Garrett's lack of Balls / suing the Weld Angel

Hey all, have been a bit lax on the blog front, but in brief over last two weeks:

*Gunns head office occupation last monday - good media, well recieved locally in Launceston, and the Gunns Ltd employees at head office are scary corporate zombie types(no surprises there)
*Garrett's visit to Tas- Mr Garrett did a quick trip to tassie to attend a $200 a head labour fundraiser. HVEC and Still Wild Still Threatened (and a random and v.upset polar bear) were there to make his life uncomfortable. A Wedgie up a tree across from the restuarant, showers and piles of woodchips for Garrett to wade through, classic Oils hits on the sound system, and multiple presentations to Garrett inside and out of his own balls on a platter of woodchips - left behind when he joined Labour. The Weld Angel also tracked him around all day.
*Two day action in the Little Denison Valley, one up from the Weld. HVEC crew discovered new roading operations into pristine giant regnans old growth , and the set up lasted two days. One to keep an eye on, this is a few hundred hectare remnant in a sea of devastation, only five minutes form the small community of Lonnavale.
*New FT 3 year plan out, confirming bridge over the weld this summer, multiple coupes in the Barnback Catchment, and three coupes in the next 18 months in the aformentioned Little Denison area.More information will be posted about this soon.
*FT and Tas Police sued the Weld Angel, resulting in some pretty good media coverage. Dodgy bastards pick on Angelic artist - check huon.org for more details on this one.
*Forest defenders in court for cable logger Weld actions and Howard hassling.To be continued.......

Climate Talks coming up in Hobart

ROYAL SOCIETY OF TASMANIA
WINTER LECTURE SERIES
D
uring 2007 the Society, in conjunction with the Tasmanian chapter of the Australian Academy of Science, will conduct a series of lectures entitled
"Climate Change, Facts, Fallacies and the Future"
to further knowledge of this controversial subject.

The lectures will be held in the Stanley Burbury Theatre, University of Tasmania
at 8 pm on the following dates

August 21 " Climate Science - the Facts"
Dr. Stuart Godfrey CSIRO
Dr. Will Howard UTAS
Prof. Nathan Bindoff UTAS

September 18 "Agriculture and Water Issues in a Changing Climate"
Dr. David Leaman Leaman Geophysics
Dr. Michael Battaglia ENSIS
Prof. David McNeil UTAS

October 16 "The Economics of Climate Change"
Dr. Frank Jotzo ANU
Prof. Aynsley Kellow UTAS

The lectures will be open to the public without charge and there will be ample time for questions and discussion.

Climate Parachute Wisdom

"To put it another way, if you bail out of an airplane, you need a crude parachute more than an accurate altimeter. And if you also happen to take an altimeter with you, at least don't become so bemused in tracking your descent that you forget to pull the ripcord on your parachute"

The Grist editor writes:

This guest essay comes from Herman E. Daly, an ecological economist and professor in the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland, College Park. He's one of the experts featured in Leonardo DiCaprio's new eco-documentary The 11th Hour, which opens in L.A. and New York on Aug. 17.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/8/14/165012/828grist.org/story/2007/8/14/165012/828

The recent increase in attention to climate change is very welcome. Most of the attention seems to be given to complex climate models and their predictions, however. It is useful to back up a bit and remember an observation by physicist John Wheeler: "We make the world by the questions we ask." What are the questions asked by the climate models, and what kind of world are they making? What other questions might we ask that would make other worlds?

The climate models ask: Will CO2 emissions lead to atmospheric concentrations of 500 parts per million? And will that raise temperatures by 2 or 3 degrees Celsius, or more, by a certain date? And what will be the likely physical consequences in climate and geography, and in what sequence, and according to what probability distributions? And what will be the damages inflicted by such changes, as well as the costs of abating them? And what are the ratios of the present values of the damage costs compared to abatement expenditures at various discount rates, and which discount rate should we use, and how much new information we will learn in the meantime?What kind of world is created by such questions?

Surely a world of such enormous uncertainty and complexity as to paralyze policy. Scientists will disagree on the answers to every one of these empirical questions.Could we ask a different question that creates a different world? Why not ask, can we systematically continue to emit increasing amounts of CO2 and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere without eventually provoking unacceptable climate changes? Scientists will overwhelmingly agree that the answer is no.

