But the reality is such celebrations are premature. We don\u2019t have all the details of the new standards, or know how they will be enforced and monitored.<\/p>\n
Business as usual?<\/p>\n
Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt has told the forestry industry, including in Tasmania, that native forest operations will continue as usual. In an interview with ABC Radio Hobart<\/a>, he said the changes keep day-to-day forestry approvals with the state government, but introduce stronger federal oversight. <\/p>\n If that is the case, the logging of habitat for endangered species, such as the swift parrot<\/a>, will continue, pushing these species closer to extinction. The Tasmanian government has shown no signs of willingness to change its current approach<\/a>. <\/p>\n And if \u201cbusiness as usual\u201d logging persists, the environment reforms will fall far short of what Australia\u2019s forests \u2013 and their plants and animals \u2013 need.<\/p>\n Uncertain standards<\/p>\n We don\u2019t yet know what the national forestry standards will contain. But the draft standards for some threatened and endangered forest species aren\u2019t enough to arrest ongoing declines, based on drafts I\u2019ve seen that are yet to be publicly released. <\/p>\n Crucially, we can\u2019t meet the habitat requirements for many forest-dependent species by simply replanting previously cleared land. This is because the trees in replanted forests won\u2019t be mature for several hundred years. Many forest-dwelling species live in holes and hollows that occur only in mature trees<\/a>. <\/p>\n In other words, allowing loggers to \u201coffset\u201d the forests they damage by replanting other areas is broadly impossible. This reinforces longstanding concerns<\/a> about the limitations of biodiversity offsets as a way to conserve endangered forests and animals.<\/p>\n Swift parrots are fast-flying migratory parrots. They are critically endangered, partly because the forests they nest in are being logged. Industry pushback<\/p>\n Parts of the forest industry are already seeking to rebrand damaging practices such as mechanical thinning<\/a> (the removal of large numbers of trees), as forms of so-called \u201cactive management<\/a>\u201d to create healthy forests. <\/p>\n The Australian government\u2019s Timber Fibre Strategy<\/a> makes extensive reference to the use of \u201cactive management\u201d. However, the scientific evidence shows the opposite<\/a>: such activities can degrade forest structure (by removing key understorey vegetation), facilitate the invasion of weed species, and undermine the ecological integrity<\/a> of forests. <\/p>\n Different forests<\/p>\n Australia has a vast range of different forest types, and many support a variety of animals and plants threatened by forestry<\/a> operations<\/a>. <\/p>\n Effective national standards therefore need to be detailed and sophisticated to deal with such complexity. This will take considerable time to design. And it\u2019s possible each species and forest type will need a different set of standards. <\/p>\n These will need to account not only for the direct impacts of logging \u2013 such as the death of animals<\/a> when their habitat trees are felled \u2013 but also indirect impacts. For example, logging can increase fire risk<\/a>, promote the spread of weeds and feral animals into disturbed areas<\/a>, and trigger long-term changes in vegetation structure. <\/p>\n Developing national standards is only part of the challenge. Implementing them will demand significant new resources, as well as robust monitoring<\/a> to ensure governments and logging contractors actually stick to the rules. <\/p>\n Better recovery<\/p>\n Many of Australia\u2019s threatened species don\u2019t have up-to-date recovery plans that will guide the best way to prevent their extinction<\/a>. And when plans do exist, there is often a lack of resourcing<\/a> to put them into action. <\/p>\n Without substantial investment, many plants and animals will fall between the cracks, and these new environmental standards will not deliver the change so desperately needed. They must be matched with careful monitoring of species in forests and properly-funded plans for their recovery. <\/p>\n A simple solution<\/p>\n There is a straightforward way to avoid the ecological, administrative, and financial problems created by native forest logging \u2013 stop it altogether. <\/p>\n The evidence shows ending native forest logging would deliver significant benefits for biodiversity, forest ecosystems<\/a>, and reduce fire risks<\/a>. <\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/file-20251208-64-37qser.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n
\n Thirdsilencenature\/Flickr<\/a>, CC BY-ND<\/a><\/p>\n