I want to address the elephant in the room: the Great Koala National Park. It feels like déjà vu we’ve seen similar debates play out in other states in recent years. As a forester and an environmentalist, it is disheartening to see political decisions driven by activist groups and made not based on science, facts or best practice sustainable management, which will have adverse outcomes for animals such as the koala.
I chose forestry because I love the bush, being outdoors, and close to nature. In my career I’ve been fortunate to work in the field, in operational, advocacy, technical and policy roles.
These activist groups persistently push the narrative that sustainable forest management is “deforestation.” This is simply misinformation. In Australia, forestry is strictly regulated and governed by some of the world’s toughest environmental laws to ensure that no deforestation occurs and that plants and animals are protected. Our forests are also independently certified to internationally recognised standards, ensuring that biodiversity, water quality, soil health, Indigenous rights, and climate outcomes are safeguarded.
A sustainably managed forest provides far greater climate benefits than one left unmanaged. Young, regrowing trees absorb more carbon than older trees – a fact recognised globally by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Harvesting and regrowth cycles maintain a steady supply of young, healthy trees that pull carbon from the atmosphere while providing a renewable material to replace more carbon-intensive materials such as steel and concrete.
History shows what happens when management stops. In the 2000s, large portions of the Pilliga Forest were converted to national park to protect the koala. At the time, the Pilliga held arguably the largest koala population in Australia. I was proud, as a forester, to showcase this thriving population, which benefited from a sustainably managed regrowing thriving forest environment. Yet, two decades on, reports now describe koalas in the Pilliga as “functionally extinct.” As an environmentalist this makes me very sad. Similarly, also in NSW species such as bandicoots and potoroos became locally extinct in a national park and had to be reintroduced from nearby state forests where they were thriving under active management.
What this shows is that doing nothing is not the same as managing the bush. When active, science-based management stops, forests can shift in ways that reduce food sources, increase the risk of catastrophic wildfires, habitat diversity, and resilience for species like koalas. Selective harvesting, carefully planned and carried out by skilled operators, together with independent third-party certification, helps maintain a balance of species and habitats. This balance plays an untold role in keeping forests healthy and able to support wildlife alongside providing the renewable materials we all rely on.
Australia’s forests have adapted to more than 60,000 years of human disturbance through active and adaptive management by First Nations people. Practices such as fire-stick farming shaped our landscapes, creating biodiversity, encouraging wildlife, and reducing the risk of catastrophic fire. To think we can now “lock up” forests and walk away is naïve and ignores this long history.
Unfortunately, activist campaigns often focus narrowly on a single species, like the koala, but also the Leadbeater’s possum or the swift parrot, portraying them as endangered in managed forests when the government’s own science shows they are doing well there. By concentrating on emotion and ‘cute and cuddly’ imagery, these campaigns divert attention from the bigger picture: the many other species and whole ecosystems that rely on active, responsible management to remain healthy. Processes of disturbance and regeneration is part of a forest’s ecology, perhaps activist groups driven by their love of nature appear to see disturbance as unnatural and damaging, but in reality, it is an essential component of forest ecology and removing disturbance has adverse outcomes. These activist groups should put their time and effort into the real threat to Australia’s native plants and animals, such as land clearing and feral animals.
As a forester, I am proud to work in an industry that not only provides positive environmental outcomes but also delivers significant socio-economic benefits, contributing billions to the economy and supporting local manufacturing. The forestry industry is a sustainable self-funding renewable industry made of people who love and care about the environment. In other parts of the world, communities take pride in their sustainably managed forests, recognising them as part of the solution to climate change and biodiversity conservation. Sadly, here in Australia, misinformation has too often driven policy.
If we truly care about koalas, we need to ask: are we making decisions that actually protect them, or are we just offshoring our environmental responsibility? Australians love timber, and we will need more of it for a sustainable built environment. If we lock up our forests without a plan, where is that timber going to come from?
Beyond the jobs, livelihoods, misinformation, political points, buy-outs and handouts, I think most of us want the same thing: a sustainable future for our kids and to protect the bush, wildlife and places we love for the next generation. Yet I can’t help but feel we’re living in an episode of Utopia… make a decision, score the points, forget about the detail and the long term.