The basic science, first principles, and directions of causality are very clear. Focusing on them creates a world of relative certainty, at least as to basic thrust and direction of policy. Only the rates and sequences, timing, trajectories, and valuations are uncertain and subject to debate.

As long as we focus on measuring inherently uncertain empirical consequences, rather than on the certain first principles that cause them, we will overwhelm the consensus to "do something now" with the second order uncertainties of "first knowing the exact consequences of what we might someday do."

To put it another way, if you bail out of an airplane, you need a crude parachute more than an accurate altimeter. And if you also happen to take an altimeter with you, at least don't become so bemused in tracking your descent that you forget to pull the ripcord on your parachute.The next question we should ask is, what is it that is causing us to systematically emit ever more CO2 into the atmosphere? It is the same thing that causes us to emit more and more of all kinds of waste into the biosphere: namely, our irrational commitment to exponential growth forever on a finite planet.

Again we ask the wrong question. For example, can my firm emit more CO2 without causing any identifiable harm to any specified person? Yes, no doubt it can. Can all firms do this without causing much harm to many people with a high degree of probability? No, certainly not. Also, instead of asking, when will we be rich enough to afford the cost of protecting the environment? we might instead ask, does growth in GDP at the current margin and scale in the U.S. really make us richer? Might it not be increasing environmental and social costs faster than it increases production benefits, thereby making us poorer? It is clear that we need an aggregate limit on CO2 emissions to avoid this "uneconomic growth."

"Is it hard to come up with a reasonable policy? Not really -- a stiff severance tax on carbon, levied at the well head, mine mouth, or port of entry, would go a long way by both reducing carbon use and giving an incentive for developing alternative carbon-free technologies."




It is easy to preach the traditional dogma of economic growth. It is something else to demonstrate that growth in GDP has not in fact become uneconomic. Economists have so far run away from this challenge.Is it hard to come up with a reasonable policy? Not really -- a stiff severance tax on carbon, levied at the well head, mine mouth, or port of entry, would go a long way by both reducing carbon use and giving an incentive for developing alternative carbon-free technologies. Yes, but how do we know what is the optimal tax rate, and wouldn't it be regressive, etc.?


Once again, we make the world by the questions we ask. We need to raise public revenue somehow, so why not tax carbon extraction heavily and compensate by taxing income lightly? More generally, tax the resource throughput (that to which value is added) and stop taxing value added. Tax bads (depletion and pollution), not goods (income). Does anyone imagine that we tax income at the optimal rate? Better first to tax the right thing and later worry about the "optimal" rate of taxation, compensation for regressivity, etc.


People don't like to see the value added by their own efforts taxed away, even though we accept it as necessary up to a point. But most people don't mind seeing resource rents, value that no one added, taxed away. And the most important public good served by the carbon tax would be climate stability, brought about by the consequent reduction in use of carbon fuels and the incentive to invent less carbon-intensive energy sources. And much of the revenue from the carbon severance tax could be rebated to the public by abolishing other taxes, especially regressive ones.Setting policy in accord with first principles allows us to act now without getting mired in endless delays caused by the uncertainties of complex empirical measurements and predictions.

"To continue business as usual, while debating the predictions of complex models in a world made even more uncertain by the way we model it, is to fail to pull the ripcord. The predicted consequences of this last failure, unfortunately, are very certain. "

Of course, the uncertainties do not disappear. We will experience them as surprising consequences, both agreeable and disagreeable, necessitating mid-course correction to the policies enacted on the basis of first principles. But at least we will have begun moving in the right direction.To continue business as usual, while debating the predictions of complex models in a world made even more uncertain by the way we model it, is to fail to pull the ripcord. The predicted consequences of this last failure, unfortunately, are very certain.

At it again, this time Forestry's research sham cops it

16 August 2007

Media Release

Forest Defenders expose selective logging sham in wilderness forest

“Forest Defenders have today halted logging operations in Tasmania’s Weld Valley. Forestry Tasmania claims to be carrying out selective logging practices, in reality this current logging operation is no different to their usual and brutal clearfell and burn regime,” Huon Valley Environment Centre spokesperson Jenny Weber said.

