Harvesting Regulation. In Recommendation 10 the Independent Review advised of the need to improve existing regulatory tools including through of Practice for Timber Production 2014 (the Code). Where there is any disagreement on interpretation, the Review recommended that DELWP should engage expert and/or legal advice to develop guidance. 

In a letter dated 31 May 2019 the Minister D'Ambrosio advised that the review of the Code would take place in two stages and that 

Stage 1 of the Code review will primarily focus on clarifying roles and responsibilities, clearly stating purpose, scope and the intent of the instrument, and correcting administrative errors. It may also include any relevant regulatory measures announced by government, such as the protection of large trees from timber harvesting. I am pleased to advise that public consultation on these proposed changes will commence in July and will provide an opportunity to develop a common  understanding of the Code.

Subsequent to the above process, stage 2 of the Code review will commence in 2020 to provide a more comprehensive review based on new scientific evidence, information and findings from the RFA forest value assessments, and broader regulatory and forest management planning reviews.

DELWP's proposals for the first stage revision were published on the Engage Victoria website on 29 August with public comment closing on 29 September. 

RFPG was one of 14 forest conservation groups who signed on to a joint letter arguing that the proposals in DELWP's draft Stage 1 revision are so flawed that they should be withdrawn. The 14 groups argue that there had been none of the promised public consultation to develop a common understanding and the proposed reforms suggested that the Department had seized the opportunity to strip away key protections contained in the Code. The group's letter highlighted a range of key protections included in the Planning Standards (Appendix 5 to the Management Standards and Procedures) which DELWP was proposing to remove.

These habitat and ecosystem rules are critical to the legally effective protection of forest wildlife and habitats and the integrity of our reserve system. Yet in total, the proposed revision deletes from the Code more than 400 specific protection rules that currently apply to conserve Victoria’s threatened fauna habitat, ecosystems, historic and recreation sites across the landscape.

In a subsequent meeting with officers of DELWP's policy and planning branch, forest conservation organisations were told that the Planning Standards had been removed from the draft revised code as part of a move to more 'flexible regulation'. The protections which are mandatory while they are included in the Management Standards and Procedures were to be promulgated in a less formal vehicle so that changes could be introduced more easily when needed. The forest conservation groups at the meeting advised that such a move to more flexible regulation was unacceptable given the State Government's support for saturation logging of Victoria's native forests, its record of weakening of regulatory provisions, and its failure to enforce the existing provisions of the Code. 

RFPG wrote to the Minister separately, highlighting some of the proposed revisions which appeared to be directed at removing the provisions on which many of our breach reports have been based. RFPG has challenged logging in a number of coupes on the grounds that the inclusion of those coupes in VicForests' Timber Release Plan (TRP) runs counter to the obligation spelled out in Section 2.1.1 of the Code.

DELWP has repeatedly refused to accept allegations that this provision is breached by including particularly sensitive coupes on VicForests' timber release plan (TRP). Their position has been that Section 2.1.1 is to be solely implemented through forest zoning decisions and that it does not apply to the TRP. Far from engaging with stakeholders or seeking the advice of independent experts DELWP is proposing instead to simply remove the obligation to abide by this section.

The proposed removal of section 2.1 stands in stark contrast with DELWP’s failure to correct the lack of a Code definition of ‘retained vegetation’, a problem that RFPG has repeatedly raised with DELWP. When we have alleged illegal coupe aggregates because of ultrathin buffers or buffers which are burnt or blow over, DELWP has relied on the lack of a definition of 'retained vegetation' to argue that dead trees or shrubs are still 'retained vegetation'.

For more background see RFPG's one page overview of forest regulation in Victoria and one page map of recent initiatives on forest policy.  See also RFPG's recent research report, RFPG research exposes looming threat to biodiversity.