Woodchips:- The main output of the Southwood proposal would be woodchips. There is no escaping that fact. If you look at proposed output from the Southwood site the message is clear. The Southwood proposal is predominantly a chip mill with most of the output to go into woodchips (half to be exported and half to be burned in the wood fired power station.) Power generated through this power station could compromise Basslink and our sustainable energy status with Seda, the national "sustainable energy authority".

Jobs at Risk:- Southwood promises jobs but risks many more jobs in the tourism, milling and Aquaculture industries. How often do we see letters from tourists and tourist operators decrying the vandalism perpetrated on our environment. Do tourists come to Tasmania to see a patchwork of plantation forestry and smoke blanketed skylines whilst playing that deadly game of dodge the truckie? Imagine the jobs that could be created if the millions of our dollars, now being spent on promoting these old, wasteful ways with wood, were spent on existing or new innovative ideas. Check out the One Tree Web Site, for Alternatives to Forest Wastage. What happens when communities put their faith in polluting industries like chip mills? Let's look at the  example that Burnie, Tasmania provides. For years Burnie was prepared, even proud to take on heavy industry. Who could forget the putrid atmosphere, the tainted seas and powder covered rooftops. Now, deserted by its industrial friends, Burnie is trying to become a tourist town. We wish them well.

Pollution:- Whatever the proponents of Southwood say, there will be more than steam coming out of that smoke stack. That steam will contain pollutants like Sulfur Oxide, Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide, Volatile Organic Compounds, Particulate Matter (soot) even dioxins, to name a few. Follow this link to read more about emissions.  Proponents claim burning of forest waste in the field will be reduced. They do not promise such burns will cease. Remember when they called them regeneration burns, pretending they were necessary to promote new growth. The new phrase is fuel reduction burns. Even with the wood fired power station, the same leaves, small branches and organic matter in soil will still burn in the field. Remember, the wood chip industry originally entered this state on the premise of using this very waste. The larger waste logs, normally left blackened and charred in the fields, will be taken to the power station for burning there. At the same time the rate of consumption (chipping and burning) will increase, to fuel the chipmill and power station.

Risk to our Waterways:- Reduction in annual rainfall, like global warming, is now a fact of life. While proponents assure us that there will be plenty of water remaining after the 5,000,000 litres a day are removed, no one is mentioning that these figures are only quoting water usage in the first stage of the development. Stage two will dramatically increase forest usage and water usage. There is no mention of minimum levels of water which will remain for users downstream. Downstream users include the aquaculture industry, orchardists and farmers of all kinds, people using water for domestic and industrial consumption, native and domestic animals, not to mention minimal levels that must be maintained to ensure the well being of the waterway itself. Risk of pollution from escaping nutrients from the composting plant and from polluted water are also a real possibility.

Danger to Road Users:- These days it is impossible to drive anywhere without meeting log trucks. If Southwood is realised, we will have woodchip trucks as well. Proponents meeting with residents living along the proposed routes supplied the following estimated figures (below). Remember these figures are estimates, can we be sure they will not increase? In fact, since these are estimates based on stage one of the project, we can be sure these movements will be substantially increased with the introduction of stage two and its increased forest usage and production.

Responsibility:- Who will be responsible for cleaning up the mess and compensating Tasmanians should our worst fears be realised? Who will pay if our valley becomes a polluted landscape like the Humbolt Valley in California. Eureka, in the  Humbolt Valley was featured in the September 1977 National Geographic because of the forestry debate taking place there at the time. Pulp mills pictured were also supposed to exude only steam. The Humbolt Valley is now the most polluted area in California. Even more polluted than Los Angeles! Who will take responsibility if this happens to us? Since Forestry Tasmania are acting as the proponents will they be taking responsibility? Since Forestry Tasmania are a Government Business Enterprise (GBE) who pay dividends to the Tasmanian treasury will we end up paying for our own compensation from our dividends?

Wood Chip Production Up but Sales Down:- Australian Bureau of Statistics figures indicate an increase in woodchip production but declining sales. (See Charts Below) Why the rush to cut and chip trees when the market is not there?
 
 

Real Sustainability:- What we need is real sustainability. We need to learn to take the high value material from the forest whilst leaving the rest to continue to grow. We need to preserve the bio-diversity of our forests for so many reasons, some of which we have yet to discover.