“A Forest Defender is perched high above the main access logging route in a tree sit, with a message to immediately protect Tasmania’s world heritage value forests, such as those in the Weld Valley,” Jenny Weber said.

"Old growth and wilderness forest should not be used as a testing ground for Forestry Tasmania's destructive logging experiments. Instead these ancient places should be given the protection they deserve," Jenny Weber said.

"Experimental logging of old growth forests is like Tasmania's version of "scientific whaling": it allows ecologically destructive practices to continue under the guise of research and scientific study."

Jenny Weber said.

Jenny Weber 0427 366 929

Carbon Market Encourages Forest Destruction

Carbon market encourages chopping forests: study

Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:09PM EDT (http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSN1334676020070814?sp=true)


By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The current carbon market actually encourages cutting down some of the world's biggest forests, which would unleash tonnes of climate-warming carbon into the atmosphere, a new study reported on Monday.

Under the Kyoto Protocol aimed at stemming climate change, there is no profitable reason for the 10 countries and one French territory with 20 percent of Earth's intact tropical forest to maintain this resource, according to a study in the journal Public Library of Science Biology.

The Kyoto treaty and other talks on global warming focus on so-called carbon credits for countries and companies that plant new trees where forests have been destroyed. Trees and other plants absorb carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas emitted by petroleum-fueled vehicles, coal-fired power plants and humans.

At this point, there is no credit for countries that keep the forests they have, the study said.
"The countries that haven't really been the target of deforestation have nothing to sell because they haven't deforested anything," said Gustavo Fonseca, one of the study's authors.

PERVERSE INCENTIVE
"So that creates a perverse incentive for them to actually start deforesting, so that in the future, they might be allowed to actually cap-and-trade, as they call it: you put a cap on your deforestation and you trade that piece that hasn't been deforested," Fonseca said in a telephone interview.

The countries most at risk for this kind of deforestation, because they all have more than half their original forests intact, are Panama, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Peru, Belize, Gabon, Guyana, Suriname, Bhutan and Zambia, along with the French territory of French Guiana.

These places need a system of credits to involve them in the "global deforestation avoidance market," said Fonseca, of the World Bank's Global Environment Facility.
Under this kind of system, these countries could agree to keep deforestation rates below the global average and get credit for how much below the average they are, Fonseca said.

These market mechanisms are still being worked out and are likely to be debated at a series of international meetings on climate change this year at the United Nations, in Washington and in Bali, Indonesia.

Besides curbing greenhouse gas emissions, this system could offer other benefits that intact forests provide, according to Russell Mittermeier, a study co-author and president of the environmental group Conservation International.

Intact forests protect watersheds, encourage pollination and preserve biodiversity, Mittermeier said by telephone.

Mittermeier said perhaps 20 to 25 percent of world carbon emissions come from the destruction of tropical forest, but this issue is not at the center of the global warming discussion.

"People are talking a lot about vehicle emissions, industrial emissions, biofuels and recycling," Mittermeier said. "Forests were barely in there and yet forests are ... perhaps the major contributor" to global climate change.

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Carbon market encourages chopping forests: study
Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:09PM EDT

Arve Action Photos

Arve Action 13/0/807

Media Release

13 August 2007

Tasmania’s Southern Forests Defenders halt logging in Arve Valley

“Two forest defenders in Tasmania’s Southern Forests have this morninghalted operations in an Arve Valley clearfell. Today’s action is to highlight the value of natural forests in mitigating climate change andthe enormous ecosystem loss that occurs with clearfelling Tasmania’sancient forests,” Huon Valley Environment Centre spokesperson JennyWeber said.

“Two activists are occupying treesits suspended from machinery in agiant 83 hectare Arve Valley clearfell,” Jenny Weber said.

"Australian and international research proves that logging mature andold growth forests , and converting them to managed regrowth, leads tomassive carbon emissions," said spokesperson Jenny Weber.

"Australian experts have recommended preserving older, natural forestsas a practical and cost effective means to mitigate the effects ofclimate change. Preserving existing old forests is now seen as moreeffective than growing new trees or plantations." Jenny Weber said.

“We call on the Federal and State Governments to end the large scaleland clearing that is robbing Tasmania of it’s natural landscapes. Ifthe fast track chemical and pulp mill continues, it will be a disasterfor the future of Tasmania’s old growth tall forests,” Jenny Weber said.


