Hancocks

In 1998, the Kennett Government sold the assets of the Victorian Plantations Corporation. US based Hancocks were the winning bidder paying 550 million dollars for the VPC, its staff and perpetual leaehold over VPC managed public land. Hancock Victorian Plantations (HVP) is the Victorian branch of US based timber company, Hancock Timber Resource Group. The land that the VPC managed was transferred to HVP in the form of leaseholds. No environmental impact study was undertaken beforehand. In the Strzeleckis, this involved some 40,000 ha. of public land in the Strzeleckis, comprising:

Ex- VPC State Softwood plantations13166 ha. 

Ex- VPC native forestmis-labelled as plantation 6500 ha.

Ex- VPC unavailable native forest 19674 ha.

In 2002, HVP bought all of Amcor's freehold land (26,500 ha. of which is in the Strzeleckis) as well as the leashold to a further 8600 ha. of State Forest in the Strzeleckis that Amcor had been leasing since the 1960s.

Leased Strz. State Forest:

Ex - Amcor native forest and plantation 4500 ha. (approx.)

Ex -Amcor unavailable Native forest 4000 ha. (approx.)

Freehold:

Ex-Amcor Softwood plantations 11934 ha.

Ex-Amcoravailable native forest 2500 ha (approx.)

Ex-Amcor Native forest 12000 ha. (approx.)

In total, HVP manage around 48000 ha of Public land and around 26,500 ha. of Freehold land in the Strzeleckis.

Hancock Victorian Plantations support for the 'Cores and Links' reserve proposal.

Hancocks support the Strzelecki Working Group 'Cores and links' reserve proposal. The Proposal asks the Government to buy back licenced areas in the Cores and Links, and create a permanent reserve. In 2002, the Company promised a two year moratorium on logging in these areas, while negotiations with the Government took place. There has been no concrete outcome yet. In the May 2004 Strzelecki Working Group meeting, HVP announced its intention to begin logging in the Link areas in October 2004. It is important that the 'Cores and Links' be formally protected in reserves before logging takes place.

Native Forest in Private Hands -  Mountain Ash treated as plantation

There is public concern that native forest in the Strzelecki State Forest is being managed by a private company and that the status of their State Forest has been undermined by this privatisation.

The community is upset by the Government's bypassing of recommendations and commitments by allowing areas of reforestation and regenerated native forest after logging to be licensed for plantation use in the privatisation package.

7000 ha. of Strzelecki native Mountain Ash regrowth and reforestation had its native forest status stripped away, was re-labelled plantation and included in the States plantation privatisation package. To make this bad idea worse, 20,000 more hectares of native forest in and around these areas were also included in the package.No other State Forest has had its regrowth re-classified as plantation and in no other State Forest has so much native forest been given over to private management.

The highly contentious 7000 ha. included 50 years of regenerated logging coupes, and 50 years of reforestation ( native forest restoration). This issue is explained in detail, in ' The Strzelecki Ranges Reforestation Scheme' and 'Misclassification of Native Forest as plantation' LINK

Classifying these areas as plantation means forest can be cut frequently and replaced with any plantation species. As a result, young Mountain Ash forest is being cut and replaced with non-endemic Shining Gum and Blue Gum, at the rate of 450 ha/year from the leased Strzelecki State Forest. In 2003, HVP announced thier intention to increase these rates to 700 ha. a year. The focus has switched from 100 year rotation rates (the time allowed between harvestings) to 20-30 year rotation rates.

Locals are deeply disturbed at the loss of this young Mountain Ash forest, forest fragmentation, threats to rainforest and reduction in forest biodiversity.All native forest is at the least regionally significant in this depleted bioregion and should not be treated in this manner.

Softwood in the Strzeleckis is being cut at a rate of around 2000 ha. per year.

Code of Forest Practices (COFP)

As the land HVP lease is treated as if private land, the company operate under the section of the COFP which applies to private land which is less stringent than the Code for Public land. As the native vegetation they cut is mis-classified as plantation, the code is less stringent still.

Responsibility for policing logging was shifted to Shires.

HVPs reluctance to adopt recommended management prescriptions

The Strzelecki Ranges Biodiversity Study made recommendations for appropriate logging prescriptions to maintain biodiversity.

1.Retention of all native vegetation on custodial lands

2.Clear delineation of native vegetation on the ground to minimise disturbance from harvesting activities.

3.250 metre buffer no go zones around all Cool Temperate Rainforest Isolates

4.100 metre buffer no go zones around all Strzeleckis Warm Temperate Rainforest Isolates

5.Minimum buffers of 30 m. from centre of waterways, including the incorporation of a strip of the closest trees, which may widen some buffer zones beyond the 30 m. minimum level.

6.Drainage lines to have20 m. buffer strips, retaining trees.

7.A minimum buffer of 2000 m.around the Spot-tailed Quoll record

8.No harvesting onslopes over 25 degrees

9.The extension of gully strips to ridge lines and widening them to retain eucalypts

10. The planting of a mix of indigenous tree species, especially for koalas in large areas that have recently been harvested.

11.The planting of Mountain ash should be encouraged for any replanting.Hardwood areas should not be replaced by pine trees or any other non-indigenous species.

12. Tracks, etc need to avoid crossing areas of retained vegetation

13.If necessary, only minimal amounts of herbicide should be used in any coupe preparation works and spray drift must be avoided.Herbicides should be relatively non-residual.

The company has indicated they cannot comply with these recommendations, with the possible exception of Nos. 1, 2 and 12.

The areas wrongly leased as hardwood plantation must have their native forest status reinstated. The State should buy back the leaseholds over all these areas (7000 ha.), not just those within the cores and links. Along with this, management of up to 20,000 ha of leased Native Forest in the immediate vicinity should be returned to Public ownership and an appropriate amount incorporated into a formal public reserve. 

Public forest leases acquired by Hancocks from Amcor should also be reviewed. 

As long as their forestry practices are acceptable, the public should not have a problem with HVP owning 76000 ha. of freehold land across Gippsland or leasing 108,000 ha. of public pine plantations across the State. However, HVPs leasehold over 20,000 ha. of native forest and 7,000 ha. of native forest mis-classified as plantation will remain a social problem until rectified.

Some Native Forest is within pine plantations (possibly up to 5000 ha. in the Strzeleckis) and for reasons of practicality should continue under HVP management

Creating a large National Park in the Strzeleckis will now involve giving back a portion of the money Hancocks paid to the State Government, in order to buy out some of the leasehold and return it to the public domain for conservation.

Home