'Saving' Australia’s forests for carbon - valid science or 'green' activism?

• June 5: Australian Greens media release - Greens in vigorous pursuit of forests solution in climate change - announces that Senator Bob Brown has “… explained to the PM, in detail, the latest research from the ANU showing that carbon emissions from logging native forests in NSW, Victoria, and Tasmania could be more than ten times above government estimates”.
   
• June 16: Senator Brown signifies his intention to move that the Senate:
  (a) notes the findings of Professor Brendan Mackey, Professor David Lindenmayer and Dr Heather Keith of the Australian National University that Victoria’s Eucalyptus regnans (mountain ash) forests are the most carbon dense on Earth; and
  (b) calls on the Government to inform the Senate by 24 June 2009:
  •  whether the report has validity,
  •  what government measures are being taken or considered to protect Eucalyptus regnans forests in Australia that are currently targeted for logging,
  •  what area and volume of such forests are available for logging under current planning regimes, and
  •  whether ending native forest and woodland removal in Australia would reduce the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions by 10 to 20 per cent.
   
• June 16: ANU Media Release - Australia home to forest carbon winner - announces that Victoria’s Central Highlands are the most carbon-dense forests in the world according to a paper by Dr Keith, Professor Mackey and Professor Lindenmayer published in the US-based Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
   
• June 16: an article appears in Melbourne’s The Age newspaper - “Mountain ash the best for carbon” - referring to the Keith et al paper;
   
• June 16: Professor Mackey is interviewed on ABC radio’s AM program. The program includes a supporting interview with Dr James Watson, University of Queensland. Dr Watson was formerly a key figure in the Wilderness Society and is thought to have played a role in obtaining funding for the forest carbon research.
   
• June 16: an article in the Brisbane Times extensively quotes Wilderness Society campaigner, Virginia Young, who believes that the latest ANU research outlines “a huge opportunity for the government to help solve the climate problem through protecting and restoring native forests”.
   
• June 22: The Wilderness Society’s Gavan McFadzean has an 800-word opinion piece published in Melbourne’s The Age newspaper - “Preserving old growth forests is vital to saving the planet” - which draws extensively on the ANU research.
   
• June 24: Professor Mackey, Dr Keith, and Professor Lindenmayer conduct a public lecture at ANU to explain their latest research.
   
• June 24: the ANU paper so extensively promoted in the media since June 16 is finally published online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
   
• June 25: the Senate defers a vote on the introduction of an emissions trading scheme until August.
   
• July 1: an article written jointly by Wilderness Society campaigner, Amelia Young, and the Australian Youth Climate Coalition’s, Lucy Manne, appears in On Line Opinion - “Forests - the essential climate fix”.

It is a concern that the ANU’s latest forest carbon research paper was for most of the time unpublished while its findings were being promoted as published fact in the media. This raises the question of whether this is a deliberate ploy to stifle debate by denying critics (and journalists) the opportunity to examine the veracity of the science.

It is also curious that the paper was published only during June 2009, despite being received by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences almost a year earlier. In light of earlier events, this raises suspicions about whether publication was delayed at the behest of the authors to fit the Wilderness Society’s campaign requirements.

Superficially, it may seem reasonable to cease timber production by placing all forests in national parks so they can grow old and store maximum levels of carbon. However, when considered in context with the natural prevalence of bushfire and the carbon-value of wood products, it would be counter-productive to the effort to mitigate climate change.

It had been hoped that the 2009 “Black Saturday” bushfires would finally show environmental activists that fire - not timber harvesting and regeneration - is the ultimate arbiter of Australia's forests. Sadly, their forest carbon campaign shows they have learnt nothing.