Back to the Arve.

Fifteen crew stopped work yesterday in AR41A. This ugly, old growth clearfell is adjacent to the 950 ha Arve Loop Reserve, and connected through pristine forest to the Hartz NP and Picton Valley. A sit suspended of a cable loop to three machines hedl up work until 1pm. FT and cops then left and contractors began felling in another area of the coupe, even though activists were known to be in the bush in teh immediate area. This was pretty unfortunate given the good interaction between crew and contractors at this action and the previous one.

The loaders were kept by the sit all day, with the bunny escaping by night fall. Three activists were told by FT rep Terry Ware they woudl be summonsed or arrested at a later date as a result of him signing statutory declaratiosn that they refused to leave the exclusion zone, even though he produced no firm evidence that the area in question was in an exclusion zone.

Letter to Editor


Forestry Tasmania have declared yet another exclusion zone in the Tasmanian public's Southern Forests. The Arve Valley, west of Geeveston, is the latest area to be locked up, denying the public a chance to view or prevent the destruction of ancient forests.

As the Weilangta appeal begins,this appears to be a part of FT's genuine efforts to protect threatened species. This time however, the threatened species is the old growth logger.

Exlusion zones now cover significant sections of the Arve,Little Denison, Styx,Upper Florentine, and Gordon State Forests, as well as the Weld Valley, which has been closed to the public since November 15 2006. The Southern Forests is starting to resemble a "wildlife habitat corridor", though not for rare and endangered species such as the Little Denison Crayfish or the Wdge Tailed Eagle, but for the anachronistic and struggling old growth logging industry.

Areas such as the Weld, which Forestry Tasmania actively promotes as a tourist drawcard, despite the fact that the public are not legally allowed to visit the area, contain ancient forests which are being sacrificed to the woodchippers. It is time that FT stopped hiding the destruction being unleashed behind locked gates, and allowed the public access to every piece of their unique Southern Forests. Isn't Forestry mandated to utilise the forest for the good of all Tasmanians', not just those who own shares in Gunns Limited?

Warrick Jordan,
Lucaston

Still Wild Still Threatened My Space

Wedge cable coupe,Gordon Forests.

check out SWST my space - www.myspace.com/stillwildstillthreatened

New Workplace Health and Safety Regs.

New workplace health and safety on the spot fines - aimed at activists? FT have previously called in these guys and tried to prosecute forest defenders, but it has been dropped. It will be interesting to see if these fines are pulled out, as there has been renewed interest by FT in calling out workplace health and safety inspectors. Below is Steve Kon's media release.


Steven Kons, MHA Minister for Justice and Workplace Relations
Sunday, 5 August 2007

On the Spot Fines to Improve Safety at Work

Workplace Standards Tasmania inspectors now have the power to issue on-the-spot fines for workplace safety breaches, the Minister for Justice, Steven Kons, announced today.
Mr Kons said the move would simplify existing enforcement processes and help send a clear message about unacceptable behaviour and unsafe practices.

“On-the-spot fines of up to $2500 will enable inspectors to immediately reinforce the message to workplaces that allow their safety standards to slip that there is no job more important than maintaining a safe work environment.

“Under the existing regime offenders must be charged and taken to court for breaches of the Workplace Health and Safety Act, and the gap between when the behaviour occurs and when a matter comes before the courts has the potential to dilute extremely important safety messages.

“The introduction of infringement notices will more quickly highlight unacceptable behaviour and encourage offenders to promptly change it."
Mr Kons said that the legislation required that any money paid as a fine from an infringement notice under the Workplace Health and Safety Act must be paid to the WorkCover Board of Tasmania.

“Fines have been set at 5% of the maximum penalty that a court may apply, ranging from $50 to $2500, and they will only apply to clear-cut offences at the lower end of the scale in terms of seriousness.”
Mr Kons said the move would bring Tasmania into line with most other States and Territories which have had infringement notices for some time.

“Tasmania’s workplace safety inspectors have recently undergone intensive training, specifically in relation to the use of infringement notices, to ensure fines are applied appropriately.”

