The native forest hardwood timber
industry argues that ‘downstream’
benefits should be taken into account when looking at the economic contribution
of the industry. This argument is not valid when comparing timber and water
values.
- The argument is
that hardwood logging, sawmilling and woodchipping have ‘multiplier’
effects by indirectly creating other jobs (and economic value) generally,
and by creating downstream value-adding industries
- However, the availability
of additional water, as a result of not logging, is likely to have equally
large (or greater) multiplier effects:
- water is already
a scarce resource in the region
- industries with
large growth potential such as tourism are water-intensive
- Further, there
appear to be no significant value adding activities in the region based
on hardwood logging
- only 6% of the
logs taken from the Otway forest currently end up as furniture-grade
timber (B+). Most timber is sold ‘green’ for low value-added applications
where there is an increasing number of substitute materials (e.g.
pallets)
- There appear
to be no significant local industries based on the further processing
of hardwood (e.g. furniture production)
|
