Recent logging of Forest Coupe 892/522/13 at Dingo Creek on the Errinundra Plateau in East Gippsland demonstrates that current logging practices are illegal.
The logging operation has destroyed Powerful Owl habitat, ancient old-growth forests, Site of Significance values, National Estate Values, failed to protect rainforest and claims to be "Special Management".
The practice of clearing the entire logging area without retaining adequate habitat trees or understorey elements kills resident fauna and permanently removes their habitat. This is contrary to Code of Forest Practice requirements and ACtion Statements listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988(Vic).

Failure to comply with the Code of Forest Practices is a breach of the law (Hastings v Brennan & Anor; Tantram v Courtney & Anor [2005] VSC 37). The breaches are of s.2.3.6 which requires a strategy for the conservation of threatened species, protection of old trees, habitat trees and "old growth forest where necessary", and of s2.3.7 which requires protection of rainforest values. BELOW:The top of a giant tree, left as waste. This shows the scale of the trees beng logged.

ABOVE: Hollow-bearing, habitat tree left as waste.

Protection of old-growth forest is necessary where;
a) Threatened species listed under Schedule 1 or 2 of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 require values associated with old-growth forest for their survival;
b) A site listed in the National Estate Register has old-growth forest values required to be protected by section 30 of the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975.
c) The area was included in the Rainforest Site of National Significance (81 East Errinundra), to act as a "fire retardant buffer" on larger rainforest tracts to the east & south-east. To retain fire retarding properties requires the retention of the tall, sparse canopy associated with the old-growth stands, and the wet understorey characteristic of Wet Forest. Both of these attributes are lost when clearfelling occurs.

In this case the area is known Powerful owl habitat, and the area is zoned 'Special Management Zone' to achieve conservation of the Owl. The Management Plan, East Gippsland FMA (CNR 1995) requires conservation to occur "within the SMZ". Despite this, the DSE have drawn a big circle around the only known Powerful Owl roost site in East Gippsland and declared there is sufficient habitat in nearby parks, so are making no attempt to protect the Owl's core habitat - contrary to the Owl's Action Statement, 92. Similarly action SMZ Plans fail to provide prescriptions for the species which they are being 'specially' managed for, but instead allow majority of the zone to be cleared.
Greater Gliders, Petauroides volans, and Yellow-bellied Gliders, Petaurus australis, were found dead on the ground after logging. Greater Glider fur was dominant in predator scats collected in the logged area. This confirms that they remain in thier hollows and are killed when the trees are felled. The Forest Management Plan, East Gippsland FMA confirms in Appendix J that gliders are "unlikely to persist at site after logging occurs". The loss of this species equals loss of viable habitat for the Powerful Owl, confirmed by the Action Statement 92, Powerful Owl. The loss of habitat and prey fauna is contrary to the Code of Forest Practice obligation for a strategy to conserve and restore the Powerful owl's population.
Action Statement 192, 'Loss of Hollow-bearing trees', requires hollow-bearing trees to be conserved "to allow fauna dispersal". This requirement in not being met as there is no attempt to identify hollow-bearing trees or retain sufficient trees to allow fauna dispersal. EPA Audits of forest operations confirm that insufficient habitat trees are retained in many coupes.

ABOVE: The few trees which have been left are too far apart to allow Gliders to jump from one to the other. The entire upper-catchment is now cleared, as is most of the Yandowne Creek catchment to the rear of photo. This is how the core area of Powerful Owl habitat, and "Special Management Zone" is being managed.

The threatening process of "loss of hollow-bearing trees from Victorian forests" was listed in 1991, and s.19 of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 requires an Action Statement to be written and implemented "as soon as possible". Surely 15 years later is more than "as soon as possible"? The recently released Action Statement (190kb download) does not contain the prescriptions required. It instead says the DSE Parks and Forests Division should "Continue to identify significant areas or stands of hollow-bearing trees in State forest, using the State Forest Resource Inventory and other relevant information, to inform management decisions". It also says the DSE Forest Services should continue "the development and application of revised habitat retention prescriptions." The DSE have failed to comly with these requirements.

Allowing logging to proceed in known threatened species habitat without implementing the required prescriptions is reckless, negligent and reflects an intention with respect to the circumstance as the DSE is aware that unlawful logging will occur in the ordinary course of events.

The logging operation fails to comply with s.2.3.7 of the Code of Forest Practices, which states that Sites of National Significance should be protected at the sub-catchment level, unless there is detailed planning to achieve full protection of rainforest.