Further information:
Tasmanian Government Communications UnitPhone:
(03) 6233 6573
Steven Kons, MHA Minister for Justice and Workplace Relations
Sunday, 5 August 2007

Cable Logger Action in WR 12C

This monday Weld and Flozza crew hit the evil cable logged coupe WR12C in the south weld. Two intrepid bunnies were in sits 20 metres up cable loggers, with attempts to tie off loading machines foiled by the early and burly arrival of the Huon Valley Truck Push Champions , the Bennetts. A weird and somewhat heavy day, with utes smashing through flaming barrels, contractors secretly shitting in crew's sleeping bags, Tony Bennet asking crew for autographs, and some unknown person, either from FT or one of the two contractor crews in the area, taxing a couple of tredleys from a stash spot.

Terry "Little Hitler" Ware also put on his usual show, threatening the usual OH&S rubbish and promising to go and dob on us to Gunns. Recent legislative change in Tassie means that Workplace Health and Safety can no issue $2500 on the spot fines which seem to be targeted at activists. These are yet to be tested.

Work was halted until 3pm, with rescue figuring out how to get up the cable loggers. The bunnies were sent to remand but got out the same night, albeit with thrice weekly reporting conditions.

National Day Of Action Targeting ALP

Big thanks to all those who participated in the National Day of Action targeting the Rudd/Garrett sell out of Tasmania's ancient forests. Forest defenders in Launceston,Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Canberra, Sydney, Newcastle and Brisbane conducted banner drops,office occupations, and other actions, with meeting held or organised with ALP pollies in several cities. check huon.org for photos of all actions.

About 20 crew from Camp Flozza, HVEC, and Still Wild Still Threatened made a rare one day only appearance in north tassie, occupying the office of Labor Forestry Spokeperson Kerry Obrian. The action focused on the ALP sell out and the hypocrisy of it's climate policy not including ancient forests as carbon sinks.After some counter jumping and office occupation antics, Senator Obrian proved happy to meet with representatives from the crew, and a 45 minute meeting discussing:
# the real situation in the Southern Forests,
# the trashing of world heritage valued and bordering forests,
# the merits of "alternative" methods of clearfelling such as aggregated retention,
# reasons as to why the Alp is mimicking the Liberal forest policy
# possibilities for creating a plantation based, native forest free economically sustainable industry in conjunction with reservation of remaining high conservation value forests
#why Garrett's office is peddling the notion to environment groups that there may be more reservation of public forests when Rudd has knocked down this possibility....

Senator Obrian confirmed that Labor, despite their March conference position to consider further reservation of old growth forests, has no intention of reserving further public lands with it's only conservation focus to ensure the private land reservation targets in the Howard -Lennon Community forest agreement are met. Basically Labor has sold us out.

So the message to all out there is - keep hassling the ALP anyway you can to get Tassie's Ancient Forest back on the agenda. Other ALP politicians have indicated that there is a large degree of dissent within the ALP regarding the Tassie forest policy, and this can clearly be worked on. Most Australians want the woodchippers out of our old growth forests, so let's make it happen!

Read this - Brendan Mackey Climate/forests Age Article

Save the forests: they are crucial to reducing carbon dioxide
Brendan Mackey August 7, 2007

REMARKABLY, both the Australian Government and Labor Opposition have now realised the importance of natural forests to solving the global warming problem. This is a good thing because the Kyoto Protocol is unfortunately blind to the role played by natural forests in the global carbon cycle. But there is some way to go before Australia has consistency between its national and international forest-climate policy responses. The recently announced Labor forest policy for Tasmania does not recognise the link between forests and the global warming problem. The Australian Government has recognised this link but is attending to forest-climate issues only at the international level. Both policy positions need to be reconsidered as they reflect a lack of scientific understanding about the role of natural forests in helping to regulate the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This is not surprising as our understanding of carbon in natural forest has been transformed in recent years through scientific research and little of this new knowledge has yet filtered into popular literature and policy circles.

The forest debate in Australia remains dominated by conflict between those who see the forest as a source of raw material (woodchips) and those who value the forest left intact for nature conservation. We need to update the forest debate to reflect current concerns and the growing imperative that we solve the global warming problem. This means that forest policy, nationally as well as internationally, must begin to reflect the role of forests as part of a co-ordinated greenhouse-gas mitigation strategy.

