Listen to Phuong interview Lisa about the images of native forest, areas labelled as 'plantation' that look like native forest, and the need for proper 'pre-harvest condition' surveys to be done.
... or read the transcript below...
Overview
Lisa Barrand is a founding member of Gippsland Forest Guardians, a small but tenacious community group advocating for the native forests of the Strzelecki Ranges. She joined 3CR’s Tuesday Breakfast program to give an update on the group’s ongoing engagement with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) over a crucial interpretation of its certification standard — one that could determine whether logged native forests must be restored to their original condition, or whether they can be replanted with pine.
3CR: You’ve been on the program a few times now to talk about Fella's Coupe and the FSC process. Can you give listeners a quick summary of how we got to this point?
Lisa: The brief summary — you really need a very good dose of patience to engage with FSC processes. They are thorough, but they take a very long time. This all started about a year and a half ago with a complaint we made about Fella's Coupe, where areas that had been logged — native species forest — were proposed by Hancock Victoria Plantations to be replanted with pine trees. On our reading of the FSC standard, that was clearly not compliant. We made a complaint, and as a result the company asked the international body to interpret the wording of the standard. A nonconformance had already been issued, and since then there’ve been two rounds of draft interpretations and extensive consultation. Here we are today.
3CR: This all hinges on Principle 10.1 of the FSC Australian Standard, which says harvested areas shall be regenerated to ‘pre-harvest or more natural conditions.’ Why is that wording so significant?
Lisa: In simple terms, 10.1 says: if you have a native forest — (with) complex diversity, different structures, different composition — once it’s logged, you regenerate it back to what it was before. Don’t make it any worse than when you took it over, and ideally make it better. That’s the ‘more natural’ part. Do not degrade forests any further. That’s the critical point, and that’s why we sent an email directly to the FSC board — because we felt a decision on the second draft was imminent. We wanted them to really see what’s at stake. So we sent them a bunch of photos. I’ve put those photos on the front page of our website if your listeners want to have a look.
3CR: Why was it so important for the board to see photos, not just the written submissions?
Lisa: That was actually the question I put to the board: what do you see when you look at these? The first couple of photos show what native forest actually looks like in the Strzeleckis — multi-species, multi-age, mountain ash, blackwoods, messmates, understorey and all. They were taken on private protected land and local reserves, so we know it’s genuinely native forest. The next couple of photos look almost identical - and you shouldn’t have to be a scientist or ecologist to understand this — but they are photos of coupes managed by Hancock that have been labelled as plantation. The point is: even if something’s labelled ‘plantation’ or ‘native forest,’ you have to look at it first to understand what it actually is. The label isn’t the reality.
3CR: For a lot of listeners, the FSC submissions can be quite dense. Why does the exact wording of something like this matter so much?
Lisa: It’s a rule book. And when you have a rule book, it has to be written really well — for two reasons. First, when a company seeks FSC certification, an independent auditor takes that rule book, looks at their operations, and gives them a tick or a cross. If there’s any wriggle room, any confusion or uncertainty, that creates problems. Auditors honestly want very clear rules. Second, if the rules aren’t clear, it creates problems for stakeholders like us — and for investors who need to be sure a company is actually complying. Principle 10.1 has been in the standard for at least ten years, and in our view it hasn’t been complied with. Getting this interpretation right is critically important.
3CR: So what are the next steps now that submissions have closed?
Lisa: What I actually anticipate is a third round of consultation, because feedback on the second draft revealed there are significant problems with it. We’re working to advocate for a new version that does two things. First, it must require regeneration for all certified areas under the FSC scheme — regardless of whether they’re labelled native forest or plantation. And second, it must require a pre-harvest condition assessment for all certified lands. Because if we don’t know what was there before, how can auditors ever be sure it’s been properly regenerated?
Before wrapping up, Lisa shared a field recording from one of the creek gullies the Gippsland Forest Guardians are working to protect. She described a group of Year 12 students visiting the site, one of whom lay across the creek and drank directly from the water — a moment she described as “fulfilling his life long dream.”
"These little creeks tinkle away all year. Beautiful, clear water filtered through the rainforest. I thought it would bring some peace to your listeners this morning.