BELOW: A bulldozer track runs adjacent to the edge of a stand of rainforest. A second "buffer" seems to have been marked after the dozer track was made.
Similarly, the Management Plan requires 'special planning to protect rainforest values'. There is no detailed or special plan; the SMZ Plan lists standard rainforest prescriptions. In East Gippsland, unlawful rainforest prescriptions are often applied:
- The Code prescribes minimum 40m buffers, but 20m buffers are applied to linear rainforest in East Gippsland. The Code requires other plans to exceed the Code's minimum requirements.
- Strict minimum size requirements of 0.4ha for a 'patch' or 20 x 100m for a 'linear strip' are applied, although this is not part of any rainforest definition, and contrary to the footnote in the Management Plan which says these are not to be strictly applied; if it has rainforest character, it's rainforest. The Rainforest Identification Key, prepared by Senior Botanist David Cameron, also has no minimum size requirements.

The logging operation fails to comply with the Sustainable Forests (Timber) Act 2004, as:
- Clearfelling of old-growth forest results in loss of species, loss of biodiversity and disruption of ecological processes, contrary to s.5(3)(c).
- It fails to comply with the precautionary principle, contrary to s.5(4)
- Loss of biodiversity associated with clearfell logging is unsustainable. Loss of species is a sustainability indicator, contrary to the requirements of s.6.
The loss of biodiversity associated with clearfelling is documented in Appendix J of the Management Plan, East Gippsland FMA, which lists Greater Glider and Yellow-bellied Glider as "unlikely to persist at site" after logging occurs. The loss of hollow-bearing trees is a listed threatening process, being applied to listed threatened fauna in this area.

The logging operation is not an isolated incident, but evidence of systematic failure to protect threatened species when old-growth forest and threatened species habitat is clear-felled. The Environment Protection Authority has been conducting audits of compliance with the Code, but insist they have "more of a monitoring role than a policing one more of a monitoring role than a policing one" (Adam Beaumont, Project Manager - Forestry, EPA Victoria).

The logging operation fails to comply with the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975, s 30, which applies as the area is listed as National Estate, and requires the Department not to take any action that adversely affects the site. This area is part of site 7017, Errinundra Extensions, most of which is in areas zoned available for logging and a large portion of which has already been clearfelled.

The above map overlays the "Timber Release Plan 2004", with SFRI logging history and DEH National Estate Register.

Attributes adversely affected include those listed as Site of Significance values (Peel 1999, Rainforests and Cool Temperate Mixed Forests of Victoria, DNRE, p.A82); ecological integrity and viability, catchment integrity, stand integrity, scientific and educational value, and EVC representation. The Wet Forest and Mixed Forest stands in particular represent ongoing ecological processes which fulfil World Heritage criteria.

BELOW: How's the ecological integrity now?
Injunctions may be sought to stop and prevent the logging, as the damage caused is irremediable and contributes towards the extinction of threatened species.

Recommendations
1) Immediately cessation and prevention of;
spacea) Forest Operations in Coupes 892-522-0013, 892-522-0009 and 892-522-0006 at Dingo Creek in East Gippsland;
spaceb) All roading and logging operations in old-growth forests;
spacec) All roading and logging operations in Sites of National Significance, until;
2) Action Statements required by Section 19 of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 are completed.
3) Special planning to achieve the full protection of rainforest .in Sites of National Significance required by Section 2.3.7(iii) of the Code of Forest Practices is completed.
4) Forest Operations conserve biodiversity and are ecologically sustainable, in accordance with the purpose of and requirements set out in the Forests Act 1958, the Endangered Species Protection Act 1992, the Environment Protection, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and the Sustainable Forests (Timber) Act 2004.
5) Forest Officers of the Department of Sustainability and Environment are trained to identify and mark for protection the elements listed in the Code of Forest Practice.

In seeking to ensure the logging of this area would be done legally, the following letter was sent to the Premier Steve Bracks, Environment Minister John Thwaites, Regional Manager Peter McHugh, Flora and Fauna Coordinator Steve Henry and Senior Forester Wayne Long: (40kb download).

The response is received contains factual errors in just about every paragraph. See Forestry Myths Busted!, a further page dedicated to busting the myths paraded here: (75kb download). .

I've referred the information to "Crimestoppers" (Victoria Police), the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Victorian Ombudsman, the Commissioner for Sustainability and Environment, and the Attorney General.
To date, the Ombudsman's Office confirm they are investigating, and the Police have referred the matter to the DSE & will take no further action.