In addition to reducing our use of fossil fuel, the other major mitigation strategy is to increase the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by natural processes through protecting and restoring the world's natural forests.

Natural forests are an important part of the global carbon cycle. They are buffers that soak up excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and store it in the biomass of trees and in the soil. Forests are an essential natural mechanism for stabilising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide in the short and long term.

One hectare of mature, tall, wet forest can store the equivalent of 5500 tonnes of carbon dioxide. This is about the same as the annual carbon dioxide emissions from 1300 cars. Even less productive dry forests and woodlands store significant amounts of carbon. Most of the carbon in a natural forest is stored in the woody biomass of big old trees, dead wood on the forest floor, and in the soil. It is easy to forget about the carbon below ground: in the tree roots and associated fungi, other micro-organisms and decomposed plant material. These represent significant stocks of carbon that are continually replenished through natural ecosystem processes.

Forests contain about three to four times more carbon than is now in the atmosphere. About half the world's forests have been cleared for agriculture and human settlement. Much of what is left is commercially logged for timber products; especially woodchip for pulp-based products.

Forests that are commercially logged store about 30 per cent to 40 per cent less carbon than unlogged forests. If we were to halt further deforestation and allow the world's forests that have been logged to naturally regrow, the amount of carbon taken up and stored in these ecosystems would make a significant contribution to solving the global warming problem. Plantation timber can be grown on land that has already been cleared and used to meet the demand for pulp and related wood-fibre products.\

In addition to reducing our use of fossil fuel, the other major mitigation strategy is to increase the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by natural processes through protecting and restoring the world's natural forests. Natural forests are an important part of the global carbon cycle. They are buffers that soak up excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and store it in the biomass of trees and in the soil. Forests are an essential natural mechanism for stabilising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide in the short and long term. One hectare of mature, tall, wet forest can store the equivalent of 5500 tonnes of carbon dioxide. This is about the same as the annual carbon dioxide emissions from 1300 cars. Even less productive dry forests and woodlands store significant amounts of carbon. Most of the carbon in a natural forest is stored in the woody biomass of big old trees, dead wood on the forest floor, and in the soil. It is easy to forget about the carbon below ground: in the tree roots and associated fungi, other micro-organisms and decomposed plant material. These represent significant stocks of carbon that are continually replenished through natural ecosystem processes.

Forests contain about three to four times more carbon than is now in the atmosphere. About half the world's forests have been cleared for agriculture and human settlement. Much of what is left is commercially logged for timber products; especially woodchip for pulp-based products. Forests that are commercially logged store about 30 per cent to 40 per cent less carbon than unlogged forests. If we were to halt further deforestation and allow the world's forests that have been logged to naturally regrow, the amount of carbon taken up and stored in these ecosystems would make a significant contribution to solving the global warming problem. Plantation timber can be grown on land that has already been cleared and used to meet the demand for pulp and related wood-fibre products.

If global warming really is the mother of all environmental problems, then perhaps the time has come to bring to an end the clearing and logging of natural forests. This will make a significant and cost-effective contribution to solving the global warming problem. We must not forget that the laws of science apply universally and do not recognise political boundaries. Whether a natural forest is in Tasmania, Victoria or Papua, it performs the same kind of role in the global carbon cycle and in helping to regulate atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide.

All the signs are that sooner or later the carbon that is stored in natural forests will be assigned an economic value and become part of the global carbon market. When this happens, companies will be allowed to offset some of their carbon emissions by investing in forest protection. Once the carbon in forest ecosystems has a market value, companies that are fossil-fuel hungry (such as steel and aluminium producers) will seek to take advantage of offset opportunities in natural forests to give themselves more time to maintain production levels while making the transition to greenhouse-friendly energy sources.

For this reason, I predict that as the impact of global warming increases in the coming years, the market values of carbon in natural forests will dramatically increase. It will be ironic if Australia's natural forests are taken out of wood production not by conservationists but by international corporations.

Of course, before this can happen in a substantial and enduring way, the international rules have to change. But this process has already started at least in terms of recognising the need to prevent deforestation in developing countries, and voluntary investments in forest conservation are already occurring.
Brendan Mackey is a professor of environmental science at the Australian National University and an expert in ecosystems and the impact of climate change on biodiversity.